Author

Randy DeSoto

Browsing

President Donald Trump addressed the controversy regarding his call for the Proud Boys group to “stand back and stand by” during Tuesday night’s presidential debate, telling reporters he doesn’t even know who they are.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, in fact, named them at the debate first, calling on Trump to condemn them specifically.

The Wall Street Journal has described the Proud Boys as a far-right group, noting the Anti-Defamation League has found some among its ranks to hold white supremacist and anti-Semitic views.

“In recent months, Proud Boys have fought with people protesting police treatment of Black people in Portland, Ore., and other cities,” The Journal reported.

Moderator Chris Wallace introduced the subject of white supremacy, saying, “You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out antifa and other left-wing extremist groups.”

“But are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland?” he asked.

Trump answered, “Sure, I’m willing to do that.”

“Do it,” Biden interjected.

“I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing,” the president continued.

Both Wallace and Biden then pressed Trump to condemn white supremacists.

“Give me a name. Who would you like me to condemn?” the president asked Wallace.

“Proud Boys,” Biden called out.

“Proud Boys, stand back and stand by,” Trump said, turning toward Biden and employing the same “stand down” language Wallace had used in the question.

“But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem, this is a left-wing problem,” Trump added.

“Antifa’s an idea, not an organization” Biden responded.

A reporter asked the president on Wednesday at the White House what he meant when he said the Proud Boys should “stand back and stand by.”

“I don’t know who the Proud Boys are,” Trump answered. “You have to give me a definition because I really don’t know who they are.”

“I can only say they have to stand down. Let law enforcement do their work,” he added.

“Law enforcement will do the work more and more as people see how bad this radical liberal Democrat movement is and how weak.”

A reporter followed up, asking if he had misspoken when he said the Proud Boys should “stand by.”

Trump reiterated, “Just stand by. Look, law enforcement will do their work.”

“They have to stand down. Everybody — whatever group you’re talking about.”

The president was also questioned whether he denounced white supremacists.

“I’ve always denounced any form of any of that,” he answered.

Last week, Trump designated both the Ku Klux Klan and antifa as domestic terror groups, while introducing his black empowerment “Platinum Plan” speaking before a group of African-American supporters in Atlanta.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Trump Addresses Proud Boys ‘Stand Back and Stand By’ Debate Comment

Amanda Milius — director of the upcoming documentary film “The Plot Against the President” — says the effort to bring down President Donald Trump makes Watergate pale in comparison.

“It’s essentially Watergate reversed,” the Trump administration veteran told The Western Journal.

Instead of the president and his associates being guilty of wrongdoing, it was those within the Department of Justice and intelligence community who foisted Russiagate on the country.

The political scandal is “so much huger, so, so, so much bigger” than Watergate argued Milius, daughter of legendary Hollywood writer and director John Milius, who is known for such films as “Apocalypse Now,” “Conan the Barbarian,” “Red Dawn,” and “Clear and Present Danger.”

Watergate, which brought down the presidency of Richard Nixon, centered on “a couple of guys” sneaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters and stealing some documents, Milius explained.

“What happens when the entire intelligence community is involved in spying on a political campaign?” asked Milius, who worked on the 2016 Trump campaign and, following his election, served in the White House and State Department until this past spring.

“If Nixon’s a crook, Barack Obama is like a mafia boss,” she said.

“The Plot Against the President” is based on the bestselling book of the same name by investigative journalist Lee Smith.

The cast of the documentary is extensive, including former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes of California, who is the star of Smith’s book. (The book’s subtitle is, “The True Story of How Congressman Devin Nunes Uncovered the Biggest Political Scandal in U.S. History.”)

Also in the film are former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell; Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio; Sidney Powell, attorney for former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn; investigative journalist John Solomon; former Deputy National Security Advisor KT McFarland; former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski; former White House aide Sebastian Gorka; and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, to name some.

There are also a few “John Doe” interviews of sources whose identities were kept confidential because of their positions and the subject matter they discussed.

One of those Milius interviewed she found particularly helpful in putting the Russiagate scandal in context was John O’Connor, the attorney who revealed the identity of Watergate source “Deep Throat” to the world in a 2005 Vanity Fair piece.

O’Connor wrote that his client, the now-deceased former FBI Associate Director Mark Felt, was the famous source for reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post during the Watergate investigation.

O’Connor is “the perfect person to explain the contrast and similarities between this and Watergate,” Milius said.

