Month: January 2020

The 2020 Democrat presidential candidates are not running on any legitimate policy proposals —nothing about keeping the country safer, no actual ideas to help grow the economy and raise employment, nothing at all about meeting international challenges in Iran, the Middle East, Russia or elsewhere, nothing about finding and producing new energy.

Instead, the Democrat Party’s entire platform is predicated on visceral antipathy for Trump and removing the president from office.

The “anybody but Trump” party line will only help secure Trump’s 2020 victory, talk radio show host Larry O’Connell surmises.

“The one big thing with the Democrats right now is they can’t tell you who they’re for,” the WMAL host explained in an exclusive interview with the Gateway Pundit. “The American people are ultimately an optimistic people. You’ve got to tell them a reason to vote for you, not a reason to vote against the other person – and that’s what Donald Trump has going for him that the Democrats still haven’t been able to figure out.”

“Since the day after the election, the Democrats have not told the American people what they are for, only who they’re against.”

Under Trump’s leadership, the economy is surging with historically low unemployment rates. Blacks, Latinos and women are experiencing unprecedented prosperity as Trump continues to restore power back to We the People. The president continues to decimate Islamic State in the Middle East.

But, Democrats know they can’t win on the issues so they are relying on effectively smearing Trump as a criminal and resorting to impeachment to secure victory in 2020, O’Connor continued.

“What does a candidate run on when they want to be president? They want to tell you how they’re’ going to make the country more safe and secure with national security. Well, they can’t do that because Trump has already – he defeated ISIS in the Middle East when Barack Obama let it explode the Middle East,” he said.

“They run on the economy – well, how would the Democrats run on the economy when Donald Trump has brought us to historic lows in unemployment,” he continued. “The Dow Jones has gone from 18,000 on Election Day to 29,000. These are all things that a normal president would run on. They can’t run on any of those things, so instead, they want to slime him, slander him and try to make him seem like he is some sort of criminal.”

Additionally, Trump will likely overperform among Black voters in 2020 and if he does, it will be incredibly hard for Republicans to lose, O’Connor predicted.

“One of the most brilliant political moves I’ve seen in my adult lifetime,” he said, “was Donald Trump in 2016, going to Detroit, speaking to a predominantly black audience and saying ‘what you have got to lose, you’ve been voting Democrat for the last 60 years and look at Detroit. What has it brought you?’

“Now [Trump] can come back to that very same audience and say, ‘You gave me a chance and now you have historic lows in unemployment. You have a historic number of people who have gotten off of food stamps. I now want to give you school choice. I now want to protect your unborn by defunding Planned Parenthood. I care about the African Americans in this country, give me another four years,’” he continued. “I think that’s a powerful argument.”

Regardless of the booming economy or the president’s swiftly growing list of achievements towards making America great, Democrats, fake news media, and Hollywood are desperate to block Trump’s reelection.

The Trump campaign and every Trump supporter must fight like we’re 20 states behind to secure victory because the four pillars of modern-day liberalism – the Democratic Party, the mainstream media, Hollywood and the fringe academic left –  are even more anomalously devoted to destroying Trump than his Republican predecessors, O’Connor warned.

“Donald Trump has Hollywood lined up against him. He’s got the music industry lined up against him. He’s got academia lined up against him. He’s got the Democrat Party lined up against him. He’s got so much lined up against him,” he explained.  “I hope the Trump reelection campaign constantly runs right up into election day like they are 20 states behind because they need to have that kind of energy and voters need to have that kind of energy.

He added, “They have to be ready, just like they were in 2016, to walk across broken glass to vote for this man.”

The post EXCLUSIVE | WMAL Host Larry O’Connor: 2020 Democrats Have Still Not Told The American People What They Are For, Only Who They’re Against appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

According to a report, a father who had assisted as a volunteer in coaching his son’s hockey team for three years has been barred from coaching because he refused to take a mandatory gender identity training course.

The Canadian man, identified by Quillette as “John Doe” because, as the Quillette writer surmises, he could accused of transphobia for speaking to the media, completed a series of mandated courses, and says he supports anti-discrimination efforts led by Hockey Eastern Ontario and the Ontario Hockey Federation (OHF). Those organizations  supervise minor hockey in Ontario, from players as young as six years old.

Doe’s objections were triggered by a 33-slide module on gender in the required gender diversity course. He told Quillette, “I would be fine taking an awareness course if it [were] factual and based in science. But I felt it was too ideological.” Now, he states, “I can’t coach. I can’t be on the bench. I can’t help on the ice —even just to help on the ice, you need this training.”

