Conservative Champion Kyle Duncan Confirmed to Fifth Circuit Appeals Court

Conservative Champion Kyle Duncan Confirmed to Fifth Circuit Appeals Court



WASHINGTON, DC – Senators confirmed conservative legal champion Kyle Duncan to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Tuesday, President Trump’s 14th confirmed lifetime appointment to the federal appellate courts.

Duncan’s nomination had been delayed as part of Democrats’ unprecedented obstruction on Capitol Hill, despite the fact that he is a former Louisiana solicitor general, law professor, Supreme Court litigator, and clerked for a Fifth Circuit judge.

The 46-year-old Duncan is well-known in the legal community for championing the full range of conservative issues, including litigating for conservative values regarding LGBT issues. He is respected as a soft-spoken Christian gentleman. He is also a prominent Federalist Society member, whose commitment to textualist legal interpretation and originalist constitutional interpretation is exactly what President Trump promised voters.

The Judicial Crisis Network (JCN) made Duncan’s confirmation a top priority, organizing grassroots support to move his name through the ongoing Senate gridlock. JCN ran a six-figure ad campaign touting Duncan’s qualifications.

“Congratulations to my friend Kyle Duncan on his confirmation to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals,” said Carrie Severino, JCN’s chief counsel and policy director. “President Trump selected one of the best lawyers of his generation, someone who has served and will continue Louisiana with distinction.” (Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi are the three states comprising the Fifth Circuit, and the court sits in the Louisiana city of New Orleans.)

“It was sad that only one Democrat was willing to break ranks and vote for such an impressive nominee,” Severino added, denouncing that fact as “a sign of how extreme [Democrats] have become, and another reason we need more conservative Republicans in the Senate.”

Democrats’ no votes against Duncan include Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), and Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), all representing Trump states and who are up for reelection in 2018. Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL)–who is not up until 2020–also voted no, noteworthy because Jones initially voted with Republicans on several matters, but now appears to be siding with the liberal base of his party instead of deep-red Alabama.

Experts were especially surprised that three vulnerable red-state Democrats voted against Duncan’s fitness to serve on the appeals court.

Sen. Claire McCaskill is in a tough fight against Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley and has consistently opposed President Trump’s nominees who pledge to follow the original meaning of the Constitution.

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp is likewise vulnerable in North Dakota, where Rep. Kevin Cramer poses a serious challenge, and voters favor judicial nominees with records of following the law as written instead of ruling according to their personal political preferences.

Sen. Joe Donnelly is similarly in trouble in Indiana, where Rep. Luke Messer and Rep. Todd Rokita are vying for the GOP nomination to take him on in November. Donnelly has built a record of voting against federal judges who favor the Second Amendment, protecting religious liberty, and limiting the federal government’s power – all of which are popular in the Hoosier state.

Judges are very important to voters in all these states, and Republican pickups would likely result in more Trump judicial nominees getting confirmed to lifetime judgeships.

Ken Klukowski is senior legal editor for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @kenklukowski.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Who Called Social Media Censorship a ‘Hoax,’ Received Over $20K from Google

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Who Called Social Media Censorship a ‘Hoax,’ Received Over $20K from Google



Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee who claimed allegations of social media censorship against conservatives were “baseless” and a “hoax,” on Thursday, received over $20,000 from Google parent company Alphabet between 2017 and 2018 alone, and received thousands more in previous years.

According to Open Secrets, Nadler received a total of $20,800 from Alphabet Inc. between 2017 and 2018, and a total of $18,350 between 2013 and 2014.

Records from the Federal Election Commission also reveal that Nadler has received regular disbursements from the Google Inc. NetPac in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018, usually totalling $10,000 a year.

Alphabet Inc. was the highest contributor to Nadler’s campaign and leadership PAC in 2018, while Facebook also donated $2,500.

During a hearing on social media censorship before the House Judiciary Committee, Thursday, Nadler claimed censorship against conservatives was a conspiracy theory and a “hoax.”

