Vermont’s criminal legislators soften criminal laws

Vermont’s “progressive” legislature is moving to relax laws governing criminals and prisoners, while increasing regulations on businesses.  The only state to suffer a credit downgrade last year, Vermont has embarked on some desperate if dubious efforts to “grow the economy.” 

The latest boondoggle is an effort to essentially eliminate prison for most criminals, to save money via “decarceration.”  Called “Justice Reinvestment II,” Vermont’s progressive push to push criminals back out to “work” (the streets) proposes to increase time “earned” off sentences for good behavior, and count probationary periods as time served.  One proposal is to give those on probation “credit” for good behavior while on probation and thereby shorten the probation period.  The rationale for these reforms?

…incarceration, while necessary for public safety in some cases, does not achieve behavior change and can undermine or disrupt a person’s ability to obtain and maintain treatment, housing, and employment.

(Translation: “research has shown imprisoning violent criminals protects the public but disrupts violent criminals’ lives.”) 

Burdensome regulations have created a horrible business climate in Vermont.  Rampant taxation impacts poor wage-earners, contributing to growing despair and crime rates.  Vermont’s inverted “solution” is to eliminate accountability for criminals under the justification that it will help the economy. The “Justice Reinvestment II” report found that “…felony convictions have grown, primarily due to increases in for assault, domestic violence, and sexual assault.”  Working-class Vermonters are fleeing the state because of the high cost of living: policies which favor crime and criminals are an additional “incentive” for emigres to pack their bags.

Vermont spends huge sums getting addicts on suboxone while in prison, and now expunges most criminal records.  It is by some measures the #1 drug-using state in the nation, and policies which label police as racists for arresting drug dealers will ensure the street supply is robust when inmates are churned through the revolving door to reoffend.  Vermont fathers whose licenses are suspended for nonpayment of child support will be unable to drive to work: illegal immigrants are not stymied by such obstacles.  One 2020 bill proposes to legalize prostitution.

Democrats seek to impose rent controls (which will drive up rents); and minimum wage increases, European-style “good cause” termination requirements, and family leave policies that will discourage businesses, reduce hiring, and spark inflation.  They invoke “climate-crisis credit downgrades” as justification to launch ambitious initiatives, ignoring the economic effects of overspending and overregulation. 

Vermont is weighing laws to create a “Bill of Rights” for homeless people to “prevent discrimination,” even as its legislature enacts policies which will undermine private-sector employment, spike taxes and thus discourage property ownership.  It is favoring criminals over victims, blacks over whites, women over men, illegal immigrants over native-born taxpayers, urbanites over ruralites, regulators over farmers, administrators over students and patients, and legislators over voters.  The state has launched all of these insane initiatives in the clarion call of social justice and “creating equity,” but the result is visibly the reverse

Meanwhile, Vermont’s progressives have introduced a number of new gun laws, in one of the safest states in America.  With a social engineering indoctrination that ensures increased rates of taxation, poverty, suicide, domestic violence, drug use, and fiscal implosion, it is only logical for the liberal elites who are gentrifying the Green Mountain State to seize the guns of law-abiding taxpayers, lest they revolt.

Many Vermont voters perceive that Vermont’s most dangerous criminals are in its legislature.  For sensible citizens, their revolt is their vote, in 2020.

Vermont’s “progressive” legislature is moving to relax laws governing criminals and prisoners, while increasing regulations on businesses.  The only state to suffer a credit downgrade last year, Vermont has embarked on some desperate if dubious efforts to “grow the economy.” 

The latest boondoggle is an effort to essentially eliminate prison for most criminals, to save money via “decarceration.”  Called “Justice Reinvestment II,” Vermont’s progressive push to push criminals back out to “work” (the streets) proposes to increase time “earned” off sentences for good behavior, and count probationary periods as time served.  One proposal is to give those on probation “credit” for good behavior while on probation and thereby shorten the probation period.  The rationale for these reforms?

…incarceration, while necessary for public safety in some cases, does not achieve behavior change and can undermine or disrupt a person’s ability to obtain and maintain treatment, housing, and employment.

(Translation: “research has shown imprisoning violent criminals protects the public but disrupts violent criminals’ lives.”) 

Burdensome regulations have created a horrible business climate in Vermont.  Rampant taxation impacts poor wage-earners, contributing to growing despair and crime rates.  Vermont’s inverted “solution” is to eliminate accountability for criminals under the justification that it will help the economy. The “Justice Reinvestment II” report found that “…felony convictions have grown, primarily due to increases in for assault, domestic violence, and sexual assault.”  Working-class Vermonters are fleeing the state because of the high cost of living: policies which favor crime and criminals are an additional “incentive” for emigres to pack their bags.

Vermont spends huge sums getting addicts on suboxone while in prison, and now expunges most criminal records.  It is by some measures the #1 drug-using state in the nation, and policies which label police as racists for arresting drug dealers will ensure the street supply is robust when inmates are churned through the revolving door to reoffend.  Vermont fathers whose licenses are suspended for nonpayment of child support will be unable to drive to work: illegal immigrants are not stymied by such obstacles.  One 2020 bill proposes to legalize prostitution.

