WATCH: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris refers to a “Harris-Biden Administration”

And so did she:

Joe Biden And Kamala Harris Make Freudian Slips, Accidentally Referring To A ‘Harris Administration’

Vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris spoke of a “Harris administration,” while discussing economic plans during a virtual roundtable Saturday.

By Ecita Duffy, the Federalist, September 15, 2020:

“A Harris administration, together with Joe Biden as the president of the United States,” she said before correcting what many are calling a “Freudian slip.”

With worries about Biden’s mental agility, many people wonder if a potential Biden administration would really be Biden’s. The Federalist Staff Writer, Tristan Justice, theorized that Biden will be “a vehicle for the left’s cultural revolution,” if he becomes president.

Angela Davis, a prominent communist, anti-Semite and former Black Panther, stated Biden could be “effectively pressured,” into promoting the agenda of the radical left in pursuit of a complete societal transformation overthrowing existing norms into a new world order.

As Justice notes, “Biden has already showcased a willingness to conform to the woke revolution,” through his agenda which is  “the most radical progressive platform of any modern Democratic candidate in recent history.”

On par with Biden’s radical agenda, Harris has proven to be a solid member of the far left. As Federalist Managing Editor Joshua Lawson writes, Harris is far from a moderate, as the corporate media likes to portray her. Harris also has the most progressive voting record in the Senate.

“Her positions form an agenda nearly entirely in lock-step with the radical leftist ideology that has taken over the Democratic Party,” Lawson writes.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Twitter Suspends Account Of Chinese Scientist Who Published Paper Alleging Covid Was Created In Wuhan Lab

GUT-WRENCHING Video: *GRAPHIC* Muslim SLUGS Random Swedish Woman in Broad Daylight In Series of Horrific Beatings

Chancellor Merkel: Jews Don’t Feel Safe in Germany

Serbia designates Hezballah in its entirety as terror group

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

Some Schools Don’t Want You to Know What They Are Teaching Your Kids. That’s a Problem.

Six months into the pandemic, some traditions will still not be upset by a virus. As approximately half of K-12 schools are only offering online instruction, parents will still know little, if anything, of what their children are being taught in school except by accident—or  unless they ask.

Recent fallout from such asymmetric information comes from Wylie, Texas, where a cartoon associating police with the KKK went from classroom to living room to the press room and on to the governor.

At Cooper Junior High, eighth-grade students were assigned to write about a political cartoon that depicts slave owners, then KKK members, and then police in corresponding panels. Furious parents, who only learned of the assignment because their children told them, contacted the school and wrote angry statements on social media.

Last week, Gov. Greg Abbott said the teacher responsible for the assignment should be fired.


How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>


To be sure, there have always been disagreements about the content that students are taught in the classroom. From the introduction of “new math” and alternative ways of teaching reading in the 1950s and ’60s, to the arrival of Common Core textbooks over the last decade, changes in school curriculum always sparks debate, and will continue to do so long as schools enroll more than one student.

But in a period that historians will mark less for its civil discourse than for the birth of cancel culture and vicious riots, parents should be wary of projects that want to reframe history or train children to see injustice all around them.

For example, the New York Times Magazine and Pulitzer Center’s 1619 Project includes a school curriculum that would change how U.S. history is taught, marking 1619, the year slaves arrived in the Virginia colony, as “our nation’s foundational date.”

Reviewers, including decorated historians, have found multiple errors within the 1619 Project, starting with the date: slaves arrived via Spanish ships in North America a century before 1619. And despite the project’s claim, American colonists did not use the preservation of slavery as the primary reason to fight the American Revolution.

Noted academics including Gordon WoodJames McPhersonAllen Guelzo, and Sean Wilentz, to name a few, have catalogued the errors.

Meanwhile, Black Lives Matter also has a school curriculum, if one can call a list of  progressive policy demands the basis for a course of study. Considering that instructions for hosting a week of action precedes the list of actual learning materials, it’s no surprise to find politically charged titles as “Open Secrets in First Grade Math: Teaching about White Supremacy on American Currency” on the list.

This material goes beyond teaching students the dangers of racism and ventures well into the misuse of journalistic license and a philosophy of perpetual victimization.

What can be done? For parents, pandemic pods are all the rage right now, in which a small group of parents pool their resources to hire private instructors for their children.

But for generations, isolated groups parents have gathered to educate themselves on what their children are learning and become active with their school board. Today we might call these “textbook pods,” but “concerned citizens” will do. For all parents now, the pandemic offers a unique opportunity to review what your child is learning while content is being delivered online for all or part of the school week.

This may sound simple, but there are startling examples of schools attempting to prevent parents from finding out what is being taught. For example, in Rutherford County, Tennessee, school officials asked parents to sign forms stating they would not watch their child’s online classes while the district remains closed for in-person learning. The district released different guidance, but only after parents complained and the policy made headlines.

State and local policymakers should help parents’ efforts by requiring that public schools provide descriptions of their curricular materials online and make copies of assigned reading or written tasks available upon request.

Goldwater Institute research explains that Arizona, Texas, and Tennessee lawmakers have already enacted provisions that allow parents to see instructional content before it is taught to students, though even some of these provisions come with caveats (and considering the incident in Rutherford County, state legislators should make sure districts follow through).

In Arizona, for example, parents only view the content on school grounds. State lawmakers should require that districts bear the responsibility for providing instructional content to parents either in physical form or online.

Finally, state and federal lawmakers should affirm a parent’s right to choose how and where their child learns. Parent choice in education became a reality for everyone this year when nearly every school in the world closed due to the pandemic, and then only certain schools re-opened for in-person learning in time for the current school year.

Again, it may seem commonsensical to say that parents should be allowed to make choices about their child’s education, but some state and local policymakers have tried to stop parents from moving their child out of an assigned school.

Last month, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan overruled Montgomery County officials’ decision to require private school buildings to remain closed while district schools were closed to in-person instruction.

Officials in North Carolina recently blocked virtual charter school enrollment, following similar decisions from lawmakers in Oregon and Pennsylvania earlier this year.

Lawmakers must maintain a consistent message that parents should be allowed to know what their children are taught, and can choose how and where their children learn.

For federal lawmakers, delivering this message without expanding the federal footprint will take legislative restraint. But such a visible show of support for parents trying to find a quality education for their child would be a welcome one, and would restore a vital tradition for everyone involved in K-12 schools: The pursuit of truth.

COMMENTARY BY

Jonathan Butcher is a senior policy analyst in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy and a senior fellow for the Goldwater Institute and the Beacon Center of Tennessee. Twitter:


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


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

VIDEO: ‘No Police, No Peace’ Billboards to Reach 4 Million in New York, Atlanta, Dallas

Six billboards declaring “No Police, No Peace” have gone up, two each in New York City, Dallas, and Atlanta, Heritage Action for America announced Monday.

The move comes amid an increase in both violence in the streets and angry anti-police rhetoric.

Two Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies, ages 24 and 31, were shot and seriously wounded Saturday night as they sat in their patrol car. And in St. Louis, a 35-year-old police officer was wounded in the shoulder during a traffic stop, becoming the ninth officer to be shot since June 1.

“Americans want safety, security, and a clear vision for how to quell the violence. I am excited to announce the launch of these billboards today, because you cannot have peace without the police,” Jessica Anderson, executive director of Heritage Action for America, the grassroots partner organization of The Heritage Foundation, said in a written statement.


How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>


Together, the billboards in the three cities are expected to reach a weekly audience of about 4 million. They will be displayed for two weeks.

In New York City, which eliminated the police department’s violent crime unit, the billboards are displayed in Times Square at 7th Avenue and 48th Street and at Broadway and 44th Street.

In Atlanta, one billboard stands across from CNN headquarters at Centennial Olympic Park Drive and Marietta Street. The other is at Peachtree Road East and Paces Ferry Road.

In Dallas, the billboards are downtown at Main Street, near Interstate 45, and on Cedar Springs Road.

“These cities are facing rising violence, deep cuts to public safety, and the resignation of their top police officers,” Anderson said. “This is a time for all citizens and leaders to come together to support the important work and sacrifices of our law enforcement officers and push back against the left’s campaign to defund the police.”

Several cities throughout the United States have supported defunding police departments, while some Democratic members of Congress called for similar actions. Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., called Monday for police to be disarmed. “Ban tear gas and rubber bullets,” he tweeted.

The billboards urge citizens to sign Heritage Action’s Police Pledge, which already has been signed by nearly 100,000.

Among the signers are former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, and nearly 100 members of Congress, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Josh Hawley, R-Mo.; Rick Scott, R-Fla.; and Tom Cotton, R-Ark.

The pledge calls on Americans to “stand with America’s police and pledge to oppose any bill, resolution, or movement to ‘Defund the Police.’”