As Quillette notes, the case that precipitated new training requirements revolved around Jesse Thompson, a girl who identified as a boy and complained about not having access to the boys’ locker room. Ultimately OHF deferred to an LGBT activist organization called Egale Canada to create new training materials.

Quillette notes, “Egale, a Toronto-based charity founded in 1986, has published materials indicating that children understand their gender identity ‘between the ages of three and five.’ And in the gender identity course that Egale produced for the OHF, it ratcheted that age down to ‘between 18-30 months.’”

Several slides from the module on gender argue “the gender binary…was imposed on Native societies…including on the land we now know as Canada.”

Quillette writes:

On another slide, amid a parade of variously configured pink and blue male/female stick-people, the concept of “polygender” is introduced to define “people who identify as multiple genders simultaneously and can be several genders all at once. Or they may alternate between their varying gender identities depending on the day or the week.” Coaches also get a slide on “genderqueer” individuals, who exist in an undefined extra-dimensional gender space that allows them to “reject gender altogether”—though this is not to be confused with “agender” (it gets its own slide), a label that applies to those who are merely “genderless.”

Doe asked for a temporary exemption so he could explain to OHF why he objected; that request was denied. Quillette writes that Hockey Canada’s Senior Vice-President for Insurance and Risk Management wrote back saying the course was required. That prompted Doe to write to Egale Canada and challenged some of the materials for the course, which yielded no different result.

OHF notes in their handbook, “In 2018-19, the OHF represented over 190,000 registered players. In addition to that playing membership, the OHF also involves in excess of 50,000 coaches and 7,000 officials. The main objectives of the OHF are: to foster, promote, encourage the sport of amateur hockey; provide opportunities for all players to play the sport; promote the orderly development of all categories, and to coordinate and conduct competitions for Branch, Regional and National Championships.”

Doe concluded, “The more I looked into it [on the Internet], the more I saw that I wasn’t alone. There’s a lot of people speaking out and who are unhappy with how the activists are controlling the narrative around this.”

via The Daily Wire

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

As reported by The Daily Wire, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently launched into a particularly delusional rant about billionaires. While being interviewed for a MLK Day event, Ocasio-Cortez claimed that all billionaire businessmen get rich on slave labor. They don’t make what they sell, she explained. They “sit on a couch” and do nothing while “thousands of people are paid slave wages” to do all of the work for them.

She then launched into a standard litany of capitalism’s alleged victims — “undocumented people,” “black and brown people,” “single mothers” — who are all “literally dying” because they aren’t being paid enough to live. “No one ever makes a billion dollars,” she said. After pausing thoughtfully she added, “You take a billion dollars.”

This all played very well in the auditorium she was sitting in, just as it plays well with Democrat voters and younger people generally. But, for the most part, it’s nonsense. AOC wants us to see billionaires as nothing but a bunch of greasy, pot-bellied tyrants, chomping on their cigars and laughing maniacally while clutching big bags with dollar signs on the front and gold coins spilling out. Her ultra-simplified worldview cannot accommodate the possibility that billionaires have any redeeming characteristics whatsoever. They are straightforwardly evil and useless, and that’s all that can be said about them.

This cartoon is easier to draw if you just stick with portraying billionaires as greedy and materialistic. It’s a tougher sell when you want them to be sedentary on top of it. Say what you want about Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and the rest of the gang, but you really can’t call them lazy. In fact, CEOs work over 60 hours a week, which is almost 20 hours more than the average American. It turns out that you can’t actually run a billion dollar company by sitting on your couch. And you certainly can’t found a business and build it into an empire that way. I could probably put this in even stronger terms: there is no such thing as a successful and lazy businessman. In the world of business, those two qualities tend to be mutually exclusive.

What about the employees? Are they really a bunch of emaciated slaves? While it’s true that some companies, such as Colin Kaepernick’s employer, have been guilty of essentially using slave labor, it would be hard to argue that this is the norm in modern America. The much-hated Walmart, for example, pays its full time hourly employees an average of $14.26 an hour. Store managers usually make over $170,000. Over half of their employees are women and almost half are people of color. They also tend to promote from within, providing advancement opportunities to those on the lowest rung of the ladder. Even the company’s CEO began his career unloading trucks at a Walmart warehouse. None of this sounds like slavery to me.