Democrats seek to impose rent controls (which will drive up rents); and minimum wage increases, European-style “good cause” termination requirements, and family leave policies that will discourage businesses, reduce hiring, and spark inflation.  They invoke “climate-crisis credit downgrades” as justification to launch ambitious initiatives, ignoring the economic effects of overspending and overregulation. 

Vermont is weighing laws to create a “Bill of Rights” for homeless people to “prevent discrimination,” even as its legislature enacts policies which will undermine private-sector employment, spike taxes and thus discourage property ownership.  It is favoring criminals over victims, blacks over whites, women over men, illegal immigrants over native-born taxpayers, urbanites over ruralites, regulators over farmers, administrators over students and patients, and legislators over voters.  The state has launched all of these insane initiatives in the clarion call of social justice and “creating equity,” but the result is visibly the reverse

Meanwhile, Vermont’s progressives have introduced a number of new gun laws, in one of the safest states in America.  With a social engineering indoctrination that ensures increased rates of taxation, poverty, suicide, domestic violence, drug use, and fiscal implosion, it is only logical for the liberal elites who are gentrifying the Green Mountain State to seize the guns of law-abiding taxpayers, lest they revolt.

Many Vermont voters perceive that Vermont’s most dangerous criminals are in its legislature.  For sensible citizens, their revolt is their vote, in 2020.

via American Thinker Blog

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

Friday caps a great week for President Trump

It’s been a great week for President Trump, from acquittal to economic reports to a great State of the Union Address to an appeals court ruling that tossed the bogus Democrat emoluments lawsuit.

It got even better with the labor participation numbers:    

The Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said the economy created 225,000 in January, well above estimates. BLS says notable job gains occurred in construction, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing.

The number of employed Americans dipped in January to 158,714,000 — down 89,000 from December’s record high.

The unemployment rate ticked up a tenth of a point to 3.6 percent in January.

But the labor force participation rate reached a Trump-era high of 63.4 percent, up from 63.2 percent in December, because the civilian labor force increased by 574,000 in January, after accounting for annual adjustments to population controls, BLS said.

Everything is looking up for President Trump and he is peaking at the right time.  Maybe this is why his reelection odds are at 60%!

PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

It’s been a great week for President Trump, from acquittal to economic reports to a great State of the Union Address to an appeals court ruling that tossed the bogus Democrat emoluments lawsuit.

It got even better with the labor participation numbers:    

The Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said the economy created 225,000 in January, well above estimates. BLS says notable job gains occurred in construction, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing.

The number of employed Americans dipped in January to 158,714,000 — down 89,000 from December’s record high.

The unemployment rate ticked up a tenth of a point to 3.6 percent in January.

But the labor force participation rate reached a Trump-era high of 63.4 percent, up from 63.2 percent in December, because the civilian labor force increased by 574,000 in January, after accounting for annual adjustments to population controls, BLS said.

Everything is looking up for President Trump and he is peaking at the right time.  Maybe this is why his reelection odds are at 60%!

PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

via American Thinker Blog

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

If Dems didn’t have voter fraud, how would they win elections?

The Democrats’ explanation for frantically pursuing President Trump’s impeachment and conviction went like this: If he’s not removed from office, he will rig this year’s election as he did in 2016.  According to Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his hand-picked team of anti-Trump, pro-Hillary investigators, no evidence was found that presidential candidate Donald J. Trump was involved in election-rigging of any kind.  But such rigging did occur in 2016, including the instances mentioned below. 

As Bernie Sanders can attest, his 2016 run for the presidency was rigged out of existence by collusion between the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, both of which were later implicated in a nationwide voter fraud operation.  Three weeks prior to the election, investigative journalist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released two videos of an undercover sting in which high-level Democrat operatives bragged about running a nationwide voter fraud operation financed by the DNC and the Clinton campaign:

  • “We’ve been busing in people [illegal voters] for 50 years and we’re not going to stop now.”
  • “[We know] this is illegal.”
  • “I think backward from how they would prosecute us, and then try to build out a method to avoid [getting caught].”
  • “We implement the plan across every Republican-held state.”
  • “[Our operation] causes massive changes in state legislatures and Congress.”
  • “Hillary knows what’s going on.”

One of the covert operatives caught in the Project Veritas sting is a longtime Democrat named Bob Creamer.  Found guilty in 2005 of tax violations and bank fraud, Creamer was a respected player in Democratic Party politics.  Official visitor logs show the convicted felon visited the Obama White House 342 times, including 47 personal meetings with President Obama, a fact that was buried by the mainstream media when O’Keefe’s explosive exposés were released less than a month before the election Hillary Clinton was heavily favored to win.

Although Creamer was forced to resign after being caught on tape discussing a nationwide voter fraud operation funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, the Democrat dirty tricks operative was honored with a front-row seat at President Obama’s farewell address in January 2017.  Click here to see an NBC News screen grab of Creamer and his wife seated directly in front of the podium where President Obama spoke.  In the Democratic Party, getting caught bragging about a nationwide voter fraud operation is worthy of being awarded the most coveted seat in the house.

