By Cliff Kincaid
Some scoff at the concept of a “Deep State” as a “conspiracy theory.” But nobody knows the truth better than Senator Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, who once questioned why Trump would fight the intelligence agencies, since “they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.” The phrase “six ways from Sunday” means in every possible way. Another common formulation is “by any means necessary.”
The U.S. Secret Service intercepted a Ricin-laced letter with the words, “If it doesn’t work, I will find a better recipe,” addressed to President Trump. Pascale Ferrier, a Canadian previously deported from the U.S., was apprehended and charged on September 24 with threatening to kill the president by using the poison. She was arrested with a loaded gun and a knife and had previously tweeted a hashtag supportive of killing Trump.
The Ferrier case seems like the work of a bumbling amateur, although Ricin (and Novichok) are poisons known to be used by the remnants of the Soviet KGB. Assassination plots involving the CIA are usually more sophisticated.
For those inclined to dismiss the idea of hit squads or assassins targeting American figures, consider the mysterious 2010 death of former presidential aide John P. Wheeler, the subject of a new “Unsolved Mysteries” story on Netflix. His body was found at the Cherry Island Landfill in Joe Biden’s state of Delaware. Wheeler, who associated with members of the political and military elite, was said by his wife to have looked “frightened” before his death. Described as the “Washington Insider Murder,” he was also said to have many “enemies” from his work in the national defense area.
Another Washington insider, Trump Attorney General William Barr, also seems frightened. He disclosed that the probe into Obamagate won’t produce a report until after the election. Obamagate involves how the Obama-Biden Administration used the intelligence agencies to destroy and obstruct the Trump presidency, using material supplied by Russia and paid for by Hillary Clinton.
Investigator Chris Farrell asks why Barr fights Judicial Watch in virtually every Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records over the Obamagate coup plot. Farrell, who was banned by Fox for criticizing George Soros on the Lou Dobbs show, has also drawn attention to CIA director Gina Haspel’s role in Obamagate.
The FBI is headed by Christopher Wray, who was nominated by Trump but sat on the evidence of corruption in Hunter Biden’s laptop for almost a year. (The FBI has since reportedly interviewed Hunter business associate Tony Bobulinski).
On top of this cover-up, Big Tech has censored evidence of Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden’s involvement in his son’s schemes involving China and Ukraine.
The Department of Justice has filed suit against Google, the gatekeeper of the Internet, over exercising monopoly control over how the American people get their news, but the action comes too late to make a real difference on November 3.
Barr’s failures tell us a lot about the power of the Deep State.
Barr, who previously worked for the CIA, had organized support for the FBI sniper who killed Randy Weaver’s wife in the 1992 Ruby Ridge operation. She was killed as she was holding her baby daughter in her arms.
Ruby Ridge is the scandal involving the FBI and ATF assaulting a right-wing figure, a so-called “white supremacist,” living in Idaho who had been set up on a charge of selling an illegal weapon, a sawed-off shotgun.
Wanting to demonstrate their power, federal agencies staged an armed attack on Weaver’s family. Weaver’s 14-year-old son was shot to death by federal Marshalls carrying machine guns. Weaver was found not guilty of assaulting federal officers.
Ruby Ridge was followed by the federal siege of the Waco religious compound on April 19, 1993, when more than eighty men, women and children were shot or burned to death. Federal agencies attacked the compound of a religious cult, the Branch Davidians, on the pretext that children were being abused. They could have apprehended the leader of the religious compound without killing all those people. It was another demonstration of their power.
The Obama and Epstein Cover-Ups
As author Jack Cashill has demonstrated in his book, Unmasking Obama, federal agencies were used in other ways under the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, such as the IRS attacks on conservative and Tea Party groups. Most importantly, the FBI covered-up the evidence of Obama’s debt to communist Frank Marshall Davis and his patron, the old Soviet Union.
Years later, the Jeffrey Epstein scandal remains unresolved, even as the media mock some conservatives for believing in the existence of a high-level pedophile ring. Cindy McCain, who says “We all knew what he [Epstein] was doing,” has endorsed Biden for president. Her husband, who lost a winnable election against Obama in 2008, peddled the phony Hillary-financed Russian dossier to the FBI.
Mitt Romney, the Utah Republican Senator who voted to impeach Trump, ran as the Republican presidential candidate in 2012 and lost to Obama. Trump blames Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, for moving Fox News to the left, as Ryan joined the board of Fox Corporation in 2019.
My own coverage of Ruby Ridge and Waco, which occurred during the Clinton Administration, were among the major incidents convincing me that important agencies of the federal government were compromised and hopelessly corrupt. Another eye-opening episode was the crash of TWA Flight 800, which resulted in the deaths of 230 passengers and crew on July 17, 1996. Federal “investigators” blamed a fuel tank explosion when eyewitnesses saw missiles hit the plane. The CIA actually produced a video showing the huge nose-less jet ascending like a rocket, an aeronautical impossibility.
In 1993 I covered the strange death of Clinton White House deputy counsel Vincent Foster, a murder labeled a “suicide” in an Independent Counsel investigation led by a Republican named Kenneth Starr and his assistant, prosecutor Brett Kavanaugh. Evidence demonstrated the existence of a shadowy group of operatives who would intimidate a witness, Patrick Knowlton, with information contradicting the government’s story. Foster had access to the secrets of Hillary Clinton and the National Security Agency (NSA).
David Martin’s new book, The Murder of Vince Foster: America’s Would-Be Dreyfus Affair, examines the case, including alleged Foster connections to drug smuggling, the CIA, and organized crime.
Starr later became a Fox News contributor, a supposed expert on the impeachment campaign against Trump, while Kavanaugh was nominated by Trump to the Supreme Court. It was another indication that the Swamp occupies both side of the “partisan divide” and affects both major political parties. Starr, by the way, was a legal counsel for Jeffrey Epstein.
In the Bush Administration, we would learn that federal operatives from the FBI, and perhaps other agencies, would be deployed to frame patriotic American scientists for the post-9/11 anthrax attacks carried out with anthrax stolen from a U.S. lab. One scientist, Steven Hatfill, would collect millions of dollars from the Department of Justice in damages over his harassment, while another, Bruce Ivins, would end up dead after being persecuted by federal agents under the direction of then-FBI Director and future Russia-gate special counsel Robert Mueller.
Former Louisiana state Senator John Milkovich, a Democrat, wrote a book on Robert Mueller, subtitled “Errand boy for the New World Order,” looking at his role in matters such as 9/11, organized crime figure Whitey Bulger, and the crooked bank BCCI.
Mueller keeps emerging at sensitive times in American history, when the federal government wants to perpetuate a certain story line about a delicate national security matter.
What’s absolutely clear is that Trump, a true outsider to Washington, has enemies here and abroad.
Concern about Trump’s physical health and safety accelerated after he was infected by the China virus at the first presidential debate, leading author J.C. Hawkins to speculate that he was infected “by a rogue Secret Service agent or staff member secretly working for The Deep State.”
Various reports had indicated that seven people who attended judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination announcement, held outside at the White House, tested positive for the coronavirus. But former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who also came down with the virus and was hospitalized, said that he had last tested negative ahead of the first presidential debate and was not having any symptoms then.
The Cleveland Clinic, the debate co-host, subsequently acknowledged that 11 people involved in debate preparation tested positive. We still don’t know who they are.
Weeks after this, Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan displayed the anti-Trump “86/45” sign during a TV appearance. The number “86” can be shorthand for killing someone. Whitmer had been on Joe Biden’s short list for vice-presidential candidates.
One does not have to be a “conspiracy theorist” to see a disturbing pattern.
*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org
Decades of gross bias and disinformation
by Joseph Klein, frontpagemag.com
National Public Radio (NPR) does not serve the American taxpayers who are paying its bills. Most recently, NPR did its part to shield Joe Biden from the fallout of the Biden family pay-for-access corruption scheme. That’s nothing new. NPR has long served as the leftwing progressive Democrat Party’s propaganda arm. Back in 2016, for example, NPR shilled for the disastrous nuclear deal pushed by the Obama administration, after receiving funding from a pro-nuclear deal advocacy group. It is long past time to end the gravy train and defund NPR.
On October 22nd, NPR’s public editor rationalized NPR’s decision to suppress coverage of the New York Post’s expose of the Hunter Biden e-mails implicating Joe Biden himself in his son’s business dealings. NPR’s managing editor Terence Samuel tweeted: “We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.”
The Media Research Center retorted: “How exactly is doing what is supposed to be your job of reporting and investigating a story with credible sources to be a ‘waste of time?’
David Folkenflik, NPR’s media correspondent, tried to kill the messenger that broke the story on the e-mails which were reportedly recovered from Hunter Biden’s laptop computer. Folkenflik attacked the New York Post as “suspect” and speculated “whether those emails were somehow hacked and doctored, or completely fabricated.” Folkenflik repeated the baseless claim, debunked by the FBI and Director of National Intelligence, that the New York Post story may have been part of Russia’s disinformation campaign.
News flash to NPR: You are paid by the American people to report the news and let the people make up their own minds as to what stories constitute a waste of their time or are “distractions.” If we want Big Brother to tell us what we should listen to and read, we might as well move to Communist China.