This comes as homicides in New York City spiked by almost 50% in August amid budget cutbacks, compared with the same month in 2019. The homicide rate in Atlanta is up nearly 150% since the protests following the May 25 killing of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis. Dallas is on the way to hitting its highest homicide rate in more than a decade.

“Now is the time for our elected officials at all levels of government to take a stand for peace and security over anarchy and chaos,” Anderson said, adding:

Supporting police is not partisan. It’s American.

Lawmakers should push back against violent rhetoric and dangerous policies that would undermine our communities.

Our law enforcement supports us every day, and it’s time we support them back.

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is chief national affairs correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Abuse of Power: Inside The Three-Year Campaign to Impeach Donald Trump.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED TWEET:


PODCAST: Taking a Newspaper to Task

It is no secret the main stream media has turned to the Left and actively supports liberal causes. As such, trying to get a conservative comment printed is next to impossible. This was one of the key reasons why I cancelled my subscription to the Tampa Bay Times a couple of years ago and started the Tampa Bay Conservatives web site. Enough is enough.

I am obviously not alone in this regard as I know many conservatives angered by the press. To illustrate, of the people in our Tampa Bay Trump Club, I have yet to meet anyone who subscribes to the Tampa Bay Times. It is simply loathed by conservatives and labeled “Fake News.” I also see this in other newspapers in Democrat-controlled urban strongholds where they pander to the Left, such as Portland, Seattle, Chicago, New York, etc.

I have offered suggestions for “Confronting the News Media,” including picketing and boycotting, but one of the most effective means to protest the media is simply the printed word which, unfortunately, few people use to express their displeasure.

Enter Larry Marlin, an old friend and conservative from Bryan, Texas (near College Station and Texas A & M University). For quite some time, Larry subscribed to the local newspaper, The Bryan-College Station Eagle. However, he began to notice a shift in the editorial slant of the paper and brought it to the attention of the Editor there. Unfortunately, the liberal slant went from bad to worse. Finally, he could stand it no more and wrote the following letter recently to the newspaper which I found particularly interesting:

Dear Editorial Board:

Since August 10th, I have kept copies of your newspaper and reviewed them for bias. As you may recall, you printed a letter I wrote saying most of “The Eagle” bias comes from your Associated Press articles. I later wrote a letter saying I had been mistaken and your paper was rife with bias. The second letter was based on material you printed after being “woke” by BLM and the rest of the “protesters.” You did not print that letter. I did say I was not a member of the “cancel culture” and, rather than cancel my subscription, I would see if your paper made any effort to reduce bias.

I have reviewed each issue since 8/10. You have not improved. If anything, you have gotten worse. During the period 8/10 through 9/4 you have printed 28 left wing editorials and 9 right wing ones. In editorial cartoons you did better with 5 right wing and 3 left wing. Concerning the cartoons, it is interesting that several days after Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s hypocritical visit to get her hair washed, you finally printed something about it in a cartoon relegated to the bottom of the editorial page. Other than that, as near as I can tell, you completely ignored the story.

Of course, your AP articles continue to be overwhelmingly left wing. I have not seen any indication of an attempt on your part to reduce this left wing bias. I doubt you have contacted AP concerning their outrageously dishonest presentations of the news. I don’t have time to list all the left-biased articles by AP. I would mention Steve People’s articles about the Democrat convention compared to his articles about the Republican convention — day and night.

Anyway, I will be cancelling my subscription. I just can’t imagine you will ever change. Should you surprise me and decide to make needed changes such as blasting AP, hiring a few conservatives, balancing your editorials, writing more unifying local editorials, or anything else please let me know. I might resubscribe.

Sincerely,
Lawrence P. Marlin*
Sep 4, 2020

What I liked about this letter is that it wasn’t ranting and raving, but rather, a matter-of-fact dissertation as to why someone was unsubscribing. If I was the Editor, I would consider it carefully and not dismiss it out of hand as it represents a legitimate concern of a reader. If Larry’s data is correct, the Editor should now realize his slip is showing and should take steps to correct it before all of his conservative readers abandon him. The reality though is, as a supporter of the far-Left, the Editor couldn’t care less and is willing to sacrifice readership to preserve the Left’s dogma. This is essentially no different than the attitude of the mayors of Democrat controlled cities where their citizen’s lives and businesses are threatened. This, of course, is reckless behavior and speaks volumes of their priorities of choosing Democrat policies over the safety and well-being of their citizens.

Larry’s letter also happens to make a handy template for writing your own letter to other newspapers. For those of you who have difficulty penning a Letter to the Editor, simply copy Larry’s letter, update it with data specific to your area and send it in (preferably by e-mail). If enough people complain of the unfair tactics of the press, the better the chances of getting some honest news reporting. To do nothing is to surrender to the press.

I’ll leave it with you.

(* Letter written with the permission of the author)

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. This is the perfect gift for youth!

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

PODCAST: Far Left Similar to Communist Movement, Former Student Radical Says

Disconcerting similarities exist between the modern progressive left and the communist movement. Take it from someone who knows.

Tony Salinski, once a student radical and now an expert on communist ideology, identified as a communist for several years during the Vietnam War era. Salinski joins the podcast to explain why he was drawn to communism as a youth and to identify similarities between communism and socialism.

Also on today’s show, we read your letters to the editor and share a good news story about a school principal who is using his skill as a barber to mentor his students.

Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript.


How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>


“The Daily Signal Podcast” is available on Ricochet, Apple PodcastsPippaGoogle Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Virginia Allen: I am joined by professor Tony Salinski, a former student radical in the communist movement. Tony, thank you so much for being here today.

Tony Salinski: You’re welcome. Thank you for having me.

Allen: The topic of communism and socialism is certainly getting a lot of attention in the current political and social climate. And when you were a student, you were a part of the communist movement. Can you just begin by telling us a little bit of your story? How did you come to identify with the communist movement?

Salinski: Well, I was actually for the war. This was back at the time of the Vietnam War. And I started out for the war and, like everybody, debating whether they wanted to enlist or wait until they got they got called, drafted.

And during that time, [President] Lyndon Johnson did a TV special. They call it a special, but he was on TV. He was arguing against the Republicans, who had wanted to get in and get it over with, and get out.

One of the things he said was, “We’re going to stay in there. We’re not going to invade the North. We’re just going to stay in there until we stop them. And it could take 50 years.” I thought to myself, “Fifty years? Fifty years of guys just getting killed to finally just out-kill these guys.” And that started me to think, “This is not for me. I don’t want to do this.”

Push comes to shove later. I was looking into means of getting out legally of the draft and went to a meeting house, where a number of different groups were present. And one of them was a communist group.

I was interviewed briefly by the people sponsoring the event. And they asked me if I would have fought in World War II, and I said, “Well, yeah. Absolutely.” And they said, “OK, that’s not what we’re looking for. We’re looking for people who wouldn’t fight at all.” And they motioned me over to the communists, and I went over and gathered some information.

Later, I just sort of drifted into them. The resistance was going because there was no other resistance. There was no resistance to what the communists were saying anywhere on the media. There was no Rush Limbaugh. And I was a blue-collar kid and didn’t know anything about “Firing Line” or William F. Buckley or anything like that.

So there was no counter to what the communists were putting out about the war in Vietnam. And I got convinced that it was illegal and that it was immoral. And … one thing led to another. …

I was in a rock band at that time. And that was the big draw that drew the communists to me. We were doing pretty well and getting good audience responses around the city of Pittsburgh. And eventually we started doing some shows for them. And one thing led to another and I was involved.

They asked me, probably on three separate occasions, to join the party. And I told him the same thing every time, I said, “Nixon’s got a list, an enemies list, and I don’t want to be on that list. But I can work with you and help you out, as we go here, without being a member of the party itself.”

And we came to that agreement and they stayed with that. And from then on, it was just a matter of just going to the events that they put on and helping them with this and that, and the other thing, and bringing the band.

Allen: I find that interesting. You didn’t join the party, but you were in the movement for a number of years, in the communist movement. What was so appealing about the communist movement to you, that kept you in it, that kept you saying, “I’ll support you all. And I’ll be a part of what you’re doing”?

Salinski: Basically the idea that they were doing something. They were active. They knew what their motives were. They knew that they wanted out of the war. And I agreed with that, at first.

They were organized. They could bring out a crowd like nobody’s business. It was amazing to see how they were able to put a lot of people together, to come out and make their point.

But I was never fully into the idea of destroying the United States of America. That was a problem for me from Day One. And they got around that by saying, “We don’t want to destroy the United States. We simply want to improve it.” And I bought it. I was 19 years old, 18 years old, at the time, and I bought it.