“The notion that social media companies are filtering out conservative voices is a hoax,” declared Nadler, adding that allegations of a “Silicon Valley plot to censor conservatives” was “baseless.”

Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington, or like his page at Facebook.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Sen. Ted Cruz Makes Plea for Alfie Evans, Warns Against ‘Socialized Medicine’

Sen. Ted Cruz Makes Plea for Alfie Evans, Warns Against ‘Socialized Medicine’



Sen. Ted Cruz took to Twitter to explain the plight of U.K. toddler Alfie Evans and to warn Americans about the dangers of “socialized medicine.”

In a tweetstorm Wednesday, the Republican senator from Texas described Alfie’s situation from his birth and subsequent illness, to the refusal of both the U.K. and European courts to allow Alfie’s parents to pursue treatment for him at a Vatican hospital:

Cruz said the events “remind us of the tragic case of Charlie Gard last year.”

“It is a grim reminder that systems of socialized medicine like the National Health Service (NHS) vest the state with power over human lives, transforming citizens into subjects,” the senator said.

“I urge the UK government to grant the Evans family’s request to treat their precious child in Italy,” Cruz continued. “Americans strive to achieve the promise of ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ for all our citizens, no matter how young or old.”

As Breitbart London reported, more than 100 supporters of the toddler and his parents gathered outside Alder Hey Children’s Hospital Wednesday night, continuing their two-week vigil.

Alfie’s parents have also received support in a tweet from Polish President Andrzej Duda:

In the U.S., Ashley McGuire, a senior fellow with the Catholic Association, called out Catholic bishops and lay leaders in the U.K. for “abandoning Catholic social teaching and splitting from the Pope by defending the government instead of Alfie and his family.”

“The Church has long been the first and only voice to speak out for truth and defend the vulnerable,” McGuire said in a statement. “True to that legacy, the Pope spoke out in defense of Alfie Evans and the fundamental human rights of his parents to do all they can to save the life of their child.”

“It is moments such as these that Catholics, especially leaders like Austen Ivereigh, are called to stand apart from the fray and defend the truth even when it contradicts the powers that be,” she added. “We thank the Pope for his leadership and look to U.K. Catholic leaders to join him in standing for Church teaching.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Exclusive – Former FCC Bureau Chief Fred Campbell: Safe Harbor Enables Facebook, Google to Censor Without Accountability

Former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Wireless Bureau Chief Fred Campbell stated in an exclusive interview that the “Safe Harbor” protection for Facebook and Google allows social media giants to censor at will without any legal repercussions.

During the House Judiciary Committee hearing about Facebook, Google, and Twitter’s censorship practices on Thursday, TechFreedom President Berin Szoka argued that amending the Safe Harbor provision in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act would create a new “Fairness Doctrine” that would stifle rather than preserve free speech.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In other words, Internet service providers (ISPs) and edge providers such as Facebook and Google can host or publish other users’ content without being legally liable for their users’ content. Campbell contends that Section 230 allows for Facebook, Google, and Twitter to censor without any legal ramifications.

Szoka said during the House Judiciary Committee hearing:

I often hear conservative groups complaining about the bias of social media platforms, but from what I can see after a decade in this field the real problem is that they just don’t use social media well. Let’s face it: the real people who use social media best and most eagerly are overwhelmingly left-wing.

The TechFreedom president explained how the original Fairness Doctrine stifled rather than expanded free speech. Szoka continued:

First enacted in 1949, the Fairness Doctrine was supposed to encourage robust hearing in broadcasting; instead, it did the opposite. Broadcasters avoided controversial topics that enforced bland orthodoxy on radio and television, entrenching, instead, what conservatives call the “mainstream media” and, instead, stifling alternative voices, such as talk radio.

“Instead of encouraging competition, a fairness doctrine for the Internet would actually entrench today’s tech giants,” Szoka added.

Campbell disputed Szoka’s argument, contending that Section 230 allows for Google and Facebook to censor at will.