“You don’t make a billion dollars, you take a billion dollars,” may be an effective and catchy applause line in front of an already sympathetic audience, but it doesn’t mean anything. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and even Google were all started in garages by their respective founders. Those founders became billionaires because lots of people liked their products. That would seem to qualify as “making a billion dollars,” by any fair definition of the phrase. If Bill Gates “took” his billions, who did he take it from? Were people forced to buy Microsoft products? Did he have a gun to everyone’s head? Or did they offer up their money in exchange for the product he provided?

If we really want to point the finger at useless, lazy leeches who take but don’t make, we should be pointing in the direction of the institution AOC herself represents. It’s the government that survives and thrives by literally taking money at gunpoint. Bureaucrats and politicians are the ones who, in so many cases, do nothing of substance all day and yet get paid hefty sums. Virtually everything AOC said about CEOs would apply far more to herself and her politician friends. And yet her solution to our country’s troubles is to put more money into the hands of the very people who have wasted trillions of dollars, and more power into the hands of the very people who have shown themselves ethically and practically incapable of handling it.

AOC wants capitalism to be a zero-sum game where every dollar earned by a billionaire is a dollar stolen from you and me. But it doesn’t work that way because we choose to forfeit our dollars and we do so in exchange for the goods and services we desire. In the government’s case, however, it is indeed a zero-sum proposition. Every dollar they earn is a dollar taken from us. We don’t volunteer it and we have no choice but to give them whatever they demand. Maybe we’ll benefit from what they do with the money, maybe not. Most of the time, not.

This is the whole problem with the program that AOC, Sanders, and Warren put forward. They want to prevent Apple and Amazon from making billions, but they see no problem with Uncle Sam making trillions. They want us to look with contempt and suspicion on the rich and powerful, and yet to blindly trust the richest and most powerful force on Earth. And they’re hoping we’re stupid enough not to notice the contradiction.

via The Daily Wire

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

In the first episode of a new podcast series, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R) peels back the curtain on the impeachment trial, offering Americans a glimpse at more than just the political theater put on for the cameras and giving his perspective on the process as both a senator-juror and a constitutional lawyer.

Asked by co-host Michael Knowles, host of The Daily Wire’s “Michael Knowles Show,” about some of his big takeaways from day one of the trial, Cruz noted that while the Democratic impeachment managers started off putting on a pretty good show, they soon devolved into “lecturing” senators and Americans, alike — and they also managed to immediately expose themselves as playing political games rather than trying to seriously get to the truth (video below).

In a discussion about the Democrats attempting to remove the judiciary in the impeachment process, particularly in connection to executive privilege — the issue at the heart of the Democrats’ “obstruction of Congress” allegation, one of the two charges the Democrat-majority House brought against Trump without a single Republican vote — Cruz pointed to the Democrats’ reversal on the testimony of a key White House official as evidence that the Democrats are just “playing games.”

“The best way to understand it is look at John Bolton,” said Cruz. “A lot of the argument today was about John Bolton, [former] national security adviser to the president. House Democrats said, ‘We want John Bolton to testify.’”

“And John Bolton did something very interesting and, I think, very clever,” Cruz continued. “John Bolton’s lawyer went to a federal court in D.C. and filed a pleading that said, ‘Judge, my client has two conflicting obligations: House Democrats have asked him to testify, but the White House has exerted executive privilege that said he can’t testify.’ And his lawyer said, ‘My client doesn’t know what to do. So, Your Honor, he’ll do whatever you tell him to do. We put ourselves at the mercy of the court. You, judge, tell John Bolton what he should do.’”

“The next step is remarkable,” said Cruz. “You know what the House Democrats did? They said never mind.” The House Democrats withdrew the subpoena for Bolton’s deputy and told the judge that they were not going to subpoena Bolton as a witness, Cruz explained.

“And then they get to the Senate and the first thing they want to do is subpoena John Bolton,” Cruz said. “They literally passed on it in the House.”

What the Democrats just revealed, the senator explained, is that they are not willing to use the proper legal method to get to the truth. Instead, they want to put on a show for the public decrying the “unfairness” of the process in front of the cameras in the Senate.

The reason, Cruz underscored, is that the Democrats know they do not have a case for their two impeachment articles, neither of which specifies an actual crime and both of which fail to rise to the definition of “high crime or misdemeanor,” as required by the Constitution.