“The Plot Against the President” goes beyond the material found in Lee’s book, which was published in October 2019.

“A lot of recent revelations are in there,” Milius told The Western Journal, “but we’re trying to stick to the basics as much as possible to kind of give people a foundation for how to understand everything that’s happening.”

The University of Southern California film school grad did not anticipate going back into movie making when she left the Golden State to join the Trump administration.

However, it became clear to Milius following the release of Smith’s book that its story needed to be told in movie form, and she was the right person to do it, given the relationships she had made in Washington.

“They’re going to trust me because…I’m not going to turn on them in some kind of Hollywood way and make everybody look like an idiot,” she told The Western Journal.

“It was somewhat difficult to leave the administration because … everything was going fairly well in my world,” Milius said. “But it was obvious that this was the more important thing to do.”

View this post on Instagram

TFW you really ♥️🇺🇸

A post shared by Amanda Milius (@amanda_milius) on

The California native comes to the project, not as a politico, but as an artist who has spent her life working in and around the film and fashion industries.

Milius believes that background will give her movie a different aesthetic than other documentaries. The subject matter also lends itself well to Hollywood-style storytelling.

“It’s a spy thriller. Who doesn’t want to watch a spy thriller? An actual spy thriller that actually happened,” she said, according to a promotional packet for the film.

“It’s the real life ‘All the President’s Men,’ but bigger. One of my favorite movies, one of the only movies that really captures the desolate evil of D.C.”

The Plot Against the President” is set for an early October release.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Trump Insider Releasing Ominous ‘Plot Against the President’ Doc Film Set To Expose DC Underbelly

Sen. Kamala Harris has been lauded as a solid centrist choice for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s running mate, with many pointing to her time as a district attorney and California’s attorney general as proof.

But a review of that record reveals she made some extremely controversial decisions, including refusing to seek the death penalty for a cop killer, failing to prosecute Catholic priests who were accused of engaging in molestation, and going out of her way to prosecute undercover citizen journalist David Daleiden for exposing Planned Parenthood’s alleged sale of aborted babies’ body parts.

Mark Pulliam, writing for City Journal, chronicled that Harris’ rise to political power was first fostered by former California Assembly speaker and later San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown.

The two dated in the 1990s, when she was in her late 20s and Brown was in his 60s and married.

After they split, Brown remained her benefactor, helping Harris to get elected as San Francisco’s district attorney in 2003.

Shortly into her tenure, Harris chose not to seek the death penalty against gang member David Hill, who on Easter weekend in 2004 ambushed and killed 29-year-old San Francisco police officer Isaac Espinoza and shot and wounded his partner.

Her announcement came just three days after Espinoza’s murder, before the officer was even buried.

“In the city and county of San Francisco, anyone who murders a police officer engaged in his or her duties will be met with the most severe consequences,” she told reporters at the time, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

The most severe consequence would have been the death penalty, which prosecutors had sought in nearly every one of the 90 cases when a police officer had been killed since 1987, the Chronicle determined.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who previously had served as San Francisco’s mayor, announced she would not have endorsed Harris for district attorney had she known the prosecutor would make such a decision.

“This is not only the definition of tragedy, it’s the special circumstance called for by the death penalty law,” Feinstein said.

Harris stood by her decision during an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow last year after she announced her presidential bid.

“I did what I believed was the right thing to do,” Harris said. “And the killer of that officer will be in prison for the rest of his life.”

The senator said she opposes the death penalty because she believes it has been disproportionately applied to poor African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans and it is not a strong deterrent to people committing murder.

While she faced heavy criticism for not seeking the death penalty in the Espinoza murder case, Harris’ failure to prosecute Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse has also been faulted.

“She did nothing,” Joey Piscitelli, Northern California spokesman for the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, told The Associated Press last year.

“Piscitelli says Harris never responded to him when he wrote to tell her that a priest who had molested him was still in ministry at a local Catholic cathedral,” the AP reported. “And, he says, she didn’t reply five years later when he wrote again, urging her to release records on accused clergy to help other alleged victims who were filing lawsuits.”

Rick Simons — a court-appointed lawyer coordinating the clergy abuse cases filed in Northern California — told the news outlet, “Of all the DAs in the Bay Area, she’s the only one who wouldn’t cooperate with us.”

The AP noted that Catholics make up a large voting block in San Francisco.