But that was it. Ideologically, I didn’t get really aware ideologically until near the end. And things started to become clearer and clearer and clearer. And I realized that from the very beginning, everything they had said was in one way or another a lie. And I just finally couldn’t stand that.

I kept confronting them, asking them, “What about this? What about that?” And I kept getting variations on the same answer. “You’re just not ready for the whole story yet.” And I, being 19 years old, I knew everything, anyway. I thought, “Well, yeah, I am ready for the whole story. Why don’t you just tell me?” But it just kept going on and on and on like that. And finally, I just dropped away.

Allen: They were almost kind of teasing you along, giving you little bits of information, but never totally upfront and candid, it sounds like, about, really, what ultimately their mission was.

Salinski: Right. And they did that to everyone, except the people who walked up and said, “I want to join the Communist Party USA.” Those people got moved to the head of the line, so to speak, but the rest of us were just drifting in varying degrees of commitment, varying degrees of understanding. And yeah, they sort of reeled us in gradually.

Allen: So fast-forward to today. And what do you know of the communist movement’s activity today? I mean, some of the unrest that we’re seeing in the streets, can we directly link that back to communism?

Salinski: Well, when I got out of the movement, … I didn’t want any parts of any of it. My wife at the time said, “If you’re drafted, are you going to go to Canada?” I said, “No, if I’m drafted, I’m going to go to Vietnam.” OK? I had just gotten sick of the whole thing. And after getting away from it for a little while, … I got into the Democratic Party.

I was … semi-active as a Democrat and paid attention to all the news and everything like that. And I realized, “Wait a minute, these people are the communists on slow motion. They’re active. It’s the same thing. What they want is the same thing. They just don’t want to do it as fast.”

The communists, they were in the process at that time of switching from Leninist tactics in the street, in-your-face revolution, to Gramsci. And the idea of a gradual movement into a revolutionary pattern that wasn’t in your face wasn’t on the street.

… That really put me off because I just wanted to get it over with and get things straightened out, as they said.

But yeah, from the Democratic Party then, I’m moving on and watching these people. And what happened was, … it took a very short time, a year or so, before I just started watching them, watching everything they were doing.

I felt strange because my dad used to always say, “Oh, that’s communist.” I’d say, “Oh, dad, yeah. I know there’s a communist under your bed.” Well, there was, they were everywhere. And whether they call themselves communists or not, they were, in my estimation, communists because the goals were the same. The tactics were a little different, but the goals were the same.

One of the last things that they did that really pushed me away was they come up to us one day on the street. And this had come down from, not an activist, an agent, actually, a KGB agent, who had been identified to me on the streets several times. He was, I guess, code named Andre.

Andre had passed on this information that we were going to completely change our tactics. And I said, “What are we going to do?” “Well, you’re going to stop calling yourselves communists.” I said, “Really? Well, what are we going to call ourselves?” “We’re going to call ourselves liberals, progressives, socialists, anything but communists.”

Allen: Wow.

Salinski: So from that point on, if you identified yourself as a liberal, I just said, “Okay, check one communist. Progressive, check another as communist.” And what I’m seeing today, in my mind, validates that.

Allen: Wow.

Salinski: Well, Antifa is and Black Lives Matter is more a return to Leninist tactics. They’re out in the street, obviously burning things down, and pushing people around, and so on and so forth.

But the main communist movement is behind them and is still chugging along with their idea of … moving the country gradually over the past, what is now 50 years since this all happened. I’m watching it. Never, never stop moving to the left. It’s always moving left.

Allen: So walk us through how exactly the Communist Party does go about enticing people. I mean, how have they essentially infiltrated the left to where we are seeing this kind of radical takeover and this radical progressivism push forward, that is very different from what I think the left used to look like?

Salinski: Well, their motive has been all along to identify areas that certain groups, certain constituencies, and when it gets down to it, certain individuals, like myself, are interested in.

They had a gold mine there during Vietnam because they had a war that nobody wanted to get into. And they used that to pull people in. But whatever it is, housing, jobs, anything that they can name that a group is interested in, they will use, even if they’re counter to each other. …

They’re promising one group this, promising the other group that, and this and that cancel each other out. But as long as those two groups don’t figure that out, they’re drawing people in.

Allen: In your own experience, how open and honest are communists actually about their goals?

Salinski: Depends on where you are in the program. Up at the top, yeah, they’re free and easy with talking about what they want to do, destroying the United States, as we know it. And then ultimately destroying all nations, and all boundaries and borders. But below the top level, it’s just what you’re given to know, what you’re supposed to know, and you move on from there.

But the word “honest” and the word “communist” should never be used together in a sentence because they’re not honest.

Allen: Interesting. You have explained, during previous presentations, that the Communist Party really sees themselves as being at war when they’re spreading their ideology. Can you just explain that a little bit more, what you mean by that?

Salinski: Well, yeah. And this was early on too, I didn’t get this late in the program, this was upfront. “We are at war.” Now, I didn’t tumble to all that that meant, but the phraseology was, “We’re at war. And that means anything goes.”

Marx said that the definition of morality is that which advances the revolution. And I found that to be true with them. That’s what morality is. …

One of the things that really frustrates me, when I’m dealing with people who are not real knowledgeable about this stuff, is that idea that they think we’re playing by the same rules that we’ve always played by.

There’s a Democratic Party, there’s a Republican Party, everybody’s agreed on the fundamental principles of right and wrong, but that’s not where the communists are.

They are at war. They are going to do anything, anything it takes to win. There’s no ground for agreement or crossing the aisle or any of that stuff. It’s just, they’re going to take advantage of every situation that offers itself. And they’re going to use that situation to win. It’s the end justifies the means, in every case.

Allen: Well, I find it fascinating that you say that because I think increasingly in the nation, that’s what we’re seeing. You’ve been through things like cancel culture, that there’s no room for disagreement or difference.

Salinski: Right.

Allen: And we’ve seen, sadly, this real interest among young people in socialism. In your opinion, what separates socialism and communism? Does one naturally kind of deteriorate into the other?

Salinski: Well, I agree with Lenin, the end, the result of all socialism is communism. There are arbitrary demarcations drawn along the historical line, but they’re arbitrary and … the moment they can be pushed aside, the moment they can be disposed with, they’re going to be disposed with.

This is an argument I have with so many people in our own movement, “Oh, well, he’s not really a communist.” No, not yet, but he’s headed there.

There’s a difference between their conception of economics, and communism is an economic system in the end. They believe in what’s called a closed economic system. There’s X amount of dollars, or whatever we want to refer to the resources as, and that’s it. You have to move that around to people in the fairest possible way, ideally, absolute equality.

But capitalism is based on an open economic system. You don’t have enough wealth? Well, go create some. And that’s what we do. … I learned that in college, that was long, long, past the communist phase of my life.

But when I learned that, it became crystal clear to me why some people are drawn to communism or socialism or any ism that says it’s going to share the money. Well, yeah, because there’s only so much, and if you have too much, then I have too little. But that’s not reality. I mean, wealth is always being created.

Allen: You mentioned in college, that was where your capitalist views kind of were cemented. And that’s wonderful, that for you that was your experience. But I do find that sad, that today, we see the exact opposite, that young people go to college and they are somewhat radicalized. They are introduced to socialist and communist ideas. And maybe that capitalist background that they grew up with is kind of lost to the wayside.

What do you think is the responsibility of educators, parents, mentors, to actually be speaking to the younger generation, honestly, about the realities of socialism and communism?

Salinski: Well, I think that their responsibility is to go there and do that and open up that conversation. But at this point, you’re going to lose … Well, even back then, it was the case. But now, it’s even more the case. You’re going to risk losing your sons and daughters because they’re bought into it.

And I should add that I was not educated in capitalism in college. I drew that from the opposite of … Everything they said was bad, I thought, “Well, that sounds pretty good to me. That actually doesn’t sound bad at all.”

So it was not that they were out there promoting capitalism at that time. I just drew that from what they were promoting. Because I had already been there, I had seen the whole communist thing up close, and thought, “Yeah, yeah, yeah. That’s not true. What you’re saying there won’t work out.”

And certain times you could speak that out and say, “Well, my experience is this,” and you’d get support. And other times, you just learn to keep your mouth shut, if you want to get that grade and get out, where you can do some real damage, which I did.

Allen: Yeah.

Salinski: I ended up teaching college, and in my classroom they got the truth. You know when I say they got the truth, they got both sides, they got a fair treatment of communism and a fair treatment of capitalism.

I have to tell you, once it’s laid out like that, I used to finish the course with just a little … Well, other things that they had to do. But one of their tasks at the end of the course was to write me a two-page paper on what they thought of the material in the course, regarding communism and capitalism, and 90% of them plus went for capitalism when they realized what the difference was.

Allen: Well, I think, unfortunately, few college students today have a professor like you that will clearly lay out both sides.