In late August 2020, NPR’s Code Switch department gave Vicky Osterweil, author of In Defense of Looting, a free platform to spout the leftist’s support for looting as a vital aspect of the Black Lives matter movement. There was no pushback from the NPR interviewer. “When I use the word looting, I mean the mass expropriation of property, mass shoplifting during a moment of upheaval or riot,” Osterweil said. “It gets people what they need for free immediately, which means that they are capable of living and reproducing their lives without having to rely on jobs or a wage…riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.”
After the fact, NPR’s public editor, Kelly McBride, tried to clean up the mess created by this interview, writing that “a book author with a radical point of view far to the left was allowed to spread false information.” But it was too little too late. NPR allowed itself to be used to disseminate disinformation, which it has regularly done with a sharp tilt to the left. This was the same Kelly McBride who defended NPR’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop e-mails story.
Talking about spreading disinformation, NPR served as one of the principal mouthpieces pushing the Obama administration’s talking points in favor of the disastrous nuclear deal with Iran. NPR’s ombudsman criticized the network for accepting money from the Ploughshares Fund, which was part of the “echo chamber” of organizations, experts and reporters that the Obama White House had set up to positively shape public opinion on the Iran nuclear deal. The ombudsman took the network to task for “the large number of Ploughshares-funded analysts and experts who made it on the air to talk up the deal, without any acknowledgement of that by NPR.” However, while saying that “NPR’s money came from one side of a very partisan debate on a specific issue to fund reporting on a specific topic,” NPR’s ombudsman ended up exonerating NPR. She concluded that “NPR did not accept money to report favorably on the Iran deal.” If you believe that, you’ll believe anything!
Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser, explained the echo chamber strategy in a 2016 article appearing in the New York Times Magazine. “In the absence of rational discourse,” Rhodes said, “we are going to discourse the [expletive] out of this. We had test drives to know who was going to be able to carry our message effectively, and how to use outside groups like Ploughshares, the Iran Project and whomever else. So we knew the tactics that worked.”
Ploughshares gave NPR $100,000 in 2015 “to help it report on the pact and related issues, according to the group’s annual report,” the Associated Press revealed. “Ploughshares has funded NPR’s coverage of national security since 2005, the radio network said. Ploughshares reports show at least $700,000 in funding over that time. All grant descriptions since 2010 specifically mention Iran.” Joseph Cirincione, Ploughshares’ president, appeared on NPR at least twice in 2015 promoting the nuclear deal negotiations.
George Soros’s leftwing Open Society Foundations have been major funders of both Ploughshares and NPR. In 2016 alone, the Open Society Foundations bestowed NPR with a $600,000 grant.
Back in 2011, NPR’s senior director of institutional giving at the time, Betsy Liley, was caught on video expressing a willingness to accept a $5 million donation from a fictitious Muslim Brotherhood front group called the Muslim Education Action Center (MEAC) Trust. She even suggested how NPR could help the group shield itself from a government audit. This was all uncovered in a sting operation conducted by the conservative Project Veritas organization to expose how far NPR was willing to subvert government oversight to fund its biased programming. The sting also caught Ron Schiller, who was then the president of the NPR Foundation and vice president for development, making an anti-Semitic remark. “Zionist influence” doesn’t exist at NPR, Schiller said, but “it’s there in those who own newspapers obviously.”
Liley was placed on administrative leave. Ron Schiller and NPR president and CEO Vivian Schiller (no relation) resigned. But NPR continues to reek of anti-Semitism in some quarters.
Just last August, for example, a National Public Radio member station fired a Jewish meteorologist because he compared the Seattle riots and looting to Kristallnacht in a post on his own personal blog. Jewish residents and Jewish-owned businesses were being attacked in Seattle and the meteorologist was drawing on a notorious historical comparison to express his fears. Since NPR is publicly funded, its firing of the Jewish meteorologist for writing his thoughts on his own blog would appear to violate his First Amendment rights. As a writer for Get Religion put it, “What is appalling is that NPR doesn’t know the difference between legitimate speech and hate speech. Or maybe hate speech is whatever social justice workers disagree with at the moment.”
The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 requires public broadcasters to operate with a “strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.” NPR has failed that test miserably for years. It does not deserve any further public funding. Let NPR go to Soros and other leftwing donors to stay afloat.
Who’s going to protect the children from the Bidens?
by Daniel Greenfield
The Hunter Biden laptop at the center of the political scandal had a sticker on it with the name of the Beau Biden Foundation. The sticker has been widely reported, but not its full name.
The full name of the foundation named after Joe Biden’s son and Hunter Biden’s brother is the Beau Biden Foundation for the Protection of Children. It’s both tragic and disgusting then that Rudy Giuliani has alleged that the laptop contained material involving underage girls.
It’s unclear if the Hunter Biden laptop actually belonged to the Beau Biden Foundation, but the The Mac Shop, at the center of the story, is in Wilmington, as is the Beau Biden Foundation. It’s a short drive down the 202 from the physical address of the foundation at the University of Delaware Law School to the Trolley Square address of the shop where the laptop ended up.
Earlier this year, the Beau Biden Foundation was one of the beneficiaries of grants from the Delaware COVID-19 Strategic Response Fund. The Biden foundation had received a $22,000 grant to provide “virtual training” to protect children from abuse. That is the sort of thing that the foundation, co-chaired by Hunter Biden and other Biden family members, does.
The Beau Biden Foundation for the Protection of Children claims that its mission is protecting children from child abuse, especially over the internet. It runs workshops, distributes ebooks, and offers training sessions to prevent children from being groomed by abusers online.
It’s deeply troubling then that Hunter Biden had apparently been accused of doing just that.
In one of the messages allegedly exchanged between Joe Biden and his son, the Democrat presidential candidate asks his son, “This is [redacted 14-year-old girl] right.”
“She told my therapist that I was sexually inappropriate with [redacted girl] when she says that I facetime naked with her and the reason I can’t have her out to see me is because I’ll walk around naked smoking crack talking [redacted] girls on face time,” Hunter replied.
Meanwhile the Beau Biden Foundation was offering lessons on how to spot online predators.
Some have speculated that this refers to Hallie Biden’s daughter. Hallie Biden, a fellow co-chair of the foundation, was also Beau’s widow and had been in a relationship with Hunter. If so this would have been a devastating indictment of the foundation’s leadership which was charging $3,000 for lessons on preventing online child abuse while its board members were involved in it.
READ MORE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/hunter-biden-chaired-foundation-stop-child-abuse-daniel-greenfield/
–But the New York Times Did
by Robert Spencer, pjmedia.com
Did the United States really have a good relationship with Adolf Hitler before he started World War II? Joe Biden made this bizarre claim during Thursday’s debate with President Trump. Trump said of North Korea’s Kim Jong Un: “North Korea, we’re not in a war. We have a good relationship. People don’t understand. Having a good relationship with leaders of other countries is a good thing.”
Biden shot back: “We had a good relationship with Hitler before he, in fact, invaded Europe, the rest of Europe. Come on.”
Come on, Joe! The U.S. didn’t have a good relationship with Hitler before he “invaded Europe. The German dictator was, however, beloved in certain quarters, including the editorial offices of the New York Times.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt didn’t attack Hitler directly before the war began, but relations between the U.S. and Nazi Germany were by no means good. In September 1938, Roosevelt sent a telegram to Hitler lecturing him about the importance of keeping the peace and stating: “The conscience and the impelling desire of the people of my country demand that the voice of their government be raised again and yet again to avert and to avoid war.” Implying that Hitler was a warmonger was hardly a hallmark of cordial relations between the two countries.
Failing to get a satisfactory response from Hitler, on October 11, 1938, Roosevelt announced that he was increasing national defense spending by $300 million (over $5 billion in today’s dollars). No one thought that money was going to build up our defenses against Britain and France.
Some in America, however, loved the Führer.
The historian Rafael Medoff recently noted that on July 9, 1933, just over five months after he became Chancellor of Germany and years after his virulent anti-Semitism and propensity for violence had become notorious worldwide, the New York Times published a fawning puff piece on Hitler that rivals even today’s media adulation of Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Nancy Pelosi in its one-sidedness, myopia, and disdain for essential facts.
Pulitzer Prize-winning “journalist” Anne O’Hare McCormick traveled to Berlin to become the first reporter from an American news outlet to interview the new chancellor, and she was an intriguing choice for the Times editors to make to conduct this interview, as in the presence of this man whose name has become justly synonymous with evil, she was decidedly starry-eyed: “At first sight,” McCormick gushed, “the dictator of Germany seems a rather shy and simple man, younger than one expects, more robust, taller. His sun-browned face is full and is the mobile face of an orator.”
As if that weren’t enough, she continues with a description of the Führer as outlandish and adulatory as likening the supremely zaftig Stacy Abrams to a supermodel: “His eyes are almost the color of the blue larkspur in a vase behind him, curiously childlike and candid. He appears untired and unworried. His voice is as quiet as his black tie and his double-breasted black suit.”
