Did the National Anthem Protesters Shakedown the NFL? You Be the Judge

The National Football League has earmarked nearly $100 million to “social justice” causes in what appears to be a massive concession to the National Anthem protestors.

The protests, which began in 2016, have taken a toll on the NFL’s television ratings as fans have expressed their disgust by simply tuning out. A boycott movement to #StandwithVets and avoid watching NFL games over the Veterans Day weekend resulted in some of the worst ratings the league has earned since 2003.

According to ESPN, the concession “earmarks at least $89 million over a seven-year period for both national and local projects, according to the documents” with the leagues owners contributing up to $12 million a year through 2023. The funds would then be allocated to United Negro College Fund (25%), Dream Corps (25%), and the Players Coalition (%50), which has filed for 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 non-profit status.

The Dream Corps is co-founded and run by the once-avowed communist and CNN commentator Van Jones.

Breitbart News points out the dollars allocated to the Players Coalition are especially concerning given the NFL Players Association’s record of spending in the past. For example, 2ndVote’s research uncovered documentation of the NFLPA’s direct contributions to the George Soros-funded Center for Community Change and to an AFL-CIO affiliate that engaged in anti-Trump protests.

Furthermore, 501(c)4 status will enable to the Players Coalition to use the allocated funds to influence elections and lobby for or against legislation. With the NFLPA’s history of aligning with liberal, Soros-funded organizations, we can only assume the Players Coalition’s 501(c)4 activities will have a leftist bent.

Since NFL owners will now be footing the bill for the players’ left-wing activism, it seems the NFLPA should no longer need funding from corporate sponsors. Certainly, the fans who decided to #StandwithVets over Veterans Day weekend would rather not have their entertainment dollars funneled through the owners into these activities. It stands to reason these same fans would rather not have their shopping dollars support the same thing.

Here are the corporate sponsors of the NFLPA. Follow the links to tell these companies the NFLPA no longer needs their donations.

Anheuser-Busch
Barclaycard US
Bose
Bridgestone
Campbell’s Soup Company
Castrol (BP)
Courtyard Marriott
Dairy Management, Inc.
Dannon
Extreme Networks
FedEx
Frito-Lay
Gatorade
Hyundai Motor America
Mars Snackfood
Microsoft
Nationwide
News America (News Corp/Fox Entertainment Group)
Papa John’s
Pepsi
Procter & Gamble
Quaker Oats
Verizon
Visa
USAA

Help us continue educating conservative consumers by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!

Shoppers Guide to Christmas retailers who are Naughty and Nice

The Christmas shopping season is officially here and 2ndVote’s research can tell you who’s been Naughty and who’s been Nice. In the list below, you’ll see the Top 10 Naughty and Top 10 Nice retailers for Christmas shopping in 2017. Are you surprised who made the Naughty list?

Please Support 2ndVote

Don’t Fall for Nancy Pelosi’s Virtue Signaling. Here Are Sleazy Democrats She Enabled.

Finally, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s faux feminist veneer has fully cracked.

The Democratic “shero” is, and always has been, a sham. But after Pelosi’s incoherent appearance on “Meet the Press” defending Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., and Al Franken, D-Minn., the progressive left can no longer mask her apologism.

Pelosi milked her XX chromosomes for all their electoral worth. Her official biography brags about her role as “the most powerful woman in American politics” and her induction into the National Women’s Hall of Fame.

Over three decades on Capitol Hill, she has scooped up Ms. Magazine’s Woman of the Year award, Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year designation, Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger award (named after the abortion godmother and notorious eugenics champion), and the Alice Award (named after suffragette Alice Paul).

So, feminists were aghast when Pelosi hailed Conyers as an “icon” and downplayed news of his secret sexual harassment settlement with a former female staffer—one of three former employees alleging sexual abuse.

Blasting D.C. double standards, Long Island Democratic Rep. Kathleen Rice fumed this week over Pelosi’s failure to call out Conyers and Franken.

But this is far from the first time see-no-evil Nancy has looked the other way at Democrats. I’ve been reporting on her creep-enabling for years.

Let me cure the left-wing political and media establishment’s amnesia:

Former Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York.

Lost in the aftermath of Weiner’s nude selfie and sexting scandals is the fact that Pelosi refused to condemn him until his interactions with an underage girl in Delaware were exposed by conservative bloggers and confirmed by police. Only then did champion-of-women Pelosi rush from behind to lead the demands for Weiner’s resignation.

Former Democratic Rep. Eric Massa of New York.

In 2010, the married Massa resigned amid a sordid sexual harassment scandal involving young, low-paid male staffers he allegedly lured to his Capitol Hill playhouse for “tickle fights.” Turned out that Pelosi’s office had been informed months before, by a staffer of former Democratic Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, of Massa’s predatory and harassing behavior with multiple congressional employees.

Massa’s former deputy chief of staff and legislative director also contacted leading Democrats on the House Ethics Committee. Former House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer also knew of Massa’s misconduct. But Pelosi said and did nothing until allegations went public. A toothless House Ethics Committee investigation went nowhere.

“I have a job to do and not to be the receiver of rumors,” she deflected icily.

Former Democratic Rep. David Wu of Oregon.

The seven-term liberal congressman had a longstanding history of alcoholism and sexual skeeviness that broke into the public eye when his own staffers revolted against their drunk-texting, Tigger costume-wearing boss and pressured him to seek psychiatric help. House Democrat leaders, desperate to keep one of their own in office, ignored the pleas.

Only after The Oregonian newspaper published allegations by a teenage girl who had complained for months to apathetic Capitol Hill offices of an “unwanted sexual encounter” with Wu did Pelosi make a show of calling for a House Ethics Committee investigation—which went, you guessed it, nowhere.

Former Democratic Mayor Bob Filner of San Diego.

Last month, Pelosi climbed aboard the #MeToo bandwagon in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse scandal. “Your courage is truly inspiring to us all,” she tweeted.

But when multiple women accused her old friend, former Democrat Congressman and San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, of harassment and assault, Pelosi indignantly refused to call on him to resign.

One staffer claimed Filner had ordered her to “work without her panties on.” Others alleged he forcibly kissed them. Another said she had contacted Democratic higher-ups in California about a half-dozen women, but nobody did nuttin’.

“What goes on in San Diego is up to the people of San Diego. I’m not here to make any judgments,” Pelosi sniffed.

The late Democratic Sen. Teddy Kennedy.

Of the Democratic lion of the Senate whose public boorishness culminated in the infamous “Waitress Sandwich” with fellow Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, Pelosi effused:

Rooted in his deep patriotism, his abiding faith and his deep concern for the least among us, no one has done more than Senator Kennedy to educate our children, care for our seniors, and ensure equality for all Americans.

The Democratic Bad Boys Club has had no better cheerleader than Nancy Pelosi.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Michelle Malkin

Michelle Malkin is the senior editor of Conservative Review. She is a New York Times best-selling author and a FOX News Channel contributor. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

De-Naturalization Sought Against 5 Child Molesters

Naturalization has provided the “keys to the kingdom” to criminals and terrorists.

On November 21, 2017 the Department of Justice issued a press release, “Denaturalization Sought Against Five Child Sexual Abusers in Florida, Illinois and Texas.”

