Conservatives welcome. Libs & RINOs go away. It's all of you destroying the society and conservatives must no longer appease you!
If there is any sincere person left in America who still claims that cancel culture is a myth, they may want to seriously consider the case of Cara Dumaplin. The popular baby sleep training expert has been ruthlessly attacked, boycotted, doxxed, and smeared recently after someone (more on that “someone” in a moment) went through […]
via Conservative Review
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/
Nicolle Wallace has Republicans and drone strikes on the noggin.
Yesterday, we caught MSNBC analyst and former FBI agent Clint Watts saying on Wallace’s show that if Anwar Awlaki had said what Trump said, the result would be a "drone strike."
Wallace took it an insane step further on her show this evening, saying:
We had a policy, and it was very controversial, it was carried out under the Bush years, and under the Obama years, of attacking terrorism at its root, of going after and killing, and in the case of Anwar Awlaki, an American, a Yemeni-American, with a drone strike for the crime of inciting violence, inciting terrorism.
. . .
The way you root out terrorism, is to take on, in the case of Islamic terrorism, kill those who incite it.
Wallace might claim she was only talking about Awlaki and Islamic terrorism. But for the second night running to, in any way, shape, or form, put incitement to "domestic terrorism" in the same breath as killing with "drone strikes" is deeply dangerous, and insane. Why was she possibly even talking about drone strikes in the context of dealing with domestic terrorism?
Again, as I wrote yesterday: "and the left shrieks about the right inciting violence?"
Nicolle Wallace once again airing the notion of dealing with "domestic terrorism" via "drone strikes" was sponsored in part by USAA and Otezla.
Here’s the transcript.
MSNBC
Deadline White House
1/29/21
5:34 pm ET
NICOLLE WALLACE: There’s a bulletin released to all law enforcement earlier this week, that there is, until the end of April, a persistent threat of domestic extremism, domestic terrorism carried out in the ideology and around this belief that the election was fraudulent, that the Covid restrictions are unnecessary. All of those ideologies pushed by Donald Trump.
But my question for you is around incitement. We had a policy, and it was very controversial, it was carried out under the Bush years, and under the Obama years, of attacking terrorism at its root, of going after and killing, and in the case of Anwar Awlaki, an American, a Yemeni-American, with a drone strike for the crime of inciting violence, inciting terrorism.
Mitch McConnell was in the Senate then. He was in the Senate after 9/11 too. How does Mitch McConnell, who understands that the way you root out terrorism, is to take on, in the case of Islamic terrorism, kill those who incite it. How does he not vote to convict someone that he said, on the floor of the Senate, incited an insurrection?
via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.newsbusters.org/
A group of disenfranchised Colorado residents want to secede from their home state and change the boundary lines so that their right-leaning county is absorbed by Wyoming.
via Conservative Review
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/
President Joe Biden has repeatedly called for unity, but said Friday that if he can’t get it, he’s fine to push through his agenda unilaterally.
via Conservative Review
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/
What’s the #Simulation up to now in DC by the Supreme Court building? pic.twitter.com/pXhzthiSNy — CIA-Simulation Warlord ????? (@zerosum24) January 29, 2021
via Weasel Zippers
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us
The 48th annual March for Life took place Friday almost entirely virtually because of concerns about the coronavirus, as the pro-life movement prepares for the Biden presidency.
Pro-life leaders told the Washington Free Beacon, during a brief in-person gathering outside the Supreme Court, that a major priority for the next four years is moving beyond political issues to push for cultural changes. March for Life president Jeanne Mancini stressed the need for education and grassroots activism.
"Our work isn’t necessarily about an administration. If you have a friendly administration, that’s great. But we’re here for the long run," she said. "We’ve been here in hostile administrations, we’ve been here in friendly administrations. We’ll keep marching until abortion is unthinkable."
Marjorie Dannenfelser pointed to the growth of pro-life education efforts by the Susan B. Anthony List, where she is president.
"We’re working very hard to cast a vision based in reality of what pro-life America looks like," she said. "Going state to state, we’re doing this in Georgia now, and doing a full inventory of every single potential service that can help a woman and her unborn child in the first two years of life. It includes pregnancy centers but a whole lot more."
The March for Life drew increased media attention in 2020 because of former President Donald Trump’s attendance, marking the first time a president has addressed the event in person. Even with the White House’s support, though, statistics showed a slight increase in the abortion rate during the first two years of his term. And the Biden administration has already begun to take executive action to roll back restrictions on federal support for abortion, such as rescinding the Mexico City Policy.
Mancini complimented the Trump administration’s moves and said the pro-life movement made lasting strides—even in the face of a new administration favorable to abortion rights.
"There were all sorts of other policy strides. Some of them, as we saw even yesterday, will be rescinded in this administration," Mancini said. "We saw the president and the vice president come to the March for Life. We’d never had that level of a White House presence before."
The virtual event featured Rep. Kat Cammack (R., Fla.), who spoke about her mother’s experience with an abortion recommendation. Two Democratic state officials, Mike Gabbard (Hawaii) and Angie Hatton (Kentucky) offered bipartisan support for the movement, and the event was capped off with a speech from former New York Jets quarterback Tim Tebow, who spoke about the importance of religion and the pro-life movement in his own life.
Dannenfelser suggested that the next step for the movement could be more pro-child policies that move beyond abortion bans.
"I think a child tax credit is a fantastic idea," she said. "It makes it easier to welcome new life into the world without question, and we hope it will pass."
The post March for Life Charts Course for Biden Administration appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.
via Washington Free Beacon
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com
An analysis of the losses incurred by hedge funds in the GameStop crusade launched by retail investors indicates that the "short squeeze" has cost short sellers as much as $19 billion already.