McCormick labored to portray Hitler as more modest than his public persona might suggest: “In the country he has plastered with banners and insignia he wears only a small gold eagle in his buttonhole. No flag or swastika is in sight.” He is also, she signaled to her readers, reasonable and genuine: “He begins to speak slowly and solemnly but when he smiles — and he smiled frequently in the course of the interview — and especially when he loses himself and forgets his listener in a flood of speech, it is easy to see how he sways multitudes. Then he talks like a man possessed, indubitably sincere.” What’s more, “Herr Hitler has the sensitive hand of the artist.”
The intrepid New York Times reporter doesn’t seem to have asked Hitler if he had a significant other, but no one would have been surprised after reading all this if the two of them had become an item.
However, McCormick’s interview was not all about Hitler’s sun-browned face and blue larkspur eyes. In the 29th paragraph of a 41-paragraph article, she recounts that she asked him: “How about the Jews? At this stage how do you measure the gains and losses of your anti-Semetic [sic] policies?” Hitler answered, she said, with “extraordinary fluency,” and she records his answer – a tissue of victim-blaming and excuse-making – at considerable length.
Then, McCormick recounts, “seeing the second part of the question was not going to be answered, your correspondent referred to the position of women.” Ah, yes: when the interviewee doesn’t want to answer the tough question, go on to something easier. The Times and its allies today always keep this in mind when interviewing Democrats. This surrender mollified Hitler as well: “Herr Hitler’s tension relaxed. He smiled his disarming smile.”
Little did Anne O’Hare McCormick realize, as Hitler’s blue larkspur eyes twinkled in her direction and his disarming smile made her heart flutter, that all these years later, the New York Times would still be publishing puff pieces about authoritarian thugs. And old Joe Biden, as he contemplates the approaching end of the presidential race from his Delaware basement, can rest secure in the certainty that no matter what outrageously false or crazy thing he says, that same New York Times will cover for him, too.
And its control of the culture
by Mark Tapson
As the revelations of international influence-peddling and multimillion-dollar corruption on the part of Joe Biden and his disgrace of a son go utterly ignored by the Democrat media, and suppressed on social media by Big Tech overlords Twitter and Facebook, it couldn’t be more obvious that the crisis in American journalism has peaked. That makes Sean Spicer’s new book, Leading America: President Trump’s Commitment to People, Patriotism, and Capitalism, all the more relevant and essential.
Former White House Press Secretary and Communications Director Spicer, also the author of the compelling account of his time in the White House titled The Briefing: Politics, the Press, and the President, has written another page-turning, eyewitness account of the volatile intersection of journalism and politics in America today. In ten highly readable, easily digestible chapters, each devoted to an aspect of left’s tightening grip on the culture, the normally calm and collected Spicer absolutely savages the Progressive activists in academia, the news media, and Hollywood. He also argues that re-electing President Trump is America’s only hope to win this “battle for the soul of this great nation.”
David Horowitz, founder of the Freedom Center and bestselling author, most recently, of Blitz: Trump Will Smash the Left and Win, sums it up in his jacket blurb for Leading America:
Sean Spicer has written an indispensable book about the destruction of American journalism by the American left. As an insider who was press secretary to President Trump, is now an anchor on Newsmax TV, and in between was a quarter-finalist among celebrity leftists on Dancing With the Stars, Spicer has written an irresistible insider’s book about the wars that are engulfing us as a nation and threatening our future.
Spicer begins the book setting up the state of the union in 2020 (“Welcome to the current state of American society, one in which all politics is personal and all persons are forced to be political”), and laying out what the stakes are in this critical, upcoming election. What are those stakes? The very principles of our nation, and the Constitution itself, which are threatened by today’s radical Democratic Party: “They will stop at nothing in their attempt to turn capitalism into socialism, patriotism into globalism, and American values into progressive values. They’re willing to run small businesses into economic ruin, turn academic institutions into harmful social experiment centers, use children as political pawns, and ruin America’s favorite pastimes with political polarization – and they’re leaving a nearly unrecognizable country in their wake.”
Then he moves on to a discussion of his wild ride on one of America’s top competition reality shows: “Just as they’ve done with everything else, the left turned a dancing reality show into a political battleground.”
When Spicer was approached about performing on the highly-rated Dancing with the Stars (DWTS) after his White House stint, he gradually realized it not only might be a lot of fun, but by diving into the left-dominated pop culture, it also would be a way to “prove that people from different backgrounds or with different beliefs could get along” – but “many in the media did not want to see that happen.”
Definitely not. The left was outraged that Trump spokesman Spicer would be treated with anything more civil than a public tarring-and-feathering, much less be showcased on one of America’s most popular shows rather than a televised war crimes tribunal. As Spicer threw himself into the gig with abandon – initially in a puffy-sleeved, fluorescent green shirt, no less – and kept surviving the cut each week, his many triggered critics scornfully suggested “that I was trying to redeem myself – or as the New York Times put it, I was wiping away my disgrace through dancing. Unfortunately for them, I was enjoying myself, having fun, and learning something different. I wasn’t asking for forgiveness.”
READ MORE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/leading-america-mark-tapson/
by John Hanson
On Monday, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe dismissed claims from Democrats and top media figures that the Hunter Biden email scandal was a Russian disinformation campaign.
The controversial emails reported by the New York Post, allegedly from Hunter Biden’s laptop, have been called such by Democrats like House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff.
Ratcliffe told Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo that Schiff was trying to politicize the intelligence community and cast an unfavorable light on it because he favored Hunter’s father, Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, in the upcoming election.
Ratcliffe Says Top Dem Schiff Playing
Politics With The Issue
“So Maria, it is funny that some of the people that complain the most about intelligence being politicized are the ones politicizing intelligence,” Ratcliffe said. He continued, “And unfortunately, in this case, it is Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who, as you pointed out, said on Friday the intelligence community believes that Hunter Biden’s laptop and the emails on it are part of some Russian disinformation campaign.”
READ MORE: https://thepoliticalinsider.com/dni-john-ratcliffe-says-hunter-bidens-laptop-is-not-part-of-some-russian-disinformation-campaign/?utm_campaign=TPI10192020BR1&utm_source=criticalimpact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=7d52785c5e9dc979a6473c7b9fa19141&source=TPICI
Photo from Shutterstock
They ‘Are Worthy of Life’
Posted by Zachary Mettler
President Trump condemned aborting babies with Down syndrome in a new presidential message on Thursday. The president said that all children, born or unborn, including those with Down syndrome “are worthy of life.”
His message was released to coincide with the beginning of October, which is National Down Syndrome Awareness Month.
President Trump noted that “around 6,000 babies are born with Down syndrome every year.”
“These treasured members of our society are sources of inspiration to the many families and communities graced by their lives. Those living with Down syndrome face unique challenges, reminding us every day that it is incumbent upon us as a nation, to continue empowering them to reach their full potential,” the president stated.
“My Administration reasserts its commitment to standing against those who seek to discriminate, devalue, and demean the sanctity of their lives.
“As our society progresses toward a more inclusive future, there are still those who pass judgment on which lives are worth living. As President, I denounce radical proposals to terminate pregnancies of unborn children with Down syndrome. Our Nation will continue to emphatically affirm the self-evident ideal that all children—born and unborn—are created in the image of God, are worthy of life, and deserve to be loved.”
In his presidential message, the president also touted the $35 million which the National Institutes of Health invested in 2019 towards more advanced Down syndrome research as well as another $60 million that was directed towards research in September 2020.
“These funds will lead to scientific breakthroughs and broaden our understanding of Down syndrome so that we can more effectively improve the health of these American citizens and expand their opportunities to thrive in our society,” President Trump noted.
Life News reports that around 250,000 Americans currently have Down syndrome. Between 1995 and 2011, 67% of preborn babies who tested positive for Down syndrome in the United States were aborted according to CBS.
President Trump concluded: “Our country must never run astray from the certitude that the lives of those with Down syndrome are precious and full of potential. During Down Syndrome Awareness Month, we are reminded that we must never waver in our efforts to support these individuals so that they can enrich the soul of our nation with their joy and love.”
by Lifezette, via thepoliticalinsider.com
A woman from California has just been arrested and charged with attempted murder after ramming her car through a crowd of supporters of President Donald Trump on Saturday.
The woman, who has since been identified as Tatiana Turner, was part of a Black Lives Matter “Caravan for Justice” group in Yorba Linda protesting the grand jury verdict in the death of Breonna Taylor. At about 3 p.m., Turner drove her car through a group of counter-protesters, many of whom were waving Trump flags, according to ABC News.
“Approximately 30 minutes after the protests began, we began to receive reports of physical altercations occurring between the two protest groups, including at least one individual who was pepper-sprayed by another protestor,” the Orange County Sheriff’s Department said.
Chilling footage appears to show Turner, 40, calmly get into her white car before deliberately driving it into the crowd of Trump supporters.
Two People Left Injured
One man and one woman were injured, and each of them were hospitalized.
“The man suffered two broken legs and the woman had major injuries,” Sgt. Dennis Breckner, of the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, told FOX LA. “Both were transported to a hospital for treatment of their injuries.”
On top of attempted murder, Turner has also been charged with assault with a deadly weapon. After her arrest, she was booked into the Orange County Jail, where records say she is being held on $1 million. Turner is due to have her first court appearance on Tuesday.
Media Virtually Ignores This Incident
Unsurprisingly, this incident is getting virtually no attention from the media, as it does not fit their narrative of Trump supporters being violent and deranged.
