Old Guard Audio

Heritage Foundation Sues Biden Administration to Stop Vaccine Mandate Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / November 29, 2021   The Heritage Foundation will "fight tooth-and-nail and send the message that our freedoms are not up for debate," Heritage President Kay C. James says. Pictured: President Joe Biden speaks Nov. 3 at the White House about authorization of a COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5 to 11. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images) The Heritage Foundation is suing the Biden administration to stop its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private employers, calling the requirement a “gross abuse of power.” “The mandate clearly encroaches on the police power of states expressly reserved by the 10th Amendment [to the Constitution],” argues the complaint filed Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The lawsuit adds: “It also exceeds the federal government's authority under the Commerce Clause.” Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James and the think tank's incoming president, Kevin Roberts, who takes office Wednesday, both issued statements on the lawsuit. “Dr. Roberts and I, along with the Board of Trustees, unanimously agreed The Heritage Foundation has a vital role to play in the courts to protect and secure the freedom of all Americans to make medical decisions for themselves,” James said, adding:    To all of our members, to the conservative movement, and to Americans concerned by this unacceptable overreach by President [Joe] Biden and his administration, I say this—Heritage's leadership is united behind this lawsuit, and we are going to fight tooth-and-nail and send the message that our freedoms are not up for debate.   Heritage's court action became one of the latest challenges to the vaccine mandate, which imposes a Jan. 4. deadline for businesses and other organizations that employ 100 or more to require their employees either to be fully vaccinated or produce the results of weekly tests for the coronavirus. Heritage has about 270 employees.  The American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative legal group, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Heritage, which is the parent organization of The Daily Signal. “The Heritage Foundation has not historically filed lawsuits,” Roberts said in his own written statement. “That we are doing so now should make clear to any observer that we view this mandate as a deadly serious threat to our individual liberty and the values that make America great. Under my predecessors, The Heritage Foundation has stood rock-solid in defense of liberty, freedom, and opportunity for all, and it will continue to do so under my leadership.” Roberts continued:  I wish this lawsuit were unnecessary. I wish we had an administration in the White House that respected the Constitution and the rule of law.  From the unprecedented border crisis, to the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, to now this unlawful COVID vaccine mandate, it is irrevocably clear that this administration will stop at nothing—even harming Americans and our national interests—in pursuit of the most radical policy agenda in American history. Rest assured, we at Heritage are only just beginning to fight back. … I am so thrilled to be leading this incredible organization at this pivotal time in our nation's history, and to be engaged in the trenches on the most important fights we've seen in a generation.   On Sept.9, Biden authorized the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to require employers with 100 or more workers to make sure those workers either are fully vaccinated or provide weekly test results showing that they don't have COVID-19.  “We're going to protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated co-workers,” Biden said in announcing the mandate. The Biden administration contends that the mandate is necessary because too many Americans refuse to get vaccinated and that OSHA has the statutory authority to impose the mandate. During remarks Monday at the White House about the omicron variant of COVID-19, Biden said the United States is doing its part to get its citizens vaccinated, and added: “We can't let up until the world is vaccinated.” The Heritage Foundation joins other employers as well as state attorneys general in filing lawsuits challenging the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's emergency rule implementing the mandate.  “The ACLJ is honored to serve as counsel for The Heritage Foundation,” said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, in a written statement. “This case focuses on the serious constitutional issues raised by the Biden administration's employer mandate.”  Implementing the mandate, which would cover at least 84.2 million Americans working for about 164,000 different businesses and other organizations, could be difficult and might rely on employees' snitching on bosses and colleagues.  The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals enjoined the Biden administration's vaccine mandate on Nov. 6, citing “grave statutory and constitutional issues.”  The appeals court affirmed its previous ruling, writing that Biden's vaccine mandate is “staggeringly overbroad” and likely “violates the constitutional structure that safeguards our collective liberty.”  The Biden administration announced it would not enforce the mandate while the litigation is pending.  Monday also marked another setback for the Biden administration when a federal court in Missouri halted the federal requirement for health care workers to be vaccinated in 10 states: Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.  The requirement, which came under a rule from the Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year, is separate from OSHA's emergency regulation.  In yet another separate regulation, the Biden administration's Office of Personnel Management announced that it would delay penalties against federal employees who were not vaccinated by a Nov. 22 deadline. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now   @FredLucasWH Fred Lucas Fred Lucas is chief national affairs correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of "The Right Side of History" podcast. Lucas is also the author of "Abuse of Power: Inside The Three-Year Campaign to Impeach Donald Trump." Send an email to Fred.  

Horrific Waukesha Deaths Preventable Result of Ill-Considered Bail Policies Amy Swearer / @AmySwearer / Zack Smith / @tzsmith / Cully Stimson / @cullystimson / November 23, 2021         John Chisholm, pictured, the rogue Soros-backed prosecutor in Milwaukee County, released Darrell Brooks from custody when he should have sought no bail. On Nov. 21, Brooks drove his car through a Christmas parade, killing five adults and injuring more than 40 people, including children. (Photo: county/Milwaukee.gov) Commentary By Amy Swearer @AmySwearer Amy Swearer is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Zack Smith @tzsmith Zack Smith is a legal fellow in the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Cully Stimson @cullystimson Charles “Cully” Stimson is a leading expert in national security, homeland security, crime control, immigration, and drug policy at The Heritage Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. Read his research. After a summer of wildly destructive civil unrest followed by the looming shadow of the high-profile trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, residents of Wisconsin suffered another blow in the form of unspeakable tragedy. Five people were killed and more than 40 injured when a driver plowed through participants of an annual holiday parade, appearing to intentionally speed up and swerve into lines of marchers, before speeding off. Hours later, police arrested 39-year-old Darrell Brooks as the suspected driver of the vehicle. He is charged with five counts of homicide. Investigators are still looking into possible motives, including, according to some reports, the possibility that Brooks did not necessarily target the parade but was instead attempting to flee from a knife fight.   Whether the act was intentional or merely reckless and without regard to others, one thing is already clear—what happened in Waukesha was entirely preventable. Darrell Brooks should have been in jail several times over. The devastation he wrought happened only because grossly reckless bail policies touted by local officials enabled the release of an unrepentantly violent man whose actions routinely placed members of the community in serious danger. Brooks is a career criminal with a long rap sheet. His history of violence—including violence toward women—is well documented, and wide-ranging.   In 1999, Brooks pled guilty to felony battery with intent to cause bodily harm, and was sentenced to six months in jail and three years' probation. Over the next seven years, Brooks had a series of short stints in jail for various drug and obstruction charges. In 2006, he was convicted of felony statutory sexual seduction for impregnating a 15-year-old girl. Brooks was 24 years old at the time. He was sentenced to probation and required to register as a sex offender. In 2010, Brooks pled no contest to felony strangulation and suffocation charges, as well as to violating the terms of his probation. He was sentenced to 11 months in jail and three more years of probation. Brooks spent much of 2011 and 2012 in jail, serving two separate 180-day sentences for charges of drug possession and bail jumping, and a 37-day sentence for misdemeanor resisting arrest. In 2016, Brooks was arrested and charged with failing to obey Nevada's sex offender registration laws. He posted bail, then fled the state and never returned to court. He still has an active warrant out for his arrest in Nevada. In July 2020, Brooks was again arrested after allegedly getting into a fist fight with his nephew over a cellphone and then firing a gun at the nephew's car as the nephew drove away. Arresting officers found Brooks still in possession of the firearm as well as a small amount of meth. He was charged with a slew of serious felonies, including possession a firearm as firearm and two counts of second-degree recklessly endangering public safety with the use of a firearm. Brooks' bond was initially set at $10,000 but was quickly lowered to $7,500. He remained in custody until his Feb. 9 trial was postponed. His attorney then successfully argued for Brooks' bail to be dropped even lower, and on Feb. 21, Brooks posted $500 bond and was released. On Nov. 5, with his 2020 charges still pending, Brooks was again arrested and charged with several serious felony offenses after a woman—reportedly the mother of Brooks' children—told police that he purposefully ran her over with a vehicle after an argument. According to reports, the vehicular assault left tire marks on the woman's pants and injured her so severely that she was hospitalized. Incredibly, despite two decades of violent behavior, an open felony warrant in Nevada, routine failures to abide by his probation or bond conditions, and an active case involving the violent use of a weapon, Brooks was allowed to post $1,000 cash bail. By Nov. 11, he was back in the community. When all relevant information comes to light about possible motive or premeditation, it seems incredible that no one could have reasonably foreseen that Brooks would commit this specific type of violence and leave this amount of carnage in his wake. Brooks' propensity for violence and his lifetime spent disregarding the safety of others made a violent tragedy anything but unforeseeable. It also could have been foreseen that this kind of tragedy would inevitably occur as a result of the well-intentioned but ill-thought-out and poorly executed bail reform policies that progressives are putting into effect across the country. In fact, John Chisholm, the rogue George Soros-backed prosecutor in Milwaukee County who released Brooks when he should have sought no bail, issued a prophetic statement in 2007. He said: “Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into [a] treatment program, who's going to go out and kill somebody? … You bet. Guaranteed. It's guaranteed to happen.” He went on to argue, though, that “does not invalidate the overall approach.” We disagree. And now that the dire consequences of these rogue prosecutors' policies are sparking public backlash, Chisholm has called for an investigation into Brooks' “inappropriately low” bond. Unfortunately, this is emblematic of the rogue prosecutor movement more generally. They take a criminal-first, victim-last, passing-the-blame approach. And while the consequences here were undoubtedly tragic, it's far from the only example of rogue prosecutors' lax bond policies wreaking havoc on their communities. In Philadelphia, for example, rogue District Attorney Larry Krasner's policies led to the murder of Philadelphia Police Cpl. James O'Connor by an individual whom Krasner released through his lenient policies. Former U.S. Attorney Bill McSwain said, “The murder was the direct result of Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner's pro-violent defendant policies.” In Chicago, police have pointed to the “skyrocketing use of electronic monitoring as a key factor in the city's shocking 50% rise in killings” last year. And no wonder. In Kim Foxx's Chicago, there are apparently no consequences for violating bail terms. According to the Chicago Tribune, “About 400 people are charged every year with felony escape. During [her predecessor's] last three years in office, she dropped a total of 55 such cases, compared with 420 for Foxx.” And then there's San Francisco's Chesa Boudin. As two of us (Cully and Zack) have previously written, “Since taking office, Boudin has also been criticized for releasing suspects with long criminal records who have gone on—surprise, surprise—to commit other crimes.” The events in Wisconsin were tragic. But the nightmare was a completely avoidable consequence of a criminal justice system run by Soros' rogue prosecutors. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.    The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now  

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in 2 Texas Heartbeat Act Cases. Here Are the Top Takeaways. Thomas Jipping / @TomJipping / Sarah Parshall Perry / @SarahPPerry / November 01, 2021 Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., Nov. 1. (Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images) COMMENTARY BY Thomas Jipping@TomJipping Thomas Jipping is deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Sarah Parshall Perry@SarahPPerry Sarah Parshall Perry is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. We are only a month into the Supreme Court's 2021-22 term and abortion already appears to be this season's defining topic. The court heard arguments in two cases on Monday related to the Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans most abortions after the fetal heartbeat is detected (which is usually about six weeks after conception). And in just one month, the court will hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which challenges the constitutionality of Mississippi's ban on most abortions after 15 weeks. While Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization focuses on the constitutional merits of the Mississippi ban, the Texas cases focus on how the legislature sought to shield the Texas abortion ban from legal challenge in its Heartbeat Act. Ordinarily, parties that opposed the law would file a lawsuit before it was scheduled to go into effect, asking for an injunction to stop any enforcement while its constitutionality is litigated. That's what happened in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The Texas law, however, says that it can be enforced only by “private civil actions” and removes public officials (those normally tasked with the enforcement of state and federal law) from the enforcement process on the Texas Heartbeat Act altogether. As a result, the law went into effect as scheduled on Sept. 1.   In Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, abortion providers sued to prevent state courts from handling any private civil actions to enforce the Texas abortion ban. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit put the Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson case on hold, and on emergency appeal, the Supreme Court left the hold in place, but said that the case raised “serious questions” about the law's constitutionality. Even though the 5th Circuit scheduled arguments on the issue of whether federal courts could enjoin state courts from handling these lawsuits for early December, the plaintiffs appealed again to the Supreme Court by way of a rarely used procedural move known as “certiorari before judgment.” In United States v. Texas, the federal government sued Texas, also asking that the abortion ban be put on hold while its constitutionality is litigated. Like the abortion providers did in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, the Biden administration did not wait for the 5th Circuit to rule, but appealed directly to the Supreme Court. So, on Nov. 1, the Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases—one brought by abortion providers and one by the federal government—involving procedural issues that must be cleared up before the constitutional merits of the Texas abortion ban can even be addressed. In Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, the question is whether Texas can insulate its state law from federal court review by delegating enforcement to the public instead of state officials. In United States v. Texas, the question is whether the federal government has an interest in the case sufficient enough to sue state courts and officials to prevent them from enforcing the law. Texas argues that its new law does not prevent the courts from deciding this underlying constitutional issue. The enforcement mechanism simply prevents blocking the law before it is enforced. But abortion providers can still claim the law is unconstitutional should it be enforced against them in a private civil action. Besides, Texas says, the federal government's desire to see the law declared unconstitutional is not enough to justify its intrusion into the state's legislative business. At the Nov. 1 argument in United States v. Texas, newly appointed Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said that the United States has a vested interest in vindicating constitutional law and warned that if the Supreme Court approved of this method of limiting judicial review, it could be replicated in other contexts. That may be true as a matter of general principle or policy, but the question for the Supreme Court is whether the United States has the legal standing to sue Texas over it. It would appear not—as the United States cannot demonstrate it has standing to bring a suit against an entire state, because it cannot prove it was somehow harmed by the actions of Texas and all its citizens. Justice Neil Gorsuch appeared impatient with the United States' broad request for relief, saying that there had never been such an injunction so expansive “in the history of the United States.” This skepticism about the federal government's desire to intervene in a state's legislative and judicial process may mean that United States v. Texas is on shakier ground than Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson. The justices were concerned not with the choice of enforcement mechanism in the Texas abortion ban—using private citizens to sue for violation of a state law—but were skeptical of the Texas solicitor general's argument that the mechanism, by its nature, exempts the law from judicial review at all before it goes into effect. Because of how it's written, the Texas Heartbeat Act cannot be challenged until after someone has brought suit on the act itself, and this seemed to be a universal hang-up for nearly the entire bench. Justice Sonia Sotomayor in particular cited a long list of constitutional rights, from the Second Amendment to same-sex marriage, that might also be infringed if the Texas act could be replicated in other states.  This is the crux of the issue in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson. Though that would remedy only one of the issues facing the justices. Ex Parte Young, a Supreme Court case from 1908, featured prominently in the arguments of the United States. In that decision the Supreme Court allowed suits in federal courts for injunctions against officials acting on behalf of states, despite the state's sovereign immunity, when the state acted contrary to any federal law or contrary to the Constitution. But at the same time, that decision held that federal courts could not enjoin state courts from hearing cases. The abortion providers in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson argued that they were entitled to an injunction that would prevent state court clerks from accepting complaints (brought by private citizens) that claim the act has been violated. But that seems to run afoul of Ex Parte Young's prohibition on federal courts enjoining state courts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh mentioned that the “spirit of Ex Parte Young” ought to apply, and that the underlying holding in that case might be expanded to permit an exception in this case. Justice Elena Kagan was quick to point out in oral arguments, saying: “Essentially, we would be inviting states, all 50 of them, with respect to their unpreferred constitutional rights, to try to nullify the law [on abortion] of—that this court has laid down as to the content of those rights.” Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone, arguing for the state of Texas, responded: “The state of Texas has not nullified anything. Abortions have dropped to 50% or 60%. We have not wholly extinguished the right of women to get abortions and Texas judges are [still] bound to follow this court's precedent fully and faithfully.” The outcome in the Nov. 1 cases will have little to no effect on the outcome in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women's Health, set for oral argument on Dec. 1. If the Supreme Court decides to ditch 50 years of abortion precedent and overturn Roe v. Wade—and some conservatives have posited there are enough votes from the justices to make it happen—all state abortion lawmaking ability and all related regulations would be sent to the states for determination of what can and cannot be done within their own boundaries on this hot-button issue. But if the Supreme Court keeps Roe v. Wade alive, Texas may be out of luck, as the Texas Heartbeat Act restricts exercise of a constitutional right. The justices' line of questioning seemed to betray their desire to let the abortion providers' case move forward. In either case, the Texas Heartbeat Act—and not Roe v. Wade—might well be the law sent to history's dustbin. Editor's note: Kagan's quote has been corrected to reflect the official transcript. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Transgender Bathroom Policies Open Doors for Sexual Predators Nicole Russell / @russell_nm / October 14, 2021   A male student sexually assaulted a female student in the women's bathroom at Stone Bridge High School in Loudoun County, Virginia in May. The girl's father was arrested on June 22 at a Loudoun County School Board meeting for protesting a proposal that would expand protections for transgender students. Pictured: The Loudoun County School Board discusses transgender issues at a meeting on Aug. 10. (Photo: Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post/Getty Images) COMMENTARY BY Nicole Russell@russell_nm Nicole Russell is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Her work has appeared in The Atlantic, The New York Times, National Review, Politico, The Washington Times, The American Spectator, and Parents Magazine. An explosive piece published this week by The Daily Wire shows what happens when crime, liberal school policies, and leftist law enforcement induce a parent's worst nightmare. In “Loudoun County Schools Tried To Conceal Sexual Assault Against Daughter In Bathroom, Father Says,” investigative reporter Luke Rosiak reveals a story about a young man who sexually assaulted a female student in the women's bathroom at Stone Bridge High School. This incident is a harbinger of what will happen as school systems, law enforcement, and other powerful groups embrace politically correct social justice agendas over the safety and security of all. While official juvenile records are sealed, attorneys reveal that a young man wearing a skirt was “charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio,” after he assaulted a young woman in the school restroom.   On June 22, weeks after the incident, the young woman's father, Scott Smith, was arrested at a Loudoun County, Virginia school board meeting for protesting a proposal that would expand protections for transgender students. He was dragged out, arrested, and later charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. He was merely upset about his daughter's sexual assault and the connection to changing school policy so that biological boys can use the women's bathroom if they identify as transgender. The school banned Smith from its property. Smith's arrest has sparked media attention, further humiliating him. The only person who has been convicted of a crime is the heartbroken, angry father, not the young man who assaulted not one, but two women—the story later reveals—in the women's restrooms. “My wife and I are gay- and lesbian-friendly,” Smith told The Daily Wire. “We're not into this children transgender stuff. The person that attacked our daughter is apparently bisexual and occasionally wears dresses because he likes them. So this kid is technically not what the school board was fighting about. The point is kids are using it as an advantage to get into the bathrooms.” Many angles of this story are disturbing. Elected Democrats in Loudoun County are implementing liberal policies in school districts despite the obvious ramifications as described.  The school brushed off the sexual assault of a young woman in order to continue pressing for broad bathroom policies that are inclusive to the small transgender population in high school. The school administrators also treated a concerned father disrespectfully. The story also reveals an obvious truth about criminal behavior: Predatory people will take advantage of any policy that favors them. Even though a small percentage of society's citizens are sexual predators, it only takes a few to upend the lives of victims and clog the criminal court divisions. Similarly, it's also true that among the transgender population, which is already quite small, very few—if any—are sexual predators. However, that does not mean sexual predators would not readily take advantage of loosened or broad bathroom policies that allow bisexual or transgender people into women's bathrooms. The nature of predatory criminals is that they can and will find loopholes so they can prey on vulnerable people easier—transgender or not. This has already happened in California. In January 2021, S.B. 132 was implemented. This law allows prisoners to request which facility they will be placed in based on their preferred gender, along with a few other parameters. Like clockwork, nearly 30 biological males asked to be transferred to California's two women's prisons. Many of these men were in prison for committing murder or sexual assault. Female prisoners must now live in fear and comply with this law, which was passed to protect the feelings of biological males. The Daily Wire article—worth a subscription and a read—provides harrowing details about how bad things will get if political correctness and law enforcement align to cover up truth. It also provides an inside look at just how sexual predators will use school bathroom policies or loose laws favoring transgender people for social justice's sake. This is a watershed moment for conservatives, particularly parents, who wish to shield their children from leftist ideology taking precedence over physical safety. Most transgender people, like the rest of society, are largely not criminals, but all it takes is a few predatory people to take advantage of well-meaning, politically correct laws, to wreak havoc on the vulnerable. The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

0

Attorney General Garland Abuses Power He Doesn't Have to Threaten Parents GianCarlo Canaparo / @GCanaparo / Mike Howell / @mhowelltweets / October 05, 2021   Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo on Monday that essentially directs the Department of Justice and the FBI to intimidate parents who oppose the teaching of critical race theory in schools. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images) COMMENTARY BY GianCarlo Canaparo@GCanaparo GianCarlo Canaparo is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Mike Howell@mhowelltweets Mike Howell is senior adviser for executive branch relations at The Heritage Foundation. A lawyer, he previously worked in the general counsel's office at the Department of Homeland Security and, before that, for the chief oversight committees of the House and Senate. Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo on Monday directing the Department of Justice and the FBI to “launch a series of additional efforts in the coming days designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”  The Garland memo looks like an effort to use the FBI to threaten and silence parents who are outspoken opponents of critical race theory in schools. That alone would be a stunning partisan abuse of power.  What Garland has done, however, is even more disgraceful. Maybe Garland doesn't actually intend to use the FBI to go after parents—maybe he knows that he doesn't have that power. In that case, he's trying to trick parents into thinking that he does. This tactic, he hopes, will suppress parents' free speech, and throw a bone to a powerful ally of his political party. Even a few FBI agents questioning parents may be enough to convince others that standing up for their values is not worth the risk.   To understand what Garland is doing with this memo, you'll need a short primer on the background facts and government legalese. Starting with the facts: What is this “rise in criminal conduct” against school officials?  You won't find any evidence cited in Garland's memo. You won't find any evidence in the FBI's crime data either. This claim is parroted from a letter sent to President Joe Biden by the National School Boards Association—a powerful leftist group representing many of the school boards around the country pushing critical race theory curricula. That letter made vague claims about “threats and acts of violence” against school board members from parents who oppose critical race theory. The letter complained about “disruptions” by angry parents but managed to find only one example of violence against a school official (likely a security guard), which was handled by local law enforcement. Most of the letter is the National School Boards Association clutching its pearls, aghast that justifiably angry parents are zealously advocating for their children's interest. The tactics thus far employed certainly are nothing compared to the riots of the summer of 2020 that destroyed over a billion dollars in property and resulted in multiple deaths. Those tactics were not decried by the National School Boards Association and its liberal friends. In fact, the current vice president organized financial support to the criminals engaged. The National School Boards Association is not really concerned about an isolated instance of violence adequately handled by local law enforcement. It is much more upset that it is powerless to stop parents from exercising their First Amendment rights to push back against critical race theory in the classroom. And so, in a move that is nearly a reflex among many leftist organizations, it asked the government to lend it some of its law enforcement power to shut up its meddling critics. Garland was only too happy to oblige. In doing so, he has made a hypocrite out of himself and Biden. When Biden announced Garland's nomination, he promised to uphold the independence of the DOJ from the political influence of the White House. Garland promised the same, saying: I have spent my whole professional life looking up to Ed Levi and the other post-Watergate Attorneys General who stood up on behalf of the Department against impermissible pressure and influence. If I am confirmed as Attorney General, I intend to do the same. There is no clearer example of political influence seeping into the DOJ than a demand letter to the president from a leftist advocacy group turning into a DOJ memorandum in less than a week. But Garland's weaponization of the DOJ has a problem: There is no conceivable basis for federal law enforcement action against these parents. Unlike Attorney General Eric Holder, who twisted and abused the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act to silence pro-life advocates, Garland can't find any law that he can similarly mangle to silence parents. If he could, he would have put it in the memo. But the parents don't know that. And here enters the government legalese. Garland's memo fails to cite any basis for law enforcement action by the DOJ or the FBI, but it hides that with a morass of official language that says nothing more than that federal law enforcement will provide some advice to local school boards.  FBI agents and federal prosecutors (who have nothing better to do, apparently) will travel the country giving school boards the phone number of their local police and the web address of the FBI's internet tip line. After the sound and fury calms, nothing beside remains. What do we make of all this?  First, there is no reason to bring federal law enforcement into this; local authorities have this under control. Second, Garland has demonstrated, disappointingly, that he is beholden to powerful leftist political groups and perfectly happy to let them use the threat of federal government's law enforcement power to suppress their critics' right to free speech. The promised impendence of the DOJ is a farce. Third, it is more important to Garland to spend scarce law enforcement resources appeasing liberal interest groups than on more pressing national concerns. Fourth, some good news, parents need not be afraid. It is their constitutional right to push back in legal ways against schools teaching children critical race theory. Go forth to the school boards and make your voices heard. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

McAuliffe vetoed a law that would have allowed parents to block their children's exposure to sexually explicit books in schools. Such as illustrations of oral sex and masturbation and Evision's allegedly shows graphic descriptions of a man having sex with children.   Terry McAuliffe: ‘I Don't Think Parents Should Be Telling Schools What They Should Teach' NICOLE SILVERIO CONTRIBUTOR September 28, 202111:59 PM ET     Democratic Virginia Gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe said parents should not have authority over what schools teach their children during a debate Tuesday evening. McAuliffe was challenged on his change in stance, as he previously advocated for protection for transgender students and now supports allowing local school districts to make independent decisions about controversial issues. His opponent, Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin, argued during the debate that local school districts should include parents in decisions regarding the educational content taught to their children. “In regard to our kids in schools, we are called for everyone to love everyone,” Youngkin said. “And I agree with your conclusion, Terry [McAuliffe], that we should let local school districts actually make these decisions. But we must ask them to include concepts of safety and privacy and respect in the discussion and we must ask that they include parents in the dialogue.” “I'm not gonna let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decisions,” McAuliffe replied. “I stopped the bill that I don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” He explained that he supports parents having the right to veto books rather than make decisions for the schools on which books are placed in school libraries.         McAuliffe vetoed a bill, known as the “Beloved” bill in 2016 that would have allowed parents to block their childrens' exposure to sexually explicit books in schools, the Washington Post previously reported. The legislation would have required teachers to inform parents of any “sexually explicit material” being presented in the classroom and give them the option to have their child opt out of the lesson. (RELATED: As Virginia Governor Race Draws To A Close, McAuliffe Will Not Name One Abortion Restriction He Supports)  Youngkin criticized McAuliffe's veto of the bill during his time as governor, arguing that “parents should be in charge of their kid's education.” The Republican candidate mentioned parents' uproar this past week over Fairfax County High School allegedly presenting “sexually explicit” material in the library without parental consent. The school system removed the books “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe and “Lawn Boy” by Jonathon Evison from the high school library Friday, according to WTOP News. Kobabe's book reportedly contains illustrations of oral sex and masturbation and Evision's allegedly shows graphic descriptions of a man having sex with children. The school board held a meeting Thursday evening during which parents challenged school administrators regarding their children's accessibility to the books, according to the outlet.     Tags : education gubernatorial race sexually explicit book terry mcauliffe

