Tag Archive for: federal government

Save our Republic—Shut Down the Government on March 8th, 2024

The weak do nothing Congressional Republican and Democrat socialists and Communists are still unable to script a balanced budget that eliminates the massive fraud waste and abuse of U.S. taxpayers hard earned money.

Currently the congress have not been able to agree on legislation to fund the departments of Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Energy, Transportation and Housing and Urban Affairs. Only the Veterans Affairs and military construction, all of which have legitimate constitutional standing.

But with that said.

The Communists and Socialists in Congress have no problem printing more money in the Treasury Department and borrowing more money from Communist China to fund the traitorous impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’s salary.

The do nothing weak Republican led Congress have no problem funding the woke led Pentagon which allows woke indoctrinated military members to slaughter their pre-born children.

The Pentagon uses our tax dollars to reimburse the travel costs allowing these woke military members to kill these pre-born future Americans who are denied their constitutional protections of life and liberty.

The Marxist Biden administration’s climate agenda designed to dismantle our free markets and capitalist entrepreneurial enterprises is still funded driving inflation to its highest levels in 50 years.

The minority group of conservative congressional patriots like Matt Gaetz (R-FL) continue to fight for the fiscal economic sanity of our Republic which could result in a much needed partial government shutdown after March 1 2024 to stop this Marxist agenda.

Globalist Socialist Republican In Name Only (RINO) and non functioning geriatric GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) has no problem funding billions of unaccounted for tax payer money to the corrupt Ukraine.

But then he screams to his House GOP colleagues on February 26th 2024 that shutting down the government due to fiscal restraints put in place by conservatives is not an option.
“Shutting down the government is harmful to the country. And it never produces positive outcomes — on policy or politics,” he warned on the Senate floor.

I’m thinking the massive national debt created in part by loser Mitch McConnell and his out of control spending with his Socialist / Marxist Republican and Democrat pals is far more damaging to our Republic.

The useless UniParty have a deadline to fund the rest of the government by March 8th 2024.

I’ve got no problem shutting the government down until these worthless members of congress initiate a balanced budget that reduces significantly our 34 trillion national debt and eliminates totally this unconstitutional fraudulent spending.

If a government shutdown hurts the reelection of these Republican and Democrat traitors to our Republic then so be it. Good riddance to them come Election Day. But the end result will be the survival of our Republic.

©2024. Geoff Ross. All rights reserved.


Border Debate Turns Deadly with Laken Riley Murder: Biden Admin ‘Has Blood on Its Hands’

Expert: Biden Admin Using Federal Agencies and Left-Wing NGOs to Illegally Amass Votes

RELATED VIDEO: BITTER PILL TO SWALLOW: Dr. Phil Tells The View Kids Crossing the Border Sent to Sweatshops


Legal Experts Sound Alarm on Biden Admin’s Pattern of ‘Unlawful Overreach’

In the wake of the Biden administration’s recent efforts to use federal agencies to regulate on matters outside their jurisdiction, legal experts are expressing dismay at what they say is a pattern of unconstitutional overreach by Biden’s government in order to achieve political ends.

Last year, the Biden administration moved forward with a new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rule that threatened to pull federal funding for school lunches from schools that did not adopt the administration’s new interpretation of Title IX, which specified that the prohibition on discrimination based on sex must “include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.” Observers noted that a program designed to help feed low-income children was now being entangled with a policy rooted in highly controversial gender ideology.

In December, a group of 21 Republican state attorneys general filed suit against the Biden administration after it finalized another federal rule through the Department of Transportation (USDOT) which required states to create benchmarks for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen (R) called the rule “another unlawful and overreaching regulation,” and the attorneys general pointed out that Congress had not given the USDOT authority to regulate emissions or to direct how states must roll out their policy decisions.

On Thursday, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (R) pointed to numerous further examples of the Biden administration’s overreach on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.”

“One of the things people ought to pay attention to is the phrase ‘whole of government,’” he noted. “You’re starting to hear this from bureaucrats and politicians in Washington over and over again. That should be a red flag for you when you hear ‘whole of government.’ … It’s kind of a code that they’re going to use [in order for] agencies that have absolutely nothing to do with the thing at hand to try to accomplish something that they don’t have authority to do.”

“For example,” Yost continued, “the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] is there to regulate the stock markets and stock trading and commodities trading. They publish rules, and it’s a regulatory agency — pretty dry and dusty. Well, under the whole of government approach, the Biden administration is using them to try to enter into fossil fuels and energy policy and climate change. What does the SEC and stock markets have to do with whether we drive electric cars or not or fossil fuel development?”

Yost further pointed to a November 2021 rule the Biden administration attempted to implement through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). “They tried to get OSHA involved in the COVID wars. OSHA is all about [having] guardrails around the catwalks. Let’s make sure that there’s safety features around the vats of acid so that workers don’t get hurt. They tried to use that department and that authority to make sure that every employee of a company that had more than 100 employees, which was over 80 million Americans, had to have the vaccine … if they wanted the government’s permission to work. The Supreme Court knocked it down … but it’s that whole of government mindset where they try to take every bureaucratic alphabet soup agency to do something that [it] was never designed to do.”

Yost went on to underscore the importance of the American court system in maintaining the rule of law going forward. “We have to rely on the genius of the Founders, the separation of powers. The courts and Congress both have the ability to rein in an overreaching executive. Congress hasn’t been too interested in doing that of late. But fortunately, in a lot of places, courts are doing their jobs as attorneys general are going to court and challenging these things.”

“We have to realize we’re in a battle,” Yost concluded. “This is not a civil debate. … These folks don’t care about the norms. They don’t care about the rules or the rule of law. We are in a pitched battle, and we need everybody to help.”

Perkins concurred. “We’ve got to be informed. We’ve got to be voting. We’ve got to be engaged, making sure that we have those that respect the rule of law [in office] because our system doesn’t work without that.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Democrats’ Primary Shenanigans Are a Bad Look for Biden

RELATED VIDEO: Joe Biden – America’s Agent of Chaos.


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Weaponized HHS Takes LGBT Agenda on ‘Offense’

Biden’s Health Department is being weaponized to promote homosexuality and the transgender agenda. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra launched the department’s “Pride Summit” on Monday, stressing the importance of normalizing the LGBT agenda. He quipped, “Supporting the LGBTQI+ community is a top priority for me and HHS. Equity runs at the heart of every initiative we take on here.”

Numerous Biden administration officials participated in the event, including White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who identifies as a lesbian, and HHS Assistant Secretary Rachel Levine, a biological man who identifies as a woman. Several other non-governmental LGBT activists were present too, including American Civil Liberties Union “Trans Justice Strategist” Arli Christian and Casey Pick, director of Law and Policy for the Trevor Project, which has hosted sexually explicit online chatrooms for children and teens.

The Pride Summit served dual purposes: the first was to laud, in the words of an HHS press release, “the historic actions taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to ensure that LGBTQI+ communities … have the resources and support they need and deserve.” Under Biden’s tenure, the HHS has turned into a veritable LGBT cheerleading squad, with both Becerra and Levine marching in Pride parades and vociferously promoting gender transition procedures (including genital mutilation surgeries) for minors, flying the “Progress Pride” flag outside HHS headquarters, and hosting a pro-trans roundtable discussion — and that’s just this month’s activities.

The second purpose of the Pride Summit was to showcase future HHS endeavors to promote LGBT ideology. Among them are the planned release of a “Behavioral Health Care Advisory on Transgender and Gender Diverse Youth” for mental health experts to use in advocating for harmful gender transition procedures, mandating state child welfare agencies use federal funding to promote gender transition procedures, and efforts to force health care providers to violate their consciences and commit gender transition procedures.

Becerra said of the HHS’s efforts, “This game of defense can get tiring. We want offense. Let’s play on the offensive and let’s grow.”

The sentiment was echoed by Levine, who tweeted last week, “All summer long we will be celebrating the ‘Summer of Pride.’” He repeated the slogan at the Pride Summit, calling for not just a whole month dedicated to the LGBT agenda but a whole season: “Happy Pride Month, and actually — let’s declare it a summer of Pride.”

Speaking on gender transition procedures for children — including puberty blockers, hormone drugs, medically-unnecessary double mastectomies, and genital mutilation surgeries — Levine declared, “We often say that gender-affirming care is healthcare, gender-affirming care is mental healthcare, and gender-affirming care is literally suicide prevention care.” There is no evidence to support Levine’s claims, and there is actually evidence which contradicts it.

In fact, Dr. Jennifer Bauwens, Family Research Council’s director of the Center for Family Studies, told The Washington Stand that “this is the most invasive ‘intervention’ that exists to treat any psychological condition and yet it has the least evidence to recommend it.” In a 2021 study authored by Bauwens, she noted that “despite the years of empirical study, there is no clear understanding of etiology in the suicide literature. In other words, there is no clear understanding of the individual and combined risks that cause a person to commit suicide,” yet transgender advocates consistently claim to know definitively, after a cursory period of usually inconsistent research, exactly why teens and adults identifying as transgender commit suicide.

Most U.S. studies on the link between gender transition procedures and suicide are largely inconclusive, admitting that there is not enough data available over a long enough period of time. The most thorough study on the subject comes from Sweden. The 30-year-long study found that the suicide rate amongst those who identify as transgender increased after gender transition surgeries, rising to at least 20 times the suicide rate of peers.