Had a Trump supporter driven through a crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters, it would be headline news for weeks with the mainstream media. When it’s the other way around, however, the media completely ignores it.
This just goes to show that despite what the left says, it’s liberals that you need to worry about when it comes to violent attacks.
This piece was written by James Samson on September 28, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.
Not ‘Worth The Trouble’
BY LIFEZETTE via thepoliticalinsider.com
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) backed down on Thursday and revealed that she won’t actually try and impeach President Donald Trump for a second time to block him from nominating someone to the Supreme Court.
“I don’t think he’s worth the trouble at this point, we have 40 days until the election,” Pelosi told reporters when asked if she will be trying to impeach the president again. “It’s no use orchestrating one thing or another when what really matters in terms of the peaceful transfer of power is that people vote.”
This comes days after Pelosi hinted in an interview that impeachment was not off the table, saying, “we have arrows in our quiver.”
“We have our options,” she told television host George Stephanopoulos. “This president has threatened to not even accept the results of the election with statements that he and his henchmen have made. Right now, our main goal — and I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg would want that to be to protect the integrity of the election — that we protect the American people from the coronavirus.”
Kevin McCarthy Fires Back
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) fired back by warning that he will introduce a motion to oust Pelosi if she dares to launch a second impeachment inquiry.
“I will make you this one promise, listening to the speaker on television this weekend, if she tries to move for an impeachment based upon the president following the Constitution, I think there will be a move on the floor to no longer have the question of her being Speaker. She may think she has a quiver — we do too,” McCarthy told reporters.
As for Trump, he plans to move forward with announcing his nominee on Saturday to fill the Supreme Court seat that was left vacated by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“I think it will be on Friday or Saturday and we want to pay respect, it looks like we will have services on Thursday or Friday, as I understand it, and I think we should, with all due respect for Justice Ginsburg, wait for services to be over,” Trump said.
by John Hanson, via thepoliticalinsider.com
On Monday, President Donald Trump addressed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refusing to rule out impeachment to prevent him from nominating a judge to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat on the Supreme Court.
“Go ahead. I want them to do that,” Trump said to supporters during a rally in Ohio.
Democratic Leaders Line Up To Threaten Impeachment Over Trump Supreme Court Pick
“I’m the only guy in the world that could get impeached for trying to fill a seat on the Supreme Court,” Trump said.
Pelosi told the New York Times on Monday that it was within her power to try to impeach Trump again.
“Well, we can impeach him every day of the week for anything he does,” Pelosi said.
ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos also asked Pelosi on Sunday during an interview if she would rule out impeachment after she said that every tool at her disposal would be considered to stop Trump’s Supreme Court pick from being confirmed.
Chuck Schumer And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Chime In
“We have our options,” Pelosi said. “We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now, but the fact is we have a big challenge in our country.”
Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made a similar comment alongside Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer during a press conference on Sunday night.
“I believe that also we must consider, again all of the tools available in our disposal and that all of these options should be entertained and on the table,” AOC said.
Schumer nodded in agreement. To read this entire article, go to: https://thepoliticalinsider.com/trump-dares-pelosi-to-try-to-impeachment-again-go-ahead/?utm_campaign=TPI09222020morning&utm_source=criticalimpact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=7d52785c5e9dc979a6473c7b9fa19141&source=TPICI
by Rusty Weiss, via thepoliticalinsider.com
Joe Biden delivered a version of the Pledge of Allegiance during his campaign speech in Wisconsin Monday that left many a viewer baffled.
It is yet another ‘gaffe’ by the former Vice President as the first presidential debate against Donald Trump looms in one week.
Biden began by stealing a similar line to his old boss, Barack Obama, regarding his disregard for ‘red states’ or ‘blue states.’
“[President Trump] has a deeply flawed and divisive view of the United States, this nation, and the job he holds,” declared Biden.
“I don’t see the presidency that way. I don’t pledge allegiance to red states of America or blue states of America,” he continued before delivering his version.
“I pledge allegiance to the United States of America. One nation, indivisible under God. For real.”
Yes, that is a direct quote.
Joe Biden’s Version of the Pledge of Allegiance
Considering Biden’s speeches and interviews are delivered using a teleprompter, his bumbling version of the Pledge is pretty remarkable.
We’re guessing he went off-script.
And once he headed down that road, there was no going back. For real. That’s when it became the CliffsNotes version of the Pledge.
The Pledge of Allegiance gaffe was similar to an effort this past March when Biden tried to recite a portion of the Declaration of Independence.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident,” he said.
“All men and women are created, by the, you know, go, you know the thing.”
This is why the Trump campaign is salivating at the prospect of cornering the Democrat nominee during a presumably unscripted debate.
Is There Something Going On?
This isn’t the first time Biden has made a perplexing statement, comment, or just generally off the wall crazy string of words.
Most recently, he claimed 200 million people would die from coronavirus before he finished his speech.
Earlier this summer, Biden said 120 million people had died from COVID-19.
President Trump called the remark “mortifyingly stupid.”
In February, Biden made the wildly inaccurate claim that 150 million Americans have died due to gun violence.
He confuses Iran and Iraq.
He’s confused about who is running for President.
He’s confused about who was President.
The pattern and track record led Fox News medical contributor, Dr. Marc Siegel, to offer an analysis of what might be happening.
“Back in 1988 former Vice President Biden had two aneurysms clipped in his brain using surgery, surgical techniques, and he had a bleed,” Siegel said.
“Studies show a 50% long-term cognitive problem. Now, what is cognition? It’s thinking, it’s memory, decision-making.”
“He’s also got atrial fibrillation, it’s a matter of public record, it’s an arrhythmia,” Siegel continued.
“Atrial fibrillation … a Swiss study just showed a couple of years ago in thousands of patients that there’s a 3 percent per year silent stroke where you can’t see it, except for changes in thinking.”
Whatever might be happening, these clips call into question Joe Biden’s fitness to lead America over the next four years.
By Cliff Kincaid – September 20, 2020
The “conservative” who vouched for the honesty and professionalism of Russia-gate prosecutor Robert Mueller has recommended that President Trump NOT appoint a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg before the election. Fortunately, Trump is ignoring the advice from former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy.
In a piece for National Review and Fox News, McCarthy called on Trump to refrain from nominating a replacement and instead use the vacancy as an issue in his campaign for president. He said “…the fact that the president has the power to name a replacement for Justice Ginsburg and that Republicans have a majority to get the nomination approved does not necessarily mean that that’s the smart play.”
McCarthy was trying to play the role of “smart” guy – smarter than Trump. It wasn’t convincing.
Trump has wisely rejected this approach, and indicates he will nominate a replacement in the next few days.
McCarthy is the writer who said Robert Mueller was a fine choice as Russia-gate prosecutor. He said, “Bob Mueller is a widely respected former prosecutor, U.S. attorney, high-ranking Justice Department official, and FBI director. He is highly regarded by both parties…He is a straight shooter, by the book, and studiously devoid of flash.”
How did that turn out? McCarthy later changed course, admitting Mueller’s probe was political and designed to destroy Trump. In fact, McCarthy wrote a book about the bad job Mueller did.
McCarthy was wrong about Mueller and he’s wrong about replacing Ginsburg. He is a weak and timid advocate for conservative values.
McCarthy wagered “that a determined Republican effort to replace Ginsburg in the coming weeks would increase the chance that Biden defeats Trump, and that Democrats take the Senate while holding the House. If that happens, Democrats will repeal the filibuster, add four to six seats to the Supreme Court, and pack it with liberal ideologues. Whatever benefit will have been achieved by confirming a Trump nominee will be overwhelmed.”
He argued that, “The best play, particularly if Republicans lack the Senate votes they need anyway, would be to use the vacancy as a core issue in the 2020 campaign.”
It’s hard to know if Republicans have the votes to confirm a replacement. They have a 53-47 margin. If they lose some Republicans, perhaps some Democrats will come over to their side. If they fail, at least they’ve tried. If they fail, Republican voters will know that Trump tried and that he was betrayed.
But at least Trump would have tried, and this is the course he’s chosen. That means he will nominate a replacement and we will have a hearing in which the real “legacy” of abortion of Ruth Bader Ginsburg will be exposed for all to see.
This is more bad advice from Andrew McCarthy, a major writer for conservative publications and a regular on Fox News. He has steered us down the wrong path before.
It appears that after he wrote this column, things changed, and it was updated. It now ends with this: “For now, President Trump is signaling (by tweet) that he intends in short order to announce a nominee to fill the vacancy left by Justice Ginsburg’s passing, and that he will push for Senate consideration. There is a good chance that he won’t get Senate consideration before the election . . . but that the nomination of a solid prospective justice, and the inevitable comparison of the kinds of jurists a Biden administration would appoint, will help the president’s reelection bid.”
So suddenly McCarthy changes from advising Trump to wait on a nomination to admitting that a replacement would “help” the president. This will have to go down as a major flip-flop in the history of policy reversals.
It was “emended,” which means to make corrections and clarifications.
What happened is that McCarthy was trying to guide the process and was completely ignored, so he changed gears.