The Morning Brew: Myth of January 6 ☠ ⚔ Insurrection ⚔ ☠ Takes Another Blow, Even CNN Calls Out Biden Border Agent Slander FBI Informant Was Inside Proud Boys on Jan 6, Told Feds No

When Politicians Call For 'Fairness,' They're Usually Lying By Ben Shapiro September 22, 2021   This week, President Joe Biden attempted to inject life into his ailing presidency by dragging out of the closet the hoariest of political cliches: "fairness" in taxation. Touting his new $3.5 trillion tax and spending bill, which would radically increase corporate taxes, personal income taxes and so-called sin taxes, Biden stated, "It's not enough just to build back; we have to build back better than before ... I'm not out to punish anyone. I'm a capitalist. If you can make a million or a billion dollars, that's great. God bless you. All I'm asking is you pay your fair share. Pay your fair share just like middle-class folks do." Of course, those who earn high incomes don't pay like middle-class folks do. They pay far, far more. IRS statistics show that the top 1% of income earners pay more in federal income tax than the bottom 90% combined — while the top 1% earned 21% of all income in 2018, they paid 40 % of all income tax revenue. The top 10 % paid over 70 % of all federal income tax. In fact, according to the American Enterprise Institute, those in the highest quintile of income earners pay, on average, well over $50,000 per year in net taxes — taxes minus government benefits received — while those in the bottom 60% of income earners receive net tax benefits. According to The Washington Post, the top 10 % of American income earners pay nearly half of all income taxes, compared with just 27% for the top 10% of Swedes, 31% for the top 10% of Germans, and 28% for France's top 10%. So what, precisely, does Biden mean by "pay their fair share"?     Perhaps he means simple sloganeering. Like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez donning a Cinderella ball gown emblazoned with the words "TAX THE RICH" to the Met Gala — a dress made by Aurora James, a woman who owes tens of thousands of dollars in back taxes and who has received over $40,000 in federal pandemic aid — class warfare sloganeering is more about the sloganeering than the class warfare. No Democrat seems prepared to define what "fairness" constitutes, other than "a word I use to pander to the rubes, while hobnobbing with the rich." And Biden's "fairness" pitch has to do with good economic policy, of course. In 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama was asked during a debate about raising the capital gains tax, even if it lowered net government revenue. He answered, "I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness." In other words, Obama explicitly stated that he would damage the economy on behalf of a vague, kindergarten notion of equal outcome. In the end, the "tax the rich to be fair" notion rests on a simple lie: the lie that income distribution is purely a matter of privilege or luck. It isn't. In the main, in a free market system, income distribution is the result of successful decision-making that must be incentivized rather than punished if we wish to see a more prosperous society. Some people game the system; some are indeed beneficiaries of insider deal-making. But most success in capitalism is due to innovation, entrepreneurialism and creativity. Biden's "fairness" cuts directly against these core elements of progress on behalf of political pandering.     If we truly care about fairness — a more nuanced and complete definition of fairness that encompasses rewards for productive decisions and disincentives for counterproductive decision-making — we must abandon the politically convenient notion that those who earn more have somehow stolen from the system and must be punished for their crimes. Lack of distributive equality does not equal unfairness, and anyone who argues differently abandons the real world — and the possibility of a better life for everyone — in favor of the flattering lie that all roads ought to end in the same basic material outcome. Ben Shapiro, 37, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show," and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the New York Times bestsellers "How To Destroy America In Three Easy Steps," "The Right Side Of History," and "Bullies." To find out more about Ben Shapiro and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com. Photo credit: Free-Photos at Pixabay             Like it? Share it!       1 opinion conservative conservative taxes economics free market wealth capitalism taxation inequality fairness tax the rich About Ben Shapiro Read More | RSS | Subscribe

As Vaccine Mandates Increase - Religious Exemptions Come Under Fire Mary Margaret Olohan / @MaryMargOlohan / September 22, 2021   Pressure from activists and mandate-minded lawmakers suggests that the religious objections of Americans to COVID-19 vaccine mandates may face more serious inquisition in the coming weeks. (Photo Illustration: photos/Getty Images) Columbia University's Robert Klitzman shared a tragic story with CNN Saturday of a woman riddled with cancer who reportedly refused to undergo medical procedures, relied on the power of prayer, and ultimately died. “Her religious belief contributed to her death, unfortunately,” he said. Klitzman, who directs Columbia's bioethics master's program, stressed that employees should not be able to easily obtain religious exemptions from President Joe Biden's vaccine mandates, pointing to the extreme beliefs of jihadists and noting, “there are limits in our society to how far religious beliefs can go.” He also suggested that the Biden administration should create “guidelines” to decide whether Americans' religious objections measure up.   “The problem is a lot of religious exemptions that people are claiming … are based on myths,” he said. “People saying, for instance, ‘All vaccines are made using fetal cells, and I'm pro-life.' That's simply not true.” A Biden administration official told The Daily Caller News Foundation Tuesday afternoon that protecting religious Americans “will be part of the policy process,” but did not further explain the remark. From the briefing room, White House press secretary Jen Psaki confirmed that some individuals may receive religious exemptions from the Biden mandate. But pressure from activists and mandate-minded lawmakers suggests that the religious objections of Americans may face more serious inquisition in the coming weeks. “How much can we ask? How far can we push? Do we have to accommodate this? Those are the questions employers are trying to figure out,” Society for Human Resource Management adviser Barbara Holland told The New York Times. “How do I tease out who's not telling the truth?” New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, told reporters in early September that she was unaware “of a sanctioned religious exemption from any organized religion,” dismissing the idea that health care workers could be religiously exempt from the state's vaccine mandate. “To the extent that there's leadership of different religious organizations that have spoken, and they have, I'm not aware of a sanctioned religious exemption from any organized religion,” Hochul said. “In fact, they're encouraging the opposite. They're encouraging their members, everybody from the pope on down, is encouraging people to get vaccinated. So people will say what they choose.”  But neither the governor of New York nor any employer has the authority to tell an individual what he or she believes, Ethics and Public Policy Center senior fellow Roger Severino told The Daily Caller News Foundation. Should an employer rebut the religious objection of a Catholic employee by noting that the pope had encouraged Catholics to get vaccinated, Severino told The Daily Caller News Foundation, that would amount to religious discrimination. “For employers to say, ‘you are wrong' about your own beliefs is a) arrogant and b) discriminatory because people are entitled to their own religious beliefs,” Severino said. “Even if they disagree with their own religious leaders.” Many thousands of Americans are seeking religious exemptions to vaccine mandates, citing reports that some of the vaccines were developed using aborted fetal cell lines. Objectors also cite concerns over the haste with which the vaccines were made, anxieties over the vaccines' effects on fertility, and distaste for the authoritarian government mandates. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, U.S. employers are required to accommodate their employees' “sincerely held” religious beliefs—including potential religious objections to a vaccine.  “Public institutions should not act like inquisitorial boards, quizzing people's religious beliefs and trying to find holes because somebody has a different view of things,” said Severino, who is the former director of the Office of Civil Rights at the United States Department of Health and Human Services.  “If separation of church and state means anything, it means that state institutions don't second guess to try to resolve religious truths.” Workplace Religious Accommodations: What Are They? There is longstanding legal precedent for workplace religious accommodations to be taken as sincere, Religious Freedom & Business Foundation President Brian Grim told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “They are viewed as personal religious convictions rather than ecclesiastical, in other words, matters of conscience rather than doctrine per se, given that there is wide variety in how people put to practice their faiths,” Grim said. “The question then becomes whether the accommodation request puts an undue burden on the employer, who is also protected by law and responsible for the health and well-being of all employees.” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance warns that “whether or not a religious belief is sincerely held by an applicant or employee is rarely at issue in many types of Title VII religious claims. “For example,” the guidance said, “with respect to an allegation of discriminatory discharge or harassment, it is the motivation of the discriminating official, not the actual beliefs of the individual alleging discrimination, that is relevant in determining if the discrimination that occurred was because of religion.” Neither the commission nor the courts should “be in the business of deciding whether a person holds religious beliefs for the ‘proper' reasons,” the guidance said, but they may examine the individual's motives or reasons for holding the belief. An individual would not be deemed insincere in his belief just because he is not scrupulous in his observance, the guidance notes, but an employee's credibility could be undermined by behaving “in a manner markedly inconsistent with the professed belief,” if the accommodation the individual is seeking would have a “particularly desirable benefit that is likely to be sought for secular reasons,” if the timing of the religious objection is suspect, or if the employer has other reasons to believe the “accommodation is not sought for religious reasons.” None of these factors are final, however: An individual may inconsistently practice his faith but still hold sincerely held beliefs, or an individual may have “forgone his or her sincerely held religious practice” out of fear of discrimination, according to the EEOC guidance. How Far Can the Biden Administration Go? Legal experts at the Alliance Defending Freedom are evaluating what the Biden administration mandates mean for religious employers and churches. “Should these mandates encroach on the First Amendment freedoms and autonomy of religious institutions, ADF stands ready to challenge the administration in federal court,” ADF President and CEO Michael Farris and General Counsel Kristen Waggoner said in a statement. Some have already taken the mandates to court. In early September, a group of 17 health professionals represented by the Thomas More Society sued New York and Hochul, accusing the state of violating Title VII and constitutional rights through its vaccination mandate and by disavowing religious exemptions. The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York granted a temporary restraining order to the medical workers Sept. 14, barring the New York Department of Health “from interfering in any way with the granting of religious exemptions from COVID-19 vaccination going forward.” New York Medical Workers Su… by Mary Margaret Olohan Hochul, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation, has until Sept. 22 to respond in court. “What New York is attempting to do is slam shut an escape hatch from an unconstitutional vaccine mandate,” Christopher Ferrara, Thomas More Society special counsel attorney, said in a Sept. 14 statement. “And they are doing this while knowing that many people have sincere religious objections to vaccines that were tested, developed, or produced with cell lines derived from aborted children.” Vaccines and Abortion-Derived Cell Lines Analysis by the Charlotte Lozier Institute released in December 2020 found that AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson use abortion-derived cell lines in development, production, and lab testing. Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, Novavax, and Inovio use abortion-derived cells in some tests but do not use abortion-derived cells in other tests, the analysis found, but these four do not use abortion-derived cell lines in development or production of the vaccine. Charlotte Lozier Institute Vice President Dr. David Prentice previously told The Daily Caller News Foundation that when abortion-derived cell lines are used in the production of a vaccine, that means the cells are “directly involved in making the final product, the vaccine that is injected in our arms.” “It is an essential element for the final vaccine,” Prentice said. “Although the connection is distant both in time and space, since the abortion occurred decades ago and the cells have been grown in the lab ever since, that connection to abortion remains and is of concern to many Americans. ” Laboratory testing using abortion-derived cell lines is potentially less morally problematic, since it is “another step removed” Prentice said. “When an abortion-derived cell line is used in laboratory testing, that is not done within the production line,” he explained. “It's a confirmatory test done on the final vaccine, to validate what the scientists believe they've produced.” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now   Mary Margaret Olohan @MaryMargOlohan Mary Margaret Olohan is a reporter covering social issues for The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Critical Race Theory Will Destroy the Fabric of Our Military Sep 14th, 2021  COMMENTARY BY John Venable@JVVenable Senior Research Fellow for Defense Policy John “JV” Venable, a 25-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force is a senior research fellow for defense policy at Heritage. KEY TAKEAWAYS The U.S. military has mastered the process that develops unity by compelling recruits to let go of their individualism for the sake of the team. Critical race theory divides organizations against themselves, and history shows that divided organizations cannot stand. If allowed to propagate, it will foster internal contempt, destroy morale and undercut the demand for excellence on which the success of our military relies.   Copied  In just 10 words, Napoleon captured perhaps the most important element for leading a team to success: "The moral is to the physical as three to one." Morale involves cohesion, confidence, a sense of common purpose, and loyalty all wrapped up into a hard-to-measure but readily discernible package. Teams with high morale radiate energy and meet heady challenges head-on. The indifference of those without it is equally palpable. Back in July, President Joe Biden publicly conveyed his belief that the Afghan army, with 300,000 soldiers and its own air force, would hold against some 75,000 Taliban. And yet, even with 4 to 1 odds, that well-equipped organization melted away in the face of a poorly armed militia. Though hard to quantify, morale is an essential element of effective teams. More often than not, it is the difference between winning and losing in any arena. Those precious few who have served during conflicts don't just embrace that fact; they view Napoleon's dictum as one of the most treasured and carefully guarded elements within their fighting force. They hold the morale of their units close to their chests because it is incredibly hard to develop and so easily lost. >>> Critical Race Theory Over the course of its history, the U.S. military has mastered the process that develops unity by compelling recruits to let go of their individualism for the sake of the team. The traits of race, creed, color, faith, and family heritage are hard enough to put in check, but in recent years, technology has delivered an accelerant to individualism. The military works to rid the iPhone generation of its focus on self through a relentless series of physical and emotional challenges that can be resolved only by believing in and being part of something bigger than themselves. Marine Corps basic training is perhaps the most effective in that role. Its graduates leave with a service culture, work ethic, and an indelible bond that is shared with all others that have earned the right to wear that uniform. Units receiving those graduates know that any semblance of cliques or individual isolation can be cancerous, so they further that bond by onboarding them technically and socially to ensure every new Marine is fully assimilated into the team. That process enables units to grow closer through the most arduous of circumstances and, when required, to fight and win. Leaders of organizations with exceptional morale will fight off every stimulus that could pit one part of their team against another or could divide the whole into favored and unfavored elements or factions. And yet, that is the very essence of critical race theory now working its way into the Defense Department. By design, critical race theory destroys unifying organizational cultures by dividing people by race and sex. And then, incredulously, it demands each subgroup to identify themselves and the others as either oppressors or the oppressed. The fix, the remedy critical race theory offers society, is to subjugate the "oppressors" to the whims of those it has predetermined to be "oppressed," sanctifying the blight of racism the service has worked so hard to stamp out. Put simply, critical race theory divides organizations against themselves, and history shows that divided organizations cannot stand. >>> Democrats Just Revealed They Don't Understand How Critical Race Theory Threatens Our Military For more than 50 years, our military has set the standard for race relations in the United States. While there will always be room for improvement, critical race theory will reverse that trajectory. If allowed to propagate, it will foster internal contempt, destroy morale and undercut the demand for excellence on which the success of our military relies. Senior leaders within the Defense Department must stand alone, if necessary, against every introductory element or seemingly benign aspect of this destructive scheme. They must make that stand now, before we lose the bond that holds our military together and relegates those segregated groups, and our nation, to the kind of nightmare the people of Afghanistan now endure. This piece originally appeared in the Washington Examiner

0

Teachers Union Sues Rhode Island Mom for Seeking Records About School's Critical Race Theory Curriculum‼️ Virginia Allen / @Virginia_Allen5 / August 05, 2021   The National Education Association is suing mother Nicole Solas after she filed multiple public records requests with the South Kingstown School District in Rhode Island requesting information about the schools' teaching of critical race theory. (Photo: Podfoto/ Getty Images) The National Education Association, America's largest teachers union, is suing a Rhode Island mom for seeking information about what her kindergartener will be taught in school.  Both the National Education Association Rhode Island and National Education Association South Kingstown, the union's local branch, are suing Nicole Solas after she filed public record requests with the South Kingstown School District to learn what students are being taught regarding critical race theory.  “It appears … [the teachers union wants] a court to say I can't get the public information that I'm requesting because it will somehow harm teachers,” Solas told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Thursday.  The complaint was filed with the Rhode Island Superior Court on Monday and a constable arrived at Solas' home on Wednesday to deliver papers informing the mother of the lawsuit.   “I just got served with a lawsuit from the teacher union, NEARI,” Solas wrote on Twitter. “Throwing down the gauntlet, are we? Game on.” On Thursday, the union also filed for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Solas. The legal action is intended to prohibit the South Kingstown school board from “responding to public record requests referenced in the Verified Complaint, unless and until a determination can be made that such documents are required to be released pursuant to the Access to Public Records Act,” the court filing reads.   “Today, the teacher union NEA filed ANOTHER lawsuit against me – this time a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction,” Solas tweeted. “Will teacher unions bullying moms be an everyday thing now?” Over the past few months, Solas has filed more than 200 public records requests with the South Kingstown School District, about 30 miles south of Providence, Rhode Island.  In April, the principal of the elementary school told Solas to file records requests after the mother emailed the principal asking for a copy of the curriculum and other information about the school district.  Solas was told that due to the breadth of her questions, she needed to file records requests, which she did.  In June, the South Kingstown school board threatened to sue Solas over the requests she was making. Ultimately, the school board voted not to take legal action against her. But now, the union representing South Kingstown teachers has filed a 30-page suit against her.  The teachers union is asking the court to “prohibit the disclosure of non-public records” and for the court to use a “balancing test” to assess whether or not teachers' “personally identifiable and other personnel-related information” must be released, according to the complaint.  The National Education Association Rhode Island “laid out a lot of reasons [in the complaint] why some of the information I requested may not be subject to public disclosure, but that is all controlled under the Rhode Island Access to Public Records Act, and the School Committee attorneys would be making all those decisions themselves,” Solas said.  She added that if the “teachers union believes that the School Committee attorney made a wrong decision on the release of information, the teachers union can certainly sue the school.” Instead, Solas is the one being sued.  “I think this is purely an intimidation tactic,” Solas said of the lawsuit.  The complaint is outlined in 70 points detailing why the information Solas is requesting should not be released, including concerns over a conservative group's reporting of educators teaching critical race theory.  Point 70 reads:  Given the circumstances of the requests, it is likely that any teachers who are identifiable and have engaged in discussions about things like critical race theory will then be the subject of teacher harassment by national conservative groups opposed to critical race theory. Appendix C of the complaint includes two news stories covering the South Kingstown school board's threat to sue Solas in June. The first is from Legal Insurrection, which first covered the story, and the second is from The Daily Signal.  Solas says that it appears that the teachers union is seeking to act as a “third-party intermediary” to decide whether or not she can receive the public information she is requesting.  “I hope teachers see this lawsuit as the last straw of their union's decades-long denigration of their profession,” Solas said. “I hope teachers leave the union because they refuse to fund litigation that harasses and bullies mothers who exercise their civil right to access public information about their children's education.” The young mom is being represented by the Goldwater Institute, a conservative public policy and ligation organization based in Phoenix.  “Rhode Island law does not authorize what the [National Education Association] is attempting to do here,” Goldwater lawyer Jon Riches told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Thursday.  “Nicole did what any conscientious parent would do,” Riches added. “She sought out information about what her child is going to learn, and from Day One, she was stonewalled. First, she was stonewalled by the district. Now, she is being intimidated by the union.”  The Daily Signal reached out to the National Education Association Rhode Island for comment and received a prepared statement in response with a quote from Deputy Executive Director Jennifer Azevedo. We are asking the Court to conduct a balancing test to determine whether our members' privacy rights outweigh the public interest. We believe they do, and those records should either not be disclosed or should be redacted accordingly. Multiple APRA requests were made in recent months to the South Kingstown School Department demanding detailed information about specific educators and members in general of NEA South Kingstown, our local NEARI educator affiliate.  While NEARI and NEASK support access to public information, the organizations firmly believe in protecting the rights, safety, and privacy of its members and will continue to advocate strongly on their behalf. We look forward to the Court's declaratory judgement. “As long as such information does not include ‘personally identifiable information,' which legally must be kept confidential, the NEA's request for a behind-closed-doors review with the judge in this case, in addition to previous statements about wanting not to distract from ‘equity efforts' by fulfilling Solas' requests, indicates that whatever the school board is teaching, it very much wants to hide,” Sarah Parshall Perry, a legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)  Even though Solas has now enrolled her daughter in a private school, both she and the Goldwater Institute are prepared to move forward with the lawsuit in an effort to stand up for parents across the nation who are concerned about their child being taught critical race theory and other leftist ideology in the classroom.  “They made the wrong mom mad,” said Solas, who added that the fight is about so much more than simply her own records requests. This is about parents having a right to know what their child's education is. This is about not being bullied by a teacher union who wants to challenge a stay-at-home mom for asking questions about education. And this is about open government.  The actions of the teachers union are “unacceptable,” Riches said. “It's not going to stand. We are going to fight back every step of the way. Nicole is not going to be intimidated.”  Correction: This piece was corrected after publication to accurately state that the lawsuit was filed in the Rhode Island Superior Court. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now                 @Virginia_Allen5 Virginia Allen Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia.

Ashli Babbitt's Family Lawyer Says Cop 'Ambushed' Her on Jan. 6 with No Warning Elizabeth Stauffer August 6, 2021 at 12:28pm   Despite the chaos unfolding at the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, just a single shot was fired — the shot that killed unarmed Air Force veteran and Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, 35. Unbelievably, not a word was uttered about either the shooter or his victim during the opening hearing of the House select committee's sham investigation into the Capitol incursion. As the Babbitt family attorney, Terry Roberts, prepares to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the U.S. Capitol Police and the officer involved, believed to be Lt. Michael Byrd, a conflict is heating up over whether or not Babbitt was warned before the officer pulled the trigger. It should be noted that Byrd has reportedly been placed on a paid administrative leave from his position with the Capitol Police. RealClear Investigations' Paul Sperry has followed this story closely and addressed this situation in a new report. Trending: 29-Year Police Vet Debunks Massive Lie About Capitol Cop Suicides, Exposes Truth Behind Horrible Deaths Byrd's attorney, Mark Schamel, insists his client issued a warning and that he “did so loudly and clearly,” according to Sperry. “He was screaming, ‘Stay back! Stay back! Don't come in here!” Schamel said. Although I have no background in the law, shouting, “Stay back! Stay back! Don't come in here!” to a mob doesn't constitute a warning that an officer is about to shoot. It's a command. A true warning would mention that shots were about to be fired into the crowd. “He was acting within his training. Lethal force is appropriate if the situation puts you or others in fear of imminent bodily harm,” Schamel argued. Do you believe Ashli Babbitt received sufficient warning of lethal force? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. He said his client had been guarding a critical chokepoint and prevented a “potential massacre of lawmakers and staff.” Schamel went so far as to say, “There should be a training video on how he handled that situation. What he did was unbelievable heroism.” “Schamel said witness statements back him up,” Sperry wrote. “He explained the lieutenant's commands were not picked up on video recordings because the footage was shot on the other side of the doors where dozens of rioters were shouting and banging and drowning out his words. And he said his client could not be seen yelling out the instructions because his mouth was covered by a mask he wore as part of COVID-19 protections.” Sperry interviewed Roberts who said, “It's not debatable. There was no warning.” “I would call what he did an ambush. I don't think he's a good officer. I think he's reckless,” Roberts said. Related: 29-Year Police Vet Debunks Massive Lie About Capitol Cop Suicides, Exposes Truth Behind Horrible Deaths Shooting randomly into a crowd is reckless. Roberts told Sperry he has several witnesses who were with Babbitt and did not hear the officer issue “any kind of warning.” Roberts made the very compelling point that if Byrd had indeed issued a warning, why did no one react to it? His investigators, he told Sperry, had examined video which showed that none of the officers who were in the hallway with the shooter reacted before he pulled the trigger. He said none of them took cover or crouched or pulled their own guns as would have been expected had they heard a warning. Instead, he said that, just prior to the shooting, they'd been casually milling about in the lobby. “Those other officers were within earshot. If he's yelling, they certainly aren't showing any reaction to it,” he said. “If he was giving any kind of warning, why didn't they react?” A veteran Capitol Police officer, who reportedly spoke to Sperry on the condition of anonymity, said, “I'm not sure how he was justified shooting her when there was a SWAT team right behind her. They saw no immediate threat.” Sperry explained the SWAT team consisted of  “three heavily armed USCP officers who had positioned themselves between the doors and the mob.” This is an issue that Republicans have brought up repeatedly. They would like to see members of the SWAT team testify before the House select committee. Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar said, “They were right next to her and saw no threat, certainly no lethal threat. Why were there no warnings given or escalation of command and force in proper law enforcement technique?” Former Capitol Police officer Patrick Skinner told Sperry that “we were trained in what to do if gunmen tried to storm the Capitol, but we were not trained in what to do if hundreds of people decided to rush the building.” He explained that officers didn't know what they were facing on Jan. 6. The situation was unprecedented. Sperry also reportedly spoke to a former inspector general who reiterated what Skinner had said. “This is not meant pejoratively but just as a fact, but the [Capitol Police] is far from being some kind of elite law enforcement body. Its principal function is to assist tourists, maintain decorum in a tourist environment, and help out members of Congress and their staffs.” So far, Democrats and the DOJ have managed to shield the shooter from the legal consequences of those actions. We know that Capitol Police were overwhelmed by an unprecedented situation (which could have been prevented had House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not rejected then-President Donald Trump's request for 10,000 National Guard troops to be present, but I digress.) Neither the DOJ nor the Democratic Party can protect the officer from the Babbitt family's wrongful death lawsuit. Roberts can call the members of the SWAT team standing right behind Ashli Babbitt that day or anyone else he chooses. And Schamel is kidding himself if he considers his client's shout of, “Stay back! Stay back! Don't come in here!” inside of the chaotic and noisy House chamber to be a proper warning of lethal force.