He told Breitbart News, “Here’s the real problem with Section 230: it empowers these Internet platforms to censor content while removing any accountability for their publications. The Constitution has always protected an individual’s right to defend themselves against libel or slander.”

“Section 230 overrides the common law and says that these Internet platforms can censor all they want and won’t be accountable for anything — for libel or any other falsehoods,” Campbell added.

In an interview on Breitbart News Sunday, Campbell called for Section 230 to be repealed, stating that “conservatism itself is at stake,” thanks to Google and Facebook’s censorship.

Campbell suggested that “efforts to paint it as a revival of the Fairness Doctrine are false. I do not support [the Fairness Doctrine]. Most conservatives do not support it. I think it is a red herring.”

House Communications and Technology chairman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) called for re-examining some of the fundamental provisions contained in the Safe Harbor provision, given the rampant censorship of conservative voices on Facebook, Google, and Twitter.

Blackburn stated that free speech “is endangered even here in America.”

“Like social media platforms, broadcasters clearly are private entities with their own First Amendment rights, but even so, we recognize that some speech is so important that we must protect its access to an important platform,” Rep. Blackburn added.

Blackburn told the House Judiciary Committee:

But Section 230 of the Communications Act gives online platforms broad immunity from liability for user-generated content, except for a responsibility to take down certain things like child sex trafficking, theft of intellectual property, or terrorism. This should translate into more freedom, not less, for their users, but, instead, we are seeing more and more content censored by the new governors on some very flimsy pretenses. As such, perhaps it is time to review some of our fundamental assumptions.

Mike Wendy, president of MediaFreedom, told Breitbart News in an exclusive statement that Congress should re-examine Section 230 and that these social media giants continue to act like publishers, given their content curation.

Wendy told Breitbart News, “I think lawmakers need to take another look at Section 230, which was passed over 20 years ago. It and other aspects of the law create an ethos of willful blindness, a moral hazard of sorts, which allows companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter to pervert the Internet to their selfish, oftentimes partisan, ends. Now, I don’t have a problem with their bias; that’s their right. But, let’s be clear; they’re acting like classic publishers, which demands they be liable for the content and actions over their platforms. This must be better addressed.”

Campbell then suggested that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should require edge providers to disclose their practices on blocking, censoring, and shadow banning users on their platforms. The FCC chairman enacted a similar policy in the “Restoring Internet Freedom Order” that requires ISPs to disclose their practices on blocking and throttling data prioritization for consumers and businesses.

“I think that would be a great modification of Section 230,” Campbell told Breitbart News. “Free-markets only work when there’s sufficient transparency and you know what the terms of the deal actually are, so the problem for a conservative is you often can’t tell whether conservative content is being blocked, and at times, it is very, very subtle. Google can just shift your search results to be on the third or fourth page. If you do not know this is happening, how can you make a marketplace decision to use another platform? Transparency is critical.”

Campbell concluded, “The argument would be if you want to block content as a platform, you can, but you need to be transparent about how you are doing it. Right now, they have no transparency requirements, and, as a matter of fact, they are not transparent about how their algorithms work. They zealously guard how they work.”

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com

Politics as a Weapon in the Cause of Islam

In 2007, in a highly controversial move, Keith Hakim Ellison, the first Muslim congressman, swore his oath of office on a copy of the Koran.  In effect, Ellison rejected the values that unify Americans and instead pledged to follow a religious text that commands Muslims to wage war against secular legal systems.


Today, swearing the oath of office on the Koran and even simultaneously praising Allah have become almost commonplace.  In 2016, Minneapolis Park Board member and Somalian refugee, A.K. Hassan took his oath on a massively oversized Koran and proclaimed his commitment to serve “in the name of Allah.”  In 2015, another Somali refugee, Ilhan Omar, elected to the Minnesota House of Representative, swore on the Koran, as did Carolyn Walker-Diallo, the first Muslim woman judge elected to Brooklyn’s 7th Municipal District, and Abdullah Hammoud, a Michigan state representative.  



In “Muslim Brotherhood Political Infiltration on Steroids,” I described how as early as 1987, FBI information revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood – a Middle East political organization considered a terrorist organization by five Arab countries and Russia – was seeking to “peacefully get inside the United States Government” and accomplish “the ultimate goal of overthrowing all non-Islamic governments.”  Several M.B. front groups, including Project Mobilize; the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO); and Jetpac, Inc., had been created to politically exploit America’s Muslim community to achieve supremacist goals set forth in the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan, the Explanatory Memorandum.


As if taking a cue from the memorandum, the executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Nihad Awad, spoke in January 2016, at the 14th annual Muslim American Society-Islamic Circle of North America (MAS-ICNA) conference in Chicago.  He urged Muslims to “[t]urn your centers, Islamic centers, mosques into registration centers for voters, into polling stations during election time.”


Awad intoned that American Muslims can determine “not only the future of you here but the future of America itself.”  In 2014, the United Arab Emirates identified CAIR and MAS as terrorist organizations.  CAIR, referred to as “Hamas doing business as CAIR” by former FBI supervisor and M.B. expert John Guandolo, had been previously identified as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF-Hamas funding trial.  ICNA was listed in the Explanatory Memorandum as one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s likeminded “organization of our friends” with the shared goal of destroying America and transforming it into a Muslim nation.


In Canada and Europe and to a more limited degree in the U.S., once devout Muslims are installed in political office, they push for anti-hate speech and anti-Islamopobia laws and even prohibitions against verbatim citing of Islamic texts.  In addition, since sharia-adherent Muslims are commanded to reject man-made law such as the U.S. Constitution, they must endeavor to replace secular law with Islamic doctrine under a caliphate or Islamic government.


Muslims in office also take positions against U.S. interests.  For example, Ellison represents “Little Mogadishu,” a neighborhood in Minneapolis with one of the highest concentrations of Somali Muslim refugees.  In 2015, despite active recruiting in his district by the East African terrorist group Al-Shabaab, and the arrest of several Somalis for attempted travel to Syria to join ISIS, Ellison ignored terrorist financing concerns and opposed efforts to curb cash transfers to Somalia.


Meanwhile, new Muslim candidates of questionable motivation and affiliation continue to run for office.  Since my previous article, two are in upcoming races, and one, who was momentarily unsuccessful, is likely to run again.


In Florida’s Broward County, Altaf Ahmed is running for county commissioner in an election to be held later this year.  In 2016, he tweeted his attendance at CAIR Florida’s 16th annual gala and included a photo of himself with Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  In 1992, Wahhaj said, “If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”


Ahmed also praised the gala’s organizer, Nezar Hamze, a CAIR leader and Broward County sheriff’s deputy.  Hamze has denied the threat of Islamic terrorism and has conducted active shooter training at an al-Qaeda-associated Florida mosque.  He has been actively involved in Islamic Relief Worldwide, an organization banned by the UAE, Israel, and several Swiss banks for funding al-Qaeda and Hamas.


Another questionable candidate for office, Ammar Campa-Najjar, is running for the 50th Congressional District in eastern San Diego County and Temecula, the seat currently held by Duncan Hunter.  Campa-Najjar’s grandfather headed the intelligence wing of Fatah, the organization responsible for the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre and other terrorist attacks against Israelis. 


Campa-Najjar attended an Islamic school at the Masjid Abu Bakr in San Diego but claims to have converted to Christianity.  His views on the Middle East are confounding.  He says he appreciates Israel’s need for security but also proclaims that “Israel will have to acknowledge its wrongdoings as the sovereign state” and “Palestinians will have to renounce violence and fanaticism, acknowledge their Jewish neighbors and accept new realities.”


In the most recent presidential election, Campa-Najjar supported Bernie Sanders, who criticized Israel for its offensive war against Gaza following thousands of rocket attacks and questioned America’s level of support for Israeli security.


