Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog

Largest Texas County Adds Noncitizens to Voter Rolls

BY WARREN MASS

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/largest-texas-county-adds-noncitizens-to-voter-rolls/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) — a public-interest law firm dedicated to election integrity that has been involved in legal cases in nine states and the District of Columbia — filed a lawsuit against Harris County, Texas, on September 28, asserting that the state’s largest county has allowed foreign nationals to register to vote. In a petition filed in the Court of Appeals for the 14th District of Texas in Houston, PILF seeks to compel Harris County Voter Registrar Ann Bennett to follow Texas election laws and reject insufficient voter applications.

Harris County, which includes Houston, had more than four million people in the last census, and is the largest county by population in Texas.

A September 28 report in Texas Scorecard noted: “Only U.S. citizens are allowed to vote in Texas elections, and it’s a violation of both state and federal law for non-citizens to vote or register to vote. But in Texas and elsewhere, registering to vote requires no documentation to verify citizenship — applicants merely check a box affirming they’re U.S. citizens.”

A PILF report stated that voter registration applications used by both the U.S. Government and the state of Texas include a direct question: “Are you a citizen of the United States?” However, when PILF researched into Harris County records they discovered a repeating problem of individuals answering “NO,” yet they were registered anyway.

The report quoted PILF President and General Counsel J. Christian Adams, who said, “The [PILF] Foundation made a federal case to access to these records — now we see what the fight was all for. Individuals claiming to be foreign nationals should not be registered in Harris County. These failures harm citizens, but they also put those immigrants into serious jeopardy with federal officials. We hope to see swift action prior to the voting this fall.”

The petition stated the nature of the case as follows:

Respondent’s office has consistently approved applications for voter registration for facially ineligible registrants. In particular, Respondent registers to vote applicants that do not affirm and answer “YES” to the question “Are you a United States citizen?” and also answer “NO” to the same question, even though Texas law requires her to reject those applications. Tex. Elec. Code § 13.072(c).

The petition included copies of actual voter registration applications clearly showing that the applicants had checked the “No” box after the question: “Are you a United States Citizen?”

A pair of articles in The New American from August and November 2018 exposed the illegal practice of cities registering non-citizens to vote. The earlier article cited PILF’s statement that non-Americans have been added to voter rolls in key battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Virginia. PILF found that a significant portion of those illegally registered have been able to cast their ballots. In May 2017, PILF issued a report stating that in Virginia, 5,556 non-citizens were removed from the voting rolls between 2011 and May 2017. The PILF report also found that 1,852 of them had cast ballots.

Related articles:

Voter Rolls Continue to Show Registered Non-citizens

Video: “Tons” of Non-citizens Are Voting

Liberal Cities Want Voting Rights for Non-Citizens — Even Illegal Ones

 

So Much for Protestant Christianity, Trump Says “Anti-Catholic Bigotry” Has No Place in the USA

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/10/01/so-much-for-protestant-christianity-trump-says-anti-catholic-bigotry-has-no-place-in-the-usa/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Donald Trump, addressing the leftist attacks on Judge Barrett at the Al Smith Dinner tonight, defended Roman Catholics, stating that America is strong because of Catholicism. While Trump was directly addressing the anti-religious freedom rhetoric of the Democrat party, he appeared to inadvertently indict the whole of Protestant Christianity, of which the beliefs this nation was actually founded upon.

Historically, there is no group of people more “anti-Catholic” than Protestant Christians. Not atheists, not Muslims, not Democrats. Protestant Christianity was founded on the notion that Catholicism is a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ and, in fact, are protesting the Roman Catholic harlot.

Protestant Christians do not believe that Roman Catholicism adds anything to the strength of this nation and certainly not to the strength of the Church — they are, in fact, the false Church.

For more on Roman Catholicism and why we continue to Protest it, see this link.

 

Leftists attack Amy Coney Barrett’s adopted kids

Democrats won't admit that the only reason they hate Amy Coney Barrett is because she's pro-life, so they attack her for being a Christian (i.e. Catholic), conservative, adoptive parent and mom of seven.

PROVEN: 70-80% OF TRANSRACIAL ADOPTIONS DO NOT PLACE CHILDREN AT HIGHER RISK OF EMOTIONAL & BEHAVIORAL PROBLEMS

School Suspends Student Over BB Gun in His Own Bedroom, Provokes Widespread Backlash

Ka'Mauri Harrison with his family and Jeff Landry

AG sends letter to state education leaders about virtual learning concerns

BY NRAHQ

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2020/09/school-suspends-student-over-bb-gun-in-his-own-bedroom-provokes-widespread-backlash/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
Ka Mauri Harrison was suspended in September because he had a BB gun in his room that a teacher noticed during a remote teaching session. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Public education’s war on children who keep gun-like toys or sporting goods in their own homes claimed another in September with the suspension Ka Mauri Harrison, who was banished from school activities for six days after a teacher glimpsed, via video feed, a BB gun in the fourth grader’s bedroom. Fortunately, Ka Mauri’s parents are not backing down in their attempts to clear his record and his reputation, and their cause is attracting some notable allies.

According to a local news report, Ka Mauri’s saga began on Sept. 11, while he was taking an English test at home monitored over video feed by a teacher employed with Louisiana’s Jefferson Parish Public School System. Ka Mauri’s brother entered their shared bedroom and stumbled over a BB gun (which at the time was unloaded). Like any good brother and responsible air gun owner, Ka Mauri picked up the BB rifle to move it out of harm’s way, placing it next to the chair on which he was sitting.

A school behavior report, however, described the incident as follows: “Harrison left his seat momentarily, out of view of the teacher. When the student returned, he had what appeared to be a full-sized rifle in his possession.”  

No one claims that Ka Mauri intentionally brandished the BB gun in a threatening manner. According to his father, it appeared only momentarily onscreen, with a portion of its barrel visible after it had been moved.

Nevertheless, when Ka Mauri did not respond to his teacher’s calls over the computer (because he had muted the sound to concentrate on his test), he was disconnected from the class. The school later called his parents to notify them Ka Mauri had been summarily suspended and would be facing a disciplinary hearing, with the school recommending expulsion.

School officials characterized the incident as “a violation of weapons in the classroom setting and a violation of the internet usage policy.” A hearing officer sustained the six-day suspension during the disciplinary hearing for what the officer described as “displaying a facsimile weapon while receiving virtual instruction” (the school’s request for expulsion was declined).

Yet when the attorney Ka Mauri’s parents retained to represent their son inquired about the specific rule the 9-year-old had supposedly violated, the school referred her to its prohibition against weapons on campus. In other words, the school apparently maintains that it can enforce the same rules that apply to its own facilities against whatever location happens to be used for online distance learning.

Another local news story even indicated the school referenced possible criminal penalties for Ka Mauri’s behavior and humiliated the young boy by encouraging his classmates to “write letters about the incident.” That report also notes that the school referred Ka Mauri for a “social work assessment” and summarized the offense leading to his punishment in an official record as “Possesses weapons prohibited under federal law.”

There is no federal law, however, against possessing an air gun on school grounds, much less in one’s own home. Indeed, the manufacture and sale of air guns and certain replica guns is affirmatively protected under federal law.

Fortunately, the injustices perpetrated against Ka Mauri are not going unnoticed or unchallenged.

“It’s not ending here,” the family’s attorney, Chelsea Cusimano, told a reporter. “It’s our intent to explore further options.”

The case has also attracted the attention of Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, who has launched an investigation into the incident. Landry issued a statement, saying, “I am alarmed by what appears to not only be multiple violations of both the State and Federal Constitutions, but also blatant government overreach by the school system.“ He continued, “For anyone to conclude that a student’s home is now school property because of connectivity through video conferencing is absurd … It is ludicrous for this All-American kid to be punished for taking responsible actions just as it is for his parents to be accused of neglect.” Landry concluded by promising that “[m]y office and I will take a deep dive into all the irreparable harm caused by this egregious incident and take appropriate actions.”

Also weighing in on Ka Mauri’s behalf was Dr. Walter M. Kimbrough, president of Dillard University, a historically black college in New Orleans. In a letter to the superintendent of Jefferson Parish Schools, Dr. Kimbrough noted that the school’s reaction to Ka Mauri’s behavior “begins to track him in a way that we both know disproportionately harms Black male children.” He went on to point out that neither of the cited policies supposedly violated appear to encompass the situation at hand, given that Ka Mauri was in his own home and was “clearly trying to be responsible.” Dr. Kimbrough’s letter urged the school district to reverse the sanctions levied against Ka Mauri and issue him a public apology.

We agree that Ka Mauri’s sanctions should be lifted, his record expunged, and a public apology issued.

We have reported for many years on how gun control advocates have leveraged the idea of “gun-free school zones” to ban not just actual firearms on school grounds but anything that even remotely suggests the idea of a firearm. This has included NRA or military-themed apparel, a screensaver depicting a firearm, a toy that generates soap bubblespointing with an extended index finger, and even food chewed into what was claimed to be a gun-like shape.

This persecution causes real harm to real young people. No offense has been too small, harmless, or inconsequential for school officials to brand students with an official record for violating policies against “weapons” or “guns” on school grounds, with all the potential for harming their future prospects that such a paper trail entails.

With the advent of virtual distance learning supposedly necessitated by the COVID-19 outbreak, these witch hunts have taken an ominous new turn, as school officials are getting an unprecedented glimpse into students’ homes via video feeds used for online classes. This has kicked off a new wave of punishments and even police activity stemming from the incidental appearance of toy or replica guns that were never used to threaten or intimidate others and that never even left the student’s own home.

These latest actions – which punish behavior occurring remotely and is therefore incapable of causing physical harm – betray the fact that schools aren’t just trying to keep kids safe from firearm-related violence; they’re trying to marginalize and stigmatize any student who shows any interest in guns. What Ka Mauri’s attorney called “robotic” enforcement of zero-tolerance polices against weapons is as much or more a matter of social engineering than of maintaining a safe educational environment.


National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org



Perverting Youth: Virginia Governor Rolls Out Sex Textline for Teens

Perverting Youth: Virginia Governor Rolls Out Sex Textline for Teens

SEE: https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/adolescent-health/

SEE: http://www.familyfoundation.org/blog-posts/gov-northams-sex-text-hotline-for-teens

VIDEO BY VICTORIA COBB OF THE VIRGINIA FAMILY FOUNDATION EXPOSES THE GOVERNOR'S PERVERSE MAILINGS TO YOUR KIDS:

BY C. MITCHELL SHAW

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/perverting-youth-virginia-governor-rolls-out-sex-textline-for-teens;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

RICHMOND — Liberal Democrat Governor Ralph Northam has introduced an initiative to allow kids to text questions about sex — including questions about sexual activity, safe sex, contraception, abortion, sexually transmitted infections, relationships, and “gender identity” — to adults.

What could possibly go wrong?

Perhaps as disturbing as the sex textline itself is the marketing used to promote it. Slick, teen-targeted postcards promoting Governor Northam’s Brds’N’Bz have been mailed to addresses all over Virginia. Those postcards are designed with artwork geared toward teens. It shows teens using mobile phones and taking selfies.

The text on the front reads:

Have questions about sex, STIs, contraception, or relationships? Text TALK2MEVA to 66746 to get answers from a certified health educator within 24 hours. This textline is free and anonymous for any teen!”

On the reverse side, the postcard shows five teens — three girls and two boys of various ethnic groups — using their mobile phones.

The word bubbles above the teens say,

Have a QUESTION about Brds ‘N’Bz? Use a free and anonymous sexual health textline for teens. Get answers about relationships, contraception, sex, pregnancy, STIs, sexuality, + more!

It also directs teens to text Talk2MeVa to 66746 and includes the logos for both the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) and the American Sexual Health Association (ASHA).

Before getting into the sex textline itself, let’s spend a few minutes unpacking the postcard. The teen-oriented graphics appear cleverly designed to make this postcard look and feel very appealing to young people. The postcards are actually addressed to teens living at the addresses to which they are mailed. The multi-cultural cartoon drawings of both boys and girls of various racial groups is clearly intended to cast a wide net to gather as many teens as possible.