According to the press release, each of the five men had become naturalized United States citizens more than a decade ago and had all engaged in illegal sexual contact with children prior to becoming U.S. citizens.  Three of the victims who had been sexually assaulted were merely six years old at the time they were assaulted.

In each case the alien concealed his criminal acts against his victim in filing for citizenship.  Such false statements constitutes a felony under the provisions of 18 U.S. Code § 1425 (Procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully) with a potential maximum prison sentence of 10 years in prison.  However the maximum sentence of 25 years in prison may be imposed if such fraud was committed in conjunction with terrorism.

However, the statute of limitations of ten years has tolled for each of these individuals.  (Most federal felonies have a statute of limitations of 5 years, where naturalization fraud is concerned, however, the statute of limitations is ten years.  We will address the reason for this shortly.)

Consequently while these criminals cannot be criminally prosecuted for committing immigration fraud, all were naturalized well over a decade ago, the Justice Department is seeking to have them stripped of their citizenship to set the stage for removing (deporting) them from the United States.

Advocates for immigration reform insist that such aliens will undergo “security checks” that are conducted when aliens file applications for various immigration benefits.  Clearly this flawed system failed where these five individuals referenced in the DOJ press release are concerned.

The only thing worse than no security is false security.

Aliens who seek to naturalize are supposed to undergo in-depth background investigations known as Good Moral Character (GMC) investigations.

Naturalization fraud not only enables criminals to evade detection but has a serious national security component as well.

This vetting process was greatly abbreviated under the Clinton administration and, as I noted in my April 2015 article, How DHS Ineptitude Facilitates Terrorist Operations has not only enabled terrorists to escape proper scrutiny, they have been able to acquire various immigration benefits that enhance their ability to travel freely and embed themselves.

For terrorists United States citizenship and a U.S. passport is the ultimate “Key to the kingdom” facilitating their travel around the world using both their U.S. passport and the passport of their country of birth to cover their tracks and gain credibility in seeking entry into a series of counties around the world as they travel to receive training, conduct clandestine meetings and carry out attacks.

My article was predicated on a naturalized United States citizen, Abdirahman Sheik Mohamud who had immigrated to the U.S. from his native Somali and was subsequently charged with traveling to Syria to fight against members of the U.S. military in the hopes of killing several American soldiers.

He was charged with several crimes including making false statements to the FBI agents who interrogated him but no mention was made of the fact that he had naturalized just one year earlier and had apparently lied on his application for citizenship.

On June 29, 2017 The Justice Department issued a press release, “Ohio Man Pleads Guilty to Providing Material Support to Terrorists” which laid out all of the charges to which the defendant pleaded guilty.  However, the charge of naturalization fraud was not included.  It is interesting to note that for one of the crimes, lying to the FBI agents in a matter involving terrorism, Mohamud can be sentenced to a maximum of 8 years in prison.  However, naturalization fraud committed in conjunction with terrorism carries a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison and would pave the way for his being stripped of United States citizenship.

There are many other documented cases of naturalized citizens who, intent on carrying out terror attacks seek U.S. citizenship thereby enabling them to obtain a U.S. passport.  That strategy that was an integral part of their plans yet, inexplicably, not all of those cases have resulted in the terror suspect being charged with naturalization fraud.

Because of the particular significance of naturalization fraud and its potential nexus to national security and terrorism, while most federal felonies have a statute of limitations of five years, the statute of limitations for naturalization fraud is ten years.

In point of fact, the 9/11 Commission determined that immigration fraud and visa fraud were frequently used by terrorists as a means of entering the United States and embedding themselves in the United States in preparation for the deadly attacks they planned to conduct.  This fact prompted me to write about Immigration Fraud- Lies That Kill.

Going back to the press release about the five aliens who face denaturalization, while, as the saying goes, “better late than never,” what is not clear is why it took the federal government more than a decade to uncover the fact that these individuals had lied on their applications for United States citizenship.

This is not simply an issue of the matter of being frustrated that justice delayed is justice denied, and the fact that because of the statute of limitations they escaped the possibility of being prosecuted and sentenced to jail time and a fine.  A potentially even more significant issue is the unavoidable fact that each every day these child molesters were present in the United States, moving freely through the towns and cities where they lived that they may have had the opportunity to attack more defenseless children.

Indeed, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that some additional children may have been attacked but that the attacks went unknown and/or unreported.

If the system had worked as it should have worked, these predatory aliens might well have been stripped of their lawful immigrant status and deported from the United States before they even had the opportunity to file for naturalization.

Therefore Attorney General Sessions should consider issuing a directive to find out how the system permitted these five miscreants to slip through the cracks for such a long period of time.

It would be important, for example, to know if any of these criminal aliens had been aided by the anarchistic sanctuary policies of jurisdictions that seek to downgrade the nature of crimes for which aliens stand accused so that these aliens can be shielded from deportation, even where this endangers public safety including the youngest and most vulnerable members of communities across the United States.

Not only does this endanger pubic safety and national security but also undermines the principle  of equal protection under the law for United States citizens.

Undoubtedly there are many other aliens who have similarly fallen through the infamous “cracks in the system.”

Every such criminal is a potential ticking time bomb whose presence, each day, poses a threat to the safety to the residents of the communities in which they live.

In the wake of recent mass shootings attention has focused on failures of the system that is supposed to prevent criminals and those suffering from serious mental illness from purchasing and possessing firearms.  In the wake of several mass shootings, to everyone’s horror and frustration, it was determined that the shooter should have been barred from possessing firearms but, for various reasons, the system was not provided with relevant information that would have barred the gunmen from owning firearms.

The laws did not fail, the way they were administered, however, did.  Vital relevant information was not included in databases undermining the integrity of the background checks.

On November 22, 2017 the U.S. Department of Justice issued a press release entitled, “Attorney General Jeff Sessions Directs FBI and ATF to Conduct a Comprehensive Review of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.”

It is important to make certain that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals and the severely mentally ill.  It is, however, no less important to make certain that no less attention is given to the vetting systems concerning aliens who live in towns and cities across the United States.

As was noted in the official report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel

Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud…

Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or embed themselves in the United States if their operational plans were to come to fruition. As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status, or applying for asylum after entering. In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated. Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials, and execute an attack.

Therefore a similar directive needs to be issued that addresses the failings of the process by which aliens seeking immigration benefits are scrutinized, including the impact that “sanctuary” policies may play in undermining this critical system.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

UN 2030 Agenda driving international labor migration

Thanks to reader Ron for sending this recent (September 2017) Briefing paper for the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The focus of the report is to promote the idea that moving migrant labor freely around the world and encouraging remittances to be sent back to the home country will alleviate world poverty. 

Basically it says that the UN is out to level the playing field around the world by removing “barriers to mobility” (borders be damned!) and supports the idea that migrants living in rich countries should send money out of the richer country to the poorer home country in a kind of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

You see here what we are up against when we know global corporations are in lock step with the UN for their own greedy desires for refugee laborers willing to work for low wages (subsidized by taxpayers)—your quality of life be damned.  Can you say Chobani Yogurt, JBS Swift and Tyson Foods just to name a few!

Has the Heritage Foundation drunk the kool-aid on this too?

I wasn’t planning to post the document until I had read it more carefully, but decided it is too important to sit around on my desk.

Click here to read the whole thing.

 

Screenshot (1203)

Why Capitalism is a fundamental Right of Man

Thomas Paine wrote a book titled Rights of Man. The Rights of Man posits that popular political revolution is permissible when a government does not safeguard the natural rights of its people. The Rights of Man begins thusly:

To

GEORGE WASHINGTON

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

SIR,

I PRESENT you a small Treatise in defense of those Principles of Freedom which your exemplary Virtue hath so eminently contributed to establish.–That the Rights of Man may become as universal as your Benevolence can wish, and that you may enjoy the Happiness of seeing the New World regenerated the Old, is the Prayer of

SIR,

Your much obliged, and Obedient humble Servant,

THOMAS PAINE

Paine was addressing the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen written in France after their revolution. The basic principle of the Declaration was that all “men are born and remain free and equal in rights” (Article 1), which were specified as the rights of liberty, private property, the inviolability of the person, and resistance to oppression (Article 2).

Capitalism is defined as:

A social system based on the principle of individual rights. Politically, it is the system of laissez-faire (freedom). Legally it is a system of objective laws (rule of law as opposed to rule of man). Economically, when such freedom is applied to the sphere of production its result is the free-market.

Therefore capitalism is a basic right of man or in more modern terminology a human right.

To take away one’s property is to take away their ability to survive. Take away a farmer’s land and you take away a farmer’s ability to reap what he has sown. The farmer can no longer feed his family nor sell what he has reaped to feed others. If the state (government) controls the dirt (land) then it controls the people.

This is what the American Revolution was all about. Unchaining the people from serfdom to the King of England. 

As Friedrich A. Hayek, in his book The Road to Serfdom wrote:

It is true that the virtues which are less esteemed and practiced now–independence, self-reliance, and the willingness to bear risks, the readiness to back one’s own conviction against a majority, and the willingness to voluntary cooperation with one’s neighbors–are essentially those on which the of an individualist society rests.

Collectivism has nothing to put in their place, and in so far as it already has destroyed then it has left a void filled by nothing but the demand for obedience and the compulsion of the individual to what is collectively decided to be good.

Capitalism is the opposite of obedience and compulsion.

Capitalism can exist even in the most repressive societies, such as in Communist Cuba. In my column My Visit to Cuba — An American in Havana I wrote:

What I observed is that the Cuban people have great potential if they are unleashed and allowed to earn what they are truly worth. Socialismo (socialism) is slowly but surely killing their lives and doing them great harm. I noticed on the ride West of Havana through the rural areas of Cuba hundreds of people waiting along the road trying to get a ride. Some were nurses in their white uniforms thumbing rides to the hospital where they are needed. I saw horse drawn carriages along the major highway carrying people because the public transportation system cannot keep up with the demand. The horses and cattle we saw were emaciated. The roads were in poor shape including the national highway system.

As one Cuban man put it, “the people have no love for their work.” They have no love for their work because Cuba needs a change in direction.

A love for work comes from the rewards of one’s efforts. Take that away and you remove the soul of the individual. You remove his purpose in life. You remove the one of the fundamental rights of man.

There are those who believe the polar opposite. There are those who believe that central control trumps individual freedom. There are those who are being taught that capitalism is evil, until the time that they must earn enough to feed themselves.

There was a time in America when there were only two classes of citizens, the working class and the non-working class. The working class took care of the non-working class. Economic classification is identity politics (a.k.a. Cultural Marxism) writ large. It is designed to put the poor (those earning below a certain wage determined by government) against the rich (those earning above a certain wage determined by the government).

During his inaugural address President Trump stated:

Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.

[ … ]

The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country.

[ … ]

That all changes – starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.

President Trump is an American. He believes in the rights of man. He is a capitalist. He is everything that Washington, D.C. hates.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Origins of the ‘Cult of Political Correctness’ [a.k.a. Cultural Marxism]

The Secretive, Taxpayer-Financed Settlement Fund Used by Lawmakers Accused of Sexual Harassment

Staffers who are the targets of unwanted sexual advances on Capitol Hill should not have to endure a lengthy mediation process and pay the legal bills as lawmakers secretly draw on a mysterious slush fund to settle the accusations against them, an advocate for taxpayers argues.

In the event of a monetary settlement of sexual harassment complaints, members of Congress can draw on a taxpayer-funded account set up within the Treasury Department to cover their legal expenses and settle cases.

The account has paid out $17 million in the past 10 years, public records show, although it is not clear how much of that was for cases of sexual harassment.

“Right now, it’s very unclear to the taxpayer where this money is going,” Grace Morgan, director of external affairs for the Washington-based Taxpayers Protection Alliance, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview.

“We don’t know who is getting paid the settlements and why they are getting paid the settlements,” Morgan said Monday. “The $17 million figure does not distinguish between sexual harassment claims and other general workplace claims. There is no information and no transparency.”

The spotlight fell on the question of sexual harassment on Capitol Hill after the scandal that brought down Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein prompted dozens of women, and men, to blow the whistle on the sexually predatory practices of major business, entertainment, and media figures ranging from actor Kevin Spacey to news anchor Charlie Rose.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the longest-serving member of Congress, has been accused of sexual harassment by two former staffers. Several women, although none of them staffers, also accuse Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., of groping them.

When a congressional staffer decides to press ahead with allegations of sexual harassment, he or she must navigate a four-step process administered through an agency called the Office of Compliance. The steps: counseling, mediation,  administrative hearing or civil action, and appeals.

“This turns out to be a 180-day process, and it’s not very fair or just to the victims,” Morgan said.

Nor is the amount paid out as the result of sexual harassment accusations against lawmakers currently public information, she said.

“We also need a full investigation into the $17 million and what has been paid to victims, how much involves sexual harassment claims and how this impacts taxpayers,” Morgan said.

‘Initial Spike’

For starters, the Senate passed a resolution requiring training on sexual harassment for senators and their staff. The House was expected to follow suit Wednesday.

Although an “initial spike” in sexual harassment complaints is likely to occur when new procedures go into effect, congressional employees will benefit over the long term from a healthier workplace, Rep. Barbara Comstock, R-Va., told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Monday.

Comstock, sponsor of a resolution targeting sexual harassment and discrimination that has attracted broad, bipartisan support, said she expects the House to adopt it.

The resolution would require “all House members, officers, employees, including interns, detailees, and fellows” to complete “anti-harassment and anti-discrimination training” during each annual session of Congress.

Comstock said she also will explore a legislative fix aimed at preventing the use of taxpayers’ money to cover settlement expenses when employees accuse lawmakers of sexual harassment.

Meanwhile, the resolution stipulates that lawmakers and employees complete training regarding sexual harassment within 90 days of the start of a one-year session.  New employees must complete the training within 90 days of their hire date.

Where the current, 115th Congress is concerned, individual lawmakers and staffers must complete training no later than 180 days after its second one-year session begins in January.

‘A Changed Culture’

The House vote Wednesday marks a “watershed moment” of bipartisan support for a resolution that will begin a step-by-step process for implementing “fundamental reforms that change how [sexual] harassment is detected and prevented,” Comstock told The Daily Signal.