Data provider Ortex said that according to their analysis provided to Business Insider, those targeted by the "short squeeze" operation by members of a Reddit investment group were headed towards losing as much as $19 billion.
And that’s only by the end of Friday.
The celebrated action by retail investors has been hailed as a David and Goliath story by some, but others have criticized it as a manipulation of the market.
The scheme developed after the Reddit group took notice of hedge funds that were over-leveraging in their bet against GameStop, a brick and mortar video game reseller. By calling on their members to buy the stock, the Reddit retail investors drove the price up and forced the bettors against GameStop into a precarious and costly position.
The "short squeeze" operation drove the price of GameStock stock to skyrocket from about $5 a share in August, to $325 a share by the end of Friday’s stock market session.
That increase of 6,400% in the value of the stock has forced one hedge fund to secure emergency funding to pay for their losses.
Ortex called the battle over GameStop the "first major battleground in an emerging war between individual investors and Wall Street institutions," in a blog post on Thursday.
They estimate that other short sellers have lost more than $70 billion on U.S. companies just this year.
"Regardless of the final outcome, the GameStop saga points to an increasing democratisation of the markets, with fairer access and a more level playing field. The information advantage that has maintained the status quo for so long is crumbling, and that has far-reaching consequences for investing, markets and the industry itself," they explained.
Critics of the Reddit rebellion have noted that many retail investors are almost certainly going to lose a lot of money if and when the GameStop stock comes crashing down to Earth from the artificially inflated price.
GameStop share frenzy starts againwww.youtube.com
via Conservative Review
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.conservativereview.com/
Earlier on Friday Gateway Pundit contributor Patty McMurray posted a report on Virginia Court Ruling that prevents officials (Democrats) from accepting late ballots without postmarks.
The case was over a Virginia Board of Elections rule issued in August that allowed mail-in ballots without a postmark to be received up to three days after the November election.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), on behalf of Thomas Reed, a local electoral board member, announced a court-approved consent decree to permanently prevent the Virginia State Board of Elections from accepting absentee ballots received up to three days after Election Day without postmarks in violation of Virginia law.
The report was released on Monday.
On Friday we posted the report on the court ruling on Twitter.
Twitter suspended The Gateway Pundit account for a week for posting a tweet on the court ruling.
Twitter says it might promote violence.
Twitter is now suspending accounts that post court rulings in Virginia.
How can this be legal?
The post Twitter Suspends Gateway Pundit Account for Posting Virginia Court Ruling on Virginia Mail-in Ballots — Claims the Court Ruling Incites Violence! 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
Most Americans believe that the Senate impeachment trial for former President Trump will only serve to “cause more division” in the country, a Rasmussen Reports survey released Thursday found.
The survey, taken January 25-26 among 1,000 likely U.S. voters, asked, “Will the Senate trial on Trump’s impeachment help unite the country or will it cause more division? Or will it not make much difference?”
Fifty-seven percent, overall, said it will only serve to divide the country compared to the 19 percent who said it will help “unite” the country. Another 20 percent said it will not make much of a difference, and four percent expressed no opinion. Republicans are significantly more likely to believe that the proceedings will divide the country — 83 percent compared to the nine percent who said it would unite the nation.
Democrats are virtually split across the board. A plurality, or 35 percent, said the trial will unite the country, followed by 31 percent who said it will not make a difference and 30 percent who said it will divide the country further. The majority of voters outside of either major party, 61 percent, also believe the trial will divide the country.
Additionally, half of those surveyed do not believe that Trump should be convicted for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” compared to the 45 percent who said he should be.
Per Rasmussen Reports:
In the immediate aftermath of violence at the Capitol and a House impeachment vote on January 13, half of voters supported removing President Trump from office before Joe Biden’s January 20 inauguration. Now that Biden is in the White House, however, there is less support for convicting Trump in the Senate trial.
Male voters are strongly in favor of acquittal, with 56% saying the Senate should not convict, compared to 41% who say the Senate should find Trump guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Women are more evenly divided, with 49% for conviction and 45% for acquitting Trump.
The survey’s margin of error is +/- three percent.
The impeachment trial is expected to begin the week of February 8, although Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) declared the trial “dead on arrival” following 45 senators supporting his motion questioning the constitutionality of impeaching Trump:
Only five GOP senators joined Democrats: Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT), Ben Sasse (R-NE), Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Pat Toomey (R-PA).
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com
A group of House Democrats is seeking to ban the term “alien,” and thus “illegal alien,” from being used by federal agencies to refer to noncitizens and those who are illegally present in the United States.
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-TX), along with 11 other members of the House Hispanic Caucus, have filed legislation to eliminate the term “alien” at federal agencies when referring to noncitizens.
“To prohibit Executive agencies from using the derogatory term ‘alien’ to refer to an individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States, to amend chapter 1 of title 1, United States Code, to establish a uniform definition for the term ‘foreign national,’ and for other purposes,” a summary of the legislation reads.
A ban on the use of the term “alien” at federal agencies would mean the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice would no longer be allowed to use the term “illegal alien” when referring to those in the U.S. illegally.
Reports this week indicate that memos have already been issued at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency — tasked with enforcing federal immigration law — to halt usage of the terms “alien” and “illegal alien.”
Similarly, President Joe Biden has suggested the change as well. A draft of his legislation to increase legal immigration levels and provide amnesty to most illegal aliens also required that the term “alien” be removed from federal law and replaced with “noncitizen” which does not distinguish between legal immigrants, visa holders, green card holders, and illegal aliens.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com