How Democrats use false charges of Republican racism to justify and facilitate voter fraud

Covert voter fraud operations aren’t the only way Democrats subvert fair elections.  Despite their feigned protests to the contrary, voter ID laws are not racist, nor do they suppress minority voting.  How does requiring voters to present a photo ID suppress the ability of any adult citizen to vote?  Government-issued photo IDs are easily obtainable by every legitimate voter in America, including those who don’t drive.  Virtually every voting-age citizen already has photo identification, yet Democrats aggressively oppose laws that require photo IDs to vote.  Blocking voter ID laws is but another way Democrats knowingly rig elections by facilitating and encouraging illegal voting.

Things that require photo identification:

  • Driving a vehicle
  • Airport check-in
  • Hotel check-in
  • Hospitals & outpatient testing
  • Doctors’ offices
  • Social Security office
  • Medicare/Medicaid
  • Pawn shop transactions
  • Federal, state & local courts
  • Military bases
  • Donating blood
  • Volunteering at charities
  • Professional applications
  • College applications
  • Job applications
  • Buying a house
  • Boarding a cruise ship
  • Boarding a train
  • Getting a license to hunt or fish
  • Buying cigarettes & alcohol
  • Opening a bank account
  • Applying for credit
  • Cashing a check
  • Getting a tattoo or body piercing
  • Getting a library card
  • Visiting Congress

Things that don’t require photo ID in many Democrat-run jurisdictions:

Democrat election official admits rampant voter fraud

As reported by The New York Post, Manhattan Board of Elections commissioner Alan Shulkin was caught on a Project Veritas undercover video slamming Mayor Bill de Blasio’s municipal ID program as contributing to “all kinds of fraud,” including voter fraud.   Here’s more of what Commissioner Shulkin had to say:

  • “I think there’s a lot of voter fraud.”
  • “There’s thousands of absentee ballots and I don’t know where they came from.”
  • “In some neighborhoods they bus people around to vote, they take them from poll to poll.”
  • “De Blasio’s municipal IDs can be used for anything, including voting.”
  • “The city doesn’t vet people who get ID cards to see who they really are.”
  • “Anybody can go in there and say I am John Smith and I want an ID card.”

So was Commissioner Shulkin praised by fellow Democrats for exposing voter fraud?  Not a chance.  A month after his comments were made public, he was told by party officials to hit the road.

Bottom line:

As shameless practitioners of the “ends justify the means” election tactics of Saul Alinsky, the modern Democratic Party actively encourages and facilitates voter fraud at every opportunity.  If America had an honorable press, Democrat election-rigging operations would have been blown out of the water decades ago.

An electrical engineering graduate of Georgia Tech and now retired, John Eidson is a freelance writer in Atlanta.

Image: Tom Arthur via Wikimedia Commons.

The Democrats’ explanation for frantically pursuing President Trump’s impeachment and conviction went like this: If he’s not removed from office, he will rig this year’s election as he did in 2016.  According to Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his hand-picked team of anti-Trump, pro-Hillary investigators, no evidence was found that presidential candidate Donald J. Trump was involved in election-rigging of any kind.  But such rigging did occur in 2016, including the instances mentioned below. 

As Bernie Sanders can attest, his 2016 run for the presidency was rigged out of existence by collusion between the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, both of which were later implicated in a nationwide voter fraud operation.  Three weeks prior to the election, investigative journalist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released two videos of an undercover sting in which high-level Democrat operatives bragged about running a nationwide voter fraud operation financed by the DNC and the Clinton campaign:

  • “We’ve been busing in people [illegal voters] for 50 years and we’re not going to stop now.”
  • “[We know] this is illegal.”
  • “I think backward from how they would prosecute us, and then try to build out a method to avoid [getting caught].”
  • “We implement the plan across every Republican-held state.”
  • “[Our operation] causes massive changes in state legislatures and Congress.”
  • “Hillary knows what’s going on.”

One of the covert operatives caught in the Project Veritas sting is a longtime Democrat named Bob Creamer.  Found guilty in 2005 of tax violations and bank fraud, Creamer was a respected player in Democratic Party politics.  Official visitor logs show the convicted felon visited the Obama White House 342 times, including 47 personal meetings with President Obama, a fact that was buried by the mainstream media when O’Keefe’s explosive exposés were released less than a month before the election Hillary Clinton was heavily favored to win.

Although Creamer was forced to resign after being caught on tape discussing a nationwide voter fraud operation funded by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, the Democrat dirty tricks operative was honored with a front-row seat at President Obama’s farewell address in January 2017.  Click here to see an NBC News screen grab of Creamer and his wife seated directly in front of the podium where President Obama spoke.  In the Democratic Party, getting caught bragging about a nationwide voter fraud operation is worthy of being awarded the most coveted seat in the house.

How Democrats use false charges of Republican racism to justify and facilitate voter fraud

Covert voter fraud operations aren’t the only way Democrats subvert fair elections.  Despite their feigned protests to the contrary, voter ID laws are not racist, nor do they suppress minority voting.  How does requiring voters to present a photo ID suppress the ability of any adult citizen to vote?  Government-issued photo IDs are easily obtainable by every legitimate voter in America, including those who don’t drive.  Virtually every voting-age citizen already has photo identification, yet Democrats aggressively oppose laws that require photo IDs to vote.  Blocking voter ID laws is but another way Democrats knowingly rig elections by facilitating and encouraging illegal voting.

Things that require photo identification:

  • Driving a vehicle
  • Airport check-in
  • Hotel check-in
  • Hospitals & outpatient testing
  • Doctors’ offices
  • Social Security office
  • Medicare/Medicaid
  • Pawn shop transactions
  • Federal, state & local courts
  • Military bases
  • Donating blood
  • Volunteering at charities
  • Professional applications
  • College applications
  • Job applications
  • Buying a house
  • Boarding a cruise ship
  • Boarding a train
  • Getting a license to hunt or fish
  • Buying cigarettes & alcohol
  • Opening a bank account
  • Applying for credit
  • Cashing a check
  • Getting a tattoo or body piercing
  • Getting a library card
  • Visiting Congress

Things that don’t require photo ID in many Democrat-run jurisdictions:

Democrat election official admits rampant voter fraud

As reported by The New York Post, Manhattan Board of Elections commissioner Alan Shulkin was caught on a Project Veritas undercover video slamming Mayor Bill de Blasio’s municipal ID program as contributing to “all kinds of fraud,” including voter fraud.   Here’s more of what Commissioner Shulkin had to say:

  • “I think there’s a lot of voter fraud.”
  • “There’s thousands of absentee ballots and I don’t know where they came from.”
  • “In some neighborhoods they bus people around to vote, they take them from poll to poll.”
  • “De Blasio’s municipal IDs can be used for anything, including voting.”
  • “The city doesn’t vet people who get ID cards to see who they really are.”
  • “Anybody can go in there and say I am John Smith and I want an ID card.”

So was Commissioner Shulkin praised by fellow Democrats for exposing voter fraud?  Not a chance.  A month after his comments were made public, he was told by party officials to hit the road.

Bottom line:

As shameless practitioners of the “ends justify the means” election tactics of Saul Alinsky, the modern Democratic Party actively encourages and facilitates voter fraud at every opportunity.  If America had an honorable press, Democrat election-rigging operations would have been blown out of the water decades ago.

An electrical engineering graduate of Georgia Tech and now retired, John Eidson is a freelance writer in Atlanta.

Image: Tom Arthur via Wikimedia Commons.

via American Thinker Blog

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

Trump’s full design is coming to fruition

President Trump has a personal schema that regularly plays out — stand tough against your enemies; exhibit restraint when it’s beneficial to do so; and then, when exonerated, claim victory loud and proud.  This framework just repeated itself.  Trump was compelled to withstand a shoddy impeachment trial, enabling his transgressors the opportunity to state their egregious case against him.  He was soon vindicated.  After the expected clearance of both charges, abuse of power and obstructing an investigation, not only did he claim victory, but he eviscerated his opponents and literally shoved his acquittal in their faces. 

Some may feel that the last step of the Trumpian design was unnecessary.  After all, most of us were raised to be gracious in our triumphs.  We conservatives are well known for our restraint and, many times, neglect to shout out our hard won victories.  That is unfortunate, mainly because it does not give pause to our enemies who want to take us down.  What we really need to do is celebrate success while stridently pointing out unmerited and unwarranted actions against us.  Whether, through chastisement, our antagonists see the error of their ways or not, they at least deserve the opportunity to reflect upon their behavior.  

We now have a perfect occasion to put into practice the full and complete Trumpian doctrine, with more victory to claim right now than in any other time during Trump’s presidential term.  We are experiencing a booming stock market despite the efforts of the last regime to administer a chokehold on businesses and the economy.  Trump just gave a State of the Union address like none other, laying out the many accomplishments of his administration, even with a leftist majority in the House hell-bent on thwarting any desirable progress.  Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and much of the Democrat Party, all liars and co-conspirators in the quest to take down the country, are in meltdown mode.  Finally, a recent Gallup poll shows 90% of Americans loving life, even with the incessant drumbeat of gloom and doom by Hollywood, the media, and the usual suspects on the left.

Yes, it is time to claim victory while we have a firm grasp on it.  Our winning needs to be shouted from the rooftops, and the reprehensible schemes against all proud Americans need to be called out for what they are.  It’s time to abide by Trump’s full design.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr.

President Trump has a personal schema that regularly plays out — stand tough against your enemies; exhibit restraint when it’s beneficial to do so; and then, when exonerated, claim victory loud and proud.  This framework just repeated itself.  Trump was compelled to withstand a shoddy impeachment trial, enabling his transgressors the opportunity to state their egregious case against him.  He was soon vindicated.  After the expected clearance of both charges, abuse of power and obstructing an investigation, not only did he claim victory, but he eviscerated his opponents and literally shoved his acquittal in their faces. 