Why States Should Tune Out Washington's COVID-19 Noise Doug Badger / @Dougsbriefcase / August 02, 2021 Infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci looks on as Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testifies before a Senate committee on July 20. Walensky has expressed support for European-style COVID-19 vaccine "passports." (Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/Getty Images) COMMENTARY BY Doug Badger@Dougsbriefcase Doug Badger is a former White House and Senate policy adviser and is currently a senior fellow at the Galen Institute and a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation. The federal government continues to offer garbled COVID-19 messages that undermine its credibility and sow confusion about the pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now thinks there are more infections among the vaccinated than it did previously (35,000 weekly with symptomatic infections) and suggests that vaccinated people are helping spread what President Joe Biden calls a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” Biden, meanwhile, continues his unsuccessful vax-“shaming” campaign. He says that unvaccinated people “aren't nearly as smart as I thought” and alleges that they “get sick and fill up our hospitals,” denying medical care to heart attack victims.  According to the Department of Health and Human Services, of the nation's more than 919,500 hospital beds, COVID-19-associated hospital admissions totaled just 944 on July 24. That compares with 6,679 such hospital admissions in early January.   The administration's vaccine campaign also has turned to coercion. The CDC director has voiced support for “vaccine passports,” which deny the unvaccinated access to public venues. The president has ordered unvaccinated federal employees and contractors to submit to frequent testing and workplace restrictions from which their vaccinated colleagues are exempt. Washington's frenetic and ineffectual reaction to the most recent run-up in cases points up the virtues of constitutional federalism, a decentralized approach that defers policy decisions to states and localities. Not everyone agrees. “When our collective fate relies on speed, efficiency, and unity,” a Journal of the American Medical Association editorial reads, “federalist ideals fall flat.” “Divided gov­ernment creates unnecessary challenges for residents of states that are too slow to act or take up federal policies,” it claims. The Bipartisan Policy Center laments the “patchwork of state responses” and says it's “vital for states and localities to follow federal evidence-based guidelines.” A recent analysis of the public policy response to COVID-19 co-authored with my Heritage Foundation colleague Robert Moffitt reached the opposite conclusion. It finds that the country benefited from policies adapted to the varied conditions of states and localities, a principal virtue of federalism. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.) Advocates of centralized decision-making assume that federal policymakers formulate consistently sound, evidence-based policies. The corollary is that states that deviate from those policies will fare worse than states that adhere to them. We found both suppositions false. The CDC made repeated errors in judgment; issued policies that were often unclear, misguided, and not evidence-based; and made recommendations that too often yielded few, if any, public health benefits while inflicting social and economic damage. Our look at the four most populous states (California, Texas, Florida, and New York) found that the two that spurned CDC-favored policies (Florida and Texas) had comparable or better public health outcomes and far better economic outcomes than the two (California and New York) that closely followed federal agency guidelines. With a new run-up in cases, it's vitally important that states strike appropriate policy courses and not accept the CDC's spasmodic policy declarations at face value. They should begin by avoiding the CDC's obsession with case counts. While higher confirmed case rates raise concerns, they don't carry the same implications as previous spikes. Unlike last winter's case surge, vaccination rates among those most susceptible to severe illness and death are high. According to the CDC, 80% of the elderly are fully immunized, and 90% have had at least one shot. State and local public health officials should instead focus on hospitalizations and deaths. The experience in the United Kingdom is instructive. Its spike in cases began in late May and only started to subside in late July. But while its seven-day moving average of newly confirmed cases peaked at 703 per million on July 21—not far from the record number of new infections that the U.S. recorded in January—COVID-19-related death rates in the U.K. increased only modestly. As of July 27, they were around one per million residents, similar to the U.S., and a fraction of the 18.46 deaths per million rate the U.K. endured last winter. The U.K. demonstrates that case counts can rise in a population with significant vaccination rates without producing nearly the devastation of earlier waves of infection. State and local policymakers should base policy on more relevant measures of pandemic severity, such as hospitalization and death rates.   That would facilitate more intelligent and tolerant approaches toward people who are reluctant to get the vaccine—approaches based on respect, not on condescension. Instead of smearing unvaccinated people as menaces to society, states can stress that vaccines protect individuals against the worst consequences of COVID-19 even if they don't always prevent infection. States should also encourage people to listen to their doctors—not their Twitter feeds—when deciding whether to get immunized. It will be hard for state officials to make themselves heard above the Washington noise, but people will more likely respond favorably to rational and balanced messaging than to insults, coercion, and contradictory messages. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Fact-Checking 6 Claims at Senate Democrats' Voting Law Hearing Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / July 19, 2021 "Spurred on by the big lie, these same actors are now rolling back voting rights in a way that is unprecedented in size and scope since the Jim Crow era,” Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., testifies Monday during a Senate Rules Committee hearing on Georgia's new voting law in Atlanta. (Photo: Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images) Senate Democrats took their push to nullify state election laws on the road Monday, holding a “field hearing” in Atlanta to attack Georgia's recent election reforms and promote their bill to eliminate voter ID and other requirements.  Only Democrat members of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee showed up to question witnesses, also all Democrats.  Committee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said Republicans had the opportunity to call a witness to defend the Georgia law, but didn't request one. A spokesperson for the committee's ranking member, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., didn't respond Monday to The Daily Signal's emails and phone inquiries on this point.  The hearing, held at the National Center for Civil and Human Rights, included numerous assertions, some true, but others debunked in previous fact checks.    Here's a look at six big claims from the hearing in Atlanta, which Democrats titled “Protecting the Vote.” 1. ‘Hurdles' to Ballot Drop Boxes Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., isn't a member of the Rules and Administration Committee, but was the first witness in his home state. Warnock, who took office in January, criticized Georgia's election reform law for “reducing the number of drop boxes where voters can return those ballots.”   Klobuchar jumped in later to say, “If you're looking for evil, you can find it pretty easily” in the Georgia law.  “Drop-off boxes cannot stay open beyond the time of the early voting,” Klobuchar said, adding, “Some of these voters were working day and night, several jobs, then they can't go to a drop-off box.”  The fact is that ballot drop boxes weren't used in Georgia nor in most other states before the 2020 election, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic.   Georgia election officials provided drop boxes to collect voters' ballots based on Gov. Brian Kemp's emergency order to address voting concerns during the pandemic.  But for Senate Bill 202, passed by Georgia lawmakers, officials wouldn't have to provide drop boxes in future elections. That said, fewer drop boxes will be available as those elections presumably take place without a pandemic. Also, the new law restricts voting by drop box to hours when early in-person voting is available. Each county in Georgia must provide at least one drop box under the law. But boxes will have to be located near early-voting sites and be accessible for dropping off absentee ballots when those polling locations are open.  2. ‘Big Lie' Democrat senators and witnesses argued that the law in Georgia and other election reforms across the United States were prompted by former President Donald Trump's claim that his election loss in November to President Joe Biden was fraudulent.  “We saw record-breaking voter turnout in our last elections—participation that should have been celebrated—get attacked by craven politicians, and, spurred on by the big lie, these same actors are now rolling back voting rights in a way that is unprecedented in size and scope since the Jim Crow era,” Warnock said.  Biden beat Trump by about 12,000 votes out of 4.9 million cast, according to official final results, to win Georgia's 16 electoral votes.  Georgia state Rep. Bill Mitchell, a Democrat and president of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, called the November election a major success.   “I define its success not by our candidates' winning their elections, but by the fact that when you have as many people vote as we did in the 2020 election cycle, with as few problems, with all challenges being dismissed—you have to consider that to be successful,” Mitchell said.  Mitchell later said “The Heritage Foundation and others” were pushing election reform legislation.  The Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative think tank, is the parent organization of The Daily Signal.  “When you have the highest levels of voter participation, combined with the lowest levels of challenges, why would you want to change that?” Mitchell said.  However, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week reported that digital ballot images show that Fulton County election officials scanned about 200 ballots two times in the November election. Skeptics of the election results argue that apparent double counting is evidence of a need for a closer examination of ballots in Georgia.  The newspaper noted that the discovery was unlikely to change the election results in Georgia. But some conservative commentators, such as Fox News Channel's Tucker Carlson, expressed concern about the finding.  The duplication of at least 200 ballots is evidence of problems with tallying votes in Georgia, but far from proof that the state's election results were affected in Biden's favor.  3. ‘Adequate Polling Locations' One of the more compelling witnesses was neither a lawmaker nor an activist, but a voter named Jose Segarra. The Air Force veteran told his story of waiting in line for hours. “I, along with thousands of Georgians, had to wait for hours in order to cast my vote in the 2020 general election,” he said.  “Our government needs to ensure that we have adequate systems and processes in place to allow every eligible voter to cast their ballot without such undue burdens,” Segarra said without specifying federal or state government, adding:  To do this, we need to have an adequate number of polling locations and these locations to be properly resourced and open for as expansive a period as possible. Voters should have the opportunity to vote on Saturdays and Sundays. Lots of people work on Saturdays, so Sundays need to be an option. It would also make it much easier for some people to vote if Election Day were a federal holiday. Georgia's new election law does provide “additional voting equipment or poll workers to precincts containing more than 2,000 electors.”  The law added early voting on two Saturdays and one Sunday that previously were not available to Georgians, stating:  Requiring two Saturday voting days and two optional Sunday voting days will dramatically increase the total voting hours for voters across the state of Georgia, and all electors in Georgia will have access to multiple opportunities to vote in person on the weekend for the first time. Under the new law, counties in Georgia have flexibility to open early voting for as long as from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., or from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. at minimum.  Previously, some rural counties didn't provide for early voting for eight hours on a workday, The Washington Post reported.  Thus, the law actually expanded hours for early voting.  4. ‘Mass Challenges' Warnock announced new legislation he is co-sponsoring with fellow Senate Democrats Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Mark Warner of Virginia, and Jon Ossoff of Georgia. Ossoff, like Warnock, took office in January after defeating a Republican incumbent in a special election.  The legislation, called the Preventing Election Subversion Act, seeks to prevent the overturning of elections based on mass challenges or by legislators controlling the makeup of a state board of elections.  The proposal is tied directly to provisions that Warnock said are in SB 202, the basis of Georgia's new law.  Warnock said Georgia's law would let “a single person make unlimited, mass challenges to the ability of other Georgians to vote, clearing the way for baseless accusations.”  The language of the law does make it more difficult for government officials to outright dismiss a complaint about election procedures and ballots. Specifically, it says:   Any elector [voter] of a county or municipality may challenge the qualifications of any person applying to register to vote in the county or municipality and may challenge the qualifications of any elector of the county or municipality whose name appears on the list of electors. Such challenges shall be in writing and shall specify distinctly the grounds of the challenge.  There shall not be a limit on the number of persons whose qualifications such elector may challenge. Upon such challenge being filed with the [local] board of registrars, the registrars shall set a hearing on such challenge within ten business days after serving notice of the challenge. As another justification for his legislation, Warnock argued that Georgia's new law “allows partisan officials in the state Legislature to control our state board of elections and take over local election administrators, and it allows them to engage in these takeovers even as the votes are still being cast.” The Associated Press reported in March that under the new law, the Legislature does indeed have an increased role in the State Election Board, but it can't overturn elections at a whim, as Warnock seemed to suggest.  Georgia's elected secretary of state has a diminished role in elections under the new law. This is the basis for Democrats' claim that partisan politics could play a role.   “The secretary of state will no longer chair the State Election Board, becoming instead a non-voting ex-officio member,” Georgia Public Broadcasting explained in a report. “The new chair would be nonpartisan but appointed by a majority of the state House and Senate. The chair would not be allowed to have been a candidate, participate in a political party organization or campaign or [have] made campaign contributions for two years prior to being appointed.” 5. ‘Rushed Through' Georgia state Sen. Sally Harrell, D-Dunwoody, said the Republican-sponsored law lacked adequate input from Democrats in the state Legislature.  “Election bills were rushed through without public input and voted out along party lines,” Harrell said. “Questions addressed to bill authors by minority members were frequently answered dishonestly and disrespectfully. … In the nine years, I have served in the [Georgia] General Assembly, I have never seen such blatant disregard for the legislative process as I did with the passage of SB 202.” Previous media reporting shows the legislation moved quickly through the Legislature to Kemp's desk. Questioning this speed has been a consistent line among critics, including the U.S. Justice Department.  Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kristen Clarke, who is leading the federal lawsuit against Georgia's voting law, has said the bill was “a rushed process that departed from normal practice and procedure.” “The version of the bill that passed the state Senate … was three pages long,” Clarke said in June during a press conference announcing the litigation. “Days later, the bill ballooned into over 90 pages in the House. The House held less than two hours of floor debate on the newly inflated SB 202 before Gov. Kemp signed it into law the same day.” 6.  Water Bottles, Ballot Harvesting Warnock also complained that Georgia's election law is “making it harder for community organizations to assist voters, whether from requesting a ballot to just handing out a bottle of water.” The law prohibits campaign workers from distributing food, drink, or anything else of value to waiting voters, and from setting up a table within 150 feet of the building or 25 feet of a voter.  However, the law specifically allows official poll workers, as opposed to campaign workers, to provide water to voters.  As for the “community organizations” Warnock cited, the law prohibits ballot harvesting, a controversial practice in which  political operatives obtain large numbers of ballots from election officials and then deliver the ballots to those officials once they've been voted.  The practice has been used to achieve fraud in several elections, among them a North Carolina congressional race later overturned in court and a Texas mayor's race that led to multiple indictments.  Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Heritage Battles Nation's Largest Teachers Union on Critical Race Theory   NEA's attacks with a promise to “continue to take on ideas like CRT.” July, 2021 The Heritage Foundation and its experts have been tireless in its efforts to fight critical race theory. It's not often you get singled out for attack in a resolution by one of the nation's biggest unions. But in its zeal to shove critical race theory into schools, the National Education Association singled out The Heritage Foundation as “one of the well-funded organizations” that is committing “attacks on anti-racist teachers.”    The resolution calls on the NEA to conduct “research” into Heritage and other such groups—a polite way of saying it plans to smear critics of CRT. We're not intimidated and we won't be backing away from our effective strategy to educate Americans about the dangers of CRT.   Heritage's Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy, and Mike Gonzalez, the Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum senior fellow, responded to the NEA's attack with a promise to “continue to take on ideas like CRT.” They said in a statement:   Heritage is proud of its comprehensive work in this field, which has always focused on explaining the facts behind critical race theory and how it is infecting all aspects of our everyday life. We stand with parents, educators, lawmakers, and other Americans who want children to learn about all of America's history, without indoctrinating them in a toxic narrative that undermines student unity and achievement or implementing CRT's racially divisive principles in ways that violate the Civil Rights Act and the Constitution. Efforts to treat students or educators differently based upon their skin color not only betray fundamental principles, but they also violate federal civil rights laws and other statutes.     Only a few days later, the NEA scrubbed this resolution from its website after considerable pushback from conservative organizations, including Heritage. The NEA's original resolution, along with the fallout, earned major coverage in multiple news outlets.    Before it was removed from the NEA's website, the resolution stated:   NEA will research the organizations attacking educators doing anti-racist work and/or use the research already done and put together a list of resources and recommendations for state affiliates, locals, and individual educators to utilize when they are attacked...     The attacks on anti-racist teachers are increasing, coordinated by well-funded organizations such as the Heritage Foundation. We need to be better prepared to respond to these attacks so that our members can continue this important work.   Critical race theory, or CRT, makes race the prism through which its proponents analyze all aspects of American life, categorizing individuals into groups of oppressors and victims. It is a philosophy that is infecting everything from politics and education to the workplace and the military. In the aftermath of the 2020 protests, CRT became the rallying cry of numerous organizations, businesses, and educators.      The Heritage Foundation has been tireless in its efforts to fight critical race theory and numerous Heritage experts have appeared in television interviews and published several reports and commentaries on the issue.  Last year, Gonzalez co-authored a comprehensive Heritage report on the subject with Jonathan Butcher, the Will Skillman fellow in education. The report, “Critical Race Theory, the New Intolerance, and Its Grip on America,” is one of Heritage's most-read publications.  Since then, Gonzalez has crisscrossed the country to bring his research on critical race theory and identity politics to audiences eager to counter these left-wing ideas. He has briefed lawmakers in Louisiana, spoken at major conservative conferences, and counseled parents how to fight back against the left's indoctrination of their kids. In addition, Gonzalez is a go-to resource for media outlets who want sage insight on the dangers of critical race theory.  Gonzalez has also teamed up with Burke to expose colleges of education as a source of critical theory, an offshoot of CRT.  Heritage also published a report by Christopher Rufo, one of CRT's leading critics, warning of its implications. The report, “Critical Race Theory Would Not Solve Racial Inequality: It Would Deepen It,” documented how critical race theory seeks to undermine the foundations of American society and replace the constitutional system with a near-totalitarian “antiracist” bureaucracy.  Rufo spoke out against the NEA's latest effort to smear CRT critics, naming Gonzalez as an ally, and promising to counter those who are “ruining American education.”  Heritage's work is getting noticed. “The Morning Call” newsletter recently praised Rufo and Gonzalez for their leadership: Rufo and Gonzales are, almost without question, the leaders of the campaign to push back against CRT, and their efforts are (almost) entirely cultural, not political. … Rufo and Gonzalez are neither ham-handed in their calls for state intervention nor quiet and sneaky. They have the luxury of not only being right on the facts, but also of knowing that what they are exposing is largely unknown but would be rejected by the majority of the American people. For more information on Heritage's efforts to fight critical race theory, click here. 

Critical Race Theory Will Destroy Our Military Jun 16th, 2021 By: Dakota Wood Senior Research Fellow, Defense Programs Dakota L. Wood, who served America for two decades in the U.S. Marine Corps, is the Senior Research Fellow for Defense Programs. KEY TAKEAWAYS Success in combat depends on the cohesion and competence of the forces involved. Critical race theory and identity politics seeks to impose on our military a manufactured victimization that is inherently divisive. All Americans should demand that the Biden administration put an end to indoctrination of our military with critical race theory.   As a young Marine Corps first lieutenant assigned to an infantry battalion in the late 1980s, I had charge of the unit transport section of operators, mechanics, and supervisors tasked with taking care of our fleet of combat vehicles. This group of Marines, like all with whom I served over a 20-year military career, was a wonderful cross section of America representing all walks of life. My maintenance and operations chiefs were American Samoan and an African American, respectively. Our collection of more junior Marines included blacks, whites, and Latinos, young men from Texas, New Jersey, California, and West Virginia, among others. They came from the city and the country, from poor and middle-class families. Some were Catholic, others Protestant, and some had no strong affiliation with any organized religion. In the maintenance bay, on the equipment lot, or in the field, we would hear a musical mix of country, rock 'n' roll, heavy metal, and rap. Everyone pitched in to accomplish the mission during unit fitness runs, shop clean-up, preparing for inspections, embarking equipment for deployments to Japan and South Korea, and supporting battalion operations during training and exercise events. Everything just worked and worked well. Why? Because they were all Marines, wearing the same uniform, supporting the same combat organization, serving the same country. They all had been through the same training. They had to measure up to the same standards. They had to make the same cutoff scores for promotion. They humped the same combat loads, ate the same field rations, fired the same qualifications at the rifle range, suffered the same annual refresher training for proper use of gas masks. They worked the same long hours in hot and sweaty, cold and damp, sunbaked or frigid or windblown field conditions, tolerated the same irritating micromanagement, and enjoyed the same positive leadership interventions from higher headquarters. They were a team, committed to each other and expecting the same high levels of performance irrespective of skin color, ethnicity, economic or social background, accent, or taste in music. Each shared in the accomplishments of his fellow Marines, and each was quick to take to task any teammate who fell short of standard. It was wonderful. I can't help but wonder what it would have been like if each person in that section had been pitted against each other, assessing his fellow Marine's trustworthiness or reliability or capability based on the color of his skin. What if the black Marines judged the white Marines from the perspective of oppressed and oppressor? What if the white Marines viewed the black Marines as having achieved their rank or position by virtue of tokenism, or the black Marines assumed that the white Marines held their positions because the “system” was structured to ensure white dominance? What if the Latino Marines viewed everyone with suspicion, presuming that they were to be treated as an inherently separate group that spoke a different language among themselves and therefore were not to be trusted? And what was with the Samoan and his completely different childhood, body type, food preferences, and speech peculiarities? How could this group of Marines have operated as a team, especially when stressed in a combat situation? But this is what class-warfare ideologies such as critical race theory and identity politics seek to impose on our military: perspectives and identities and manufactured victimization that are inherently divisive, inherently anti-team, and inherently anti-American. Each of those young Marines had the same opportunity to excel, to reenlist, to be promoted based on merit, to take advantage of education programs, and to prove he had what it takes to be a Marine—again, regardless of where he came from or what he looked like. That unit was the finest representation of the American idea just as every crew of a Navy ship; every company, battalion, and brigade of the Army; every squadron within the Air Force; and delta within the Space Force. America's military draws young men and women from all backgrounds and all walks of life, integrating them into teams united in common identity and shared purpose, to serve our country. What are they to think when they are told that the country they have sworn to serve is structurally prejudiced to favor one group over another? How is anyone to have credibility if he or she is viewed as having gained a position not from hard work, competence, and meeting or exceeding standards but because of race or gender? How is the chain of command in any military organization to retain its legitimacy and authority if those more senior in command second-guess how their directives might be viewed through the personal lenses of those in their charge, or those who are junior question the legitimacy of the hierarchy above them? Yet these very problems are now emerging as a result of such training being imposed on our troops, evidenced by hundreds of personal complaints registered by personnel on a whistleblower website established by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, both military combat veterans. Success in combat depends on the cohesion and competence of the forces involved. These, in turn, derive from teamwork and standards, which are built on trust, mutual respect, merit, shared experience, and a belief in service to a higher purpose. Critical race theory and other such divisive concepts would destroy all this. The U.S. military is the epitome of opportunity, shared purpose, and constructive idealism—the very things America was built on and that have driven it to become the best example of what is possible. This is why so many people from around the world have flocked to our shores since our founding, to participate in our ongoing great experiment. Critical race theory is as great an insult to our men and women in uniform as their shared service and identity is the best example of what it means to be an American. The leaders of our military, both uniformed and civilian, must not lose sight of this. All Americans should demand that the Biden administration put an end to indoctrination of our military with critical race theory.

Fact-Checking the Fact-Checkers: What Anti-Critical Race Theory Legislation Actually Does   Conn Carroll / June 28, 2021 After the House of Representatives voted 415-14 to make Juneteenth a national holiday, New York Times national political reporter Astead Herndon tweeted, “its kinda amazing: juneteenth is gonna be a federal holiday for reasons teachers won't be allowed to explain to their students out of fear critical race theory backlash.” Herndon's claim is outrageously false, as many on twitter quickly pointed out, including WFAA Dallas reporter Chris Sadeghi who responded, “This is the type of tweet that gets shared a lot and many will use similar logic to support their stance. But there's nothing banning the teachings of emancipation. In fact, the Texas law mandates the history of slavery/white supremacy be taught. Please don't fall for this.” The Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Social Studies does in fact require the teaching of “the abolitionist movement, which led to the Emancipation Proclamation,” as Sadeghi notes. Herndon's false claim about what is taught in our nation's schools is understandable, however, when you consider how his employer, The New York Times, covered recent Texas legislation that sought to ban the use of critical race theory in Texas schools. Under the headline “Texas Pushes to Obscure the State's History of Slavery and Racism,” the Times claims that “nearly a dozen other Republican-led states” are seeking “to ban or limit how the role of slavery and pervasive effects of racism can be taught.” “Idaho was the first state to sign into law a measure that would withhold funding from schools that teach such lessons,” the Times continues. “And lawmakers in Louisiana, New Hampshire and Tennessee have introduced bills that would ban teaching about the enduring legacies of slavery and segregationist laws, or that any state or the country is inherently racist or sexist.” Everything the Times published in this paragraph is false, except its claim that some of these states banned the teaching “that any state or the country is inherently racist or sexist.” That part is true. Here is what the legislation from each of these states actually does: Texas Senate Bill 2202 forbids any teacher, administrator, or other employee in a state agency from requiring any of the following concepts in their course work: (1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex. (2) An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously. (3) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex. (4) Members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex. (5) An individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex. (6)  An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex. (7) Any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex. (8) Meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by members of a particular race to oppress members of another race. Idaho House Bill 377 forbids any public school or public institution of higher education from directing or otherwise compelling any student to adopt the following tenets: (i) That any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin is inherently superior or inferior. (ii) That individuals should be adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin. (iii) That individuals, by virtue of sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin, are inherently responsible for actions committed in the past by other members of the same sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin. Louisiana House Bill 564 forbids any trainings provided to students or employees that promote “divisive concepts,” which the legislation then specifically defines as: (a) That one race or sex is inherently superior or inferior to another race or sex. (b) That either the United States of America or the state of Louisiana is fundamentally, institutionally, or systemically racist or sexist. (c) That an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently or systemically racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, or has negative or positive characteristics that inhere in the individual's DNA. (d) That an individual should be discriminated against, favored, or receive differential treatment solely or partly because of the individual's race or sex. (e) That an individual of one race or sex should be treated disrespectfully regarding that individual's race or sex. (f) That an individual's moral character is anyway defined, described, or determined by the individual's race or sex. (g) That an individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, bears responsibility or is to be held accountable for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex. (h) That any individual should feel or be made to feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological or emotional distress on account of that individual's race or sex. (i) That the concept of meritocracy or traits such as a strong work ethic are racist or sexist or were created by a particular race or sex to oppress another race or sex. (j) That the concepts of capitalism, free markets, or working for a private party in exchange for wages are racist and sexist or oppress a given race or sex. (k) That the concepts of racial equity and gender equity, meaning the unequal treatment of individuals because of their race, sex, or national origin, should be given preference in education and advocacy over the concepts of racial equality and gender equality, meaning the equal treatment of individuals regardless of their race, sex, or national origin. (l) Any form of race or sex scape goating or race or sex stereo typing. New Hampshire  House Bill 544 forbids the teaching, instruction, or training of any employee or student to adopt or believe any “divisive concepts,” which the legislation specifically defines as: (a) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex. (b) The state of New Hampshire or the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist. (c) An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously. (d) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of his or her race or sex. (e) Members of one race or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race or sex. (f) An individual's moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex. (g) An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex. (h) Any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex. (i) Meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a particular race to oppress another race. (j) The term “divisive concepts” includes any other form of race or sex stereotyping or any other form of race or sex scapegoating. Tennessee Senate Bill 623 prohibits any local education association or public charter school from “including or promoting the following concepts as part of a course of instruction”: (1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex. (2) An individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently privileged, racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously. (3) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of the individual's race or sex. (4) An individual's moral character is determined by the individual's race or sex. (5) An individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex. (6) An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or another form of psychological distress solely because of the individual's race or sex. (7) A meritocracy is inherently racist or sexist, or designed by a particular race or sex to oppress members of another race or sex. (8) This state or the United States is fundamentally or irredeemably racist or sexist. (9) Promoting or advocating the violent overthrow of the United States government. (10) Promoting division between, or resentment of, a race, sex, religion, creed, nonviolent political affiliation, social class, or class of people. (11) Ascribing character traits, values, moral or ethical codes, privileges, or beliefs to a race or sex, or to an individual because of the individual's race or sex. The Times Is Plain Wrong As you can see, after actually reading the bills, none of them “ban teaching about the enduring legacies of slavery and segregationist laws,” as the Times claims. What they do do is reaffirm America's core commitment to equality: that “no sex, race, ethnicity, color, or national origin is inherently superior or inferior”; that no individual should be “adversely treated on the basis of their sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin”; and that no individual should be held responsible “for actions committed in the past by other members of the same sex, race, ethnicity, religion, color, or national origin.” These core American concepts of equality and individual responsibility are antithetical to critical race theory just as they are antithetical to Marxism. Where Marxism asked Americans to understand history as a struggle between classes, critical race theory asks Americans to understand history as a struggle between races. This is a fundamentally un-American idea and state legislators have every right to make sure it is not being taught in our nation's schools. >>> WATCH: Christopher Rufo breaks down what critical race theory in “Critical Race Theory: Coming to a School Near You?“ The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.  Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  Print