Back in 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services refused to mandate coverage of gender transition procedures, citing an absence of evidence that such procedures are actually beneficial. That was undone by the Biden administration last year, and health insurance providers are now required to cover gender transition procedures. Conservative author and commentator Matt Walsh’s documentary “What Is a Woman?” also explores the question, highlighting the experiences of those who regret their gender transitions and the increased risk of suicide, especially since underlying psychological issues aren’t addressed by gender transition procedures.

Quena Gonzalez, Family Research Council’s senior director of Government Affairs, told The Washington Stand, “How much more aggressive can the Biden administration possibly get? We may be about to find out. Buckle up: Biden has another year and a half in this term.”

Monday’s Pride Summit doesn’t just mark the ideological weaponization of yet another federal agency under Biden’s guidance: since his appointment to head HHS in 2021, Becerra has turned the department into arguably the largest pro-abortion activism arm in the U.S. It should be no surprise that a man who considers the brutal, broadscale killing of unborn babies to be “health care” should also advocate for the sexualization and mutilation of children who aren’t killed in the womb.


S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.


Republicans Gut Biden’s Trans Extremism in Woke-Crushing Military Bill

UN Expert Argues Religious Beliefs Must Change to Accommodate LGBT Ideology

Rep. Mark Green to Introduce Bill Combatting ‘HHS Weaponization’ of Title X

BlackRock Abandons Term ‘ESG,’ Rebrands Due to Red State Boycott

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Under Investigation for Partisan Behavior, DOJ Commits More Partisan Behavior

House Republicans have threatened to initiate contempt proceedings against FBI Director Christopher Wray over his defiance of a House Oversight Committee subpoena, which demands an unclassified document it suspects will expose Joe Biden’s complicity in his family influence-peddling scheme. Wray reportedly agreed to turn over the document on Friday. At the same time that it has seemingly stonewalled Congress to protect Democrats, the Department of Justice (DOJ) — of which the FBI is a part — is unashamedly pursuing other legal battles that are widely perceived as partisan.

In a May 3 subpoena, the House Oversight Committee directed Wray to turn over all FD-1023 forms containing the word “Biden” produced during June 2020 by Tuesday, May 30. An FD-1023 form is a standard form for internal FBI communications. The highly specific request was based on “whistleblower disclosures” alerting them to the existence of “an unclassified FD-1023 form that describes an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions,” wrote House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) in an accompanying letter. “It has been alleged that the document includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose.”

However, the FBI refused to comply with the subpoena or even acknowledge the existence of the document. “They are not above the law,” said House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who called Wray and told him to send the document on Tuesday, the deadline. “We have jurisdiction over the FBI, which they seem to act like we do not.”

In a Tuesday press release, Chairman Comer announced, “Today, the FBI informed the Committee that it will not provide the unclassified documents subpoenaed by the Committee. The FBI’s decision to stiff-arm Congress and hide this information from the American people is obstructionist and unacceptable.” He stated his intention of “taking steps to hold the FBI Director in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a lawful subpoena.”

After talking to Wray, Comer issued another press release on Wednesday, “Today, FBI Director Wray confirmed the existence of the FD-1023 form alleging then-Vice President Biden engaged in a criminal bribery scheme with a foreign national. However, Director Wray did not commit to producing the documents subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee.” Wray “offered to allow us to see the documents in person at FBI headquarters,” but Comer made “clear that anything short of producing these documents … is not in compliance with the subpoena” and would result in contempt proceedings.

In response to mounting pressure and possible contempt charges, Wray agreed to turn over the document on Friday.

Wray’s pretense for withholding the document was that it might reveal a confidential human source. But Grassley responded, “The FBI has apparently leaked classified information to the news media in recent weeks, jeopardizing its own human sources,” yet refuses “to provide a specific unclassified record” to Congress.

Wray’s action (or inaction) constitutes “defiance of a legitimate congressional subpoena,” Grassley warned. Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy agreed, writing that Wray is “about to be held in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena that he has no lawful basis to defy.” He explained that “the executive branch can legitimately defy congressional subpoenas” in circumstances where the legislature attempts “to usurp or undermine the constitutional authority of the president,” but that those circumstances are irrelevant to the FBI, which Congress created.

The only plausible reason for Wray’s stonewalling tactics is to shield President Biden by withholding information that is at best embarrassing and at worst criminal. The House Oversight Committee is conducting a widespread investigation into the Biden family, which has begun to unearth what appears to be a sordid web of foreign influence-peddling. From a partial review of bank records, the committee has already tracked over $10 million in foreign cash — from places like China, Ukraine, and Romania — through 21 shell corporations to at least nine members of the Biden family — for no discernable reason other than Biden’s influential position as vice president under Barack Obama.

Oddly enough, the DOJ’s protection of the Biden family seems to do less with his position as president and more with his affiliation as a Democrat. Earlier this month, news broke that a former federal prosecutor had reported bribery allegations to the DOJ as early as October 2018 — while Biden held no governmental office, and while Trump was in the White House — but was ignored.

Meanwhile, political figures who are not Democrats can expect the DOJ to target them and their family members just as zealously as they shield the Bidens. On Wednesday, May 31 — the same day Wray told Comer he would not deliver the subpoenaed document — the DOJ announced it had filed a civil action against 13 coal companies owned or operated by Jim Justice III, son of West Virginia Governor Jim Justice, Jr. (R), to collect $7.6 million in penalties. The press release alleged the companies had committed 130 violations of federal law over a five-year period (2018-2022) and had received “over 50 cessation orders.”

The timing of this announcement raised suspicions. A poll conducted last week of the West Virginia Senate race showed Governor Justice leading incumbent Senator Joe Manchin (D) by 22 points. It’s too much to ask anyone to believe that, after 50 cessation orders over five years, the DOJ just happened to file suit a week after a poll showed Justice III’s father with a massive lead over an incumbent Democratic senator. “Utterly brazen,” responded Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas). “When I said the Biden DOJ is the most political & partisan DOJ in history, I wasn’t kidding…” It’s also noteworthy that the alleged violations began in 2018, the year after Governor Justice switched to the Republican party.

The DOJ’s political interference was also on display in its refusal to prosecute Rachael Rollins. As U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, Rollins leaked “non-public, sensitive” information acquired in her official capacity in an attempt to help Boston City Councilman Ricardo Arroyo in the Democratic primary for Suffolk district attorney against Kevin Hayden, then the interim D.A., according to a 161-page report published in May by the DOJ’s internal watchdog agency, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Rollins, who resigned in May, then “falsely testified under oath” by denying she had leaked non-public information. Although the OIG recommended prosecution, the DOJ declined to prosecute Rollins.

It’s not that the DOJ is too busy to investigate alleged wrongdoing by those on the political Left. No, they’re working hard not to investigate. An IRS whistleblower who participated in the DOJ’s investigation into Hunter Biden, the president’s son — which has dragged on since at least 2018 without charges — said last week, “There were multiple steps that were slow-walked — were just completely not done — at the direction of the Department of Justice.” He added that the “deviations from the normal process” were “way outside the norm.” Instead of correcting the discrepancies or speeding up the investigation, the DOJ (not knowing the whistleblower’s identity) got the IRS to remove the entire team from the investigation.

To the uninitiated, the notion that America’s premier federal law enforcement agency has hopelessly prostituted the integrity of its mission for the short-term benefit of left-wing politicians sounds far-fetched, even conspiratorial. But when one monitors their actual behavior, evidence of politicization soon becomes overwhelming. The question, “is the DOJ politically biased?” becomes such a foregone conclusion that it seems to belong in a TV advertisement, right after the question, “Can Geico really save you 15% or more on car insurance?”

Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis said last week, “I think the DOJ and FBI have lost their way. I think that they’ve been weaponized against Americans who think like me and you, and I think they’ve become very partisan.” He said he would replace Wray on Day One and “[clear] out people who are not doing the job.” He isn’t the only one who thinks that should be done.


Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a staff writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: Obama’s Russia Collusion

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Democrat Asks Biden to Send Illegal Immigrants to Every Town in America

Republicans and one of the nation’s most prominent Democrats agree on one issue: America’s open border with Mexico has created a humanitarian crisis that has stretched multiple cities’ resources to the breaking point. Yet while Republicans focus on increased border security, at least one Democrat wants the Biden administration to adopt a comprehensive plan to settle illegal immigrants in every city, town, and village in the United States.

Historically unprecedented levels of illegal immigration since Joe Biden took office have created a humanitarian crisis for the most vulnerable people. Administration officials admitted last month that they had lost track of 85,000 children, roughly one of every three children who entered the U.S. illegally. “It horrifies me to think of the conditions that they possibly have been thrust into, sold into and have been distributed” into sex slavery, Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.), a member of the House Border Security Caucus, told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” on Monday.

“That is not humane. That is not compassionate.”

New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) has said the uncontrolled border has drained the Big Apple’s finances to the core. Adams anticipates the sanctuary city will spend $1.4 billion on illegal immigrants this fiscal year. When asked, Adams expressed no gratitude for $30 million in federal funding provided by the Biden administration. “When you look at the price tag, $30 million comes nowhere near what the city is paying for a national problem,” Adams told “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

The city’s shelters and hotels became so overfilled that Adams began placing illegal immigrants in seven NYC public school gyms — while students were in the classrooms.

It is “unfair to the city of New York and [other] cities to carry the burden of a national problem,” Adams said — leaving critics to charge him with hypocrisy.