Video of the full episode below:

Related: WATCH: Ted Cruz Sums Up First Day Of Impeachment Trial With ‘Old Saying,’ Offers Prediction

via The Daily Wire

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

The United Nations ruled that “climate refugees” cannot be returned back to their home countries. This ruling forces the United States to allow all Central Americans into our country.

Literally, anyone can claim the new refugee status.

This will essentially open US borders for good.

Now the left has combined open borders with junk science to create climate refugees.

Via The Central Tibetan Administration:

It is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found.

The judgment – which is the first of its kind – represents a legal “tipping point” and a moment that “opens the doorway” to future protection claims for people whose lives and wellbeing have been threatened due to global heating, experts say.

Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.

The judgment relates to the case of Ioane Teitiota, a man from the Pacific nation of Kiribati, which is considered one of the countries most threatened by rising sea levels. He applied for protection in New Zealand in 2013, claiming his and his family’s lives were at risk.

The committee heard evidence of overcrowding on the island of South Tarawa, where Teitiota lived, saying that the population there had increased from 1,641 in 1947 to 50,000 in 2010 due to sea level rising leading to other islands becoming uninhabitable, which had led to violence and social tensions.

He also spoke of the lack of fresh water and difficulty growing crops due to salinity of the water table causing serious health issues for his family. He said that as Kiribati was predicted to be uninhabitable in 10 to 15 years, his life was endangered by remaining there.

The New Zealand courts rejected Teitiota’s claim for protection.

The post UN Human Rights Ruling Says “Climate Refugees” Cannot be Returned back to Their Home Country — US Must Open Its Borders to All Central Americans appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

“We can’t just drill our way out of the problem.”

That was the oft-repeated phrase of President Barack Obama,  who throughout his presidency argued that the key to beating higher gasoline prices was to subsidize alternative energies, such as solar and wind.

It was a common sentiment from those who fretted that the world had reached “peak oil,” and that America was simply doomed to become increasingly reliant on a few big international oil producers for a rapidly dwindling resource.

It also played well into the narrative that fossil fuels were inherently evil, destroying the planet by escalating climate change.

But the doomsayers were wrong.

Thanks in large part to American ingenuity and technological innovation, the script has been flipped—and the dividends have been enormous.

Recent events in the Middle East underscore the dramatic change that’s occurred.

It’s been remarkable that following the September attacks on Saudi Arabian oil facilities and the recent U.S. strike on Iranian Gen. Qassim Suleimani, oil prices have remained more or less stable.

This is a huge departure from what has transpired after major incidents in the Middle East in the past. As Foreign Policy’s C.K. Hickey noted:

The August 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait led to a surge in the price of oil from $15 a barrel that month to $40 by October ($65.68 adjusted for inflation as of 2019). In February 2003, the lead-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq once again led to a spike in prices to nearly $40 a barrel, or around $55 in today’s dollars, a level that hadn’t been seen since the Gulf War.

This time was different.

Why?

U.S. oil production has boomed in the past decade, thanks largely to innovation in the use of fracking, which has allowed the U.S. to tap into not only enormous amounts of shale oil, but also natural gas and other petroleum resources.

In fact, U.S. production has ramped up so much that in 2018, the U.S. became a net exporter of oil for the first time in nearly 75 years.

Perhaps even more incredibly, for a brief time at the end of 2019, the U.S. surpassed Saudi Arabia to become the world’s top oil exporter.

That, of course, produced jobs and a boon to the American economy, but it also created the conditions for a global oil market more resistant to supply and price shocks—which were sometimes created by OPEC nations. Many of the latter are in the Middle East or generally hostile to the U.S.

But now, a world suddenly deprived of, say, Iranian oil, can rely increasingly on U.S. oil.

As political scientist Walter Russell Mead wrote for The Wall Street Journal, the Middle East is now a region “being fundamentally reshaped by drillers in Texas, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, and elsewhere.” 

As my colleague Nick Loris, an expert on energy and environmental policy, has noted, the huge increase in domestic oil production doesn’t mean that the U.S. is truly energy independent. We are still very much affected by the global supply and the actions of countries abroad.

Nevertheless, the surge in production has transformed the American economy and given the U.S. an invaluable tool in foreign relations.

That has transpired in spite of efforts by the Obama administration and the left to strangle an industry they fundamentally dislike, an effort that would be stepped up massively if the so-called Green New Deal became law.

The Green New Deal, a badly disguised Trojan Horse for socialism and of dubious environmental benefit, would end and reverse the oil production advances that have been such a broad-based benefit for the U.S. economy.

