Month: January 2021

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris said in a statement Friday on the 48^th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Roe v. Wade that they are “committed to codifying” the decision and to “appointing judges that respect foundational precedents like Roe.”

On January 22, 1973, the Court created a right to abortion, though none existed in the Constitution.

Using the language of the abortion industry, specifically that abortion is the equivalent of “health care,” Biden, referred to as a “devout Catholic,” and Harris said in their statement that during the four years of the Trump administration, “reproductive health, including the right to choose, has been under relentless and extreme attack.”

“We are deeply committed to making sure everyone has access to care – including reproductive health care – regardless of income, race, zip code, health insurance status, or immigration status,” they stated:

Meanwhile, pro-life leaders throughout the country marked the anniversary of Roe Friday, vowing to end abortion with even greater resolve as Biden and Harris begin their radical pro-abortion agenda.

Rev. Patrick Mahoney, an ordained minister in the Reformed Presbyterian Church and the chief strategy officer for the Stanton Public Policy Center, expressed that commitment:

As the most pro-abortion President and Congress take power in Washington, D.C., the pro-life community recognizes our struggle to end abortion violence takes on even greater urgency. The election of President Biden will clearly reveal to the American public how extremist and out of touch his administration is regarding abortion.

Pro-life black organization Every Black Life Matters, a Christian alternative to Black Lives Matter, delivered a letter of commendation to former President Donald Trump as he left office. The group thanked Trump for his support.

“While there have been many Presidents of the U.S. who have asserted support for the Black community, you have fully demonstrated your commitment and resolve to support and improve Black life by standing firm on the right to life,” the letter read, and continued:

While Progressives/Leftists/Democrats publicly decry “racism,” privately, they have remained silent and complicit while one of their primary funding sources (Planned Parenthood) admitted their notable history of racism (PP of NY July 2020). You, on the other hand, have consistently stood against Planned Parenthood’s racism and publicly acknowledged their tactics and schemes to “exterminate the negro population” (actual quote from PP Founder, Margret Sanger) as the equivalency to “Black genocide!” Your stand is righteous and correct!

In December, Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson told Newsweek the abortion vendor is “ready to hit the ground running day one,” with the goal of an executive order after the inauguration that showcases the Biden administration’s commitment to abortion on demand.

She said what is most important to abortion activists is that Biden appoint “key personnel” who will ensure their agenda is achieved.

“We know that personnel is policy,” Johnson said. “So we’re making sure that those positions are filled with sexual and reproductive health champions”:

A Marist poll released in January of last year found most Americans reject the 1973 ruling that created a right to abortion.

According to the poll, which was sponsored by the Knights of Columbus, 62 percent of Americans say that if the Supreme Court revisits Roe v. Wade, it should rule to allow states to determine abortion restrictions (46 percent) or make abortion illegal (16 percent). This outcome included 39 percent of those who identify as Democrat and 40 percent of those who consider themselves “pro-choice.”

Only 33 percent of Americans said abortion should be legal at any time, without restriction.

“What our polling makes clear is that millions of Americans describe themselves as ‘pro-choice’ because they believe in some choice, which would include life of the mother, rape, and incest as examples, but very few agree with abortion throughout pregnancy,” said Knights of Columbus CEO Carl Anderson in an interview with Breitbart News at the March for Life in Washington, DC.

“Many of the people who describe themselves as pro-choice are actually in agreement on policy with pro-lifers,” he continued, noting a pattern in the annual poll. “The trend is steady: seven out of ten Americans for a decade want significant restrictions; four out of ten Democrats want significant restrictions.”

A year-old defense company backed by a $63 million investment from board member and former Google Chairman Eric Schmidt is already working its way into the good graces of the Biden administration.

Two employees of the company, Rebellion Defense, are serving as staff members for President Biden’s transition team, alongside employees from more established tech companies like Uber and Amazon.

The American Prospect explains further:

What is Rebellion Defense? With a Star Wars allusion as its name, this firm is not your typical contractor. Rebellion launched in the summer of 2019 to craft artificial-intelligence (AI) software for the defense industry. Trade publications gushed about how innovative it was. It quickly raised $63 million, with the conspicuous backing of its board member Eric Schmidt. Schmidt is best known as the former CEO of Google, but he’s also a billionaire investor and an influential consultant to key government bodies.

Schmidt serves as chairman of an advisory board to the White House and Congress called the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence. From official positions, he has advocated for the Defense Department and intelligence agencies to adopt more machine-learning technology. Meanwhile, as a venture capitalist, he has invested millions of dollars in more than a half-dozen national-security startups that sell those very technologies back to the government.

Government watchdogs consider those dual roles a conflict of interest. “He’s got many, many financial incentives to ensure that the Department of Defense and other federal agencies adopt AI aggressively,” said John Davisson, senior counsel for the nonprofit Electronic Privacy Information Center.

As Breitbart News previously reported, Eric Schmidt has deeply tied himself to the leadership of the Democrat party, especially in the area of defense policy.

