Conservatives welcome. Libs & RINOs go away. It's all of you destroying the society and conservatives must no longer appease you!
Even before he was inaugurated as the President of the United States, Donald Trump was fiercely pro-Israel. In December 2016, after he was elected but not yet inaugurated, he reportedly worked with foreign governments to urge them to oppose a U.N. Security Council Resolution condemning Israel’s presence in the ancient Jewish territories of Judea and Samaria and part of Jerusalem.
via Daily Wire
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml
Via Islamist Watch: Writing in Alpha News, journalist Megan Olson draws attention to Islamist Watch research on the cozy relationship between politicians and anti-Semitic Islamists in Minnesota. Now, new information about the virulent anti-Semitism of leading Islamist activists in Minnesota has emerged. As Olson concisely explains, not only was anti-Jewish cleric and activist Asad Zaman invited by Minnesota […]
via Weasel Zippers
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us
Yet another criminal statute looks set to be knocked down following Wednesday oral arguments in United States v. Davis, the latest case in a line that has created a "royal mess" since 2015.
Davis concerns the case of Maurice Lamont Davis, who was convicted along with a co-conspirator following a string of robberies in 2014. Specifically, Davis was convicted of a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(3), which brings with it graduated penalties of between 5 to 10 and 25 years.
This conviction went all the way to SCOTUS because of how the section defines a "crime of violence." Specifically, it is defined as either a) a felony that involves the use, attempted use, or threat of physical force, or b) any felony that "by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense."
This second, "substantial risk," definition has popped up whack-a-mole-like in SCOTUS cases for the past four years, starting with 2015’s Johnson v. United States. That case concerned a section of the Armed Career Criminals Act (ACCA), a law designed to make it easier to prosecute repeated, violent offenders.
In Johnson, the court decided 8-1 to void a "residual clause" in the ACCA which stipulated that a person could be held to have committed a violent offense if there was a "substantial risk" of the use of the force. To determine if there is such a risk, courts often use what is called the "categorical approach," assessing if in the "ordinary case" a particular offense is likely to lead to violence.
Prior to Johnson the ACCA’s residual clause could, if interpreted with the categorical approach, lead to conviction for a non-violent robbery that in its "ordinary case" carries a risk of violence (with the associated mandatory minimums). But, the court found, the language of the ACCA’s residual clause was so vague as to offer no guidance whatsoever for interpretation, which in turn qualified it as unconstitutionally vague.
This seemingly technical conclusion has had major reverberations in federal criminal law, in part because the "substantial risk" approach to specifying a crime of violence appears over and over again throughout it. Last year, Justice Neil Gorsuch made headlines by siding with the court’s liberals in Dimaya v. Sessions, applying the same reasoning from Johnson to the deportation of a green card holder found guilty of a non-violent "violent" felony.
Johnson was also the subset of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s first ever question during oral arguments, showing just how much the ruling has reverberated through the criminal law.
Davis, meanwhile, looks set to be "the last Johnson domino to fall," a lower court wrote, because the section of federal law it concerns appears to be the last to replicate the "substantial risk" language that was already struck down in a different context in Dimaya.
At oral arguments Wednesday, SCOTUSBlog reports, the government sought to save that section of law by trying to convince the court’s justices that the reason they had rejected the ACCA and the law in Dimaya was their choice of interpretative method—using the "categorical approach" rendered an unconstitutionally vague interpretation, but considering the real world form that the crime actually took might not have. In SCOTUSBlog’s estimate, the justices seemed unconvinced
"By the end of the argument, it was clear that at least three justices, and quite possibly five, are not inclined to abandon the categorical approach in order to save Section 924(c)," wrote guest blogger and law professor Leah Litman.
This is all relevant thanks to the path that Johnson and related cases have carved through the criminal law. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions Attorney called the ruling "devastating for Americans," and indicated that more than 1,400 federal prisoners were released early under post-Johnson sentence reductions.
Sens. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) and Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) introduced a bill in the last Congressional session to address the neutering of the ACCA. The Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act would replace the voided language in the ACCA with a blanket application of its terms to any individual convicted of a felony with a minimum sentence of ten years or more, thus doing away with any concerns of vagueness.