Some may feel that the last step of the Trumpian design was unnecessary.  After all, most of us were raised to be gracious in our triumphs.  We conservatives are well known for our restraint and, many times, neglect to shout out our hard won victories.  That is unfortunate, mainly because it does not give pause to our enemies who want to take us down.  What we really need to do is celebrate success while stridently pointing out unmerited and unwarranted actions against us.  Whether, through chastisement, our antagonists see the error of their ways or not, they at least deserve the opportunity to reflect upon their behavior.  

We now have a perfect occasion to put into practice the full and complete Trumpian doctrine, with more victory to claim right now than in any other time during Trump’s presidential term.  We are experiencing a booming stock market despite the efforts of the last regime to administer a chokehold on businesses and the economy.  Trump just gave a State of the Union address like none other, laying out the many accomplishments of his administration, even with a leftist majority in the House hell-bent on thwarting any desirable progress.  Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and much of the Democrat Party, all liars and co-conspirators in the quest to take down the country, are in meltdown mode.  Finally, a recent Gallup poll shows 90% of Americans loving life, even with the incessant drumbeat of gloom and doom by Hollywood, the media, and the usual suspects on the left.

Yes, it is time to claim victory while we have a firm grasp on it.  Our winning needs to be shouted from the rooftops, and the reprehensible schemes against all proud Americans need to be called out for what they are.  It’s time to abide by Trump’s full design.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr.

via American Thinker Blog

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

Trump dismisses Alexander Vindman, Yevgeny Vindman, and Gordon Sondland

ABBA’s song “The Winner Takes It All” seems peculiarly appropriate for today’s news: “The winner takes it all, The loser’s standing small, Beside the victory, That’s [his] destiny.”

In this case, the winner was President Donald Trump, who emerged victorious from the Democrats’ ill-begotten impeachment debacle. The losers left standing small – and destined to be removed from their positions – were Alexander  Vindman and his twin brother Yevgeny, both of whom are out at the National Security Council, and Ambassador (now former Ambassador) to the European Union Gordon Sondland.

In normal times, dismissing these men from their positions would make perfect sense. All three serve at the President’s pleasure. Under the Constitution, Trump is responsible for foreign policy and is Commander in Chief. In the former role, he has wide latitude to choose and dismiss ambassadors. In the latter role, thousands of years of military tradition hold that officers can be dismissed – or worse – for insubordination.

Sondland came across as merely weak, but Alexander Vindman is a genuine piece of work. The fact that his commanding officer has a constitutional right (and duty) to set foreign policy did not weigh at all with him. He felt that, as a decorated bureaucrat,  his opinion matter more.

When the president ignored Vindman’s opinion, the latter violated national security to complain about Trump’s chosen policy approach. (And note, please that he did not protect himself by being an official whistleblower. Instead, he whined to someone else.) Then, when called before Congress, the man who wears a suit to work showed up in his uniform, evidently trying to put the military’s imprimatur on his personal mutiny.

All three men learned the truth behind Ralph Waldo Emerson’s reminder that “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.” Alexander Vindman, in addition, should be thanking his lucky stars that he hasn’t been court-martialed (or at least hasn’t yet been court-martialed).

Kentucky Rep. Tom Massie understands the dynamics:

As noted above, firing these men was normal and appropriate. But not in Democrat land, a place in which everything Trump does is deemed abnormal and evil.

At the Democrat debate in New Hampshire, seven wannabe commanders-in-chief joined with Joe Biden in urging the audience to give a standing ovation to Alexander Vindman, insubordinate officer extraordinaire.

At the New York Times, it took four writers to report about the firings, and they opined in dire terms:

President Trump wasted little time on Friday opening a campaign of retribution against those he blames for his impeachment, firing two of the most prominent witnesses in the House inquiry against him barely 48 hours after being acquitted by the Senate.

Emboldened by his victory and determined to strike back. . . .

[snip]

The ousters of Mr. Sondland and Colonel Vindman — along with Mr. Vindman’s brother, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, an Army officer who also worked on the National Security Council staff — may only presage a broader effort to even accounts with the president’s perceived enemies. [“Perceived”? They seemed pretty real as they worked to get him impeached.]

[snip]

Even as he began purging administration officials who testified in the House impeachment inquiry. . . .

Nancy Pelosi was shocked, shocked, that an insubordinate officer who leaked like a sieve could be reassigned to a position where he could do no damage:

Rick Wilson, who thinks that Trump supporters are illiterate morons, practically hit the fainting couch:

Trump is a character, but in policy he functions as a conventional American president, operating within the constraints of the Constitution. It’s the Democrat party, which has drifted very far left, that has entirely lost its bearings and its sanity, something its members show in matters great (impeachment) and small (Vindmans).

ABBA’s song “The Winner Takes It All” seems peculiarly appropriate for today’s news: “The winner takes it all, The loser’s standing small, Beside the victory, That’s [his] destiny.”