Kangaroo Court Confirmed: Prosecutor in George Floyd Case Makes Stunning Admission Christine Favocci June 28, 2021, at 4:36pm   Derek Chauvin's murder conviction was a pivotal event in American history — not as the moment of racial reckoning the professional race-baiters have sold it as, but rather as the day the Sixth Amendment died. The white former Minneapolis police officer was convicted of three counts of murder and will spend more than two decades behind bars after George Floyd, a black suspect, died while in his custody in May 2020. Instead of the usual case of an impartial jury finding him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (much more on that in a bit), it now appears there was a concerted effort to scapegoat and sacrifice Chauvin to appease the violent mobs who burned cities for months. But you don't have to take my word for it. According to Keith Ellison, the attorney general of Minnesota and lead prosecutor in the case, Chauvin would not be in jail but for “ordinary people who courageously bore witness to Floyd's death and the pressure from a community that demanded accountability and action,” he said in an Op-Ed for The Washington Post. “For generations, America has been stuck in a cycle of inaction when it comes to addressing decades of mistrust between communities of color and law enforcement,” Ellison began. “To honor the legacy of George Floyd, we must act now to break the cycle.” Though Chauvin's trial didn't include any official accusations of racism against the ex-cop, Ellison subtly tied his conviction to larger tensions that exist between minority communities and law enforcement (Chauvin was somehow such an unabashed white supremacist that he married an Asian immigrant). Ellison lamented how the prosecution of cops is scarce, pointing out that “Chauvin is one of the few police officers ever convicted of murder for a death on the job,” he wrote. “Chauvin's 22½-year sentence, announced Friday, is one of the longest any police officer in the United States has received in modern times for the death of a civilian,” Ellison gloated. The attorney general further recommended “vigorous, visible and swift prosecutions” for officers who harm civilians with excessive use of force but ratcheted up that reasonable proposition into a call for activism. “They should not be afraid to use all the tools the law puts at their disposal,” Ellison advised other prosecutors. “The visibility of prosecutions, to restore and build credibility with the public, is as important as the vigor employed.” However, it was his conclusion that proved the outsized influence Black Lives Matter riots and activism had on the outcome of the case. “My office could not have led the prosecution of Chauvin without the help of ordinary people who courageously bore witness to Floyd's death, and the pressure from a community that demanded accountability and action,” Ellison said. Related: Report: Here's More Evidence Chauvin Juror Lied During Jury Selection It was a sentiment shared by veteran instigator the Rev. Al Sharpton who similarly credited groups like BLM for Chauvin's conviction and harsh sentence. “Justice would have been the maximum. We got more than we thought, only because we have been disappointed so many times before,” Sharpton said Friday following the sentencing. He asserted Chauvin's 22.5-year sentence is “longer than we've ever gotten, but shorter than what we should have gotten in the past” for police involved in other such incidents. “Let us remember: A man lost his life. This is not a prayer of celebration; it's a prayer to thank God for giving the strength to this family and those activists that stayed in the streets to make sure this court had to do what was right,” he said in an apparent nod to the rioters who burned down several major cities in Floyd's name. Ben Crump, the Floyd family's attorney, also credited the uprisings for the severe sentence. “You all raised your voices and because you raised your voices, that is why we got the guilty conviction and that is why we got the longest sentence in the state of Minnesota history,” he said. But more than Ellison's words or Sharpton's rallying cry or Crump's gratitude, the actual circumstances of the trial reveal the greatest miscarriage of justice when it comes to the influence the racial activists had on Chauvin's fate. When footage of Chauvin with his knee across Floyd's neck first went viral on social media, it sparked a months-long outbreak of protests and riots across the country largely fueled by the unfounded narrative that the incident was a racially motivated killing. By the time Chauvin and the other officers involved would stand trial, Minneapolis had become ground-zero for those protests — but a judge denied a change of venue anyway. This meant the jurors were plucked from a city still suffering from the aftermath of those protests tied directly to the man whose fate they would decide. It was clear those selected were painfully aware of the grave consequences that would await the city all over again if Chauvin was set free as an implicit threat. But then there was also California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters who urged protestors at another anti-police rally in Minnesota to “get more confrontational” if they didn't get their way just ahead of the Chauvin trial verdict — and jurors had not been sequestered at the time she said it. Worst yet was juror Brandon Mitchell who it was later learned had attended BLM protests and on more than one occasion wore a shirt that specifically referenced the Floyd case with graphics that read “Get Your Knee Off Our Necks/BLM.”   Chauvin was no choir boy, but he still deserved a fair trial that the Sixth Amendment specifically guarantees to all who are accused under the law. Instead, what he got was an activist media exploiting racial tensions and a violent mob to influence prosecutors and jurors to send the man to jail. Never mind that it could have been the number of drugs in Floyd's system or resulting excited delirium that caused his death — only Chauvin's conviction would appease the mob. Many on the left cheer the verdict and the decades-long sentence as a victory for their movement, but it's more likely this was a loss for the right to a fair trial. Today it's Derek Chauvin rotting in jail after facing such odds, a prospect many don't find so bad considering he appeared to be callous and cold while a man died on the street — but who will it be next time?

MIRANDA DEVINE OPINION   New York attorney a brave devil's advocate By Miranda Devine June 27, 2021 | 10:32pm | Enlarge Image Joseph McBride's client Richard Barnett is back home now under house arrest. Washington County Sheriff's Office via AP File MORE FROM: MIRANDA DEVINE FBI tears innocent New Yorker's life into shreds after Jan. 6: Devine   Did Joe inadvertently pay for Hunter Biden's wild night with a prostitute?   The media bought Vladimir Putin's flattering lies: Devine   Joe Biden's a Putin-like polarizer: Devine   American moms are taking a stand against Critical Race Theory: Devine Lawyers haven't exactly been flocking to defend Trump voters charged in the Capitol riot. It's an unpopular cause, and likely to lead to an attorney being shunned by colleagues or worse, and the defendants for the most part can't afford to pay legal fees.  But Joseph McBride is one of the heroic few attorneys who has stood up in the name of equal justice for the most reviled people in the nation. As a former Manhattan public defender, it's what he always has done.  McBride's client today is the most reviled of the reviled: Richard “Bigo” Barnett, 60, the window installer from Arkansas who put his feet up on a desk in Nancy Pelosi's office and has come to symbolize the “insurrection” that wasn't.  “I made my bones at Manhattan Legal Aid and the Innocence Project,” says McBride.  “None of my colleagues from those places have supported my representing Bigo in any way. This is because . . . they fear being canceled by their own group more than anything.”  After Barnett spent almost four months in solitary confinement without trial in a DC jail, McBride managed to secure his pretrial release. He is back home now under house arrest in Gravette, Ark., and must do battle with an adversary with infinite resources and a vested interest in maintaining the fiction that the Capitol Hill riot was an insurrection.  Not one of 510 people arrested over the Capitol riot has been charged with insurrection, says McBride.  He spoke up in court about the inhumanity of jail conditions endured by his client and other January Sixers. He called it “torture,” and said they were “political prisoners.”  “The guards want to hurt them, and . . . feel like they have a green light from the government to do whatever they like.”  Barnett complained that he was bashed by guards. He blew the whistle on physical abuse of other inmates, including one beaten so badly he went blind in one eye and started to suffer seizures, an incident the FBI reportedly is investigating. Barnett said the man's face looked like “chopped meat.”  No one deserves that, no matter how heinous their crime.  For McBride, 43, preventing such injustices has been his life's work. It's why he became an attorney.  Richard Barnett, a supporter of Donald Trump, sits inside the office of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi as he protests inside the US Capitol. SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images He was raised in Brooklyn in the violent 1980s and '90s. “I was lucky to have two good Catholic God-fearing parents . . . but everybody I grew up with with — except for a handful — is dead or in jail.”  His Irish father was from Flatbush and worked at Con Edison, and his mom was Puerto Rican, from Spanish Harlem. They fostered about 20 children, “the most damaged ones,” and ended up adopting a mentally disabled 6-year-old boy who had been born addicted to heroin.  McBride saw his vulnerable adopted brother railroaded by the justice system, threatened into pleading guilty and spending 10 years in jail for a crime McBride said he didn't commit.  “It changed my world. I dropped everything to become a lawyer . . . to try to get him out.”  By the time he graduated, his brother had been released, a broken man. But McBride vowed to beat a rigged system, working for six years as a legal aid attorney in Manhattan, defending mainly black and Hispanic defendants. More than 98 percent of people charged with a felony in New York City at that time pleaded guilty, and never went to trial, because they knew they couldn't win, a sure sign the system is rigged, he says.  “I learned when defending people who weren't able to afford representation that the rules of the game were changed to disadvantage them . . . They were threatened with jail sentences so large they could take a plea for five years or risk going to jail for 50. Defendants made an informed decision that ‘this isn't going to work out for me.' ”  That's what happened to his brother and it's what he sees happening to the January Sixers.  In Barnett's case, prosecutors offered seven years in jail in exchange for a guilty plea, which Barnett rejected.  The charges he faces include obstructing Congress, entering the Capitol while armed with a stun gun and stealing an envelope, which could see him jailed for more than 10 years if convicted.  The charges Richard Barnett faces include obstructing Congress, entering the Capitol while armed with a stun gun and stealing an envelope SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images On the charge of possessing a “deadly weapon,” McBride says the stun gun, which doubled as a flashlight and walking cane, was “disarmed” because there were no batteries in it.  Barnett had been with friends in a DC bar the previous evening showing off the new gadget and had worn out the batteries, which he threw in the trash. He never replaced them before going into the Capitol, as evidenced, says McBride, by the fact that a white indicator light, which should be visible on the device if it is charged, was absent from every photo of his client taken that day.  Barnett maintains he was pushed inside the Capitol in the second wave of protesters well after the initial violent breach.  He went into Pelosi's office through an open door looking for a bathroom because Mayor Muriel Bowser had ordered all Porta Potties removed from DC.  An AFP photographer asked him to pose at the desk, which he stupidly did. A cut on his finger bled on an envelope, so he left a quarter to pay for it, and a rude note for Pelosi.  No one condones Barnett's actions that day.  But he committed no violence and seven years in jail is disproportionate punishment in any language.  The FBI circulated a notice labeling him a “Tier One” terrorist — the worst category.  How then should we describe someone who kills thousands of people by flying a plane into a building or plants a bomb at the Boston Marathon?  Last summer's rioters were treated with kid gloves, although more than two dozen people were killed.  The terrorism label is just used to dehumanize Barnett and his ilk and make it acceptable to shun them and everyone associated with them.  “Before I took this case I counted the cost,” says McBride. “I knew it would be difficult and that I would make enemies. That is OK. I know deep in my soul that we are on the right side.”  Bravo to a good man.

The Charlottesville Lie   Steve Cortes   Did President Trump call neo-Nazis “very fine people” during a famous press conference following the Charlottesville riots of August 2017? The major media reported that he did. But what if their reporting is wrong? Worse, what if their reporting is wrong and they know it’s wrong? A straight exploration of the facts should reveal the truth. That’s what CNN political analyst Steve Cortes does in this critically important video. Politicians lie. We all know that. That is not an indictment of all politicians—it’s simply part of the game. It’s our job, as informed citizens, to figure out the truth. And that’s where journalists and the media come in. They are supposed to help us ferret out fact from fiction. So when they get a fact wrong, that’s bad. When they get a fact wrong, know it’s wrong, and don’t correct it, that’s worse. That’s not getting a fact wrong; that’s a lie. And that’s journalistic malfeasance. The best (or maybe worst) example of this followed a presidential press conference at Trump Tower on Tuesday, August 15, 2017. You remember what happened that previous weekend: A group of white supremacists held a “white pride” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. The ostensible reason was to protest the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee.  An Antifa group showed up to counter-protest. The mayor and the police were totally unprepared to deal with the violence that ensued. Tragically, a young woman, Heather Heyer, was run over and killed by a neo-Nazi. The press conference itself was raucous. The media was antagonistic. The president was combative. Out of it all, one phrase eclipsed the thousands of words exchanged: The media reported that President Trump described neo-Nazis as “very fine people.” Only, he didn’t. In fact, he didn’t even hint at it. Just the opposite: he condemned the neo-Nazis in no uncertain terms. So then, who were the “fine people” he mentioned? The answer: He was referring to another group of Charlottesville demonstrators who came out that weekend—protestors who wanted the Robert E. Lee statue removed and protestors who wanted to keep the statue and restore the park’s original name.  This is what President Trump said about those peaceful protestors: “You also had some very fine people on both sides. . . .  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of—to them—a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.” A few moments later, in case there would be any misunderstanding, he makes his meaning even more explicit.  “…I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists. They should be condemned totally.” Lest you have any doubts that good people were in Charlottesville to protest the removal of the Robert E Lee statue, the New York Times confirmed it in a story they published the next day, August 16. “’Good people can go to Charlottesville,’ said Michelle Piercy, a night shift worker at a Wichita, Kansas retirement home, who drove all night with a conservative group that opposed the planned removal of a statue of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee. After listening to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, she said it was as if he had channeled her and her friends… who had no interest in standing with Nazis or white supremacists…” There’s another simple test that we can employ to prove that the president was not referring to the neo-Nazis as “fine people.” It’s so obvious, it’s painful to mention: The president’s daughter and son-in-law are Orthodox Jews. His grandchildren are Jewish. And if that is still not enough to convince you, how about this: Does anyone believe that Donald Trump thinks there are “good” Antifa, the leftist thugs who were counter-protesting the neo-Nazi thugs? After all, if those two groups were the only ones involved, and there were “fine people on both sides,” that means the president believed that there were fine Antifa people. Even MSNBC should have found that hard to swallow. Again, the “very fine people on both sides” President Trump described at the press conference were the people who wanted to remove the Robert E. Lee statue and the people who wanted to keep it. Both of these groups were non-violent protesters—fine people with very different ideological views. The scandal of Charlottesville is not what President Trump said about neo-Nazis. It’s what the media said President Trump said about neo-Nazis. It’s a scandal because news reporting is supposed to be about gathering facts, not promoting an agenda.  In Charlottesville, they got it exactly backwards. We have been living with the consequences ever since.  Plainly put: ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the others spread a malicious lie that has poisoned our national dialogue.  They should apologize to the American people for what they have done.  Don’t hold your breath.  Actually, I have a better idea. Let out a big sigh of relief.  Because now you know the truth. I’m Steve Cortes, CNN political commentator and columnist for Real Clear Politics, for Prager University.   PRAGER UNIVERSITY IS NOT AN ACCREDITED ACADEMIC INSTITUTION AND DOES NOT OFFER CERTIFICATIONS OR DIPLOMAS. BUT IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE FREE TO LEARN. © 2019 Prager University 

President Trump Speech at the United Nations 2018 Best speech ever? Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity think so President Trump Returns to the U.N.—with a Mountain of Evidence for ‘Peace Through Strength’ September 25, 2018   5 minute read SHARE:       ALL NEWS President Donald J. Trump helped kick off the 73rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York City yesterday. Along with a series of bilateral meetings with allies this week, the President is addressing the full Assembly in a major speech Tuesday morning. “The scourge of our planet today is a small group of rogue regimes that violate every principle on which the United Nations is based,” President Trump told the Assembly last September. “They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries.” One year later, the bold diplomacy of the Trump Administration has diminished many of the threats the President cited that day, including the most critical ones from North Korea, Iran, and ISIS. Among these accomplishments, the historic Singapore Summit with North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-Un stands out, marking the first-ever face-to-face meeting between an American President and a North Korean head of state. At the summit, the two leaders committed to the complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. At last year’s UNGA, President Trump foreshadowed this development. “It is time for North Korea to realize that denuclearization is its only acceptable future,” he said. Just last week, leaders from both North and South Korea met to reaffirm that vision and begin drafting a plan to achieve it. Last year’s speech identified another significant threat to the American homeland: terrorism originating from turbulence in the Middle East. Two bad actors, ISIS and the Iranian regime, share much of the responsibility for the death and destruction. “We must deny the terrorists safe haven, transit, funding, and any form of support for their vile and sinister ideology,” President Trump said. The President has also condemned regimes’ and terror groups’ use of hostage-taking and prioritized the recovery of Americans held hostage or detained overseas. To eradicate the first of these threats, ISIS, President Trump changed the rules of engagement on the ground, empowering U.S. commanders with broader authority. The results are unmistakable.  ISIS has lost nearly all of its territory, more than half of which was liberated in less than 18 months under the Trump Administration. The chips fell quickly. In October 2017, ISIS’ self-proclaimed capital city of Raqqah was liberated. By December, the Iraqi government announced that all Iraqi territory had been liberated from ISIS control. On Iran, President Trump used last year’s UNGA speech to reiterate his profound objections to a nuclear deal that put the interests of diplomats ahead of the Iranian people—and, indeed, peaceful people the world over. By lifting sanctions and unfreezing financial assets, the Obama Administration’s deal gave the Iranian regime a cash windfall while failing to advance America’s national security interests. “Rather than use its resources to improve Iranian lives, its oil profits go to fund Hezbollah and other terrorists that kill innocent Muslims and attack their peaceful Arab and Israeli neighbors,” President Trump said. “This wealth, which rightly belongs to Iran’s people, also goes to shore up Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship, fuel Yemen’s civil war, and undermine peace throughout the entire Middle East.” In May, the President made good on his promise to withdraw the United States from that deal. A new agreement, he emphasized, must permanently deny Iran any path to a nuclear weapon and address the totality of the regime’s malign activities, including its support for terrorism. While North Korea, ISIS, and Iran constituted three of the biggest threats to peace, they were far from the only aggressors President Trump called out in New York last year: “The actions of the criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad, including the use of chemical weapons against his own citizens—even innocent children—shock the conscience of every decent person.” In April, the United States joined Britain and France in launching precision air strikes on targets associated with those chemical weapons capabilities. “The Venezuelan people are starving and their country is collapsing. Their democratic institutions are being destroyed. This situation is completely unacceptable and we cannot stand by and watch.” In March, the Trump Administration expanded its sanctions against Venezuelan leaders, upping pressure on the corrupt Maduro regime. “In America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are sovereign. I was elected not to take power, but to give power to the American people, where it belongs. In foreign affairs, we are renewing this founding principle of sovereignty.” In keeping with that vision, National Security Advisor John Bolton announced this month that the Trump Administration would take all necessary steps to protect American soldiers and citizens from unjust prosecution by the unaccountable International Criminal Court. By prioritizing peace through strength, the rate of progress for American foreign policy over the past 12 months has been staggering. President Trump makes it clear that this work is only just beginning. On Tuesday in New York, he will build on last year’s message to the U.N.—that strong, sovereign nations must work side-by-side to confront the gravest threats to our civilization. “If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph.”

How does one spell HYPOCRITE?

Governor Matthew Griswold Bevin is an American businessman and politician serving as the 62nd and current Governor of Kentucky since 2015. He is the third Republican elected Governor of Kentucky since World War II. Gov Bevin challenges Evan Davies on Gun Control vs Cultural Issues 00-00 hi my name is Evan Davies and I'm just 00-02 an independent consultant I'm not 00-03 affiliated with a organization 00-06 I really admire the work that you're 00-08 doing to help foster children and you've 00-10 said a number of times that you know the 00-13 children's lives is most important we 00-16 had a murder a little while ago where 00-19 seventeen people including eight kids 00-21 were murdered in their schools and how 00-23 do you reconcile the children's lives 00-26 are most important with the comments 00-28 you've made to the media about it's 00-29 naive and premature to talk about gun 00-32 control and that it's culture and not 00-35 guns that is causing these these 00-36 horrible things I'll tell you exactly 00-40 how I reconcile that first of all month 00-43 ago in Kentucky we had this very similar 00-46 situation made a very concerted effort 00-49 to make sure that we removed the media 00-52 circus from the healing process so 00-55 within 24 to 48 hours you've probably 00-57 not even aware of most people aren't 00-58 that I had a 15 year old come into a 01-00 school in Kentucky last month and shoot 01-03 16 children at point-blank range two of 01-07 whom died a set of twins were both shot 01-10 and taken to a level 1 trauma center 01-12 they lived this is very real to me I've 01-15 sat with these families you also 01-17 probably are not aware of the fact that 01-19 I've buried my oldest child died under 01-21 different circumstances but went to 01-23 school and didn't come home she was 17 01-24 years old I know exactly not exactly 01-28 it's not possible to know exactly what 01-30 another person's going through but I 01-32 know exactly what it feels like to bury 01-33 your oldest child I know what the impact 01-36 is on a family I don't come at this with 01-39 a sense of sympathy but empathy the 01-41 point that I've made that's been largely 01-42 misconstrued 01-43 I'll reaffirm with you and tell you 01-46 exactly why it comes from where it comes 01-48 from this idea just as solving this 01-52 issue is able to be solved with a single 01-55 law or rule or change is naive and 01-58 delusional and so we shouldn't allow 02-01 ourselves to entertain naive and 02-03 delusional thoughts it is part of a 02-05 broader construct just as this issue is 02-08 and the point that I made that I'll 02-11 reiterate is that if we think that 02-13 part of what we are seeing is not a 02-15 cultural problem we're kidding ourselves 02-18 and the point that I've made is this 02-21 what has shifted in the last 10 20 30 40 02-25 50 years it's not the percentage of guns 02-29 that we find in homes and you can give 02-31 me a statistic at that there's now more 02-33 guns fair enough I'll submit that that 02-35 may be true I'm not gonna argue with you 02-36 but the reality is there's fewer homes 02-39 that have guns in them than there were 02-41 50 years ago when children didn't walk 02-43 into schools and shoot themselves and 02-45 shoot each other that's a fact you can 02-48 confirm that but I'll tell you this when 02-51 I was a kid kids brought guns to school 02-53 kids brought guns on the school bus kids 02-55 brought guns to school in their own 02-57 vehicles it didn't shoot each other with 03-01 so some things have not changed what has 03-04 changed we as a culture as a society and 03-07 it's very germane to this topic as well 03-10 we don't value human life like we did we 03-15 remove increasingly respect for the 03-18 dignity of other people you look at how 03-21 rampant pornography is the degradation 03-24 and disrespect for women and for human 03-26 life in general it is so systemic people 03-30 of our age have not been exposed like 03-32 our children have been there's not a 03-35 child in America that hasn't been 03-36 exposed to pornography I guarantee you 03-39 if they're above the age of 12 that's a 03-41 fact 03-41 it is so systemic it's horrific and it 03-44 desensitizes us at every turn 03-46 and so we're desensitized to the value 03-49 and dignity of human life we're 03-51 desensitized through and this is to the 03-53 heart of what I said that you seem to 03-54 take exception with is that through 03-57 violent video games where literally you 03-59 are encouraged you can roll your eyes 04-01 all you want man but I will say this 04-03 you've explained to me the value of a 04-06 game that encourages somebody to go back 04-09 and finish him off where you get points 04-12 for four kill counts and you slaughter 04-14 people 04-15 we're desensitizing people to the value 04-18 of life and we see it through the lyrics 04-20 and music and we see it through 04-22 television shows we see it through 04-24 movies we see it in the fact that the 04-26 mores of this nation 04-27 have changed we see it through the fact 04-30 that we increasingly want to remove any 04-31 sense of moral authority from everything 04-35 here's I'll tell you again this we could 04-38 have a thousand sidebars and you could 04-40 agree or disagree as it relates to what 04-42 I'm about to say but in a nation where 04-44 over the last 40 years we've aborted 04-48 50-something million children and we 04-51 have multiple states with medically 04-53 assisted suicide being provided by 04-55 doctors at both ends of a life spectrum 04-57 we're losing the value for life that we 05-00 once historically had you can say that's 05-02 good you could say it's bad but it's a 05-03 reality you couple that with the fact 05-06 that all these other things are changing 05-08 that we're removing any sense of 05-10 authority it used to be that you had 05-12 different levels of authority starting 05-14 in the home itself only a third of 05-16 children in a recent Pew study say that 05-19 they have no interaction for all intents 05-21 and purposes with their own parents when 05-23 their parents live in the home they say 05-25 their parents have no clue what they're 05-26 even learning in school there was a 05-28 study recently in an article that was 05-31 derived from that and other studies it 05-32 was in the Atlantic encourage you to 05-34 look it up about the impact and you can 05-37 smart and you can smile but if somebody 05-39 who's an independent consultant I find 05-40 it remarkable that you're so smug and 05-43 you're so disregarding of my opinion 05-46 when in fact I'm just trying to have an 05-48 honest dialogue with you based on a fair 05-50 question but but I will say this look at 05-54 this article in the Atlantic this 05-56 article in the Atlantic talks about how 05-58 young people are increasingly becoming 06-00 suicidal and depressed because of the 06-03 use of social media in the use of these 06-06 personal devices in on screen time all 06-10 these are part of a cultural issue in 06-14 this cultural issue if we're not 06-16 addressing it we are kidding ourselves 06-19 because it also affects this issue we 06-21 came here to talk about today which is 06-24 why these homes are broken why so many 06-26 children are finding themselves in 06-28 government care which is not the best 06-30 solution the government should not be 06-33 raising our children period it just 06-36 shouldn't the fact of the matter is we 06-39 need people in the position like I am 06-41 and I had the same conversation less 06-43 than an hour ago with the President of 06-44 the United States and I said to him he 06-46 should I should this whole room was full 06-48 of cabinet secretaries and governors of 06-51 other states those of us who that are in 06-53 a position of influence and the ability 06-55 to say something shame on us if we don't 06-57 step up and call people to a higher 06-59 authority and there will always be those 07-01 including many in the media whoever the 07-03 messengerís they're gonna find the 07-05 imperfection in that messenger so if the 07-07 messenger says we should do XYZ as it 07-09 relates to this issue or adoption of 07-11 foster care 07-12 people will say well who is this person 07-13 they're an imperfect person well so is 07-15 every one of us there's not a perfect 07-17 person in America but that doesn't mean 07-19 we don't strive for perfection there's 07-21 not a perfectly morally upright person 07-23 in America that doesn't mean we don't 07-24 espouse in a spire to reach for moral 07-27 higher authority and expect more and 07-31 demand more of our children shame on us 07-34 if we don't sound the alarm you want to 07-38 take any kind of morality and change the 07-40 mores of a nation remove any sense of 07-43 higher responsibility try to pin it on 07-46 any one thing and assume the government 07-48 and a piece of regulation the rule is 07-49 the solution and then we're shocked when 07-51 these things happen we're kidding 07-54 ourselves 07-54 yes sir  