So are there any resources that you would recommend for young people who, they’re in college, they’re facing, essentially, being indoctrinated with these ideas and they just want to hear both sides of the argument. Are there certain books that you would recommend or individuals, maybe, to look up on YouTube?

Salinski: … First of all, the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, they should become familiar with that. And the history behind it, that in itself is quite a task, but they need to do that. But writing’s more directly concerned with it.

What started me off was W. Graham Sumner. I don’t know if you ever heard of Sumner, but he was an anti-socialist back in, I think he died in 1910 or something like that, in 1912. So he was in the Progressive Era and he was noted as an anti-progressive, but he frequently got onto outing socialism and just laid out the differences.

Salinski: Let’s see, [Antonio] Gramsci, or not Gramsci. Well, they should read Gramsci. They should read something of Gramsci because that tells them what they’re hooked up in now. They should read “Rules for Radicals,” if they haven’t already. Which is, again, a Marxist source, but it lays out what they’re being asked to do and why.

Any of the writings from [The Heritage Foundation]. OK? Any of the writings from people like Pat Buchanan, back in the ’90s, especially. There’s a lot of material out there. They have to look it up though.

Allen: Absolutely. How can our listeners follow your work?

Salinski: Through ACAT, mostly. And I do some things around here. I’m doing a speech on the 29th about communism. Well, it was originally in a library, but then this coronavirus came along and shut the library thing down. So they’ve moved it across the alleyway to a church over there.

You could look me up online. I’m trying to think of whether most of my talks are still up there. I know we took a lot of them down, but they have a way of getting back up there. So you could just look up my name and see what comes out in that, but always through ACAT, Anticommunist Action Team. That’s where I’ll be.

Allen: Great. Thank you. So that’s the Anticommunist Action Team.

Salinski: Yeah.

Allen: We’ll be sure to link that in the show notes today. Tony, thank you. We just really appreciate your time and you coming on and talking about your own personal experience, really fascinating.

Salinski: Well, thank you very much for having me.

COLUMN BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5

RELATED ARTICLES:

Looking Back: Combating Tyranny, Waste, and Economic Devastation of ‘Green’ Agenda With Free Enterprise

The State of Race in America Today and Yesterday

ICYMI: 10 Examples of Defensive Gun Use Underscore Second Amendment’s True Purpose


A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »


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

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers [and Obama Pal] Says Civil War Has Already Started

Ayers should be rotting in prison. Instead the left has made him a god.

Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.

From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.
Bill Ayers.
AP

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.

The CAC’s agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland’s ghetto.

[…]

CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

Mr. Obama once conducted “leadership training” seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama’s early campaigns. External partners like the South Shore African Village Collaborative and the Dual Language Exchange focused more on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditional education. CAC’s in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement.

CAC also funded programs designed to promote “leadership” among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children’s education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama’s alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda. CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents “organized” by community groups might be viewed by school principals “as a political threat.” Mr. Obama arranged meetings with the Collaborative to smooth out Mr. Weber’s objections.

 (Read the rest at the WSJ)

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers Says Civil War Has Already Started

By Tyler O’Neil Sep 11, 2020 12:03 AM EST

As violent and destructive antifa and Black Lives Matter riots continue to ravage American cities like Portland and Kenosha, a self-described communist who plotted to blow up the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s suggested that America’s second Civil War has already started.“Am I the only one, or do you feel eerily that we’re living in Kansas, 1859, and that tensions are boiling over, but only years later will people say, ‘Yes, the Civil War began there and then?’” Ayers posted on Facebook. He posted the same statement on his website, BillAyers.org.Ayers, who co-founded the Weather Underground in 1969, took part in the bombings of the New York City Police Department headquarters in 1970, the U.S. Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. Since the FBI used illegal tactics against the Weather Underground and the New Left, the government dropped key charges against the Weather Underground and Bill Ayers.

After his radical career, he settled into academia, where he taught at the University of Illinois. When he retired in 2010, the university denied him emeritus status. The university’s board chair, Christopher G. Kennedy (son of assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy), condemned Ayers for dedicating a book “to the man who murdered my father.” Kennedy referred to a 1974 book Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism, which Ayers wrote with other Weather Underground members and which the authors dedicated to manny revolutionaries, including the man who assassinated Robert F. Kennedy. Ayers denied dedicating a book to the assassin and suggested that right-wing bloggers started a rumor to that effect.

As for Ayers’ “eerie” feeling, he was referring to Bleeding Kansas, a lesser-known precursor to the American Civil War.

In the decade leading up to the Civil War, Southern Democrats fought to extend slavery north and west. The Founders had forged a grand bargain to allow the evil institution of slavery while restricting its spread. In 1820, Congress drew a line, saying that any state north of the line would enter the Union as free while states that entered below the line could have slavery. Yet Southerners started defending slavery as a positive good and arguing for “popular sovereignty,” the notion that white landowners in states north of the 1820 line would vote on whether the state would be slave or free. Abraham Lincoln grew to prominence by opposing this notion.

Has the Second American Civil War Already Started?

The South held tremendous sway in the federal government. In 1854, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, opening up Kansas and Nebraska to “popular sovereignty.” Pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers rushed into Kansas, seeking to tip the balance toward their side. The settlers fought and killed one another in a prelude to the Civil War known as “Bleeding Kansas.”

With the benefit of hindsight, Americans see “Bleeding Kansas” as a precursor to — if not the very first tremors of — the Civil War. In one sense, the Civil War had a “soft opening” in 1854, before the main event in 1861.

Ayers was suggesting that the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots in Portland, Kenosha, Seattle, Chicago, and other cities may be a prelude to a much larger conflict, a full-blown civil war. Others on the Left have suggested something similar.

The Portland antifa ally suspected of shooting a Trump supporter said a civil war was “right around the corner.” Former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta war-gamed the 2020 election and suggested that Joe Biden may cry foul if he loses, starting off a chain reaction resulting in secession and a civil war. Far-left groups recently came together to prepare for a civil war.

Given Ayers’ violent revolutionary history, the fact that he would suggest that a civil war is brewing seems particularly significant. During his academic career, Ayers gained “stature and high esteem” in the field of education. The American Educational Research Association elected him vice president for curriculum studies. Some of the radical Marxism in academia today traces back to his efforts.

Like Abraham Lincoln, Donald Trump represents a long-overdue backlash to a radical Democratic movement seeking to transform America and break the Founders’ compact, the U.S. Constitution. This is not to say that Trump necessarily has the stature of Lincoln — but he does represent the same kind of backlash.

While the Southern Democrats before the Civil War sought to expand the institution of slavery and railroaded the Founders’ grand bargain, leftists today seek to undermine the Constitution and remake America in the name of intersectional “social justice.” Activists demonize Americans who hold conservative views and seek unlimited federal power to champion abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgender identity, to deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights, and to foist leftist ideas in education in the name of diversity.

Trump champions the Constitution while Democrats actively campaign against it, calling for the abolition of the Electoral College and the Senate in order to push their radical agenda. Perhaps for this reason, even liberals like John Podesta suggest that states will secede and spark a civil war on behalf of Joe Biden. Democrats have used American institutions to push their ideas, but now that a backlash against their radicalism has been building, they no longer want to abide by the terms of the agreement.

The South arguably brought the Civil War on itself, and the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots suggest the Left may do something similar. That makes Bill Ayers’ comment all the more chilling.

Let us pray it does not come to that.


HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM


RELATED ARTICLES:

WILDFIRE ARSON: Four Arrested for Arson on the West Coast, One a ‘Regular Attendee’ of Anti-Cop Rallies in Seattle

Navid Afkari: Iran executes young wrestler despite global outcry

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers (and Obama Pal) Says Civil War Has Already Started

NFL Ratings Crash over 16% for Woke Season Opener

Joe Biden Appears to Reflect Teleprompter Text During TV Interview

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

VIDEO: Biden May Be Mentally Incompetent, but He’s Highly Competent With Corruption

Dinesh D’Souza published the following on his YouTube channel:

These days, Biden seems mentally incompetent. But when it comes to corruption and cashing in on his public office, Biden has proven himself to be highly competent.

WATCH:

Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, “United States of Socialism,” reveals how the Left uses the Venezuelan formula for socialism, decisively refutes this new face of socialism, chillingly documents the full range of the Left’s gangster tendencies, and provocatively exposes the tactics of the socialist Left. Who is behind it, why is it evil, and how can we stop it? Don’t get left in the dark—order Dinesh D’Souza’s powerful new book today.

©All rights reserved.

How an Islamic Terror Sheikh Ended Up Selling Meth in Orange County, California

And why the authorities let it happen.

The end of what law enforcement had called the most imminent Islamic terrorist plot since September 11 came when Gregory Vernon Patterson left his cell phone behind at a gas station.

