Hollywood Opening Doors and Wallets for ‘Unicorn Candidate’ Buttigieg

Unofficially, Hollywood seems to have chosen its candidate. And while that may be an an ambitious claim at this stage in the 2020 race, it only reflects the insane amount of support Hollywood bigwigs are showing to Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. ABC news ran a story on how just starstruck celebs and heavyweight producers are with Buttigieg, claiming he’s everything they’ve ever dreamed of — the “unicorn candidate.”

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

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

Obama’s Former Defense Secretary Slams Biden’s Foreign Policy Credentials, Age

Former defense secretary Robert Gates is standing by his long held criticism of Joe Biden’s foreign policy credentials and raising new questions about the 2020 Democrat’s stamina.

Gates, who led the Pentagon under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama, said during a Sunday interview with CBS’s Face the Nation he stood by statements made in his 2014 memoir that Biden had "been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades." The show’s host, Margaret Brennan, looped Gates’s prior comments into a broader question about whether Biden had the ability to "be an effective commander-in-chief."

"I don’t know, I don’t know," Gates said. "I stand by that statement. He and I agreed on some key issues in the Obama administration, we disagreed significantly on Afghanistan and some other issues."

"I think that the vice president has some issues with the military, so how he would get along with the senior military and what that relationship would be," Gates continued. "I just think it would depend on the personalities at the time."

The interview than moved onto to a discussion of Biden’s age and vitality. Brennan asked if as a "peer," Gates thought the former vice president was the "right" person "for this moment," especially as Biden would be 78-years-old at the time of his inauguration.

Gates said that although he keeps "busy and pretty active," the prospect of having a president "our age or older," as "in the case of" Vermont senator Bernie Sanders (I.), was "problematic."

"You don’t have the kind of energy that I think is required to be president," Gates said. "I think… I’m not sure you have the intellectual acuity that you might have had in your 60s. So, I mean it’s just a personal view… for me the thought of taking on those responsibilities at this point in my life would be pretty daunting."‘

Gates remarks come amid a renewed scrutiny of Biden’s foreign policy record as polling shows him the clear frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. Even before announcing his bid, Biden was being hammered by more liberal competitors over his vote for the Iraq War and prior support of free trade deals, like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

On Saturday, an article in the New York Post shed new light on lucrative business ties Hunter Biden, the vice president’s youngest son, developed with the governments of China and Ukraine while his father served in the Obama administration.

The post Obama’s Former Defense Secretary Slams Biden’s Foreign Policy Credentials, Age appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

DC May Soon Allow Residents To Issue Parking Tickets

What could possibly go wrong allowing some Washington, D.C. residents to issue parking tickets against their neighbors?

A whole host of things, but the D.C. city council may implement a pilot program that would allow citizens to issue parking tickets to those obstructing a bike lane, crosswalk, bus lane, or fire hydrant by using a mobile app.

The Citizen Safety Pilot Program is included in a larger bill, called the Vision Zero Enhancement Omnibus Amendment Act of 2019, which was introduced to address transportation safety concerns after several cyclists and pedestrians recently died, WTOP reported. This section of the bill would allow up to 10 residents in each ward to be trained to use the app and issue the tickets.

“It would start small. Just 10 people per ward. They would be trained and made sure they would be ready to go. When they see a vehicle that is blocking a bike lane, blocking the crosswalk, blocking a fire hydrant, they would have the ability using an app on their phone to be able to take a picture and actually have a ticket that will be issued,” DC Councilmember Charles Allen, who introduced the bill, told Fox 5.

The photo taken by the authorized resident using the app would indicate when and where the photo was taken, and once submitted through the app, would carry the authority of a traffic injunction issued by a city employee.

Residents who applied for the program would be trained in “bicycle and pedestrian safety; the laws, regulations, policies, and best practices related to issuing notices of infraction for parking violations; proper use of the app; and conflict resolution techniques,” according to the bill.

There could be some legal issues involved in providing citizens such power, however, Allen’s bill also provides for abuse of the program.

“Anyone who knowingly submits false information through the app, or who provides anyone not authorized by the Department with access to the app, shall be subject to a civil fine of up to $100.”

The city will end the program after one year and issue a report detailing how many residents signed up for the program, how many were granted access to the app, how many infractions they issued, and how many of those infractions were dismissed. The report will also look into “evidence of confrontations attributable to the” program and issue recommendations for improvement.

Traffic cops already get plenty of grief if they’re spotted giving someone a ticket, imagine what could happen if a resident gets a ticket from his or her neighbor – a neighbor whose address he or she knows.

As with any idea, this could end up being great for neighborhoods or disastrous. Should the program be extended, perhaps cyclists and pedestrians could be issued notices for crossing during red lights.

The inner libertarian in me, of course, doesn’t approve of such over-policing, but the “nearly hit by a cyclist who rode full speed through a red light and nearly plowed into me when I was legally crossing the crosswalk” in me thinks these people need to obey some traffic laws.

via Daily Wire

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

Washington, DC, Area School District Under Investigation Amid Allegations of Discriminating Against Asians

Is a public school system in a leafy county straddling the Capital Beltway discriminating against Asian Americans? The feds next door are investigating in a case with national implications, and with good reason: The type of racial balancing that Montgomery County Public Schools is using may well be illegal.

No one questions that the changes MCPS put into effect in 2016 have led to a sharp decline in Asian American admissions to a middle school magnet program. In 2016-2017 the drop was 23%; the following year it was 20%. The numbers for whites, Hispanics, and blacks went up.

That in itself should satisfy those who always insist that policies that have a disparate impact on members of an identity group are suspect per se, and need to be reassessed.

And these students and their parents, with the help of the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, have something more substantial than mere impact on their side. Though the district insists its new approach to admissions is colorblind, there is considerable evidence that the effort was in reality an attempt at “race norming,” which is unfair and illegal.

The changes in the admissions process stem from the recommendations included in a 2016 report commissioned by the school system from the New York-based consulting agency Metis Associates.

The report noted that the system “experienced significant increases in the number and diversity of students over the past 20 years.” Yet, Superintendent Larry Bowers was quoted as saying the county had “created structural and systemic barriers that have prevented some of our students from full participation in an instructional program that meets their needs and pushes them to excel.”

In short, Hispanic, black, and low-income students were less likely to be selected.

So the system asked Metis to address “these barriers and the unintended consequences of the impact these program decisions have had on our achievement gap.” Metis recommended as remedies broadening “the definition of gifted to include non-cognitive measures” and “using group-specific norms that benchmark student performances against school peers with comparable backgrounds.”

MCPS responded with two major shifts. First, it invited to the qualifying cognitive-skills assessment all fifth-graders performing above grade level, rather than relying on parental requests and teacher recommendations. The number of test-takers tripled, making the selection process more democratic.

It was the second change that smacked of “group-specific norms”: Students could be disqualified if their home schools already included “a peer group” of 20 similarly gifted classmates. MCPS has portrayed this adjustment as a neutral way of deselecting kids who already have an enriched surrounding. It promised that higher-level courses would be added to their schools, something that parents complain has been limited or nonexistent.

Worse, in light of the Office of Civil Rights investigation, this “peer group” approach looks like a fig leaf for something else. The peers at the children’s home schools are likely to come from the same race. What is happening looks a lot like race-norming.

That term refers to the practice of adjusting outcomes to account for the race or ethnicity of an applicant. In selecting people for school admission or employment, the selector would not admit, say, the top 5% of all candidates, but the top 5% in each racial silo.

Though it was used for decades in hiring, Congress outlawed the practice in 1991. Like the doctrine of disparate impact, race-norming has been a darling of the left. It also has its fans among conservatives, however.

Their point is that, if progressives are intent on group proportionalism in all institutions, then it is far better to hire the best from each group, rather than just lowering standards across the board.

One can see their point, but race-norming’s fans are wrong. It’s not just illegal; it stigmatizes the real achievements of the people in whose name it was carried out.

It’s unfair, too, to those who scrimp and save money for tutoring, emphasize homework, stay married, and abstain from out-of-wedlock births, i.e., make the sacrifices required for their children to succeed.

And Asians can hardly be thought of as racially “privileged.” The Asian American parents of MCPS complained bitterly for two years about the unfairness dealt to their children, but they were practically alone until the Office of Civil Rights notified them that it was bundling 10 of their complaints into one investigation.

MCPS, like other places, is struggling with a very real racial achievement gap. Its refusal to face up to real cultural problems makes it thrash about in search for cures. The latest is an attempt to change school boundaries. The sooner the feds inform MCPS that it is on the wrong side of history, as the left likes to say, the better.

Originally published by National Review

The post Washington, DC, Area School District Under Investigation Amid Allegations of Discriminating Against Asians appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

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

Bernie Sanders: Would Eliminate Private Insurance, Would Force Americans To Pay More In Taxes

Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders says he will eliminate private insurance and will force Americans to pay more in taxes if he becomes presidentpic.twitter.com/JiUlg0DKTW — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) May 13, 2019 Why would anyone vote for any of these characters?

via Weasel Zippers

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

Another University Votes To Boot Chick-fil-A From Campus

Even though the fast food chain Chick-fil-A has routinely fended off the hate leftists have directed at it simply because the company’s late founder expressed support for biblical morality, another university has voted to ban the restaurant from campus.

According to LifeSiteNews, the faculty of Cal Poly San Luis Obisbo “voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to recommend expelling Chick-fil-A from campus.” Strangely, the school likened the presence of Chick-fil-A on campus — and there has been one there for 25 years — to pornography in the campus bookstores.

“We don’t sell pornography in the bookstore and we don’t have a Hooters on campus — we already pre-select those kind of things based on our existing values,” academic senate Vice Chair Thomas Gutierrez said told the on-campus publication Mustang News. “This is a similar thing, the difference is we’re actually profiting from this. So our money, every dollar a student is spending at Chick-fil-A, is going to these causes that are in violation of our values.”

Thirty-eight of the Cal Poly’s academic senate’s 44 members voted that Chick-fil-A be forced off campus. University spokesman Matt Lazier agreed that Chick-fil-A represents bigotry but disagreed that fighting “intolerance with intolerance” would solve the problem.

“While university administration passionately disagrees with the values of some of the organizations, the president of Chick-fil-A has chosen to make personal donations to, we do not believe in responding to intolerance with intolerance,” Lazier said. “Rather, we must model our values of inclusion — that means upholding the rights of others to have different perspectives and ensuring there is space in our community for differing viewpoints and ideologies, even those that may be in direct conflict with our own.”

The hate toward the chicken sandwich empire began in 2012 when company founder Dan Cathy expressed support for traditional one-man/one-woman marriage, prompting boycotts across the country from LGBTQ activists.

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage,'” Cathy said at the time. “I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.”

Just last year, two major publications wrote scathing articles begging people to boycott the business: The New Yorker and HuffPost. “If You Really Love LGBTQ People, You Just Can’t Keep Eating Chick-fil-A,” wrote Noah Michelson of HuffPost. When Chick-fil-A wanted to set up shop in New York City, Dan Piepenring of The New Yorker called it a “creepy infiltration” of the city.

Since then, Chick-fil-A has been banned from two major airports: San Antonio and Buffalo. Most recently, a dean at Rider University resigned from his post when the school banned the chicken restaurant on campus.

As reported by The Daily Wire’s Amanda Prestigiacomo, however, the chicken giant just continues to thrive no matter what the Left throws at it, becoming the third biggest fast-food chain in the United States with $10.2 billion in sales while doubling its number of locations since 2007.

via Daily Wire

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

Laura Loomer Is Right… What are Republicans Going to Do to Stop the Elimination of Conservative Content Online?

As the censorship of freedom-minded Americans gets worse and worse, many of us have become frustrated beyond belief. Most of us confide in family or friends. Some of us do what we can to organize politically to speak out against the censorship. Others fight back on the remaining platforms where we still have accounts. And many remain focused on other things… assuming that they will never be targeted or harassed by the tyrants of the tech-left.

When it comes to evaluating who is the most censored women in the MAGA movement, Laura Loomer holds that unlucky title. Loomer has bravely faced the radical Islamists that want us all dead and vigorously supported President Trump. She has been relentless in sharing the hard truths that awaken our fellow Americans.

And for that she has been targeted for depersoning. The tech-left has almost erased her completely from the internet. Some have suggested that Loomer’s melt down on Alex Jones a few days ago over the hardships of being deplatformed and depersoned was “over-the-top” or “crisis acting.”

Shame on those poor souls. She is mad as hell and refuses to deal with the abuse directed at her in a quiet or calm fashion. That is nothing to be ashamed about. Quite frankly, it got our attention and shares a far greater purpose. It was a cathartic moment for Loomer, but it should also be the wake up call for the rest of us.

This Gateway Pundit reporter has also been banned from Facebook and Twitter. IT SUCKS. Instead of retreating into nothingness or depression, it’s time we all fought back. It is time that we scream and shout.

Our fundamental rights as Americans are wasting away as the Republicans in DC sit around and do nothing. As our President sits around and tweets about how horrible it is. When are more people going to take meaningful action?

Let the digital erasure of Laura Loomer, Roger Stone, Alex Jones, Gavin McInnes and so many others be the spark to action. We need a digital revolution or we need to just submit completely to our new monarchs and their far left thought police.

The time for do-nothing posturing and pontificating is over. What are Republicans going to do?

What are we going to do?

You can help support Loomer’s journalistic efforts at lauraloomer.us

The post Laura Loomer Is Right… What are Republicans Going to Do to Stop the Elimination of Conservative Content Online? 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

Gallup: Fewer than half of Americans would vote for a socialist, lowest of any trait tested

Luckily for progressives Bernie’s going to finish third or fourth in the primaries, thus sparing them from having to face this reality in the general election.

Any poll on socialism is immediately met with the criticism, “What do you mean by ‘socialism’?” People define it in different ways. A right-winger might tell you that the welfare state is socialism; a left-winger would tell remind you that even someone as progressive as Elizabeth Warren continues to define herself as a capitalist. Earlier this week we had a poll in which 57 percent of the public declared “socialism” to be incompatible with American values and yet in the same poll 58 percent said they supported universal health care. Is that a “socialist” goal or not?

But here’s the bottom line: Regardless of how you define “socialist,” Bernie Sanders defines himself that way. It’s his brand, to the point where he’s resisted identifying as a member of the Democratic Party lest that brand be diluted. He’s gonna have to wear it and let people judge him for it. And for many that judgment won’t be kind.

Until recently, “atheist” was the worst trait a candidate for office could have that’s reasonably common across the general population. Even Muslims tend to be more appealing to voters. Socialism now enjoys that distinction, though, despite the recent prominence of Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The most striking thing about Gallup’s numbers to me is that socialism’s not only rock bottom in terms of public support, it hasn’t gained any support even though every other trait tested has. (Two weren’t tested in 2015.) You would expect Bernie’s 2016 insurgency and the rise of AOC to have helped mainstream socialism, especially at a moment when Americans are growing more willing to vote for candidates who break from the traditional mold. But that hasn’t happened — and this isn’t the only survey to show it. In March, a poll from NBC found just 25 percent of Americans willing to say they’d be “comfortable” with a nominee who’s socialist. That was *down* two points since October 2015. The Overton window might be moving towards socialism among the commentariat (isn’t it always?) but not among the genpop.

Look at the partisan numbers, though, and you’ll see that the story with socialism isn’t necessarily that the trend line is flat but that it’s being tugged in opposite directions at the same time, creating an appearance of flatness:

Four years ago, 59 percent of Democrats and 26 percent of Republicans said they’d be willing to vote for a socialist, a net divide of 33 points. Now they’re at 74 percent and 19 percent, respectively — a net gap of 55 points. As in so many other things, the parties are becoming more polarized around the issue. The Overton window *has* moved towards socialism, quite a bit, on the left but the backlash on the right is keeping it static across the population. Meanwhile, independents have held steady at 49 percent both in 2015 and now, suggesting that this will be a liability for Sanders to some extent as nominee. I wonder if the right-wing backlash to “socialism” is a pure reaction to its growing popularity on the left or if it’s being driven in an outsized way by the person of AOC, who’s become a lightning rod and an avatar to Republicans of what a DSA-led future would look like. What if Ocasio-Cortez has become a liability to Bernie?

If you can spare five minutes, compare how favorably the parties rated different candidate traits in 2015 versus how they rate them now in the table above. Four years ago, more Democrats said they’d vote for an evangelical Christian (66 percent) than a socialist (59 percent). Today it’s the opposite, with socialism at 74 percent and evangelical Christianity at 71 percent. Republicans are getting less comfortable with Muslim candidates, dropping from 45 percent willing to vote for one in 2015 to 38 percent now, while Democrats are becoming more comfortable, from 73 percent four years ago to 86 percent now. I wonder if that’s an “Ilhan Omar effect.” The numbers willing to vote for a gay candidate are also interesting in light of Pete Buttigieg’s popularity: Republicans willing to vote for someone gay are steady at 61 percent, but independents are up big from 73 percent to 82. Democrats, however, have actually slipped a tiny bit, from 85 percent to 83. What explains that?