As disturbing as all of that is, though, the fact that two of the teens are seen taking pictures of themselves is a real shocker. Surrounded by text about sexuality, the selfie element takes on a whole new meaning. By joining those two things, VDH and ASHA are guilty of sending a subtle message to teens about violating the basic rules of safe use of technology. In the context of sex, the idea of teens taking selfies should raise red flags for anyone paying attention. The psychological affect of combining those elements serves to connect them in the minds of kids who are — because of their biological level of mental development — already prone to taking risks without counting the costs. Given the data about teen “sexting” that is widely available — and therefore, certainly known by anyone who is a “certified health educator” — one should be able to expect the adults at VDH and ASHA to at least keep those things separate.

But then, one should also be able to expect those adults to leave the moral education of kids to parents. And that is the real issue with this campaign. The purpose of this campaign is to make an end-run around parental authority where moral training is concerned. This is especially interesting since the ASHA website includes a page about parents talking to their kids about sex. The button leading to that page says, “You are your child’s most important teacher. Be an askable parent.”

The page itself is filled from margin to margin with advice, beginning with, “Educating a child about sexual health is an important part of his or her healthy development. Their early understanding of sex, love, intimacy and their own sexuality can help mold their values, behavior, and even their self-image, for a lifetime.” The page also asks, “Does your child feel it’s okay to talk with you about sex and sexual health? If not, have you thought about who will answer your child’s questions?”

This mass-mailed postcard to teens across Virginia is apparently the answer to that question — “anonymous” adults (i.e., strangers) will be the ones “who will answer your child’s questions” about sex and sexuality — making them the ones who will provide guidance on “sex, love, intimacy and their own sexuality” and “mold their values, behavior, and even their self-image, for a lifetime.”

The state and its approved organizations are the new parents. Marx would be proud.

This writer asked several parents of teens and children in Virginia whether they were aware of the postcards and campaign. Some were, but many were not. Those who were were very upset and concerned. So were those who weren’t — once I shared the postcard with them. They are not alone. One pro-family organization in Virginia — the Richmond-based Family Foundation — is taking action to expose and shut down the textline.

In a post on the official website of the Family Foundation, the organization lays out several points of concern. Chief among those concerns is the nature of encouraging teens to text adults — anonymous strangers — about sexually explicit topics. As the post states, “The Governor’s new “BrdsNBz” sex-textline has undermined everything I’ve been teaching my kids about stranger dangers.” It then addresses a litany of points that explain how this campaign endangers kids. Those points include: 1) It’s aimed at our kids — and it encourages them to share private details with strangers, 2) One of the most common signs of sexual-predator grooming is encouraging kids to keep secrets from parents, 3) It encourages kids to give their cellphone numbers to strangers, and 4) It doesn’t acknowledge the danger of kids texting graphic content.

Stop and ask yourself about every conversation you have ever had with kids about “stranger danger.” Did any of those conversations include the idea that sneaking around behind parents’ backs to text sexual content — including questions of a personal sexual nature — to anonymous strangers (adults, no less) while providing that stranger with information that could be used to identify the child is safe and acceptable? Of course not.

And while this sex textline promises to keep the teems “anonymous,” this writer has reason to doubt that. Because in an attempt to see just how deep the rabbit hole goes, this writer texted the sex textline (not a sentence I ever thought I would type) to ask — in the persona of a 13-year-old boy who believes he is really a girl on the inside — about a sexual relationship with an “older” boy.

Three interesting things happened.

First, the number I texted to was not the number that texted me back. I texted Talk2MeVA to 66746. I received a text back from 833-933-6655. The message read, “Success! 1. Reply to this text w/ your question or message. 2. Save this number in ur phone as Talk2MeVa to text us later. Reply stop to quit.” So far, I had every reason to believe that I was having a text conversation with VDH — an official department of the state of Virginia. So, I texted, “I am 13 and feel like I am a girl even though my body is a boy. My parents don’t know that I have an older boyfriend. What should I do?”

The second interesting thing that happened was that only after I sent the question did I receive the first indication that my conversation was with a third party. The reply read, “Thnx 4 textingBrdsNBz — part of the American Sexual Health Association (ASHA). We’ll get back 2 u ASAP. +Find info at http://iwannaknow.org/

Third, though the message said they would get back to me ASAP and the postcard promised “within 24 hours,” I have waited four days and have not received any reply. I will update this article if that changes. Given that I am a journalist whose phone number is registered in my name — a name that is easily searchable to learn who I am and what I do — I suspect that the promise of anonymity is so much smoke and mirrors. I likely never received a reply because the handlers on the other end figured out — in the few nanoseconds it took their computer script to connect that number to me — that I asked that question for the sake of an article exposing their agenda.

Again, that is an educated guess, but given what I know about how text services work and how easy it is to have a script set up to identify the person who owns a phone, it seems to me the most reasonable explanation. Otherwise, are we to believe that my text just fell through the cracks?

The New American spoke with Victoria Cobb, president of the Family Foundation, to ask her about her organization’s efforts to expose and end this campaign. She told The New American that the Family Foundation’s goal where the sex textline is concerned is twofold: First, to have enough Virginia parents sign a petition demanding that the program be shut down, and, second, to overwhelm the textline with complaints from parents so that the third parties involved know that Virginia parents consider this highly inappropriate.

“This really is [at least] two different parties engaged in this effort [to sexualize teens at earlier and earlier ages],” Cobb said. “First is the governor and the second is the party they’ve outsourced this to — the American Sexual Health Association.” The Family Foundation’s plan to shut down the sex textline for teens recognizes that both of those entities are necessary for this program — which Cobb describes as “insidious” — to continue. So, both the petition — aimed at the governor — and the plan to have parents text their complaints to the textline — aimed at ASHA — are essential components to shutting it down.

As to the nature of the sex textline, Cobb told The New American that in the natural course of human families, parents are responsible for the moral training of their children, and this “overstepping” on the part of the state is unacceptable. “All adults should be encouraging kids to talk to their own parents about these sensitive topics,” she said, adding, “Having any conversation over technology about sex — especially with a stranger — is the exact opposite of the way any responsible parent trains their child.”

Cobb explains, “We say, ‘Don’t talk to strangers. Don’t give out your phone number. Don’t send any inappropriate pictures. Everything you do on the phone is permanent.’ This sex textline is counter to all safe teaching about technology.”

Cobb says she want to have parents “convince Governor Northam and the outside party that’s running this sex textline to simply stop invading our homes — to stop asking our children to connect with strangers about the topic of sex.” She added that parents in Virginia should “guard your mailboxes so that your children do not get solicited in this way.” After all, kids don’t need to be exposed to oversexualized material, and it is the job of parents to protect them from predators.

For those outside Virginia: Expect a program such as this to come to your state. Be prepared and fight it with everything you have. Your children will be the targets of this plan and they need you to protect them.

This article is the first in a series addressing this topic. The next article will address the reaction of Virginia parents to Governor Northam’s plan to sexualize their kids.

_______________________________________________________________________________

SEE SECOND OF THREE ARTICLES WE POSTED: 

https://ratherexposethem.org/2020/10/02/parents-react-to-virginias-sex-textline-for-teens/

 

PROJECT VERITAS BOMBSHELL: ILHAN OMAR CONNECTED TO ILLEGAL BALLOT HARVESTING SCHEME

Ilhan Omar Ballot Harvesting

‘It’s an open secret. She [Omar] will do anything that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that,’ says whistleblower

Project Veritas Bombshell: Ilhan Omar Connected to Illegal Ballot Harvesting Scheme

BY JAMIE WHITE

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/project-veritas-bombshell-ilhan-omar-connected-to-illegal-ballot-harvesting-scheme/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Project Veritas has uncovered a ballot harvesting scheme by the political allies and associates of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) with the help of a whistleblower, Snapchat videos, and undercover recordings.

A ballot harvester named Liban Mohamed described on his own Snapchat how he collected ballots from the Somali-American community in Omar’s district to help his brother Jamal Osman win a special election for a vacant Ward 6 city council race.

“Numbers don’t lie. Numbers don’t lie. You can see my car is full. All these here are absentees’ ballots. Can’t you see? Look at all these, my car is full. All these are for Jamal Osman… We got 300 today for Jamal Osman only,” said Liban Mohamed in several Snapchat videos posted July 1 and July 2 on his own Snapchat profile.

“Money is everything. Money is the king in this world. If you got no money, you should not be here period. You know what I am saying.”

Mohamed said that money is central to the political operation.

“Money is everything and a campaign is managed by money,” he said. “You cannot campaign with $200 or $100 you got from your grandmother or grandfather. You cannot campaign with that. You gotta have an investment to campaign. You gotta have fundraisers.”

A local whistleblower and insider in the Somali community named Omar Jamal came to Project Veritas to expose the corruption in Omar’s political web.

From Project Veritas:

Jamal, as part of his participation in the investigation, interviewed a Somali-American who functions as a ballot harvester his community. In the interview, the harvester described how he was paid to vote in the Aug. 11 special election and primary, along with a Project Veritas undercover journalist.

The harvester said Somali-American vote-buying operatives from the Omar machine came to his apartment building to oversee the voter filling out the paperwork.

Omar operatives request the ballots and fill them out for the voters, he said.

“They come to us. They came to our homes. They said: ‘This year, you will vote for Ilhan,’” he said. “They said: ‘We will make the absentee ballots. We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back, we will again fill it out and send it.”

There was no need to go to the voting site, because the Omar operatives told him: “You stay home and you will not go to the place.”

After the ballots are signed and documented the harvester said he got paid.

“When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money,” he said. “The minute we signed the thing [ballot] for the election. That’s when we get paid.”

Project Veritas’ legal adviser Jered Ede said Mohamed and the other individuals involved violated both federal and state law, punishable by up to five years in prison in some cases.

“The federal laws, 18 USC §597 and 52 U.S.C. §10307(c), are quite clear,” he said. “In the case of 18 USC §597, it is punishable by up to two years in prison and in the case of 52 USC §10307 it’s punishable by up to $10,000 in fines and up to five years in prison.”

The Minnesota statute, 211B.13(1) prohibits paying a person or receiving money to register to vote or to vote, he said. “This is a state felony punishable by more than one-year imprisonment.”

_____________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

Omar Fingered in Vote-buying Scheme. Cops Investigating

https://thenewamerican.com/omar-fingered-in-vote-buying-scheme-cops-investigating

TRUMP NOMINATES AMY CONEY BARRETT TO REPLACE RUTH BADER GINSBURG ON SUPREME COURT

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/26/breaking-trump-nominates-amy-coney-barrett-to-replace-rbg-on-supreme-court-n972448;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Saturday, President Donald Trump nominated Amy Coney Barrett, a law professor at Notre Dame and a judge at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, to the Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Trump commemorated Ginsburg before introducing Barrett.

“Today it is my honor to nominate one of our nation’s most brilliant and gifted legal minds to the Supreme Court. She is a woman of unparalleled achievement, towering intellect, sterling credentials, and unyielding loyalty to the Constitution, Judge Amy Coney Barrett,” Trump said. “Judge Barrett is a graduate of Rhodes College and the University of Notre Dame Law School,” he noted. She graduated the first in her class and edited the school’s law review.

Barrett clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and Trump introduced Scalia’s widow, Maureen.

“You are very eminently qualified for this job, you are going to be fantastic,” the president said to Barrett.

“If confirmed, Judge Barrett will be the first mother of school-age children ever to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court,” he added, introducing each of her seven children by name.

Trump joked, “I’m sure [her confirmation] will be extremely non-controversial.”

“I am deeply honored by the confidence you have placed in me,” Barrett told the president.

“I fully understand that this is a momentous decision for a president,” the nominee said. “I love the United States and I love the United States Constitution. I am truly humbled by the prospect of serving on the Supreme Court. Should I be confirmed, I will be mindful of the one who came before me.”

She noted that the flag is still at half-staff commemorating Ginsburg. “She not only broke glass ceilings, she smashed them.”

“Her life of public service serves as an example to us all,” Barrett said, noting Ginsburg’s close friendship with Antonin Scalia.

“Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy preferences they may hold,” she added.

Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can expose and fight the Left’s radical plans for the Supreme Court? They will stop at nothing, so your support for conservative journalism is more important than ever. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code SCOTUS to get 25% off your VIP membership.