Now we will be facing an endless series of articles about why Trump should have waited, and why his nominee may go down to defeat anyway. But by making this an issue of right to life versus the culture of death, Trump will win no matter what. It is a fight that has to take place. With more than 60 million abortions already in America since Roe v. Wade in 1973, Americas needs a “reckoning” on the matter of the meaning of life.
All lives matter. This is a real social justice issue.
The death of Ginsburg has made the sanctity of life into THE issue of the 2020 presidential campaign. Trump has wisely seized it.
Here, too, McCarthy misses the point, saying, “For all the Democrats’ hysteria about the purportedly imminent reversal of Roe v. Wade (that never happens), every time a conservative is appointed, the fact is that Republican judicial nominees are forces of stability who favor judicial restraint, enabling Americans to determine democratically how they wish to live.”
He neglects to mention that Roe v. Wade terminated the ability of the American people to decide by inserting a “right” to abortion in U.S. law and the Constitution. It’s not “judicial restraint” to keep that “right” where it does not belong. Roe v. Wade must be overturned.
In short, there is no “right” to terminate the life of another human being. Why can’t a “conservative” like McCarthy state the obvious? And if human life is in jeopardy, why wait?
*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org
by Rusty Weiss, thepoliticalinsider.com
A three-judge panel in New York has ruled that illegal immigrants must be counted when determining the number of seats states receive in the House of Representatives.
President Trump signed an executive order in July clarifying that illegal aliens are not to be included for the purpose of the apportionment of Representatives following the 2020 census.
“By directing the Secretary to provide two sets of numbers, one derived from the decennial census and one not, and announcing that it is the policy of the United States to use the latter in connection with apportionment, the Presidential Memorandum deviates from, and thus violates, the statutory scheme,” the judges wrote.
“Second, the Presidential Memorandum violates the statute governing apportionment because, so long as they reside in the United States, illegal aliens qualify as ‘persons in’ a ‘State’ as Congress used those words.”
Perversion of Democratic Principles
Two of the judges on the panel – Richard C. Wesley and Peter W. Hall – were appointed by George W. Bush, while the other – Jesse M. Furman – was appointed by Barack Obama.
In announcing the original executive order, President Trump stated that “giving congressional representation and political influence to illegal aliens – people who have blatantly disregarded our laws – would be a perversion of our democratic principles.”
Far-left states that accept illegal aliens and offer them sanctuary would be given greater representation in the House.
“Allowing illegal aliens to be counted for the purpose of apportionment could also create perverse incentives – such as potentially rewarding states that encourage violations of Federal immigration law – that would undermine our system of government,” the memorandum reads.
In it, the President vowed to “never allow our democracy to be eroded by giving congressional representation to illegal aliens when the Constitution does not require it.”
Win For Democrats
The ruling is a clear-cut win for Democrats, who have long used illegals as a means to greater electoral and political power.
A study by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) shows that, of 26 seats that would be lost, 24 are from states that voted for Trump in 2016, while 19 seats would be gained in the solidly Democratic states of California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois.
The ruling by these Bush-Obama appointed judges could be appealed to the Supreme Court, according to CBS News.
Rusty Weiss is a freelance writer focusing on the conservative movement and its political agenda. He has been following and analyzing the political climate for several years, and his writings have appeared in the Daily Caller, FoxNews.com and more.
Dem presidential nominee blames Trump for violence, fails to condemn Antifa, and offers no sympathy for victims.
by Lloyd Billingsley, frontpagemag.com
“The incumbent president is incapable of telling us the truth,” and “incapable of facing the facts and incapable of healing. He doesn’t want to shed light, he wants to generate heat and he’s stoking violence in our cities.”
That was presidential candidate Joe Biden on Monday, speaking from Mill 19, an historic steel mill in Pittsburgh. The Democrat’s first event since emerging from his basement was not open to the public, though some 100 supporters gathered outside.
“Fires are burning and we have a president who fans the flames, rather than fighting the flames,” Biden proclaimed. “But we must not burn, we have to build.” According to Biden, President Trump “long ago forfeited any moral leadership,” and was incapable of stopping violence “because for years he had fomented it.”
In Biden’s vision, Trump “may believe mouthing the words ‘law and order’ makes him strong, but his failure to call on his own supporters to stop acting as an armed militia in this country shows you how weak he is.” And “does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is re-elected?”
After months of silence and denial, Biden suddenly contended that “rioting is not protesting. Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting. None of this is protesting. It’s lawlessness, plain and simple. And those who do it should be prosecuted.” As the Democrat added, “ask yourself, do I look like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters? Really? I want a safe America.” Candidate Biden failed to mention that, as Reuters reported, at least 13 of his staffers made donations to a fund that paid bail for rioters in Minneapolis. Biden opposes cash bail as a “modern day debtors prison.”
As a number of reports noted, Joe Biden did not specifically condemn or call out Antifa and allied leftist groups now perpetrating the violence. Biden is on record that Black Lives Matter protests are “a wake-up call for our nation.”
President Trump often praises law enforcement, but no such support emerged from Biden on Monday. The Democrat presidential candidate failed to name victims such as St. Louis police officer David Dorn. As his widow Ann Dorn noted at the Republican National last Thursday, Dorn’s murderers live-streamed his execution.
Biden made no mention of Trump supporter Aaron “Jay” Danielson, shot in the chest during riots in Portland on Saturday. Antifa-BLM activists openly celebrated the murder. The Democrat also failed to note that President Trump had offered to send federal forces to restore law and order, and that Democrat mayors and governors had refused the offer and blamed the president for the violence.
In similar style, Biden did not spell out what, exactly, he would do as president if such deadly violence broke out in major cities. He preferred to blame Trump, the target of leftist Democrats from the day of his inauguration. Sen. Joe Biden was hardly lead voice calling for the peaceful transition of power.
In June of 2017, “strongly anti-Trump” Bernie Sanders supporter James Hodgkinson opened fire on Republicans playing baseball in Arlington, Virginia, nearly killing Rep. Steve Scalise and wounding four others. What Joe Biden thought about this attempted mass murder has yet to emerge in any clarity.
Joe Biden has picked up an endorsement from Angela Davis, the Communist Party candidate for vice president under the Stalinist Gus Hall in 1980 and 1984. Before that, Davis gained fame for supporting violent convicts such as Black Panther George Jackson, who killed a guard at Soledad Prison. Davis brought the “arsenal of weapons” to a California courthouse and during the shootout judge Harold Haley’s head was blown off. As Davis now explains, “to vote for ourselves I think that means that we will have to campaign for and vote for Joe Biden.”
The Delaware cellar-dweller is not fond of fielding questions from reporters, and by all indications the candidate did not do so on Monday. His brief speech, doubtless cobbled together by handlers and endlessly rehearsed, was not exactly understated.
“Mr. Trump, want to talk about fear?” Biden said. “You know what people are afraid of in America? They’re afraid they’re going to get COVID. They’re afraid they’re going to get sick and die. And that is no small part because of you.” And as the former vice president closed out, “Trump’s been a toxic presence in our nation for four years. We have a decision to make: will we rid ourselves of this toxin or will we make it a permanent part of our nation’s character.”
The president was quick to respond in a tweet. “Just watched what Biden had to say. To me, he’s blaming the Police far more than he’s blaming the Rioters, Anarchists, Agitators, and Looters, which he could never blame or he would lose the Radical Left Bernie supports!”
How Joe Biden’s sudden revelation that rioting, looting and arson are “not protesting” will play with the people is uncertain. For his part, President Trump visits Kenosha on Tuesday, despite opposition from Democrat governor Tony Evers.
Fox News photo
by Rusty Weiss, political insider.com
Fox News anchor Chris Wallace floated the possibility that President Trump may actually have a point when it comes to an increased chance of voter fraud through mail-in ballots.
Wallace, who has been critical of the President on this matter in the past, made the assertion during a segment on Fox News Sunday.
The sheer volume of increased mail-in ballots due to Democrat-led restrictions or hysteria involving in-person voting due to the coronavirus pandemic was cited as a potential source of trouble.
“Hear me out for a minute. Isn’t it possible that the president really has a point here?” Wallace wondered.
“As I mentioned earlier, there were 33 million either absentee or mail-in ballots in 2016. If we have double that or triple that, isn’t there a pretty good chance that we will have a mess, at the least,” he asked. “And yes, possibly fraud?”
Be still, our beating hearts. Did Chris Wallace just address a concern that many voters share about election integrity?
Wallace is, of course, stating the obvious here. That the United States Postal Service (USPS) might be able to handle things under normal circumstances, but as 2020 has already shown several times over – these aren’t normal circumstances.
Punctuated by Trump appearances and a diverse set of inspiring speakers
by Joseph Klein, frontpagemag.com
“Where Joe Biden sees American darkness, I see American greatness,” President Trump said following the conclusion of the Democratic Party’s dismal digital convention. The Democrats presented voters with their gloom and doom vision of America, harping on what they claim is fundamentally wrong with the country rather than on America’s greatness. Their depressing message was delivered in a humdrum setting devoid of live programming. The Republican National Convention’s theme for the upcoming week is “Honoring the Great American Story.” It is presenting an optimistic vision of an America on the mend from the China Virus, thanks to President Trump’s decisive actions. The convention will conclude with a live acceptance speech by President Trump on Thursday night from the South Lawn of the White House.