“For the past two years, Texas has been Ground Zero for the unprecedented surge of illegal immigration unleashed by the Biden administration that has strained resources in border communities to the breaking point,” said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). “Even with the efforts of Gov. Greg Abbott to move migrants away from the border, Texas is getting slammed to the tune of $13.4 billion for costs associated with illegal immigration.” Florida, led by Governor Ron DeSantis (R), pays more than $8 billion annually on programs for illegal immigrants or their children, according to a recent FAIR report that calculated the cost imposed on states.

Americans nationwide bear an ever-mounting cost for the uncontrolled border. “It’s costing [U.S.] taxpayers $150 billion a year,” said Rosendale. “Now, the cities that are starting to have this same economic impact pushed upon them are starting to recognize, yes, there is a problem.”

Adams has called on Biden to make the problem the nation’s problem by evenly distributing illegal immigrants nationwide.

“We have 108,000 cities, villages, towns. If everyone takes a small portion of that, and if it’s coordinated at the border to ensure that those who are coming here to this country in a lawful manner is actually moved throughout the entire country, it is not a burden on one city,” said Adams.

The mayor has tried to implement the process by sending illegal immigrants who arrive in his city to other locations statewide, and even to Canada. New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) has been “a real partner” in helping Adams “find space throughout the state,” he said. “We believe the entire state should participate in a decompression strategy.”

Others were less pleased. Canadian MP Christine Fréchette learned of Adams’ “surprising” decision to bus illegal immigrants to the Canadian border in February. A month later, President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hammered out an agreement for Canada to allow 15,000 asylum-seekers to enter from the United States.

Aside from the economist cost, “the people of my city, are watching this city being transformed … the same people I protected for 22 years as a police officer,” Adams said. Illegal immigration has transformed North America, with Canada admitting three migrants for every birth and the U.S. adding three migrants for every four native American births in 2022.

All parties agree the size and scope of illegal border crossings is without parallel in U.S. history. There have been 5,429,144 illegal border encounters since February 2021, the first full month of the Biden-Harris administration, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). That number does not include nearly one million (989,155) gotaways, who successfully eluded Border Patrol, according to an inspector general report on how “Intensifying Conditions at the Southwest Border Are Negatively Impacting CBP and ICE Employees’ Health and Morale.” The number of total encounters at the southern border has increased 245% and gotaways increased 303% since the fiscal year 2019, the IG report found.

Altogether, border encounters and gotaways under the Biden-Harris administration totaled 6,418,299 — more than the population of the state of Missouri. Adams may have a population deficit to make up; nearly half-a-million people (468,200) moved out of New York City between April 2020 and last July — 5.3% of the city’s total population, according to U.S. Census data released last Thursday.

Adams blamed the crisis on the GOP, alleging that “Republicans have blocked comprehensive immigration reform,” by which he meant partial or full amnesty granting U.S. citizenship. Yet previous spikes in illegal immigration in 1986 and 2000 coincided with fulfilled or anticipated amnesty plans.

New York City has long touted its status as a sanctuary city. Mayor Ed Koch (D), whom The New York Times revealed as a “closeted gay man,” established New York City as a sanctuary city through Executive Order 124 on August 7, 1989. Subsequent mayors Michael Bloomberg (a Republican-turned-independent) and Bill DeBlasio (D) liberalized the categories of illegal immigrants whom the city would not turn over to the federal government for deportation.

Adams personally greeted a busload of illegal immigrants sent by Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) last August. Adams proposed sending illegal immigrants to community college at taxpayer expense — in Sullivan County, more than 100 miles north — and he supported a city council measure allowing illegal immigrants to vote in citywide elections. The voting law was struck down by the New York Supreme Court of Richmond County last June.

Citizens in other parts of New York state have indicated they want nothing to do with Adams’ plan to relocate his illegal population. Suffolk County hired a lawyer to prevent Adams from sending illegal immigrants to their area.

Adams also reversed himself on gyms after parents expressed concerns about their children roaming the halls with unvetted adults.

But parents and communities will not receive relief until the president gets serious about border security, said Rosendale.

“We know what to do,” he said. Washington must start “completing the border wall security system — the sensing devices, the cameras, the lighting, the road that would parallel the wall. That would be a huge, huge help.”

D.C. must also reform the oft-abused asylum process, he said. “We know that by implementing the stricter standards on asylum and making sure that people really do have a threat to their lives,” rather than merely coming as economic migrants. “That’s why they’re fleeing, and they’re only coming across one border in order to gain that asylum status.”

They must also reinstate President Donald Trump’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) policies. “While they had to wait in Mexico,” 75% of alleged asylum-seekers “went back to their country of origin,” casting serious doubt on their stories that they feared for their lives.

These policies can again “slow down the flow of people that are fleeing, trying to get into our country dramatically.”


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED VIDEO: ANYWHERE BUT HERE: Adams Says No More Migrants in NYC, Says Spread Them All Over Country

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

No, You Can’t Invoke the 14th Amendment to Raise the Debt Ceiling

Earlier this month, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned the U.S. could run out of money to pay its bills by June 1 if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling. This has led to a game of chicken between the White House and the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

President Biden has demanded Congress pass legislation that raises the debt ceiling without any changes to the way the federal government spends money. House Republicans passed a budget bill that would raise the debt ceiling but would also return government spending to 2022 levels. In addition, citing the fact that Social Security is on pace to be insolvent by 2035, the Republican spending plan proposes modifications to Social Security that would increase its chances of long-term sustainability. The White House has opposed all of it.

Instead of compromising with the majority of Republicans in the House, some on the Left have come up with a theory that would allow them to act unilaterally. In fact, Senate Democrats held a press conference encouraging President Biden to “invoke the 14th Amendment” so they can raise the debt ceiling without the involvement of the Congress.

As a matter of habit, the U.S. spends more money than we bring in. As a result, we’re forced to borrow money each month to pay the bills, which means that next month’s bill is always higher than last month’s bill. The U.S. debt is now over $31 trillion dollars, which represents more than $94,000 per citizen. It was only $12 trillion in 2010.

Because of our habitual overspending, Congress routinely considers legislation to raise the debt ceiling. In fact, Congress has raised the debt limit 13 times since 2000. Despite our familiarity with debt limit debates, no one has ever proposed “invoking the 14th Amendment” as a way of raising the debt limit before. The reason no one has ever proposed it before is because it’s nonsense.

The 14th Amendment does many things, but the relevant section for this discussion is Section 4, which says:

“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations, and claims shall be held illegal and void.”

The 14th Amendment was passed right after the Civil War in 1868 and sought to put the issues of the Civil War in the past in several ways. It clarified that all people, regardless of their skin color, would enjoy equal protection under the law. In addition, to avoid any attempts to revive the struggle, it prohibited civil and military officers who had supported the Confederacy from holding any state or federal office again. Most relevant to this discussion, it also said the debts of the Union “shall not be questioned” but the Union was not going to pay the debts of the Confederacy.

Now, you have most Democrats in the U.S. Senate claiming that this language — which was unambiguously a promise to pay Union debt but not Confederate debt — somehow gives President Biden the power to ignore Congress when it comes to debt ceiling legislation in 2023.

While this interpretation is absurd on its face, it’s worth remembering the Supreme Court was recently convinced the word “sex” actually means “gender identity,” and by extension the word “woman” actually means “anyone who wants to be a woman.” Once you’ve accepted the progressive claim that language can mean anything you want it to mean, the only limits to the Constitution are the limits to your creativity.

To be fair, even if there was an attempt to “invoke the 14th Amendment” to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, legal challenges would follow and the Supreme Court would likely halt the effort as the unconstitutional abuse of power it would be.

The good news is, there are points of agreement in this debate. Both the president and Congress agree a default on U.S. debt would be terrible. But whatever the problem is, consolidating political power into the hands of one man and destroying the checks and balances our system is built upon is not the solution.

If Democrats doubt this, they would do well to remember that once upon a time, they didn’t love the president, and that guy is trying to be president again. If they don’t want to live in a world where a crazy old guy is doing whatever he wants from the White House, they shouldn’t try to create a world in which a crazy old guy is allowed to do whatever he wants in the White House.


Joseph Backholm

Joseph Backholm is Senior Fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council.

RELATED ARTICLE: Yellen: 14th Amendment Can’t Appropriately Be Used to Raise Debt Ceiling

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Democrats Will Use Deep-State ‘Falsehoods’ to Win ‘Election after Election’: Senator

The Democratic Party has burrowed so deeply into the federal bureaucracy that it conducts “one continuous operation” of disinformation designed “to impact and interfere in our election using falsehoods across the board, election after election,” said Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.).

Federal agents’ refusal to investigate Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, conducting a three-year-long inquest against Donald Trump over baseless charges of “collusion” with Russia, and classifying evidence of Joe Biden’s influence peddling taken from Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation is “literally part and parcel of the exact same operation,” Johnson told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” recently.

“The individuals in the FBI that exonerated Hillary Clinton moved, went on to [the] Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That was a fraudulent investigation,” said Johnson, citing Special Counsel John Durham’s final report. “Then the FBI sees Hunter Biden’s laptop in December 2019. We have whistleblowers that said higher ups in the FBI said, ‘You will not look at that Hunter Biden laptop.’ We also have whistleblowers from the FBI who said that the FBI developed a scheme in August of 2020 to downplay any derogatory information on Hunter.”

The FBI Erases Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Bribery Scandals

The Durham report details how the FBI refused to investigate, much less prosecute, Hillary Clinton over three incidents involving receiving donations intended to sway her foreign policy following the 2016 election.