Amy Coney Barrett’s background

Amy Coney Barrett graduated from Notre Dame Law School first in her class. She has taught there for decades — and continues to teach there while serving as a judge on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. After graduation, she clerked at the Supreme Court for Justice Antonin Scalia. As Princeton professor Robert P. George noted, even fellow clerks who disagreed with Barrett admired her intellect. Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman described her as “a brilliant lawyer.”

Barrett and her husband have seven children, ranging in age from 5 to 16. They adopted two of them from Haiti. One of her sons also has “special needs.” As George wrote, “As someone who excelled as a legal scholar and reached the pinnacle of her profession as a Supreme Court Justice, Barrett would be an example to women hoping to combine a flourishing family life with a professional vocation.”

Barrett is an originalist in the Scalia mold. Last year, she spoke about her judicial philosophy at the Washington, D.C., branch of my alma mater, Hillsdale College. She rebuked the notion of a “living Constitution,” arguing that the judge’s role is not to twist the text of the Constitution to fit his or her policy prescriptions but rather to interpret the law faithfully.

“If the judge is willing not to apply the law but to decide cases in a line, in accordance with personal preference rather than the law, then she’s not actually functioning as a judge at all. She’s functioning as a policymaker,” Barrett explained.

“And I would have had no interest in the job if the job was about policymaking and about making policy decisions,” the judge said. “My interest is in contributing to our tradition of judges upholding the rule of law.”

She also addressed the increasing political polarization centered on the Supreme Court.

“There’s a lot of talk these days about the courts being mere political institutions. But if we reduce the courts to mere politics, then why do we need them? We already have politicians. Courts are not arenas for politics. Courts are places where judges discharge the duty to uphold the rule of law,” Barrett said.

Yet the judge insisted that the Supreme Court is not partisan, not divided along the lines of Republicans and Democrats.

“So I don’t think that five-four decisions or splits on courts are explicable by partisan commitments or by outcomes in particular cases. I think they’re explicable by starting points, by first-order commitments. So there are differences in ways that judges approach the enterprise of interpreting the Constitution,” Barrett explained.

“All judges think that the original meaning of the Constitution—its history, the way that it was understood by those who ratified it, who drafted it, the founding generation—all judges take that as a data point, as relevant,” she said. “Those who are committed to originalism treat it as determinative when the original meaning is discernible. Others just treat it as a data point, but one that would not necessarily control.”

“Some judges approach the Constitution saying, ‘There are some constitutional commitments that we’re not going to back down from because the Constitution enshrines them. But with respect to those that the Constitution does not speak, we’re going to leave it to democratic majorities to work out.’ Others see the Constitution as having a more amorphous and evolving content and speaking to evolving values and majority—evolving values in ways that democratic majorities don’t have the freedom to make choices,” the judge explained.

5 Things to Know About Amy Coney Barrett

The long slog ahead

Amy Coney Barrett is likely to face a firestorm during any Senate confirmation hearings. During her confirmation hearing for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) notoriously imposed something of a religious test. “The dogma lives loudly within you,” Feinstein said, suggesting that Barrett’s religious convictions disqualified her from service on the federal bench.

After Ginsburg’s death, some on the Left have rushed to demonize Barrett. Washington Post book critic Ray Charles suggested that there was something nefarious to Barrett’s statement that she intends to pursue “the kingdom of God.” On the contrary, the “kingdom of God” is a common Christian phrase that has more to do with loving your neighbor as yourself than bringing about some kind of theocracy.

Similarly, Newsweek ran a story claiming that Barrett belonged to a secret cult-like organization that inspired Margaret Atwood’s book The Handmaid’s Tale. In truth, the pentecostal group to which Barrett belonged, People of Praise, had no connection with People of Hope, the group Atwood seized upon. Newsweek corrected the story but did not retract it.

On Friday, HBO host Bill Maher called Barrett a “f***ing nut. Religion, I was right about that one, too.” Maher described Barrett as “really, really Catholic, like speaking in tongues.”

Barrett addressed the controversy last year at the Hillsdale event. She noted that “the religious test clause in the Constitution makes it unconstitutional to impose a religious test on anyone who holds public office. So whether someone is Catholic or Jewish or Evangelical or Muslim or has no faith at all is irrelevant to the job.”

Amy Coney Barrett Gave a Perfect Response to Anti-Religious Bigotry

“I do have one thing that I want to add to that, though. I think when you step back and you think about the debate about whether someone’s religion has any bearing on their fitness for office, it seems to me that the premise of the question is that people of faith would have a uniquely difficult time separating out their moral commitments from their obligation to apply the law. And I think people of faith should reject that premise,” she added.

“All people, of course– well, we hope, most people– have deeply held moral convictions, whether or not they come from faith. People who have no faith, people who are not religious, have deeply held moral convictions,” Barrett noted. “And it’s just as important for those people to be sure– I just spent time talking about the job of a judge being to set aside moral convictions, personal moral convictions, and personal preferences, and follow the law. That’s a challenge for those of faith and for those who have no faith.”

“So I think the public should be absolutely concerned about whether a nominee for judicial office will be willing and able to set aside personal preferences, be they moral, be they political, whatever convictions they are,” Barrett explained. “But that’s not a challenge just for religious people. I mean, that’s a challenge for everyone. And so I think it’s a dangerous road to go down to say that only religious people would not be able to separate out moral convictions from their duty.”

Barrett will face a firestorm of controversy, but she has proven that she can rise to the challenge.

Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can expose and fight the Left’s radical plans for the Supreme Court? They will stop at nothing, so your support for conservative journalism is more important than ever. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code SCOTUS to get 25% off your VIP membership.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

No, Amy Coney Barrett Doesn’t Belong to a Catholic Group That Inspired ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’
Trump Will Name One of These 12 People to the Supreme Court Next Week
Liberals Are Already Gearing Up to Attack the Notorious ACB… for This Common Christian Phrase
Blame the Left for Making the Supreme Court Too Political
 

PROMINENT D.C. CHURCH BECOMES FIRST TO SUE OVER MAYOR MURIEL BOWSER’S HYPOCRITICAL WORSHIP RESTRICTIONS

ABOVE: District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser walks on the street leading to the White House after the words Black Lives Matter were painted in enormous bright yellow letters on the street by city workers and activists Friday, June 5, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

BY PAULA BOLYARD

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/culture/paula-bolyard/2020/09/25/finally-prominent-d-c-church-becomes-first-to-sue-over-mayor-muriel-bowsers-hypocritical-worship-restrictions-n965391;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Capitol Hill Baptist Church, a prominent and influential church in the District of Columbia, has sued Mayor Muriel Bowser and the District for violating its right to worship as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

In March, Bowser issued an executive order prohibiting churches from gathering to worship, whether indoors, or out, citing the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the District’s four-stage plan, CHBC’s in-person worship gatherings will be prohibited until there is an “effective cure or vaccine” for COVID-19—a scenario that could take many months or even years to come to fruition. The District of Columbia is still in Phase 2 of the four-step plan to reopen, which means gatherings are limited to 100 people or up to 50 percent of the building’s capacity, whichever is fewer. For the last several months, the 850-member Capitol Hill Baptist Church (CHBC) has been meeting in a field outside a Virginia church.

For the 142-year-old congregation, “a weekly in-person worship gathering of the entire congregation is a religious conviction for which there is no substitute. The Church does not offer virtual worship services, it does not utilize a multi-site model, and it does not offer multiple Sunday morning worship services,” according to the lawsuit.

Moreover, per the church’s covenant, which is recited at all members’ meetings and before communion is administered, members agree that they “will not forsake the assembling of [them]selves together,” which is commanded in the Bible.

“CHBC desires to gather for a physical, corporate gathering of believers in the District of Columbia on Sunday, September 27, 2020, and on subsequent Sundays, and would do so but for those actions of the Defendants that are the subject of this Complaint,” the lawsuit charges.

For those who aren’t well acquainted with the discussions about ecclesiastical polity (operational and governance structure of a church) going on in evangelical circles, CHBC Senior Pastor Mark Dever has been at the forefront of a movement to encourage churches to be biblically faithful in their preaching, theology, understanding of the Gospel, conversion and membership policies, as well as church discipline and church leadership. His seminal (in my opinion) book, Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, launched the 9Marks ministry, which has led to a clarifying debate about what a healthy church looks like (you can read about the 9 Marks here).

I’ve benefitted greatly from the ministry’s resources and have attended services at CHBC several times when visiting family in D.C. It’s an ethnically diverse congregation with no bells or whistles—music is simple, consisting mostly of hymns, with sermons lasting an hour. The simple, stripped-down services, which are heavy on theology and eschew entertainment, manage to attract a large number of young people, many of them likely exhausted from years of entertainment-focused youth ministries at other churches.

Judge Rules That John MacArthur Deserves a Fair Trial Before Facing Hefty Fines

Justin Sok, a pastor at CHBC, explained the reasons for the lawsuit in a statement on the church’s website. “Since its founding in 1878, CHBC has met in-person every Sunday except for three weeks during the Spanish Flu in 1918,” he stated. “That changed following Mayor Bowser’s first orders concerning COVID-19 on March 11, 2020. Since that time, the members of CHBC—most of whom live in the District—have been unable to meet in person, as one congregation inside District limits (even outdoors).”

“CHBC has applied for multiple waivers to the policy. District officials refuse to provide CHBC with a waiver beyond 100 persons as part of a mass gathering,” said Sok. The lawsuit filed Tuesday, he said, asks that CHBC be permitted to meet in-person “with similar restrictions as area businesses and other gatherings have employed to protect public health.”

“A church is not a building that can be opened and closed. A church is not an event to be watched. A church is a community that gathers regularly and that community should be treated fairly by the District government,” declared Sok.

On June 10, the church requested a waiver from the worship ban from the mayor’s office, asking to meet at RFK Stadium, where they could all worship together while social distancing. The mayor’s office ignored the request and subsequent appeals until Sept. 15, when it denied the request.

“The denial letter thanked CHBC for providing information about its ‘social distancing plan, and other measures to mitigate the risk of spread of COVID-19′” and pointed out that capacity limits for places of worship were “double the District’s current prohibition on mass gatherings of more than fifty (50) persons,” suggesting that they ought to be grateful for that minuscule concession.

Further, the letter stated that “[w]aivers for places of worship above that expanded capacity are not being granted at this time” therefore, the request “is denied.'”

Not so fast, Mayor Bowser.

The lawsuit points out the inconsistencies in waiver approvals:

Meanwhile, on June 27, 2020, the District of Columbia granted a waiver request for a different type of expressive gathering protected by the First Amendment. Earlier in June, two local companies had requested a waiver to operate a pop-up drive-in movie theater at RFK Stadium in a desire “to bring people together in D.C.” The D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency approved the waiver request, allowing the drive-in gathering to hold up to 350 socially distanced vehicles.

The lawsuit claims Bowser and the District “have been discriminatory in their application of the ban on large scale gatherings,” citing a June 6 appearance by Bowser at a gathering of tens of thousands of anti-racism protesters where she declared that the crowd was “wonderful to see.” In addition, the District’s Metropolitan Police Department closed city streets “to accommodate protests and marches of thousands to tens of thousands of people.” Not only that, three weeks ago, “the Mayor coordinated with organizers of the Commitment March on Washington to ‘re-imagine’ the five-hour event on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial for several thousand people in attendance to hear an array of speakers.”

In addition, many museums, restaurants, and other entertainment venues in D.C. are open and Metro services have been restored to pre-COVID levels.

“Creating an exception for mass protests and not other types of First Amendment activities is constitutionally forbidden content-based discrimination and thus violates CHBC’s free speech rights,” the church asserts.

It would be one thing if the lockdown policies were being enforced consistently, but the hypocrisy of shuttering churches while allowing protesters to gather, aided and abetted by the police and the District, is breathtaking.

“The First Amendment protects both mass protests and religious worship,” the lawsuit explains. “But Mayor Bowser, by her own admission, has preferred the former over the latter. When asked why she celebrates mass protests while houses of worship remain closed, she responded that ‘First Amendment protests and large gatherings are not the same’ because ‘in the United States of America, people can protest.'”

Long before anyone ever heard of COVID-19, CHBC had made the “convictional choice not to hold multiple services, instead capping attendance at the capacity of its auditorium.”

On March 13, Senior Pastor Mark Dever announced that the church would not be streaming its services online.