A third Muslim would-be politician, Dilara Sayeed, ran unsuccessfully as a Democratic candidate for the Illinois House’s 5th District and was endorsed by M.B. operative Ellison.  Sayeed recently spoke at a Muslim religious festival (Eid) dinner at the Loyola University Chicago Muslim Student Association and was honored by the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC) at an event that featured M.B. and sharia-advocate, Dalia Mogahed, as the keynote speaker.


The Muslim Student Association, a rabidly anti-U.S., anti-Semitic, and anti-Israel group, is the first national Islamic organization established by the Muslim Brotherhood to indoctrinate and recruit Muslim students for terrorist organizations.  Meanwhile, CIOGC members include many M.B. front organizations, such as the Mosque Foundation (M.F.), which has held fundraisers for individuals and groups associated with the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas; Islamic Relief USA, which has funded al-Qaeda; and the Muslim American Society, which has propagated materials that degrade women, curse Christians, and call for the murder of Jews and homosexuals.


With endorsements from the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune and as a fellow of JetPac, an organization established as an “open call for American Muslims to immerse themselves in local politics,” Sayeed is likely to seek political office again and succeed. 


Given the new Muslim candidates and their affiliations, and the likely emergence of even more such office-seekers, Ellison’s address at a 2010 MAS fundraiser, hosted by jihad supporter Esam Omeish, now seems an ominous warning.  Said Ellison, “And I am telling you, that with your help, we are able to take the Muslim presence on Capitol Hill from zero to a real player.  And this is what we’re trying to do and we got to do it in every state house in America … positioning Muslims in general to help steer the ship of state in America.”


Surely, the ongoing attempt to penetrate American society through political office so clearly documented in Muslim Brotherhood strategic documents published decades ago is proceeding apace.  Despite a stated objective to destroy the United States from within and replace its system of laws and values with Islamic doctrine or sharia, ignorance or willful blindness on the part of Americans insures that their goal is dangerously within reach.


Image: Rudy Herman via Flickr.










In 2007, in a highly controversial move, Keith Hakim Ellison, the first Muslim congressman, swore his oath of office on a copy of the Koran.  In effect, Ellison rejected the values that unify Americans and instead pledged to follow a religious text that commands Muslims to wage war against secular legal systems.


Today, swearing the oath of office on the Koran and even simultaneously praising Allah have become almost commonplace.  In 2016, Minneapolis Park Board member and Somalian refugee, A.K. Hassan took his oath on a massively oversized Koran and proclaimed his commitment to serve “in the name of Allah.”  In 2015, another Somali refugee, Ilhan Omar, elected to the Minnesota House of Representative, swore on the Koran, as did Carolyn Walker-Diallo, the first Muslim woman judge elected to Brooklyn’s 7th Municipal District, and Abdullah Hammoud, a Michigan state representative.  


In “Muslim Brotherhood Political Infiltration on Steroids,” I described how as early as 1987, FBI information revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood – a Middle East political organization considered a terrorist organization by five Arab countries and Russia – was seeking to “peacefully get inside the United States Government” and accomplish “the ultimate goal of overthrowing all non-Islamic governments.”  Several M.B. front groups, including Project Mobilize; the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO); and Jetpac, Inc., had been created to politically exploit America’s Muslim community to achieve supremacist goals set forth in the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan, the Explanatory Memorandum.


As if taking a cue from the memorandum, the executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Nihad Awad, spoke in January 2016, at the 14th annual Muslim American Society-Islamic Circle of North America (MAS-ICNA) conference in Chicago.  He urged Muslims to “[t]urn your centers, Islamic centers, mosques into registration centers for voters, into polling stations during election time.”


Awad intoned that American Muslims can determine “not only the future of you here but the future of America itself.”  In 2014, the United Arab Emirates identified CAIR and MAS as terrorist organizations.  CAIR, referred to as “Hamas doing business as CAIR” by former FBI supervisor and M.B. expert John Guandolo, had been previously identified as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF-Hamas funding trial.  ICNA was listed in the Explanatory Memorandum as one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s likeminded “organization of our friends” with the shared goal of destroying America and transforming it into a Muslim nation.