President Donald Trump Addresses the World Economic Forum President Trump speech in Davos, Switzerland Transcript 00-00 Thank You class very much it's a 00-01 privilege to be here at this forum we're 00-03 leaders in business science art 00-06 diplomacy and world affairs have 00-08 gathered for many many years to discuss 00-12 how we can advance prosperity security 00-15 and peace I'm here today to represent 00-18 the interests of the American people and 00-20 to affirm America's friendship and 00-23 partnership in building a better world 00-26 like all nations represented at this 00-30 great forum America hopes for a future 00-33 in which everyone can prosper and every 00-36 child can grow up free from violence 00-38 poverty and fear over the past year we 00-43 have made extraordinary strides in the 00-46 u.s. we're lifting up forgotten 00-49 communities creating exciting new 00-51 opportunities and helping every American 00-53 find their path to the American dream 00-56 the dream of a great job a safe home and 01-00 a better life for their children after 01-03 years of stagnation the United States is 01-07 once again experiencing strong economic 01-11 growth the stock market is smashing one 01-15 record after another and has added more 01-18 than seven trillion dollars in new 01-21 wealth since my election consumer 01-24 confidence business confidence and 01-27 manufacturing confidence are the highest 01-30 they have been in many decades since my 01-34 election we've created 2.4 million jobs 01-38 and that number is going up very very 01-42 substantially small business optimism is 01-46 at an all-time high 01-47 new unemployment claims are near the 01-50 lowest we've seen in almost half a 01-53 century african-american unemployment 01-56 has reached the lowest rate ever 01-58 recorded in the United States and so has 02-02 unemployment among Hispanic Americans 02-07 the world is witnessing the resurgence 02-10 of a strong and 02-12 prosperous America I'm here to deliver a 02-16 simple message there has never been a 02-18 better time to hire to build to invest 02-22 and to grow in the United States America 02-25 is open for business and we are 02-28 competitive once again the American 02-31 economy is by far the largest in the 02-34 world and we've just enacted the most 02-37 significant tax cuts and reform in 02-40 American history 02-42 we've massively cut taxes for the middle 02-45 class and small businesses to let 02-47 working families keep more of their 02-50 hard-earned money we lowered our 02-54 corporate tax rate from 35% all the way 02-57 down to 21% as a result millions of 03-02 workers have received tax cut bonuses 03-04 from their employers in amounts as large 03-07 as $3,000 the tax cut bill is expected 03-12 to raise the average Americans household 03-15 income by more than four thousand 03-17 dollars the world's largest company 03-20 Apple announced it plans to bring 245 03-24 billion dollars in overseas profits home 03-28 to America their total investment into 03-31 the United States economy will be more 03-33 than three hundred and fifty billion 03-36 dollars over the next five years now is 03-39 the perfect time to bring your business 03-42 your jobs and your investments to the 03-46 United States this is especially true 03-49 because we have undertaken the most 03-51 extensive regulatory reduction ever 03-55 conceived regulation is stealth taxation 04-01 the u.s. like many other countries 04-05 unelected bureaucrats and we have 04-08 believe me we have them all over the 04-11 place and they've imposed crushing and 04-13 anti business and anti worker 04-15 regulations on our citizens with no vote 04-19 no legislative debate and no real 04-22 accountability 04-24 in America those days are over I pledged 04-28 to eliminate two unnecessary regulations 04-32 for everyone new regulation we have 04-36 succeeded beyond our highest 04-39 expectations instead of two for one 04-43 we have cut 22 burdensome regulations 04-47 for every one new rule we are freeing 04-52 our businesses and workers so they can 04-54 thrive and flourish as never before we 04-58 are creating an environment that 05-00 attracts capital invites investment and 05-03 rewards production America is the place 05-07 to do business 05-09 so come to America where you can 05-11 innovate create and build I believe in 05-16 America as president of the United 05-19 States I will always put America first 05-23 just like the leaders of other countries 05-27 should put their country first also but 05-32 America first does not mean America 05-36 alone when the United States grows so 05-40 does the world American prosperity has 05-43 created countless jobs all around the 05-46 globe and the drive for excellence 05-49 creativity and innovation in the US has 05-52 led to important discoveries that help 05-55 people everywhere live more prosperous 05-58 and far healthier lives as the United 06-03 States pursues domestic reforms to 06-06 unleash jobs and growth we are also 06-08 working to reform the international 06-11 trading system so that it promotes 06-14 broadly shared prosperity and rewards to 06-16 those who play by the rules we cannot 06-21 have free and open trade if some 06-25 countries exploit the system at the 06-27 expense of others 06-30 we support free trade but it needs to be 06-34 fair and it needs to be reciprocal 06-38 because in the end unfair trade 06-41 undermines us all the United States will 06-45 no longer turn a blind eye to unfair 06-48 economic practices including massive 06-51 intellectual property theft industrial 06-54 subsidies and pervasive state-led 06-57 economic planning these and other 07-01 predatory behaviors are distorting the 07-04 global markets and harming businesses 07-07 and workers not just in the US but 07-09 around that low just like we expect the 07-13 leaders of other countries to protect 07-15 their interests as president the United 07-19 States I will always protect the 07-21 interests of our country our companies 07-24 and our workers we will enforce our 07-28 trade laws and restore integrity to our 07-31 trading system only by insisting on fair 07-34 and reciprocal trade can we create a 07-37 system that works not just for the US 07-41 but for all nations as I have said the 07-45 United States is prepared to negotiate 07-48 mutually beneficial bilateral trade 07-51 agreements with all countries this will 07-54 include the countries in TPP which are 07-57 very important we have agreements with 08-00 several to them already we would 08-03 consider negotiating with the rest 08-05 either individually or perhaps as a 08-08 group if it is in the interests of all 08-13 my administration is also taking swift 08-17 action in other ways to restore American 08-20 confidence and independence we are 08-23 lifting self-imposed restrictions on 08-27 energy production to provide affordable 08-29 power to our citizens and businesses and 08-31 to promote energy security for our 08-35 friends all around the world no country 08-38 should be held hostage to a single 08-41 provider of 08-42 energy America is roaring back and now 08-47 is the time to invest in the future of 08-49 America we have dramatically cut taxes 08-53 to make America competitive we are 08-56 eliminating burdensome regulations at a 08-59 record pace we are reforming the 09-02 bureaucracy to make it lean responsive 09-05 and accountable and we are ensuring our 09-08 laws are enforced fairly we have the 09-13 best colleges and universities in the 09-15 world and we have the best workers in 09-17 the world energy is abundant and 09-20 affordable there has never been a better 09-22 time to do business in America we are 09-25 also making historic investments in the 09-29 American military because we cannot have 09-31 prosperity without security to make the 09-34 world safer from rogue regimes terrorism 09-37 and revisionist powers we are asking our 09-40 friends and allies to invest in their 09-43 own defenses and to meet their financial 09-46 obligations our common security requires 09-51 everyone to contribute their fair share 09-54 my administration is proud to have led 09-57 historic efforts at the United Nations 09-59 Security Council and all around the 10-02 world to unite all civilized nations in 10-05 our campaign of maximum pressure to de 10-09 nuke the Korean Peninsula we continue to 10-15 call on partners to confront Iran 10-17 support for terrorists and block Iran's 10-19 path to a nuclear weapon we're also 10-23 working with allies and partners to 10-24 destroy jihadist terrorist organizations 10-27 such as Isis and very successfully so 10-30 the United States is leading a very 10-34 broad coalition to deny terrorists 10-36 control of their territory and 10-38 populations to cut off their funding and 10-41 to discredit their wicked ideology I am 10-45 pleased to report that the coalition to 10-48 defeat Isis has retaken almost 100 10-51 percent of the territory once held by 10-54 these killers 10-56 in Iraq and Syria there is still more 11-00 fighting and work to be done and to 11-04 consolidate our games we are committed 11-08 to ensuring that Afghanistan never again 11-11 becomes a safe haven for terrorists who 11-14 want to commit mass murder to our 11-17 civilian populations I want to thank 11-20 those nations represented here today 11-22 that have joined in these crucial 11-25 efforts you are not just securing your 11-28 own citizens but saving lives and 11-30 restoring hope for millions and millions 11-34 of people when it comes to terrorism we 11-38 will do whatever is necessary to protect 11-41 our nation we will defend our citizens 11-44 and our borders we are also securing our 11-47 immigration system as a matter of both 11-49 national and Economic Security America 11-54 is a cutting-edge economy what our 11-58 immigration system is stuck in the past 12-01 we must replace our current system of 12-04 extended family chain migration with a 12-07 merit-based system of admissions that 12-10 selects new arrivals based on their 12-13 ability to contribute to our economy to 12-16 support themselves financially and to 12-19 strengthen our country in rebuilding 12-22 America we are also fully committed to 12-25 developing our workforce we are lifting 12-28 people from dependence to independence 12-31 because we know the single best 12-34 anti-poverty program is a very simple 12-38 and very beautiful paycheck to be 12-42 successful that is not enough to invest 12-45 in our economy we must invest in our 12-48 people when people are forgotten the 12-52 world becomes fractured only by hearing 12-56 and responding to the voices of the 12-59 Forgotten can we create a bright future 13-02 that is truly shared by all the nation's 13-06 greatness is more than the sum of its 13-08 production 13-09 and nation's greatness is the sum of its 13-13 citizens the values pride love devotion 13-18 and character of the people who call 13-20 that nation home from my first 13-24 international g7 summit to the g20 to 13-28 the UN General Assembly to APEC to the 13-32 World Trade Organization and today at 13-34 the World Economic Forum my 13-37 administration has not only been present 13-39 but has driven our message that we are 13-42 all stronger when free sovereign nations 13-46 cooperate toward shared goals and they 13-49 cooperate toward shared dreams 13-53 represented in this room are some of the 13-55 remarkable citizens from all over the 13-57 world 13-58 you are national leaders business Titans 14-02 industry giants and many of the 14-04 brightest minds in many fields each of 14-07 you has the power to change hearts 14-11 transform lives and shape your country's 14-15 destinies with this power comes an 14-17 obligation however a duty of loyalty to 14-21 the people workers and customers who 14-23 have made you who you are 14-25 so together let us resolve to use our 14-29 power our resources and our voices not 14-33 just for ourselves but for our people to 14-37 lift their burdens to raise their hopes 14-40 and to empower their dreams to protect 14-43 their families their communities their 14-45 histories and their futures that's what 14-48 we're doing in America and the results 14-52 are totally unmistakable it's why new 14-56 businesses and investment are flooding 14-58 in it's why our unemployment rate is the 15-02 lowest it's been in so many decades it's 15-05 why America's future has never been 15-08 brighter today I am fighting all of you 15-11 to become part of this incredible future 15-13 we are building together thank you to 15-17 our hosts thank you to the leaders and 15-19 innovators in the audience 15-21 but most importantly thank you to all of 15-24 the hard-working men and women who do 15-26 their duty each and every day making 15-29 this a better world for everyone 15-32 together let us send our love and our 15-36 gratitude to make them because they 15-40 really make our countries run they make 15-44 our countries great thank you and god 15-48 bless you all 15-49 thank you very much 15-51 [Applause] 16-20 thank you very much 16-21 Thank You mr. president for this 16-24 inspiring speech as it is tradition it's 16-28 a form I will ask you one or two 16-31 questions and my first question is why 16-35 is the tax reform why has it been for 16-39 such a high priority for your 16-42 administration well first of all class I 16-44 want to congratulate you this is an 16-46 incredible group of people we had dinner 16-48 last night with about 15 leaders of 16-51 Industry none of whom I knew but all of 16-55 whom I've read about for years and it 16-57 was truly an incredible group and I 17-00 think I have 15 new friends so this has 17-02 been really great what you've done and 17-04 putting it together the Economic Forum 17-06 the tax reform was a dream of a lot of a 17-12 lot of people over many years but they 17-14 weren't able to get it done many people 17-16 tried and Ronald Reagan was really the 17-19 last to make a meaningful cut and reform 17-21 and ours is cutting and reforming we 17-24 emphasize cut but the reform is probably 17-28 almost as important we've wanted to do 17-30 it it is very tough politically to do it 17-34 hard to believe that would be but it is 17-36 very very tough that's why it hasn't 17-37 been done in close to 40 years and once 17-41 we got it going it was going and the big 17-45 and and I wouldn't say a total surprise 17-46 but one of the big things that happened 17-49 and took place is AT&T; and some others 17-53 came out very early and they said they 17-55 were going to pay thousands and 17-57 thousands of dollars to people that work 18-00 for their companies and you have three 18-02 hundred thousand four hundred thousand 18-03 five hundred thousand people working for 18-05 these companies and all of a sudden it 18-08 became like a big waterfall a big 18-10 beautiful waterfall where so many 18-13 companies are doing it and even today 18-15 they just announced many more but every 18-17 day they announce more and more and now 18-19 it's a fight for who's going to give the 18-20 most it started at a thousand now we 18-22 have them up to 3,000 18-24 this is something that we didn't 18-26 anticipate oftentimes in business things 18-28 happen that you don't anticipate usually 18-32 that's a bad thing but this was a good 18-35 thing this came out of nowhere nobody 18-37 ever thought of this as a possibility 18-40 even twe it wasn't in the equation we 18-42 waited we said wait'll February 1st when 18-45 the checks start coming in and people 18-47 Klaus have a lot more money in their 18-50 paycheck because it's not just a little 18-51 money there's a lot of money for people 18-53 making a living doing whatever they may 18-56 be doing and we really thought February 18-58 1st it was going to kick in and 19-00 everybody was going to be well we 19-01 haven't even gotten there yet and it's 19-04 kicked in and it's had a incredible 19-06 impact on the stock market and the stock 19-08 prices we've set 84 records since my 19-12 election record stock market prices 19-15 meaning we hit new highs 84 different 19-19 times out of a one year period and 19-22 that's a great thing and in all fairness 19-25 that was done before we passed the tax 19-28 cuts and tax reform so what happened is 19-32 really something special then as you 19-34 know and as I just said Apple came in 19-36 with 350 billion dollars and I tell you 19-39 I spoke with Tim Cook I said Tim I will 19-42 never consider this whole great run that 19-47 we've made complete until you start 19-50 building plants in the US and I will 19-53 tell you this moved up very 19-54 substantially but when I heard 350 I 19-57 thought he was talking I thought they 19-59 were talking three hundred and fifty 20-01 million dollars and by the way that's a 20-03 nice sized plant not the greatest but 20-06 not bad 20-06 and they said no sir it's three hundred 20-09 and fifty billion dollars I said that is 20-13 something well we have tremendous 20-15 amounts of money including my newfound 20-17 friends from last night great companies 20-20 they're all investing when one of the 20-23 gentlemen said he's putting in two 20-25 billion dollars because of the tax cuts 20-27 I said to myself wow he's actually the 20-30 cheap one in the group because they're 20-32 putting in massive numbers of billions 20-34 of dollars so 20-36 I think you have a brand-new United 20-39 States you have a United States who are 20-41 people from all over the world are 20-43 looking to come in and invest and 20-45 there's just nothing like what's 20-48 happening and I just want to finish by I 20-51 have a group of people that have been so 20-53 outs I have a whole lot of them so I 20-55 won't introduce cousin Ellen self at 20-56 least half of them but I've had a group 20-59 of people that work so hard on this and 21-01 other things and we're really doing we 21-04 had a great first year so successful in 21-07 so many different ways and there's a 21-09 tremendous spirit when you look at all 21-11 of the different charts and polls and 21-14 you see as an example African American 21-17 unemployment at the historic low that's 21-21 never it's never had a period of time 21-23 like this 21-24 same with Hispanic women at a 17-year 21-27 low it's it's very heartwarming to see 21-30 but there's a tremendous spirit in the 21-33 United States I would say it's a spirit 21-35 like I have never witnessed before I've 21-37 been here for a while I have never 21-39 witnessed the spirit that our country 21-42 has right now so I just want to thank 21-44 you all and all of those that are 21-46 pouring billions of dollars into our 21-49 country or ten dollars into our country 21-51 we thank you very much Thank You mr. 21-54 president I well I will ask you maybe a 21-57 personal question but before doing so it 22-01 sounds very interesting 22-02 Akinori I didn't know about this one I 22-04 would like to acknowledge the strong 22-07 presence of your cabinet members yes who 22-11 tremendously contributed to the 22-13 discussions good it's a loss I would 22-16 like to do that that's no Steven Wilbur 22-21 Gary Robert even my general and my 22-27 various other generals you know we're 22-30 making our military protection a little 22-32 bit better for us too so thank you very 22-35 much does everybody understand that I 22-36 think so thank you all for being all why 22-40 I may be personal question would be 22-45 what experience from your past have been 22-50 most useful in preparing you for the 22-54 presidency well being a businessman has 22-57 been a great experience for me I've 22-59 loved it I've always loved business I've 23-02 always been good at building things and 23-04 I've always been very successful at 23-05 making money I'd buy things that would 23-07 fail 23-08 that would be failures and I turn them 23-10 around and try and get them for the 23-12 right price and then I turned them 23-13 around make them successful and I've 23-15 been good at it and that takes a certain 23-17 ability and you know historically I 23-19 guess there's never really been a 23-21 businessman or businessperson elected 23-25 presidents always been a general or a 23-26 politician throughout history it's 23-29 always been a general you had to be a 23-31 general but mostly it was politicians 23-34 you'd never have a businessman and then 23-35 in all fairness I was saying to Klaus 23-37 last night had the opposing party to me 23-41 won some of whom you backed some of the 23-45 people in the room instead of being up 23-47 almost 50% the stock market is up since 23-51 my election almost 50 percent rather 23-54 than that I believe the stock market 23-56 from that level the initial level would 23-58 have been down close to 50% that's where 24-01 we were heading I really believe that 24-02 because they were going to put on 24-04 massive new regulations you couldn't 24-06 breathe that was choking our country to 24-07 death and I was able to see that Klaus 24-10 as a businessperson the other thing is 24-12 I've always seemed to get for whatever 24-14 reason a disproportionate amount of 24-16 press or media and not my whole life 24-22 somebody will explain someday why but 24-24 I've always gotten a lot and as a 24-27 businessman I was always treated really 24-29 well by the press you know the numbers 24-30 speak and things happen but I've always 24-32 really had a very good press and it was 24-35 until I became a politician that I 24-38 realized how nasty how mean how vicious 24-41 and how fake the press can be as the 24-44 cameras start going off in the back 24-48 but but overall I'm in the bottom line 24-51 somebody said well they couldn't have 24-53 been that bad because here we are were 24-54 president and I think we're doing a 24-56 really great job with my team I have a 24-58 team of just tremendous people and I 25-02 think we're doing a very special job and 25-04 I really believe it was time and it was 25-07 time to do that job because I don't 25-09 think the United States would have done 25-12 very well if it went through four or 25-14 eight more years of regulation and 25-17 really a very anti business group of 25-20 people we have a very pro-business group 25-23 we have regulations cut to a level in 25-26 the history of our country class this 25-29 was reported recently in one year we've 25-32 cut more regulations in my 25-33 administration than any other 25-36 Administration in for eight or sixteen 25-39 years in the one case we've cut more 25-41 regulations in one year and we have a 25-43 ways to go 25-44 I mean we're probably 50% done and we're 25-47 going to have regulation there's nothing 25-49 wrong with rules and regulations you 25-51 need them but we've cut more than any 25-56 administration ever in the history of 25-58 our country and we still have a ways to 26-00 go so I think between that and the 26-02 tremendous tax cuts we've really done 26-05 something and one other thing I said and 26-06 I saw it last night was some of the 26-08 leaders and the business people I think 26-12 I've been a cheerleader for our country 26-14 and everybody representing a company or 26-17 a country has to be a cheerleader or no 26-20 matter what you do it's just not going 26-22 to work and the reason I'm a cheerleader 26-24 is because it's easy because I love our 26-27 country and I think we're just doing 26-31 really well and we look forward to 26-33 seeing you in America special place and 26-37 where you are is a special place also 26-39 thank you all very much I appreciate it 26-41 thank you 26-44 thank you very much mr. president for 26-48 being with us sir World Economic Forum 26-52 community who is assembled here will be 26-55 certainly and I quote you from the last 26-58 piece of your remarks will be suddenly 27-01 be amongst a hard-working man and women 27-05 who do serve duty each and every day 27-09 making this world a better place for 27-12 everyone thank you very much thank you 27-15 thank you very much everybody thank you 27-17 [Applause]  