“There’s a potential political risk if you move aggressively against the church,” said Michael Meadows, a Bay Area attorney who has represented clergy abuse victims. “I just don’t think she was willing to take it.”

The AP reported that the Harris presidential campaign, responding to the controversy, held up her record as a “staunch advocate on behalf of sexual assault victims” but did not address her silence regarding those who said they were abused by Catholic clerics.

Finally, although Harris was not tough on crime in situations when she should have been as district attorney, while serving as attorney general she went beyond the pale in targeting Center for Medical Progress founder David Daleiden, whose undercover videos exposed atrocious wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood regarding the sale of aborted babies’ body parts.

In March 2016, while running for the U.S. Senate, Harris’ AG office launched a criminal investigation against not Planned Parenthood but Daleiden, for allegedly illegally recording the people in his videos, and conducted a raid of his home the following month, The Federalist reported.

Harris met with six Planned Parenthood executives in March 2016 at the Los Angeles attorney general’s office.

“An email outlining action items from the meeting shows that they discussed both Planned Parenthood’s political agenda in the state of California and her investigation into Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress. Two of the six executives in that meeting were used as witnesses in Harris’ criminal investigation,” The Federalist reported.

“California video recording law does not prohibit anybody from recording conversations in a public area that anybody can oversee. The law also explicitly permits recording, even a private conversation, if it is being done in order to gather evidence of a violent crime,” the news outlet said.

Fox News reported a San Francisco Superior Court judge in fact dismissed five of the 15 felony charges brought against Daleiden in December before the case even goes to trial.

“The Court finds that based on the specific factual findings as to each of these counts that there is an absence of probable cause to establish that these conversations were ‘confidential communications’ as defined by the statute,” Judge Christopher C. Hite wrote in his opinion.

Daleiden responded to the ruling, saying, “Former California Attorney General Kamala Harris concocted this bogus, biased prosecution with her Planned Parenthood backers against undercover video reporting, and now their case is falling apart as the facts about Planned Parenthood’s criminal organ trafficking are revealed in the courtroom.”

In May, Daleiden filed a lawsuit against Harris and current California Attorney General Xavier Becerra for violating his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

One thing is clear from these three examples:

Harris is not a centrist, she is a radical leftist, whose main goal is not upholding the rule of law but advancing her political agenda and interests.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Harris’ Controversial Record as a Prosecutor Proves She’s No Centrist

President Donald Trump said Tuesday that if he were to back a financial aid package to cover states’ COVID-19-related revenue shortfalls and expenses, he would want “adjustments” to sanctuary policies.

Many cities and some states, such as California, New York and Oregon, have enacted so-called “sanctuary” policies, which prevent local law enforcement from cooperating with federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement in relation to criminal illegal aliens.

Trump first made it clear he has no intention of backing legislation that would seek to bail out states for financial issues they had going into the coronavirus pandemic.

“The problem with the states is we’re not looking to recover 25 years of bad management and to give them the money that they lost. That’s unfair to other states,” the president said.

“Now if it’s COVID-related,” Trump continued, “I guess we can talk about it, but we’d want certain things also, including sanctuary city adjustments, because we have so many people in sanctuary cities, which I don’t even think are popular even by radical-left folks because what’s happening is people are being protected that shouldn’t be protected and a lot of bad things are happening with sanctuary cities.”

The president also addressed the issue during a meeting earlier in the day with Florida Gov. Ron Desantis, emphasizing his concern is about criminal illegal aliens.

Trump also called for a payroll tax cut to be included in any relief package.

“[W]e’d have to talk about things like payroll tax cuts,” he said, according to Politico. “We’d have to talk about things like sanctuary cities, as an example. I think sanctuary cities is something that has to be brought up where people who are criminals are protected, they are protected from prosecution.”

“I think that has to be done. I think it’s one of the problems that the states have. I don’t even think they know they have a problem, but they have a big problem with the sanctuary situation,” Trump added.

In February, Attorney General William Barr announced the Justice Department was filing three lawsuits against California, New Jersey and a Washington county over their so-called “sanctuary city” policies.

“Let us state the reality upfront and as clearly as possible: When we are talking about sanctuary cities, we are talking about policies that are designed to allow criminal aliens to escape,” the attorney general said.

“These policies are not about people who came to our country illegally but have otherwise been peaceful and productive members of society,” he explained.

“Their express purpose is to shelter aliens whom local law enforcement has already arrested for other crimes. This is neither lawful nor sensible.”