Patterson and his roommate, Levar Haley Washington, had joined Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh, a prison Islamic terror group, and had been conducting a robbery spree to finance terror plots against the LAX airport, the National Guard, and local synagogues during the High Holy days.

The shotgun robberies by the organization, whose name meant the Association of True Islam, were going well. The gang of criminal Jihadis had pulled off eleven gas station robberies in LA and Orange County to raise funds for their terror spree until Patterson dropped his phone during a robbery at a gas station in Torrance. The phone led authorities to the South Central apartment being used by Patterson and Washington where they found Bin Laden posters and a target list.

The target list included LAX which was convenient because Patterson already worked there.

Washington and Patterson were busted while trying to rob another gas station in Fullerton.

Patterson told cops that robbing gas stations was “part of a jihad against the U.S., particularly against American oil companies who are stealing from our countries” and that he wanted to die for Allah. The gas station robberies had been meant to raise money to buy weapons and to provide training to Patterson, who had no criminal record, in how to be a terrorist.

Patterson and Hammad Riaz Samana, a Pakistani, had all attended the Jamaat-E-Masijudal mosque where Washington had recruited the black convert and the Pakistani Muslim. The two terrorists swore allegiance to Washington and the shotgun robberies of gas stations began.

Washington, a former Crip, had done time in Folsom State Prison where he found a copy of the Koran, began calling himself Abdur Rahman, and was recruited by a terror mastermind.

There were two unique things about the 2005 terror plot. As Daniel Pipes pointed out at the time, it was the first “large-scale” terror plot organized by Americans, not Muslim immigrants.

But it was also the first Islamic terror plot in America that was organized from prison.

Kevin Lamarr James, a Crips gang member, had been sent away for a decade for a robbery in 1996. A member of the Nation of Islam, James made the same journey as Malcolm X and many other black Muslims, away from the racist black nationalist UFO cult, and to mainstream Islam.

On one hand, he had gotten a tattoo of Allah and on the other, the star and crescent of Islam.

The charismaic James created Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh or JIS to spread true Islam, recruit prisoners, and set off a wave of Islamic terrorist atrocities against American targets in California.

Members were told to swear an oath of secrecy, to wage war on infidels, especially Jews. In prison, they practiced Arabic, studied Islamic theology, and trained in martial arts. Out of prison, they were told to blend into society and build the Caliphate in America through Jihad.

By the time the robberies began, a Jihadist group had been secretly operating in Folsom Prison for nearly a decade, and was about to make the leap to carrying out attacks on the outside.

One of their target dates for a terror attack was the fourth anniversary of September 11.

“This incident is the first in a series of incidents to come in a plight to defend and propagate traditional Islam in its purity,” James, who had changed his name to Ahmed Binyamin Alasiri, allegedly declared in a press release for the attacks.

“We are not extremists, radicals, or terrorists. We are only servants of Allah.”

But James hadn’t picked the best servants for his deity. When Patterson left behind his phone, the authorities followed the trail right back to Folsom Prison and JIS’ mastermind.

The four-man cell was charged with levying war against the United States.

But James was the one with the brains. While Washington, his patsy, was slapped with a twenty-two year prison sentence, his ‘Sheikh’ who had built an entire terror group in prison, denied everything and then claimed that he suffered from a really bad childhood.

“Your honor, I’m thoroughly embarrassed and appalled by my actions. I don’t even recognize who I was three years ago. Never before in my life before meeting these people, did I believe in violence or targeting innocent civilians,” the terror sheikh gushed.

Judge Cormac Carney, who would later illegally declare the death penalty to be unconstitutional, called James’ missive “the most powerful letter I’ve ever received.”

The naive judge was also impressed by all of James’ prison college classes and his evolution and repentance, and described him as a victim from a disadvantaged background.

In the portion of James’ letter that Judge Carney read out loud in court, the terror mastermind vowed that, “My country need never fear from me again.”

That was in 2009.

He was freed in September 2019. And in August 2020, he was busted selling meth.

James, now living in Orange County and officially being called Ahmed Binyamin Alasiri, had been selling nearly pure methamphetamine for thousands of dollars.

And all of this was going on while James was on supervised release.

The FBI had called the terror plot by Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh, “probably the one that operationally was closest to actually occurring”.

“Americans watched so-called ‘home grown’ terrorists unleash multiple bombings in the city of London. Some in this country may have mistakenly believed that it could not happen here. Today we have chilling evidence that it is possible,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said.

The terror plot had been aimed at military targets, as well as a number of Los Angeles congregations, including, allegedly, the ultra-progressive B’nai David-Judea, which would have been struck by armed gunmen pushing their way inside and opening fire on Yom Kippur.

The heavy security presence at Los Angeles synagogues, which includes heavily armed guards and bulletproof vests, is part of the legacy that James and his True Islam terror group left there.

James had built up a terrorist operation in prison backed by manifestos and operational documents making him the closest counterpart to the Blind Sheikh. Instead he was given a lighter sentence because the same charismatic gang member turned preacher, who had convinced hardened criminals from rival gangs to believe in him, had turned a judge.

Selling meth may have been the alleged hobby of a newly freed criminal, or something more. Traffic in certain drugs, including methamphetamines, has been used by Islamic terrorist groups to finance their operations. It’s unknown whether this is the case here, but the FBI, after Obama, is less likely to be looking for it or to even know what to be on the lookout for.

When Jamiyyat Ul-Islam Is-Saheeh fell afoul of the FBI in 2005, law enforcement was acquainted with the methodology, infrastructure and strategies of Islamic terrorists. During the Obama administration, a cultural revolution was waged against counterterrorism from the inside.

If James is up to anything these days, the FBI is unprepared and unready to find out.

Fifteen years later, the terror plot, once a major event, has been largely forgotten. And the same is true of most Islamic terrorist attacks except for September 11. As the country enters another September and begins a countdown to 9/11, everything afterward is being forgotten.

During the Black Lives Matter riots, a white Muslim illegal alien stabbed a New York cop, grabbed his gun, and opened fire on other officers while shouting, “Allahu Akbar”. Despite wounding three cops and claiming, “my religion made me do it,” there’s been little coverage.

In the midst of a pandemic and nationwide race riots, we should not forget that there is more than one threat vector. Islamic terrorists don’t go away just because no one is paying attention. And the same prison system that helped produce the wave of BLM violence has also incubated Islamic prison terror cells like the one that plotted to kill Americans on another September 11.

The Nation of Islam has been a feeder for both Islamic terrorism and Black Lives Matter violence. All three are deeply violent, bigoted, and possessed of a feverish hatred of America.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Shock Horror: Bob Woodward Says Trump Called Obama ‘Overrated’

Australia: Muslim leader says Israelis ‘are waiting for the Islamic nation to carry out the jihad against them’

Turks irked at Qur’an-burning in Sweden: ‘We expect Swedish authorities to take all measures to fight this disease’

Germany: Muslim migrant stabs random German in order to escape deportation

Iran’s Judiciary Chief: ‘Insulting the holy prophet of Islam is soft violence against freedom of expression’

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

Unfit To Print Video Episode 69: Netflix’s ‘Cuties’ Is Worse Than We Thought

The French film “Cuties” was finally released on Netflix this week and it is much worse than anyone thought it would be. Netflix tried to lie to American viewers by telling them the hyper-sexualized promotional poster that showed pre-teen girls in seductive poses was not representative of the film.

The film contains numerous inappropriate scenes featuring the young girls and was even considered child pornography in a parental guide posted to IMDb — that is, until IMDb scrubbed that language in an attempt at a cover-up. Host Amber Athey blasts the film’s enablers in this week’s episode of “Unfit to Print” and covers Disney’s “Mulan” controversy, CNN’s horrible PR week, Bob Woodward’s newest Trump book, and The Atlantic’s disastrous anti-Trump article.

LISTEN: 

If you like this podcast, go check out Amber’s work at The Spectator and take advantage of their special election offer before it goes away. Make sure you use the discount code AMBER!

COLUMN BY

AMBER ATHEY

Podcast columnist. Follow Amber on Twitter

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netflix CEO BUSTED with 13,000 files of CHILD PORNOGRAPHY

Tulsi Gabbard Condemns Netflix for Releasing ‘Cuties’: ‘Child Porn’ That ‘Will Whet the Appetite of Pedophiles & Fuel Child Sex Trafficking’

‘I Just Miss Her’: Uighur American Speaks Out About Missing Mom, Disney’s ‘Mulan’

RELATED PODCASTS:

Unfit To Print Episode 68: Pelosi Personifies Liberal Elitism With Salon Visit

Unfit To Print Episode 67: Kyle Rittenhouse, Murder Or Self Defense?