"True criminal justice reform includes giving prosecutors the tools they need to seek enhanced penalties against the worst repeat offenders," Hatch said at the time. "Prosecutors lost one of those tools three years ago when the Supreme Court ruled that a provision of the Armed Career Criminal Act was unconstitutionally vague. Criminals released early from prison as a result of that decision have gone on to commit heinous crimes, including the murder of three innocent Utahns."
As the last Johnson domino looks likely to fall, then, alterations may be needed not only to the ACCA, but to related criminal laws as well.
The post SCOTUS Looks to Knock Down Yet Another Vague Violent Felony Law appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
via Washington Free Beacon
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com
The video was part of a series of exposés by Project Veritas on teachers’ unions, who provide much of the organizing — and even fundraising — muscle of the Democratic Party.
The context of the conversation was a discussion about how to maintain classroom discipline. In a later conversation, also recorded by hidden camera, Wentz is seen telling a relative of the student mentioned above that he had not, in fact, threatened that student.
The story of Wentz’s lawsuit against Project Veritas created a minor media sensation when it was filed in 2017, with BuzzFeed News reporting that Wentz had claimed the video had been “creatively edited … to make him appear violent and dangerous.” The lawsuit added that “Veritas’s video and Breitbart’s summary [thereof] omitted “most of the reasoning and all explanatory detail from O’Keefe’s story.” Wentz also claimed that O’Keefe and a colleague had violated Florida recording laws, though Florida is a “two-party” state that only requires one person involved to consent.
But the judge, G. Kendall Sharp, found that Wentz — who admitted he made the statements on the videos — “is unable to sufficiently identify a false statement published by Defendants that plausibly supports his defamation claims.” He added: “the Court finds that the alleged defamatory content in this case is true, substantially true, or at least not provable as false.” He also concluded that Project Veritas had not violated Florida’s two-party laws or its wiretapping statutes, and dismissed the case.
In a statment, Project Veritas exulted: “As hard as it was to spend the roughly $350,000 defending ourselves in this case, it was worth every penny. We could have settled this case out of court. But that is not what we do. We fight, we fight for the 1st Amendment and the truth. Principles matter. I can assure you right now; we will never surrender our principles. And we will never settle.”
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com
Remember when Hollywood loved special counsel Robert Mueller? Heck, unfunny comedienne Chelsea Handler said she “had finally found the first Republican I could see myself being penetrated by.”
But as soon as the full Mueller report was released on Thursday, that swooning lust changed. Some took aim at Attorney General William Barr, who held a press conference shortly before he released the full report (redacted only to protect grand jury testimony and prevent the release of classified information).
Actor John Cusack claimed that Barr was engaging in a “complete whitewash coverup.”
Barr = complete whitewash coverup
A press circus orchestrated by the White House – ? corruption— John Cusack (@johncusack) April 18, 2019
Film director Rob “Meathead” Reiner wrote, “Prima Facie: Trump is guilty as hell.”
Prima Facie: Trump is guilty as hell.
— Rob Reiner (@robreiner) April 18, 2019
Long washed up actress Mia Farrow said, “Just stunning to see the Attorney General in the role of Trump’s personal attorney.”
Just stunning to see the Attorney General in the role of Trump’s personal attorney
— Mia Farrow (@MiaFarrow) April 18, 2019
“Will & Grace” actress Debra Messing also blamed Barr, saying he is “disloyal to the Constitution.”
THIS. https://t.co/mTKD6iUU71
— Debra Messing (@DebraMessing) April 18, 2019
Actress Patricia Arquette said, “I wish a reporter would have asked Barr if Mueller finished with his investigation unimpeded or if he was asked by anyone to conclude it or if funding was stopped in any way.”
I wish a reporter would have asked Barr if Mueller finished with his investigation unimpeded or if he was asked by anyone to conclude it or if funding was stopped in any way.
— Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) April 18, 2019
And full-time Trump hater Kathy Griffith simply decided to try to make some money. Look folks, we can still have a sense of humor while dealing with Orange Dumbass. I have many other items where you can take your anger and have a giggle at the same time. Go to https://store.kathygriffin.com to check them out.”