In January 2019, Trump addressed the killing California police officer Reggie Singh, saying, “America’s heart broke the day after Christmas when a young police officer in California was savagely murdered in cold blood by an illegal alien, who just came across the border. The life of an American hero was stolen by someone who had no right to be in our country.”

“Over the last several years, I’ve met with dozens of families whose loved ones were stolen by illegal immigration,” he added.

“I’ve held the hands of the weeping mothers and embraced the grief-stricken fathers. So sad. So terrible. I will never forget the pain in their eyes, the tremble in their voices, and the sadness gripping their souls.”

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Trump Calls for Tying Any Financial Aid to States Changing Their Sanctuary Policies

Dr. Stephen Smith, founder of the Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health in East Orange, New Jersey, said the remarkable results he is seeing in his coronavirus patients using a combination of the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine and the antibiotic azithromycin marks the “beginning of the end” of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Appearing on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” on Wednesday night, Smith said not a single patient he has been treating with the combination over a five-day period has had to be placed on a ventilator.

“The chance of that occurring by chance, according to my sons Leon and Hunter, who did some stats for me, are .000-something,” he said, adding that “it’s ridiculously low.”

The doctor told host Laura Ingraham he was currently treating 72 COVID-19 patients.

“It’s a game-changer. It’s an absolute game-changer,” he said, arguing his findings support what a French researcher’s study determined.

“I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic. I’m very serious,” said Smith, whose facility is in the New York metropolitan area, the U.S. hotspot for the coronavirus outbreak.

Similarly, Dr. Mehmet Oz told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Wednesday that the Chinese have conducted a “randomized trial” with hydroxychloroquine after noticing that none of the patients taking the drug for lupous and rheumatoid arthritis were contracting the coronavirus.

The study consisted of 62 COVID-19 patients in which researchers gave half of them hydroxychloroquine over a five-day period, Oz said.

“What they realized was pretty interesting,” he said.

“First off, the symptoms. The temperature, the fevers, instead of lasting three days, in a typical illness, it only lasted two days,” while coughing also went from three to two days for the people receiving the drug, Oz said.

All the people in the study had pneumonia, and over the course of the five days, 81 percent of the people taking hydroxychloroquine saw improvement in their lungs compared with 55 percent of those not given that medication.

Additionally, four people in the control group not receiving hydroxychloroquine died, while none of the patients in the experimental group taking the medication did.

Oz recommended that the United States do a search of the entire Medicare database and see if any of those being treated with hydroxychloroquine for other medical conditions had developed COVID-19.

He said New York-Presbyterian Hospital, where he works as a surgeon, has launched a study among its staff to see if taking hydroxychloroquine has a prophylactic effect of keeping people from developing the illness.

Regarding the drug’s efficacy for treating COVID-19, Oz said, “We’ll only prove it with a larger trial, but this is tantalizing bait.”

On Sunday, the Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus patients.

President Donald Trump has said he sees the drug as a potential “game-changer” in the fight against COVID-19.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Medical Expert Sees ‘Beginning of the End’ in Coronavirus Fight with New Treatment Results

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York wrongly tried to link the shooting of New York City police officers over the weekend to the National Rifle Association and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s lack of support for “common-sense” gun safety measures.

New York City Police Commissioner Dermot Shea identified 45-year-old Robert Williams as the suspect in two shootings, one on Saturday night when an officer was shot in the neck in his vehicle, The Washington Post reported.

The other incident took place Sunday morning when Williams allegedly walked into a Bronx precinct police headquarters and opened fire with a 9 mm handgun, striking one police officer in the arm.

Both officers are expected to make a full recovery from their injuries.

At a news conference on Sunday, Shea said, “the coward from this morning’s shooting is in police custody.”

“He has a lengthy violent criminal history,” the commissioner continued. “He was paroled in 2017 for an incident [in 2002] in which an individual in the Bronx was shot, a subsequent carjacking of a female, and then a crash of a car where he engaged in a gunfight with members of the New York City Police Department.”

Williams had served over a decade in prison for attempted murder, according to Shea.

“At this time, we are confident that he is the same person who attempted to assassinate our police officers last night,” the commissioner said.

Fox News contributor David Webb tweeted on Sunday that he had reached out to Ocasio-Cortez, whose district includes part of the Bronx, for comment, but she had not responded.

The congresswoman later replied on Twitter, writing, “This is not my district, but our thoughts are with all officers & people impacted by this shooting & the epidemic of gun violence in this country.”