In Canada and Europe and to a more limited degree in the U.S., once devout Muslims are installed in political office, they push for anti-hate speech and anti-Islamopobia laws and even prohibitions against verbatim citing of Islamic texts.  In addition, since sharia-adherent Muslims are commanded to reject man-made law such as the U.S. Constitution, they must endeavor to replace secular law with Islamic doctrine under a caliphate or Islamic government.


Muslims in office also take positions against U.S. interests.  For example, Ellison represents “Little Mogadishu,” a neighborhood in Minneapolis with one of the highest concentrations of Somali Muslim refugees.  In 2015, despite active recruiting in his district by the East African terrorist group Al-Shabaab, and the arrest of several Somalis for attempted travel to Syria to join ISIS, Ellison ignored terrorist financing concerns and opposed efforts to curb cash transfers to Somalia.


Meanwhile, new Muslim candidates of questionable motivation and affiliation continue to run for office.  Since my previous article, two are in upcoming races, and one, who was momentarily unsuccessful, is likely to run again.


In Florida’s Broward County, Altaf Ahmed is running for county commissioner in an election to be held later this year.  In 2016, he tweeted his attendance at CAIR Florida’s 16th annual gala and included a photo of himself with Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.  In 1992, Wahhaj said, “If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”


Ahmed also praised the gala’s organizer, Nezar Hamze, a CAIR leader and Broward County sheriff’s deputy.  Hamze has denied the threat of Islamic terrorism and has conducted active shooter training at an al-Qaeda-associated Florida mosque.  He has been actively involved in Islamic Relief Worldwide, an organization banned by the UAE, Israel, and several Swiss banks for funding al-Qaeda and Hamas.


Another questionable candidate for office, Ammar Campa-Najjar, is running for the 50th Congressional District in eastern San Diego County and Temecula, the seat currently held by Duncan Hunter.  Campa-Najjar’s grandfather headed the intelligence wing of Fatah, the organization responsible for the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre and other terrorist attacks against Israelis. 


Campa-Najjar attended an Islamic school at the Masjid Abu Bakr in San Diego but claims to have converted to Christianity.  His views on the Middle East are confounding.  He says he appreciates Israel’s need for security but also proclaims that “Israel will have to acknowledge its wrongdoings as the sovereign state” and “Palestinians will have to renounce violence and fanaticism, acknowledge their Jewish neighbors and accept new realities.”


In the most recent presidential election, Campa-Najjar supported Bernie Sanders, who criticized Israel for its offensive war against Gaza following thousands of rocket attacks and questioned America’s level of support for Israeli security.


A third Muslim would-be politician, Dilara Sayeed, ran unsuccessfully as a Democratic candidate for the Illinois House’s 5th District and was endorsed by M.B. operative Ellison.  Sayeed recently spoke at a Muslim religious festival (Eid) dinner at the Loyola University Chicago Muslim Student Association and was honored by the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC) at an event that featured M.B. and sharia-advocate, Dalia Mogahed, as the keynote speaker.


The Muslim Student Association, a rabidly anti-U.S., anti-Semitic, and anti-Israel group, is the first national Islamic organization established by the Muslim Brotherhood to indoctrinate and recruit Muslim students for terrorist organizations.  Meanwhile, CIOGC members include many M.B. front organizations, such as the Mosque Foundation (M.F.), which has held fundraisers for individuals and groups associated with the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas; Islamic Relief USA, which has funded al-Qaeda; and the Muslim American Society, which has propagated materials that degrade women, curse Christians, and call for the murder of Jews and homosexuals.


With endorsements from the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune and as a fellow of JetPac, an organization established as an “open call for American Muslims to immerse themselves in local politics,” Sayeed is likely to seek political office again and succeed. 