For any Sanders fans tempted to despair at these results, here’s something to cheer you up: There’s evidence lately that Trump has slipped a bit among his base of whites without a college degree. That’s supposed to be Bernie’s strongest demo too. If he can figure out a way to become nominee he may have more opportunity than other potential nominees in siphoning off votes from POTUS.

The post Gallup: Fewer than half of Americans would vote for a socialist, lowest of any trait tested appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

Border Patrol Chief Drops TRUTH BOMBS on CNN About Illegal Immigration, Smugglers

Friday morning’s CNN Newsroom ended on quite the interesting note as co-host and former Obama official Jim Sciutto brought on U.S. Border Patrol Chief Carla Provost to discuss the tsunami of illegal immigrants crossing into the country and, needless to say, Provost brought the heat and some takes that CNN viewers probably haven’t heard as much as they maybe should.

via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias

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

FBI Opens Campaign Finance Investigation Into Trump Donor Cindy Yang Over $5,400 Donation

The FBI opened a campaign finance investigation into Trump donor Li “Cindy” Yang, the founder of a Florida massage parlor chain.

Apparently the FBI springs into action over a $5,400 donation that may have come from China only because it concerns Donald Trump.

The Democrats are weaving a new scandal as the Russian collusion delusion dies — China — the Dems will push a new narrative about Chinese influence over Trump as he battles them on trade.

The FBI subpoenaed records on Tuesday related to a $5,400 donation (the maximum allowed) to Trump’s 2020 campaign from a woman named Bing Bing Peranio, a receptionist at one of Cindy Yang’s massage parlors.

The Miami Herald reported that feds are looking into whether the donation to Trump’s re-election campaign made last year was illegally funneled from China.

Via The Miami Herald:

Investigators obtained a federal grand jury subpoena Tuesday seeking records from Bing Bing Peranio, an employee of Yang’s family’s spa business who last year contributed a maximum $5,400 to President Donald Trump’s re-election effort, according to a source familiar with the probe. Yang came to Peranio’s workplace and helped her write the check, Peranio told reporters from The New York Times, who first reported the contribution. Peranio told The Times she didn’t “say no.”

The subpoena asked for any records related to that March 5, 2018, donation and possibly other contributions between 2014 and the present, said the source, who asked for anonymity to discuss an ongoing federal investigation.

In a brief phone interview with the Miami Herald, Peranio confirmed that she had received a subpoena and that FBI agents had interviewed her at her home Thursday.

She declined to discuss the nature of the conversation but said she did not understand why investigators were interested in her political contributions.“It’s not just me,” Peranio said. “I don’t know why I always get it.”

According to the Miami Herald, feds are investigating whether Li “Cindy” Yang (a naturalized American citizen) reimbursed Bing Bing Peranio for the $5,400 contribution or delivered “anything of value” to her during that time that would benefit the Trump campaign.

It is against the law to reimburse someone for a political donation without disclosing the original donor.

It is also illegal to make a donation in someone else’s name…only if it concerns Donald Trump.

Agents are seeking records from Peranio, a potential witness in the investigation, that are linked to Yang, Yang’s husband, their businesses, as well as Trump campaign entities and the Republican National Committee, reported The Herald.

Does the FBI do anything else besides investigate Trump, his family and everyone connected to him?

Recall, Barack Obama received hundreds of millions of dollars in ‘mystery’ donations from foreign donors in 2012, yet he was only slapped with a fine by the FEC.

Obama’s campaign in 2012 didn’t ask for the CVV number on the credit cards from donors — the CVV number is designed to prove the donor is actually holding the credit card at the time of the donation.

Furthermore, many donations to Obama’s campaign’s (both 2008 and 2012) were fraudulent and given in other people’s names.

For example, the Washington Post reported in 2008 that a woman named Mary Biskup was reported to have donated over $170,000 to Obama’s campaign in a series of small donations. The problem? Mary Biskup said she never donated money to Obama’s campaign so someone must have illegally donated in her name.

But the FBI is investigating Trump’s donor over $5,400…feel safer yet, America?

The post FBI Opens Campaign Finance Investigation Into Trump Donor Cindy Yang Over $5,400 Donation 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