The church is asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for relief in the form of a declaration that the mayor and the District of Columbia have unlawfully burdened the church’s free speech rights and their right to peaceably assemble under the First Amendment and that the District has violated CHBC’s religious free exercise rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The church is also asking the court to declare that their Fifth Amendment right to due process has been violated. They seek a temporary restraining order, “preliminarily enjoining, and permanently enjoining Defendants from prohibiting Plaintiff from physically gathering as a congregation in the District of Columbia if conducted with appropriate social distancing practices.”

“Meeting in-person as one congregation is a deeply-held religious conviction for which there is no substitute,” Pastor Sok said. “Our simple desire is to have a community and one that meets together safely.”

Follow me on Twitter @pbolyard


GOVERNOR RON DESANTIS OPENS FLORIDA 100% AFTER COVID-19 PANIC/PANDEMIC NEARLY DESTROYED AMERICAN ECONOMY

BY MEGAN FOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2020/09/25/ron-desantis-opens-florida-100-after-covid-19-panic-pandemic-nearly-destroyed-american-economy-n968454;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Governor Ron DeSantis fully opened the state of Florida by executive order on Friday. All restaurants and bars can operate at full capacity starting immediately. The order also prohibits local governments from imposing fines or shutting down businesses, or enforcing mask mandates. “We are going to preempt closure of restaurants from local [authorities] and this is evidence-based. Miami-Dade closed them…Broward didn’t. I challenge you to show me a difference in those epidemic curves,” he said. “They’re both dense counties and they both had significant epidemics, so I don’t think the closure of restaurants has proven to be effective.” He continued, “We can’t have businesses die.”

Leftists have immediately taken to calling DeSantis names like “Dr. Mengele” in response.

New York Magazine is actually accusing DeSantis of trying to kill Floridians to benefit Donald Trump. For real. They not only criticize his handling of COVID but are accusing him of trying to get people killed by proposing a new law that decriminalizes any incident where a motorist hits a protester who is blocking a road and threatening the safety of the motorist. The riots over the summer have seen several incidents where protesters have blocked vehicles and even pulled people from their vehicles and assaulted them.

Despite the loud partisan heckling, DeSantis is sticking to his guns. “Everyone in Florida has the right to work. Everyone in Florida has the right to operate a business,” he said.

DeSantis is also looking into a Bill of Rights for students because of “draconian” measures that have seen students expelled from college for going to parties. “That’s what college kids do,” said DeSantis at a press conference. “I really think we have to be reasonable about this and focus the efforts on where the significant risk is.” He continued, “I think it’s very important that we have the campuses functioning and we have the kids back.” DeSantis pointed out the significant benefits of in-person learning both for educational reasons and socialization.

The toll on Americans during the COVID-19 lockdown has been severe and significant, impacting their mental health with increased reports of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation. The CDC reported that anxiety and depression symptoms are up by 31%, PTSD is up by 26%, and thoughts of suicide up by 11%. Young people are impacted most severely. “Mental health conditions are disproportionately affecting specific populations, especially young adults,” according to CDC studies.

Governor Ron DeSantis Says Florida Will Never Lockdown Again for COVID-19
Ron DeSantis Exposes Media Lies on COVID-19 in Florida
Governor DeSantis Has an Amazing Plan to Deal With Rioters

 

 

LOGAN, OHIO: MOM TASED FOR NOT WEARING MASK

A mother, who was peacefully sitting outside on school bleachers to watch her son play a school football game in Logan, Ohio, was grabbed, shoved, pulled, tased, handcuffed, pushed down the steps and arrested by a local cop Wednesday – all for the horrible crime of being outside without a mask over her face. https://www.mrctv.org/blog/ohio-mom-t...

AS BLM MURDERS COPS IN STREETS DURING VIOLENT GATHERINGS, CHRISTIANS ARRESTED FOR SINGING HYMNS

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/09/24/as-blm-murders-cops-in-streets-during-violent-gatherings-christians-arrested-for-singing-hymns/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

One can only look at what this nation has become with complete and utter disdain. The judgment of God is upon this nation when violent anarchists, rioters, looters, and domestic terror groups are allowed to freely assemble in the streets with the foreknowledge that destruction will ensue while Christians, on the other hand, are arrested for singing hymns.

That’s exactly what happened in Moscow, Idaho. While the name resembles the name of the capital city in the Communist nation, Russia, its actions mirror them just as well. The city has now arrested several Christians for gathering in the streets to sing hymns amid the terror and chaos taking over or cities in America.

We hope that this nation will understand what is happening before its too late and hope that more people will come to realize that without faith in Christ, there is no hope.

In case you want to reach the city council members of Moscow, Idaho, their email addresses are listed below:

Email the Moscow, Idaho city council members:

  • blambert@ci.moscow.id.us
  • mlaflin@ci.moscow.id.us
  • abettge@ci.moscow.id.us
  • gtaruscio@ci.moscow.id.us
  • azabala@ci.moscow.id.us
  • bsullivan@ci.moscow.id.us
  • skelly@ci.moscow.id.us

Of the three arrested, one of them, Gabriel Rench, was a candidate for Latah County Commissioner and was arrested on charges of not social distancing and flouting the facemask order. The two others arrested were a husband and wife on charges of singing too closely together.

 

SOUTHERN BAPTIST APOSTASY: PRO-ABORTION FEMALE BIBLE TEACHER AT JD GREEAR’S CHURCH PRAISES DECEASED, PRO-ABORTION SCOTUS JUDGE RUTH BADER GINSBURG

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2020/09/21/pro-abortion-female-bible-teacher-at-jd-greears-church-praises-ruth-bader-ginsburg/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

You would think that the top leader of the Southern Baptist Convention — the largest Protestant denomination in America that calls itself “conservative” — would hold his own church accountable to the Scriptures on issues that shouldn’t even be debatable — like women teaching in churches and holding to theological positions that are opposed to the revealed will of God.

No. Instead, JD Greear props up a Jezebel named Rebecca Shrader who continues to defy God while representing his church.

Rebecca Shrader refers to herself as a “pro-life feminist, pro-choice Christian” who authored a “statement of lament” for white people to sign denouncing their skin color. Shrader is a small group Bible teacher at Greear’s Summit Church in North Carolina, and proudly boasts it.

Shrader is a very confused person who believes that she is “pro-life” because she chose not to kill her own children. However, Shrader is continually and adamantly clear that she believes every woman should have the “choice” whether or not to end their own children’s lives. She defends Planned Parenthood and does not believe that life begins at conception.

She has also stated that she would join hands with the pro-choice escorts at abortion clinics to protect them from hearing the gospel from pro-life groups.

And she, a “bible teacher,” is apparently clueless as to why Christians believe murder is wrong and should be illegal.

So it should come as no surprise that Shrader, a teacher and member in good standing at the Southern Baptist Convention president’s church, praises one of the most anti-Christ, pro-abortion, pro-sodomy Supreme Court Justices ever to walk the face of this earth, Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

People, if you want to know what’s wrong with the Evangelical Church today, look no further than Rebecca Shrader, and particularly, her pastor, JD Greear. That a woman like this is allowed to remain in good standing in a Southern Baptist Church while her pastor says nothing of her wicked behavior while propping her up and supporting her Black Lives Matter statements, speaks volumes of the problems in the Church. No wonder God is angry. Will anyone say anything? No, but you can rest assured that all the Evangelical leaders will complain about social media etiquette.

TRENDING:  Joe Biden Denied Communion at Catholic Church for Pro-Abortion Stance
 

162 HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTE AGAINST ANTISEMITISM AMENDMENT TO RIGHTS BILL

See the source image

BY WARREN MASS

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/37107-162-house-democrats-vote-against-antisemitism-amendment-to-rights-bill;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

After Representative Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) proposed an amendment to the Equity and Inclusion Enforcement Act (H.R. 2574) adding antisemitism to race, color, or national origin as a form of discrimination to be prohibited by the act, 162 Democrats in the House voted against Foxx’s amendment.

“With anti-Semitism on the rise around the world, the need for this amendment is clear,” Foxx said,

The summary of H.R. 2574 said that the bill “authorizes private civil causes of action for disparate impact violations … of federal regulations of general applicability that prohibit discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.” The stated purpose of the bill, which was introduced by two Democrats, Bobby Scott of Virginia and John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan, was to strengthen Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by restoring “the right to individual civil actions in cases involving disparate impact.”

Most Republicans, including Foxx, initially opposed H.R. 2574. Foxx stated during debate: “The consequences of this legislation within the education community are very clear. The creation of a private right of action would lead to additional burdens on already taxed State and local agencies, especially school systems who would have to defend themselves against tenuous allegations advanced by parents and activists.”

When the speaker pro tempore asked Foxx, “Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?” Foxx answered, “I am in its present form.”

Foxx then moved to insert an amendment into the text that included this wording: “Antisemitism Considered Discrimination. — In carrying out the responsibilities of the recipient under this title, the employee or employees designated under this section shall consider antisemitism to be discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin as prohibited by this title.” 

Foxx continued: “If this House is going to radically rewrite title VI, as this bill does, we should use this opportunity to show commitment to combating anti-Semitism.”

One might think that this language would appeal to most Democrats, who usually describe themselves as champions of all minorities. However the vote indicated differently. While 66 Democrats voted for the amendment, enough to pass it when added to the votes of 189 Republicans, 162 voted “nay.” Among the 162 were all four members of the “squad” — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), and Ayanna Pressley (Mass.)

H.R. 2574 passed in the House on September 16 by a vote of 232-188 and now goes on to the Senate. If the Senate passes it, President Trump will likely veto it. 

A September 14 statement issued by the Executive Office of the President begins: “The Administration strongly opposes passage of H.R. 2574.” The statement continues: “Granting a private cause of action for enforcement of such regulations would inevitably lead to a massive expansion of litigation involving recipients of Federal financial assistance, diverting resources toward litigation and away from education.” It concludes: “If H.R. 2574 were presented to the President, his advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.”

Related articles:

Do Democrats Have an Anti-Semitism Problem?

The Continuing Scourge of Anti-Semitism

 

“BURN CONGRESS DOWN”: “ELITE” DEMOCRATS & LEFTISTS URGE VIOLENCE IF DECEASED SCOTUS JUDGE GINSBURG IS REPLACED BEFORE THE ELECTION

We confirm justices to interpret the Constitution, not to dictate through “dying wishes” who their successors should be or when they should be nominated
The Hill
@thehill
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Mitch McConnell: "This is a man who does not care about a dying woman's final wish."

BY SELWYN DUKE

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/37101-burn-congress-down-elite-dems-leftists-urge-violence-if-rbg-is-replaced-before-election;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

It’s not enough that this year’s rioting and looting have hurt innocent people, destroyed their businesses, and even taken some of their lives. Now pseudo-elite Democrats/leftists are calling for another violent response — if President Trump and the Senate exercise their constitutionally granted power and replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg before the election.

Ginsburg died Friday at age 87 of complications from metastatic pancreatic cancer. Since then, a firestorm has arose, with Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell resolving to quickly fill the vacant Supreme Court seat and Democrats insisting that November 3rd’s winner be allowed to choose Ginsburg’s replacement.

The Street Rabble Are No Longer Just in the Street

“Elections have consequences,” said Barack Obama shortly after his 2009 inauguration. Yet prominent writers, a professor, and an ex-CNN host are among the leftists singing a different tune now that they’re out of power, essentially saying that the consequence of their losing elections will be destruction.

As the Daily Mail reports on the Ginsburg-oriented threats:

Reza Aslan, a religious scholar and former CNN host, tweeted to his 293,000 followers: ‘If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f****** thing down.’ 

... Beau Willimon, a screenwriter who produced the U.S. version of House of Cards and the president of the Writers Guild of America, East, told his 164,000 followers: We’re shutting this country down if Trump and McConnell try to ram through an appointment before the election.’

Another writer predicted riots. 

‘If McConnell jams someone through, which he will, there will be riots,’ said Laura Bassett, a political journalist writing for GQ and the Washington Post.

Author Aaron Gouveia, whose latest book is about toxic masculinity, tweeted:  ‘F*** no. Burn it all down.’ 

And a professor of political science repeated calls for arson attacks on Congress.  