Given the new Muslim candidates and their affiliations, and the likely emergence of even more such office-seekers, Ellison’s address at a 2010 MAS fundraiser, hosted by jihad supporter Esam Omeish, now seems an ominous warning.  Said Ellison, “And I am telling you, that with your help, we are able to take the Muslim presence on Capitol Hill from zero to a real player.  And this is what we’re trying to do and we got to do it in every state house in America … positioning Muslims in general to help steer the ship of state in America.”


Surely, the ongoing attempt to penetrate American society through political office so clearly documented in Muslim Brotherhood strategic documents published decades ago is proceeding apace.  Despite a stated objective to destroy the United States from within and replace its system of laws and values with Islamic doctrine or sharia, ignorance or willful blindness on the part of Americans insures that their goal is dangerously within reach.


Image: Rudy Herman via Flickr.




via American Thinker

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/

Berkeley Discrimination Suit Survives Legal Challenge

Berkeley Discrimination Suit Survives Legal Challenge
The University of California at Berkeley’s thuggish request to throw out an important civil rights lawsuit that could hold the school accountable for its blatant viewpoint discrimination that involves slapping unreasonable restrictions and fees on appearances by conservative speakers like David Horowitz and Ann Coulter was refused this week by the federal judge hearing the case.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://canadafreepress.com/

Mid-term narrative of a ‘blue wave’ building is bogus

Amy Walter of the respected Cook Political Report asks the question: “If Democrats Are Doing so Great, Why Don’t They Have a Bigger Lead on Generic Ballot?”


Indeed, the Democrat’s lead in the generic ballot has gone from double digits last year to less than 7 points, according to several polls. And the reason may surprise you:



Here’s my best guess. First, we tend to spend too much time looking at the margin instead of the vote itself. For example, the Quinnipiac poll in March had Democrats up 10 points. In April, that lead was down to just 3 points. The headline: Democrats lose their lead! But, let’s take a closer look at what actually changed between March and April. In March, 48 percent said they’d like to see Democrats win control of Congress to just 38 percent who said they’d want Republicans in control. In April, 46 percent wanted to see Democrats in control (a slight 2 point drop), while 43 percent picked the GOP (a more impressive 8-point improvement).


What does this mean? It means that Republicans are “coming home.” Even in a terrible year for the GOP, they are not going to perform much worse in the national vote than 43-44 percent. In 2006, for example, Republicans took 44 percent of the national House vote, even as many polls leading up to Election Day showed Republicans in the high-30’s. In 2008, an even more politically horrific year for the GOP, Republicans garnered 43 percent of the national House vote. In both cases, Republican voters, many reluctantly, “came home” to the GOP in the end. What’s happening now is that these voters are coming home sooner. Given our intense polarization, and a president and a news media that fans those partisan flames, this shouldn’t be all that surprising.


As disgusted as many GOP voters have been with the party, their voters are still far more likely to pull the lever for Republicans rather than the Democrats.


And the Democrats are making it ridiculously easy for them.


In some of the most competitive races around the country, Democrats are insisting on nominating “pure” progressives – clones of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Younger party members may be cheering the radicals on, but given that young voters historically don’t vote in off year elections, unless there are some huge surprises, most of the far left radicals will lose.


This gives Republicans a chance to hang on to the House. But other factors must break their way for that to happen.


The question for the fall, of course, is where those who currently put themselves in the “undecided” category break. We know these voters are much less engaged in politics. They are less attached to party and partisanship. We lump this group into the category called “independents.” And, here’s what we know about them: they don’t like Trump. Overall, about one-third to 40 percent of self-described independent voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president. And, as we know, how you feel about the president is correlated very closely to how you vote in a mid-term election.


In the latest Marist/NPR/PBS poll (April 10-13), for example, Trump’s job approval rating among independents is 38 percent. On the generic ballot question in that same poll, the congressional Republican gets 32 percent of the independent vote. A late April Quinnipiac poll showed Trump with a 33 percent job approval among independents, and 36 percent of independents say they will vote for a Republican in the fall.