President Donald Trump remarks while signing Tax Cut Bill Also, comments on missile defense, continuing budget resolution 00-00 good morning everybody thank you very 00-01 much for being here and Merry Christmas 00-03 Happy New Year have great holidays we 00-07 are going to sign some very important 00-09 things today 00-10 one is a continuing resolution that very 00-16 importantly gives us the right and we 00-19 are ordering four billion dollars worth 00-21 of missile defense equipment and 00-24 missiles themselves very important 00-27 top-of-the-line best in the world we 00-30 make the best military product in the 00-32 world nobody is even close so we're 00-35 ordering four billion dollars worth of 00-36 missile defense and that will be done by 00-40 signing right here and also by notifying 00-44 the Speaker of the House and president 00-48 of the Senate designating the missile 00-50 defense as emergency defense fund so 00-53 it's four billion dollars for that and 00-56 seven hundred million dollars for 00-59 various other military forms of 01-02 equipment and I'm very honored to be 01-04 doing that our military has been doing a 01-05 fantastic job in so many ways with Isis 01-07 and everything they're touching lately 01-10 has been working out so we're signing 01-12 that 01-23 this is the letter to Mitch McConnell 01-28 and separately to Paul Ryan authorizing 01-32 that having to do with missile defense 01-52 okay 02-00 very important so that's being done 02-02 today and that's going to be sent out 02-04 and then when I watched the news as you 02-07 know we had the largest tax cuts in our 02-10 history just approved and I was gonna 02-14 wait for a formal signing sometime in 02-16 early January but then I watched the 02-18 news this morning and they will say will 02-20 he keep his promise will he sign it by 02-22 Christmas you are one but will he sign 02-26 it by Christmas and I called downstairs 02-29 I said get it ready we have to sign it 02-31 now 02-31 we're gonna wait till January 7th or 8th 02-34 and do a big formal ceremony but every 02-37 one of the networks was saying will he 02-39 keep his promise will he sign it for 02-41 Christmas before Christmas and so I 02-44 immediately called I said let's get it 02-46 ready as you know three point two 02-48 trillion dollars in tax cuts for 02-51 American families including the doubling 02-53 of the standard deduction and the 02-55 doubling of the child tax credit the 02-59 typical family of four earning $75,000 03-02 we see an income tax cut of more than 03-05 two thousand dollars many much higher 03-08 than the slashing their tax bill in half 03-11 and they're gonna start to see that 03-14 because we're signing today they're 03-16 gonna start to see that in February the 03-18 numbers will speak one of the big things 03-20 that happened you have some great 03-22 companies I want to thank AT&T; who 03-24 actually was the first out of the box 03-26 and Boeing and Sinclair and Wells Fargo 03-29 and Comcast even though they owned NBC 03-31 which is not so nice to the presidency 03-35 or the president but Comcast also they 03-39 all have made tremendous contributions 03-42 to their employees and tremendous 03-45 contributions to spending money in this 03-47 country because of the tax bill and they 03-50 all said it it's because of the tax bill 03-52 so they're making tremendous investments 03-54 that means jobs means a lot of things 03-57 and we're very happy so that's AT&T; 03-59 Boeing Sinclair Wells Fargo Comcast and 04-03 now many other companies as you 04-05 in fact just this morning I see three 04-06 more companies came on friend of mine 04-09 Bob Kraft called me last night he said 04-12 this tax bill is incredible 04-14 he owns the New England Patriots but 04-16 he's in the paper business too and he 04-19 said based on this tax bill he just 04-21 wanted to let me know that he's going to 04-24 buy a big plant in the great state of 04-27 North Carolina and he's going to build a 04-30 tremendous paper mill there or paper 04-33 products plant and I've had many calls 04-36 such as that people that are 04-39 entrepreneurs people in business they're 04-41 going out and they're going to buy 04-43 frankly factories that are closed 04-45 abandoned and now they're not going to 04-47 be abandoned and they love this is 04-49 having an even bigger impact faster than 04-52 I thought the corporate tax rate as you 04-54 know will be lowered from 35 to 21 04-57 percent that means that more products 04-59 will be made in the USA a lot of things 05-03 are going to be happening in the US and 05-04 we're going to bring back our companies 05-06 that they've already started coming back 05-07 I think they had certain confidence in 05-10 me they figured we're going to get this 05-11 done but they have already started 05-13 something very important to me the 05-15 family farmers and small business owners 05-18 who lost their business because of the 05-20 estate tax most of them won't have any 05-22 estate tax to pay it will be a great 05-26 thing for their families you can leave 05-27 your farm to your family you can leave 05-30 your business your small business to 05-31 your family not even so small because 05-33 the numbers are pretty big here so 05-36 they'll be exempt from having to pay 05-38 estate tax which will be tremendous 05-40 they'll keep their farms and their 05-41 businesses in the family businesses will 05-44 be able to deduct 100 percent of the 05-46 cost of their capital investments in the 05-48 year the investment is made that's 05-50 called expensing and to do one year 05-53 expensing I think is going to be one of 05-55 the biggest things in the bill frankly I 05-56 think people are going to go out and 05-58 absolutely go wild over expensing Bob 06-01 Kraft mentioned that last night in this 06-03 telephone call the the fact that they 06-06 can expense - when you're expensing is a 06-08 fantastic asset historic small business 06-12 tax cuts and pastures now are made 06-15 really really good for the business 06-17 owner you know they're high 06-18 people I see it on television I'm 06-21 reading about it all over where people 06-22 are hiring a lot of people right now to 06-24 go to work the small business tax cut 06-27 and the passages are now really 06-30 incentivizing people we're going to 06-32 bring back probably four trillion 06-34 dollars from overseas nobody knows the 06-37 exact number but it's massive it'll be 06-39 over three trillion it could be five 06-40 trillion but it's a tremendous amount of 06-42 money that was caught overseas that the 06-45 bureaucracy plus the tax laws didn't 06-48 allow it to reasonably be brought back 06-50 into our country so we think at least 06-53 four trillion dollars is going to be 06-55 brought back and if you look at that 06-59 it's going to be brought back right 07-01 under the code this is something that 07-03 Republicans wanted for years and 07-05 Democrats wanted two years and yet it 07-07 never got done who would object to 07-09 trillions of dollars being brought back 07-11 into our country nobody but it never got 07-14 done now it's being done and the bottom 07-17 line is this is the biggest tax cuts and 07-20 reform in the history of our country 07-21 this is bigger than actually President 07-24 Reagan's many years ago I'm very honored 07-28 by it in addition we have Anwar we're 07-31 opening up and war for drilling they've 07-33 tried to get that for forty years 07-35 they've tried to get that even during 07-36 the Reagan administration they could 07-38 never get it that alone would be a big 07-40 bill if that ever happened but that's 07-43 even part of this and we have of course 07-47 the individual mandate which is a very 07-51 unfair and very unpopular provision as 07-53 you know in Obamacare essentially I 07-57 think it ultimately leads to the end of 07-59 Obamacare it's essentially I think 08-01 Obamacare is is over because of that and 08-04 we're going to come up with something 08-05 that's really going to be very good but 08-07 the individual mandate was very unfair 08-09 because you're basically saying pay for 08-12 something in order not to have to get 08-14 health care so you're paying you're 08-16 paying not to have to have health care 08-19 it was very unfair many people thought 08-22 it should have been overturned in the 08-23 supreme court didn't quite make it 08-25 almost but didn't quite make it but now 08-27 we're overturning the individual 08-28 most unpopular thing in Obamacare very 08-31 very unfair so this is the bill right 08-35 here and we're very proud of it it's 08-38 gonna be a tremendous thing for the 08-40 American people it's gonna be fantastic 08-42 for the economy it's going to keep 08-45 companies from leaving our shores and 08-48 opening up in other countries they are 08-51 very disincentivized to do that they are 08-54 there's not a lot of lot of not a lot of 08-56 not a sense to do that you do that and I 08-59 don't think you're going to be running 09-00 the company very well so what's 09-02 happening is we're going to sign this 09-04 this is a little picture of it it fits 09-08 nicely in the box I said take it out of 09-10 the box because people have to say and 09-12 all of this everything in here is really 09-17 tremendous things for businesses for 09-21 people for the middle class for workers 09-24 and I consider this very much a bill for 09-26 the middle class at a bill for jobs and 09-29 jobs are produced through companies and 09-32 corporations and you see that happening 09-33 corporations are literally going wild 09-36 over this I think even beyond my 09-38 expectation so far beyond my 09-40 expectations so I'll sign this today 09-43 rather than having a very big formal 09-45 ceremony in two weeks when we were going 09-48 to do it because I didn't want you folks 09-51 to say that I wasn't keeping my promise 09-53 I am keeping my promise I am signing it 09-55 before Christmas I said that the bill 09-58 would be on my desk before Christmas and 10-00 you are holding me literally to that so 10-03 we did a rush job today it's not fancy 10-05 but it's the Oval Office it's the Great 10-08 Oval Office and just to conclude a 10-11 country's doing very well we 10-13 tremendously cut regulations legislative 10-17 approvals for which I've given no credit 10-20 in the mainstream media we have I 10-22 believe it's 88 which is number one in 10-26 the history of our country second now is 10-28 Harry Truman Harry Truman had more 10-30 legislative approvals than any other 10-32 president and a record long held and 10-37 beat him on legislative approval so for 10-40 which I get no credit a lot of people 10-41 say he needed this because he has had no 10-44 legislative approvals 10-45 well if you look at VA accountability 10-48 act and so many other bills having to do 10-50 with the VA having to do with the 10-52 military having to do with many things 10-53 we have more legislative victories than 10-57 any other president not including this 11-00 but this is the capper because this is 11-02 again the biggest tax cut biggest reform 11-05 of all time so it's an honor to have you 11-10 with us and we will sign this right now 11-12 this is something I'm very proud of 11-15 great for our country great for the 11-17 American people thank you all 11-32 so we went through the whole thing but 11-35 this is basically what it is 11-36 let's you know 11-45 and I want to thank some people in 11-49 particular that aren't here because 11-51 again we expected a formal ceremony in 11-53 two weeks but Mitch McConnell has been 11-55 fantastic worked so hard we would speak 12-01 at 3-00 in the morning and 2-00 in the 12-02 morning and we would speak whenever we 12-04 had to speak but do you work so hard and 12-07 the exact same thing can be said for 12-08 Paul Ryan they are very proud of this 12-13 and we're already seeing the results and 12-16 I as I said long before long ahead of 12-18 schedule Paul Ryan Mitch McConnell thank 12-22 you very much Orrin Hatch the chairman 12-24 made a beautiful speech the other day in 12-28 front of the White House absolutely 12-31 brilliant beautiful speech and we 12-32 appreciated it and I appreciate it it's 12-34 hard working Kevin Brady we I don't 12-37 think he slept for months it's almost 12-39 like that's all he did was this Mike 12-42 Enzi senator and Diane black Rob Portman 12-47 a group of Rutte Rob Portman Rob works 12-50 so hard so knowledgeable on the subject 12-52 Pat Toomey likewise Tim Scott likewise 12-55 John Thune likewise these people work so 12-58 hard and I don't know if they given the 13-00 proper credit and the whole Senate when 13-03 I say the Senate unfortunately the 13-06 Republicans in the Senate Democrats 13-10 don't like tax cuts they want to raise 13-12 your taxes they don't want to lower your 13-14 taxes they want to raise your taxes and 13-17 they want to spend money foolishly on 13-18 things that we we don't need in many 13-21 cases so we're cutting taxes we're 13-25 taking care of our military and we're 13-27 taking care of people and we're really 13-29 doing a job one job so these folks have 13-32 been so fantastic that I had to call 13-34 them and plenty of others believe me 13-36 Republicans in the House and Republicans 13-39 and the Senate have been incredible so 13-42 this is what we 13-44 we had it it was all set to go as soon 13-46 as I got back from Christmas where we'll 13-49 be working in Florida I'll be working 13-52 very hard during that Christmas because 13-53 we have many things with talking about 13-55 including North Korea including a lot of 14-00 things happening in the Middle East as 14-01 you know we've made tremendous strides 14-04 obviously in Syria with Isis we've taken 14-07 back virtually all of the Caliphate all 14-10 of the land same thing in Iraq and we're 14-13 making tremendous strides at sort of the 14-15 unwritten story right now but since my 14-17 speech on Afghanistan we're making 14-19 tremendous progress tremendous strides 14-21 we've opened it up and it's a whole 14-23 different world in Afghanistan I can 14-25 tell you then so I'll be working very 14-27 hard over the holidays again I want to 14-31 wish you a very Merry Christmas I have 14-32 some beautiful pens over here and 14-35 because all of these folks are either 14-38 continuing to work down the road or 14-42 getting ready to leave and I'm sure 14-44 they'll be working very hard also I 14-46 think I'm probably going to hand some of 14-49 them to depress this the media would any 14-51 of the media like any look at these 14-52 camera guys but I think we'll do that so 14-55 we have them many of you have worked 14-59 very hard many of you have worked very 15-02 very fairly and we really appreciate 15-04 that so here you go folks you want the 15-06 box with it or not huh 15-10 to sell this tax have to travel too much 15-14 to sell it 15-16 I think it's selling itself it's 15-17 becoming very popular but I think it'll 15-20 really you'll see something on February 15-22 1st when they open up the paycheck 15-24 that's when you're gonna start to see it 15-25 because by signing it now it kicks in 15-28 for this year remember if we didn't make 15-30 a certain date it wouldn't kick in until 15-33 next year meaning the following year 19 15-36 and I wasn't happy with that so we 15-38 worked very very hard to make sure it 15-40 was this year even language originally 15-42 said the corporate would kick in in 19 15-44 but we didn't do that we we haven't kick 15-46 in and now but we had a sign so I don't 15-49 think we're gonna have to do much 15-50 selling I think the corporations that 15-52 are giving billions and billions of 15-53 dollars away to their workers and many 15-56 more are coming I think that's really 15-58 what's selling this maybe better than 16-00 anybody could including myself but I 16-02 think come February when they open their 16-04 checks and they see wow what happened to 16-07 have a lot more money in here I think 16-09 that's really going to be something very 16-10 special so have a great holiday folks 16-13 some of you folks take I in particular 16-16 like the boom holders they were so nice 16-18 to me the other day right and the 16-20 cameramen and the captain mr.president 16-23 education note Democrats have supported 16-26 this tax cut legislation 16-27 will they regret it I think the 16-29 Democrats will really regret the 16-32 Democrats already regret it you know 16-34 they have their typical thing it's for 16-36 the rich they know that's not true and 16-37 they've been called out on it by the 16-39 media actually but the Democrats very 16-42 much regret it they wanted to be a part 16-44 of it just doesn't work out but I really 16-46 do believe when I said on social media 16-48 today I read I really do believe we're 16-51 going to have a lot of bipartisan work 16-54 done and maybe we start with 16-56 infrastructure because I really believe 16-58 infrastructure can be bipartisan 17-00 we've spent seven trillion dollars in 17-02 the Middle East 17-04 not to mention all of the lives and all 17-06 of the heartache and it's so sad seven 17-09 trillion dollars it's time for us to 17-12 rebuild our country thank you very much 17-21 thank you would have started with 17-29 infrastructure at the beginning of this 17-31 year would that up sort of set the tone 17-32 differently well we're gonna get 17-34 infrastructure infrastructure is the 17-35 easiest of all we're very well in our 17-38 way we've essentially Obamacare you know 17-42 the individual mandate is a very big 17-43 factor in this bill frankly a lot of 17-45 people don't talk about it because the 17-46 tax cut is so forth but infrastructure 17-49 is by far the easiest people wanted 17-51 Republicans and Democrats we're gonna 17-53 have a tremendous Democrat support and 17-54 infrastructure as you know I could have 17-57 started with infrastructure I actually 17-58 wanted to save the easy one for the one 18-01 down the road so we'll be having that 18-03 pretty quickly thank you all very much 18-05 every 18-08 thanks guys but you think we'll help you 18-15 think we'll help ya you know one thing I 18-18 really learned as I learned had got to 18-20 know and became very friendly with the 18-22 people in the house the people in the 18-25 Senate both Republicans and Democrats 18-27 when I came you know I didn't know too 18-30 many I was very politically active but I 18-31 didn't know too many I think the fact 18-33 that I become friends with so many of 18-35 the names that I just read off in so 18-36 many of the Senators so many of the 18-39 congressmen and women I think that's a 18-41 huge factor I can call anybody now I 18-43 know every one of them very well and I 18-45 understand the legislation very well so 18-48 you know it's been a process it's been a 18-49 great for us it's really beautiful but I 18-51 do believe I do believe that the fact 18-54 that I have gotten to know so many of 18-57 these people and many of these people 18-59 have to say not saying off what I'm 19-01 saying many of these people are great 19-03 people that truly love this country so I 19-06 think that helps and I think you'll see 19-09 that in this legislation

Double Header - Congressmen Trey Gowdy and Jim Jordan question Rod Rosenstein No doubt it is time to remove the biased special counsel Mueller 00-00 there are a lot of issues that I would 00-01 like to ask you about mr. Deputy 00-03 Attorney General we had a terrorist 00-04 incident in New York this week we have 00-06 702 reauthorization that is pending in 00-09 Congress gun violence the opioid 00-11 epidemic criminal justice reform but 00-15 when I go home to South Carolina this 00-17 weekend trust me when I tell you no one 00-19 is going to ask me about any of those 00-20 issues they're gonna ask me what in the 00-23 hell is going on with the Department of 00-25 Justice and the FBI the reason we have 00-29 special counsel this is a very important 00-31 point the written you know it the reason 00-33 we have special counsel is because of a 00-35 conflict of interest the regulation 00-38 itself specifically makes reference to a 00-41 conflict of interest and and we don't 00-43 like conflicts of interest because it 00-45 undercuts people's confidence and both 00-48 the process and the result so so let's 00-50 be really clear why we have special 00-53 counsel there was either a real or 00-55 perceived conflict of interest that we 00-58 were fearful would either impact the 01-00 result or people's confidence in the 01-03 process that's why we have something 01-05 called special counsel and that's why we 01-08 have special counsel in this fact 01-10 pattern and then lo and behold those who 01-13 are supposed to make sure there are no 01-16 conflicts of interest seem to have a few 01-18 of their own there's a senior prosecutor 01-22 who said obsequious emails to a fact 01-26 witness I she can be described as 01-30 nothing other than a fact witness she's 01-32 a really important fact witness if you 01-35 pursue the line of inquiry that my 01-38 Democrat friends want to pursue they got 01-40 off of collusion and now their own 01-42 obstruction of justice she may be the 01-44 most important fact witness in an 01-46 obstruction of justice case and the 01-49 senior prosecutor for this conflict of 01-52 interest free special counsel sent a 01-55 fawning obsequious email to a fact 01-58 witness and then we have prosecutors 02-00 assigned to conduct this investigation 02-03 who donated almost exclusively to one 02-06 candidate over another and then we have 02-09 a prosecutor assigned to this calm 02-12 flicked of interest free team that 02-14 attended what was supposed to be what 02-16 he'd hoped to be a victory party for 02-18 Secretary Clinton and we have a senior 02-21 DOJ official mr. Deputy Attorney General 02-23 with an office it used to be two doors 02-25 now from yours meeting with fusion GPS 02-29 and fusion GPS of course was paying for 02-32 rush and dirt on the very person that 02-35 they're supposed to be objectively 02-37 investigating and then that same senior 02-40 DOJ officials wife the one that met with 02-44 fusion GPS his wife was on the payroll 02-47 of fusion GPS and then we have a senior 02-52 agent assigned to investigate secretary 02-55 Clinton's email helped draft the 02-58 exoneration letter well we changed the 03-00 language from grossly negligent to 03-02 extremely careless interviewed Secretary 03-05 Clinton in an interview I've never seen 03-08 and I doubt you have either in your 03-09 career as a prosecutor interviewed 03-12 Michael Flynn was actively involved in 03-14 the investigation into the trunk 03-16 campaign before the Inspector General 03-18 found his text so this agent in the 03-21 middle of almost everything related to 03-25 Secretary Clinton in President Trump 03-27 sent pro Clinton tax anti-trump texts to 03-31 his paramour in response to being told 03-34 maybe he is where he is to protect the 03-38 country from that menace Donald Trump he 03-41 said I can protect our country at many 03-45 levels and then he said Hillary Clinton 03-47 should win 100 million to nothing I 03-50 think about that mr. Deputy Attorney 03-51 General that's a pretty overwhelming 03-53 victory 100 million to zero and when I 03-58 read that last night what I thought was 04-00 this conflict of interest free senior 04-03 agent and the FBI can't think of a 04-05 single solitary American who would vote 04-07 for Donald Trump that's where the zero 04-10 comes in not a single solitary American 04-13 he can imagine would vote for Donald 04-16 Trump this is the conflict of interest 04-18 free special agent aside and then he 04-21 went on if that 04-22 enough to belittle Trump supporters by 04-24 saying he could smell them at a Walmart 04-27 in Virginia this is the person we needed 04-32 to avoid a conflict of interest and then 04-34 he said this they fully deserve to go 04-37 and demonstrate the absolute bigoted 04-39 nonsense of trunk but he wasn't content 04-42 to just disparage Donald Trump he had to 04-45 disparage Donald Trump's family this is 04-49 what he said mr. Deputy Attorney General 04-50 he said the douche bags are about to 04-52 come out he's talking about our First 04-54 Lady and children this conflict of 04-58 interest free special agent of the FBI 05-01 this is who we were told we needed to 05-04 have an objective impartial fair 05-07 conflict of interest free investigation 05-09 so he's openly pulling for the candidate 05-11 he had a role in clearing and he's 05-13 openly investigating a candidate that he 05-16 has bias against and then if that's not 05-18 enough he says Trump is an effing idiot 05-21 what the f just happened to our country 05-24 this is the same man that said he would 05-26 save our country what happens when 05-30 people who are supposed to cure the 05-32 conflict of interests have even greater 05-33 conflicts of interest than those they 05-35 replace well that's not a rhetorical 05-38 question you nor I nor anyone else 05-42 whatever sit Peter struck on a jury we 05-46 wouldn't have him objectively 05-48 dispassionately investigate anything 05-50 knowing what we know now why didn't we 05-54 know what ahead of time and my last 05-56 question my final question to you and I 05-58 appreciate the Chairman's patience how 06-00 would you help me answer that question 06-02 when I go back to South Carolina this 06-04 weekend 06-05 congressman first of all with regard to 06-09 the special counsel mr. struck was 06-12 already working on the investigation 06-13 when the special counsel was appointed 06-15 the appointment I made was to Robert 06-16 Mullins what I recommend that you tell 06-18 your constituents is that Robert Muller 06-21 and rod Rosen Stein and Chris Rea are 06-24 accountable and that we will ensure that 06-27 no bias is 06-28 selected in any of the actions taken by 06-30 the special counsel or in any matter 06-33 within the jurisdiction the Department 06-35 of Justice when we have evidence of any 06-38 inappropriate conduct we're going to 06-39 take action on it and that's what mr. 06-41 Muller did here as soon as he learned 06-43 about this issue he took action and 06-46 that's what I anticipate that the rest 06-48 of our prosecutors are a new group of US 06-50 attorneys our Justice Department and 06-52 poor entities they understand the rules 06-55 and they understand the responsibility 06-56 to defend the integrity of the 06-57 department if they find evidence of 06-59 improper conduct they're going to take 07-01 action so congressman that's the best 07-03 assurance I can give you but actually 07-06 there's one other point which is you 07-07 should tell your constituents that we 07-09 expose this issue because we're ensuring 07-13 that the Inspector General conducts a 07-14 thorough and effective investigation and 07-17 if there is any evidence of impropriety 07-18 he's going to surface it and report 07-20 about it publicly I'll try  

President Trump Gives Remarks at the Opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum Some protested by not attending, but President Trump was fantastic! Thank you, President Trump.   00 - 00 thank you very much thank you and I do 00 - 03 love Mississippi it's a great place and 00 - 06 thank you 00 - 08 governor Bryant for that kind 00 - 10 introduction and for honoring me with 00 - 12 this invitation to be with you today I 00 - 16 also want to recognize Secretary ben 00 - 18 Carson and his wonderful wife kandi for 00 - 22 joining us thank you 00 - 23 Thank You Ben Thank You kandi I 00 - 26 especially want to thank you justice 00 - 30 Ruben Anderson great man with a great 00 - 33 reputation even outside of the state of 00 - 37 Mississippi I have to tell you that so 00 - 40 thank you thank you very much and you 00 - 44 are an inspiration to us all thank you 00 - 46 judge and we're here today to celebrate 00 - 48 the opening of two really extraordinary 00 - 53 museums and I just took a tour the 00 - 57 Mississippi State history museum and the 01 - 00 Mississippi Civil Rights Museum to all 01 - 04 who helped make these wonderful places 01 - 06 possible we are truly grateful we thank 01 - 09 you we admire you it was hard work it 01 - 13 was long hours sell a lot of money and I 01 - 16 know the governor helped with that you 01 - 18 know that was a great thing you've done 01 - 19 that's a great legacy fill right there 01 - 22 just that in itself but it really is a 01 - 25 beautiful beautiful place and it's an 01 - 28 honor these museums are labors of love 01 - 31 love for Mississippi love for your 01 - 34 nation love for god-given dignity 01 - 37 written into every human soul these 01 - 41 buildings embody the hope that has lived 01 - 45 in the hearts of every American for 01 - 48 generations the hope in a future that is 01 - 51 more just and more free the civil rights 01 - 56 museum records the oppression cruelty 01 - 58 and injustice inflicted on the African 02 - 01 American community the fight to end 02 - 04 slavery to break down Jim Crow to end 02 - 08 segregation to gain 02 - 11 the right to vote and to achieve the 02 - 14 sacred birthright of equality here 02 - 18 [Applause] 02 - 22 that's big stuff that's big stuff those 02 - 26 are very big phrases very big words here 02 - 30 we memorialize the brave men and women 02 - 33 who struggle to sacrifice and sacrifice 02 - 37 so much so that others might live in 02 - 40 freedom among those we honor are the 02 - 44 Christian pastors who started the civil 02 - 47 rights movement in their own churches 02 - 49 preaching like Reverend Martin Luther 02 - 51 King jr. man that would have studied and 02 - 56 watched and admired from my entire life 03 - 00 that we're all made in the image of our 03 - 04 Lord students like james Meredith who 03 - 09 were persecuted for standing up for 03 - 12 their right to the same education as 03 - 15 every other American student young 03 - 19 people like the nine brave students who 03 - 22 quietly said and they said very 03 - 27 stoically but very proudly at the 03 - 31 Jackson Public Library in 1961 and by 03 - 37 the way I would add the word very 03 - 39 bravely they said very bravely 03 - 41 and finally martyrs like Sargent Medgar 03 - 45 Wylie Evers 03 - 52 whose brother I just met at the plane 03 - 55 and who I liked a lot I have to stand up 03 - 58 please come on stand up you were so nice 04 - 01 I appreciate it 04 - 02 you were so nice thank you very much 04 - 05 medgar joined the US Army in 1943 when 04 - 09 he was 17 years old he fought in 04 - 12 Normandy in the Second World War and 04 - 14 when he came back home to Mississippi he 04 - 18 kept fighting for the same rights and 04 - 20 freedom that he had defended in the war 04 - 24 Evers became a civil rights leader 04 - 28 in his community he helped fellow 04 - 31 African Americans register to vote 04 - 34 organized boycotts and investigated 04 - 37 grave and justices against very innocent 04 - 41 people for his courageous leadership in 04 - 44 the civil rights movement mr. Evers was 04 - 48 assassinated by a member of the KKK in 04 - 52 the driveway of his own home we are 04 - 57 deeply privileged to be joined today by 05 - 01 his incredible would have somebody 05 - 04 that's loved throughout large sections 05 - 08 of our country beyond this area so I 05 - 13 just want to say hello to him early 05 - 15 Murli well how was your morning thank 05 - 21 you so much 05 - 23 highly respected thank you 05 - 29 [Applause] 05 - 35 Thank You Murli and his brothers Charles 05 - 39 Thank You Charles again for decades they 05 - 42 have carried on medgar's real legacy and 05 - 46 a legacy like few people have and few 05 - 49 people can even think and I want to 05 - 52 thank them for their tremendous service 05 - 54 to our nation less than a month before 05 - 57 Evers death he delivered a historic 06 - 00 televised address to the people of 06 - 03 Jackson on the issue of civil rights in 06 - 06 that speech he said the following the 06 - 09 African American has been here in 06 - 11 America since 1619 this country is his 06 - 18 home he wants to do his part to help 06 - 20 make this city state and nation a better 06 - 24 place for everyone regardless of color 06 - 27 or race Medgar Evers loved his family 06 - 32 his community in his country and he knew 06 - 36 it was long past time for his nation to 06 - 39 fulfill its founding promise to treat 06 - 43 every citizen as an equal child of God 06 - 53 four days after he was murdered sergeant 06 - 58 Evers was laid to rest in Arlington 07 - 00 National Cemetery with full military 07 - 04 honors in Arlington he lies besides men 07 - 09 and women of all races backgrounds and 07 - 11 walks of life who have served and 07 - 14 sacrificed for our country their 07 - 18 headstones do not mark the color of 07 - 20 their skin but immortalize the courage 07 - 24 of their deeds their memories are carved 07 - 28 in stone as American heroes 07 - 31 that is what Medgar Evers was he was a 07 - 34 great American hero 07 - 36 that is what others honored in this 07 - 39 museum were true American heroes today 07 - 44 we strive to be worthy of their 07 - 46 sacrifice we pray for inspiration from 07 - 49 their example we want our country to be 07 - 51 a place where every child from every 07 - 55 background can grow up free from fear 07 - 57 innocent of hatred and surrounded by 08 - 01 love opportunity and hope today we pay 08 - 06 solemn tribute to our heroes of the past 08 - 09 and dedicate ourselves to building a 08 - 12 future of freedom equality justice and 08 - 18 peace and I want to congratulate your 08 - 21 great governor and all of the people in 08 - 24 this room who were so inspirational to 08 - 28 so many others to get out and get this 08 - 31 done this is an incredible tribute not 08 - 35 only to the state of Mississippi a state 08 - 39 that I love a state where I've had great 08 - 42 success this is a tribute to our nation 08 - 46 at the highest level this is a great 08 - 49 thing you've done and I want to 08 - 51 congratulate you and just say god bless 08 - 55 you and God bless america thank you very 08 - 58 much thank you thank you all very much 09 - 02 [Applause] 09 - 04 [Music]  

