Category: US Politics

The minds behind the Fox series “Party of Five” didn’t want to revive the show for the usual reasons.

Nostalgia sells, of course, and new versions of “Will & Grace,” “Veronica Mars,” and “Roseanne” scored (again) with audiences. Amy Lippman, who created the ’90s hit “Party of Five” with Chris Keyser, told the TV’s Top 5 Podcast that she needed a better reason to bring the story back to primetime TV.

The nation’s immigration crisis, and a hearty case of Trump Derangement, gave her team all the rocket fuel required.

“Party of Five,” debuting Jan. 8 on Freeform, doesn’t feature five children whose parents die in a car crash as in the original version. This family’s children are separated from their illegal immigrant parents when ICE agents deport them back to Mexico.

Lippman broke down the show’s creative process, vowing that the series wouldn’t be as political as it sounds. Her own words clashed with that description throughout the interview.

She said the genesis of the project began before President Trump’s shocking 2016 election day victory. In the early stages, the story morphed from the car accident leaving the kids without parents to an immigration-based drama.

That gave the reboot a fresh coat of creative paint. Still, she worried the show wouldn’t get on-air quickly enough to mirror reality.

“We kept saying, ‘lets get going on it because the situation may resolve itself in some way that means we’re sort of writing after the fact, we’re behind on it.’ And we wanted to be relevant,” Lippman says.

“I don’t think any of us anticipated we would find ourselves debuting the show right in the middle of this crisis,” she says of the current immigration battle.

Lippman concedes the show has a strong viewpoint on illegal immigration, but reveals the president won’t be part of the conversation, at least not directly.

That, she confirms, was by design.

“We don’t mention the president or the administration throughout the [first] season,” she says, a measure taken as an ideological olive branch. “We’d like to reach everyone with the show because we think it has something to say regardless of where you are on the political spectrum.”

“Obviously we’re on the side of families, and families staying together seems very important to us,” she says. Does that imply Americans who support border enforcement are anti-family?

Lippman also described the diversity of her writer’s room, including one colleague who made a dramatic change following Trump’s victory.

“After the election, one of the writers in our room went out and became a dual citizen of the country that her parents were born in,” Lippman explains.

“I said, ‘why?’ I don’t understand. You’re an American. You have a passport. You’re not even a naturalized citizen. You were born in this country. Why would you do that?”

“She said, ‘I don’t feel safe.’”

Lippman continues the writer’s thoughts on the dual citizenship decision.

“I feel like even though I’m completely here legitimately, in this climate it feels like it could all go away. Maybe people would begin to investigate how did my parents come over, or my grandparents? And that that could all unravel for me,” Lippman recalls.

“And that feeling of insecurity, and a feeling that prejudice and bias against you, is not my experience,” Lippman says. “I couldn’t have done the show this season without being surrounded by people who had that perspective.”

Early “Party of Five” reviews strain to describe the show as apolitical. That’s the line peddled by the liberal site Vulture.com.

Until it doesn’t.

Make no mistake: All of this is political. But Party of Five humanizes the political and makes the audience see the deeply personal impact that the decisions made by the administration have on the lives of young people who are trying their best to do the right thing every day.

The Washington Post quotes lines from the first few episodes as preachy as a Michael Moore screed. Here’s what an ICE official says to the parents as they round them up for deportation.

“You think the rules don’t apply to you? Things have changed, Mr. Acosta. I need to see your papers,” the man “growls.”

Naturally, this critic frames the story as a welcome plea for open borders.

The show gives “American viewers a solid, up close experience of how easily U.S. immigration policy (and its blunt enforcement) can tear apart a good, law-abiding family.”

They broke the law by entering the country illegally, a point the critic clearly ignores.

The WaPo critic also contends the show isn’t “overly political” … and then quotes the family saying the immigration officials “don’t care who we are.”

Nothing political or incendiary there. Never mind that these officials are just doing their jobs and enforcing the law.

Lippman’s podcast interview eventually gives away the game.

She admits to wanting the show’s audience to care so deeply for the family in question that they reconsider their views on immigration

“If you embrace the family, maybe that’s a path to understanding the political situation from a different perspective,” she says.

A version of this article is also published on HollywoodInToto.com.

via The Daily Wire

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

On Thursday’s Erin Burnett Outfront, CNN host Erin Burnett tried to dismiss the "death to America" chants that Iran has been infamous for as just being a "trope" that is not "seriously meant" as she discussed President Donald Trump’s Iran policy with Ohio Republican Congressman Mike Turner,

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

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

The New York Times provided another unasked for encomium to Communism, this time by China correspondent Javier Hernandez, in “Raising Fists and Hearts to Communism" on Thursday. He reported from Nanhu Lake, China, a sacred site for true believers. The Times has made a habit of whitewashing the Communist past as well as the Communist regimes still creaking along in the present. Whitewashing the crimes of International Communism, as in its Red Century series on the Soviet era on the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, is a recurring bad habit.

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

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

The headline of an Associated Press article blamed the United States for the crash of a civilian airplane Iran shot down.