“We are looking at what can be done by resolution and what needs to be done legislatively,” the Virginia Republican said:

What we want is a zero-tolerance policy for this kind of behavior and a changed culture so that people can be free from this kind of harassment. We would also like to streamline the process for victims to come forward with any complaints so that it is not so long and drawn out. It should be a victim-friendly process.

BuzzFeed first reported that Conyers, the senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, reached a settlement in 2015 with a former staffer in a wrongful dismissal complaint. She alleged that she was the victim of unwanted sexual advances from Conyers, now 88.

Conyers “repeatedly made sexual advances to female staff that included requests for sex acts, contacting and transporting other women with whom they believed Conyers was having affairs, caressing their hands sexually, and rubbing their legs and backs in public,” BuzzFeed reported.

Tuesday morning, news broke that another former staff member had leveled accusations against the congressman.

The accuser, Deanna Maher, said Conyers made unwanted sexual advances toward her on three different occasions while she ran his district office in Michigan between 1997 and 2005, according to the Detroit News and other media reports.

Four women have come forward to accuse Franken, 66, of sexual harassment, beginning with Leeann Tweeden, a radio talk show host who described his behavior during a USO tour in 2006, two years before he was elected senator. Another woman, Lindsay Menz, said Franken groped her while having his photo taken with her at the 2010 Minnesota State Fair.

Legislation Possible 

Co-sponsors of Comstock’s resolution include fellow members of the House Administration Committee: Chairman Gregg Harper, R-Miss.; ranking member Robert Brady, D-Pa.; and Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif.

Looking ahead, Comstock said she would like to see additional steps taken to ensure taxpayers would not be on the hook to cover legal settlements following allegations of sexual harassment.

“For that, we would need new legislation,” she said.

The House Administration Committee scheduled a hearing for Dec. 7 to review possible actions under the Congressional Accountability Act, the 1995 law specifying that certain civil rights, labor, workplace, and health care laws must apply to Congress.

That law also created an independent agency, the Office of Compliance, which is led by a five-member, nonpartisan board of directors and four executive staff members appointed by the board.

The Office of Compliance is charged with advising members of Congress, congressional staff, and visiting members of the public on their rights and their responsibilities in the workplace setting.

The office also offers advice on potential changes to the Congressional Accountability Act. Its general counsel has independent investigatory and enforcement authority for certain violations of the law.

‘Needs to Be Reformed’

After receiving multiple media inquiries about taxpayers’ money being used to cover the costs of settling sexual harassment allegations against lawmakers or legislative branch employees, Susan Tsui Grundmann, executive director of the Office of Compliance, released figures showing more than $17 million has been spent since 1997 to cover the settlements.

Not all of the complaints covered by the $17 million involved sexual harassment. Some were allegations made under the Americans with Disabilities Act, while others involved potential civil rights infractions.

Neither Grundmann nor other officials have made public a detailed breakdown of how and why the $17 million was spent.

The idea behind the Congressional Accountability Act was to apply the same set of anti-discrimination and civil rights laws governing other Americans to members of Congress and their staffs. But the 1995 law created a taxpayer-financed “Awards and Settlements” account in the Treasury Department to cover the cost of legal settlements.

The Taxpayers Protection Alliance, which is nonpartisan, focuses on educating the public about the effects of excessive taxation and spending at all levels of government.

Morgan, the organization’s director of external affairs, said the settlements fund appears to be used to insulate Congress from much-needed accountability and transparency.

“I would like to see a system where members of Congress themselves have to pay the settlement, or they have to go through the dispute process,” Morgan said in the interview, adding:

As it stands now, the victim has to pay for her own legal fees,  where the member of Congress gets the federal funding for their lawyer. It’s a very long, drawn-out process that needs to be reformed.

The Office of Compliance would be responsible for administering the training created by the House resolution.

Aggressive Action

Comstock said she anticipates more complaints will be filed against members of both the House and Senate as employees become more familiar with what sexual harassment is.

“We might see an initial spike in the number of complaints as people develop a better understanding of what constitutes harassment,” the Virginia Republican said. “But the end result will be a more positive, healthy work environment.”

Congress could learn from how corporate America and the military moved to address questions of sexual harassment, she said. Both institutions have wrestled with similar issues for many years and their procedural changes could be instructive, she said.

“They have addressed this problem very aggressively,” Comstock said, and she believes in-person training is more effective than online sessions.

In a change long familiar to many other workplaces, the House resolution would require every lawmaker’s office to post “a statement of the rights and protections provided to employees of the House of Representatives under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995.”

What happens next, assuming the House adopts the resolution Wednesday, will become more clear after the Administration Committee’s Dec. 7 hearing.

While it may be challenging for Americans inside and outside Congress to come to terms with misconduct that involves public officials who agree with their political views, Comstock said, the safety and well-being of employees should be paramount.

“I think it’s best to stay out of the team politics and instead focus on the right policies,” she said.

Ken McIntyre contributed to this report.

Portrait of Kevin Mooney

Kevin Mooney

Kevin Mooney is an investigative reporter for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Kevin. Twitter: @KevinMooneyDC.

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

Jesus: the Heart of Christian Morality

Many influential theologies of the past half-century are misleading, sterile abstractions because they effectively disconnect morality from our participation in Christ’s life. Until that breach is healed, the life, witness, and unity of the Church and her members will continue to suffer. Recovery begins by returning to reality: Jesus.

Jesus, the Word Incarnate, revealed the mysteries of who God is and what it means to be authentically human. Those mysteries are the realities that ground His existence and identity. He gave full expression to them in His earthly life through human words and deeds.

The Good News announced by Jesus is that God is love and that human nature can be transformed by communion with God in order to participate in His love. That’s the meaning of Jesus’ incarnation, death, and resurrection. There is absolutely nothing abstract or idealistic about this. It’s the nitty-gritty reality of the life of the son of Mary who is also God the Son.

Jesus did not, however, merely reveal God and the call to communion with God. From the Cross, He drew us to Himself, inviting us to share His divine and human life and to become one with Him in heart, mind, body, and soul as members of His bride, the Church. This participatory union arises from His dwelling within us and our dwelling in Him, a gift he bestowed by sending the Holy Spirit.

United to Jesus, we are one with God and all the members of the Church. The Christian life, therefore, is inherently Trinitarian, Christological, and ecclesial. It is communal, not individualistic.

Jesus’ mission is to establish the mutual indwelling of the Trinity and the human race. With that indwelling comes all the gifts (or “graces”) we need to remain one body, one Spirit in Christ. Chief among these gifts are Faith, Hope, and Charity, which enable us to know God, to look to Him for aid in every circumstance, and to love Him.

Christian morality, then, arises from our union with God in Christ. It is simply the faithful living of the Love of God according to the heart and mind of Jesus who dwells in us. Like Faith, which is a participation in Jesus’ knowledge of God, our sharing in His Love is incomplete during our pilgrimage on earth. Nevertheless, this imperfect participation really enables our thoughts, words, and deeds to flow from God through and in Jesus.

Ladder of Divine Ascent, 12th century [St. Catherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, Egypt]

It follows that a Christian’s knowledge of moral duty and culpability (i.e., his conscience) is a participation in Christ’s knowledge and love. Hence con-science is a self-knowledge that is simultaneously a “knowing with” Jesus, the Trinity, and the Church. This means God and the Church are internal to our conscience.

As a participation in Jesus’ life, conscience is a particular witness to Hope. Hope strengthens conscience to direct us to actions that foster the indwelling both in ourselves and in others despite the evils that threaten or befall us and them. Hope assures us that in Christ right action is achievable whatever the cost. When we sin, it makes conscience’s rebuke a call to conversion rather than a cause for despair.

It is clear from the above that moral theology is properly concerned with words and norms understood not as abstractions, but in relation to the concrete reality of Christ and, through Him, to the reality of who God is and who we are. It should not be surprising that such profound realities can (despite the deniers) be adequately expressed in words. After all, God revealed Himself and his saving work through human words and the Incarnate Word. Moreover, God willed that the Church should proclaim His words and His Word to the world. Jesus shared this mission in a unique way with the Apostles and their successors so that through them He continues to teach and shepherd his people.

Tragically, the participatory understanding of Christian life, faith, morality, conscience, and the Church has been attenuated or eclipsed in much of Western Christianity in recent centuries. Instead, focus shifted to individual believers conforming their thoughts and actions to Christ’s teaching and example as handed down through the Church or, more narrowly, through the Bible. Submission to these external words and norms tended to replace participation as central to Christian identity.

Increasingly, statements of faith and morals have come to be treated as mere linguistic propositions and are considered apart from Christ as expressions of abstract ideas or of historical beliefs and practices. As such, they lack any intimate relation to God, us, or the realities of contemporary life. Thus, to be relevant they must be adapted to personal experience and circumstance. That is why private judgment, first of Scripture and then of conscience, emerged as the key to applying Christian faith and morals. The witness of the Church, while perhaps retaining some value, is not considered to have an internal or normative role in these judgments.

Moral theologies based on this approach claim to uphold Church teaching because they acknowledge that her pronouncements are abstractly true – even infallible. However, by labeling those teachings “abstract ideals,” and failing to consider the crucial role of the Church within conscience, conscience itself is permitted to apply those teachings to concrete situations in a manner that actually violates the alleged “ideal.”

For example, it’s said that conscience can affirm marital fidelity in theory while, in practice, justifying a second sexual relationship out of fear of damaging the wellbeing of children in a remarriage. The unreality of the entire approach is thereby exposed, since this amounts to saying: “Jesus is faithful, unless that entails extreme suffering.”

These false theologies forget that whoever acts wrongly due to ignorance or to fear of following moral norms nevertheless suffers harm and, in reality, is ignorant or fearful of sharing Christ’s life. “Gospel ideals” cannot help them. They need the Church’s proclamation of a Gospel that reaches into the realities of daily life, unites us to Christ, and sets us free to love as he loves – whatever the cost.

Fr. Timothy V. Vaverek

Fr. Timothy V. Vaverek

Fr. Timothy V. Vaverek, STD has been a priest of the Diocese of Austin since 1985 and is currently pastor of parishes in Gatesville and Hamilton. His doctoral studies were in Dogmatics with a focus on Ecclesiology, Apostolic Ministry, Newman, and Ecumenism.

EDITORS NOTE: © 2017 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.orgThe Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Planned Parenthood Is in Deep Trouble With the Law. This Could Be a Turning Point.

We are living through a remarkable time in history. Almost daily, those in influential positions who once appeared untouchable are falling out of popular favor as their abuses are exposed.

Earlier this month, one particularly corrupt institution was dealt back-to-back blows: Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business.

On Nov. 13, The Hill reported that the FBI may be investigating Planned Parenthood and its associates for the sale of aborted babies’ body parts for profit. It’s the latest development yet in a scandal that began in 2015 with the release of explosive undercover videos.

Those videos showed abortion industry executives haggling over the price of hearts, livers, brains, and kidneys and describing, in chilling detail, their techniques for crushing late-term babies to get the freshest organs.

The Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives spent almost one-and-a-half years conducting a national investigation, reviewing 30,000 pages of documents, and hearing hours of testimony.

They found enough evidence to refer several Planned Parenthood affiliates and tissue procurement companies for potential prosecution. Attorney General Jeff Sessions suggested that if the FBI concurs, charges might be filed.

Then came the second punch.

Just as news of the FBI inquiry broke, the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals declined to revisit its ruling that the state of Arkansas can redirect Medicaid funds away from abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood, which the state is completely justified in doing considering the ongoing baby parts scandal.

These two major breakthroughs would have been inconceivable under the Obama administration, which repeatedly abused federal power to prop up the abortion industry.

President Barack Obama’s aggressively pro-abortion administration put the “bully” in “bully pulpit.” Under Obama, the Justice Department became a tool to harass and intimidate pro-life advocates, labeling them domestic terrorists alongside groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

Instead of investigating Planned Parenthood for the shocking, potentially illegal practices exposed in the videos, pro-abortion Attorney General Loretta Lynch decided to investigate the whistleblowers.

The Obama administration also actively interfered with state efforts to defund Planned Parenthood. KansasTennesseeIndianaTexasNew HampshireNew Jersey, North Carolina—all these states tried to get taxpayers out of the abortion industry, only to have the federal government bypass local officials to directly award lucrative contracts to Planned Parenthood or threaten to withhold federal Medicaid funds unless they kept tax dollars flowing.

As one last parting gift, during Obama’s final weeks in office, his administration issued an order banning states from defunding Planned Parenthood under Title X, which took effect two days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Through it all, Obama’s court appointees have generally been reliable backers of abortion. One Obama appointee even compared an abortion to a tonsillectomy in a recent case that would have created new “rights” to abortion on demand for illegal immigrants.

But there’s a new sheriff in Washington now, and a palpable sense of terror is gripping Planned Parenthood and its camp. Without their defender-in-chief or the courts to bail them out, they are finally being held accountable.

Trump has busily set about undoing his predecessor’s destructive pro-abortion legacy. He has filled his Cabinet with pro-life officials, and has filled court vacancies with outstanding judges like Neil Gorsuch who faithfully interpret the Constitution.

Right away, Trump signed legislation (H.J. Res. 43) rolling back Obama’s parting gift to the abortion industry—something that, on a personal note, I was proud to witness in the Oval Office.

Trump’s strong commitment to pro-life policies has helped embolden state governors and legislatures. Texas has now applied to reclaim the federal funding it was denied under the last administration. South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster in August successfully defunded Planned Parenthood and requested a waiver from the Trump administration so that the state can do the same with Medicaid, which is where the abortion business gets most of its taxpayer funding.

The next step is for the Trump administration to issue new guidance to the states restoring their freedom to prioritize Medicaid funds the way they believe will best serve their citizens. The administration must be prepared to defend that policy vigorously should the case go to the Supreme Court.

The pro-life majorities in both houses of Congress should also fulfill their promise to redirect half a billion dollars in annual taxpayer funding away from Planned Parenthood using budget reconciliation, where they have the best chance of succeeding.