In this case, the winner was President Donald Trump, who emerged victorious from the Democrats’ ill-begotten impeachment debacle. The losers left standing small – and destined to be removed from their positions – were Alexander  Vindman and his twin brother Yevgeny, both of whom are out at the National Security Council, and Ambassador (now former Ambassador) to the European Union Gordon Sondland.

In normal times, dismissing these men from their positions would make perfect sense. All three serve at the President’s pleasure. Under the Constitution, Trump is responsible for foreign policy and is Commander in Chief. In the former role, he has wide latitude to choose and dismiss ambassadors. In the latter role, thousands of years of military tradition hold that officers can be dismissed – or worse – for insubordination.

Sondland came across as merely weak, but Alexander Vindman is a genuine piece of work. The fact that his commanding officer has a constitutional right (and duty) to set foreign policy did not weigh at all with him. He felt that, as a decorated bureaucrat,  his opinion matter more.

When the president ignored Vindman’s opinion, the latter violated national security to complain about Trump’s chosen policy approach. (And note, please that he did not protect himself by being an official whistleblower. Instead, he whined to someone else.) Then, when called before Congress, the man who wears a suit to work showed up in his uniform, evidently trying to put the military’s imprimatur on his personal mutiny.

All three men learned the truth behind Ralph Waldo Emerson’s reminder that “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.” Alexander Vindman, in addition, should be thanking his lucky stars that he hasn’t been court-martialed (or at least hasn’t yet been court-martialed).

Kentucky Rep. Tom Massie understands the dynamics:

As noted above, firing these men was normal and appropriate. But not in Democrat land, a place in which everything Trump does is deemed abnormal and evil.

At the Democrat debate in New Hampshire, seven wannabe commanders-in-chief joined with Joe Biden in urging the audience to give a standing ovation to Alexander Vindman, insubordinate officer extraordinaire.

At the New York Times, it took four writers to report about the firings, and they opined in dire terms:

President Trump wasted little time on Friday opening a campaign of retribution against those he blames for his impeachment, firing two of the most prominent witnesses in the House inquiry against him barely 48 hours after being acquitted by the Senate.

Emboldened by his victory and determined to strike back. . . .

[snip]

The ousters of Mr. Sondland and Colonel Vindman — along with Mr. Vindman’s brother, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, an Army officer who also worked on the National Security Council staff — may only presage a broader effort to even accounts with the president’s perceived enemies. [“Perceived”? They seemed pretty real as they worked to get him impeached.]

[snip]

Even as he began purging administration officials who testified in the House impeachment inquiry. . . .

Nancy Pelosi was shocked, shocked, that an insubordinate officer who leaked like a sieve could be reassigned to a position where he could do no damage:

Rick Wilson, who thinks that Trump supporters are illiterate morons, practically hit the fainting couch:

Trump is a character, but in policy he functions as a conventional American president, operating within the constraints of the Constitution. It’s the Democrat party, which has drifted very far left, that has entirely lost its bearings and its sanity, something its members show in matters great (impeachment) and small (Vindmans).

via American Thinker Blog

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

Social media refuse to remove a video attacking Pelosi’s SOTU shenanigans

One of the most worrisome things in America today is that the public square isn’t public. Instead, it’s owned by tech oligarchs, all of whom hew left politically. For years Google (and its subsidiary, YouTube), Twitter, and Facebook have systematically shut down conservative speech while giving almost unlimited passes to speech coming from the Left.

Twitter has been especially fierce in silencing conservatives, but Facebook has had its moment. Of late, private Facebook groups are finding their posts censored, even though they’re being shared only between members of like-minded communities. Facebook also has a revolting habit of appending to certain links that it doesn’t like claims that the link could be false and directing people instead to “reputable” sources such as the New York Times, Washington Post, AP, or Reuters.

For this reason, it’s noteworthy when social media outlets allow a popular conservative video to remain on their sites. In this case, the video was a re-cut showing highlights from Trump’s State of the Union speech, intercut with endlessly repeated footage of a vindictive, petty Pelosi ripping that same speech.

Those who opposed the video, which has been viewed millions of times, claimed that it’s a “manipulated video,” which violates Facebook’s current rules and Twitter’s upcoming rules. Both outlets, however, rejected that viewpoint – and rightly too. The concept of a dangerously manipulated video arises in the context of “deep fakes”; that is, videos so subtly manipulated that people do not realize that the video has been altered.

In this case, it’s clear even to the meanest intelligence that the video has been altered to make a point (a good point):

Kevin Jackson made a similar, equally good video:

Sooner or later (with sooner being better), Trump is going to have to address the way in which the social media giants systematically suppress conservative speech. In an ideal world, competition would create competitive sites. However, it’s been years now and none of the competitive attempts have taken off.

The unique status of the tech giants makes them very difficult to challenge in the free market. In many ways, they have become the internet equivalent of the restaurants and hotels that the Civil Rights Act addressed when it passed legislation overriding private property rights and holding that people who own places of “public accommodation” cannot discriminate. Given social media’s extraordinary reach and control over communications between members of the public, it’s dangerous to allow these tech sites to hold such unlimited power over the content of speech in America.