Look folks, we can still have a sense of humor while dealing with Orange Dumbass. I have many other items where you can take your anger and have a giggle at the same time. Go to https://t.co/UySm4K9Jiv to check them out. pic.twitter.com/UPYInERtkp
— Kathy Griffin (@kathygriffin) April 18, 2019
But remember, the report was complied by Mueller, not Barr, who simply redacted the report before release. Liberals — especially those in limousines — are simply looking for a new target on whom to take out their ill-directed ire.
The post HOLLYWOOD FREAKS: Limousine Liberals Melt Down Over Mueller Report 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
Villanova Professor Communications Professor Billie Murray is scheduled to give a lecture on April 24 that will seek to challenge preconceived notions about political violence. A description of the lecture that was posted online notes that Murray will speak directly from her experience working with Antifa groups.
In this presentation, Dr. Billie Murray will challenge the violence/nonviolence binary that limits our understanding of activist practices. Drawing on examples from her fieldwork with anti-fascist activists, she will argue that we should reimagine activism as combative. Such an expanded understanding will allow us to better discern the efficacy and ethics of combative tactics and how they work in concert with traditional, nonviolent activism.
This isn’t the first time that Murray has defended Antifa. In November 2018, Murray said that although she draws the line at engaging in violence, she supports Antifa’s core values and principles. “I am Antifa as a set of beliefs and values about the world,” Murray said in a previous interview. “As an activist, I support antiracist action and antifascist organizing, but I draw the line at engaging in violence.” She understands, though, why Antifa groups engage in what she calls symbolic violence.
Respected Princeton Professor Robert George addressed Murray’s scheduled lecture in a series of tweets. George argued that conservatives must condemn the left’s insistence on normalizing political violence before it is too late.
We’re heading for a bad place. Note a lecture hosted by a “peace and justice” center questioning “the violence/non-violence binary” that “limits our understanding of activist practices.” There are folks on the right also “questioning” that before it’s too late, sane and honorable conservatives and sane honorable progressives need to unite around the conviction that we resolve our differences not by violence but by the constitutionally prescribed mechanisms of our republican democracy. However deeply we may disagree, even on profound questions of justice and the common good, we are not enemies but rather fellow citizens. “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.”
1/ We’re heading for a bad place. Note a lecture hosted by a “peace and justice” center questioning “the violence/non-violence binary” that “limits our understanding of activist practices.” There are folks on the right also “questioning” that “binary.” https://t.co/ABRl29k4oG
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) April 16, 2019
2/ Before it’s too late, sane and honorable conservatives and sane honorable progressives need to unite around the conviction that we resolve our differences not by violence but by the constitutionally prescribed mechanisms of our republican democracy.
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) April 16, 2019
3/ However deeply we may disagree, even on profound questions of justice and the common good, we are not enemies but rather fellow citizens. “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.”
— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) April 16, 2019
Stay tuned to Breitbart News for more updates on this story.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com
Ryabkov (pictured) told reporters the latest round of U.S. sanctions was illegal and that Russia would do everything in power to support the far-left regimes in both Cuba and Venezuela.
“We are concerned over the continuing actions by the United States toward the countries of the Latin American region. We see the sanctions as absolutely unlawful and illegitimate,” he said, according to Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik. “We will oppose them. Venezuela and Cuba are our allies and strategic partners in the region. We will do everything we can to let them feel our support.”
On Wednesday, White House National Security Adviser John Bolton announced a fresh round of sanctions against the Maduro regime and the communist government in Havana. The sanctions included new limits on remittances to Cuba and its access to foreign currency, as well as new sanctions on the Central Bank of Venezuela that prohibit its access to U.S. dollars.
“Under this administration, we don’t throw dictators lifelines. We take them away,” said Bolton at an event to mark the 58th anniversary of the failed liberation effort at Bay of Pigs. “Through the Treasury Department, we will also implement changes to end the use of ‘U-turn transactions’, which allow the regime to circumvent sanctions and obtain access to hard currency and the US banking system.”