In 2014, a foreign nation sent an asset to curry favor with Hillary Clinton, who had not yet officially declared her candidacy. Agents sought a FISA warrant almost immediately, but officials in Obama’s FBI held up the application for five months. One agent remembered that “everyone was ‘super more careful’” about her application and “scared with the big name [Clinton]” involved. “[T]hey were pretty ‘tippy-toeing’ around HRC, because there was a chance she would be the next [p]resident.” Two officials, including Peter Strzok, “alluded to the fact that they did not want a presidential candidate on tape.”

Ultimately, the warrant came down 11 months later, “conditioned on the requirement that the FBI give defensive briefings to the various public officials and candidates of both political parties”: that is, that the FBI warn both candidates of attempts by foreign agents to affect policy. The offer came although Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe admitted that defensive briefings “reduce your ability to get to the bottom of the threat.”

Hillary Clinton did not attend the briefing, opting to have her attorneys attend in her place.

In November 2015, an FBI informant embedded in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign warned of another foreign agent seeking to influence her impending administration. The informant made a $2,700 donation on behalf of the U.S. citizen fronting for this foreign agent seeking to influence the Clinton campaign. The foreign citizen was known by the FBI “to have foreign intelligence and criminal connections,” and a contribution of that sort would violate 52 U.S. Code § 30121. Federal Election Commission records confirmed a donation.

The informant told the FBI handling agent, “They [the campaign] were okay with it. […] yes they were fully aware from the start” of its origins, and intent to purchase access.

Yet “this apparent illegal contribution was not documented in FBI records,” Durham noted. “Instead, the FBI effectively removed their sole source of insight into this threat.” The agent in charge of the case, “responding to direction” from above, told the informant to have nothing more to do with Clinton fundraising:

“do NOT attend any more campaign events, set up meetings, or anything else relating to [Clinton’s] campaign. We need to keep you completely away from that situation. I don’t know all the details, but it’s for your own protection.”

Finally, Andrew McCabe quashed an FBI investigation into foreign donations to the Clinton family’s “philanthropic” nonprofits. Paul Abbate, now the FBI deputy director and then the assistant director of the Washington Field Office, described McCabe as “negative,” “annoyed,” and “angry” that the investigation took place, during a meeting on February 22, 2016. McCabe then told investigators in multiple FBI field offices that he must personally approve all investigations into the Clintons’ foundations.

In August 2016, Obama-era FBI Director James Comey shut down the investigation, turning it over to the New York office, and subpoena power was given to the U.S. Attorneys offices in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. Those offices refused to issue subpoenas to investigate the Clintons.

The Southern District of New York issued 34 charges against former President Donald Trump at an April 4 arraignment over campaign finance violations, charges legal experts call strained.

Durham contrasted that with the way agents rushed to investigate 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump over charges they knew to be hearsay. Agents received the Steele dossier on September 19, 2016, and, within two days, incorporated it into a FISA application targeting the Trump campaign.

Hillary Clinton is “the one, with the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, that was cozy with the Russians,” Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) told Perkins on Tuesday. “Clinton was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to go deliver speeches in Russia.” But the FBI responded to their prodding after “they created this narrative, they paid for this narrative, and they pulled together documentation and hired people to push this narrative. And the media went along with them every single step of the way.”

The CIA Peddles Disinformation about Russian Disinformation

When the Hunter Biden laptop story broke on the eve of the 2020 election, Obama-era Acting CIA Director Mike Morell, “at the direction of current Secretary of State Anthony Blinken,” who was then “working for the Biden campaign [came] up with a fraudulent letter signed by 51 intelligence officials” asserting the story carried all the hallmarks of Russian propaganda, Senator Johnson told Perkins. “But also, we now know the CIA tried to solicit signatures from current CIA employees.”

The CIA uncharacteristically expedited approval of the statement, which deemed any mention of Hunter Biden’s laptop “Russian disinformation,” according to a report released last week by the House Judiciary Committee. Morell asked the CIA’s Prepublication Classification Review Board for a “rush job” to approve a statement via email on October 19, 2016 — three days before the final debate between President Trump and Joe Biden.

In an email to former CIA Director John Brennan the same day, Morrell revealed the letter’s intention was starkly political: to “give the [Biden] campaign, particularly during the debate on Thursday, a talking point to push back on [President] Trump on this issue.”

Partisan political appointees manifested their political bias in each of these cases — and tried, or succeeded, in changing the course of multiple elections, Johnson said.

“This is one continuous operation of the Left, of Democrats, of the Biden campaign, the Hillary Clinton campaign, to impact and interfere in our election using falsehoods across the board, election after election,” Johnson told Perkins on Monday.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) echoed his words Tuesday night. “We’ve got the pattern of recognition here,” Gaetz told Newsmax TV host Chris Plante. “You’ve got Big Government, Big Media, Big Tech all in this conspiracy to try to reshape the nature of truth. And guess what? You saw the very features of that conspiracy reemerge in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.”

Truth “shouldn’t be something defined by the powerful,” said Gaetz.

The Deep State ‘Goes Down Very Low’: Trump

Former President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a pledge to “drain the Swamp,” said clearing left-leaning partisans out of the U.S. government’s bureaucracy will take a herculean effort.

“There is a Deep State, and there are a lot of problems,” he told Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt on Tuesday. “I did a lot of firings, but it goes down very low” into the ranks of federal employees.

Durham closed out his nearly four-year-long investigation by declining to make any criminal referrals, or call for any new policies, to prevent future election-tampering. “Not every injustice or transgression amounts to a criminal offense,” wrote Durham. “If this report and the outcome of the Special Counsel’s investigation leave some with the impression that injustices or misconduct have gone unaddressed, it is not because the Office [of Special Prosecutor] concluded that no such injustices or misconduct occurred. It is, rather, because not every injustice or transgression amounts to a criminal offense, and criminal prosecutors are tasked exclusively with investigating and prosecuting violations of U.S. criminal laws.”

The Biden administration’s FBI responded to the Durham report by declaring the agency needs no reform, because “current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time. Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented.”

Impeachment, Expulsion Resolutions Introduced in the House

While Trump states the Deep State goes low, House Republicans are starting at the top.

FBI Director Christopher Wray faces impeachment, thanks to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). Her legislation, introduced Tuesday and reported first by The Daily Caller, raps Wray “for facilitating the development of a [f]ederal police force to intimidate, harass, and entrap American citizens that are deemed enemies of the Biden regime,” including pro-life advocates and traditional Roman Catholics.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) introduced a bill to expel Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a Democratic hopeful for U.S. Senate, from Congress, citing his role in promoting the Russian collusion narrative. “Schiff lied to the American people. He used his position on House Intel to push a lie that cost American taxpayers millions of dollars,” Luna said. “He is a dishonor to the House of Representatives.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has invited Durham to testify before his committee and co-authored a letter to Biden administration CIA Director William Burns over “the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election.” Burns has until Sunday to respond.

Republican presidential candidates have called for massive retaliation against the agency. Aside from Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) said the next president will “need to clean house at these agencies, as they’ve never been held accountable for this egregious abuse of power.” Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley agreed. “Heads need to roll over this. Anybody that touched it or had a part in it needs to be fired and every one of their senior managers needs to be fired. The FBI has lost complete credibility when it comes to this.”

Equality Under the Law Is a Battle ‘for the Soul of America’

Restoring even-handed administration of justice has spiritual connotations, one rising Republican said.

“The Democrats try to lecture us on democracy,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) told Schmitt on Tuesday. “It is Republicans, it is conservatives: We’re the ones that are actually fighting for the soul of America and for our republic, because we want the law to be applied equally.”

The Bible repeatedly condemns “respect of persons” (James 2:9Colossians 3:25Ephesians 6:9), especially in applying the law (Deuteronomy 1:17 and 16:19II Chronicles 19:7Proverbs 24:23).

The ongoing bias of deeply embedded federal bureaucrats in favor of one party across multiple election cycles “is going to have to be a campaign issue,” Tony Perkins told Senator Blackburn.


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.


FBI broke rules in scouring foreign intelligence on Jan. 6 riot, racial justice protests, court says

Poll: 4 in 10 Say Congress Should Begin Impeachment Proceedings on Biden

Durham Report Shows The Corrupted Elite And The Fact That America Is Losing Its Moral Compass

GOP Rep. Files Resolution to Expel Adam Schiff Over Durham Report

FBI used cash bonuses to encourage agents to wiretap more Americans, whistleblower says

Study: Taxpayer-Subsidized PBS Whacks GOP with 85% Negative News

RELATED VIDEO: MTG introduces articles of impeachment against Joe Biden, calls current government ‘illegitimate’


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

As Dems Ignore the Border, Cries of ‘Do Something’ Grow

Maybe President Joe Biden isn’t the only one with cognitive deficits. At a fundraising event in Atlanta Friday, his “border czar,” Vice President Kamala Harris, insisted that everything on the border is “going rather smoothly” — an absurd assessment for a country that just watched more migrants cross the border last week than fits in Dallas’s AT&T Stadium (83,000). While our country is overrun by terror suspects and drug smugglers, the crisis earned barely a shrug from the two leaders, who spent their weekends either lounging by the beach or raising money for the party defending this lawlessness.

Since Biden’s czar has obviously lost touch with the situation, Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) decided to send a special Lone Star wake-up call. To remind Harris what border states are facing, he bussed dozens more migrants to the vice president’s residence and let them loose. As for other area accommodations, a local ABC station says that the D.C. hotels and shelters housing illegal immigrants are already at capacity. “There will be more coming,” Abbott warned leftist leaders, floating more drop-offs in New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago.