Sometimes justice is a long time coming, but as two of our nation’s greatest thinkers—Thomas Jefferson and Martin Luther King, Jr.—pointed out, it “cannot sleep forever” and “the arc of the moral universe … bends toward justice.”

There are good reasons to hope that for America’s abortion giant, justice is right around the corner.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Marjorie Dannenfelser

Marjorie Dannenfelser is president of the national pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List. Twitter: 

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

No U.S. data on financial/social impact of refugee resettlement on communities

And, I think the refugee industry wants to keep it that way! (Think about the enormous stonewalling going on in St. Cloud for instance!).

How many times over the years have I struggled to try to answer your questions about how much all of this is costing state and federal taxpayers? Now, I have a better understanding of why the facts are so elusive thanks to some researchers who sound like they do want to resettle refugees, but want answers too!

Caren Jean Frost and her fellow researchers are clearly not right-wingers. They are on to something, but will Trump’s Office of Refugee Resettlement listen?

Opinion from The Salt Lake Tribune:

Before you read know that “service providers” is the polite word for resettlement “contractors.”

Resettling refugees has become harder to justify, but not for the reasons you may expect. Lost in the passionate rhetoric of lobbyists, politicians and humanitarian agencies are statistics and evidence.

Appeals to forestall resettlement efforts speak to fears of terrorists infiltrating refugee flows, notwithstanding evidence that suggests otherwise. Advocates of resettlement reference duty, morality and hospitality, but don’t provide compelling evidence to justify the financial and social strains resettlement places on host communities.

Proponents on both sides struggle to support their reasoning with evidence, and this is the real issue. The absence of consistent data collection and measurement by service providers and government agencies has impaired policy makers’ ability to craft effective policy. Furthermore, resettlement data is full of holes and redundancies because service delivery agencies do not coordinate their data collection efforts. Additionally, service providers are unable to answer basic questions about the effectiveness of their programs and current resettlement trends because their data are not structured in an analyzable format.

Standardizing refugee resettlement data collection could revolutionize the resettlement process. It would facilitate analysis, enabling service providers and those interested in refugee statistics to more easily understand what is happening in real time. This information would also enable service providers to better serve refugee communities and educate policymakers on current trends, potential issues and policy gaps.

[….]

CCSLogo

Without meaningful data standards, agencies and organizations may struggle to evaluate their work and share information. Because funding is typically tied to defined performance or outcome measures, evaluation is a crucial element of program design. The absence of data standards makes evaluation problematic and makes comparisons across programs nearly impossible. The University of Utah’s Center for Research on Migration and Refugee Integration’s recently attempted to evaluate Catholic Community Services’ refugee case management program but was stymied before it even began because the case data were not collected in an analysis-friendly format; moreover, it is impossible to track refugee outcomes as individuals pass from one agency’s stewardship to another’s. Service providers and policymakers across the country face similar challenges.

[…..]

Data standardization can only happen if the United States’ Office of Refugee Resettlement takes the lead on this issue.Access to federal funding is already conditional on reporting to the office. The simple solution is this: tie federal funds to data standardization and formatting.

So why isn’t it being done?—surely reform doesn’t require the lazy lunks in Congress. ORR can require this before it throws more of your money at the US Refugee contractors. So why aren’t they doing it? I think I have a guess!

Florida E-Verify Constitutional Amendment Needs Public Support

On Tuesday, November 28th the Florida Constitution Revision Commission will hold a hearing on proposed state constitutional amendments, including one that would require employers to use E-Verify to check the workplace eligibility of new hires proposals. You can see the amendment at the Floridians for E-Verify website.

The group Floridians for E-Verify Now is seeking people to attend the hearing and, if possible, testify in support of their E-Verify amendment. If you cannot attend but want to help, please see instructions further below for emailing commission members.

Regarding testimony, the group is seeking, in particular:

  • Business owners or their staff who use E-Verify;
  • American workers adversely affected by illegal workers; and
  • Farmers who use the H-2A visa program as an alternative to hiring illegal aliens.

If you want to testify, or can attend but do not wish to testify, please contact Jack Oliver at jack@floridiansforeverifynow.org or 772-215-8424. Those not wanting to testify can waive their right to speak and assign it to others.

What: Florida Constitution Revision Commission hearing

When: Tuesday, November 28 — 1-6 pm

Where: The Capital, Room 401 S

400 Monroe St., Tallahassee, Fl. 32399

Emailing Commission Members

First “copy and paste” the comments just below to the body of your email. Then type in the subject line: Please Support Floridians for E-Verify Now’s E-Verify Amendment. Now place your name in the “To” field and copy the email addresses further below and paste in your “Bcc” field.

Dear Commission Member,

Please vote to move the E-Verify Amendment forward favorably without amendments. Floridians should have a right to vote on this issue next November. Thank you.

Jacqui.lippish@flcrc.govEmery.Gainey@flcrc.govBrecht.Heuchan@flcrc.govFred.karlinsky@flcrc.govGary.Lester@flcrc.govJeanette.Nunez@flcrc.govsherry.plymale@flcrc.gov

Muslim convicted of $1 million in food stamp fraud — Will he be deported?

Longtime readers know that I’ve had a side interest in food stamp fraud, specifically trafficking in food stamps.  This kind of fraud doesn’t involve purchasing unapproved items with food stamps as you might think, but it’s about selling ones benefits for 50 cents on the dollar.

It works like this: customer comes in with benefits, buys some small item, but the cashier rings up a larger amount.  Customer walks out with half the cash that was rung up. Clerk submits full amount to government for repayment.

It is called trafficking, and the fraud is huge at mom and pop convenience stores nationwide.

You can see my many previous posts on the topic by clicking here.  The vast majority of cases involve immigrant owners/managers of small stores like this one in Maine.

What is different in this Maine case is that the store is a Halal grocery store which says to me that it is very likely that the majority of people participating in the owner’s fraud are people who prefer Halal food.

Screenshot (1192)

Ali Ratib Daham

Learn more about the case against Ali Ratib Daham here.

And, by the way, there have been cases where customers are arrested and also found guilty of taking part in the scheme to defraud the US taxpayer, will there be some here?

From WGME (Hat tip: Frank) $1 MILLION fraud!

PORTLAND (WGME) – A man accused of running a welfare scam out of a Portland halal grocery is pleading guilty.

The market sells meat permissible under Muslim law.

According to federal court documents, Ali Ratib Daham is pleading guilty to federal food stamp and other welfare fraud.

He is also admitting to money laundering and theft from the state’s MaineCare program.

Daham is agreeing to a jail sentence of at least 33 months and will pay more than $1 million in restitution to the government.

In exchange, prosecutors are agreeing to drop dozens of other charges in the case.

The plea deal will be considered in federal district court Tuesday. The guilty plea could cause him to be deported.

They never deport these people, and tell me how is he going to repay $1 million when I’ll bet the money was moved abroad a long time ago.

Here is the pitch I’ve made innumerable times: If you are looking for something to do, start a blog on immigrant welfare fraud.  You will have news to post daily and it would be a great service to our country, especially since any real investigative reporters are few and far between.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

5 Terrorists Are Still in Pretrial Hearings for the 9/11 Attacks. Here’s Why It’s Taking So Long.

Somali arrested in Australia on terror charges; planned to shoot New Year’s Eve revelers say police

Michigan: Do we see a new trick by the US State Department to keep information from citizens?