“Perhaps you would get less mixed up if McConnell stood up to the NRA & passed common-sense gun safety measures to reduce shootings,” she added.

According to her House website, the “common-sense” gun reform she supports includes universal background checks and a ban on “assault weapons,” high capacity magazines and bump stocks.

News to AOC: Current law prevents Williams, a former felon, from purchasing or possessing firearms.

What makes you think more laws would have prevented him from doing what he did?

According to the NRA, New York state already has strict laws regarding owning or possessing a handgun.

They include requiring a permit to purchase and carry the gun. Further, the weapon must be registered.

Police have not reported how Williams obtained his gun, but it is almost certain enacting a universal background check law would not have prevented it.

All licensed gun dealers currently are required by federal law to perform a background check before selling a firearm.

Gun-control advocates like Ocasio-Cortez have called for universal background checks, which would also cover the sale or transfer of guns between private individuals.

So friends or other private individuals trying to give or sell their firearms to each other would have to perform a background check, most likely through a gun dealer.

The congresswoman co-sponsored House Resolution 8, which passed in a vote mostly along party lines last year, calling for universal background checks.

The measure has not been taken up by the Senate.

Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw described the legislation as “a pretty big overreach” into the area of Americans’ Second Amendment rights and wondered what good it would do.

He noted that if H.R. 8 became law, many of the highest-profile shootings — “Parkland, or Sutherland Springs, or the Thousand Oaks tragedy or Sandy Hook” — would not have been prevented.

A 2019 Department of Justice study based on a survey of nearly 300,000 prison inmates found 43 percent obtained their gun through the black market. An additional 7 percent reported they found it a the scene of the crime, while 6 percent said they stole it.

Meanwhile, 25 percent said they obtained it from a family member or friend or as a gift.

Only 1.3 percent said they purchased it from a retail source and 0.8 percent stated they bought it at a gun show.

The NRA opposes universal background checks because it would have its greatest impact on law-abiding Americans.

Further, “Federal law prohibits transferring a firearm to anyone known or believed to be prohibited from possessing firearms,” the NRA notes.

So private individuals violate federal law when then put guns in the hands of criminals.

McConnell said last summer he is open to improving or expanding the background check system; however, he is looking for where consensus exists among his Republican colleagues and with the White House.

The truth of the matter, AOC, is Williams, and violent criminals like him, are the problem — not the NRA or McConnell.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: AOC Blames McConnell & NRA for NYPD Shootings, Forgets Shooter Broke Current Gun Control Laws

For years, Democrats have been talking about flipping Texas from red to blue, thereby thwarting Republican chances of winning the presidency or likely holding the House of Representatives ever again.

That prospect took a serious hit on Tuesday when Texans elected Republican businessman Gary Gates over Democratic educator Eliz Markowitz by an impressive 58 to 42 percent margin to become the next congressman for the 28th Congressional District.

The district runs from the suburbs of San Antonio south to the Mexican border.

The 30,000 ballots cast represented an unusually high voter turnout, easily surpassing the previous record of 22,000 for a special election, the Houston Chronicle reported.

Democrats nationally poured more than $1 million into the contest, according to CBS News, pinning their hopes on former Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s strong showing in the district during his 2018 U.S. Senate bid to unseat Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.

O’Rourke pulled within three points of Cruz in the 28th, which President Donald Trump won by 10 points in 2016.

Of course, midterm elections traditionally favor the political party that does not hold the White House.

O’Rourke, who campaigned for Markowitz, tweeted last week, “The first critical election of 2020 is happening now in Fort Bend, TX. Victory for Eliz Markowitz means we can win the state house and build the team to defeat Trump in Texas.”

Other former and current 2020 Democratic presidential candidates endorsed Markowitz, too, including former Vice President Joe Biden, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, who hails from San Antonio.

Their support did not change the outcome and maybe hurt the Democratic candidate’s chances.

Karl Rove, a former top campaign adviser to President George W. Bush, told The Associated Press that Democrats “made a big mistake by nationalizing” the contest.

Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott noted that “Beto math” did not work out in the 28th congressional district race.

“Beto math was that if he won or was close in a House district then he could help a democrat win. He came within 3% in this district,” Abbott tweeted on Tuesday.

“Beto math doesn’t work. All of that $ was incinerated.”