Google has deeper ties to the Democrat party than perhaps any other technology company, which is perhaps why some executives were caught on camera tearing up after Hillary Clinton failed to win the presidency in 2016.

An investigation by the Intercept found that hundreds of individuals either moved from Google to the White House or from the White House to Google during the Obama administration.

Eric Schmidt, who was executive director of Alphabet Inc during the presidential campaign, pitched himself as “head outside adviser” to the Clinton campaign in 2014, according to emails leaked by WikiLeaks. Schmidt — then still executive director of Google-parent Alphabet — was also pictured at Hillary Clinton’s NYC “victory” party wearing a badge marked “campaign staff.”

Schmidt is deeply tied to the Department of Defense, a relationship that began during the Obama administration. He is currently Chairman of the DoD’s Defense Innovation Advisory board. Schmidt’s relationship with top U.S. politicians has also paid off in New York, where Governor Andrew Cuomo has asked him to “re-imagine” the state post-coronavirus.

Biden’s transition team is teeming with Silicon Valley insiders, including former employees from Google, Twitter, Facebook, Lyft, Amazon, and Airbnb.

This is after Google directly interfered in the 2020 presidential election by suppressing search visibility for Breitbart News and other conservative media outlets. Twitter and Facebook, meanwhile, suppressed the New York Post’s reporting about the Biden family’s overseas business deals.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. His new book, #DELETED: Big Tech’s Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election, which contains exclusive interviews with sources inside Google, Facebook, and other tech companies, is currently available for purchase.

Last week, the Washington Post excised a segment from one of its profiles of Vice President Kamala Harris originally published 18 months ago. Reason described the deletion as an attempt to “memory-hole Kamala Harris’s bad joke about inmates begging for food and water.”

The original article, published July 23, 2019 — during then-Sen. Kamala Harris’s (D-CA) presidential campaign — opened with the following anecdote, in which Harris likened political campaigning to imprisonment:

It was the Fourth of July, Independence Day, and Kamala Harris was explaining to her sister, Maya, that campaigns are like prisons.

She’d been recounting how in the days before the Democratic debate in Miami life had actually slowed down to a manageable pace. Kamala, Maya and the rest of the team had spent three days prepping for that contest in a beach-facing hotel suite, where they closed the curtains to blot out the fun. But for all the hours of studying policy and practicing the zingers that would supercharge her candidacy, the trip allowed for a break in an otherwise all-encompassing schedule.

“I actually got sleep,” Kamala said, sitting in a Hilton conference room, beside her sister, and smiling as she recalled walks on the beach with her husband and that one morning SoulCycle class she was able to take.

“That kind of stuff,” Kamala said between sips of iced tea, “which was about bringing a little normal to the days, that was a treat for me.”

“I mean, in some ways it was a treat,” Maya said. “But not really.”

“It’s a treat that a prisoner gets when they ask for, ‘A morsel of food please,’” Kamala said shoving her hands forward as if clutching a metal plate, her voice now trembling like an old British man locked in a Dickensian jail cell. “‘And water! I just want wahtahhh….’ Your standards really go out the f—ing window.”

Kamala burst into laughter.

The Washington Post removed the entire anecdote in an edited version of its Harris profile published last week. Reason described the original profile’s introduction as “a memorable anecdote in which Harris bizarrely compared the rigors of the campaign trail to…life behind bars. And then proceeded to laugh—at the idea of an inmate begging for a sip of water.”

Reason described the deleted anecdote as revelatory of Harris’s baseness: “The Post profile provided a mask-slipping moment that seemed to perfectly capture a warped sense of justice and lack of basic human dignity—all in just a few hundred words.”

“We repurposed and updated some of our strong biographical pieces about both political figures,” wrote the Washington Post to Reason via email. “The profile of Maya Harris was updated with new reporting, as noted online, using the existing URL. The original story remains available in print.”

The Washington Post did not provide Reason with other examples of edited profiles of political figures. On Friday, the Washington Post‘s restored a link to the original profile of Kamala Harris alongside its updated edit of the 18-month-old article.

The Washington Post updated its slogan to “Democracy Dies in Darkness” shortly after former President Donald Trump’s inauguration in 2017. The news media outlet, owned by Jeff Bezos, markets itself as a politically objective and nonpartisan operation.

Two of every three Americans want the federal government to block the caravans of migrant workers from Central America, says a Rasmussen Reports poll.

The opposition among likely voters is deep and broad — except among liberals and people who earn above $200,000 per year.

The poll asked: “Should the U.S. government stop all of the migrants in the Honduras caravan from entering, or should it allow them to enter this country temporarily until each of their cases can be individually reviewed?”

The sample of 880 likely voters opposed the entry of the migrants by 60 percent to 30 percent.

Conservatives oppose the entry by 82 percent to 13 percent, while “moderate” respondents oppose it by 55 percent to 34 percent.

But liberals overwhelmingly favored entry for the migrants, with 63 percent saying the government “should allow them to enter this country temporarily until each of their cases can be individually reviewed.”