The Republican Party National Convention formally got under way Monday in Charlotte North Carolina, with 336 delegates representing 50 states, five territories and Washington, D.C. present in person to re-nominate Donald Trump and Mike Pence for president and vice president. The delegates did so unanimously. The Charlotte portion of the convention concluded Monday afternoon, but not before both President Trump and Vice President Pence appeared live to address the delegates.
President Trump took the stage to deliver an almost hour-long stemwinder of a speech to the delegates. “I felt an obligation to be here,” he said. Shouts of “four more years” broke out as the president began his remarks. “If you want to really drive them crazy, you’ll say ’12 more years,'” President Trump exclaimed. The president hailed America’s economic recovery from the depths of the coronavirus shutdown, which he described as a “super V-shape.” He noted his historic accomplishments to benefit the black community.
However, President Trump also zeroed in on the Democrats’ calls for universal mail-in voting with unsolicited ballots being sent out willy-nilly, accusing the Democrats of “trying to steal the election.” The president warned that “This is the most important election in the history of our country. We have to be very careful and we have to win. Our country is counting on it.” The president called for unity, declaring that “the best way to bring unity is success.”
President Trump outlined some items on his second term agenda – continuing to build up our military, creating 10 million jobs in the first 10 months, creating tax credits for companies that bring our jobs back from China and other countries, pursuing school choice, and continuing to expand opportunities zones for black communities.
In keeping with the upbeat mood Republicans want to project at their convention, the Village People’s 1978 hit “YMCA” played as President Trump left the stage. It was a not too subtle reminder of one of the president’s most significant trade agreement accomplishments – the USMCA, known formally as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
Monday night’s prime time focus was on America as the “Land of Promise.” Charlie Kirk, the founder and president of Turning Point USA, a conservative student organization, opened the night by calling President Trump the “bodyguard of western civilization.” The night featured speeches from U.S. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who gave the closing address of the night, and former UN Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Other speakers Monday night included U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, Donald Trump Jr., Herschel Walker, and Georgia Democratic state representative Vernon Jones.
Ordinary Americans from diverse walks of life spoke about the real-life positive impacts that President Trump’s policies have had on their lives. The president himself appeared on video alongside doctors, nurses and other essential workers whom he thanked at the White House for their service to the country as it faced the China Virus. President Trump later was shown appearing alongside six former hostages, who the president was able to get released from captivity and sent home. Pastor Andrew Brunson, who was detained in Turkey for 28 years, said the Trump administration “really fought for me.”
The couple who stood their ground on their own property to defend themselves and their home against intruders from a Black Lives Matter protest march, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, also appeared. As Mark McCloskey noted, “Not a single person in the out-of-control mob you saw at our house was charged with a crime. But you know who was? We were. They’ve actually charged us with felonies for daring to defend our home.” The McCloskeys warned that “what you saw happen to us could just as easily happen to any of you who are watching from quiet neighborhoods around our country.” The message was aimed in part at suburban women concerned about the safety of their families.
Vernon Jones, a black Democrat, declared that “The Democratic Party does not want Black people to leave the mental plantation. We’ve been forced to be there for decades and generations.” Explaining his decision to support President Trump in the face of fierce opposition from members of his own Democratic Party, Jones added, “We are free people with free minds, and I’m part of a large and growing segment of the Black community who are independent thinkers, and we believe that Donald Trump is the president that America needs to lead us forward.”
Former pro-footballer Herschel Walker, who has known President Trump for 37 years, took umbrage against those who falsely labeled President Trump as a racist. “Growing up in the deep south, I have seen racism up close,” Walker said. “I know what it is. And it isn’t Donald Trump.”
To read this entire article, please go to: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/08/rousing-first-day-republican-national-convention-joseph-klein/
Claiming false information. The ads, titled “On Hold,” were placed in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin
fox news photo
By Sally Persons, Brooke Singman | Fox News
A pro-Trump ad was removed from Facebook after claims that it contained false information, Fox News has learned.
America First Action PAC on Tuesday told Fox News that Facebook removed one of its ads, titled “On Hold,” which was placed in Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin on July 24. The ad was flagged by Politifact on July 29, according to the PAC.
“Facebook’s decision to take down this ad shows its anti-conservative bias,” America First Communications Director Kelly Sadler told Fox News. “America First Action has logged an appeal, but the threat of anti-conservative bias, targeting, and censorship remains ahead of Election Day in November and we must be vigilant in holding big tech, like Facebook accountable.”
Sadler, during an interview on Fox Business on Tuesday, added that this “is just more bias from these social media companies.”
“We’re going to file an appeal, but there’s really little we can do about it,” she told host Stuart Varney. “These social media giants are monopolies, and ultimately they make the decision of what runs on their platform.”
Facebook confirmed to Fox News on Tuesday that the ad had, in fact, been fact-checked. A Facebook spokesperson told Fox News that ads that are fact-checked and found to contain false information are not eligible to run as a paid ad on the social media platform.
The spokesman added that the videos can, instead, run as original content on the group’s page.
America First Action, though, said certain versions of the ad were removed in particular states, but the Facebook spokesman said that once the ad was fact-checked as false, all versions would be removed from the platform.
The Facebook spokesperson said that if any version of the ad was still running on the platform, it would be due to a lag in Facebook’s fact-checking system.
The ad in question was titled “On Hold,” and shows a woman calling 9-1-1 and being put on hold. The ad moves to show Democratic nominee former Vice President Joe Biden saying “yes,” with a “defund the police?” banner. The ad is currently marked on Facebook with a label saying: “False Information. Checked by independent fact-checkers.”
Facebook’s fact-checking comes as members of the Trump administration and prominent Republicans have claimed that social media platforms have censored right-leaning viewpoints.
Attorney General William Barr told Fox News in June that social media platforms are “engaged in censorship” and are acting more like “publishers.”
“They originally held themselves out as open forums where the third parties could come and express their views and they built up a tremendous network of eyeballs,” Barr said on “Special Report” in June.
“They had a lot of market power based on that presentation,” the attorney general added. “And now they are acting much more like publishers because they’re censoring particular viewpoints and putting their own content in there to diminish the impact of various people’s views.”
Twitter, earlier this summer, slapped a warning label on one of President Trump’s tweets for the first time, cautioning readers that despite the president’s claims, “fact checkers” say there is “no evidence” that expanded, nationwide mail-in voting would increase fraud risks — and that “experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.”
Within minutes, Trump accused Twitter of “interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election,” that the platform “is completely stifling FREE SPEECH” and vowing: “I, as President, will not allow it to happen!”
Two days later, the president signed an executive order that interprets Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 as not providing statutory liability protections for tech companies that engage in censorship and political conduct. It also cuts federal funding for social media platforms that censor users’ political views.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi refers to AG Barr as a ‘Blob’
BY RUSTY WEISS, thepoliticalinsider.com
Ainsley Earhardt, co-host of Fox & Friends, called Nancy Pelosi out after the House Speaker described Attorney General William Barr as a “blob” and “henchman” for President Trump.
Following Barr’s testimony on Capitol Hill Tuesday, a spectacle meant only to make Democrat lawmakers feel good about themselves by “reclaiming their time,” Pelosi attacked the Attorney General for allegedly doing the President’s bidding.
She was particularly distraught over his use of federal law enforcement to quell violence in cities like Portland and Chicago.
“He was like a blob,” she said, sputtering along in an MSNBC interview. “He was like a, just a henchman for the president of the United States, instead of the attorney general of the United States of America.”
Name-calling. The woman who is second in line to the presidency and her best retort is to call Barr a blob.
Earhardt was quick to call out the fact that there is quite the double standard in Pelosi’s disrespectful comments about Barr.
“Nancy Pelosi is saying that he is a henchman and a blob, and there’s a double standard there,” she accused. “What if someone called a woman a blob?”
The Fox & Friends host then turned it over to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for his thoughts on the House Speaker’s attack.
“It’s terrible,” he replied. “But this is the same individual who said that the President of the United States is an imposter back during impeachment.”
Jordan added, “I don’t take what she says about people in the administration very seriously.”
To that point, America doesn’t really take what she says seriously. Earhardt is right – imagine the uproar had a Republican called a female Democrat a ‘blob’ or any other schoolyard insult.
They’d be forced to apologize from the House floor.
What Barr Really Said
In Barr’s opening statement he spoke of “one standard of justice” and how he has “handled criminal matters that have come to me for a decision in this way.”
He was clear and concise about his independence from the administration.
“The President has not attempted to interfere in these decisions,” he stated. “On the contrary, he has told me from the start that he expects me to exercise my independent judgment to make whatever call I think is right.”
In other words, not a henchman by any means.
Pelosi went on to reiterate her disgusting claims that federal law enforcement officers are the equivalent of “stormtroopers.” “Peaceful protest is who we are and what we do. And do some other people come along and try to disrupt? Yes,” she said. “But you don’t send in people acting like stormtroopers into the scene and evoking even more, even more unease and unrest.”
Imagine that line of thinking in dealing with other crimes. You don’t send police into a bank robbery and put the bank at risk. You don’t send police to a domestic violence situation and cause the assailant to become ‘uneasy.’
It’s clear Pelosi’s mind is ‘like a blob’ – a dark, shapeless and aimless mass of darkness.