Beto math also did not work in his effort to defeat Cruz. The Democrat raised and spent a record $79 million in the endeavor, compared to Cruz’s $46 million, according to Open Secrets.

It was the most expensive Senate race in U.S. history.

The RealClearPolitics average of polls shows Trump beating all comers in Texas this November, with Biden tracking the closest, just 1.4 percent behind. However, the most recent survey has Trump ahead by five percentage points.

The political site 270toWin puts Texas with its 38 Electoral College votes in the “likely Republican” column.

The running tally is 205 for the GOP presidential candidate (who will presumably be Trump) to 248 for the Democratic challenger, leaving 85 electoral votes in five swing states up for grabs.

Those states are Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin and Arizona.

Right now, according to 270toWin, Democrats have the advantage in holding the House, though they are likely to lose at least 10 seats, with 21 races currently listed as toss-ups.

In September, conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said he believes Trump is heading for a landslide win in 2020 that simply is not being calculated by the media and political observers because Democrats have so galvanized the Republican base.

“I think that there is, across a vast expanse of this country, I think that there are millions and millions and millions of Americans who are quietly seething, quietly enraged over everything that has gone on here since Trump was inaugurated,” he said.

The results in this week’s Texas House race may be evidence of Limbaugh’s observation being true.

If so, many in the media and the political establishment may be shocked to see not only a Trump victory by a wider margin than 2016 this November, but also a new GOP majority in the House.

CORRECTION, Jan. 31, 2020: A previous version of this story incorrectly said Gary Gates was elected to Congress rather than the Texas House of Representatives. We apologize for the error and to our readers for any confusion we may have caused.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: In Landslide Defeat, Dems Lose Race That Was Supposed To Start Turning Texas Blue

For years, Democrats have been talking about flipping Texas from red to blue, thereby thwarting Republican chances of winning the presidency or likely holding the House of Representatives ever again.

That prospect took a serious hit on Tuesday when Texans elected Republican businessman Gary Gates over Democratic educator Eliz Markowitz by an impressive 58 to 42 percent margin to become the next congressman for the 28th Congressional District.

The district runs from the suburbs of San Antonio south to the Mexican border.

The 30,000 ballots cast represented an unusually high voter turnout, easily surpassing the previous record of 22,000 for a special election, the Houston Chronicle reported.

Democrats nationally poured more than $1 million into the contest, according to CBS News, pinning their hopes on former Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s strong showing in the district during his 2018 U.S. Senate bid to unseat Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.

O’Rourke pulled within three points of Cruz in the 28th, which President Donald Trump won by 10 points in 2016.

Of course, midterm elections traditionally favor the political party that does not hold the White House.

O’Rourke, who campaigned for Markowitz, tweeted last week, “The first critical election of 2020 is happening now in Fort Bend, TX. Victory for Eliz Markowitz means we can win the state house and build the team to defeat Trump in Texas.”

Other former and current 2020 Democratic presidential candidates endorsed Markowitz, too, including former Vice President Joe Biden, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, who hails from San Antonio.

Their support did not change the outcome and maybe hurt the Democratic candidate’s chances.

Karl Rove, a former top campaign adviser to President George W. Bush, told The Associated Press that Democrats “made a big mistake by nationalizing” the contest.

Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott noted that “Beto math” did not work out in the 28th congressional district race.

“Beto math was that if he won or was close in a House district then he could help a democrat win. He came within 3% in this district,” Abbott tweeted on Tuesday.

“Beto math doesn’t work. All of that $ was incinerated.”

Beto math also did not work in his effort to defeat Cruz. The Democrat raised and spent a record $79 million in the endeavor, compared to Cruz’s $46 million, according to Open Secrets.

It was the most expensive Senate race in U.S. history.

The RealClearPolitics average of polls shows Trump beating all comers in Texas this November, with Biden tracking the closest, just 1.4 percent behind. However, the most recent survey has Trump ahead by five percentage points.

The political site 270toWin puts Texas with its 38 Electoral College votes in the “likely Republican” column.

The running tally is 205 for the GOP presidential candidate (who will presumably be Trump) to 248 for the Democratic challenger, leaving 85 electoral votes in five swing states up for grabs.

Those states are Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida, Wisconsin and Arizona.

Right now, according to 270toWin, Democrats have the advantage in holding the House, though they are likely to lose at least 10 seats, with 21 races currently listed as toss-ups.

In September, conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said he believes Trump is heading for a landslide win in 2020 that simply is not being calculated by the media and political observers because Democrats have so galvanized the Republican base.