In the end, the fate of the GOP in the mid terms will be determined as it always has been; turnout and approval of the president. Democrats know this which is why they are trying to shape the narrative that makes a Democratic victory inevitable. A lot will depend on the Republican get out of the vote effort. Perhaps even more will depend on Democrat’s ability to sideline their radicals and nominate more moderate candidates. The fact is, any talk of a “blue wave” is bogus at this point.


 


Amy Walter of the respected Cook Political Report asks the question: “If Democrats Are Doing so Great, Why Don’t They Have a Bigger Lead on Generic Ballot?”


Indeed, the Democrat’s lead in the generic ballot has gone from double digits last year to less than 7 points, according to several polls. And the reason may surprise you:


Here’s my best guess. First, we tend to spend too much time looking at the margin instead of the vote itself. For example, the Quinnipiac poll in March had Democrats up 10 points. In April, that lead was down to just 3 points. The headline: Democrats lose their lead! But, let’s take a closer look at what actually changed between March and April. In March, 48 percent said they’d like to see Democrats win control of Congress to just 38 percent who said they’d want Republicans in control. In April, 46 percent wanted to see Democrats in control (a slight 2 point drop), while 43 percent picked the GOP (a more impressive 8-point improvement).


What does this mean? It means that Republicans are “coming home.” Even in a terrible year for the GOP, they are not going to perform much worse in the national vote than 43-44 percent. In 2006, for example, Republicans took 44 percent of the national House vote, even as many polls leading up to Election Day showed Republicans in the high-30’s. In 2008, an even more politically horrific year for the GOP, Republicans garnered 43 percent of the national House vote. In both cases, Republican voters, many reluctantly, “came home” to the GOP in the end. What’s happening now is that these voters are coming home sooner. Given our intense polarization, and a president and a news media that fans those partisan flames, this shouldn’t be all that surprising.


As disgusted as many GOP voters have been with the party, their voters are still far more likely to pull the lever for Republicans rather than the Democrats.


And the Democrats are making it ridiculously easy for them.


In some of the most competitive races around the country, Democrats are insisting on nominating “pure” progressives – clones of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Younger party members may be cheering the radicals on, but given that young voters historically don’t vote in off year elections, unless there are some huge surprises, most of the far left radicals will lose.


This gives Republicans a chance to hang on to the House. But other factors must break their way for that to happen.


The question for the fall, of course, is where those who currently put themselves in the “undecided” category break. We know these voters are much less engaged in politics. They are less attached to party and partisanship. We lump this group into the category called “independents.” And, here’s what we know about them: they don’t like Trump. Overall, about one-third to 40 percent of self-described independent voters approve of the job Trump is doing as president. And, as we know, how you feel about the president is correlated very closely to how you vote in a mid-term election.


In the latest Marist/NPR/PBS poll (April 10-13), for example, Trump’s job approval rating among independents is 38 percent. On the generic ballot question in that same poll, the congressional Republican gets 32 percent of the independent vote. A late April Quinnipiac poll showed Trump with a 33 percent job approval among independents, and 36 percent of independents say they will vote for a Republican in the fall.


In the end, the fate of the GOP in the mid terms will be determined as it always has been; turnout and approval of the president. Democrats know this which is why they are trying to shape the narrative that makes a Democratic victory inevitable. A lot will depend on the Republican get out of the vote effort. Perhaps even more will depend on Democrat’s ability to sideline their radicals and nominate more moderate candidates. The fact is, any talk of a “blue wave” is bogus at this point.


 




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

HILLARY’S MONEY LAUNDERING SCHEME

HILLARY’S MONEY LAUNDERING SCHEME

While it obsesses over an aging porn star, Russians, discredited ex-FBI officials, and pimple-faced gun-grabbers, the mainstream media has been ignoring an explosive federal lawsuit unearthing a huge illegal money-laundering conspiracy said to have been masterminded last election cycle by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://canadafreepress.com/