Psychological studies show people who strongly oppose inequality tend to become liberals. In contrast, people who emphasize solidarity tend to become Republicans.

Just 24 percent of liberals aligned themselves with American workers by agreeing “the U.S. government should stop all of the migrants in the Honduras caravan from entering.”

The liberals’ welcome policy would spur further labor migration because catch and release policies allow migrants to get U.S. jobs, either legally or illegally. The migrants want and need to work hard to quickly repay the home country mortgages and loans that fund their coyote-guided “Hunger Games” trek past the murderous cartels.

The mass migration ended in 2020 when President Donald Trump managed to stop the catch and release of migrants — nearly all of whom compete with blue-collar Americans for jobs, usually by providing cheaper services to wealthier Americans.

Currently, the northward movement of the caravans is being blocked by the Guatemalan and Mexican soldiers, police, and politicians, even as President Joe Biden’s liberal deputies display their welcome policy by dismantling Trump’s border controls.

Wealthy people who earn above $200,000 also favored the migrants’ entry, by 52 percent to 38 percent.

Responses from liberals and wealthy people dragged the collective response from Democrats down to 38 percent rejection, 49 percent welcome.

In contrast, high school graduates opposed a welcome policy by 64 percent to 22 percent.

People with post-graduate degrees narrowly opposed entry, at 49 percent to 38 percent.

The poll showed an unusually wide class difference between wealthy Americans and poor Americans, partly because it directly asked participants to describe what side are they on.

Race was not a major factor. Blacks and other non-white respondents opposed entry by 58 percent to 33 percent.

The vast majority of Americans tell pollsters that the federal government should ensure Americans have decent jobs before it allows companies to import more foreign workers.

The polls show Americans’ deep and broad opposition to labor migration and the inflow of temporary contract workers into the skilled jobs needed by young and mid-career American graduates.

The multi-racial, cross-sex, non-racist, class-based opposition to labor migration co-exists with generally favorable personal feelings toward legal immigrants and toward immigration in theory — despite the media’s magnification of many skewed polls that still push the 1950’s “Nation of Immigrants” claim.

Investor-backed progressives deride the public’s civic solidarity as “xenophobia.” But migration moves money from employees to employers, from families to investors, from young to old, from children to their parents, from homebuyers to real estate investors, and from the central states to the coastal states.

Migration also allows investors and CEOs to skimp on labor-saving technology, sideline U.S. minorities, ignore disabled people, exploit stoop labor in the fields, shortchange labor in the cities, and also impose tight control and pay cuts on American professionals.

Migration also helps corral technological innovation by minimizing the employment of American graduates, undermine Americans’ labor rights, and redirect progressive journalists to cheerlead for Wall Street’s priorities and claims.

I’ve joined many others, including the President of the United States, in being locked out of Twitter for posting a tweet about hydroxychloroquine that I posted time and time again and that Twitter had already found to be in compliance with its rules. Without warning, Twitter told me that not only did I have to take it down but that even if I did I’d be locked out for seven days. 

Judicial Watch’s Twitter account was purged of nearly 200,000 followers, and I’ve lost over 10 percent of my followers. Fair-minded Americans are concerned that our civil liberties, especially the God-given right of free speech, is being censored by these private actors that have this unique role in our nation’s public life and that control our ability to communicate.

No one would say Big Tech can keep people off because of their race, so why can they keep people off because of their political beliefs?

(I discussed this issues in interview with Fox & Friends first and Newsmax recently.)

I “appealed” the Twitter lockout but Twitter has ignored my appeal which is no surprise because we all know that this is not about HCQ, it is about finding a pretext to silence another leading conservative voice. Facebook/Instagram is also targeting conservatives and Judicial Watch will be at risk for more suppression from the leftists controlling Big Tech. 

I suggest you pop over to our website (https://www.judicialwatch.org/petitions/sign-up/) and share your postal and email addresses so Judicial Watch can keep in direct contact with you about our essential work to uncover and stop government corruption. Our heavy lifting will intensify for the rule of law despite the censorship — with your support!

You can see our work is needed more than ever as the Pelosi House abused President Trump with a baseless and malicious second impeachment of President Trump! 

The latest Trump impeachment is a violation (again) of due process and undermines the rule of law. There is no evidence President Trump incited violence or insurrection. A summary, snap impeachment imposed without any hearing, any evidence or providing President Trump the ability to defend himself is fundamentally unjust. 

The Left once again has rolled over the civil rights of President Trump to score political points.

But this abuse of power is “bipartisan,” as ten Republicans signed onto to an impeachment that would have the effect of criminalizing core political speech that has nothing to do with violence or insurrection.

This impeachment is meant to criminalize opposition to their agenda. Never letting a crisis go to waste, Democrats, allied media, and Big Tech have attacked the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans. Again, we have had mass censorship and purges on Twitter, the destruction of Parler, and outright bans on conservative speech related to the election debates. This impeachment seeks to effectively outlaw support for election integrity reform. 

The Senate should summarily dispose this sham impeachment as soon as possible.