BY RUSTY WEISS, thepoliticalinsider.com
Over 100 police agencies have backed out of providing security at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Milwaukee next month. WTMJ reports that, according to Milwaukee Police Chief Alfonso Morales, the departments are concerned with new orders that restrict the ability to use tear gas, pepper spray, and other crowd control measures.
Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission issued a series of directives to Morales, of which one ordered him to work with the commission to change department policy to discontinue the use of the aforementioned chemicals. They threatened him with firing if he did not comply.
The DNC has been reduced to a mostly virtual event, with actual physical attendees ranging in the hundreds.
Still, police anticipate large protests from rioters dragging out racial grievances well after the death of George Floyd in Minnesota in May.
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting that the agreement with the DNC would have resulted in over 1,000 police officers from various agencies to provide security for the DNC.
Fond du Lac Police Chief William Lamb explained why limiting officers’ use of crowd control measures creates a dangerous situation.
“We believe (that) in removing those tools, the use of chemical irritants or pepper spray, from the available resources that the law enforcement officers would have at their disposal if protests become non-peaceful would severely compromise the safety of the public and also the safety of the law enforcement officers who would be assigned to protect the DNC,” he explained.
Franklin Police Chief Rick Oliva added, “I can not send personnel if they are not properly equipped or will not be allowed to engage in appropriate actions which would ensure their safety.”
Isn’t it Ironic?
The irony here is that any Democrat attendees to the convention will be getting a taste of what their ‘defund the police’ policies are bringing to America.
The Democrat party, from top to bottom, wants to defund police departments, or worse, abolish them.
Even the presumptive Democrat nominee who will be honored at the DNC, Joe Biden, has said he would “absolutely” divert funds from police because some have “become the enemy.”
“Surplus military equipment for law enforcement, they don’t need that!” Biden exclaimed during an interview with Now This in early July. “The last thing you need is an up-armored Humvee coming into a neighborhood, it’s like the military invading.”
“They don’t know anybody. They become the enemy,” he continued. “They’re supposed to be protecting these people.” Donald Trump Jr. has challenged Democrats pushing the ‘defund police’ movement to ditch their own personal security detail first.
Ironically, it appears they don’t have a choice now. At least in terms of the convention. Let’s see how many show up knowing they won’t have the police officers’ to protect them.
BY JACK HADFIELD, the politicalinsider.com
Conservative actor James Woods went after Rep Jerry Nadler in a series of tweets for claiming that antifa rioters are a “myth.” Nadler: Antifa Is A “Myth”
On Sunday, Jerry Nadler told a member of the press that the current violent antifa riots taking place across the country, in cities like Portland, Chicago, and Seattle, are a total “myth that’s being spread only in Washington D.C.”
This is, of course, contrary to the mountains of video and photographic evidence that exists, but that doesn’t seem to bother Mr Nadler at all.
Nadler was then slammed by multiple people, including Senator Tom Cotton.
“Nadler denying antifa is in Portland is kind of like ‘Baghdad Bob’ denying there were American tanks in Baghdad back in the day,” Cotton said.
“I mean, you can just look at the videos posted in recent weeks. People are carrying the flag of antifa and wearing t-shirts and spray painting it on buildings,” he added.
Woods Takes Nadler Down!
Conservative star James Woods also didn’t take too kindly to Nadler’s remarks.
“Stick his chubby ass in the middle of the mob, they’d literally trample him to death,” Woods tweeted. “Honestly this numbskull would lie about the color of the sky.”
Woods then proceeded to mercilessly mock Nadler for denying antifa violence in a series of tweets. Woods posted photos from the riots showing people dressed up as antifa committing violent acts, something that clearly Nadler missed before making his statement on Sunday.
These Statements Only Deserve Mockery
Mockery is exactly what’s needed when dealing with ridiculous statements like the one that Nadler made. They shouldn’t be approached with any serious debate, because of just how ludicrous they are. The concrete evidence that Woods posted, and investigative journalists like Andy Ngo regularly disseminates, prove him totally wrong.
The question is, why exactly is Nadler denying this evidence?
Ohio’s Speaker of the House of Representatives, Larry Householder taken into custody in $60M Bribery Case
Photo from Cleveland.com
The Republican Party was just rocked by a bombshell arrest when Larry Householder, the conservative Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, was among four people taken into custody on charges involving a $60 million federal bribery case.
Householder was reportedly arrested by the FBI at his farm in Ohio early Tuesday morning, according to Fox News. He was reportedly arrested along with Householder adviser Jeffrey Longstreth, longtime Statehouse lobbyist Neil Clark, former Ohio Republican Party chairman and consultant Matthew Borges and Juan Cespedes, co-founder of The Oxley Group in Columbus.
The Department of Justice has refused to give any details about the arrests so far, saying that it will do so later in the day on Tuesday. FBI spokesman Todd Lindgren would only say that agents were carrying out “law enforcement activity” on Householder’s property, refusing to say anything further on the subject.
Householder is a veteran Republican lawmaker who was Ohio’s House Speaker from 2001-2004 before taking the position again in 2019. When he left office for the first time over a decade ago, he was under federal investigation for alleged money laundering and irregular campaign practices, but no charges were ever filed.
Householder made his return to Ohio politics in 2016, and he won a contentious fight last year to become Ohio’s House Speaker again, according to WLWT5.
Sources have been saying that Householder’s arrest was connected to House Bill 6, the FirstEnergy nuclear bailout bill that was passed by the legislature and signed last year by Governor Mike DeWine. The bill was a controversial one, with detractors saying it was bad for the environment.
“It’s an environmental nightmare,” Rep. David Leland (D – Columbus) said when it was passed last year. “This is over a billion dollars that’s going to go to two nuclear power plants and a coal plant in Indiana so there’s a lot of money at stake here.”
Others, however, supported the bill.
“House Bill 6 saves those plans, lowers tax bills and helps protect the environment,” said Rep. Jamie Callender (R – Concord), the sponsor of the bill.
News Commentary By Rusty Weiss | Featured Contributor, thepoliticalinsider.com
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany slammed “Squad” Reps. Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over their recent respective anti-police and crime comments.
Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, said people “don’t want your damn reforms” and compared police departments to cancer in calling for the Minneapolis Police Department to be “completely dismantle(d).”
For her part, Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) did a crime analysis following an uptick in violence and shootings in New York and discovered it couldn’t be due to a lack of respect for the police. And by ‘crime analysis’ we mean she completely made something up in her head.
“Maybe this has to do with the fact that people aren’t paying their rent and are scared to pay their rent, and so they go out and they need to feed their child and they don’t have money, so you maybe have to, they’re put in a position where they feel like they either need to shoplift some bread or go hungry that night,” she said while grasping at the nearest straw.
She prefaced those comments by saying “let me make something super clear,” an indicator she was super-serious about her idiotic claims.
McEnany Pummels AOC
Super-serious or not, McEnany dismissed AOC in all of three words: “That is preposterous.”
An understatement if ever there was one, and really evergreen content for any of the New York socialist’s “deep thoughts.”
McEnany analyzed AOC’s comments regarding the real reason for the uptick in crime – leftist calls to defund the police and being forced to stand down against criminals.
Of particular note, she addressed the Squad leader’s complaints that defunding the NYPD budget by over $1 billion was not nearly enough.
“You have, most egregious of all, really, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez saying, ‘Defund[ing] the police means defund[ing] the police,’” noted McEnany. “She criticized, of course, the announcement of $1.5 billion being taken down from NYPD.”
“And this weekend, you know, when faced with — there were 28 shootings in New York, a 600 percent increase from this time last year — you have Representative Ocasio-Cortez saying this is just because people are trying to get food with their families,” she added. “That is preposterous.”
Not How We Should Be Talking About Our Heroes
McEnany blasted Omar over the “police are cancer” comments as well.
“When you have people out there, like Representative Ilhan Omar, saying, ‘We have to completely ‘dismantle the police’ and police are ‘cancer,’” she lamented, “this is not how we should be talking about our heroes.”
She then took a jab at any liberals who are pushing for defunding the police by addressing the two officers shot and killed in Texas this past weekend.
She recalled that the daughter of one of the slain officers wrote a touching tribute to her father.
“I want Savannah to know: Your dad is a hero,” McEnany said. “His police department should never be defunded because most of our police officers are good, hardworking men and women, and heroes — much like Savannah’s dad.”
AOC and Omar want people like Savannah’s dad to go without resources, unable to do their job, or flat-out eliminated. They are a disgrace to the people they represent as well as the country.
Calls him a ‘Lying Dog Face’
Photo from VOX
After giving a speech in which he attacked President Donald Trump for his response to the coronavirus pandemic on Tuesday, Joe Biden completely lost it on a reporter, going so far as to call the journalist a “lying dog face.”
During a speech given at a school in his hometown of Wilmington, Delaware, Biden accused President Trump of waiting too long to take action against the COVID-19 pandemic.
“It’s almost July and it seems our wartime president has surrendered, waved the white flag and abandoned the battlefield,” said Biden, 77, according to the New York Post. “We don’t need a cheerleader, Mr. President. We need a president, Mr. President.”