Pope Francis arrives in Burma, will he use the ‘R’-word—Rohingya?

Heritage Foundation finds over 100 missing comments late today; most very critical of refugee program

Minnesotan does some homework on refugee employment issue; comes to unexpected conclusion

Declining population? Polish government says “breed like rabbits!”

After 30 Years, Alarmists Are Still Predicting A Global Warming ‘Apocalypse’

By Michael Bastasch

For at least three decades scientists and environmental activists have been warning that the world is on the verge of a global warming “apocalypse” that will flood coastal cities, tear up roads and bridges with mega-storms and bring widespread famine and misery to much of the world.

The only solution, they say, is to rid the world of fossil fuels — coal, natural gas and oil — that serve as the pillars of modern society. Only quick, decisive global action can avert the worst effects of manmade climate change, warn international bodies like the United Nations, who say we only have decades left — or even less!

Of course, human civilization has not collapsed, despite decades of predictions that we only have years left to avert disaster. Ten years ago, the U.N. predicted we only had “as little as eight years left to avoid a dangerous global average rise of 2C or more.”

This failed prediction, however, has not stopped the U.N. and others from issuing more apocalyptic statements.

To celebrate nearly three decades of dire predictions, The Daily Caller News Foundation put together this list of some of the most severe doomsday prophecies made by scientists, activists and politicians:

1. Apocalyptic warnings on repeat

A group of 1,700 scientists and experts signed a letter 25 years ago warning of massive ecological and societal collapse if nothing was done to curb overpopulation, pollution and, ultimately, the capitalist society in which we live today.

The Union of Concerned Scientists put out a second letter earlier this year, once again warning of the dire consequences of global warming and other alleged ecological ills. Now numbering 15,000, the group warns “soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory, and time is running out.”

“We must recognize, in our day-to-day lives and in our governing institutions, that Earth with all its life is our only home,” the scientists and experts warned.

It’s a terrifying warning — if you ignore the fact that none of their 1992 warning has come to fruition.

2. The planet will be “uninhabitable” by the end of the century

New York Magazine writer David Wallace-Wells published a 7,000-word article claiming global warming could make Earth “uninhabitable” by “the end of this century.”

Wallace-Wells’s article warned of terrors, like “Heat Death,” “Climate Plagues,” “Permanent Economic Collapse” and “Poisoned Oceans.”

“Indeed, absent a significant adjustment to how billions of humans conduct their lives, parts of the Earth will likely become close to uninhabitable, and other parts horrifically inhospitable, as soon as the end of this century,” Wallace-Wells wrote.

3. Prince Charles’s global warming deadline passed…and nothing happened

Prince Charles famously warned in July 2009 that humanity had only 96 months to save the world from “irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it.” That deadline has passed, and the prince has not issued an update to when the world needs to be saved.

Though the recently-released “Paradise Papers” show Charles lobbied U.K. lawmakers to enact policies that benefited his estate’s investment in a Bermuda company that does sustainable forestry. So, there’s that.

4. ‘Ice Apocalypse’ Now

Liberal writer and climate scientist Eric Holthaus claimed manmade global warming would set off the “ice apocalypse” at a pace “too quickly for humanity to adapt.”

Holthaus warned the wholesale collapse of two Antarctic glaciers — Pine Island and Thwaites — could happen sooner than previously believed, resulting in “flooding coastal cities and creating hundreds of millions of climate refugees.” Sounds terrible, but his conclusions aren’t really backed up by the science.

“I think his article is too pessimistic: that it overstates the possibility of disaster. Too soon, too certain,” Tamsin Edwards, a scientist who’s studied Antarctica, wrote in The Guardian about Holthaus’s article.

5. 2015 is the ‘last effective opportunity’ to stop catastrophic warming

World leaders meeting at the Vatican  issued a statement saying that 2015 was the “last effective opportunity to negotiate arrangements that keep human-induced warming below 2-degrees [Celsius].”

Pope Francis wants to weigh in on global warming, and is expected to issue an encyclical saying basically the same thing. Francis reiterated that 2015 is the last chance to stop massive warming.

But what he should really say is that the U.N. conference this year is the “last” chance to cut a deal to stem global warming…since last year when the U.N. said basically the same thing about 2014’s climate summit.

6. France’s foreign minister said we only have “500 days” to stop “climate chaos”

When Laurent Fabius met with Secretary of State John Kerry on May 13, 2014 to talk about world issues he said “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Ironically at the time of Fabius’ comments, the U.N. had scheduled a climate summit to meet in Paris in December 2015 — some 565 days after his remarks. Looks like the U.N. is 65 days too late to save the world.

7. Former President Barack Obama is the last chance to stop global warming

When Obama made the campaign promise to “slow the rise of the oceans,” some environmentalists may have taken him quite literally.

The United Nations Foundation President Tim Wirth told Climatewire in 2012 that Obama’s second term was “the last window of opportunity” to impose policies to restrict fossil fuel use. Wirth said it’s “the last chance we have to get anything approaching 2 degrees Centigrade,” adding that if “we don’t do it now, we are committing the world to a drastically different place.”

Even before that, then-National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Space Flight Center head James Hansen warned in 2009 that Obama only “has four years to save Earth.”

8. Remember when we had “hours” to stop global warming?

World leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark in 2009 to potentially hash out another climate treaty. That same year, the head of Canada’s Green Party wrote that there was only “hours” left to stop global warming.

“We have hours to act to avert a slow-motion tsunami that could destroy civilization as we know it,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Greens in Canada, wrote in 2009. “Earth has a long time. Humanity does not. We need to act urgently. We no longer have decades; we have hours. We mark that in Earth Hour on Saturday.”

Sodom and Gomorrah – Is this the mirror of today’s society?

By Wallace Bruschweiler & William Palumbo

Reading the constant newspaper headlines over the past weeks and months, it’s high time we ask ourselves: are we living in a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah?  These Biblical cities were infamously smote by God’s righteous cleansing by a rain of fire and brimstone; what will we do to rectify today’s situation?

The number of cases of sexual harassment/abuse from society’s so-called “elites,” (and since they run the media, government, and Hollywood, “elite” is no idle label) points to a disturbing – and, frankly revolting – number of sexual criminals running our country’s government and influential industries.  From Harvey Weinstein to Charlie Rose to Bill Clinton, the highest level of our society is veritably infested by sexual predators who know neither morals nor consequences for their destructive actions.

Tax Payer’s Slush Fund for Congressional Predators/Criminals

Adding insult to injury, we recently learned that Congress has operated slush fund to pay out various victims of sexual, racial, and handicap abuse since 1995. Under the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA) of 1995, they are required to report on the payouts from this fund, although under a convenient cloud of half-disclosed information.