"An Iranian general dies in U.S. attack, and innocents suffer," read the original headline of the Associated Press story published on Thursday. The innocents in question were passengers of a Ukrainian International Airlines jet shot down by what Western leaders say was an Iranian missile.

The piece reported that the recent U.S.-Iran conflict "had begun with a drone attack on Gen. Qassem Soleimani’s motorcade" and "rippled outward until dozens of Iranian-Canadians … were dead." The story failed to mention any escalation from the Iranian regime that led to the drone attack, including one attack on America’s embassy in Iraq and another that led to the death of a U.S. contractor.

The piece quotes Canadian civilians who fault Trump for the Iranian missile strike. "This is insane. Sickening. Imagine having a family member on that plane," one Torontonian told the AP. "One man, and only one, is responsible for those deaths. And he will never face consequences for them."

After publication, the headline was changed Friday to "As Iran and U.S. take step back from the brink, Canada grieves." The wire service did not attach a correction to the change. Even after amending the headline, the article still says "the killing of an Iranian general last week in a U.S. drone stroke may have led to the deaths of dozens of their citizens in a plane crash."

The Associated Press is not alone in blaming Trump for Iran’s missile strike. Several Democrats have also blamed Trump for the deadly attack. "If what is being projected is true, this is yet another example of collateral damage from the actions that have been taken in a provocative way by the president of the United States," Rep. Jackie Speier (D., Calif.) said on CNN Thursday.

"Innocent civilians are now dead because they were caught in the middle of an unnecessary and unwanted military tit for tat," tweeted Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg.

The post AP Blames U.S. For Iran Shooting Down Commercial Jet appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

via Breitbart News

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

Qasem Soleimani was responsible for thousands of deaths, including hundreds of American soldiers, but instead of commemorating the death of a war criminal, liberal reporters and hosts filled their broadcasts with somber tones as they mourned the loss of the “bold” “revered” “military genius” and Iranian “cult figure.”
 

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

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

Texas governor Greg Abbott (R.) on Friday told the State Department that his state will become the first in the nation to refuse federal refugee resettlement.

In a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Abbott wrote that in the wake of the border crisis that rocked the state in 2019, Texas lacks the state and private capacity to deal with even more demand on its humanitarian resources.

"At this time, the state and non-profit organizations have a responsibility to dedicate available resources to those who are already here, including refugees, migrants, and the homeless—indeed, all Texans," Abbott wrote. "As a result, Texas cannot consent to initial refugee resettlement for FY2020."

The move is likely to shake up refugee resettlement in the United States, as Texas has historically played home to as many as 10 percent of annual refugee arrivals. Particularly if other states follow suit, this may in turn mean a continued decline in refugee admissions in the Trump era.

In his letter, Abbott pinned the blame for the circumstances leading to his decision squarely on Congress, writing that "Texas has been left … to deal with disproportionate migration issues resulting from a broken federal immigration system."

The state, which makes up over half of America’s 2,000 mile border with Mexico, was particularly hard hit by 2019’s illegal immigration crisis. Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection show that of the roughly 850,000 individuals apprehended attempting to illegally cross, 626,000—74 percent—were picked up in one of the five border sectors covering Texas. In total, Texas saw a 150 percent increase in border apprehensions over F.Y. 2018, compared to a 54 percent increase in the other border states.

"Texas continues to have to deal with the consequences of an immigration system Congress has failed to fix," Abbott wrote.

This strain is exacerbated by Texas’s disproportionate generosity toward refugees in years past. As Abbott noted, roughly 10 percent of refugees arriving since 2010 have gone to Texas. It was the number one state for refugee resettlement in 2019, accounting for 9 percent of refugees, or 1,389 individuals. California and New York, by comparison, accepted only 6 percent.

Abbott’s move follows President Donald Trump’s executive order, issued in September, which required states to give their consent before more refugees are resettled in their territory. Thirty-nine states have thus far signed on, with the Lone Star state now the lone standout refusing any more arrivals.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told the Washington Free Beacon that this change was intended "to give states and localities some control over their own destinies." Krikorian declined to comment on the wisdom of Abbott’s decision—"I’m not going to tell people in Texas what to do, that’s up to them"—but emphasized that refugee resettlement is as much as anything a matter of fiscal soundness.

"Some states may want to take refugees," Krikorian said. "That’s okay, if they know what they’re getting in to. In other words, they’re affirming that they understand that the federal government is going to be fobbing off enormous costs on them per person. If they’re okay with that, so be it."

Abbot in 2016 withdrew his state from direct participation in the federal Refugee Resettlement Program, citing the Obama administration’s failure to provide him assurances that resettled refugees would not pose a threat. Abbott said then that while Texas would still accept refugees, they would do so "without the state acting as the middleman between federal dollars and local resettlement agencies." Non-state actors have since continued to work directly with the federal government to resettle refugees, a practice that will likely end thanks to Abbott’s decision.

The post Texas Becomes First State to Reject Refugee Resettlement appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

Actress Gwyneth Paltrow is selling a candle that smells like her vagina at $75 a pop for her lifestyle and wellness company Goop. The name of the candle is none other than, you guessed it, “This Smells Like My Vagina.”