What Happens When Google Disagrees With You? Is Google open to a diverse array of viewpoints? Or is it an ideological echo chamber? Just ask former Google software engineer James Damore. He was fired for disagreeing with Google's (left-wing) orthodoxy. In this video, James shares his story. Google/YouTube continues to restrict over 30 PragerU videos and deem them "inappropriate for young audiences". Or is it an ideological echo chamber? Just ask former Google software engineer James Damore. He was fired for disagreeing with Google's (left-wing) orthodoxy. In this video, James shares his story   I used to be a senior software engineer at Google. Until they fired me. For doing something unforgivable... Something so controversial that it was the number one news story for days. My crime: I wrote an internal document that, among other things, suggested that men and women, on average, are different. Like I told you: Unforgivable. The politically progressive viewpoint, which is dominant at Google and in the media, is that all disparities in society are due to injustices. Or, in this case, that the gender gap in tech is solely due to some form of sexism. But is this true? The politically correct answer is: yes. And Google acts accordingly. It treats men and women differently during hiring and promotion, holds official women-only events, and gives mandatory sensitivity training on how to combat alleged sexist bias. Of course, all of this makes sense if sexism is indeed the sole cause of the imbalance. But what if men and women are not exactly the same? Then, sexism is just one of many possible causes of the imbalance, and exclusionary programs and differential treatment can be a counterproductive form of sexism. These practices actually increase tensions and make some feel like Google cares more about their gender than their programming ability. As an engineer, when I’m faced with a problem, I want to solve it. So, I decided to research the premise: that men and women are exactly the same. I wrote my findings in a 10-page document titled, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” You can read it online. What did I discover? That not all of the male-female disparity in tech may be the result of sexism.That at least some of it may be attributed to men and women having different goals for their careers and their lives. To cite just two examples: In the study, ”Women, Careers, and Work-Life Preferences,” published in the British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, the study’s authors conclude that women across populations tend to look for more work-life balance, while men tend to have a higher drive for status. And according to a study by Cal State Fullerton psychologist Richard Lippa, men, on average, tend to be more interested in things, while women tend to be more interested in people. These findings have been replicated many times. They’ve actually been cited by other researchers as a cause for the gender gap in tech. In other words, I didn’t make this stuff up. In fact, after my document came under attack, evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller said its “empirical claims are scientifically accurate.” But Google disagreed. Like…really disagreed. First, the company’s newly appointed VP of Diversity, Integrity, and Governance, Danielle Brown, posted a memo that said my report “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.” Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, sent a memo to all employees saying that I “cross[ed] the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes.” This was, he added, “not O.K.”  Then, he fired me. By that point, much to my shock, my document had gone viral. News outlets were branding it an “anti-diversity manifesto.” But if they had read what I wrote, they could see for themselves that it was pro-diversity. I had suggested multiple ways that we could get more women into tech without resorting to counterproductive discrimination. Ironic, isn’t it? The company that hires some of the smartest people in the world couldn’t handle a well-reasoned, scientific discussion. But my firing pales in comparison to a larger issue: Will Google force upon its users the same politically correct views that it forces upon its employees? The evidence is disturbing. Google already manipulates its products to fit a certain viewpoint. Just one example: YouTube, Google’s video platform, restricts access to dozens of PragerU videos, along with videos made by other influential moderates and conservatives. Yes—Google is a business and can set its own policies. But for its billions of users, Google is their main gateway to information, the lens through which they view the world. This makes Google, in some ways, more powerful than even the government. And that means Google has a special responsibility to, well…simply follow its own motto: “Don’t be evil.” I’m James Damore for Prager University.

How can the States Fix the Federal Government A Convention of States and Article V of the Constitution. Washington is gigantic, corrupt, and unaccountable. Can it be fixed? Learn more about the Convention of States and Article V of the Constitution. Jim DeMint, former Senator from South Carolina, explains. The federal government has become a lumbering giant. With each passing year, it gets bigger and scarier. In 1965, Washington was 761 billion dollars big. In 2016... it was 3.5 trillion – five times the size. If the government spent only the money it collected in taxes, that would be one thing. But it always spends more­­—which is why we’re $20 trillion dollars in debt. That’s 13 zeroes. Count ‘em: Thirteen. But the crazy spending isn’t even the worst of it. Washington is involved in every part of our lives. Think about anything you do, from driving your car to buying your groceries to mowing your lawn. Whatever it is—your education, your job, your health— the government has its hands on your shoulder, if not on your throat. As a congressman and senator for 14 years, I know this only too well. So, how do we cut this giant down to size? Is it even possible? Yes. And the amazing thing is, the answer is right in front of us. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, foresaw the situation we find ourselves in today. They wrote into the Constitution a way to repair Washington...not from the inside, because that will never happen but from the outside, where it might. It’s right there in Article 5. Most people are familiar with the first part: “The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution...” All 27 Amendments we have now started this way. Congress proposed them and at least three-quarters of the states ratified them. But is this the only way to amend the Constitution? Well, let’s read the next clause: It says that Congress, “…on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments...” Did you catch that? Congress must call a convention to amend the Constitution if two-thirds of the states—that’s 34 states—demand it. The time has come to demand it. The time has come to propose amendments that will restore meaningful limits on federal power and authority. The time has come for a convention of states. Here’s how it would work: Once the 34 states call a convention, all 50 states send a delegate to represent their interests. For any constitutional amendments proposed, each state gets one vote. And an amendment only passes out of the convention and to the states for ratification if a majority of the states’ delegates vote in the affirmative. In this scenario, Congress has no say. It is completely in the hands of the states, which means it’s a whole lot closer to the hands of the people. We’ve never once amended the Constitution this way—but that doesn’t mean we can’t. But, you might ask, doesn’t this open the door to rewriting the entire Constitution? Antonin Scalia, the late Supreme Court justice, acknowledged this risk but regarded it as a “minimal” and “reasonable” one. Why? Because to be ratified, a proposed amendment would need the approval of 38 states. That’s a high bar. Thirty-eight states would never agree to something radical like abolishing freedom of speech. “The Founders,” Scalia said, “knew the Congress would be unwilling to give attention to many issues the people are concerned with, particularly those involving restrictions on the federal government’s own power... [so] they provided the convention [of states] as a remedy.” This should not be a partisan, left/right, Democrat/Republican issue. This should be a "who controls your life" issue: you or the government? Today, politicians can turn your life upside down on a whim, kind of like King George in 1775. Being at the mercy of distant, disconnected rulers was why the American Revolution was fought in the first place! But we don’t need a revolution. We have Article Five. So, what amendments might a Convention of States propose to limit Washington’s power? Term limits, for one. No one should be in Congress for 20 or 30 years. The only people who disagree have been in Congress for 20 or 30 years. And how about a limit on taxes, spending, and borrowing? Since you began this video, the national debt has gone up $8.4 million dollars. Here’s one more idea: A constitutional amendment that Congress can't exempt itself from the laws it passes—something it’s done dozens of times, from insider trading to Obamacare. Now, I don’t believe a Convention of States will solve all of America’s problems. But the Founders put it in the Constitution for a reason. They knew a time would come when Washington would become so big, and so intrusive, that only we the people could cut it down to size. That time is now. I’m Jim DeMint for Prager University.

The Southern Poverty Law Center ☠ A Hate Group ☠ The "Anti-Hate" Group That Is a Hate Group Shutting down people you don’t agree with is about as un-American as you can get. Rigorous debate, honest discussion, open exchange of ideas—that’s the American way. But free thinking and speech are threatened today by a group with a sweet-sounding name that conceals a nefarious purpose. This group is called the Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC. Originally founded as a civil-rights law firm in 1971, the SPLC reinvented itself in the mid-‘80s as a political attack group. Every year now it produces a new list of people and charities it claims are “extremists” and “haters.” Aided by glowing coverage from the establishment media, the SPLC’s hate list has become a weapon for taking individuals and groups they disagree with and tarring them with ugly associations. The SPLC employs a two-pronged strategy: First,  find a handful of crazies with barely any followers, no address, and no staff, and blow them up into a dangerous movement— proof that there are neo-Nazis lurking everywhere. On their notorious “Hate Map,” the SPLC lists 917 separate hate groups in the U.S.! No one has even heard of more than a handful of them. The second strategy of the SPLC is to undermine legitimate political voices that they oppose by associating them with extremists like the KKK. Take the charity known as the Alliance Defending Freedom. The SPLC lists them as a “hate group.” Is that fair? Well, the ADF has a network of 3,000 attorneys from all across the U.S. who’ve donated more than a million volunteer hours in defense of religious liberty. They’ve had a role in 49 victories at the U.S. Supreme Court. Putting the Alliance Defending Freedom on a list with 130 Ku Klux Klan chapters is not only wrong, it’s malicious. According to the SPLC, one of the most influential social scientists in the U.S.— Charles Murray—is a, quote, “white nationalist.” Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps the most eloquent spokesperson for the rights of Muslim women, is, to the SPLC, a “toxic... anti-Muslim extremist.” Scores of other individuals and charities active in mainstream conservative or religious causes have likewise been branded by the Southern Poverty Law Center as threats to society. Mind you, it is entirely fair to disagree with any of those folks. But it is utterly unfair to call them haters or extremists. The largest category listed by the SPLC as extremists—with 623 entries—covers groups like the Tea Party organizations that are wary of centralized government. Last time we checked, favoring smaller government was a mainstream and perfectly honorable American tradition. What is not honorable is the course prescribed by a leader of the SPLC, Mark Potok, who was caught on video proclaiming the organization’s true intentions. He told a group of supporters, quote, “the press will describe us as ‘monitoring hate groups’…. I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them.” Portraying someone with political views different from your own as a public menace is bullying. And it’s a dangerous game. Instead of reducing hate and violence, the SPLC’s name-calling directly incites it. In March 2017, Charles Murray was trying to discuss his acclaimed book Coming Apart at Middlebury College when he was violently attacked by protesters inflamed by the SPLC’s labeling of him as a racist. A professor escorting Murray ended up in the hospital. In 2012, a gunman attempted mass murder at the Family Research Council, and failed only because the first man he shot managed to disarm him. The attacker told the police he acted because the SPLC had listed the Family Research Council as a hate group. It’s a vicious irony: while promoting itself as a monitor of “hate groups,” the SPLC has, in practice, become a fomenter of hate. Yet the group rolls on, bigger than ever. What keeps them going? For one thing, the establishment media constantly quote them. Scare stories about right-wing storm-troopers are a sure way to attract eyeballs, and fit nicely with the media’s own preconceptions of the “dangerous reactionaries” lurking out there in middle America. Second, alarmism is a great fundraising technique. Convincing people there are fascists everywhere has turned the SPLC into a cash machine. Last year, the group hustled $50 million dollars out of frightened liberal donors, adding to the $368 million dollars of assets they were already sitting on. So, the next time you see the Southern Poverty Law Center quoted in the news, just remember: the masterminds behind the SPLC aren’t eliminating hate. They are fueling it. I’m Karl Zinsmeister for Prager University.

President Trump Gives Remarks on Tax Reform to American Truckers in Harrisburg, PA The American Trucking Association.  The current tax code is a disaster and needs to be reformed for all Americans. President Donald J. Trump is committed to bringing historic tax relief to the American people based on four key ideas – cutting taxes for every day Americans, simplifying the tax code, giving business the competitive edge, and investing in America. Today, President Trump is traveling to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to deliver this message on tax reform to the American Trucking Association.   The American Trucking Associations, founded in 1933, is the largest national trade association for the trucking industry.   Trucking Leaders Join President Trump in Calling for Tax Reform  Reducing Rates Will Allow Industry to Expand, Add Jobs   Harrisburg, Pennsylvania – Today, leaders with the American Trucking Associations joined President Trump in calling on Congress to quickly act on comprehensive tax reform as a way of growing the economy and creating jobs.   “While trucking sustains the vitality of the U.S. economy, we also carry a heavy tax burden, paying the highest corporate tax rate of any transportation mode,” said ATA President and CEO Chris Spear. “That is why we joined President Trump at today’s event, in support of his plan to reform our tax code. We urge Congress to follow the President’s lead and pass tax reform by year’s end.   “Hearing the President specifically call out the benefits of tax reform for ATA’s members and the trucking industry underscores the need for this effort. We urge Congress to work with the President to achieve the goal of reducing the rates families and small businesses pay in taxes,” he said.   Spear was joined at the event in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, by several ATA members, in support of the tax reform effort.   “Few industries are as connected to every facet of the American economy as trucking. From that vantage point, we can see clearly what the President’s tax reform plan would do to drive our economy,” said ATA Chairman Kevin Burch, president of Jet Express Inc., Dayton, Ohio. “Every day, we proudly do our job to move America forward. We join the President in calling on Congress to do the same.   “Lower rates equals money that can be used to hire and pay drivers – the top job in 29 states. It can be used to purchase new, safer equipment, or hire highly skilled technicians to maintain it,” Spear said. “By easing the tax burden on the truckers that literally move our economy, Congress will enable us to invest in our employees, equipment and the growth of our companies. Higher tax rates mean higher transportation costs, which make everyday goods more expensive – hurting lower-income Americans the most. By contrast, the benefits of lowered rates will reverberate up and down the supply chain, from the manufacturer to the small business and individual household.”   “Passing tax reform would help me as the owner of a small family-owned business, by not only helping us add drivers and trucks, but in allowing this business to stay in my family by eliminating the estate tax,” said ATA member Calvin Ewell, president of H.R. Ewell Inc., East Earl, Pennsylvania. “Trucking is a low-single-digit-margin  business, and family-owned companies aren’t flush with cash, but they have millions in capital tied up in trucks and facilities, so eliminating this tax will preserve our small family trucking businesses as a small family business.”   American Trucking Associations is the largest national trade association for the trucking industry. Through a federation of 50 affiliated state trucking associations and industry-related conferences and councils, ATA is the voice of the industry America depends on most to move our nation’s freight. Follow ATA on Twitter or on Facebook. Trucking Moves America Forward

President Trump - Remarks on Las Vegas Mass Murder It was an act of pure evil Thank you. My fellow Americans, we are joined together today in sadness, shock, and grief. Last night a gunman opened fire on a large crowd at a country music concert in Las Vegas, Nevada. He brutally murdered more than 50 people and wounded hundreds more. It was an act of pure evil. The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are working closely with local authorities to assist with the investigation and they will provide updates as to the investigation and how it develops. I want to thank the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police department and all of the first responders for their courageous efforts and for helping to save the lives of so many. The speed with which they acted is miraculous and prevented further loss of life. To have found the shooter so quickly after the first shots were fired, is something for which we will always be thankful and grateful. It shows what true professionalism is all about. Hundreds of our fellow citizens are now mourning the sudden loss of a loved one, a parent, a child, a brother or sister. We cannot fathom their pain, we cannot imagine their loss. To the families of the victims, we are praying for you and we are here for you. And we ask God to help see you through this very dark period.     Scripture teaches us the Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit. We seek comfort in those words, for we know that God lives in the hearts of those who grieve. To the wounded who are now recovering in hospitals, we are praying for your full and speedy recovery, and pledge to you our support from this day forward. Psalm 34:18 The Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.   In memory of the fallen, I have directed that our great flag be flown at half-staff. I will be visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday to meet with law enforcement, first responders, and the families of the victims. In moments of tragedy and horror, America comes together as one. And it always has.   We call upon the bonds that unite us, our faith, our family, and our shared values. We call upon the bonds of citizenship, the ties of community, and the comfort of our common humanity. Our unity cannot be shattered by evil, our bonds cannot be broken by violence, and though we feel such great anger, at the senseless murder of our fellow citizens, it is our love that defines us today. And always will. Forever. In times such as these, I know we are searching for some kind of meaning in the chaos, some kind of light in the darkness. The answers do not come easy. But we can take solace knowing that even the darkest space can be brightened by a single light and even the most terrible despair can be illuminated by a single ray of hope. Melania and I are praying for every American who has been hurt, wounded or lost the ones they loved so dearly in this terrible, terrible attack. We pray for the entire nation to find unity and peace, and we pray for the day when evil is banished and the innocent are safe from hatred and from fear. May God bless the souls of the lives that are lost, may God give us the grace of healing and may God provide the grieving families with strength to carry on. Thank you. God bless America. Thank you.

US Representative Steve Scalise full address to Congress since his Attempted Murder Attest to the Power of Prayer, Thanks God, and Capitol Police Transcript 00 - 05 the gentleman is recognized for as much 00 - 08 time as he may consume 00 - 11 Wow Thank You mr. speaker 00 - 15 you have no idea how great this feels to 00 - 18 be back here at work in the people's 00 - 21 house 00 - 22 [Applause] 00 - 27 as you can imagine these last three and 00 - 29 a half months have been pretty 00 - 30 challenging times for me and my family 00 - 33 but if you look at the outpouring of 00 - 38 love of warmth of prayer my gosh 00 - 44 Jennifer and I have been overwhelmed 00 - 46 with all of that outpouring and it's 00 - 48 given us the strength to get through all 00 - 50 of this and to get to this point today 00 - 53 and it starts with God 01 - 00 [Applause] 01 - 05 when I was laying out on that ball field 01 - 08 the first thing I did once I was down 01 - 10 and I couldn't move anymore as I just 01 - 13 started to pray and I will tell you it 01 - 15 gave me an unbelievable sense of calm 01 - 18 knowing that at that point it was in 01 - 20 God's hands but I prayed for very 01 - 22 specific things and I'll tell you pretty 01 - 28 much every one of those prayers was 01 - 29 answered and and there were some pretty 01 - 32 challenging prayers I was putting in 01 - 33 God's hands 01 - 34 but he he really did deliver for me and 01 - 39 my family and it just gives you that 01 - 41 renewed faith in understanding that the 01 - 45 power of prayer is something that you 01 - 46 just cannot underestimate 01 - 50 [Applause] 01 - 57 so I am definitely a living example that 02 - 00 miracles really do happen the first 02 - 05 place I want to go to to thank true 02 - 08 angels along the way starts with the 02 - 12 United States Capitol Police 02 - 39 [Music] 02 - 46 when I was elected Majority Whip as you 02 - 49 know the elected leadership has a 02 - 51 security detail and if anybody ever 02 - 54 wondered why we're signed security 02 - 57 detail 02 - 58 I surely found out that day and let me 03 - 01 tell you I want to specifically mention 03 - 04 crystal Greiner and David Bailey 03 - 07 [Applause] 03 - 34 crystal and David were signed to my 03 - 37 security detail that morning and day in 03 - 41 and day out they're they're part of our 03 - 42 family Jennifer I truly do treat him as 03 - 44 part of our family because they're with 03 - 45 us everywhere we go and on that day it 03 - 48 was no different On June 14th 03 - 50 they came 6 - 30 in the morning we arrived 03 - 53 at the baseball field just to play in 03 - 55 practice for a game of charity baseball 03 - 58 and nobody would have suspected what 04 - 01 ensued and yet as soon as those shots 04 - 04 were fired I'll tell you when I was 04 - 06 laying on the ground one of the things I 04 - 09 prayed for is that David and Krystle 04 - 12 would be successful in carrying out 04 - 15 their duties and both David and Krystal 04 - 19 are incredibly well trained incredibly 04 - 21 for professional but when I was laying 04 - 23 there not long after the first couple of 04 - 25 shots were fired 04 - 26 I could hear a different caliber weapon 04 - 28 and that told me that they had 04 - 30 immediately engaged the shooter and let 04 - 32 me tell you if they didn't act so 04 - 33 quickly and even after being shot both 04 - 36 themselves continued to engage the 04 - 39 shooter and ultimately got him down 04 - 41 which not only saved my life but saved 04 - 44 the life of a lot of other people that 04 - 45 are here in this chamber today Krystle 04 - 48 couldn't be with us today but David 04 - 50 Bailey is with us David you are my hero 04 - 52 you saved my life and everything thank 04 - 54 you so much 05 - 22 Tiger blood I also think those thanks to 05 - 28 a lot of the people that run the field 05 - 29 with me right after the shooter was down 05 - 32 a lot of my colleagues came and ran to 05 - 34 come check on me and one I want to 05 - 36 mention in particular is one of those 05 - 39 things that Jennifer and I call the the 05 - 41 little miracles that happened that day 05 - 44 and throughout the next few months of 05 - 47 our recovery happen to have Brad 05 - 50 Wenstrup on the field that day and he 05 - 53 was one of the first to come to my side 05 - 54 and as you know Brad's not only a doctor 05 - 57 but he's a decorated Army Ranger who 05 - 59 served in combat in one of his roles and 06 - 02 missions was to take care of people that 06 - 04 were wounded before they went off on the 06 - 06 helicopter to go get prepared who would 06 - 09 have thought that God would have put 06 - 11 Brad out there on that field with me 06 - 13 because the tourniquet he applied many 06 - 15 will tell you saved my life so that I 06 - 17 can actually make it to the hospital in 06 - 19 time with all the blood loss so Brad 06 - 21 where you at 06 - 22 [Applause] 06 - 54 once I arrived at MedStar Hospital I was 06 - 57 a little bit out of it at that point but 06 - 59 luckily I ended up in the trusted hands 07 - 03 of dr. Jack Sava and his great team over 07 - 07 at MedStar they gave me a second chance 07 - 09 at life and through many many surgeries 07 - 13 where my life was truly in the balance a 07 - 15 few of those they did a wonderful job at 07 - 18 making sure that I was well taken care 07 - 20 of and ultimately made it through that 07 - 22 point so I could get to dr. golden and 07 - 25 his team who actually put me back 07 - 27 together again which was quite a task to 07 - 30 the point where I'm actually able to 07 - 32 relearn how to walk again 07 - 33 so I doctored dr. Sava dr. golden thank 07 - 36 you for being here and thanks for your 07 - 37 team 07 - 58 above all else I want to thank my lovely 08 - 03 wife Jennifer 08 - 05 [Applause] 08 - 30 those you know or know how strong 08 - 32 Jennifer is she's an incredibly warm and 08 - 35 loving wife and she's an incredible 08 - 38 mother to our children and somehow 08 - 40 through the late nights and the 08 - 42 surgeries and all the other things she 08 - 44 managed to hold our family together to 08 - 46 make sure that Harrison and Madison were 08 - 48 cared for as well and still to this day 08 - 51 she's not only by my side but she's also 08 - 53 serving as a great mother I am lucky to 08 - 56 have you thanks for being here love you 08 - 58 sweetheart 08 - 58 [Applause] 09 - 05 and while it's been a challenge in time 09 - 08 for my family the thing that really 09 - 10 overwhelmed us from the start was the 09 - 13 outpouring of love and warmth and 09 - 16 prayers from Southeast Louisiana the 09 - 20 district that I represent we saw blood 09 - 22 drives at st. Catherine we saw prayer 09 - 25 groups at First United Methodist Church 09 - 28 in Slidell but what we also saw were 09 - 31 prayer groups and well-wishes being 09 - 35 given from people that we'd never met 09 - 37 before throughout all of your districts 09 - 39 and you shared it with me and it was one 09 - 43 of those things that was hard for us to 09 - 44 completely comprehend that you had 09 - 46 people from all walks of life that had 09 - 49 never met me before and yet they saw 09 - 52 what had happened and they just wanted 09 - 54 to offer prayers and let me tell you - 09 - 57 each and every one of you and please 09 - 59 convey it to your constituents and I 10 - 00 sure convey it to my constituents back 10 - 02 home that warmth and love gave us just 10 - 06 incredible strength that you can't 10 - 08 imagine during some really really 10 - 09 difficult times and so that is one more 10 - 12 example of the power of prayer something 10 - 16 else I saw firsthand wasn't a surprise 10 - 18 to me but it was the outpouring of love 10 - 21 from you my colleagues both Republican 10 - 23 and Democrat I know right after the 10 - 27 shooting we were practicing on the 10 - 30 Republican side the Democrats were 10 - 31 practicing too and my colleague and 10 - 34 friend and sometimes archrival in 10 - 36 baseball from back home in New Orleans 10 - 38 unfortunately the star of the game too 10 - 40 many times Cedric Richmond somehow 10 - 44 figured out which hospital I was sent to 10 - 45 and got there probably the first person 10 - 48 there on the scene in his baseball 10 - 50 uniform to check on me so many others of 10 - 53 you again both Republican and Democrat 10 - 56 reached out in ways that I can't express 10 - 58 the gratitude and how much it means to 11 - 01 me Jennifer and our whole family it 11 - 04 really does show the warm side of 11 - 06 Congress that very few people get to see 11 - 09 and so I want to thank each and every 11 - 11 one of you for that you don't know how 11 - 12 much it meant to me and when I come back 11 - 14 into this chamber here today it just 11 - 16 seeing the faces of all of you 11 - 19 it just means more to me than you can 11 - 21 imagine so thanks for all of that love 11 - 23 and support 11 - 24 Oh 11 - 33 a lot of people ask did this event 11 - 37 change you and I think those even know 11 - 39 me no I'm a I'm an optimistic person I'm 11 - 42 you know just a fun-loving person I'm 11 - 44 from south Louisiana and we believe you 11 - 46 work hard and you play hard and Jawad 11 - 48 2 - v is an event like this gonna really 11 - 51 change that and and the first thing I 11 - 53 can tell you is yes it changed me but 11 - 55 not in the ways you might think it's 11 - 58 it's only strengthened my faith in God 12 - 01 and it's really crystallized what what 12 - 06 shows up as the goodness in people I got 12 - 09 to see that goodness in people and so 12 - 12 while some people might focus on a 12 - 14 tragic event and an evil act to me all I 12 - 18 remember are the thousands of acts of 12 - 21 kindness and love and warmth that came 12 - 23 out of this and kept me going through 12 - 24 all of it and again just re-emphasize 12 - 26 just how wonderful most people are and 12 - 29 how how much compassion there is out 12 - 32 there and finally I want to talk about 12 - 37 something that I guess hit me and 12 - 39 probably struck me more than anything 12 - 41 that I was not expecting and that was 12 - 44 the outpouring of love and support from 12 - 46 world leaders people I've met and have 12 - 49 known Benjamin Netanyahu and I have had 12 - 51 some incredible conversations from the 12 - 54 hospital the Theresa Mamie reached out 12 - 56 the King Abdullah of Jordan who so many 12 - 58 of us have met reached out but other 13 - 01 world leaders also reached out people I 13 - 05 had never met before and that touched me 13 - 08 in a different way because each and 13 - 11 every one of us we come here and we 13 - 13 fight for the things that we believe in 13 - 14 I have passionate beliefs for some 13 - 17 reason some of you don't agree with all 13 - 19 of those 13 - 22 but it's so important that we come up 13 - 24 here we are the people's house this is 13 - 26 the place where these ideas are supposed 13 - 28 to be debated and we fight through those 13 - 30 issues but ultimately we come together 13 - 32 on whatever the board shows is 218 if 13 - 37 you can put the majority together 13 - 39 that's what rules the day it's so 13 - 41 important that is we're having those 13 - 43 political battles we don't make them 13 - 45 personal because one of the things I saw 13 - 48 and I guess this is the thing that that 13 - 50 really kept coming back to me as I tried 13 - 51 to to make sense of all this and 13 - 53 comprehend the outpouring of love that I 13 - 56 saw it kept coming back to those world 13 - 59 leaders you know why would leaders from 14 - 02 around the world that I'd never met 14 - 03 before reach out and say Steve we hope 14 - 05 you can get back to work we hope you can 14 - 07 come through this and what it says is 14 - 10 sure they cared about my well-being but 14 - 13 more than that they saw this as an 14 - 15 attack on all of us they saw this as an 14 - 17 attack on the institution of the United 14 - 20 States Congress and our government and 14 - 21 they really count on us to be successful 14 - 24 look we all know the United States is 14 - 26 the leader of the free world it's 14 - 28 something that we've frankly had the 14 - 29 honor as a country to hold as a 14 - 32 distinction for generations and yet when 14 - 36 you look at that title what it really 14 - 38 means is that there are people all 14 - 39 around the world that want freedom maybe 14 - 42 that have freedom but they know the 14 - 44 United States being strong is critical 14 - 47 to the rest of the world having the 14 - 49 opportunity for freedom 14 - 51 [Applause] 15 - 05 [Music] 15 - 09 but that's why I'm so excited to be back 15 - 11 because as we're fighting through the 15 - 14 issues of the day let's just keep in 15 - 17 mind that we rise above the challenges 15 - 19 of the day and understand that it's not 15 - 21 just us in our constituents in the 15 - 24 country the United States that's 15 - 25 counting on us being successful people 15 - 28 all around the world that believe in 15 - 29 freedom are counting on us as well and 15 - 31 we will deliver form that's why I am so 15 - 33 honored to be back here in the house 15 - 35 serving with you god bless each and 15 - 37 everyone of you and God bless the 15 - 39 The United States of America 15 - 48 [Applause] 16 - 55 speaker with that I yield back the 16 - 58 balance of my time 16 - 59 [Music] 16 - 59 [Applause]  