After his speech, the former vice president took questions from reporters for the first time in months, and it didn’t take long for this to go downhill. Biden lashed out on one reporter who dared to ask about his own mental deterioration as someone who is well over the age of 65, going on to ask if he had been tested for cognitive decline.
This did not sit well with Biden, to put it mildly.
“You’re a lying dog face,” a visibly-irritated Biden barked, going on to add that he is “constantly tested.”
“All you gotta do is watch me and I can hardly wait to compare my cognitive capability to the cognitive capability of the man I’m running against,” he continued.
“Lying dog face” seems to be Biden’s go-to insult, as he infamously called a female college student a “lying dog-faced pony soldier” back in February during a campaign event in New Hampshire. The young woman later spoke out to say that she found this experience to be “humiliating.”
Biden appeared defensive about his cognitive abilities as he took questions from reporters, at one point lashing out at Trump for his own mental skills. “He talks about cognitive capability. He doesn’t seem to be cognitively aware of what’s going on,” Biden said of Trump.
“He either reads and/or gets briefed on important issues and he forgets it or he doesn’t think it’s necessary that he needs to know it.”
It seems it might be time for someone to taking Grandpa Joe back to his basement.
by Rusty Weiss Contributor, thepoliticalinsider.com
Donald Trump Jr. is challenging Democrats pushing the ‘defund police’ movement to ditch their own personal security detail first.
The President’s son, in a social media post, stated that condemnation of police brutality has been universal, but pulling resources from law enforcement is not the answer.
“We all want to stop police brutality, but cutting funding to police departments like so many Dems want to do doesn’t stop abuses, it just makes communities (particularly impoverished communities) less safe,” he wrote.
“Will those same anti-cop Dems call for their security details to be cut?” he asked.
No ‘Damn Reforms’
Democrat lawmakers on Monday proposed legislation that would increase the accountability of police officers and remove immunity from legal action stemming from inappropriate conduct.
Rep. Ilhan Omar has used the George Floyd tragedy to call for the Minneapolis Police Department to be “completely dismantled,” claiming that the entire department is “rotten to the root.”
“We don’t want your damn reforms, we don’t want the slow dying of our communities to continue,” she preached to an angry crowd of protesters. “What we want you to do is to cut the cancer so that it does not continue to spread throughout our bodies.”
By contrast to what Democrats wish you to believe, the overwhelming majority of our police officers are heroes. They’re the ones out on the streets in our community each and every day, protecting law-abiding citizens and peaceful protesters alike.
Bad cops need to be held accountable. Good ones need to be protected and supported.
Former congressman Trey Gowdy and Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) have described the “defund police” movement as both the “dumbest idea I’ve ever heard” and “ridiculous” respectively.
“Who is going to process crime scenes, arrest bad people?” Gowdy asked in an interview earlier this week. “Who is going to enforce any law, child sex abuse, homicide? Who is going to do it if it’s not the police?”
Scott added that dismantling police departments is “not an idea whose time has come,” rather, “it should never come.”
President Trump is standing with the 72 percent of African-Americans who are happy with their local police departments.
Leftists have launched yet another campaign to destroy President Trump, the economy, and the hopes of the African-American community which had been seeing record employment numbers.
If you believe the media, African-Americans are rising up against President Trump because of a police incident in Minneapolis, a Democrat city, run by radical lefties who voted to disband the police, in Minnesota, a Democrat state, which had not voted for a Republican since Nixon, over 1,000 miles away from Washington D.C. And, if you believe the media, the economy is doomed, and every state that opened before the riots has streets filled with piles of the pandemic dead.
The latest Rasmussen tracking poll shows that President Trump’s approval rating among likely black voters is at 41%.That’s up from 40% in the fall of 2018 which had been a high at the time.
How is that possible? Aren’t black people furious after Trump’s call for law and order?
A Monmouth University poll however shows that 72 percent of African-Americans are satisfied with their local police departments. Despite what you’re seeing on television, 21 percent of African-Americans are very satisfied with the local police and another 51 percent are satisfied.
Only 5 percent are very dissatisfied.
Why is the country burning and why are so many politicians, corporations, and organizations falling into line to sate the outrage of that 5 percent? Ask them if you can find them inciting a riot.
By backing law and order, President Trump is standing with the nearly 3 in 4 African-Americans who are happy with their local police departments over the less than 1 in 5 who aren’t.
Why do these numbers about what African-Americans actually believe differ so dramatically from what the media insists on telling us that they believe in order to justify the riots and looting?
41 percent of African-Americans reported that they had an experience where a police officer had helped keep them or their family members safe in a dangerous situation.
That’s significantly higher than the 33 percent of white people and 21 percent of Hispanic people.
Black communities benefit from law enforcement more than other communities do. Many of the stores that were ransacked and looted were owned by African-Americans. And they’re much less likely to be able to rebuild than massive national chains like Target or CVS. The collapse of cash businesses and businesses that provided local credit will devastate these neighborhoods.
While the media has been busy championing the radical protests to defund the police, 167 people were shot in one week in Chicago, 14 people were shot over the previous weekend in Baltimore, and a 12-year-old was shot in St. Louis. No one but the police is going to stop this.
Defunding the police is the project of a small number of wealthy young radicals who have never lived in a world without the police and have no idea what can happen to them without the cops.
Black people who live in poorer areas know exactly what can and does happen every week.
That’s why President Trump’s call for law and order, and his march to a besieged church, may have infuriated white radicals, especially in the media, but is understood differently by many black people. The history of fighting crime in America has undergone its own radical historical revisionism that might be dubbed the 1960 Project as a counterpart to the 1619 Project.
The contemporary state of the police and prisons wasn’t invented by white people, but the result of demands by black community leaders who wanted a crackdown on drugs and crime.
In 1973, 71 percent of African-Americans in New York wanted drug dealers to be sentenced to life in prison without parole. That was back when the NAACP Citizens’ Mobilization Against Crime had asked for more police officers in black neighborhoods and a minimum of 5 years in prison for muggers, 10 years for drug dealers, and 20 years for murderers.
“It is not police brutality that makes people afraid to walk the streets at night,” Vincent Baker, the head of the Citizens’ Mobilization Against Crime, had said.
Meanwhile, black residents were buying guns and forming vigilante groups to protect their own streets. Ministers and black nationalists stepped into that vacuum to go after drug dealers.
“The silent majority in Harlem would welcome a police order to get tough,” Baker had pleaded. The alternative, he had previously argued, would be vigilante justice. “We don’t need gunslingers, paid or unpaid, in our community. We want law enforcement.”
Crime debates in the 1960s pitted white liberals, who favored looser crime rules, against black community leaders who were ready to call for the vigilante killings of drug dealers. Putting police officers on every block was not a racist conspiracy, it was the demand of neighborhood leaders who wanted to avoid the bad choices between drug gangs and community vigilantes.
President Trump knows this history and lived this history. That’s why he stands for law and order. Law and order isn’t racist. When it collapses, its victims are very often African-American.
“The biggest victims of the rioting are peace-loving citizens in our poorest communities and as their president, I will fight to keep them safe,” President Trump declared. “I will fight to protect you. I am your president of law and order.”
While the media has falsely claimed that he was threatening to repress the black community, Trump was really reminding African-American voters of the difference between him and Biden.
Biden might be happy to watch America burn as long as his radical allies were satisfied, but the black communities and businesses that are burning are likely to be less enthusiastic at the idea.
The media has suggested that President Trump’s call for law and order is somehow radical.
Fighting crime, like supporting the military or free speech, used to be a bipartisan issue before radicalized Democrats defected from what had been a fundamental plank of national policy.
Democrats keep trying to tie Trump’s call for law and order to Nixon. But it’s actually LBJ who declared a war on crime and who federalized law enforcement, tying local police into the DOJ, and supplying them with military equipment, while emphasizing statistics and metrics.
“Our parks are deserted. Our storekeepers weigh the dangers of arming themselves against the dangers of attack. Crime and violence in the suburbs increase even more rapidly than in the central cities,” President Johnson had vowed. “Until every woman in this land can walk the streets of her city at night, unafraid and unharmed, then we have work to do in law enforcement.”
Like the rest of the Great Society, Johnson’s War on Crime failed because it assumed that running local policies through a national expert class would make them more efficient, and, the Great Society’s other great fallacy, that social problems could be solved with social welfare. Instead of defeating crime, the Great Society created the welfare state and made blight permanent, reducing formerly aspirational black communities to a morass of broken homes.
Had LBJ sought to deliberately destroy black communities, he could not have done better.
Johnson’s War on Crime was a response to race riots, but failed to address the reality that the riots, like most race riots in the previous century, had been inspired by first Communist, and then assorted other leftist agitators, of which Antifa is just one of many incarnations.
Where LBJ’s team focused on pandering to black socialists, Trump has reached out to black capitalists. The riots and looting are devastating not the welfare state that the black socialists want, but the small businesses that are at the root of black capitalism. That’s not a coincidence.
Defunding the police is a demand to shift money from law and order to the welfare state.
Black capitalism cannot operate without law and order, while black socialism thrives on misery.
The riots are, in a certain sense, a civil war for the soul of the black community. If the rioters succeed, black communities will sink deeper into gangland decay and the welfare state. They will become more integral to the Democrats even as they lose any hope for a better future.
That’s why law and order African-Americans stand with President Trump.