Russia has over recent years proven a vital ally to both Castro and Maduro, providing financial and military support to both regimes. Last month, Russian troops arrived in Caracas to help bolster Maduro’s authority amid widespread calls for him to step down as the country suffers the worst economic and humanitarian crisis in its history.
Following U.S. condemnation of the exchange, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that troops would remain in the country as “for as long as needed” and accused the U.S. of trying to “stage a coup” in the country through the threat of military action.
“They are involved in the implementation of agreements in the sphere of military and technical cooperation,” she said at the time. “Russia is not changing the balance of power in the region, Russia is not threatening anyone, unlike citizens in Washington whom I have just quoted.”
Since January, the U.S. has stepped up efforts to remove the Maduro regime from power in Venezuela, mainly through recognizing opposition leader Juan Guaidó as the country’s legitimate president and imposing a range of economic sanctions aimed at squeezing the regime’s external revenues. President Donald Trump has warned Russia to leave the country, while repeatedly insisting that “all options are on the table” for instigating a transition to democracy, including the possibility of military force.
“Russia has to get out,” Trump said during a meeting with Guaidó’s wife Fabiana Rosales in the White House last month. “Venezuela was and is still a country with tremendous potential where people are starving. They’re getting killed. They’re being beaten. What’s going on there is unfathomable.”
Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at bkew@breitbart.com.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com
Current illegal immigration projections by Princeton Policy Advisors researcher Steven Kopits predicts that there could be about 1.28 million border apprehensions this calendar year — a rate of illegal immigration that would exceed every fiscal year of former Presidents George W. Bush and Obama.
Kopits’ finds that up to 300,000 migrant children could enter the country by the time school begins in September for most students under a scenario where illegal immigration continues at projected rates throughout the next year and a half.
Assuming 80 percent of these migrant children enroll in school, the U.S. could be faced with absorbing 240,000 new migrant school students across the country –and specifically states like California, New York, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, and New Jersey — this coming school year, alone.
For the 2019 to 2020 school year, for instance, California would be forced to absorb about 50,000 new migrant students. Likewise, Texas would see an influx of about 36,000 migrant students.
Fast forward to the beginning of the next school year, September 2020 to June 2021, and the U.S. could have nearly a million new migrant children in the country before the 2020 presidential election, about 800,000 of which could enroll in school systems, under the mass migration scenario.
(Princeton Policy Advisors)
“Should the situation not be resolved and asylum seeking continue at the pace we anticipate for the coming year, by September 2020, nearly 1,000,000 asylum children could be in the US (arriving Jan. 2019 – Aug. 2020),” Kopits writes.
This translates to California’s public school system having to take about 168,000 new migrant students at the beginning of next year’s school year while Florida would see an influx of about 59,000 and for New Jersey, an influx of about 36,000. Texas would see an influx of about 120,000 new migrant students.
Skyrocketing illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has not only strained public resources but could choke 4 percent wage hikes that President Trump has delivered to America’s blue collar and working class.
Experts like former Secretary of State Kris Kobach have warned that if illegal immigration levels continue to rise over this year and throughout 2020, those wage hikes will be depleted by a saturated labor market with more cheap, foreign workers competing against Americans.
Every year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants, with more than 70 percent arriving through chain migration. In 2017, the foreign-born population reached a record high of 44.5 million. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the legal and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15 percent of the entire U.S. population.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com
Conservative activist Laura Loomer filed a lawsuit today against the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Twitter.
This comes after CAIR officials reportedly pushed Twitter to ban the conservative Jewish activist.
Activist and Journalist Brings Claims in Florida Court Detailing Twitter’s Collusion with Hamas Front Group CAIR to Silence and De-Platform Her
CAIR’s “Favorite Daughters” Reps Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib Implicated
Read more here.
The post Conservative Activist Laura Loomer Files Lawsuit Against Twitter and CAIR 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
President Donald Trump triggered members of the left-wing media on Thursday morning by posting a meme as Attorney General William Barr gave a positive news conference about the results of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
"No Collusion. No Obstruction. For The Haters And The Radical Left Democrats–Game Over," Trump tweeted in a photoshopped image from "The Game of Thrones."
via Daily Wire
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml