“I haven’t thought about that question… uhhh… uhhhhhhh… I just haven’t thought about that question,” Garland reluctantly replied. “I think the uh, the uh, president has, uh, made clear that we are a country of uh with borders and uh a concern about national security. Um, I don’t know of proposal to uh decriminalize, but um, still make it unlawful to uh, enter.”
Garland continued to assert that he does not know the answer to the question and hasn’t thought about it.
Hawley went on to ask if he will continue to prosecute unlawful border crossings.
“This is again, ah, uh, a question of allocation of resources. We will uh, the department, will um ah um, I don’t know,” Garland rambled nearly incoherently.
The nominee eventually said that he “assumes” the answer will be yes, but that he doesn’t know.
When questioned by Hawley about if he considers Antifa and Black Lives Matter attacks on the courthouse in Portland to be “domestic terrorism,” Garland said he might not, because those attacks happened at night.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue warned Monday that the Equality Act would “promote the most comprehensive assault on Christianity ever written into law.”
While its proponents insist that the Equality Act is about “ending discrimination,” it would in fact fundamentally alter the legal definition of sex to include sexual orientation and gender identity, Dr. Donohue argues.
The Act would also undermine the Religious Freedom Restoration Act by conferring special status on gay rights, prioritizing them over religious freedom and conscience rights, he added.
The Equality Act would also require healthcare providers to provide “hormone therapies and surgical procedures that are required to change the physical characteristics associated with sex changes,” Donohue observes, without regard for the beliefs of healthcare workers.
“It has become increasingly clear that the expansion of rights to transgender women — really biological males who identify as female — has come at the expense of rights for biological females,” Donohue adds.
“Boys and men would be allowed to compete in sports with girls and women, thus unfairly altering women’s athletics,” he writes. Moreover, “biological males can use the locker rooms, restrooms and shower facilities that have always been reserved for females.”
This would also mean that “Catholics, evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Mormons, Muslims, and many other religious communities could not raise religious liberty objections to any of the aforementioned rights of transgender women,” Donohue warns.
“It is hard for the public to understand, especially Catholics, why such allegedly ‘devout Catholics’ as Biden and Pelosi would want to champion such patently anti-Christian legislation as the Equality Act,” he concludes.
On its website, the U.S. Catholic Bishops’ Conference warns that the Equality Act would “discriminate against people of faith” and “punish faith-based organizations, such as charities and schools who serve everyone in their communities, simply because of their beliefs.”
The proposed legislation would also “force girls and women to compete against boys and men for limited opportunities in sports, and to share locker rooms and shower spaces with biological males who identify as women,” the bishops note.
It would also “force people in everyday life, and especially health care workers, to support gender transition,” they add.
Last week, Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann said Biden should “stop defining himself as a devout Catholic and acknowledge that his view on abortion is contrary to Catholic moral teaching.”
The Special Committee on Election Integrity of the Georgia House of Representatives held hearings Thursday and Friday on HB 531, which includes a provision designed to ban private funding of election administration of the sort practiced by the Mark Zuckerberg-funded Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) in that state in 2020.
“No superintendent shall take or accept any funding, grants, or gifts from any source other than from the governing authority of the county or municipality, the State of Georgia, or the federal government,” lines 47 through 49 of HB 531, which is sponsored by Committee Chair State Rep. Barry Fleming, reads, taking some of the language found in HB 62, which was filed by State Rep. Joseph Gullett in January.
On Thursday, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported, “voting rights advocates and Democratic groups are incensed” by the bill’s many other election integrity provisions :
Introduced by Republican Rep. Barry Fleming hours before a hastily-called House hearing, House Bill 531 would restrict absentee voting, limit the use of mobile voting units and ban counties from holding early voting on Sundays, often called “souls to the polls,” which is popular with Black voters
Unlike some other measures pushed by back-bench legislators, this one has juice. Fleming is a rival to House Speaker David Ralston with his own power center, and chairs a special committee set up to handle elections proposals.
Among the other provisions in the measure: a requirement for photo ID for absentee voting, a more limited timeframe for voters to request absentee ballots, and restrictions on where ballot drop boxes could be placed.
Today, Fleming scheduled an hours-long hearing that could stretch through the afternoon to vet the bill. Voting rights advocates and Democratic groups are incensed. (emphasis added)
While Democrats are “incensed” by the election integrity reforms included in the bill, painting them as an infringement on voting rights, one prominent conservative who has led the way in 2020 election integrity litigation says when it comes to making Zuckerberg-style private funding of election administration, HB 531, “while possibly well intended,” if passed as currently written “fails to address these concerns.”
Phill Kline, director of the Amistad Project of The Thomas More Society, told Breitbart News:
The danger of allowing private interests to direct government expenditures played out in the 2020 election as more than $400 million of Mark Zuckerberg monies combined with other Big Tech funding to create a two-tiered election system with election officials in democrat strongholds have millions to target voter turnout, engage in ballot harvesting and to cure ballots while areas of the state with Republican voters did not benefit from such government efforts.
Unfortunately, HB 531, although possibly well intended, fails to address these concerns. Rather it codifies the use of such money by allowing cities and counties to receive, appropriate and spend such funds just as they did in the 2020 election. The state legislature has the responsibility under the United States Constitution and federal law to treat all voters equally.
Therefore, private monies must be prohibited at the local level unless such monies are received and appropriated by the state legislature consistent with the state election plan approved under the Help America Vote Act. Otherwise, the disparate treatment of voters dictated by private interests will continue. House Bill 531 needs to be amended if Georgia wants to prohibit the private takeover of government that occurred during the 2020 election. (emphasis added)
Kline is referring to the language of HB 531, which prohibits “the superintendent” of the administration of elections from receiving private funds. As Kline reads that language, “the superintendent” could receive funding from a county government which, in turn, received that funding from a private donor, such as the Zuckerberg-funded Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL).
[The] controversial practice of [private funding of election administration was] pioneered by Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan through $419 million in donations to nonprofits Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) and the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) played a key role in determining the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, particularly in five key battleground states where President Biden narrowly defeated former President Trump: Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
During Georgia’s 2020 election, the CTCL donated more than $24 million to four counties–Fulton, Gwinnett, Cobb, and DeKalb–where Biden outperformed Hillary Clinton by more than 200,000 votes, and the CEIR donated an estimated $3 million to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office “for the purpose of educating voters about election rules and process.”
The language of the earlier bill filed in the Georgia House of Representatives this legislative session, HB 62, more definitively banned the acceptance or expenditure of such private donations:
Key components of HB 62, cosponsored by [State Rep. Joseph Gullett], State Rep. Alan Powell, State Rep. Martin Momtahan, State Rep. Rick Williams, State Rep. Matthew Gambill, and State Rep. Philip Singleton, are as follows:
Aboard of elections or board of elections and registration established pursuant to this subpart shall only be authorized to accept funding from lawful appropriations of public funds from the government of the United States, the State of Georgia, or a Georgia county municipality. No such board of elections or board of elections and registration shall be authorized to accept or expend any grant, gift, or funding from private persons, corporations, organizations, partnerships, registered political parties, or political bodies.
A superintendent of a county or municipality shall only be authorized to accept funding from lawful appropriations of public funds from the government of the United States, the State of Georgia, or a Georgia county or municipality. No such superintendent shall be authorized to accept or expend any grant, gift, or funding from private persons, corporations, organizations, partnerships, registered political parties, or political bodies.
Acounty board of registrars shall only be authorized to accept funding from lawful appropriations of public funds from the government of the United States, the State of Georgia, or a Georgia county or municipality.No county board of registrars shall be authorized to accept or expend any grant, gift, or funding from private persons, corporations, organizations, partnerships, registered political parties, or political bodies.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is beating Senators Marco Rubio and Rick Scott in a hypothetical 2024 primary match-up, according to a new poll conducted by veteran Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio.
In a hypothetical three-way primary for president, DeSantis gets 64 percent support compared to 12 percent for Rubio and 10 percent for Scott, according to Fabrizio’s survey, which was conducted last week for a private client and shared with POLITICO. That 52-point lead over Rubio represents a massive increase since July — the last time Fabrizio polled a matchup between the three and found DeSantis ahead by just 11 points over Rubio. […] Fabrizio’s survey of 304 Republicans had a margin of error of +/-5.6 percent.
Speaking to Politico, Fabrizio said DeSantis’s survey figures are a positive sign for the rising GOP star if he chooses to seek the White House in three years. “In order to run for president, you need to have your home state, you need your home base. And DeSantis clearly has that,” the pollster said.
“Given the attention in the state to Scott’s and Rubio’s positions and votes on the outcome of the election, it’s kind of startling to see DeSantis, by an even wider margin, is perceived as Trump’s biggest supporter of the three,” the pollster added.
Fabrizio’s poll isn’t the only one in which DeSantis performed strongly. Last week, Echelon Insights survey released a poll showing former Vice President Mike Pence, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), and DeSantis (R) rounding out the top tier in a non-Trump 2024 Republican field. The poll, which was conducted between February 12-18, was comprised of 1,005 registered voters and 430 Republican voters or Republican-leaning voters. It asked respondents, “Would you like to see Donald Trump run for President in 2024?”
Breitbart News reported: “Twenty-one percent chose Pence, followed by Cruz, DeSantis, and Donald Trump Jr. with ten percent, eight percent, and eight percent, respectively. That reflects a two-point jump for Cruz and six-point jump for the Florida governor since January.”
DeSantis has seen his popularity rise in recent months due to handling of the coronavirus pandemic and new initiatives designed to reign in big tech’s power.