Emmett Macfarlane, who teaches at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, tweeted: ‘Burn Congress down before letting Trump try to appoint anyone to SCOTUS.’

A member of the Wisconsin Ethics Commission, responsible for administering state laws regarding campaign finance, ethics and lobbying, echoed the urging for violence.

When Ed Markey, senate candidate for Massachusetts, said that McConnell should not nominate a replacement in an election year, Scot Ross tweeted: ‘F****** A, Ed. If you can’t shut it down, burn it down.’

It’s truly striking. The United States had always been known for exhibiting what we’d previously taken for granted: The peaceful transfer of power — and respect for its lawful exercise. Now we’re starting to resemble a Third World nation, where violence and underhanded dealings elevate leaders as much as, if not more than, free and fair elections.

Speaking of which, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has also gotten in on the act (and in many cases it is an “act”), as she “on Sunday refused to rule out pushing forward a privileged impeachment resolution that would have the effect of eating up Senate floor time and potentially stalling a Supreme Court nomination,” reported the Mail in a different article.

“We have our options,” said Pelosi. “We have arrows in our quiver.”

(The speaker certainly is perturbed. But I would recommend, Nancy, that you be more fatalistic and remember some counsel I once heard you give: “People will do what they do.”) 

Returning to the approval of violence, it’s beginning to appear a pattern with pseudo-elites. Just about a week ago, in fact, some leftists essentially applauded the shooting of police officers.

As for the SCOTUS vacancy, both parties are fending off accusations of hypocrisy. For “Ginsburg’s death immediately recalled how Republicans resisted a vote on former President Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland while Democrats told the other side it was their job to confirm another justice,” writes TheSpectator.Info.

Moreover, the Spectator relates Barack Obama as saying that a “basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment.”

Of course, this is the same man who said in 2010 “I am not king” when explaining why he couldn’t unilaterally alter immigration law, but then did so anyway in instituting DACA. In contrast, the only “law” involved in the SCOTUS vacancy’s filling is the constitutional provision stating that the president and Senate have the rightful power to fill it. The GOP’s 2016 rationale for not voting on Garland was just that — a rationale — not a “law.”

Moreover, some Republicans are saying the rationale is actually that a SCOTUS seat should not be filled during an election year when the White House and Senate are controlled by different parties. As McConnell put it Friday, “Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year.”

Of course, here’s reality: The Democrats wouldn’t flinch from filling the seat were the roles reversed. Alluding to this, I tweeted the following yesterday:

The point is that the Democrats are seeking power by any means necessary, including vote fraud and Big Tech manipulation (and violence) — and the application of socialist revolutionary Saul Alinsky’s RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

Then there’s guilt. That is, leftists insist we must respect Ginsburg’s “dying wish,” which allegedly was that she not be replaced until after the presidential election. Below is avowed socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) making this appeal, saying on video that McConnell is “a man who does not care about a dying woman’s final wish.”

First, this “dying wish” claim could be a ploy — and one that puts Ginsburg in a bad light. For we’re to believe that in her final moments her thoughts weren’t about God or her ultimate destination, but about politics and power.

Regardless, there’s an irony here. Despite Democrats’ talk about “consistency” and abiding by laws, what they’ve consistently done is appoint “living Constitution” justices who violate the law, engaging in judicial activism and imposing their will from the bench.

Now they want a judge to be able to impose her will even after death.

And the consequence for defying this postmortem judicial activism, say some pseudo-elites, is violence in Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s name. Hey, nothing proves your devotion to the rule of law like threatening insurrection.

Selwyn Duke (@SelwynDuke) has written for The New American for more than a decade. He has also written for The Hill, Observer, The American Conservative, WorldNetDaily, American Thinker, and many other print and online publications. In addition, he has contributed to college textbooks published by Gale-Cengage Learning, has appeared on television, and is a frequent guest on radio.

 

JUDGE RESCINDS PA GOVERNOR WOLF’S COVID MANDATES~MICHELLE MALKIN: AMERICANS AGAINST UNCONSTITUTIONAL MASK MANDATES

Masks off. Fight on. This is the American way.

See the source image

SEPT 21, 2020

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/09/americans-against-unconstitutional-mask-mandates-michelle-malkin/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Good news: The anti-mask mandate movement is gaining steam. Americans yearning to breathe free are waking up from their pandemic stupor. Common sense and constitutional principles, now more than ever, are vital to a sovereign nation's health.

On Monday, a federal judge rescinded Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf's shutdown orders restricting gatherings, forcing "nonessential" business closures and directing citizens to stay at home to combat COVID-19. U.S. District Judge William Stickman determined that the sweeping measures violated "the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment." He noted Wolf's hypocrisy in severely limiting indoor and outdoor fairs, festivals, concerts and other gatherings and condemning a small anti-lockdown protest of small-business owners (whom he called "selfish," "cowardly" and "unsafe") — while marching with thousands of non-socially distancing Black Lives Matter radicals in Harrisburg in June.

Moreover, Stickman ruled, Pennsylvania's stay-at-home order — a sweeping population unlike any "in the history of our Commonwealth and our Country" — violated the 14th Amendment's due process rights to travel, association and privacy. Similarly, Wolf's extreme and open-ended power grab designating and closing "nonessential" businesses undermined due process protections "against arbitrary government action."

While Wolf's measures may have been "well-intentioned," Stickman concluded that "good intentions toward a laudable end are not alone enough to uphold governmental action against a constitutional challenge. Indeed, the greatest threats to our system of constitutional liberties may arise when the ends are laudable, and the intent is good — especially in a time of emergency."

In Florida, conservative lawyer and state House Rep. Anthony Sabatini cheered the defeat of Wolf's draconian COVID-19 orders. "Some in the Judiciary are finally waking up to the fact that the government is not always right — and that the constitution is not suspended during an emergency," he told me. Sabatini has filed 15 ongoing challenges to the Sunshine State's lockdown measures. "We're looking forward to winning."

In Colorado, I joined a similar lawsuit with state House Rep. Pat Neville to challenge Gov. Jared Polis' whopping 166 COVID-19 executive orders, as well as multiple public health orders issued by state and county health departments. As in Pennsylvania, our state Supreme Court declined to hear the case. So we filed in Denver District Court two weeks ago. Polis and other government officials are on notice: No more kings.

Like Americans all across the country, Coloradans have been threatened with civil and criminal penalties for failure to wear a mask in public, and businesses are coerced by the governor into enforcing his mask order with zero input from voters or their elected representatives. Last week, Polis unilaterally extended the mask mandate by another 30 days. Our lawyer, Randy Corporon, laid down the law:

"The Colorado Constitution expressly prohibits the delegation by the legislature of lawmaking authority to the governor. While courts have made limited exceptions for emergency situations, we are now six months into this 'emergency' with a governor who, on his own, extends his superpowers every 30 days. Enough is enough."

Corporon's law firm has filed a companion lawsuit seeking an injunction against "Power Grab" Polis on behalf of the family owners of the Bandimere Speedway — where more than 5,500 patriots joined us at a rally to "Stop the COVID Chaos" two weeks ago. Liberals and "Never-Trumpers" have condemned our constitutionally protected peaceful protest, while downplaying violent BLM and antifa riots that have turned downtown Denver into a Third World hellhole.

We are not alone. Parents in Tennessee are suing to free their children from unlawful and unhealthy mask mandates unsupported by science. Minnesotans have filed multiple lawsuits against Gov. Tim Walz. "It's not the place of government to impose those requirements on us when there is no lawful authority to do so," Doug Seaton, Upper Midwest Law Center President and attorney, argues. "That's something that is against our self-governing principles that we've had in the state of Minnesota since we were a part of the northwest territory. We can't have our governor override the separation of powers and the limited government we have and trample on rights, whatever good the intentions might be."

In Boise, Idaho, this weekend, citizens held an anti-mask rally at the local Veterans Memorial park. Organizer Jeff Buck spoke for all of us: "We feel like we are being held hostage and we need to stand up for our rights or the government will take them away."

Masks off. Fight on. This is the American way.

 

SUPREME COURT REPLACEMENT: TRUMP CALLS FOR FILLING RUTH BADER GINSBURG’S SEAT “WITHOUT DELAY”

Pro Abortion Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at Age 87

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/18/breaking-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-n944311;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

And you thought 2020 couldn’t get any more tense. On Friday night, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg finally lost her long battle with pancreatic cancer. The Court’s most outspoken liberal, Ginsburg had survived multiple bouts with cancer but finally passed away at age 87, the Associated Press reported.

While Ginsburg was a notorious liberal, twisting the text of the Constitution to support far-left causes like abortion, she was also an impressive and inspiring individual. A pioneer as a woman in the legal profession, she rose through the ranks while having children and raising a family.

“Our Nation has lost a jurist of historic stature,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a statement on Ginsburg’s passing. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn, but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her — a tireless and resolute champion of justice.”

Her passing opens up one of the Court’s nine seats less than two months before the presidential election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said he would rush to confirm any justice nominated by President Donald Trump even shortly before an election.

When Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016, McConnell refused to consider President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee. Democrats have accused McConnell of having a double standard on a potential Trump nominee during an election year, but McConnell has insisted that when the president and the Senate majority represent two separate parties, they should wait to confirm a justice until the election.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) tweeted the exact text of McConnell’s statement when Scalia passed away.

Get ready for a tense political battle.

Last week, President Donald Trump released an updated list of potential Supreme Court nominees.

It remains unclear whether or not the president will nominate a justice so close to the election, but since the Democrats did away with the filibuster for judicial nominations, it seems likely the Senate could confirm a replacement for Ginsburg before the election. If the Senate did so, the Democrats would likely renew their calls to pack the Supreme Court after a Joe Biden victory.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Trump’s 2020 Supreme Court List Will Drive the Left Crazy
Hey Supreme Court, Government Can’t Decide ‘Which Beliefs Are Acceptable’
Blame the Left for Making the Supreme Court Too Political
WINNING: Trump Is Restoring the American Judiciary

____________________________________________________________________________

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/19/breaking-trump-calls-for-filling-ruth-bader-ginsburgs-seat-without-delay-n944816;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Saturday, President Donald Trump rallied the Republican Party to confirm a Supreme Court nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He called filling the vacancy an “obligation” to be fulfilled “without delay.”

“We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us, the most important of which has long been considered to be the selection of United States Supreme Court Justices,” the president tweeted. “We have this obligation, without delay!”

Ginsburg, an impressive justice and a liberal lion of the Court, passed away on Friday at the age of 87.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said the Senate will consider Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

Democratic nominee Joe Biden has called for the Senate to wait until after the election, rather than rushing to confirm a potential Trump nominee.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Trump’s 2020 Supreme Court List Will Drive the Left Crazy
Blame the Left for Making the Supreme Court Too Political
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dies at Age 87

____________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://christiannews.net/2020/09/21/rep-offers-condolences-to-30-million-innocent-babies-who-died-from-ginsburgs-defense-of-abortion/

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/09/18/ted-cruz-explains-perfectly-why-rbgs-seat-must-be-filled-before-the-election-n944445

https://www.ammoland.com/2020/09/ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-just-as-president-trump-releases-his-list-of-scotus-judges/

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/09/20/how-ginsburgs-death-gives-an-advantage-to-republicans-in-the-supreme-court-n946234

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/09/19/ruth-bader-ginsburg-made-the-case-for-filling-her-vacancy-before-the-election-back-in-2016-n944778

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/09/19/hillary-clintons-response-to-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburgs-death-is-quite-deplorable-n943718

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/09/19/here-are-the-four-gop-senators-who-might-derail-trumps-scotus-pick-n944785

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/09/19/liberals-will-look-to-expand-the-supreme-court-if-biden-wins-n945636

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/09/19/radical-left-threatens-riots-war-and-to-burn-it-down-if-rbg-replaced-n944513

https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2020/09/20/the-no-limit-casino-of-doom-n944274

https://christiannews.net/2020/09/21/jen-hatmaker-amy-grant-praise-justice-ginsburg-well-done-good-and-faithful-servant-thank-you-ruth/

 

 

 

 

IT’S ON: UNDERCOVER JOURNALIST DAVID DALEIDEN BEHIND BABY BODY PARTS SCANDAL SUES PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOR DEFAMATION

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/19/its-on-undercover-journalist-behind-baby-body-parts-scandal-sues-planned-parenthood-for-defamation-n945758;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Thursday, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) and its founder, David Daleiden, sued Planned Parenthood for defamation in federal court. Daleiden and CMP released a string of sting videos exposing Planned Parenthood employees’ shameful and illegal trafficking in aborted baby body parts in 2015. Even though the videos were accurate, Planned Parenthood claimed that they were doctored and false. Government officials even targeted Daleiden for prosecution. Yet some of Planned Parenthood’s business partners confessed to illegally selling body parts and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the undercover footage was accurate.