“Pray that our country will survive” was all that Rev. Franklin Graham could say.

Meanwhile, the tsunami of migrants — which included an Afghan on the America’s terror watch list — is not a catastrophe, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas argued on CNN Sunday. “I would disagree [that we have fallen short],” the beleaguered Biden official said. “We have surged resources, asylum officers, Border Patrol agents, processing coordinators to do the data entry work so our Border Patrol agents can be out in the field. We’ve expanded our holding capacity in Border Patrol stations. … We’re setting up regional processing centers now. It’s extraordinary what we’ve done over the past 18 months or so.”

“Extraordinary,” yes. An extraordinary failure. Even NBC’s Savannah Guthrie didn’t hold back with Mayorkas, demanding to know why, after they’ve had “two years to prepare for this,” there’s so much “chaos and confusion” at the border. Like Biden, the secretary blames Congress. “We are operating with the constraints of a broken immigration system.”

A system, Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) points out, that House Republicans have tried to fix — as recently as last week. This “absolutely” could have been avoided, he told “Washington Watch” guest host Jody Hice. “And what you’re seeing now is the actual policies that would keep this from taking place — the [ones] that were initiated under the Trump administration — we saw that tide of humanity slowed to a little trickle. It was policies, not money, being thrown at the border,” he explained.

“… The Remain in Mexico Policy, which I tried to get into statute two years ago and introduced a bill to do just that, says, ‘Okay, if you come to the American border and you’re going to claim asylum status, you can make that claim, but you’re not released into the United States until you await your hearing date to find out if you’re eligible. You wait in Mexico until that hearing date.’ And just by that one simple thing alone, we were able to have 75% of the people who claimed asylum status returned to their country of origin.” Solutions like that were “contained in H.R. 2 … [which the House passed Thursday]. It’s going to the Senate. And now we’re going to find out how many people are truly interested in securing the United States’s sovereignty.”

Biden, of course, is just fine with the status quo. As he said to reporters during his bike ride, throwing open the doors to America has gone “much better than you all expected.” That’s because, Rosendale pointed out, this has been the Democrats’ goal all along. They want the country to be to be invaded by foreigners who are dependent on the government and the party who let them in.

“If you go back in time and you play the quote from Secretary Mayorkas from two years ago, he said at that time, ‘We have a plan. Please allow us to carry our plan out.’ And he has, [because] his plan has been to allow as many people into our country illegally as he possibly can under this administration. … He has absolutely no intention of trying to even slow down the flow of humanity that’s coming into our country. And it’s really unfortunate, because there is a lot of suffering that is taking place [with] all of those people.”

He, like former Congressman Hice, has visited the border multiple times and witnessed the turmoil up close. “They’ve got — what is it — I think up to 85,000 children now [who] are unaccounted for that have been released into the country. Where are they located? Where have they been sent? What kind of conditions are they living in? Have they been sold into slavery? There are so many terrible things that are happening to people that are coming up into this country.”

And the expense to taxpaying Americans is astronomical. The preferential treatment Biden is giving illegal immigrants — over our own veterans, who are being booted out of shelters to house them — comes with a massive price tag. “I’ve heard estimates as much as $150 billion a year in order for us to house, Medicaid, and educate all of the illegals that are coming in.” And because of their status, Rosendale points out, “they’re not allowed to work legally. So that means they become dependent upon our entire system. So we are creating a permanent underclass. And this is not humane. And the way that these folks are treated on the way traveling here is not humane.”

As for the surge being a non-event, Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) could only shake his head at the Democrats’ apathy. “Remember,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Monday’s “Washington Watch,” “President Obama declared it a humanitarian crisis when we were apprehending about 2,000 people a day. … It’s been averaging over 8,000 people a day. … [T]his is an enormous disaster that has been caused by the Biden administration. We [had] pretty well gotten the border under control [under Trump]. We shut down the flow of unaccompanied children, of family units abusing our asylum laws. But Biden blew that open. This is completely his fault. This is his crisis.”


Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Sickening’: NIH Funds Transgender ‘Experiment’ on Mostly Minors, Leaving 2 Dead

On Tuesday, news broke that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded a study on mostly minors who purported to identify as transgender, in which they were given cross-sex hormones over the course of two years. Two of the study’s participants ended up committing suicide, and 11 more experienced suicidal ideation. Lawmakers and doctors are expressing outrage that taxpayer dollars were used to fund a study that caused death and irreversible harm to children.

The study, entitled “Psychosocial Functioning in Transgender Youth after 2 Years of Hormones,” was published in The New England Journal of Medicine in January and was conducted by the Boston Children’s Hospital, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago under a $477,444 five-year grant from NIH. It studied 315 participants aged 12-20 who identified as transgender or nonbinary, 240 of which were minors.

Each participant was given cross-sex hormones over the course of the two-year study, meaning that they were given hormones of the opposite biological sex in order to appear more like the opposite sex. Despite claiming that “appearance congruence, positive affect, and life satisfaction increased, and depression and anxiety symptoms decreased” among the participants, the study went on to acknowledge that two people died by suicide and 11 people experienced “suicidal ideation” (“a broad term used to describe a range of contemplations, wishes, and preoccupations with death and suicide”).

“It is sickening that the federal government is preying on young people and using our taxpayer dollars to advance its radical gender ideology,” Rep. Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.) told The Daily Signal. “We are rightfully demanding answers from NIH, and we are committed to holding those responsible accountable for this tragic loss of life.” Brecheen is one of 15 Republican lawmakers that signed a letter to NIH Acting Director Lawrence Tabak expressing “grave concerns” over the study.

“Despite overwhelming evidence that chemically transitioning children is not safe, the NIH plans to give more than $10.6 million to experiment on children and adolescents through 2026,” the letter states. “We are deeply concerned about your agency’s use of taxpayer dollars to advance experiments on children who will be irreversibly harmed by radical gender ideology.”

Doctors are also expressing serious concerns over the study. During Wednesday’s edition of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Dr. Quentin Van Meter, a pediatric endocrinologist and former president of the American College of Pediatricians, pointed out that the study was conducted using questionable methodology.

“It’s a very unusual study in that it’s not like other studies where you have unified criteria across the centers, a set of consent forms that’s uniform for the whole project,” he explained. “[Most studies] are governed by an institutional review board that’s independent … and they require a very strict consent form for adolescents. They have a safety committee, which is a separate entity which has no financial interest in any way with those doing the study. So it’s a very clean and solid way to stop a study and examine it when things go wrong.”

“That does not apply to this study,” Van Meter continued. “For some reason, it’s not a standard study. Nothing was standardized by it. Each center was doing just what they wanted to do and what they continue to do. And they call it an ‘observational study’ to get out from under the regular kinds of regulations which [would] have stopped this study in its tracks. The sad thing is … the two deaths are unconscionable.”

Van Meter, who also serves as an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at Morehouse School of Medicine, went on to note that a total of $5 million was originally granted for a five-year study.

“It’s perverse that they’re [publishing] this study [with] the first two years [of] data … as a study hailing success of their programs. It is an absolute sham with faulty reasoning [and] faulty representation. … I was at the Pediatric Endocrine Society meetings in San Diego just over this past weekend, and it was lauded by the interest groups as being one of the most concrete studies to show the benefits of their labor and their ideology. And clearly it doesn’t show that.”

Van Meter further detailed the health outcomes that result from giving minors cross-sex hormones.

“They will be sterilized, first of all, that’s the baseline of the horrific nature of the outcomes,” he underscored. “On top of that, there is the side effects of the medications that create disease. … We have known about [that] in medicine for as long as we’ve known about hormones and their effects going back into the early 1920s. … [T]here’s plenty of data from top to bottom to show that every one of the drugs they’re using has adverse consequences. The overall lifespan of the transgender population is half that of the U.S. population. … [T]hey’re creating medical problems that would not have otherwise existed. And these poor individuals not only are sterile, but they are sexually incompetent. They have no ability to have any real sexual function moving forward when their organs are fried by cross-sex hormones. Their brain [development is] adversely affected, and the adolescent age bone density is taken apart and they end up having frequent fractures in adulthood because of that.”

Van Meter continued, “It’s just a panoply of disease that otherwise would not have existed if the child had been counseled and walked through the process, which is the real international standard of care — to not medicalize this, but realize it’s based on mental health issues, and resolving those mental health issues essentially resolves the transgender affirmation or the transgender identification in [over] 90% of all these kids.”

The endocrinologist additionally emphasized how many European countries are “10 years ahead” of the U.S. in determining that there is “no proven benefit to mental health and likely a deterioration of mental health” due to gender transition procedures through the use of broad systemic reviews of the literature. In October, Van Meter highlighted the fact that the United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and France have all taken steps to restrict minors from being able to undergo irreversible gender transition procedures.

Perkins further observed that efforts like the NIH-funded study will likely be remembered with “shock and horror” decades from now, just as the Tuskegee syphilis study is today.

“You’re absolutely right,” Van Meter responded. “And hopefully it will be sooner [rather] than later that the real reality breaks forth and the world knows how evil this concept is of taking healthy children with mental health problems and throwing hormones and surgery at them to create a solution which does not work and never has worked. You know … there’s going to be maybe a million plus children around the world who have been permanently damaged. And that is the sad thing. You know, my heart says we need to do this yesterday and shut this down.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The Injustice of Biden’s Equity Agenda

In a move that has critics crying “socialism,” the Biden administration created a new policy that will raise mortgage fees on low-risk borrowers so high-risk borrowers can pay less. The most affected group, those with credit scores between 720 and 759 who also have a downpayment of 15% -20%, would pay an additional $3,200 in fees.