Hopefully, the strong economy and stable oil markets amid turmoil in the Middle East will serve as a reminder that reversing the incredible advances in oil drilling of the past decade would be a huge mistake.

The post How the Oil Production Boom Has Benefited America appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

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

This year
marks the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, which granted American women
the right to vote and catapulted them out of the shadows of dependence into the
full sunlight of long-awaited civic freedoms. 

The right
to vote was only the beginning of a long list of goals achieved by the early
women’s right movement. It also gained for us the right to control our property, to
defend ourselves and our children from abusive husbands, to earn advanced
degrees, and join professions reserved for men. 

But one
right the early feminists did not fight for was the right to
abortion. On the contrary, they understood abortion not as a woman’s
right, but a wrong against our sex. It is today’s pro-life women that
fully preserve the suffragists’ ideals.

Decades of strident abortion activism have obscured this important piece of history, as today’s feminist activists have gone from demanding that abortion be “safe, legal, and rare” to the outright celebration of “shout your abortion.”

Yesterday’s
courageous suffragists would be shocked and saddened by today’s pro-abortion
feminists’ complete disregard for the nature of abortion and its effects on
women. 

The first
feminists felt keenly that abortion was not an act of liberation, but of
coercion—not a triumph, but a tragic defeat. Abortion did not empower women,
but degraded them, treating their fertility as a defect and their sons and
daughters as disposable. 

They also understood that abortion empowered unscrupulous men by absolving them from all responsibility in the sexual act. 

The very
basis of the equal rights movement was the inherent dignity of every human
person It makes perfect sense that such a movement should frown on abortion and
infanticide, acts that end the life of a defenseless child. 

The suffragists understood that young lives were being sacrificed due to crushing poverty, the irresponsible behavior of selfish men, and the callous indifference of the wider society. They also understood that women, in their powerlessness, resorted to the unnatural acts of abortion and infanticide to save themselves. 

Women’s enfranchisement, the suffragists felt, would give them the longed-for ability to receive and raise their children. 

“Sweeter even than to have had the joy of caring for children of my own,” Susan B. Anthony said, “has it been to me to help bring about a better state of things for mothers generally, so that their unborn little ones could not be willed away from them.”

One
hundred years later, hundreds of thousands of “unborn little ones” are willed
away from American women each year. And not because of crushing poverty or
unjust laws, but because we have allowed ourselves to be hoodwinked by the
false promise of “sexual liberation”—deceived into treating our fertility like
a disease and our “unwanted” children as consequences that can be flushed away.

Our sex
has come a long way, and we enjoy privileges and opportunities inconceivable in
the grand scope of human history. But the awful fact is that today, we are
sacrificing far more of our children to abortion than we did when the women’s
movement first began on pro-life terms.  

Pro-life women
are eager to complete the work our foremothers began. Many thousands of us will
gather at the 2020 March for Life in Washington, D.C., which this year proudly
and truly proclaims that “Pro-Life is Pro-Woman.” 

My sisters
and I will march this week for full liberation for ourselves, our daughters, and
our sons—a liberation that acknowledges our full rights as women and the
dignity of our unborn children.  

The post Pro-Life Women Stand in the Shoes of Early Suffragists appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

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

The post ‘Ruinous’ to separation of powers: 21 state attorneys general urge Senate to reject impeachment appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

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

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA —The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a male federal prisoner’s motion to be addressed with female pronouns, finding that compelling the use of pronouns at the invitation of litigants could “raise delicate questions about judicial impartiality.”

via CanadaFreePress.Com

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

Judicial Watch is going to court to uncover details of the alleged monitoring of President Trump’s family, lawyer and journalists, as ordered by the since-recalled U.S. Ambassador to the Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch.

The two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the State Department for documents tied to the alleged monitoring of President Trump’s intimate circle and journalists covering him is an extension of our Judicial Watch investigation, which began in October 2019, into the alleged monitoring, via CrowdTangle and other means. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch is alleged to have ordered State Department entities to conduct the monitoring. The list of the alleged targets includes:
     
Jack Posobiec
Donald Trump Jr.
Laura Ingraham
Sean Hannity
Michael McFaul (Obama’s ambassador to Russia)
Dan Bongino
Ryan Saavedra
Rudy Giuliani
Sebastian Gorka
John Solomon
Lou Dobbs
Pamella Geller
Sara Carter

via CanadaFreePress.Com

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