“Planned Parenthood admits my videos are true when under oath in federal court, but when speaking to the public, Planned Parenthood lies and calls the videos fake,” Daleiden said in a statement. “I have put my life on hold for five years to report, with video evidence, the trafficking of aborted infants that I and others witnessed at the highest levels of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry. It is time for Planned Parenthood to face the truth.”

“Planned Parenthood has tremendous power and influence in our society. But even it must adhere to legal norms. We filed this lawsuit to hold PPFA accountable for damaging falsehoods it uttered concerning our clients’ groundbreaking journalism that exposed shocking practices it would rather keep hidden — for good reason,” Harmeet Dhillon, a lawyer representing Daleiden and CMP in the suit, said in a statement. “Planned Parenthood is not above the law. We look forward to the merits litigation of this lawsuit.”

“Instead of coming clean about its ruthless pursuit of profit from selling the remains of aborted children, Planned Parenthood tried to smear David Daleiden, the man who blew the whistle on its dirty secret,” Peter Breen, vice president and senior counsel for the Thomas More Society and another of Daleiden’s lawyers, added. “In its earlier lawsuit against David and the Center for Medical Progress, Planned Parenthood fought to avoid scrutiny of its illegal fetal tissue trafficking. This new lawsuit puts Planned Parenthood’s grisly business practices front and center, to prove the truth of the conclusions of David’s investigation, which were also confirmed and echoed by the United States Congress and other government officials.”

After CMP and Daleiden released the sting videos, which showed Planned Parenthood staff admitting to selling aborted baby body parts for profit, and one even joking about buying a Lamborghini with the profits, Planned Parenthood hired the firm Fusion GPS, now notorious for assembling the Trump-Russia dossier, to obscure the facts and suggest the videos were deceptively edited.

Many media outlets have claimed that the Fusion GPS report settled the matter, even though the report’s fine print acknowledged the veracity of the photos.

Planned Parenthood Would Gut the First Amendment to Silence Sting Videos

The Planned Parenthood sting videos were authentic

In 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it had opened a federal investigation into Planned Parenthood and its business partners, prompted by the videos. Two of Planned Parenthood’s business partners in Orange County, Calif., admitted guilt for selling aborted baby body parts in a $7.8 million settlement. DV Biologics and DaVinci Biosciences acquired their profits “by viewing body parts as a commodity and illegally selling fetal tissues for valuable consideration,” District Attorney Tony Rackauckas explained in a statement.

In September 2018, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) terminated its contractswith Planned Parenthood partner Advanced Bioscience Resources because it could not be “sufficiently assured” that the company’s supply of fetal tissue complied with federal law. In January 2019, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Edith Jones ruled that CMP’s footage was “authentic and not deceptively edited.”

Planned Parenthood officials admitted — in sworn deposition testimony that the CMP videos authentically captured their statements. Planned Parenthood Federation of America admitted in a federal trial that the words captured in the sting videos “were spoken by those persons.”

Yet on September 18, 2019, Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Melanie Newman accused Daleiden of launching a “multiyear illegal effort to manufacture a fake smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.” Planned Parenthood also tweeted that Daleiden and CMP had “created a false smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.”

The lawsuit claims that these two statements constitute defamation with actual malice against Daleiden and CMP. The lawsuit demands actual and punitive damages of at least $75,000, “including damages necessary to make Plaintiffs whole for the presumptive impairment to their reputation, personal humiliation, mental anguish and suffering; and punitive and exemplary damages, in an amount necessary to punish PPFA for its malicious conduct toward Plaintiffs.” The lawsuit also requests an injunction to force Planned Parenthood to retract these statements.

Planned Parenthood’s Melanie Newman condemned the lawsuit as a “desperate attempt” to “get publicity.”

“These baseless claims are not new. They are just another desperate attempt by a discredited source to get publicity,” she told Fox News. “Last fall, a jury — with all of the facts fully presented to it — decided that David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress intentionally broke the law in a multi-year, malicious campaign to advance their goals of banning safe, legal abortion in this country, and preventing Planned Parenthood from serving the patients who depend on us. The result: Daleiden was ordered to pay millions of dollars in damages. And, he still faces criminal charges.”

David Daleiden Exposes Planned Parenthood’s ‘Coordinated Attack on the Civil Liberties of Pro-Life Americans’

Impact on 2020

This lawsuit is also important during the 2020 presidential race. When Kamala Harris — now Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s running mate — was attorney general of California, her office searched Daleiden’s home, seizing his video footage and preparing a legal case against him. Harris has received at least $81,000 from Planned Parenthood. In 2017, Harris’s successor, Xavier Becerra (another politician bankrolled by Planned Parenthood), filed 15 felony charges against CMP and Daleiden.

Peter Breen, special counsel at the Thomas More Society, briefed PJ Media on the ongoing case last July. He argued that Daleiden’s filming was taken in “entirely public places.”

“I could point you to undercover investigations that are being shown on the evening news in Los Angeles. Under the standard they are applying to David, those would be felonies,” the lawyer argued. “The other reporters are being lauded for their brave investigative techniques, but David is being prosecuted.”

“I would say this is an abuse of the criminal process,” Breen told PJ Media.

Pro-choice law professors have defended Daleiden’s right to engage in undercover journalism.

“The Planned Parenthood case reveals that activists – and journalists – might… have to go to prison for undercover reporting if they violate any laws to gain access to the targets of their investigation,” Sherry F. Cobb and Michael C. Dorf, professors of law at Cornell University and authors of Beating Hearts: Abortion and Animal Rights, wrote in 2016. They condemned the charges against Daleiden as “a stunning act of legal jujitsu” that could “chill undercover journalists and activists everywhere.”

If CMP and Daleiden prevail in this lawsuit, that will serve as a damning indictment to Kamala Harris, whose office launched the criminal investigation against them. This news should also remind Americans of Harris’ tyrannical past — which is extremely relevant because most Americans have said that if Joe Biden is elected in November, he will not serve out his term.

Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can continue telling the truth about the Biden-Harris campaign? Join PJ Media VIP TODAY and use the promo code LAWANDORDER to get 25% off your VIP membership

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

6 Reasons to Oppose Nanny State Tyrant Kamala Harris in 2020
The SPLC Is in Serious Legal Jeopardy for Defamation Regarding Its ‘Hate Group’ Labels
Fusion GPS, Firm Behind the Trump-Russia Dossier, Linked to Planned Parenthood
‘Most Damning’ Planned Parenthood Videos Yet Set for Release if Judge Lifts Gag Order
‘Hate Group’ Lawsuit Clears Hurdle, Judeo-Christian Group Warns SPLC ‘Day of Reckoning’ Is Coming
 

NYC: MUSLIM DOCTOR CALLED ON PEOPLE TO SPIT ON “JEW DOGS”, BEAT UP ZIONISTS, YET IS ALLOWED TO TREAT JEWISH PATIENTS

See the source image

HERE ARE SOME MILD ANTI-SEMITIC TWEETS HE SPENDS HIS SPARE TIME VOMITING; THE REST ARE TOO OFFENSIVE TO SHOW 

See the source image

See the source image

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/09/nyc-muslim-doctor-called-on-people-to-spit-on-jew-dogs-beat-up-zionists-yet-is-allowed-to-treat-jewish-patients;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“The hospital discovered his social media rants and last year tried to fire Khass from his position as a pediatric resident, however, Khass took them to court and won his job back claiming the hospital wrongly fired him for violating his ‘freedom of speech.'”

That’s ridiculous. I’m a free speech absolutist, but there is no doubt that no one has the freedom or the right to call for harming other people. This man is supposed to be a doctor, but what will he do if he has a Jewish, Zionist, or Christian patient? He should not just be fired from New York-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital; he should be barred from practicing medicine immediately.

“‘Beat Up Zionists’: NY Doctor Tweets Violent Anti-Semitic Incitement, Permitted to Treat Jews,” by Yakir Benzion, United With Israel, September 13, 2020:

For the past two years New York-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital has been trying to fire a doctor with a history of posting anti-Semitic and violently anti-Israel messages on social media.

Next week, the hospital and Dr. Walid Khass will be back in court to address the doctor’s eight-year history of tweets denigrating Jews and calling for Israel’s destruction.

Before Khass was hired as a resident at the hospital, his reputation for virulently anti-Israel social media activity was known.

As far back as 2012, Khass tweeted “My beloved Palestine! Spit on you, Jew dogs!” His tweets continued as a medical student until his graduation from St. George’s University (SGU) School of Medicine in June 2019, reported Canary Mission, a watchdog organization that tracks anti-Semitism on campuses….

On August 1, 2014, Khass tweeted: “quran chapter 2 take not the christians and the jews for friends — I’m Muslim And Know This.”

On November 13, 2014, Khass tweeted: “Go Beat Up A Zionist, You’re Not You When You Don’t Beat Up A Zionist.”

His tweets are also racist including one on July 10, 2015, in which he said: “Israel Needs To Stop Payin Ethiopians To Pretend That They’re Jewish Just So They Can Have A Bigger Population.”

On February 9, 2017, Khass tweeted: “Trump Trust Me, The Only People Ruining Our Country Is The Zionist Israeli’s …. #FreePalestine.”

The Canary Mission website lists at least 57 tweets by Khass that call for violence, spread anti-Semitism, support the Hamas terror group, and spread hatred of Israel and calls for its destruction.

The hospital discovered his social media rants and last year tried to fire Khass from his position as a pediatric resident, however, Khass took them to court and won his job back claiming the hospital wrongly fired him for violating his “freedom of speech.”…

 

PASTOR JOHN MACARTHUR GETS SUPPORT FROM TRUMP, HEALTH DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS, POLICE AGAINST GOVERNOR & MAYOR

#JohnMacArthur tells Gavin Newsom and the California Government to "Bring it On" regarding an arrest and jail time for keeping Grace Community Church open. With the the U.S. Constitution and the backing of President Trump that #ChurchIsEssential, he continues to fight the #COVID19 mandates in California.

US LAWMAKERS CONCERNED OVER NETFLIX AIRING OF “CUTIES” MOVIE THAT ADDRESSES SEXUALIZATION OF GIRLS BY DEPICTING CHILD SENSUALITY

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2020/09/14/us-lawmakers-concerned-over-netflix-airing-of-cuties-movie-that-addresses-sexualization-of-girls-by-depicting-child-sensuality/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

A French-made film available on Netflix that is said to be a dramatized “commentary” about how social media and societal role models wrongly influence young girls to sexualize themselves is generating outrage, including from Congress, as its content counteracts its purpose by utilizing 11-year-old female actors who “perform dances simulating sexual conduct in revealing clothing.”

“I urge the Department of Justice to investigate the production and distribution of this film to determine whether Netflix, its executives, or the individuals involved in the filming and production of ‘Cuties’ violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography,” wrote Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to Attorney General William Barr on Friday.

According to reports, the movie was directed by Maïmouna Doucouré and seeks to address the negative influence sensual role models and social media have on pre-adolescent females by telling the story of an 11-year-old Senegalese Muslim immigrant, named Amy, who joins a girls dance troupe in Paris in rebellion against her mother.

She also finds herself dressing more provocatively and posting various pictures of herself online to gain attention and approval.

The scantily-clad girls engage in various sexually-charged dance moves — all clearly captured on camera and in the face of the viewer — while practicing and performing for a competition. Amy later tearfully realizes the wrong of her pursuits and returns to the arms of her mother.

“The film routinely fetishes and sexualizes these pre-adolescent girls as they perform dances simulating sexual conduct in revealing clothing, including at least one scene with partial child nudity,” Cruz wrote. “The scenes in and of themselves are harmful.”

Netflix has defended the movie, stating that it encourages others to watch the production because of its message.