Unfit To Print Episode 66: Democratic Conspiracies About USPS Are Russiagate 2.0

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

Author on NPR Defends Looting: ‘We Can Have Things For Free’

In an interview last Thursday, the author of a book titled In Defense of Looting told National Public Radio (NPR) that looting enables rioters to steal others’ property with “an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure.”

Vicky Osterweil explained her theory to a supportive NPR that looting is merely a means to address the unequal distribution of wealth. She claims there is a distinction between “the mass expropriation of property, mass shoplifting during a moment of upheaval or riot” and “any situation in which property is stolen by force.”

She added that looting “attacks the history of whiteness and white supremacy,” because “the reason that the world is organized that way, obviously, is for the profit of the people who own the stores and the factories. So you get to the heart of that property relation, and demonstrate that without police and without state oppression, we can have things for free.”

“Looting strikes at the heart of property, of whiteness and of the police…,” she added. “And also it provides people with an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure and helps them imagine a world that could be. And I think that’s a part of it that doesn’t really get talked about—that riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.”

Except by the people whose property is stolen or destroyed.


National Public Radio (NPR)

71 Known Connections

Over the course of NPR’s history, some of its broadcasts have made big headlines with their incendiary anti-conservative rhetoric. In July 1995, for instance, after Republican Senator Jesse Helms had stated that the federal government was spending too much money on AIDS research, NPR’s legal-affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg said: “I think he [Helms] ought to be worried about what’s going on in the Good Lord’s mind, because if there is retributive justice, he’ll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.”

Fifteen years later, in 2010, the same Nina Totenberg, reporting on Barack Obama‘s nomination of Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court, described Kagan “as a modern-day Superman.”

In November 2009, the NPR website featured an animated video disparaging the Tea Party movement by teaching readers how “to speak Tea Bag.”

To learn more about NPR, click here for the profile link.

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

VIDEO: The mysterious power of an international transgender declaration that no one has ever heard of

Why are the Yogyakarta Principles so influential?


Russian feminist Anna Zobnina’s excellent summary of the Yogyakarta Principles at a recent seminar.

The reasons for the rapid conquest by transgender activists of the media, universities, government departments and woke corporations are mysterious. Is it cultural? Psychological? Philosophical? Legal?

Without being a complete explanation, one reason is widespread acceptance of the Yogyakarta Principles. Amnesty USA describes them as “a universal guide to applying international human rights law” to LGBT issues. A leading German NGO, the Heinrich Böll Stiftung, describes them as “a groundbreaking document, extensively used since by human rights mechanisms and advocates” and Human Rights Watch has praised them as “a milestone for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender rights”.

America’s leading LGBT think tank, the Williams Institute at UCLA, says that “the Yogyakarta Principles are the primary document defining the application of international human rights law with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity.”

But despite scholarly journals often quoting these principles they are not recognised in international human rights law.

The Yogyakarta Principles, promulgated in 2006, addressed lesbian, gay and bisexual rights. In 2017, more principles to accommodate transgender rights were added. These are called the Yogyakarta Principles + 10.

You may have never heard of either document. But trans activists have turned them into powerful propaganda tools for transforming transgender rights into human rights. As an example, a recent submission by Amnesty Australia to a federal government inquiry into religious freedom quotes the Yogyakarta Principles over and over again.

The trouble is, they are not worth the paper they are written on.

The back story

The genesis of the Yogyakarta Principles is a horror story involving several key people, legal strategies and well-organised public relations events around the world, all designed to replace the term “sex” with “gender”.

The site of the first meeting in November 2006, Yogyakarta in Indonesia, was chosen because it was “south of the equator, in a Muslim majority country and in a jurisdiction ruled by a Sultan”. The co-chairs of the meeting were from Thailand and Brazil and representation was carefully selected from outside the West and Latin America, including individuals from Botswana, China, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nepal, Pakistan, South Africa, Thailand and Turkey. The participants came from only 25 countries.

The original document became the Yogyakarta Principles Plus 10 in 2017. Its new principles included gender expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation and “gender identity”.

The 2017 document was signed by only 33 people.

Legally inconsequential

What is their legal status? They have none at all. They are just a Christmas shopping list for the transgender lobby.

The Principles have never been accepted by the United Nations. Attempts to make gender identity and sexual orientation new categories of non-discrimination have been repeatedly rejected by the General Assembly, the Human Rights Council and other UN bodies. In fact, a majority of members of the General Assembly opposed any reference to the Yogyakarta Principles as they are seen as being contradictory to the position of the UN Human Rights Council.

Despite its reputation in Australia, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee has acknowledged that the Yogyakarta Principles have no statutory power in Australia. They have no binding effect in international human rights law either.

Compare this to the legal support that the international community has given to women. The Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) was adopted by the United Nations in 1979 and has been ratified by 189 states (the US being one notable exception).

Australia became a signatory of CEDAW in 1980, but the convention was further empowered by our federal legislature when it was incorporated in its entirety into the Commonwealth legislation enacted to protect and further the rights of women, the Sex Discrimination Act of 1984.

Feminists betrayed

Do feminists support the Yogyakarta Principles? No.

In fact, an international feminist group, the Women’s Human Rights Campaign (WHRC), which includes many well-known academics and feminist activists, is fiercely opposed to them. In their view, the principles are misogynistic and attempt “to make sex a defunct legal category.” The Yogyakarta Principles document is designed to replace “sex”, which is a scientific, biological fact, with “gender identity”, which is a socially constructed fiction, based largely on postmodernist rhetoric and identity politics.

They claim that the popularity of the document is a sign that “we are moving towards a society where sex does not exist”, especially for women and girls. They fear that acceptance of the Yogyakarta Principles will destroy the enormous gains made in past decades by the feminist movement.

Nor has the Yogyakarta Principles project had much popular support. It is largely coordinated by Allied Rainbow Communities, or ARC International (ARC), an NGO based in Canada. In her analysis of the Yogyakarta Principles, feminist Anna Zobnina notes that ARC is basically a lobby group, not an internationally representative organisation.

The WHRC Declaration on Women’s Sex-Based Rights has been signed, as at September 9, by 11,772 individuals and 256 organisations from 119 countries. All supporters of the WHRC are listed on its Declaration page. It is quite transparent.

The ARC website is not transparent. Its latest accounts date from 2016, when it received $407,000 from “membership and donations” in 2016. It also received $275,000 from “foundations” and $71,000 from the Norwegian Foreign Ministry.

The WHRC Facebook page has about 4,000 likes; the ARC page has about 2,500. The WHRC has representatives across at least 25 countries and was established only 18 months ago. The ARC was established 17 years ago.

What’s wrong with the Yogyakarta Principles?

In the Yogyakarta Principles “gender identity” is defined as:

Understanding “gender identity” to refer to each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender. Including dress, speech and mannerisms.

As noted by American human rights lawyer Tina Minkowitz, “gender itself is not defined, but is situated in relation to “sex assigned at birth”, with which a person’s internal experience of gender may or may not correspond” and the reference to “sex” is only to indicate that it does not refer to personality traits. “Sex” is not defined either.

Alarmingly, for everyone, “YP implicitly accepts a concept of gender as equivalent to stereotypes. When beliefs about mannerisms, dress and speech appropriate to one sex or the other are abstracted and made to serve as a ground for personal identity, they are shielded from challenge.”

This unravels decades of progress for feminists. The notion that an innate feeling can lead to a change in an individual’s sex status at birth, with the corresponding legal entitlements and access to spaces and places reserved for girls and women (including their sports), is a violation of the protections established over decades for women, beginning with CEDAW.

As Minkowitz further notes, “It is not gender identity that is being protected, but the substitution of internal identity for recorded sex, upon the request of any person”. The legitimisation of this process is simply creating new forms of discrimination against girls and women and is in conflict with CEDAW.

This is not to say that transgender people should not be protected, but replacing “sex” with “gender identity” not only erases sex as a category and girls and women as a class distinct from that of boys and men, but also erases girls’ and women’s human rights.

A significant, currently relevant, example of the consequences of these changes is given by Minkowitz. She states that women have “little reason to expect their rights will be protected, in (a) law and policy environment that treats their discussion of sex and gender as tantamount to hate speech”.

On the matter of “sex” and “gender”, the CEDAW Committee’s General Recommendation 28 emphasizes that changing one’s gender does not change an individual’s social positioning. Gender identity advocates are naïve to think this is possible; the ideological nature of their claims renders them as fictional as the postmodernist thinking upon which they are based.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there are six fundamental criticisms of the Yogyakarta Principles and its “Plus 10” extensions:

  1. They were constructed by a few unelected, unrepresentative civil groups and individuals;
  2. They have never been adopted by the United Nations;
  3. They have no legal force either internationally or within Australia and were rejected by the Commonwealth legislature and the United Nations;
  4. The Yogyakarta Principles +10 principles were signed by just 33 people;
  5. They are often quoted misleadingly by members of parliament and trans lobby groups as though they had been adopted by UN resolution; and
  6. Their full implementation would effectively make “sex” a defunct legal category, replacing it by the ambiguous category of “gender”.