“I think that there is, across a vast expanse of this country, I think that there are millions and millions and millions of Americans who are quietly seething, quietly enraged over everything that has gone on here since Trump was inaugurated,” he said.

The results in this week’s Texas House race may be evidence of Limbaugh’s observation being true.

If so, many in the media and the political establishment may be shocked to see not only a Trump victory by a wider margin than 2016 this November, but also a new GOP majority in the House.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Author: Randy DeSoto, The Western Journal

Source: The Federalist Papers: In Landslide Defeat, Dems Lose Race That Was Supposed To Start Turning Texas Blue

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democratic leaders are decrying President Donald Trump’s use of force against Iranian Quds force commander Qassem Soleimani without congressional authorization but allowed former President Barack Obama free rein to carry out military operations.

Obama oversaw military actions in both Syria and Libya for months without seeking the approval of Congress.

The Washington Times reported in April 2015 that U.S. strikes against Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq surpassed 2,800 by that point in the conflict.

“The U.S. military has been conducting strikes in Iraq for 10 months, and began striking directly at targets in Syria last September as part of Mr. Obama’s announced campaign to degrade the capabilities of the Islamic State,” according to The Times.

By mid-April 2015, the U.S. had carried out 1,458 strikes in Iraq and 1,343 in Syria.

Obama pointed to his powers as commander in chief, as well as the September 2001 “Authorization for Use of Military Force” resolution passed by Congress, which recognizes, “the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States.”

The Obama administration also relied on the 2002 AUMF resolution calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein as leader of Iraq.

The Times reported that Obama continued his military campaign in Iraq and Syria, even after a new authorization for the use of force against the Islamic State was introduced, but had not been passed by Congress.

While ISIS was certainly a purveyor of terrorism, some of which was directed at the U.S., such was not the case when Obama decided to commit the American military to assist in the toppling of Libyan leader Colonel Moammar Gadhafi in 2011.

The Washington Post reported in June 2011, nearly three months into the air campaign, that the Obama administration had yet to seek congressional approval.

The president did not comply with the 1973 War Powers Resolution, otherwise known as the War Powers Act, by either obtaining congressional authorization for the military action or pulling U.S. forces out of the conflict within 60 days of committing them.

Hillary Clinton, who was secretary of state during the operation, said in October 2011 regarding Gaddafi’s overthrow, “We came, we saw, he died,” mimicking Roman Emperor Julius Caesar’s famous line, “veni, vidi, vici.”

That was then; this is now.

Suddenly with one voice Democrats are concerned that Trump overstepped his authority as commander in chief by green-lighting the killing of Soleimani in Baghdad, just days after our embassy was attacked and Americans were killed and injured by Iranian backed forces.

RELATED: During Obama Years, Biden Reportedly Helped Soleimani, Iran Gain More Power in Middle East

In a letter to her Democratic colleagues on Sunday, Pelosi wrote that this week that the House will introduce a war powers resolution “mandating that if no further Congressional action is taken, the Administration’s military hostilities with regard to Iran cease within 30 days.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer charged on Friday that Trump has no authority for a war with Iran.

Meanwhile, Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin and Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia have introduced a war powers resolution seeking to block further acts by Trump directed at Iran.

“The resolution requires that any hostilities with Iran must be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force, but does not prevent the United States from defending itself from imminent attack,” Durbin and Kaine said in a joint news release on Friday.

The Associated Press reported that Trump met “the 48-hour deadline required by the War Powers Act to notify Congress” via a Saturday communication, following Friday’s deadly drone strike on Soleimani, but neither Pelosi nor Schumer was satisfied.

Pelosi responded to Trump’s notification in a news release on Saturday, saying, “This classified War Powers Act notification delivered to Congress raises more questions than it answers.”

“This document prompts serious and urgent questions about the timing, manner and justification of the Administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran,” she continued. “The highly unusual decision to classify this document in its entirety compounds our many concerns, and suggests that the Congress and the American people are being left in the dark about our national security.”

In a Sunday letter to Trump, Schumer called for the immediate declassification of the notice president sent to Congress regarding the Soleimani strike.

All the messaging appears aimed at trying to cast doubt in the minds of the American public that Trump made the right decision to kill the man responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans and thousands of others.

After all, if Trump is a good commander in chief, protecting Americans, why in the world would the Democrats be pushing forward a purely partisan impeachment, in which they do not allege he engaged in any sort of criminal conduct?