“‘Cuties’ is a social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” it said in a statement. “It’s an award-winning film and a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society more generally growing up — and we’d encourage anyone who cares about these important issues to watch the movie.”

“[Amy] believes she can find freedom through that group of dancers [where there is a] hyper-sexualization, but is that really true freedom, especially when you are a kid? Of course not,” Doucouré also explained in a video posted to the film page on Netflix.

She said that she interviewed a number of young girls before creating the film in seeking to understand how social media affects the way they think about themselves and their bodies.

“I needed to know how they felt about their own femininity in today’s society and how they dealt with their self-image in a time when social media is so important,” Doucouré outlined. “Our girls see that the more a girl is overly-sexualized on social media, the more she is successful. And children just imitate what they see trying to achieve the same result without understanding the meaning. And, yeah, it’s dangerous.”

“We are able to see oppression of women in other cultures, but my question is: isn’t the objectification of a woman’s body that we often see in our Western culture not another kind of oppression?” she asked.

Hawley

But Cruz says the film could conversely encourage the abuse of children, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., worries about the child actors who were used for the production and taught to engage in such acts for the camera.

“[I]t is likely that the filming of this movie created even more explicit and abusive scenes and that pedophiles across the world in the future will manipulate and initiate this film in abusive ways,” Cruz told Barr.

“Did Netflix, at any point, take measures to ensure the protection of the physical, mental and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways?” Hawley wrote in a letter to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings.

“Why did your company choose to market this film — which touches on a range of issues, including religion, culture and social media — with a poster solely depicting scantily-clad preteens in sexually suggestive positions?” he asked.

The original marketing image in France had been of the girls walking with shopping bags through the street and confetti flying in the air. The Netflix version had showed the girls in more provocative poses as dancers.

Others who have spoken out against the film include Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark.; Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind.; and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hi.

Even the liberal site Vice, which found the film to be “a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society,” acknowledged that at least some scenes in the film give cause for concern given the age of the actors, even if the underlying message is well-intentioned.

“There are some scenes that are intentionally provocative … and one in particular that feels unnecessarily eroticized,” it wrote. “The girls have established themselves as an urban dance troupe and spend an afternoon filming footage of themselves dancing to a song called ‘Bum Bum’ by well-known Nigerian artist Yemi Alade.”

“The montage features close-ups of their young bodies, skin-tight clothing and highly sexualized dance moves. This scene is designed to make viewers uneasy, but knowing that the actors themselves are very young is somewhat concerning,” the outlet said.

Online petitions for Netflix to pull the film have surpassed 1 million.

___________________________________________________

'Critics' Rush to Defend Netflix's Pre-Teen Twerking Flick 'Cuties'

Where will we as a culture draw a line in the sand?

BY MARK TAPSON

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/09/critics-rush-defend-netflixs-pre-teen-twerking-mark-tapson/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow on Popular Culture for the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The brilliant satirical website Babylon Bee recently posted another gem of a faux headline:  “Awesome: Netflix Will Now Just Pump Septic Waste Straight Into Your Living Room,” poking fun at the streaming entertainment service’s reputation for pushing increasingly controversial and offensive content. But Netflix’s latest offering is no joke: a French flick that veers into the realm of child pornography.

Cuties (originally Mignonnes), which debuted Thursday on Netflix, is the story of Amy, 11, a Senegalese girl growing up in Paris who rebels against her conservative Muslim immigrant family and seeks the approval of a bullying quartet of fellow 11-year-old girls who are absolutely clueless about sex but who nevertheless believe dressing and acting like prostitutes is the key to popularity (the ages of the actresses at the time of filming are unclear, but reportedly range from 11-14). Their aimless lives center on rehearsing sexed-up choreography to a rap song for a local dance contest.

As Amy becomes desperate to escape the stultifying, traditional expectations of the women in her family, she exhibits increasingly wanton behavior, such as posting a pic of her genitalia on social media and teaching the other girls how to rev up their dance routine by twerking (if you are mercifully ignorant about twerking, it’s a very popular move derived from strip-club lap dancing, in which females squat and shake their rear ends up and down like primates presenting themselves for mating; needless to say, this is wildly inappropriate for pre-teens). The movie culminates in an extended, raunchy dance performance in which the camera lingers repellently on the scantily-clad little girls’ pelvic gyrations, come-hither looks, and suggestive touching – of themselves and each other.

SPOILER ALERT:

During the performance, Amy is horrified onstage by the sudden revelation of what she has become, and she turns her back on both that downward spiral and her family's traditions, to find liberation in her own identity. But the transcendent ending of self-purification and newfound innocence feels utterly tacked-on, and it is too little, too late to rescue the film from the sense that we have been trapped in a pedophile’s dream.

END OF SPOILER

Cuties has lit such a firestorm of controversy and anti-Netflix backlash that the hashtag #CancelNetflix has been trending on Twitter as people cancelled their subscriptions en massein protest. Politicians have even weighed in. Sen. Josh Hawley called out Netflix on Twitter, with a screenshot highlighting posts to the parental guidance page of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb), where warnings about nudity and sexual scenes are shown. Those warnings (see below) have since mysteriously disappeared from IMDb.

Sen. Ted Cruz has written to Attorney General William Barr requesting an investigation into whether the production or distribution of the film has broken any laws against child pornography.

Netflix did concede that its marketing for the film – a movie poster depicting the little girls posing provocatively like strippers – was, to put it mildly, a mistake, and it apologized in the wake of an earlier tsunami of justifiable public outrage. But Netflix stands by the film itself. “Cuties is a social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” a spokesperson said in its defense. “It’s an award-winning film and a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society more generally growing up — and we’d encourage anyone who cares about these important issues to watch the movie.”

It’s social commentary! It’s art! And it’s award-winning! But as Breitbart News’ John Nolte wrote in his review, “Cuties is not an indictment of the sexualization of children. Cutiessexualizes children,” and portrays the young girls’ twerking ultimately as a “path to enlightenment and growth.”

Predictably, the left-leaning mainstream film critics have leapt to the movie’s defense, calling it “extraordinary” and “inspired” and dismissing its detractors as uptight “scandal-mongers on the right.” “It’s actually a sensitive portrait of growing pains that deserves to be seen,” Rolling Stone reassured its few remaining readers.

The New Yorker’s Richard Brody dismissed the “scurrilous campaign” from conservatives he claims simply don’t understand the movie. “The subject of Cuties isn’t twerking,” he insists. “It’s children, especially poor and nonwhite children, who are deprived of the resources — the education, the emotional support, the open family discussion — to put sexualized media and pop culture into perspective.”

RogerEbert.com critic Monica Castillo also argued that the movie “actively critiques the very thing pearl-clutchers were mad about — the sexualization of children.” Mashable critic Angie Han chimed in similarly: “It’s upsetting, and it’s supposed to be — because the whole point of Cuties is how damn hard it can be for girls to navigate womanhood in a society that’s all too eager to tell girls and women what they should be, and not at all interested in what they might be or want to be.”

This argument is delusional; it is actually feminism, not “society,” that is all too eager to tell girls and women what they should be and is not at all interested in what they might be or want to be. Cuties reflects a sexualized pop culture that feminism has intentionally created, to “liberate” our daughters from the patriarchal chains of the nuclear family.

Tim Robey at the UK Telegraph praised the film as “a provocative powder-keg for an age terrified of child sexuality” (emphasis added) – a description that says much more about Tim Robey than it does about the purported prudes he is sneering at. He tittered approvingly that it has “pissed off all the right people” – by which he means people who vehemently oppose the sexual exploitation of children under a patina of art.

But Los Angeles Times critic Justin Chang praised the movie as not at all “exploitative,” condemning its detractors as “putative grownups” who “can never be bothered to do the hard work of looking at something, let alone learning from it.”

Well, I did the hard work. I watched Cuties, and I learned from it – or at least, it confirmed what I already knew, which is that the entertainment critics at mainstream media outlets will defend any perversity, any ugliness, any slog through the gutter, rather than seem judgmental or moralistic. None of them is willing to align themselves with the “scurrilous,” Philistine “pearl-clutchers” of the right who just don’t understand art. None of them is willing to admit that they are apologists for an inherently exploitative showbiz industry that is populated with pedophiles at the highest cultural and political levels who have a vested interest in normalizing the sexualization of children.

Breitbart’s Nolte points out that “a full 88 percent of critics approve of Cuties, Netflix’s piece of soft-core child pornography, while only three percent of the audience agree.” This speaks volumes about the vast chasm that lies between the worldview of our leftist cultural elites and that of everyday Americans, who are becoming increasingly repulsed by the sinful excesses of pop culture.

The critics are tragically correct about one thing: our culture hyper-sexualizes women and children and shows no sign of reining that in. We are submerged in a cultural cesspool of such bottomless degeneracy that the number one song in the country is a steaming pile of rap pornography called “WAP” (as in, “wet-ass pussy”), marketed by a music video that glamorizes self-proclaimed “whores” (that is the female rappers’ own word, not mine). Shame on us. And yet the Democrat Party legitimizes former stripper Cardi B, the Grammy-winning “recording artist” behind that hit song, by letting her interview empty-suit presidential nominee Joe Biden for Elle magazine (because even fashion magazines now are leftist propaganda outlets.)

So yes, Cuties’ purported message that today’s little girls don’t know how to navigate our sexualized culture is a very real issue. And who made our culture what it is today? Who dragged our values down to the point at which a movie like Cuties is nearly unanimously defended by our media elites? Answer: the secular libertines of the Marxist left, whose relentless aim has been, and still is, to undermine the values and family structure of Western civilization, to push the envelope of “art” until no envelope even exists anymore, until there are literally no moral boundaries, no limits, no line in the sand.

If a movie that sexualizes children can be defended by claiming it is a critique of the sexualization of children, then what cannot be defended? It’s hard to imagine how our culture could degenerate even lower, but it can and it will unless enough Americans with a moral compass find the backbone to say no more, to put an end to the left’s domination of our media and entertainment.

 
 

FEDERAL JUDGE RULES GOVERNOR WOLF’S COVID RESTRICTIONS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The judgment says: “(1) that the congregate gathering limits imposed by defendants’ mitigation orders violate the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment; (2) that the stay-at-home and business closure components of defendants’ orders violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; and (3) that the business closure components of defendants’ orders violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

US District Judge William Stickman IV, a Trump appointee, ruled on the lawsuit brought by business owners and Republicans

SEE: https://christianaction.org/top-stories-of-the-day/u-s-judge-rules-pa-governors-strict-lockdown-measures-are-unconstitutional/

EXCERPT: "Like most Democrats Wolf is also obsessed with homosexuality, and, strangely, announced that the state would use COVID-19 data collection to also gather data on Pennsylvanians’ sexual orientations and “gender identity.”" 

SEE ALSO: https://christianaction.org/top-stories-of-the-day/leftist-pa-governor-gears-states-coronavirus-strategy-toward-homosexuality/

_________________________________________________________________________________

BY RAVEN CLABOUGH

SEE: https://christianaction.org/top-stories-of-the-day/leftist-pa-governor-gears-states-coronavirus-strategy-toward-homosexuality/

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV ruled this week that Democratic Pennsylvania Governor's Tom Wolf’s coronavirus restrictions were unconstitutional.

“The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms — in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble,” Stickman wrote in his 66-page opinion.

The plaintiffs in the case include various businesses such as hair salons and drive-in theaters, and several Republican lawmakers — U.S. Representative Mike Kelly and State Representatives Marci Mustello, Tim Bonner, and Daryl Metcalfe.

The original plaintiffs also included the counties of Washington, Butler, Greene, and Fayette, but the defendants argued that the County Plaintiffs were “not proper plaintiffs,” a point with which Judge Stickman agreed before dismissing the counties as plaintiffs.

“While counties may undoubtedly litigate in many circumstances, as Defendants aptly note, well established law prohibits the County Plaintiffs from bringing claims of constitutional violations.... As such, the County Plaintiffs are not proper parties and cannot obtain relief in this case,” Stickman wrote.

Monday’s ruling marks an important victory for Pennsylvania residents, as previous rulings rejected challenges to Wolf’s orders. The Hill observes that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had ruled in July that the state legislature could not end the coronavirus shutdown.