This content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.

COLUMN BY

Geoff Holloway

Dr Geoff Holloway writes from Hobart. He is a sociologist, poet, author, and Fado fan. His current research interests include domestic violence in Portugal, ecocentrism, Green politics, transgender politics,… 

RELATED ARTICLE: The flag waving has gone too far

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

VIDEO: Cancelling Election Night — A Diabolical Plan.

TRANSCRIPT

Church Militant (a 501(c)4 corporation) is responsible for the content of this commentary.

As a reminder, please join us in our 54-day Rosary Novena in the run-up to the election.

Given that this is the anniversary of the largest terror strike against the United States in its history, it’s fitting to recall that the motivation for that attack against the Twin Towers was the destruction of America. It was not to merely injure the country or weaken it or soften it up and cut it down to size. It was to destroy it. Period.

And so now to pivot to the upcoming election: How are the Democrats any different in their stated aims. They want America destroyed. And they are pretty darn close to accomplishing it. Using a crafty combination of propaganda, phony science and appeals to emotion, the Marxist crowd in the United States has constructed a narrative that says, “America is bad and must be replaced with a new understanding of America.”

By seizing on past injustices and sins, they have developed a plan to make the entire history of the country seem evil and inhuman (and, therefore, in need of overthrowing). For the moment, they must work within the boundaries of a supposedly free election.

Recognize, however, if they win, this may be the last presidential election in America — or the first in a series of purely manufactured elections with a predetermined outcome already baked in. That’s the whole point of this mail-in balloting scheme — to completely throw into confusion the results of election night.

This is not just absentee voting. Absentee voting is just casting a vote ahead of time because you know you won’t be able to be at the polls on Election Day for some reason. This is an organized campaign to get as many people as possible to not show up at the polls on Election Day so an air of uncertainty, of unknowingness, of no-conclusion hangs over election night, and the country is prepared for a long, drawn-out, ongoing supposed “vote count.”

The problem is tracking these ballots. So far, any effort on the state level to do mail-in voting on a large scale has proven completely unworkable. Some public officials have been charged with vote fraud. Counties and states have had hundreds of thousands of ballots rejected owing to miscounting, mismanagement and overall chaos.

There’s a reason the election happens on the same day in all 50 states — because it makes sense and it works. The Marxist Democrats are keeping up the Wuhan virus scare in an attempt to terrify enough voters into voting by mail and not showing up at the polls.

Then, after the polls have closed, the mayhem can begin. Dead people’s votes can get rolled into the total. Ballots illegally filled out by Democrats in key counties and states can suddenly appear by the box-load. More ballots end up being cast in a given precinct than there were eligible voters to cast them in the first place.

As some old sayings go, “It’s not the voting that’s democracy; it’s the counting.” And a saying from a Third World dictator — Nicaragua’s Anastasio Somoza — sums it up perfectly and fittingly: “Indeed, you won the election, but I won the count.”

From a Catholic point of view, it would be difficult to imagine a greater sin — a greater fraud perpetrated against the people of a nation built on free elections — than a massive fraud negating their votes and canceling out the actual results.

It’s theft, and accordingly, it’s an offense against justice. It’s an offense against truth, which makes all of it an offense against charity. But, then again, you’re talking about people who murder babies. So, there’s that.

What’s the theft of a few hundred thousand votes here and there on the days following the election? As further evidence of the diabolical involvement in this great unfolding spiritual war, the Party of Death is deliberately setting the stage for post-election-night chaos.

Chaos is the stock and trade of the diabolical. Theft, lies, deception — all in the ultimate service of child-killing: Do you still need convincing this is a spiritual war?

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

The Dangers of “Sexxx Ed”

Because of the virus, there is a current debate between opening up the schools or only using online instruction. Online instruction allows parents to hear what is being taught to their children. But that has some liberals up at arms because they want to teach a more radical curriculum than most parents would wish.

Perhaps the largest bone of contention in this respect is in the realm of sex education, which in our day has become more radicalized.

Christian attorney Brad Dacus, the president of Pacific Justice Institute, even calls today’s curriculum “Sexxx ed.”

Dacus told D. James Kennedy Ministries: “With the new sex-ed curriculum revolution taking place in public schools, it is a literal spiritual genocide….It is so twisted with a radical LGBTQ taught to young children all the way down to kindergarten, convincing them that they can change their gender—be a boy on the inside, girl on the outside.”

The Family Research Council (FRC) has recently released a booklet laying out the shocking facts about all this. It is entitled “Sex Education in Public Schools: Sexualization of Children and LGBT Indoctrination.” The author is Cathy Ruse, a Senior Fellow at FRC and Georgetown Law grad.

Ruse notes, “Most of us remember what sex education was like when we were in school. A couple of uncomfortable hours….Things are very different today.”

  • Children are taught they could be born “in the wrong body.”
  • Teens are shown videos of techniques to pleasure their sex partners.
  • Students are told how to have abortions without telling their parents.
  • Schools in Indiana send teens out to shop for condoms.

And on it goes.

Tony Perkins, the president of FRC, told me in an interview: “When most parents hear about sex education, they immediately think back to their gym teacher giving them some of the basic facts of human biology. But that’s not what is being taught today in our schools.”

He noted that for the most part much of today’s teaching is “a tutorial on sexual activity.” He also said, “It has expanded to where in some cases it is 70 hours of instruction.”

Planned Parenthood is now the nation’s largest sex educator in our public schools. And they profit off of the abortions they provide to sexually active teenagers. This reminds me of the old phrase, “Follow the money.”

In an interview on Christian television, Cathy Ruse told me, “There is a story out of a rural Virginia county where parents learned that their 9th grade daughters had been shown a Planned Parenthood sex ed video…focusing on certain sexual organs of their partners, and the video promoted the use of sex toys.”

As noted earlier, response to the coronavirus has shut down many schools, which now provide only virtual classes. And some educators do not welcome parental involvement.

Last week, the DailyWire.com (8/20/20) noted that parents have to sign a waiver “agreeing not to monitor virtual instruction.” Why? Does the school have something to hide? This particular story was out of Murfreesboro, Tennessee—not some liberal metropolis.

On 8/10/20, washingtonexaminer.com wrote of a Philadelphia teacher who fretted that “conservative parents” who listen in on their children’s instructions might interfere with teachers who are involved “in the messy work of destabilizing a kid’s racism or homophobia or transphobia.” The teacher assumes that teachers know what’s best for the children, not the parents. Who is responsible for the children? The parents or the teachers?

The Bible tells us that the parents are responsible for rearing their children. And God will hold parents accountable for the type of education they provide for their children. This is why school choice is such a hotly debated topic today.

One byproduct of the COVID-19 pandemic is that some parents learned that they actually could homeschool their children. Homeschooling has a long and rich tradition in American history. Some of our founding fathers and great leaders were homeschooled for at least part of their education. This includes George Washington, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Abraham Lincoln. Homeschooled children today often succeed well beyond their public school counterparts.

Parents are responsible for their children, even if they delegate the teaching to the school. Our TV ministry once covered a story about a young girl in a California high school who had an abortion apart from her parents’ permission or knowledge. When she developed an infection (because of the abortion) that caused her to be paralyzed, it was the parents, not the school, who had to pick up the pieces of her shattered life. Schools should work with parents, not against them.

If the schools are teaching dangerous things, including falsehoods about sex—and purposely excluding the parents from knowing what’s going on—parents might want to consider other educational options for their children.

©Jerry Newcombe, D.Min. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Planned Parenthood wants schools to teach ‘Pleasures of Sex’ to 10 yr old kids

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kinsey, Father of Comprehensive Sexuality Education

”Sex Ed” is NOT Comprehensive Sexuality Education

Early Sexual Activity is not Safe or Healthy

Scientific Studies show the brain does not mature until age 25…or later

Teaching Consent…is wrong

Sex Trafficking

Let Parents Decide

Planned Parenthood

Sex Change Transitioning for Minors

Antisemitic Content Voted into California Public School Curriculum

The unmasked face of ‘critical ethnic studies’


A new bill passed by the California legislature mandates that all high school students must complete an “ethnic studies” course to graduate.

However, many Jewish voices have raised an alarm over the proposed curriculum of the course, which, among other issues, accuses Jews of possessing “racial privilege.”

The bill, AB-331, is currently on Governor Gavin Newson’s desk awaiting his signature. Last month, Newson signed a similar bill, AB-1460, requiring all California State University students to complete an ethnic studies course in order to graduate.