Not only are potential voters excited about a possible bid for the White House by DeSantis, but so are some high-profile Florida Republican lawmakers, such as Rep. Matt Gaetz.
“What Ron DeSantis didn’t say, which is the truth, is that the Biden folks know that if Donald Trump is not the candidate in 2024, the leader of our movement will be Ron DeSantis,” Gaetz said.
“He is a strong potential presidential candidate in 2024. The Biden team knows that, and so they’re trying to somehow cast aspersions on the Florida experience because you know what, throughout America, there’s a lot of Florida envy right now,” he added.
Two congresspersons in the US House of Representatives sent letters to broadcasters asking them to remove Fox News, Newsmax, and One America News Network.
As politicians and the mainstream media continue to insist that America is divided and at each other’s throats, Dr. Ben Carson has a different message. He joined the "Glenn Beck Podcast" this week to discuss his time in the Trump administration and how we move forward and heal America. Overall, he says, we must realize "Americans are NOT each other’s enemies."
Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation, or enjoy the full interview with Dr. Ben Carson here.
Want more from Glenn Beck?
To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Justice Clarence Thomas issued a vigorous dissent Monday in response to the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear a challenge against the Pennsylvania state court’s ruling that permitted ballots to be counted even if they were received three days after Election Day.
“One wonders what the Court waits for,” Thomas wrote. “We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us. I respectfully dissent.”
Thomas acknowledged that the case before the Court would not have changed the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, but he also warned that the unwillingness of the Supreme Court to deal with the issues presented in the case now could hold potential problems in the future.
“We are fortunate that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision to change the receipt deadline for mail-in ballots does not appear to have changed the outcome in any federal election. This Court ordered the county boards to segregate ballots received later than the deadline set by the legislature. Order in Republican Party of Pa. v. Boockvar, No. 20A84. And none of the parties contend that those ballots made an outcome-determinative difference in any relevant federal election.”
“But we may not be so lucky in the future. Indeed, a separate decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court may have already altered an election result,” he said, going on to mention a state Senate race.
“That is not a prescription for confidence,” Thomas continued. “Changing the rules in the middle of the game is bad enough. Such rule changes by officials who may lack authority to do so is even worse. When those changes alter election results, they can severely damage the electoral system on which our self-governance so heavily depends. If state officials have the authority they have claimed, we need to make it clear. If not, we need to put an end to this practice now before the consequences become catastrophic.”
“That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas warned. “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”
Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch also dissented in the case.
“There is ‘reasonable expectation’ that the parties will face the same question in the future,” Alito wrote in his dissent, echoing Thomas’ warning about potential future problems. “And that the question will evade future pre-election review, just as it did in these cases.”
“These cases call out for review, and I respectfully dissent from the Court’s decision to deny certiorari.”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming amember.
Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga has appointed a “minister of loneliness” to his Cabinet in order to combat the rise of suicide that has taken place in the country due to the pandemic. Earlier this month, Suga reportedly chose Tetsushi Sakamoto to take on the role in addition to his work “combating the nation’s falling […]
Biden Attorney General nominee Merrick Garland refused to answer during his confirmation hearing on Monday whether allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports was “fundamentally unfair to female athletes” and instead just said that it was a “very difficult societal question.” “In my last 20 seconds, I’m going to ask you, if you agree […]
In this course, Robin DiAngelo, the best-selling author of White Fragility, gives you the vocabulary and practices you need to start confronting racism and unconscious bias at the individual level and throughout your organization. There’s no magic recipe for building an inclusive workplace. It’s a process that needs to involve people of color, and that needs to go on for as long as your company’s in business.
The free into above does not show the ending slide "Try to be less white" but what you can see is galling enough.
The video Tweet by @DrKarlynB shows more of the damning slides.
Coca-Cola, facing mounting backlash from conservatives online, has responded to allegations of anti-white rhetoric after an internal whistleblower leaked screenshots of diversity training materials that encourages staff to "try to be less white."
A Coca-Cola spokesperson confirmed that the course is "part of a learning plan to help build an inclusive workplace," but also noted that "the video circulating on social media is from a publicly available LinkedIn Learning series and is not a focus of our company’s curriculum."
Coca-Cola Logo
The Coca-Cola logo is on training snapshots in the video Tweet.
If Coca-Cola did not authorize and pay for the the training, the slides would not have their logo, Karlyn would be in deep legal trouble, and Twitter would have removed the Tweet.
Who in the hell is reviewing their training materials?
Candance Owens
Best selling author Candance Owens had this to say.
If a corporate company sent around a training kit instructing black people how to “be less black”, the world would implode and lawsuits would follow.
My thanks to Coca-Cola for finally giving me the reason to quit drinking Diet Coke – which for health reasons you should not be drinking anyway.#CokeIsRacistpic.twitter.com/hBeYX5jwnj
(@JackPosobiec) February 22, 2021