Unlike other left-wing economic plans which transfer money from the wealthy to the poor, under this scheme, borrowers with good credit will pay more even if they have less money. In a sane world, this makes no sense. We understand that lending money comes with risk, and borrowers come with different risks. Someone who has paid their bills on time for the past 30 years presents less risk than a recent high school graduate. But we no longer live in a sane world, we live in a world led by those who want every group to experience the same outcome. They call it “equity.”

We’re very familiar with this dynamic when it comes to categories like race, sex, religion, and the suite of LGBTQ identity categories. Applicants to medical school are rewarded and punished based on their skin color as much as their competency, and male-dominated professions like computer science are seen as evidence of sexism, not evidence that women like different things.

The Biden administration’s new mortgage fee policy is just an extension of this logic as they attempt to “level the playing field” so those with bad credit will have the same outcome as those with good credit. What everyone other than the most zealous equity advocates immediately recognize, however, is that this playing field should not be leveled. We do not want to live in a world where responsible people are treated the same as irresponsible people. While equity demands groups be treated similarly, justice demands individuals be treated as individuals. This is why none of us would hire a convicted sex-offender to babysit our children.

We have a criminal justice system because we understand some individuals deserve to walk about freely in society, while others do not. While we should acknowledge the unfortunate ways race and wealth have been relevant in the criminal justice system, we should also acknowledge the entire purpose of the criminal justice system is to treat people justly, not equitably. If we had a criminal equity system instead, we would rotate people in and out of prisons based on their age, sex, or race — regardless of their criminal history — to ensure that no groups were over or under-represented in the prison population. An equity-based credit system is less harmful than an equity based criminal justice system would be, but it is just as unfair. So why do smart people propose it?

Modern sensibilities reject the idea that human nature is inherently sinful but acknowledge the world is broken. Since their starting assumption is that there’s nothing wrong with people, they blame the bad things people do on “systemic injustice.” The gospel tells us the systems will be fixed once hearts change, but modern progressivism tells us heart will change once the systems are fixed.

This is the reason Brandon Johnson, the recently elected Mayor of Chicago, came to the defense of hundreds of teenagers who destroyed property, beat bystanders, and got into gun fights with police in a recent Chicago riot. He said it was “not constructive to demonize youth who have been starved of opportunities.” If the problem is a lack of character, those kids need to take responsibility for what happened. If the problem is a lack of opportunity, everyone but the kids need to take responsibility for what happened.

Of course, there are things we can do to help each other. Life is a team sport best lived in community which means we each have power to help and harm each other. But when we misunderstand the source of our problems, we guarantee the solutions will be inadequate. The pursuit of equity discourages us from treating individuals based on the content of their character. Instead, it encourages us to see people primarily as members of a group and demands those groups be treated the same. So, we treat the guilty the same as the innocent and the capable just like we treat the less capable. And now we’re charging responsible people more for credit because it doesn’t feel right that one group should be treated differently than another.

It isn’t just or fair, but it is equitable.


Joseph Backholm

Joseph Backholm is Senior Fellow for Biblical Worldview and Strategic Engagement at Family Research Council.


Truth, Sexuality, and Gender

Smirnoff Drag Queen Partner Flashes Bystanders at Texas Capitol

‘They Will Try to Bully You’: Lawmakers Exit the Democratic Party

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘States Have No Choice’: Officials Grapple with Border Surge amid Listless Federal Response

On Friday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas claimed on “NBC Nightly News” that “the border is secure.” The statement comes as the number of apprehensions at the U.S.’s southern border has spiked to record highs, with an additional surge expected in the coming days when Title 42 expires. In response, border state officials say they are preparing to take immigration enforcement into their own hands due to a lack of effort from the federal government.

On Sunday, reports surfaced that migrant apprehensions had reached 9,000 per day, significantly up from the previous high during Joe Biden’s presidency of 7,200 per day and “the second-highest month in Border Patrol history.” Indications are that the surge will only increase in the coming days due to the expiration of Title 42, which is set to end on May 11. Title 42 is a pandemic-era policy that allowed border officials to quickly expel migrants. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill from both sides of the aisle are expressing frustration over what they say is a lack of preparation for the expected surge on the part of the White House.

“[W]e need the Biden administration to act, and to act fast,” said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.). “I’ve heard directly from leaders in our border communities … [who] are simply unequipped to handle the surge of migrants that are expected when Title 42 ends.” Senator Krysten Sinema (I-Ariz.) was equally concerned about the Biden administration’s actions, or lack thereof. “Just today [Sunday], I was on the phone with a sheriff of Cochise County. He has gotten no information from the Department of Homeland Security or the federal government about what the flow is going to look like, about what they can expect for processing in terms of how long it takes to process migrants. He’s got no information.”

In response to the Biden administration announcing that 1,500 active-duty troops would be deployed to the border to “serve in administrative roles and not perform any law enforcement function,” Sinema was blunt. “It is a border of over 2,000 miles … so 1,500 troops isn’t gonna get the job done. That’s just the reality.”

The concerns come as a new report reveals that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents are “overwhelmed, overworked and frustrated” and “stretched to their breaking points,” with almost 90% of employees in both agencies saying they do not have enough staff to handle an additional migrant surge. The report noted that despite “increasing border encounters and travel volume … staffing levels have remained the same, with CBP and ICE using details and overtime to temporarily fill staffing gaps along the Southwest border.”

As a result, Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) announced Monday that a new “Texas Tactical Border Force” made up of 545 specially trained Texas National Guard troops will be deployed at “hotspots along the border to intercept, to repel and to turn back migrants who are trying to enter Texas illegally.” The governor said that the troops will be used to strengthen Operation Lone Star, which has already repelled 37,000 individuals attempting to cross the border illegally, arrested 27,000 criminals, including “cartel gang members” wanted for crimes including murder, and seized “enough fentanyl that would have been enough to kill every man, woman, and child in the United States.”

On Friday’s edition of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) further emphasized the need for border states like Texas to assume responsibility for protecting the border.

“[H]ere in Texas, for the past couple of years, there’s been lots of talk about do we actually look at the U.S. Constitution and say, ‘Is this an invasion?’” he noted. “Luckily, Governor Abbott in the last year declared this is, in fact, an invasion across our borders. … The Constitution makes clear that it should be a federal operation for us to secure our borders. But when the federal government is unwilling to do so, states have no choice.”

“States like Arizona and Texas are the ones that are leading the way,” Moran concluded. “But I can tell you here in Texas … we recognize that there is a need to fill the gap where the federal government has failed over and over again.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Deplatforming Works’: Left Learns Wrong Lesson from Week of Media Firings

Far-left Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) raised eyebrows — not to mention blood pressures — with her response to Tucker Carlson’s abrupt departure from Fox News. Her most offensive comment was not the mean-spirited joke, “couldn’t have happened to a better guy,” nor the possibly libelous claim that Carlson was “arguably responsible for driving some of the most amounts of death threats, violent threats, not just to my office but to plenty of people across the country,” but the political conclusion she drew, “deplatforming works, and it is important, and there you go.”

By “deplatforming,” Ocasio-Cortez means more than just someone losing a platform (in the abstract, modern sense of “platform” that includes all digital-age equivalents for mounting a literal platform to deliver a speech). For her and other leftists, “deplatforming” describes a particular form of censorship achieved by disallowing those who express undesirable views from using the media by which they reach their intended audience. She also seems to have in mind not only the act of removing someone from a platform, but the activism and pressure campaigns that lead to that result — in two words, cancel culture.

This is emphatically the wrong conclusion to draw.

For starters, Ocasio-Cortez completely overlooks the context of Carlson’s firing. Unless you’ve been reading the news about “the news” — which, let’s be honest, you probably shouldn’t — you’re probably unaware that Carlson’s departure from Fox is only one item in a string of high-profile firings across cable and network television. In just the past week, CNN booted left-wing gadfly Don Lemon, Comcast (which owns NBC) parted ways with NBC Universal CEO Jeff Shell, Disney-owned ABC (which owns election data site FiveThirtyEight) did not renew a contract with FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver, and Fox fired commentator Dan Bongino in addition to Carlson. With all this sacking, it’s a wonder the price of burlap hasn’t gone through the roof.

Surprisingly, these clustered separations seem to be unrelated to one another. Lemon got the hammer after engaging in a racially charged tirade against Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, of Indian heritage. Shell was pushed out at NBC over an inappropriate sexual relationship. Silver got swept up by Disney-wide layoffs (apparently subsidizing the rainbow renders other colors unaffordable).

Meanwhile, Fox has given no public reason for the firings, but they might be related to the company’s legal problems. The pair of firings came days after settling a defamation lawsuit in which Carlson was mentioned frequently with voting machine manufacturer Dominion for a stunning $787 million; the company still faces a defamation lawsuit from another voting machine company, Smartmatic, and a hostile work environment lawsuit from a former booker for Carlson’s show, Abby Grossberg. Another possible reason for at least Lemon’s and Carlson’s ousters is that the CEO or owner disliked them and was actively looking for an opportunity to show them the door.

These details indicate that there are many possible reasons why a network might terminate a relationship with an anchor — reasons which might be totally unrelated to a cancellation campaign against them. Without knowing the reason why a host lost his show, it’s impossible to prove that “deplatforming works” in the strategic sense Ocasio-Cortez means.