One of the most worrisome things in America today is that the public square isn’t public. Instead, it’s owned by tech oligarchs, all of whom hew left politically. For years Google (and its subsidiary, YouTube), Twitter, and Facebook have systematically shut down conservative speech while giving almost unlimited passes to speech coming from the Left.

Twitter has been especially fierce in silencing conservatives, but Facebook has had its moment. Of late, private Facebook groups are finding their posts censored, even though they’re being shared only between members of like-minded communities. Facebook also has a revolting habit of appending to certain links that it doesn’t like claims that the link could be false and directing people instead to “reputable” sources such as the New York Times, Washington Post, AP, or Reuters.

For this reason, it’s noteworthy when social media outlets allow a popular conservative video to remain on their sites. In this case, the video was a re-cut showing highlights from Trump’s State of the Union speech, intercut with endlessly repeated footage of a vindictive, petty Pelosi ripping that same speech.

Those who opposed the video, which has been viewed millions of times, claimed that it’s a “manipulated video,” which violates Facebook’s current rules and Twitter’s upcoming rules. Both outlets, however, rejected that viewpoint – and rightly too. The concept of a dangerously manipulated video arises in the context of “deep fakes”; that is, videos so subtly manipulated that people do not realize that the video has been altered.

In this case, it’s clear even to the meanest intelligence that the video has been altered to make a point (a good point):

Kevin Jackson made a similar, equally good video:

Sooner or later (with sooner being better), Trump is going to have to address the way in which the social media giants systematically suppress conservative speech. In an ideal world, competition would create competitive sites. However, it’s been years now and none of the competitive attempts have taken off.

The unique status of the tech giants makes them very difficult to challenge in the free market. In many ways, they have become the internet equivalent of the restaurants and hotels that the Civil Rights Act addressed when it passed legislation overriding private property rights and holding that people who own places of “public accommodation” cannot discriminate. Given social media’s extraordinary reach and control over communications between members of the public, it’s dangerous to allow these tech sites to hold such unlimited power over the content of speech in America.

via American Thinker Blog

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

Pregnancy Center Files Religious Discrimination Suit Against N.Y. Over Compulsory Hiring

A charity that helps pregnant women and newborns is fighting a New York state law that requires nonprofits and religious institutions to hire employees who openly contradict their beliefs.

EMC Frontline, a crisis pregnancy center, is suing to block New York from enforcing the so-called Boss Bill, which state Democrats passed in 2019. The law prohibits employers from discriminating against prospective workers based on their beliefs about abortion. EMC founder Chris Slattery said the law represents "a fundamental effort to crush the pro-life movement" by targeting pro-life church institutions and nonprofits.

"When you have a pro-life group that’s dedicated to work[ing] against abortion, for them to hire an opponent is patently absurd," Slattery told the Washington Free Beacon. "For Catholic schools to have to hire pro-choice school teachers, priests, bishops, deacons—it’s patently absurd."

The law prohibits employers from deciding not to hire an employee based on the employee’s or an employee’s dependent’s "reproductive health decisions." It also prevents employers from accessing "an employee’s personal information regarding the employee’s or the dependent’s reproductive health decision making," including "the decision to use or access a particular drug, device, or medical service." New York City passed a similar law shortly after Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the statewide "Boss Bill" in November. 

EMC is represented by the Thomas More Society, a nonprofit religious liberty firm. The lawsuit argues that the laws infringe on both the 1st and 14th Amendment rights of New York residents. The complaint states that the pregnancy center "hires and employs only employees who adhere" to the center’s stance on abortion. Under the law, this would be considered unlawful discrimination. The complaint criticizes the law as an "existential" threat because of "crippling fines and statutory damages" that would be imposed in the case of a violation. Slattery said the damage extends beyond religious institutions.

"When it comes to a secular pro-life group, it goes against the mission of the organization. It goes against our freedom of association," Slattery said.

Neither the Cuomo administration nor Mayor Bill de Blasio’s office returned requests for comment.

Timothy Belz, special counsel for the Thomas More Society, said the new law threatens to violate EMC’s rights "in multiple ways."

"Expectant Mother Care and EMC Frontline exist for the purpose of advocating for and providing desperate women with alternatives to abortion. Forcing them to hire someone who promotes abortion would completely undermine their mission," he said in a statement. "These state and city laws also violate our client’s right to free speech and right to due process." 

The suit follows the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, which struck down a California law that required crisis pregnancy centers to advertise abortion and contraceptive services to their clients. The 5-4 ruling found the law violated the First Amendment.

Cuomo has a long history of advancing radical abortion positions. In 2014, he said that pro-life, pro-gun voters "have no place" in the state. In addition to the "Boss Bill," Cuomo also signed a law expanding late-term abortion access in 2019. 

Slattery stressed the implications of the law beyond a predominantly liberal state like New York. "It is literally about the survival of the pro-life movement in our country," he said. "If you can’t be pro-life in the United States, whose cause is next?"

