Category Archives: News

Who will Trump nominate for SCOTUS, and can he get it done by election day?

It's going to be Ted Cruz, because that's who we want
It’s going to be Ted Cruz, because that’s who Republican voters want

So, there’s a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and since we don’t have a wuss in the Oval office, we’re going to get a nominee and a vote on that nominee in the Senate. The process of nominating someone to the Supreme Court requires the president to nominate, and the Senate to advise and consent. The Republicans control both the White House and the Senate, and there is time to get it done.

The Federalist explains that short-time nominations have happened before:

Three Supreme Court Justices, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away on Friday due to complications of metastatic pancreatic cancer, were confirmed by the Senate within 45 days of their formal nomination date.

According to Senate records, Justices Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and Sandra Day O’Connor were all confirmed in a short period of time. Stevens’s confirmation in 1975 took 19 days, O’Connor’s confirmation in 1981 took 33 days, and Ginsburg’s confirmation in 1993 took 42 days.

[…]Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced Trump’s nomination would receive a vote on the floor, adding the Senate will keep their promise to “support [Trump’s] agenda “particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary.”

“President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” he stated.

I love this news story, because if there is anything that can get the conservative base out, it’s a conservative Supreme Court nominee. We care about judges, and now everyone is going to be reminded why we elected Trump in the first place. It’s hard to get a perfect nominee through the Senate when we have a few moderate senators who won’t support a social conservative. We need 50 votes for a real social conservative, and we don’t have that. There are at least 3 moderates: Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins, and Mitt Romney. Murkowski and Collins have already come out and said they don’t want to vote on a judge until after the election. Still, we might be able to get someone right of center in there who would give us most of what we want, and get him or her through with a few votes from moderate Democrats.

Now watch this 2 minute video:

Here’s a summary for those who can’t watch:

Trump brought up Cruz in the context of speaking about Cruz’s last Senate victory. “I helped a lot too. I was with Ted all the way, and I think Ted appreciated it. Even said I’m putting Ted Cruz as one of the people for the Supreme Court,” Trump said. He continued:

You know why I did it, because I wanted to make sure I had somebody on the list of about 45 unbelievable people, the smartest, the best, the absolute crème de la crème, the best minds in the country, conservative, they believe in the Constitution. Little things like that. But I said I have to add somebody that we’re going to make sure we could get approved. The only one I could think of was Ted, because  He’s going to get 50 Republican votes and 50 Democratic votes. They’ll do anything to get him out of the Senate. But I joke when I say that to Ted, and I say that all the time, Ted’s only one I know that will get 100 votes in the Senate.

Trump added of Cruz: “He’s a great guy; he’s a brilliant guy.”

I think it would be a smart move for Trump to drive turnout by having a fight over someone the base really wants – like Ted Cruz. Not only is Ted Cruz brilliant and conservative, but his replacement in the Senate would be picked by Greg Abbott, the conservative governor of Texas.

Ted Cruz is Hispanic, and that is a very useful thing to put in the news 45 days out from an election. It reminds Hispanic voters that Hispanics can be conservative, and fit into the Republican party. We need to counter the narrative that the Democrats spread about racism from the right. It’s ironic, because people like Ted Cruz and Thomas Sowell are our best conservatives.

Facebook and Google removing content that harms Democrat party

Facebook, Google, Youtube, Twitter purging conservative speech (Source: The Stream)
Facebook, Google, Youtube, Twitter purging conservative speech

There were a few interesting stories about Big Technology companies censoring content critical of the Democrat party. The first one involves Facebook censoring two anti-Biden ads. The second one involves Google / Youtube censoring a video featuring a Stanford University medical doctor. The third one involves Twitter censoring a Chinese scientist. Let’s take a look at the stories.

Here’s the first story from Daily Wire:

The ad launched on Aug. 4 before getting slapped with a “mostly false” rating by PolitiFact and subsequently blocked by Facebook the next month. The ad directly quotes Biden declaring, “If you elect me, your taxes are going to be raised, not cut,” and warns that his plan will raise taxes “on all income groups.”

[…]PolitiFact specifically cites a “Biden campaign official” as supposed evidence of the Democrat’s intent (emphasis added):

The full exchange shows that Biden was saying his plan would raise taxes for people who, in his words, “benefited from” the GOP’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. A Biden campaign official said his point was that the wealthy — not all Americans — would not benefit from his plan.

The ad’s portrayal of the exchange leaves a different impression.

And another ad predicted that allowing biological men to compete in women’s sports would end women’s sports. Politifact admits that they can’t fact-check a prediction, but they censored the ad anyway:

America First is not the only conservative organization censored by the platform. In another recent case, Facebook censored an ad by the conservative American Principles Project that stated that the Democrat-backed Equality Act allowing transgender athletes will “destroy girls sports” because the ad was “missing context and could mislead people.” The censorship was imposed despite PolitiFact openly admitting in its review of the ad that the claim is “a prediction we can’t fact-check.”

Meanwhile, YouTube (which is owned by Google), censored a Hoover Institute discussion about COVID that featured an actually medical doctor from Stanford University.

The Federalist reports:

YouTube, which is owned by Google, removed a video of an interview with [Dr. Scott] Atlas conducted in June originally posted by the Hoover Institution where he serves as a senior fellow. In it, Atlas, a prominent neuroradiologist and professor at Stanford University Medical Center as well as a commentator on public health issues, spoke of his belief that the pandemic lockdowns might have done more harm than good. Since then, his opinions have become of greater interest due to his appointment in August as a presidential advisor and a member of the White House coronavirus task force.

That fact alone ought to make it vital that the public should be able to hear his opinions about the pandemic. YouTube, however, removed the interview from its video streaming service this past weekend for allegedly violating its terms of service.