Left-wingers tried to cancel Carlson on numerous occasions. In 2021, the Anti-Defamation League called for an advertising boycott, but that failed to drive audiences away. On former White House press secretary Jen Psaki’s MSNBC show, Ocasio-Cortez herself on Sunday endorsed government action to end his show, calling for “federal regulation, in terms of what’s allowed on air and what isn’t. And when you look at [what] Tucker Carlson and some of these other folks on Fox do, it is very, very clearly incitement of violence. Very clearly incitement of violence. And that is the line that I think we have to be willing to contend with.” But what Ocasio-Cortez called for did not happen.

In fact, the coincidental cancellation campaign may have had no more effect on Carlson’s firing than a child attempting to use “the Force” on a supermarket’s automatic doors.

A separate issue from the factual accuracy of Ocasio-Cortez’s position — and a more important one — is whether the “deplatforming” she envisions is acceptable in a free society. Ocasio-Cortez explicitly called for government suppression of the distribution of opinions with which she disagrees. The policy outcome flies so obviously in the face of the First Amendment’s protection of free speech and a free press that Ocasio-Cortez felt the need to justify herself by claiming the speech that offended her was “very clearly incitement of violence.” If that case could be proven in court, surely someone would have sued Fox News over that by now.

A giant chasm yawns between what actually happened to Tucker Carlson and what Ocasio-Cortez wanted to happen to him. Opinions will differ about whether Rupert Murdoch (owner of Fox’s parent company News Corp) made the right decision or for the right reasons. But at root, Carlson’s employer no longer wanted to employ him, so he terminated his employment. One bedrock principle of a free market is that no one is forced to do business with anyone they don’t want to do business with. Ocasio-Cortez wants the government to dictate to broadcasters who they can put on air.

The Left seems not to recognize or understand this difference, as Ocasio-Cortez’s recent “deplatforming works” claim underscores. Left-wing cancellation efforts target not only Fox News, but virtually every right-wing news outlet you can think of. Ironically, the self-proclaimed opponents of fascism have ripped a page right out of the fascist playbook (and every other dictator in history) in agitating to shut down dissenting media outlets.

This trend has increased in recent years. Pew Research Center found that the percentage of Democrat or Democrat-leaning U.S. adults who agree that “the U.S. government should take steps to restrict false information online, even if it limits freedom of information,” increased from 40% in 2018 to 65% in 2021. Even more (76% of Democrat or Democrat-leaning adults) believed in 2021 that “tech companies should take steps to restrict false information online, even if it limits freedom of information.”

This notion is dangerous to America. But rather than censor it, proponents of free speech must defeat it through persuasion, which is far more challenging.

If Ocasio-Cortez and other leftists have taken the “wrong” — both incorrect and totalitarian — lesson from Carlson’s departure from Fox News, what is the right lesson? Combined with other recent media departures, it’s clear that the American news media — for all of its problems — remains capable of self-adjustment. Different outlets continue to represent different points of view, cycle between spokespersons, and remain accountable both to the public and to the legal system. The media landscape continues to remain open to independent new players, such as The Washington Stand or (possibly soon) the Tucker Carlson Network. No one has a monopoly on the facts, the right opinions, or the press. That’s how things are supposed to work in a rambunctious popular government.

There is, and will always be, a fundamental difference between government regulators taking a popular program off the air and that program’s broadcast cutting that program from its lineup. The difference is freedom.


Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a staff writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

HICE: U.S. Government Seeks Permission to Spy on American Citizens

The phrase “Big Brother” has been used in reference to the government’s attempts to control the lives of Americans for decades. Following 9/11, amid an outcry for greater security, a chilling and intrusive surveillance of citizens took an unprecedented uptick in individual monitoring across the nation. In the wake of tragedy and horror, politicians pushed through the Patriot Act in the name of terrorism deterrence.

The Patriot Act ushered in a new era, and America would never be the same so far as individual privacy is concerned. While the intentions of the legislation might have been good, the consequences of its enactment have invaded the privacy of millions of Americans. It essentially gave the government a free pass to spy on people in their homes and beyond. Without any previous notification requirements, federal intelligence agencies could examine and have unhindered exploration into the financial records, medical histories, travel patterns, and more of individuals.

As is often the case with unrestrained government power, the overreaching scrutiny produced by the Patriot Act is no longer enough. There is a new and disturbing movement to provide Big Brother even more access into your private life. Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) has introduced the RESTRICT Act, formally known as “Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology” Act. This legislation would essentially expand the sentiments of the Patriot Act to the technology sphere, so that internet activity by citizens would be accessible to federal agents.

Thankfully, while there is a substantial bipartisan effort to block the use of TikTok in the United States over concerns about the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of the platform, some Washington politicians are withholding their support for the RESTRICT Act. For example, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) recently told reporters that he is very worried about “creating, effectively, a PATRIOT Act for the digital age.”

He is correct. Once unbridled access is given to the government to monitor internet activity, personal privacy will be but a memory of America’s past. Moreover, allowing the government and federal agencies access to personal devices and advanced technology usage by individuals could very well lead to domestic espionage. Such meddling should never be allowed. While efforts to block foreign adversaries from spying on Americans and the U.S. government operations should be made, efforts cannot be allowed to permit our own government to violate people’s constitutional right to privacy.

At a time when even the most sacred branch of government, the judiciary, is being politicized, it is crucial to avoid further intrusion into the lives of Americans. The RESTRICT Act would allow the government to pursue any person it deems as a “national security risk.” To this day, some protestors from January 6th, 2021 are still sitting in jail, having been denied their legal rights under the law. And potentially, other individuals advocating for their right to justice could be labeled as “national security risks” and have their privacy stripped away as well.

The U.S. government is already too big and intrusive. Further, a two-tiered system of justice is increasingly becoming more apparent and alarming. Do we really need to bolster government with unfettered access into the private data of American citizens? No! Not only is the RESTRICT Act a terrible idea but it is unconstitutional. The First Amendment grants freedom of personal and private religious belief. The Third Amendment protects privacy in our homes. And the Fourth Amendment guarantees that the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Make no mistake, Americans have a right to privacy! The government does not possess sufficient legal “interest” to invade the most personal aspects of people’s lives.

Ultimately, at risk with the RESTRICT Act is personal and constitutionally protected liberty. Congressional leaders need to hear from constituents about this invasive legislation. For the sake of defending our God-given rights, we should reject this egregious attempt by government to enter our personal space and monitor our private lives. If allowed to become law, this Act could produce a government-run and politically driven “terrorist” of its own making. Don’t let that happen!


Jody Hice


Senator Josh Hawley: The FBI is ‘infiltrating’ churches and spying on Americans

JORDAN FIRED UP! Judiciary Chair UNLOADS After Learning Biden DOJ Infiltrating Religious Orgs

RELATED ARTICLE: U.S. Would Run Out Of Missiles In A Week In Two-Front Conflict: ‘War Game’ Analysis

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Congressman Says East Palestine Citizens Deserve Answers After Catastrophic Train Derailment

A Norfolk Southern train derailment that occurred two weeks ago in eastern Ohio still has not received the attention it should have from the federal government, said Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) February 17 on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.” Those impacted by the disaster need answers, he insisted.

The February 3 incident and “controlled explosion” of leaking rail tanker cars by authorities in East Palestine, Ohio escaped the national media’s attention for days. Yet as a result of the derailment, 38 rail cars derailed, including 11 carrying hazardous materials, according to a National Transportation Safety Board press release.

The decision to drain and ignite the contents of the tankers, which carried vinyl chloride, prompted an intense explosion that sent a plume of dark smoke and particulates high over the town of nearly 5,000 people, has sparked controversy over the federal government’s response.

Citing the health and environmental concerns of those who live in the area, Johnson said the community remains in an “emergency phase.”

The Ohio congressman, whose district includes East Palestine, told “Washington Watch” guest host Jody Hice February 17 on “Washington Watch”that he has stood at ground zero of the train derailment and “controlled explosion.” “We can’t dismiss the claims of the community about some of the ailments that they’re seeing and the fears that they have for their children to go outside,” he said.

“My number one concern today is getting the people of this community the answers that they need,” Johnson emphasized. Johnson serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Budget Committee. He complimented the work of the state and federal Environmental Protection Agencies in responding to the incident. “While there is still a long way to go,” Johnson continued, “they are making progress.”

Yet Johnson said what has happened in East Palestine should not happen in any community in the U.S. “The people here are frightened. They’re scared. They’re not getting answers to their questions …” the congressman continued.

“They’re concerned about the air in their homes and the water that they drink. And there’s been a lot of confusion,” Johnson said.

Residents of the eastern Ohio town are extremely frustrated and have “more questions than answers,” Hice agreed, noting U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg has indicated he has no plans to visit East Palestine and that the Biden administration determined the region fails to qualify for federal disaster aid.

Johnson said he was surprised that Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) denied the request for disaster funding. “If this doesn’t qualify as a disaster, I don’t know what does,” he said, noting he has reached out for an explanation. The congressman said as well that he was shocked that Secretary Buttigieg has not visited the site. Johnson noted the National Transportation Safety Board is moving forward with their own investigation of the matter.

He called Secretary Buttigieg’s February 13 statement on the East Palestine tragedy an “outrageous comment.”

Buttigieg told Yahoo! Finance Live that “… while this horrible situation has gotten a particularly high amount of attention, there are roughly 1,000 cases a year of a train derailing.”