The post Pregnancy Center Files Religious Discrimination Suit Against N.Y. Over Compulsory Hiring appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

Fact Check: Warren Busts Colleagues for Sucking Up to Billionaires–as She Has Done Herself

CLAIM: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said candidates who are trying to buy the election, whether through their status as a billionaire or their willingness to “suck up” to billionaires, should not be able to do so.

VERDICT: Warren has received support from dozens of billionaires and has happily courted big donors over the course of her political career, even holding a winery fundraiser with perks for big donors as recently as 2018.

In a question about billionaire Michael Bloomberg (D), Warren said, “I don’t think anyone ought to be able to buy their way into a nomination or to be president of the United States”:

“I don’t think any billionaire ought to be able to do it ,and I don’t think people who suck up to billionaires in order to fund their campaigns ought to do it,” she continued, railing against everyone on stage — minus Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) — for their status as a billionaire or their willingness to receive help from PACs “that can do unlimited spending.” She went on:

So if you really want to live where you say, then put your money where your mouth is and say no to the PACs. Look, I think the way we build a democracy going forward is not billionaires reaching in their own pockets and people sucking up to billionaires.

The way we build it going forward is we have a grassroots movement funded from the grassroots up. That’s the way I’m running this campaign.

However, Warren has not always lived by that standard. She has accepted support from at least 30 billionaires over the course of her years-long political career, as detailed by the New York Post:

A review of Warren’s campaign donations to her presidential and Senate campaigns reveal that she’s received donations from more than 30 billionaires during her time in politics.

Christopher Sacca, a venture capitalist who appeared on “Shark Tank”, gave $2,800 to Warren in May.

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate also netted two $2,500 contributions from GitHub founder Tom Preston-Werner’s wife, Theresa, in June. That same month Susan Pritzker, wife of Hyatt heir Nicholas Pritzker II, donated $2,500 to Warren.

The donations run from 2011 to 2019 and include contributions to Warren’s presidential and Senate campaigns. Most of the individual billionaires are giving at or near the maximum contribution limit, which currently is $2,800 for the primary and $2,800 for the general election for a total for $5,600.

Warren, who has busted Pete Buttigieg (D) over ritzy “wine cave” fundraisers in the past, has attended similar events herself, holding a fundraiser at a Boston winery in 2018 that included a souvenir wine bottle for those who donated $1,000. It also provided “VIP experiences” for big donors — those who donated $2,700.

“This was the danger in the @ewarren ‘wine cave’ attack on @PeteButtigieg,” former Obama strategist David Axelrod pointed out in December. “Her own past fundraising practices were pretty much in line with his, including even some of the same high dollar sponsors.”

“She invited stories like this. Unforced error,” he added:

“While Warren touts her presidential campaign as 100 percent grassroots-funded,  she transferred over $10 million from her senatorial bid — a time she attended swanky fundraisers and gave facetime to big donors — to cushion her campaign,” as Breitbart News has previously noted.

via Breitbart News

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

Every Democrat At Debate Was Fine With A Socialist President Except One

There’s another ad.

Via Daily Wire:

During the ABC News Democrat debate on Friday night, only one Democrat signaled that they had a problem with a socialist becoming the party’s nominee to face President Donald Trump in November.

“Is anyone else on the stage concerned about having a democratic socialist at the top of the ticket?” ABC News host George Stephanopoulos asked.

Only Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) raised her hand indicating that she had a problem with it.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

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

Feds Open Investigation into Google Speakers Following Sonos Complaint

The U.S. International Trade Commission has reportedly launched an investigation into audio players and controllers sold by Google following a complaint by rival smart speaker manufacturer Sonos Inc.

Reuters reports that following a complaint from smart speaker manufacturer Sonos, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has launched a patent investigation into Google. Sonos sent a complaint to the ITC last month in which the smart speaker maker alleged that Google’s import of certain audio players and controllers infringed on the manufacturer’s patents.

Sonos filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Google in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles and testified to a House of Representatives antitrust subcommittee about its issues with Google. Google spokesman Jose Castaneda said in a statement on Thursday: “Sonos has made misleading statements about our history of working together. Our technology and devices were designed independently. We deny their claims vigorously, and will be defending against them.”

Breitbart News reported on Sonos’ complaint in January in which Sonos executives claimed that the company’s complaints go far beyond simple patent infringement, claiming that the legal action is a result of years of growing dependence on both Google and Amazon both of which used their leverage against Sonos to put pressure on the company.

Sonos’ speakers are integrated with both Amazon and Google’s virtual assistants, its speakers are advertised on Google and sold via Amazon. Sonos quietly became dissatisfied with its growing reliance on the tech giants, and over the past few months, Sonos Chief Executive Patrick Spence decided the company had to do something about the situation.

Spence said in a statement: “Google has been blatantly and knowingly copying our patented technology. Despite our repeated and extensive efforts over the last few years, Google has not shown any willingness to work with us on a mutually beneficial solution. We’re left with no choice but to litigate.”

The ITC has previously issued orders banning products from entry into the U.S. on the grounds that they infringe on U.S. patents. But many companies subject to these bans have continued to import their products by redesigning them to avoid using patented technology.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

via Breitbart News

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