I have seen my Google search engine traffic from Google drop 90% since Trump won the election in 2016. My current incoming search engine traffic from DuckDuckGo is half of my current Google traffic. And I’m not the only conservative site that’s being censored. Google is in the pocket of the Democrat party.

Meanwhile, Twitter is censoring scientists who make the Chinese Communist Party look bad.

The New York Post reports:

Twitter has suspended the account of a Chinese virologist who has claimed that COVID-19 was manufactured in a laboratory.

Dr. Li-Meng Yan, a former researcher at the Hong Kong School of Public Health, went dark on the platform after she accused China of covering up evidence that the deadly virus came from a lab in Wuhan.

“They don’t want the people to know this truth. Also, that’s why I got suspended, I got suppression [and] I am the target that China Communist Part wants to [sic] disappear,” she told Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Tuesday.

Carlson responded, “I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt so I’m going to assume you’re not an anti-Chinese racist so it’s not clear why Twitter would shut you down or why you’re being ignored by the rest of the US media.”

Twitter declined to comment to The Post on Wednesday.

If I were in charge, I would just break up all of these big technology companies into tiny little pieces. They’re too big, and they’re dangerous to our liberties.

Senate committee authorizes subpoenas for Obama officials involved in Trump campaign surveillance

Left to right: Comey, Lynch, Clinton, McCabe
Left to right: Comey, Lynch, Clinton, McCabe

Have you ever wondered which members of the Obama administration were involved in spying on the Trump campaign? Would you like to hear from former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former FBI Director James Comey? The Senate does. They’ve issued subpoenas for these people, and many more.

Fox News has the story:

The Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday voted to authorize subpoenas for former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former FBI Director James Comey, and other Obama administration officials as part of its broad review into the origins of the Russia investigation.

[…]The committee also authorized subpoenas for Sidney Blumenthal, former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough, former FBI counsel Lisa Page, former FBI agent Joe Pientka, former ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, former FBI director of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, former White House national security adviser Susan Rice, former FBI agent Peter Strzok, former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith – who pleaded guilty to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from U.S. Attorney John Durham’s review of the investigation into links between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign – among others.

The committee further authorized subpoenas for “the production of all records” related to the FBI’s original Russia investigation and the Department of Justice Inspector General’s probe, as well as the process of “unmasking” for James Baker, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, DOJ official Bruce Ohr, FBI case agent Steven Somma, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Teftt, former deputy assistant attorney general Tashina Gauhar; and Stefan Halper.

Do you remember the details of the FBI-media collaboration on the Trump-Russia collusion story? I have a summary of it for you, below.

The Trump-Russia collusion story that was trumpted by the progressive media for the last two years was a joint effort between the Hillary Clinton campaign and high-ranking members of the FBI during the Obama administration.

The goal was to get the government to spy on the Trump campaign, in order neutralize his administration, if he won the 2016 election.

Here’s the left-leaning The Hill, reporting on an important finding from October 2018:

Congressional investigators have confirmed that a top FBI official met with Democratic Party lawyers to talk about allegations of Donald Trump-Russia collusion weeks before the 2016 election, and before the bureau secured a search warrant targeting Trump’s campaign.

Former FBI general counsel James Baker met during the 2016 season with at least one attorney from Perkins Coie, the Democratic National Committee’s private law firm.

That’s the firm used by the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to secretly pay research firm Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence operative, to compile a dossier of uncorroborated raw intelligence alleging Trump and Moscow were colluding to hijack the presidential election.

The article notes that Perkins Coie is the “Democratic National Committee’s private law firm”.

The Federalist reports that the Obama presidential election campaign also paid $972,000 to Perkins Coie in 2016 alone:

Former president Barack Obama’s official campaign organization has directed nearly a million dollars to the same law firm that funneled money to Fusion GPS, the firm behind the infamous Steele dossier. Since April of 2016, Obama For America (OFA) has paid over $972,000 to Perkins Coie, records filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show.

[…]Federal records show that Hillary Clinton’s official campaign organization, Hillary For America, paid just under $5.1 million to Perkins Coie in 2016. The DNC paid nearly $5.4 million to the law firm in 2016.

[…]The Washington Post reported last week that Perkins Coie, an international law firm, was directed by both the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to retain Fusion GPS in April of 2016 to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele, a former British spy, to compile a dossier of allegations that Trump and his campaign actively colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 election. Though many of the claims in the dossier have been directly refuted, none of the dossier’s allegations of collusion have been independently verified. Lawyers for Steele admitted in court filings last April that his work was not verified and was never meant to be made public.

In addition, Fox News reports that the FBI paid Christopher Steele ELEVEN TIMES in 2016. So this dossier was funded by Democrats from many different groups. They probably thought that no one would ever find out who was behind it.

But why would the FBI and the FISA court accept the Democrat-funded dossier as a basis to spy on the Democrat’s main political rival? Answer: there were Democrats in the FBI who covered up the source of funding for the Steele dossier, as well as the anti-Trump bias of the dossier’s author.

The Washington Examiner reported on the released text messages from highly-placed anti-Trump Democrat Lisa Page within the FBI in March 2019:

The text messages, between then-Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe, who was later fired, and former FBI attorney Lisa Page — who was having an affair with FBI agent Peter Strzok — were obtained by Fox News.

[…]Then-Director of the FBI James Comey ultimately signed off on the application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for approval to surveil Carter Page. It was dated nine days after the Page-McCabe texts: Oct. 21 2016.

The specific funding of Steele’s dossier was never mentioned to the FISA court, either during that first application or during three subsequent FISA renewals. Steele’s anti-Trump fervor and determination to provide his dossier to the media and members of the U.S. government later became well known.

The reason why the mainstream media reported on a #FakeNews story for two years was because they wanted to sway voters away from Trump in the 2018 elections. And it worked.