“The secretary has been AWOL, absent without leave,” Johnson argued. “He just has not been tuned into this at all.” The congressman said Buttigieg’s comment suggests he is being “very lighthearted” about the incident.

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (R) announced late Friday evening FEMA has reportedly reversed course and will respond to the emergency situation in East Palestine with federal resources.


K.D. Hastings

K.D. Hastings and his family live in the beautiful hills of Middle Tennessee. He has been engaged in the evangelical world as a communicator since 1994.


LEAVE NOW! – Multiple Plants EXPLODE – Raining Metal & Toxic Chemicals | Patrick Humphrey

East Palestine, Ohio Resident: FEMA Should Have Been Here Two Weeks Ago

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

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Biden Urges Congress to ‘Restore Soul of This Nation’ by Expanding Abortion, Transgenderism in SOTU

During his State of the Union Address Tuesday night, President Joe Biden called on Congress “to restore the soul of this nation” by making abortion legal nationwide until birth and passing a bill that would force religious employers to hire people who identify as transgender. His administration’s focus on pushing polarizing social issues clashes with Republicans’ more mainstream views of abortion and gender identity, a contrast that Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) said gives Americans a clear choice “between normal or crazy.”

“Congress must restore the right the Supreme Court took away last year and codify Roe v. Wade to protect every woman’s constitutional right to choose,” said Biden, an apparent nod to the “Women’s Health Protection” Act, which would erase 1,381 pro-life protections including parental notification requirements. “The vice president and I are doing everything we can to protect access to reproductive healthcare and safeguard patient privacy.” He went on to chide states for enacting “extreme abortion bans” and threatened to veto any national pro-life legislation.

The president also urged Congress to “pass the bipartisan Equality Act to ensure LGBTQ Americans, especially transgender young people, can live with safety and dignity.” The bill, a longstanding goal of the LGBT lobby, would amend landmark civil rights acts to equate sexual orientation and gender identity with race, sex, and religion. It effectively places homosexuality and transgender status above religious liberty by denying protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The extreme bill, once supported by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and former House Speaker Paul Ryan, “would eradicate freedom of thought, conscience, and belief — resulting in the penalization of anyone who disagrees with the ideologies,” wrote Mary Beth Waddell, director of Federal Affairs for Family and Religious Liberty at the Family Research Council.

Passing such social legislation, Biden said, would enhance “the power of our example. Let’s remember the world is watching.”

Biden symbolically gestured toward left-wing social issues with his guest list, which included Gina and Heidi Nortonsmith, the lesbian couple whose lawsuit foisted same-sex marriage on the state of Massachusetts by judicial fiat in 2004. The couple also spoke at the signing ceremony of the so-called “Respect for Marriage” Act, which struck down marriage protection laws nationwide.

Biden also invited Amanda and Josh Zurawski of Austin, who say doctors denied them medical treatment for a miscarriage due to confusion over the state’s Heartbeat law. SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser says the president has weaponized their “tragic” story to further his “deeply misleading” allegations. “Every pro-life law in the country allows necessary and timely medical treatment to save the life of a pregnant woman in an emergency,” she said. “There are no laws in any state that prevent timely and compassionate care for a miscarriage,” added the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). “Denying proper healthcare to patients facing miscarriage complications is not complying with the law. Miscarriage care is not abortion.”

Some members of Congress made statements of their own, with Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) inviting acquitted pro-life activist Mark Houck, who found himself swarmed by federal agents at his home in front of his family for allegedly violating federal laws against blocking access to an abortion facility.

Even as he discussed bipartisanship, Biden tied conservatives and Republicans to civil war, insurrection, and the attack against Paul Pelosi by a hammer-wielding man with a mental illness. “Two years ago, our democracy faced its greatest threat since the Civil War,” he said, referring to the January 6 riot. “Today, though bruised, our democracy remains unbowed and unbroken,” apparently quoting the HBO series “Game of Thrones.” He claimed Pelosi’s assailant had been “unhinged by the Big Lie.”

“This kind of provocative rhetoric has only served to fuel the spread of violent attacks on churches and pregnancy help centers since Biden took office. While ignoring these attacks and their victims, the Biden administration has openly weaponized the federal government against pro-life Americans like Mark Houck and his family,” said Brian Burch of CatholicVote.

Biden also proposed a massive federal intervention into the way families raise children by “providing access to pre-school for 3- and 4-year-olds,” a proposal repeatedly made by President Barack Obama during successive State of the Union addresses. Multiple studies have found Pre-K attendance inflicts a number of harms on young students, and polls have found most mothers would like to stay at home. “No public preschool program can provide the environments and the parental love and care of a functioning family and the lifetime benefits that ensue,” said James J. Heckman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist frequently cited by those who support universal pre-K.

Those references aside, Biden’s 70-minute-long address largely focused on economic issues, showing uncharacteristic “restraint,” Meg Kilgannon, senior fellow for Education Studies at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand. Biden “tried so hard to seem like a 1980s Democrat but it’s just not believable.”

The president often cited his economic success by comparing his results to the worst days of the 2020 recession, caused by a government-mandated shutdown to “slow the spread.” Biden said he had “created a record 12 million new jobs, more jobs created in two years than any president has ever created in four years,” he said.

Biden has added 2.7 million jobs over the prepandemic high of 152.4 million reached under President Donald Trump. By comparison, Trump added nearly 5 million jobs in his first two years in office, and 13.4 million in the 22 months rebounding from the COVID-19 lockdown. The labor force participation rate under President Biden remains below prepandemic levels (62.4% this month compared to 63.3% in January 2020).

“The state of our union is miserable, and the blame rests squarely with President Biden and the Democrats,” said Jenny Beth Martin, honorary chair of the Tea Party Patriots Action. “Whether it’s record deficit spending causing the worst inflation in four decades, an ‘open borders’ policy causing a record stream of illegal immigrants crossing our border, or a weak foreign policy emboldening China and other adversaries, President Biden is always doing the wrong thing and American families always end up paying the price.”

President Biden urged Congress to “pass the PRO Act, because workers have a right to form a union.” The Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, a sought-after legislative goal of labor unions, would strike down all state right-to-work laws and compel workers in a unionized shop to pay union dues, even if they do not want to belong to a union. Federal legislation has protected workers’ right to join a union since the 1936 Wagner Act. Yet only 6% of the private sector workforce belonged to a union in 2022, while one-third of government employees have unionized, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor unions contributed $65 million in union dues to Democratic candidates during the 2020 election cycle, including $27.5 million to Biden’s presidential campaign. The president was also the top recipient of campaign donations from teachers unions.

At two points, Biden paused mid-speech as Republicans opposed his caricature of their platform, accusing Republicans of wanting to eliminate Social Security and Medicare. A legislative proposal to that effect, from Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.), received little legislative support.

Biden made a brief reference to the border, which has seen record-breaking levels of illegal immigration and virtually non-existent deportations during both of his years in office. “America’s border problems won’t be fixed until Congress acts,” particularly “if you won’t pass my comprehensive immigration reform,” which includes a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants, he told lawmakers.

On foreign affairs, Biden pledged continued financial and military aid to Ukraine despite flagging public support, and boasted of a supposed hardline against China. “Before I came to office, the story was about how the People’s Republic of China was increasing its power and America was falling in the world. Not anymore,” he said. “As we made clear last week, if China’s threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country. And we did.” Biden shot down a Chinese spy craft this weekend after it had completed its surveillance of areas that included U.S. nuclear installations.

Biden gave a nod to COVID-19, which defined the first few months of his presidency. “We have broken COVID’s grip on us,” he said. “And soon we’ll end the public health emergency.” Biden announced the federal government would end its emergency in May, shortly after the House of Representatives passed legislation ending the government’s state of emergency immediately. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) invited as his guest a U.S. serviceman briefly dismissed from the military for refusing to take the COVID shot.

“Biden’s comments aimed at the need for a world ‘solution’ on certain topics (which understandably concern people) continue to imply the legitimacy of world power centers like the UN, WHO, and the like. Yet this takes power further from the people that true democracies are supposed to represent. If we have a ‘crisis of democracy’ as some think we do, such ‘solutions’ only exacerbate the problem,” Travis Weber, vice president for Policy and Government Affairs at Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand. “To the extent that the Biden administration’s priorities (like abortion or gender transitions for minors) are injected into these centers of world power, we will be exporting spiritually harmful activities to other nations. Social liberals’ intended solutions for these young people only keeps them imprisoned … and they need to find true freedom from the clutches of the enemy of their souls,” Weber said.

The spiritual condition of America figured prominently in his remarks. “Because the soul of this nation is strong, because the backbone of this nation is strong,” he said. Americans “are a good people, the only nation in the world built on an idea: that all of us, every one of us, is created equal in the image of God.”

“I appreciated the president’s affirmation that everyone is ‘created equal in the image of God.’ Unfortunately, for two years the president has demonstrated that he really doesn’t believe that,” David Closson, director of FRC’s Center for Biblical Worldview, told The Washington Stand. “Against the moral teachings of his own church, President Biden has pursued the most radical pro-abortion agenda in our nation’s history, and he made it clear tonight that he remains beholden to the abortion lobby by indicating he would veto any federal efforts to protect unborn life.”

“When it comes to protecting life, I wish the president’s policies matched his rhetoric,” said Closson.

“Americans want common sense from their leaders, but in Washington, the Biden administration is doubling down on crazy,” said Governor Sanders.


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.