But Judge Stickman determined that Governor Wolf superseded his authority in his response to the public health crisis.

Judge Stickman determined that the administration’s actions were “undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency,” but added that emergencies do not grant government “unfettered” authority.

“There is no question that this country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment,” Stickman wrote. “The constitution cannot accept the concept of a ‘new normal’ where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures.”

Several coronavirus restrictions have been deemed unconstitutional by the ruling, including the state’s gathering limits, which Judge Stickman determined violates the First Amendment right to assembly. Pennsylvania’s stay-at-home and business closures violated the due process clause the Equal Protection clause of the Fourth Amendment, the judge ruled.

Thomas W. King, III, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told Pittsburgh's Action News 4."You can't tell 13 million Pennsylvanians that they have to stay home. That's not America. It never was. That order was horrible."

Thomas E. Breth, another attorney for the plaintiffs, asserts that the plaintiffs are not challenging some of the other guidelines, including wearing masks and maintaining social distance and are still willing to “abide by those guidelines.”

“They just want to be able to operate their businesses to make a living, go about their lives as they're protected by the U.S. Constitution," Breth said.

One plaintiff, Taste of Sicily in Lebanon, said the business had received more than $10,000 in fines from the Commonwealth for refusing to stay closed for more than two months. Owner Christine Wartluft celebrates Judge Stickman’s ruling, but is concerned that the fight is not over.

“The judge’s ruling is a victory, but we are not walking in ignorance and know that Governor Wolf will strike back due to his heartlessness and pride” Christine Wartluft, a co-owner of Taste of Sicily, told the Daily Caller. “We will continue to fight this governor and will show him the same relentlessness that he has shown our great state.”

Governor Wolf’s office has already indicated it will seek a stay of the decision and file an appeal. The governor’s press secretary states Wolf’s actions were no different from those taken by governors across the country.

"The actions taken by the administration were mirrored by governors across the country and saved, and continue to save lives in the absence of federal action,” Kensinger said. “This decision is especially worrying as Pennsylvania and the rest of the country are likely to face a challenging time with the possible resurgence of COVID-19 and the flu in the fall and winter."

Current restrictions in Pennsylvania include limiting indoor gatherings to 25 people, outdoor gatherings to 250 people, and indoor dining to 25-percent occupancy, though that is expected to rise to 50 percent on September 21, CBS Pittsburgh reports.

According to the New York Times, Pennsylvania’s cases are “lower and staying low.”

__________________________________________________________________________________

LEBANON/PALMYRA, PA TASTE OF SICILY RESTAURANT:

"WE AIN'T PAYING CRAP"

Mike Mangano speaks. Elected officials and community members gather at a protest in support of Taste of Sicily, a Palmyra-based restaurant that's been allowing customers to have sit-down meals in violation of Gov. Tom Wolf's reopening plan.
June 5, 2020. 
Dan Gleiter | dgleiter@pennlive.com

From left to write, Taste of Sicily owners Pero Popovic, Christine Wartluft, Silvana Drill and Christian Wartluft.

Elected officials and community members gather at a protest in support of Taste of Sicily, a Palmyra-based restaurant that's been allowing customers to have sit-down meals in violation of Gov. Tom Wolf's reopening plan.
June 5, 2020. 
Dan Gleiter | dgleiter@pennlive.com

SEE ALSO: https://www.pennlive.com/news/2020/07/lebanon-countys-taste-of-sicily-restaurant-has-10k-in-fines-but-no-plans-to-close-dining-room-we-aint-paying-crap.html?ref=hvper.com

 

 

 

TRUMP EXPANDS ORDER DEFUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD

BY RICK MORAN

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/09/15/trump-expands-order-defunding-planned-parenthood-n932689;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Donald Trump is expanding his 2017 executive order that built on the nation’s “Mexico City Policy” to cut off more streams of revenue from international organizations providing or promoting abortions overseas.

Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers were prevented from accessing hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer funds. And the proposal to expand the order could lead to even more cuts to their funding.

Life News:

According to the Catholic News Agency, the proposal expands the Mexico City Policy to include military and government contracts overseas.

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser praised the Trump administration for “boldly defending life” across the world.

“From day one, they have championed innovative policies to protect unborn children and their mothers, as well as taxpayers,” Dannenfelser said. “This new proposed rule builds on that success, further preventing the big abortion industry from exporting abortion on demand around the world on American taxpayers’ dime.”

President Ronald Reagan’s original Mexico City Policy affected about $600 million in USAID grants. Trump’s expansion of the policy will be global in reach.

Catholic News:

The expanded Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy covers nearly $9 billion in U.S. foreign aid under the State Department, USAID, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Department of Defense. This includes, for example, grants to foreign NGOs under international health programs to fight AIDS and infectious diseases, or to provide maternal and child nutrition.

Pro-abortion groups are not pleased. Planned Parenthood tweeted on Monday about the “unprecedented expansion of a harmful policy.”

The expanded rule would “require all groups that receive global health aid contracts to agree not to promote and/or provide elective abortions.” Those that do will not receive taxpayer funds.

When Trump first proposed the rule in 2017, Planned Parenthood warned of an unmitigated disaster with “gaps” in health care coverage in the Third World. But a state department report published earlier this year disputes that idea. They found very few gaps were created and those that were were filled by governments or private donations.

Life News:

Just eight of the 1,340 groups that received U.S. aid money under the Obama administration refused to comply with Trump’s new pro-life policy, according to the report. An additional 47 sub-awardees also refused to comply, the report found.

“Principled pro-life policies can exist hand and hand with … quality health care,” a Trump administration official told reporters.

The few, limited health care disruptions were due to Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups’ own decision to refuse to comply with the policy. In doing so, they placed the killing of unborn babies in abortions at a higher priority than real, life-saving health care for impoverished women and families across the globe.

If Planned Parenthood wants to save the Third World by killing babies, it can use part of its billion-dollar budget not funded by U.S. taxpayers to do it.

Poll: 83% of Americans Back Trump Reversal of Obama’s Overseas Abortion Funding
New Poll: Most Pro-Choice Americans, Even Democrats, Favor Abortion Restrictions
Fact-Checking the 2020 Democrats on Abortion

__________________________________________________________________________

Trump Administration Seeks to Further Restrict International Abortion Funding

BY JAMES MURPHY

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/37047-trump-administration-seeks-to-further-restrict-international-abortion-funding;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Trump administration signaled on Monday that it wishes to further restrict federal funds going to international abortion providers. A proposed new rule would require foreign entities that receive aid through contracts with the U.S. Government to agree not to provide or promote abortion as a family-planning method.

The proposed legislation is an expansion of the “Mexico City Policy,” which blocks federal funding for international NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) that either promote or provide abortions. First enacted by Ronald Reagan in 1984, the Mexico City Policy has been a political seesaw ever since. Since it is an executive order, it can be rescinded when another president takes office. Bill Clinton rescinded the rule in 1993, George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 and Barack Obama again rescinded it in 2009.

Called a “global gag rule” by opponents, Donald Trump re-instituted the protocol in 2017 and now looks to expand upon it by including international groups that receive funding — even through military and government contracts — to agree not to promote or provide elective abortions. The new rule would deny funding for any global health organization — even those that don't specialize in family planning — if they provide or counsel for abortions.

The protocol changes, dubbed Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA), can be read in the Federal Register.

Pro-life groups were ecstatic about the proposed rule change. “We thank President Trump and Secretary Pompeo for boldly defending life on the world stage. From day one they have championed initiative policies to protect unborn children and their mothers, as well as taxpayers,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List. “This new proposed rule builds on that success, further preventing the big abortion industry from exporting abortion on demand around the world on American taxpayers' dime.”

Opponents of the rule change argue that because of the abortion restrictions, groups that offer other services such as HIV treatment, family planning, tuberculosis testing and treatment, and maternal and child nutrition services have already been adversely affected by the Mexico City Policy.

“This administration is fully aware that the global gag rule is coercive and demonstrably hurts women and families worldwide,” read a statement from Zara Ahmed, the associate director of Federal Issues for the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion think tank.

“By choosing to expand it even further, they are intentionally depriving people of live-saving and essential reproductive healthcare all over the globe in service of a manipulative ideological agenda.”

Planned Parenthood Global called the new rule “yet another unprecedented expansion of a harmful policy.”

But a State Department report issued in August found that the effect on the vast majority of health service grants issued by the government would be negligible since most participants agreed to the requirements.

“The majority of foreign NGOs that receive US global health assistance funding have accepted the terms of PLGHA in their awards. In total, only eight out of 1,340 prime awardees with awards in place between May 2017 and September 30, 2018, have declined to agree to the Policy, as well as a small portion of sub-awardees.”

So, it's simple. Just stop providing and promoting abortions and the NGOs can have taxpayer money to treat whatever disease or malady that they're willing and able to treat.  Any NGO that refuses to comply with the rule is choosing abortion over all those other services that they claim are necessary.

What the Mexico City Policy really hurts is only the abortion industry. Because of the policy International Planned Parenthood Federation was forced to close 22 abortion mills in sub-Saharan Africa as of 2018. British abortion provider Marie Stopes International was also forced to shut down several African facilities.

The proposed new rule is just another small, incremental step in the battle to rid the world of the scourge of abortion. As soon as a Democrat gets back into the White House, the Mexico City Policy will almost certainly be rescinded quickly. But it's another signal that President Trump — whose views on abortion were admittedly shaky before taking office — has become possibly the most pro-life president of the modern era.

 

 

 

GERMANY’S CORONA TYRANNY: STUDENT REVEALS TEACHERS FORCE THEM TO WEAR MASKS DESPITE OVERTURNED GERMAN MANDATE (VIDEO)

BY AMY MEK

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/corona-tyranny-student-reveals-teachers-force-them-to-wear-masks-despite-overturned-german-mandate-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Schools in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany ended their controversial compulsory mask requirement in schools on August 31, 2020. Although there is no longer a mandate, a students explains teachers are using manipulative methods to force students to wear the Chinese coronavirus masks.

In the following video translated by RAIR Foundation USA, a female student explains the actions teachers are taking to force students to wear masks:

Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/

Read the following RAIR articles on Germany and the coronavirus, ranging from mandatory and forced vaccinations, to politicians warning of the false information being spread by Merkel’s government:

Many thanks to Miss Piggy for the translation:

So, people, since I recently returned to school, yesterday, I could clearly recognize how deceptively the schools operate. Although the mandatory mask requirement in the classroom for schools [in NRW] was overturned, what they are doing now is really clever.

As soon as students enter the classroom, the windows and doors are all opened. All the students are sitting there with, really, every window open. Doors too. There’s an enormous draft. It’s freezing cold.

Then the teacher says, “We’ll close the window when you put your masks on”.

So you have the choice between getting sick because you’re freezing the entire time in school or you put the sh***y mask on. Most comply at that point.

Teachers come into classes saying, “Oh, yes, I know there isn’t a mask requirement, but nevertheless I would ask you to put your masks on so we protect each other.”

Students are being directly manipulated.

I’m talking about students from the age of 19 or 20 years old at vocational schools.

Maybe even 25 years old or whatever. They acquiesce directly.

There are other methods. A teacher is wearing a mask and mumbling.

Teachers who put masks on purposefully mumble behind their masks so that no one can understand.

When the students say they can’t understand, or we can’t understand, the teacher’s ice-cold response is, “That’s your problem.

If you put on your masks, then I’ll take mine off.”

That’s how it works now. Absolutely manipulative. Extremely disgusting.

Yes, it would be interesting to see how it is at elementary schools, and I am going to find out.

If children in the elementary school are sitting in drafty classrooms and start getting sick because of this manipulative crap, then I think we as parents aren’t finished with this topic yet.

It looks like we celebrated too soon after hearing that the mask requirement was overturned.

Imagine students sitting in classroom in this horrible weather in a nonstop draft, and being oppressed by this method. Totally manipulated.

The choice is either you put your masks on or you sit here in the freezing cold, getting sick.

Either you put your masks on or you can’t understand a thing I say.

It’s a filthy trick. I’m outraged.

It’s just completely disgusting how manipulative the teachers are acting.

Unbelievable. Unbelievable. Have a nice day.

You can follow Amy Mek on Twitter at @AmyMek, and on Parler at @AmyMek.

 
1 63 64 65 66 67 72