What the Curriculum Includes and How It Evolved

The plans essentially began as an extension of The 1619 ProjectThe New York Times‘ account of race history in America which follows the narrative of what is known as “critical race theory.”

A report by The Wall Street Journal explains how The 1619 Project found a nesting space in California’s Department of Education:

  • In 2019, California State Assembly passed an ethnic studies bill with a 63-8 vote ratio
  • The model curriculum that came out of that bill was halted as result of bipartisan opinion that the curriculum was extreme
  • 2020 riots offered a new leverage to supporters in favor of the bill and curriculum

The original curriculum, which was proposed in 2019, was assailed by Jewish groups as outright antisemitic.

It included sections such as “Direct Action Front for Palestine and Black Lives Matter,” “Call to Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Israel,” and “Comparative Border Studies: Palestine and Mexico.”

The Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement against Israel has been deemed an outright antisemitic movement as per the U.S. State Department’s (and 34 other countries’) definition of antisemitism.

Tammy Rossman-Benjamin, co-founder and director of the California-based AMCHA Initiative, which protects Jewish students from antisemitism, criticized the proposed ethnic studies curriculum in 2019 for its attempt to “politically indoctrinate students with the view that Israel and its Jewish supporters are part of ‘interlocking systems of oppression and privilege.’”

The California Legislative Jewish Caucus (comprised solely of Democrats) responded to the curriculum proposed in 2019 by stating that although they have “consistently prioritized efforts to promote inclusion and have strongly supported efforts to ensure that California students understand our state’s complicated history and rich diversity,” they could not “support a curriculum that erases the American Jewish experience, fails to discuss anti-Semitism, reinforces negative stereotypes about Jews, singles out Israel for criticism and would institutionalize the teaching of anti-Semitic stereotypes in our public schools.”

The 2019 curriculum also included units studying national figures such as:

  • Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
  • Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)
  • Islamist activist Linda Sarsour
  • Actress Alia Shawkat
  • The late White House correspondent Helen Thomas

All of these figures are associated with antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric, and, in the case of the congresswomen, a push to enact legislation punishing Israel.

The 2019 curriculum also presented students with classic Islamist talking points that included:

  • The concept of nakba, (Arabic for “catastrophe”), the term that is used by Islamists to describe the establishment of a Jewish nation in 1948

Due to public outcry, Governor Newsom apologized to California’s Jewish community, vowing that the curriculum would “never see the light of day.”

The revised curriculum does not include sections on the BDS movement. While an improvement, it still “remains incredibly problematic and concerning,” Rossman-Benjamin said.

“The ethnic-studies movement, known as ‘critical ethnic studies,’ which is what this curriculum is a product of, is based on an ‘us vs them’ model,” she told JNS. “It views Jews as white and privileged, and not part of the ‘us,’ and is blatantly anti-Zionist.”

Rossman-Benjamin added, “The goal of ‘critical ethnic studies’ is not to educate, but to indoctrinate students into adopting certain political views and engaging in specific forms of political activism, including those that vilify and harm Jewish students.”

The new curriculum specifically calls out Jews as a privileged white racial group. One model suggests that students “will write a paper detailing certain events in American history that have led to Jewish and Irish Americans gaining racial privilege.”

Large sections of the course detail the experience of Arab/Muslim Americans and other minorities, yet give very little attention to the experience of Jews and even less to the recent phenomena of antisemitism.

Jews are consistently the victims of the most religiously-motivated hate crimes perpetrated in America by a large margin.

The new curriculum calls for content that criticizes capitalism as a form of oppression, and highlights movements for study that were started and run by socialists and Marxists, such as the Third World Liberation Front and the Black Lives Matter movement, both of which hold anti-Israel and antisemitic views.

Sarah Levin, executive director of JIMENA: Jews Indigenous to the Middle East and North Africa, commented in a statement that while the 2020 curriculum proposal is an “improvement over past versions, some of the supplemental materials that have been included are deeply problematic and exclusionary [regarding this group of Jews].”

Levin noted that the curriculum “[portrays] the Arab American experience as a monolith to represent the [Middle East and North Africa] region,” yet 60 percent of all Californians who originate from the Middle East and North Africa are Jewish.

At the end of August 2020, the California legislature approved the new curriculum.

However, according to the law, the curriculum is offered as a model, but teachers are free to deviate from it, meaning that any part of the objectionable 2019 curriculum or other antisemitic material could theoretically make its way into the classroom.

Hate and Extremism in American public schools

This isn’t the first struggle against what many would classify as extreme curriculum in the public school system.

Yet, Covid-19 lockdowns and remote learning have given parents new awareness of these curriculums.

Astonishingly, when American schools resumed this fall, a recent poll showed that millions of families chose not to re-enroll their children in the public education system, but rather opted for home schooling or charter schools.

While studies have not been conducted as to the reason for this move away from public education, one thing is clear: Remote learning placed tremendous oversight power into the hands of parents.  

A Cease and Desist on Institutional Indoctrination

On Sunday, September 5, President Trump announced that the Department of Education would investigate whether or not California schools are using The New York Times’ 1619 Project in public school curriculum.

The previous Friday, September 4, the administration put out a memorandum aimed at the heads of executive departments and agencies in the federal government.

Addressing federal funding for a growing number of (often forced) critical race theory trainings, the memo detailed the president’s order to “ensure that Federal agencies cease and desist from using taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions.”

While the measure is aimed at federal government and critical race theory, it is a decisive and bold step that could impact other institutions and how public funding is diverted, especially considering we haven’t even seen the tipping point in the public school crisis.

Conclusions

The narrative of oppression as a tactic of ideological indoctrination has no place in the neutral field of childhood education. Rather, it only encourages students to walk down the path of hate by first making the student feel unequal and undervalued and then pointing to the “oppressor” as a target.

In short, this narrative does not educate children; rather it weaponizes them.

Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center accurately points out that if left unchallenged, the curriculum would “be a disaster for all Jews in California.”

He is right. However, the curriculum would not only be a disaster for Jews in California, but a disaster for the children themselves and the type of futures they will go on to build.

Children, when left to their own devices, do not approach the world as either being oppressed or as an oppressor. It is something that must be learned.

The role of identity destabilization is a well-documented radicalization strategy cited in several research papers, including the June 2018 U.S. Department of Justice paper on “How Radicalization to Terrorism Occurs in the United States.”

Radicalization often occurs long before the point of the first contact with recruiters with indoctrination in hate. Whether it’s a child in the Middle East conditioned to hate by community programming or an American child at his or her public school, the abuse is the same.

Moreover, it is that abuse that serves as a primer that fertilizes the landscape for radicalizing elements the child will face in later years through social media, peer pressure and pressure-cooker politics.

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

GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE: 58% of Double Voters in June Primary Were Democrats

Shocker. NOT.

The crooked party can’t win without cheating.

What is being done to keep the Presidential election 2020 safe? The whole of the GOP should be singular in this pursuit. Everything is ay stake – everything.

Georgia Secretary of State: 58% of Double Voters in June Primary Were Democrats

By: Kyle Olson, Breitbart News, September 10, 2020:

The Georgia Secretary of State said on Tuesday that 1,000 voters cast ballots twice in the state’s June primary, and 58 percent of them were cast for Democrats.

In Georgia, a voter must request a specific party ballot in the primary election.

“While the investigation is still ongoing, initial results show that of the partisan ballots at issue, approximately 58% were Democratic ballots,” a spokesman for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger told Breitbart News.

Raffensperger’s office announced voting twice is a felony and those accused would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The Secretary of State said the voters returned absentee ballots prior to the election and then showed up at their polling location on Election Day.

Many double-voters are able to be stopped, but county election officials “weren’t able to catch everyone,” the Atlanta Journal Constitution reported.

“A double voter knows exactly what they’re doing, diluting the votes of each and every voter that follows the law,” Raffensperger said.

“Those that make the choice to game the system are breaking the law. And as secretary of state, I will not tolerate it.”

According to the paper, 150,000 residents requested absentee ballots, but then attempted to vote in person because the ballot never arrived or they changed their minds and decided to vote in person instead.

Most of them were intercepted, but 1,000 double-voted.

Raffensperger said in past elections, absentee ballots accounted for five percent of all ballots. In the June primary election, 50 percent of votes were mailed in.

RELATED ARTICLES:

WATCH: African nation Chad announces Jerusalem diplomatic office

Washington and Lee University offers a course on ‘How to Overthrow the State’, and they are proud of it

Democrat women face hate crime charges after attacking Trump supporters, their children

ENTIRE Rochester Police Dept. command staff resigns over protests from the death of Daniel Prude​

President Trump’s Growing List of Foreign Policy Successes

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