As I have previously argued, one result of Trump’s decisive response to last week’s attack on the United States embassy in Baghdad has been to once again highlight what competent leadership looks like, particularly when compared to the actions of the Obama administration.

Unlike at the Benghazi, Libya, consulate attack in 2012, the call for U.S. military help was answered in a timely fashion. The result was no dead Americans. Further, the Trump administration was clear about who was responsible for the attack — Iran — and what the consequences would be if the aggression persisted.

The tragic result of the Obama administration’s incompetence in Benghazi was the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens.

Everything that Pelosi, Schumer and their cohort say and do should be viewed through the lens of their one and only objective: to remove Trump from office, whether by impeachment or in November’s election.

Trump made the right call to take out Soleimani, and the Democrats likely know it’s true, but their hypocrisy in the pursuit of political gain knows no bounds.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Hypocritical Dems Trash Trump but Are Fine with Obama’s 2,800 Strikes Congress Didn’t Approve

Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher thanked President Donald Trump for once again intervening on his behalf and preventing the Navy from taking his Trident pin, saying the commander in chief is a “true leader.”

The Trident is a gold pin awarded to Navy service members who have successfully completed SEAL training and are certified as special operators.

Gallagher responded to the news that Trump has ordered that he be allowed to retire at the end of the month without losing his Trident.

“President Donald Trump, you have my deepest gratitude and thanks,” Gallagher said in a statement to the Washington Examiner for a story published Sunday. “You stepped in numerous times and showed true moral fiber by correcting all the wrongs that were being done to me.”

“You are a true leader and exactly what the military and this nation needs,” he added. “God bless you and your family.”

GOP Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas, a retired Navy SEAL, was one of Gallagher’s first and most high-profile advocates.

In March, Crenshaw, along with 17 other House Republicans, sent a letter to then-Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer, who Secretary of Defense Mark Esper fired on Monday, urging him to review Gallagher’s pre-trial confinement, Fox News reported.

“Chief Gallagher is a decorated warfighter who, like all service members, is entitled to the presumption of innocence while awaiting court-martial,” the Republicans wrote in their letter to Spencer.

Among those who signed that letter was Republican Rep. Michael Waltz of Florida, the first retired member of the Army Green Beret to win election to the House.

Trump intervened later that month, which led to Gallagher being released from a Navy brig and confined to Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in southern California, according to USA Today.

In June, the lead prosecutor in Gallagher’s murder case was removed for alleged misconduct, including spying on the Navy SEAL’s legal defense team and a Navy Times journalist by using digital tracking devices hidden in email.

After Gallagher’s court-martial began in the mid-June, Corey Scott, a SEAL medic, confessed that he, not the accused, was responsible for killing an Islamic State group militant who was being held as a prisoner of war.

In July, a court-martial board found Gallagher not guilty of murder, though he was found guilty of posing in a photo with a dead Islamic State group combatant.

The SEAL was sentenced to reduction in rank to petty officer 1st class from chief petty officer and four months confinement. He was given credit for time served.

In October, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday denied an appeal from Gallagher’s legal team to have his conviction vacated.

The SEAL’s family then made a direct appeal to Trump for a pardon.

The president did not pardon Gallagher, but he did restore his rank and pay.

The Navy then announced it would be reviewing Gallagher’s SEAL status, which prompted Trump to step in again.

He tweeted last last week, “The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin. This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!”

Asked if his client’s fight with the Navy is finally over, Gallagher’s defense attorney, Tim Parlatore, told the Examiner, “I hope. I sincerely hope.”

Appearing Sunday on “Fox & Friends,” Gallagher thanked Trump for his consistent support.

“I don’t know how many times I’ve thanked the president. He keeps stepping in and doing the right thing,” he said.

“And I want to let him know the rest of the SEAL community is not about this right now. They all respect the president.”

Gallagher also revealed that he has filed a complaint with the Defense Department’s inspector general with the intent of “exposing all the corruption that’s been going on in my case.”

Trump defended his decision in the Gallagher case, as well as the two pardons he issued for Army soldiers.

“I have to protect my warfighters,” Trump said. “A lot of warfighters and people in the military have thanked us very much.”

“Somebody has their back, and it’s called the ‘President of the U.S.,’” he added.

Author: Randy DeSoto

Source: Western Journal: Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher Praises Trump for Allowing Him To Retire with Honor

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!