According to the Office of Compliance (compliance.gov), Congress has paid out more than $17 million from 1997 – present day (20 years). This figure encompasses 264 individual cases, which include “overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

Here are some questions to consider in the aftermath of this stunning and disgusting revelation:

  • How many of these cases are related to sexual harassment/abuse? Since the revelation of this fund came only after the public outing of high profile sex offenders, is it reasonable to assume that most of the cases related to sexual offenses?
  • How many individual lawmakers and aides does this slush fund affect? Is it 50? 100? 150? (Reminder: 264 cases since 1997.)  How many are repeat offenders, and who are they?
  • Is it completely fair to assume that these payments were only made to victims whose accusations were validated? It seems reasonable to conclude… yes!
  • Additionally, is it also fair to assume that each victim who was paid out of this fund is normally sworn to secrecy as a condition of the payout? If so, it is fair to point out that “money for silence” is a common applied mafia tactic.
  • What, if any, actions have been taken against the offenders?
  • What was going on in 2002, when the fund paid out nearly $4 million for a total of 10 cases? (Average of nearly $400,000 per case.) What was the nature of these claims? And who are/were the offenders?

Proposed Reforms for the Rotten Core

In the days since we have learned of this horrifying tax payer-financed fund, there have been calls for reform.  Up to and including President Trump, many people have been calling for Congress to disclose immediately the names of the criminals/offenders whose actions led these payouts. Here are our two simple, humble recommendations which should be implemented as soon as possible:

  • All names of members of Congress and their aides who admitted to criminal actions that resulted in payouts should be released so that voters can identify them, and vote accordingly in the upcoming election. Victims should not be named.
  • Any above named individual should refund the government/tax payer for any and all funds paid to victims as a result of their disgusting individual actions. The tax payer should not be responsible for any payment whatsoever that resulted from impropriety on behalf of elected officials and their staff.

Since the passage of Obamacare and its exemptions of Congressmen/women, it is commonplace to assert that elected officials should be subject to the same laws and rules as citizens. This fund for victims is the prime example! Elected officials are no different than the people who elect them, and if they are criminals they should be subject to the same investigations, arrests, penalties, and consequences.

We, the People, Accuse!

What type of a society accepts rulers that act like animals without morals or scruples?  What is now considered “normal” by our society? Is the right to routinely abuse women and men, (and dare we ask, children, too? Cf. Dennis Hastert) a reward of winning elected office?

What type of society accepts men in power who prey on women/men/boys/girls, ruin their lives through traumatic experiences, and worst of all pays for these crimes through our provided tax dollars? This is a pox on our house that we cannot afford to ignore.

This appalling revelation of a tax-funded slush fund should not go unnoticed. For example, recent accusations against Al Franken (D-MN) should not lead to 1 cent being paid out on his behalf.  All compensation money should come from Franken’s own pocket – PERIOD!

The Clintons, Bill and Hillary, ushered into Washington a disgusting culture of casual abuse and, yes, rape and pedophilia. The phenomenon, however, affects both parties and cannot and should not be looked at in a partisan manner.

It is our right – no, it is our duty – as citizens, as a civilized and moral people, to demand accountability and an absolute end to these criminals’ careers as lawmakers.

This is your government, and dammit it’s your country!  Don’t let them off the hook this time!

RELATED ARTICLES:

24 Democrat Sex Scandals The Liberal Media Is Not Reporting

John Conyers Steps Down from House Judiciary Committee.

BREAKING: Ex-Cop making Roy Moore Harassment Claim is Leftist, Anti-Moore Opponent

Few witnesses could be more damning against a purported sexual abuser of four decades ago than an ex-cop from that era. That is, unless the ex-cop has a hidden agenda. Like the former Gadsden, Alabama cop who claims police were told in the 1970s to ensure that now-GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore stayed away from teen cheerleaders — and who actually turns out to be a left-wing Moore opponent.

Faye Gary

Faye Gary created quite a stir last week with her comments, though she confessed to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that the claims about Judge Moore were “just rumors” and that “we never got a complaint on it.”

What didn’t come out during her media interview — in which she appeared sober and non-partisan — is that she has an ideological ax to grind with the judge.

After confirming with the City of Gadsden Personnel Office that Gary actually had served as a police officer, I contacted her via a Facebook message. The passion and anger quickly emerged, with Gary making clear she objected to Moore’s stances on homosexuality, Islam and the display of the Ten Commandments.

In fact, the venom leapt from the page. Gary insisted that Moore will, as she put it, “pay for his stance on gays, Muslims and most of all for hiding behind the Ten Commandments for his political gain.” She seemed to be implying that he’ll suffer some kind of divine retribution.

Gary also became vulgar. After I told her the Gadsden Mall’s ex-manager contradicted her claim that Moore was suspended from the facility and that this is what happens when you listen to the “rumor mill” (her term), she wrote, “Thanks for your opinion but they r just like a[**] h[***]s we all have one.”

Note that none of this means Gary’s claims are or aren’t true. But it hints at her motivation for coming forward and certainly makes her something less than an unimpeachable source.

Unsurprisingly, Gary’s Facebook page reflects her political passions. Scrolling down, you find pictures of Barack Obama along with some harsh condemnation of conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who had at the time raised Gary’s ire by criticizing Michelle Obama.

Casting further doubt on Gary’s claims is that her story doesn’t add up. She stated that “we were also told to watch him [Moore] at the ball games and make sure that he didn’t hang around the cheerleaders.” But when Andrea Mitchell asked if “this was just rumor” or if she was actually given instructions from superiors, Gary replied “It was just rumors.”

Of course, there’s no law stating you “can’t hang around cheerleaders,” anyway, so this wouldn’t be the police’s official domain. Nor did Gary say she ever saw Moore hanging around cheerleaders. And if cops had approached him and said “Judge, you must observe an exclusion zone around those cheerleaders,” it would be quite the story.

So the real story here may be that Gary would like to be a cheerleader for Moore’s far-left opponent, Doug Jones. Once again, Gary cited a rumor that the judge was banned from the Gadsden Mall even after Barnes Boyle, the facility’s former manager, said that to the best of his knowledge Moore was not banned (video below). Gary states she was told to watch Moore around cheerleaders, yet indicates that this “instruction” was actually a rumor. She says she “worked juvenile, so if any complaint [about Moore] had come in, it would have come to us. … But we never got a complaint on it.” What she doesn’t say is that, with all her watching, she ever observed Moore behaving inappropriately around any teen girls. So is there anything here but rumor?

In addition, the story of Moore’s most damning accuser, Beverly Young Nelson, has already unraveled. Meanwhile, rumor is helping obscure reality. This is precisely the goal, too. As Huffpo’s Amanda Terkel put it Friday, the best chance to defeat Moore is “for the Democratic Party to lie low.” Why? Because their positions are damning in Dixie.

Consider how Terkel also wrote that “Doug Jones is trying to distinguish himself from the national party….”

Well, he’s not trying very hard.

He’s pro-prenatal infanticide, apparently even up to the moment of birth. He’s pro-“transgender” agenda, which includes support for “transgenders” in the military and having confused (or clever) boys use girls’ locker rooms. He’s also pro-amnesty, pro-CO2 regulation, pro-ObamaCare and is a tax-and-spend politician. This is the real scandal in the Senate special-election campaign: that Doug Jones wants to bring New York values to Alabama.

And maybe this is why Democrats have to bring a Hollywood scandal to Roy Moore.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

RELATED ARTICLE: John Conyers Steps Down from House Judiciary Committee.