Paltrow first came across a scent that she said reminded her of the smell of her own vagina, she claims. The scent was then finalized for the “This Smells Like My Vagina” candle, which reportedly sold out within hours of its test run.

“This candle started as a joke between perfumer Douglas Little and GP — the two were working on a fragrance, and she blurted out, ‘Uhhh … this smells like a vagina,’” Goop outlined.

The smell then “evolved into a funny, gorgeous, sexy, and beautifully unexpected scent,” according to the company.

“That turned out to be perfect as a candle — we did a test run … and it sold out within hours,” Goop bragged. “It’s a blend of geranium, citrusy bergamot, and cedar absolutes juxtaposed with Damask rose and ambrette seed that puts us in mind of fantasy, seduction, and a sophisticated warmth.”

Goop, clearly, is not a traditional brand. In 2018, for example, the wellness company settled a six-figure lawsuit surrounding their “vagina eggs,” which were prompted to help regulate females’ hormones and negate menstrual cramps.

“It turns out, contrary to Goop’s advice, shoving a large egg made out of a porous mineral into the recesses of your lady-regions may not be the best treatment for conditions like endometriosis,” The Daily Wire reported. “Apparently, Goop knew — or, according to a complaint filed by the California consumer protection office, Goop should have known before they marketed this product, as well as a ‘flower essence’ they claimed treated depression, to consumers on their website.”

“The health and money of Santa Clara County residents should never be put at risk by misleading advertising,” the attorney for the California consumer protection office said in a statement. “We will vigilantly protect consumers against companies that promise health benefits without the support of good science … or any science.”

Paltrow again made headlines for her “progressive” ways last month, this time for gifting herself a vibrator for Christmas.

The Daily Wire reported on the ad:

After Gwyneth shakes herself up a couple of Martinis, the narrator says “someone’s double-fisting” as she struts through the kitchen with her libations.

“The holidays are work, so don’t be afraid to ask for help with lighting, and food, and style, and hair, and hair, and hair,” the narrator cheekily continues. “Find your favorite look, or eleven of them. Look fabulous in each one, and get super high… In your heels, of course.”

The ad then takes a salacious turn by reminding people to treat themselves to a little self-service, but only after doing “something for others.”

“Do something for others but don’t forget about No. 1,” the narrator says as Paltrow pulls a vibrator from a Christmas stocking and keeps it for herself. “Yes, that is a vibrator.”

The ad finishes with the narrator wishing everyone a “happy holidays from G. Label.” 

via The Daily Wire

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

Former secretary of state John Kerry on Friday referred to the $1.7 billion payment the U.S. made to Iran in 2016 as a "little bit of money."

Discussing President Donald Trump’s claims that the Obama administration helped fund the Iranian regime’s terror initiatives, Kerry told CNN that the Obama administration saved American taxpayers from accruing interest by settling old debt when it did.

"We gave them a little bit of money that was released in that period of time, not as part of the nuclear arrangement," Kerry said. "But the fact is the [Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps] had all the money it wanted. The IRGC wasn’t starving at that point in time, and in fact, Iran owed billions upon billions of dollars. Most of that money went to pay off their debts and to facilitate their economic initiatives."

Kerry admitted in 2016 that the billions in sanctions relief Iran got under the nuclear deal would go partly to financing terrorism.

"Money is fungible in any budget," he said on Friday.

The Obama administration paid Iran $400 million, plus an additional $1.3 billion in interest from taxpayer funds, ostensibly to settle a dispute over military equipment Iran purchased but never received following the shah’s fall in 1979. Critics, however, described the payment as a "ransom" to secure the freedom of American hostages being held by the Tehran regime.

"Obama officials are the last people on earth who are pretending that the $1.7 billion wasn’t a ransom payment," one foreign policy consultant who worked with Congress on the nuclear deal told the Washington Free Beacon at the time. "Everyone else knows what happened, which is that we rewarded Iranian hostage takers."

The Obama administration denied the cash was a ransom, but the State Department later admitted it delayed the initial $400 million payment as "leverage" to secure the release of three prisoners held by Iran.

As part of the nuclear deal Kerry brokered, Iran received $150 billion in sanctions relief in the form of unfrozen assets held in banks around the globe. The U.S. Treasury Department estimated Iran had roughly $55 billion left over of that amount after fulfilling its other financial obligations, according to the Washington Post.

Iran is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, backing such proxy groups as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

Tensions between the U.S. and Iran hit a boiling point after Trump last week ordered the killing of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, the terrorist leader of the IRGC’s elite Quds Force. Iran retaliated with missile attacks on U.S. air bases in Iraq this week, although no Americans were killed or injured.

The U.S. and its allies also say Iran is responsible for bringing down a Ukrainian airliner with a surface-to-air missile it fired during its onslaught against Iraq, killing all 176 aboard.

The post Kerry on $1.7 Billion Payment to Iran: ‘We Gave Them a Little Bit of Money’ appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

via Breitbart News

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