President Donald Trump Speech to the 72nd Session of the United Nations Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime *With special commentary by Rush Limbaugh* United Nations New York, New York 10:04 A.M. EDT PRESIDENT TRUMP:  Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, world leaders, and distinguished delegates:  Welcome to New York.  It is a profound honor to stand here in my home city, as a representative of the American people, to address the people of the world.  As millions of our citizens continue to suffer the effects of the devastating hurricanes that have struck our country, I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to every leader in this room who has offered assistance and aid.  The American people are strong and resilient, and they will emerge from these hardships more determined than ever before. Fortunately, the United States has done very well since Election Day last November 8th.  The stock market is at an all-time high -- a record.  Unemployment is at its lowest level in 16 years, and because of our regulatory and other reforms, we have more people working in the United States today than ever before.  Companies are moving back, creating job growth the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time.  And it has just been announced that we will be spending almost $700 billion on our military and defense.   Our military will soon be the strongest it has ever been.  For more than 70 years, in times of war and peace, the leaders of nations, movements, and religions have stood before this assembly.  Like them, I intend to address some of the very serious threats before us today but also the enormous potential waiting to be unleashed.   We live in a time of extraordinary opportunity.  Breakthroughs in science, technology, and medicine are curing illnesses and solving problems that prior generations thought impossible to solve.   But each day also brings news of growing dangers that threaten everything we cherish and value.  Terrorists and extremists have gathered strength and spread to every region of the planet.  Rogue regimes represented in this body not only support terrorists but threaten other nations and their own people with the most destructive weapons known to humanity.   Authority and authoritarian powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances that prevented conflict and tilted the world toward freedom since World War II.     International criminal networks traffic drugs, weapons, people; force dislocation and mass migration; threaten our borders; and new forms of aggression exploit technology to menace our citizens. To put it simply, we meet at a time of both of immense promise and great peril.  It is entirely up to us whether we lift the world to new heights, or let it fall into a valley of disrepair. We have it in our power, should we so choose, to lift millions from poverty, to help our citizens realize their dreams, and to ensure that new generations of children are raised free from violence, hatred, and fear. This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world wars to help shape this better future.  It was based on the vision that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their prosperity. It was in the same period, exactly 70 years ago, that the United States developed the Marshall Plan to help restore Europe.  Those three beautiful pillars -- they’re pillars of peace, sovereignty, security, and prosperity. The Marshall Plan was built on the noble idea that the whole world is safer when nations are strong, independent, and free.  As President Truman said in his message to Congress at that time, “Our support of European recovery is in full accord with our support of the United Nations.  The success of the United Nations depends upon the independent strength of its members.” To overcome the perils of the present and to achieve the promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past.  Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent nations that embrace their sovereignty to promote security, prosperity, and peace for themselves and for the world. We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government.  But we do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties:  to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation.  This is the beautiful vision of this institution, and this is foundation for cooperation and success. Strong, sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures, and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect. Strong, sovereign nations let their people take ownership of the future and control their own destiny.  And strong, sovereign nations allow individuals to flourish in the fullness of the life intended by God. In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch.  This week gives our country a special reason to take pride in that example.  We are celebrating the 230th anniversary of our beloved Constitution -- the oldest constitution still in use in the world today. This timeless document has been the foundation of peace, prosperity, and freedom for the Americans and for countless millions around the globe whose own countries have found inspiration in its respect for human nature, human dignity, and the rule of law.  The greatest in the United States Constitution is its first three beautiful words.  They are:  “We the people.” Generations of Americans have sacrificed to maintain the promise of those words, the promise of our country, and of our great history.  In America, the people govern, the people rule, and the people are sovereign.  I was elected not to take power, but to give power to the American people, where it belongs. In foreign affairs, we are renewing this founding principle of sovereignty.  Our government's first duty is to its people, to our citizens -- to serve their needs, to ensure their safety, to preserve their rights, and to defend their values.  As President of the United States, I will always put America first, just like you, as the leaders of your countries will always, and should always, put your countries first.  (Applause.)  All responsible leaders have an obligation to serve their own citizens, and the nation-state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition.   But making a better life for our people also requires us to work together in close harmony and unity to create a more safe and peaceful future for all people. The United States will forever be a great friend to the world, and especially to its allies.  But we can no longer be taken advantage of, or enter into a one-sided deal where the United States gets nothing in return.  As long as I hold this office, I will defend America’s interests above all else. But in fulfilling our obligations to our own nations, we also realize that it’s in everyone’s interest to seek a future where all nations can be sovereign, prosperous, and secure. America does more than speak for the values expressed in the United Nations Charter.  Our citizens have paid the ultimate price to defend our freedom and the freedom of many nations represented in this great hall.  America's devotion is measured on the battlefields where our young men and women have fought and sacrificed alongside of our allies, from the beaches of Europe to the deserts of the Middle East to the jungles of Asia.  It is an eternal credit to the American character that even after we and our allies emerged victorious from the bloodiest war in history, we did not seek territorial expansion, or attempt to oppose and impose our way of life on others.  Instead, we helped build institutions such as this one to defend the sovereignty, security, and prosperity for all. For the diverse nations of the world, this is our hope.  We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife.  We are guided by outcomes, not ideology.  We have a policy of principled realism, rooted in shared goals, interests, and values. That realism forces us to confront a question facing every leader and nation in this room.  It is a question we cannot escape or avoid.  We will slide down the path of complacency, numb to the challenges, threats, and even wars that we face.  Or do we have enough strength and pride to confront those dangers today, so that our citizens can enjoy peace and prosperity tomorrow? If we desire to lift up our citizens, if we aspire to the approval of history, then we must fulfill our sovereign duties to the people we faithfully represent.  We must protect our nations, their interests, and their futures.  We must reject threats to sovereignty, from the Ukraine to the South China Sea.  We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.  And just as the founders of this body intended, we must work together and confront together those who threaten us with chaos, turmoil, and terror. The scourge of our planet today is a small group of rogue regimes that violate every principle on which the United Nations is based.  They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries.  If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph.  When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength.  No one has shown more contempt for other nations and for the wellbeing of their own people than the depraved regime in North Korea.  It is responsible for the starvation deaths of millions of North Koreans, and for the imprisonment, torture, killing, and oppression of countless more.  We were all witness to the regime's deadly abuse when an innocent American college student, Otto Warmbier, was returned to America only to die a few days later.  We saw it in the assassination of the dictator's brother using banned nerve agents in an international airport.  We know it kidnapped a sweet 13-year-old Japanese girl from a beach in her own country to enslave her as a language tutor for North Korea's spies. If this is not twisted enough, now North Korea's reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles threatens the entire world with unthinkable loss of human life.   It is an outrage that some nations would not only trade with such a regime, but would arm, supply, and financially support a country that imperils the world with nuclear conflict.  No nation on earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles. The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.  Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime.  The United States is ready, willing and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary.  That’s what the United Nations is all about; that’s what the United Nations is for.  Let’s see how they do. It is time for North Korea to realize that the denuclearization is its only acceptable future.  The United Nations Security Council recently held two unanimous 15-0 votes adopting hard-hitting resolutions against North Korea, and I want to thank China and Russia for joining the vote to impose sanctions, along with all of the other members of the Security Council.  Thank you to all involved. But we must do much more.  It is time for all nations to work together to isolate the Kim regime until it ceases its hostile behavior.    We face this decision not only in North Korea.  It is far past time for the nations of the world to confront another reckless regime -- one that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing death to America, destruction to Israel, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room.  The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy.  It has turned a wealthy country with a rich history and culture into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed, and chaos.  The longest-suffering victims of Iran's leaders are, in fact, its own people. Rather than use its resources to improve Iranian lives, its oil profits go to fund Hezbollah and other terrorists that kill innocent Muslims and attack their peaceful Arab and Israeli neighbors.  This wealth, which rightly belongs to Iran's people, also goes to shore up Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship, fuel Yemen's civil war, and undermine peace throughout the entire Middle East.  We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles, and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program.  (Applause.)  The Iran Deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.  Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it -- believe me.   It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran's government end its pursuit of death and destruction.  It is time for the regime to free all Americans and citizens of other nations that they have unjustly detained.  And above all, Iran's government must stop supporting terrorists, begin serving its own people, and respect the sovereign rights of its neighbors. The entire world understands that the good people of Iran want change, and, other than the vast military power of the United States, that Iran's people are what their leaders fear the most.  This is what causes the regime to restrict Internet access, tear down satellite dishes, shoot unarmed student protestors, and imprison political reformers. Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever, and the day will come when the Iranian people will face a choice.  Will they continue down the path of poverty, bloodshed, and terror?  Or will the Iranian people return to the nation's proud roots as a center of civilization, culture, and wealth where their people can be happy and prosperous once again? The Iranian regime's support for terror is in stark contrast to the recent commitments of many of its neighbors to fight terrorism and halt its financing. In Saudi Arabia early last year, I was greatly honored to address the leaders of more than 50 Arab and Muslim nations.  We agreed that all responsible nations must work together to confront terrorists and the Islamist extremism that inspires them.  We will stop radical Islamic terrorism because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation, and indeed to tear up the entire world.  We must deny the terrorists safe haven, transit, funding, and any form of support for their vile and sinister ideology.  We must drive them out of our nations.  It is time to expose and hold responsible those countries who support and finance terror groups like al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the Taliban and others that slaughter innocent people. The United States and our allies are working together throughout the Middle East to crush the loser terrorists and stop the reemergence of safe havens they use to launch attacks on all of our people.  Last month, I announced a new strategy for victory in the fight against this evil in Afghanistan.  From now on, our security interests will dictate the length and scope of military operations, not arbitrary benchmarks and timetables set up by politicians.  I have also totally changed the rules of engagement in our fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups.  In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains toward lasting defeat of ISIS.  In fact, our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined.     We seek the de-escalation of the Syrian conflict, and a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people.  The actions of the criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad, including the use of chemical weapons against his own citizens -- even innocent children -- shock the conscience of every decent person.  No society can be safe if banned chemical weapons are allowed to spread.  That is why the United States carried out a missile strike on the airbase that launched the attack.  We appreciate the efforts of United Nations agencies that are providing vital humanitarian assistance in areas liberated from ISIS, and we especially thank Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon for their role in hosting refugees from the Syrian conflict.   The United States is a compassionate nation and has spent billions and billions of dollars in helping to support this effort.  We seek an approach to refugee resettlement that is designed to help these horribly treated people, and which enables their eventual return to their home countries, to be part of the rebuilding process. For the cost of resettling one refugee in the United States, we can assist more than 10 in their home region.  Out of the goodness of our hearts, we offer financial assistance to hosting countries in the region, and we support recent agreements of the G20 nations that will seek to host refugees as close to their home countries as possible.  This is the safe, responsible, and humanitarian approach. For decades, the United States has dealt with migration challenges here in the Western Hemisphere.  We have learned that, over the long term, uncontrolled migration is deeply unfair to both the sending and the receiving countries. For the sending countries, it reduces domestic pressure to pursue needed political and economic reform, and drains them of the human capital necessary to motivate and implement those reforms. For the receiving countries, the substantial costs of uncontrolled migration are borne overwhelmingly by low-income citizens whose concerns are often ignored by both media and government. I want to salute the work of the United Nations in seeking to address the problems that cause people to flee from their homes.  The United Nations and African Union led peacekeeping missions to have invaluable contributions in stabilizing conflicts in Africa.  The United States continues to lead the world in humanitarian assistance, including famine prevention and relief in South Sudan, Somalia, and northern Nigeria and Yemen.   We have invested in better health and opportunity all over the world through programs like PEPFAR, which funds AIDS relief; the President's Malaria Initiative; the Global Health Security Agenda; the Global Fund to End Modern Slavery; and the Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative, part of our commitment to empowering women all across the globe. We also thank -- (applause) -- we also thank the Secretary General for recognizing that the United Nations must reform if it is to be an effective partner in confronting threats to sovereignty, security, and prosperity.  Too often the focus of this organization has not been on results, but on bureaucracy and process. In some cases, states that seek to subvert this institution's noble aims have hijacked the very systems that are supposed to advance them.  For example, it is a massive source of embarrassment to the United Nations that some governments with egregious human rights records sit on the U.N. Human Rights Council.  The United States is one out of 193 countries in the United Nations, and yet we pay 22 percent of the entire budget and more.  In fact, we pay far more than anybody realizes.  The United States bears an unfair cost burden, but, to be fair, if it could actually accomplish all of its stated goals, especially the goal of peace, this investment would easily be well worth it. Major portions of the world are in conflict and some, in fact, are going to hell.  But the powerful people in this room, under the guidance and auspices of the United Nations, can solve many of these vicious and complex problems. The American people hope that one day soon the United Nations can be a much more accountable and effective advocate for human dignity and freedom around the world.  In the meantime, we believe that no nation should have to bear a disproportionate share of the burden, militarily or financially.  Nations of the world must take a greater role in promoting secure and prosperous societies in their own regions.  That is why in the Western Hemisphere, the United States has stood against the corrupt and destabilizing regime in Cuba and embraced the enduring dream of the Cuban people to live in freedom.  My administration recently announced that we will not lift sanctions on the Cuban government until it makes fundamental reforms. We have also imposed tough, calibrated sanctions on the socialist Maduro regime in Venezuela, which has brought a once thriving nation to the brink of total collapse. The socialist dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on the good people of that country.  This corrupt regime destroyed a prosperous nation by imposing a failed ideology that has produced poverty and misery everywhere it has been tried.  To make matters worse, Maduro has defied his own people, stealing power from their elected representatives to preserve his disastrous rule.    The Venezuelan people are starving and their country is collapsing.  Their democratic institutions are being destroyed.  This situation is completely unacceptable and we cannot stand by and watch. As a responsible neighbor and friend, we and all others have a goal.  That goal is to help them regain their freedom, recover their country, and restore their democracy.  I would like to thank leaders in this room for condemning the regime and providing vital support to the Venezuelan people. The United States has taken important steps to hold the regime accountable.  We are prepared to take further action if the government of Venezuela persists on its path to impose authoritarian rule on the Venezuelan people.    We are fortunate to have incredibly strong and healthy trade relationships with many of the Latin American countries gathered here today.  Our economic bond forms a critical foundation for advancing peace and prosperity for all of our people and all of our neighbors. I ask every country represented here today to be prepared to do more to address this very real crisis.  We call for the full restoration of democracy and political freedoms in Venezuela. (Applause.)  The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.  (Applause.)  From the Soviet Union to Cuba to Venezuela, wherever true socialism or communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish and devastation and failure.  Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems.  America stands with every person living under a brutal regime.  Our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action.  All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests, and their wellbeing, including their prosperity.  In America, we seek stronger ties of business and trade with all nations of good will, but this trade must be fair and it must be reciprocal. For too long, the American people were told that mammoth multinational trade deals, unaccountable international tribunals, and powerful global bureaucracies were the best way to promote their success.  But as those promises flowed, millions of jobs vanished and thousands of factories disappeared.  Others gamed the system and broke the rules.  And our great middle class, once the bedrock of American prosperity, was forgotten and left behind, but they are forgotten no more and they will never be forgotten again.   While America will pursue cooperation and commerce with other nations, we are renewing our commitment to the first duty of every government:  the duty of our citizens.  This bond is the source of America's strength and that of every responsible nation represented here today. If this organization is to have any hope of successfully confronting the challenges before us, it will depend, as President Truman said some 70 years ago, on the "independent strength of its members."  If we are to embrace the opportunities of the future and overcome the present dangers together, there can be no substitute for strong, sovereign, and independent nations -- nations that are rooted in their histories and invested in their destinies; nations that seek allies to befriend, not enemies to conquer; and most important of all, nations that are home to patriots, to men and women who are willing to sacrifice for their countries, their fellow citizens, and for all that is best in the human spirit. In remembering the great victory that led to this body's founding, we must never forget that those heroes who fought against evil also fought for the nations that they loved.  Patriotism led the Poles to die to save Poland, the French to fight for a free France, and the Brits to stand strong for Britain.  Today, if we do not invest ourselves, our hearts, and our minds in our nations, if we will not build strong families, safe communities, and healthy societies for ourselves, no one can do it for us.  We cannot wait for someone else, for faraway countries or far-off bureaucrats -- we can't do it.  We must solve our problems, to build our prosperity, to secure our futures, or we will be vulnerable to decay, domination, and defeat. The true question for the United Nations today, for people all over the world who hope for better lives for themselves and their children, is a basic one:  Are we still patriots?  Do we love our nations enough to protect their sovereignty and to take ownership of their futures?  Do we revere them enough to defend their interests, preserve their cultures, and ensure a peaceful world for their citizens? One of the greatest American patriots, John Adams, wrote that the American Revolution was "effected before the war commenced.  The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people." That was the moment when America awoke, when we looked around and understood that we were a nation.  We realized who we were, what we valued, and what we would give our lives to defend.  From its very first moments, the American story is the story of what is possible when people take ownership of their future. The United States of America has been among the greatest forces for good in the history of the world, and the greatest defenders of sovereignty, security, and prosperity for all.  Now we are calling for a great reawakening of nations, for the revival of their spirits, their pride, their people, and their patriotism.  History is asking us whether we are up to the task.  Our answer will be a renewal of will, a rediscovery of resolve, and a rebirth of devotion.  We need to defeat the enemies of humanity and unlock the potential of life itself. Our hope is a word and -- world of proud, independent nations that embrace their duties, seek friendship, respect others, and make common cause in the greatest shared interest of all:  a future of dignity and peace for the people of this wonderful Earth. This is the true vision of the United Nations, the ancient wish of every people, and the deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul. So let this be our mission, and let this be our message to the world:  We will fight together, sacrifice together, and stand together for peace, for freedom, for justice, for family, for humanity, and for the almighty God who made us all.   Thank you.  God bless you.  God bless the nations of the world.  And God bless the United States of America.  Thank you very much.  (Applause.)   END  10:46 A.M. EDT The Meaning of Trump’s “America First” Sep 20, 2017   RUSH: AP: “Trump Insists on America First. Who Will Follow?” Let me tell you something about this America first. What do you think Trump means by it? (interruption) Yeah, yeah, yeah, he does. But it’s not just that. I actually heard Trump explain this and some people in Trump’s administration explain this. Fox has this analyst that appears on some of the shows. She worked in the National Security Council. She’s on the staff I think for Obama. And she was talking about this, and she had heard exactly what I heard. And what Trump means by this, America first, also means the U.K. people being U.K. first, and in Belgium, Belgium first. Trump’s belief, it’s exactly what I said yesterday. Trump believes that if every nation believes in itself rather than believes in being subordinate and subservient to a global organization, the whole world is gonna be better, with everybody trying to be the best they can be. He doesn’t mean put America first over everybody else. But he says compared to the world and global organizations, screw that; I’m going to do what’s best for America. And he further explained, I think the Brits ought to do what’s best for them. The theory is that in all of the western democracies and free nations there’s enough commonality that these nations banding together to put themselves first has a lot of commonality. The way it was explained, it made sense. I remember watching Gillian Turner, she was saying (paraphrasing), “When I heard this, it completely changed my view of Trump on this. He fleshed this out for me in a way that I had not understood it.” And she sounded like she was supportive of the whole thing, when of course liberals hate the concept of America first, ’cause they don’t think America deserves it. America’s too guilty. America still has too many prices to pay. America first, that’s arrogant and braggadocios, and we don’t deserve it, in their view. And so this piece in the AP, “Well, who’s gonna follow?” Meaning Trump is hated, Trump is despised, so Trump putting America first is gonna isolate the country. The writer here is Josh Lederman. I’m not gonna share the piece. The guy is just totally off the wall and wrong, as most of them are. They’re not even making an effort to understand what Trump actually means with the things that he says, but his voters do. His voters, 80% of Republicans understand it and they love it and they support it. And they don’t think America’s guilty. And they don’t think America has a price to pay. And they don’t think the world is better off with America being weakened. And they don’t think the world’s better off with America being portrayed as a problem in the world. They think just the exact opposite, as Trump does.

How's Socialism Doing in Venezuela? The Maduro Diet = Starvation Once there was a South American country with a promising future. It had a functioning democracy, a rapidly developing economy, and a growing middle class. All the important indicators, including education, health care, and foreign investment, were pointed in the right direction. It was far from perfect, but the mood was hopeful – and with good reason. But now all that promise is gone. The country is a failed state, a hollowed-out shell of its former self. Services like power and water are sporadic. The most basic consumer goods, from bread to toilet paper, are in chronically short supply. Crime has skyrocketed. Freedom of the press is almost non-existent. Democracy has been replaced by a virtual dictatorship. The country is, I’m sorry to say, my beloved Venezuela, a place in which my family has deep roots. I can tell you what happened to it in one word: socialism. In 1999, then-candidate for president Hugo Chavez promised to lead the people of Venezuela to a socialist paradise. His theme was “Esperanza y Cambio” – “Hope and Change.” “Venezuela is a nation of great wealth,” Chavez said, “but it’s being stolen from its citizens by the evil capitalists and the evil corporations.” This wrong would be righted, he assured the voters, if they elected him. And they did. To their everlasting regret.  Chavez drew inspiration from his mentor, Fidel Castro. Like his mentor, he enjoyed giving speeches – some that lasted as many as seven hours! He even gave himself his own weekly television show where he would spontaneously break into song. Here’s a rule: When your nation’s leader starts singing on national television, you’re in trouble. Under Chavez, the government of Venezuela took over industry after industry. The government, he assured everyone, would run these businesses better than private enterprise, and the profits would be “shared” by the people. With great fanfare, he tore up contracts with multinational oil and gas companies and demanded that they pay much higher royalties. When they refused, he told them to leave. They did. His image was burnished by Hollywood celebrities who flocked to see the great work he was doing – taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor.  Progressive politicians from the US and Europe also praised him lavishly. Here’s another rule: When Hollywood celebrities visit your country to praise your leader, you’re in trouble. When the leader sings on national television and is praised by Hollywood celebrities, you’re doomed. Socialism always works in the beginning, so people are fooled...in the beginning. It’s easy for governments to confiscate money, but eventually, there’s no more money to confiscate. In the case of Venezuela, I mean that literally: People who could get money out of the country, did. Many left the country altogether – nearly 2 million, according to Venezuelan sociologist Tomás Páez. The wealth creators continued to create wealth, but they created it somewhere else – Miami or Madrid and other places around the world. When Chavez first ran for President in 1999, he said he would leave in two years if people weren’t happy with him. But, like Castro, Chavez never had any intention of giving up power. He died in office in 2013, replaced by his vice president, Nicolas Maduro. Maduro is Chavez without the charisma or the voice. The country is now a pariah, shunned by the world and isolated. It’s so bad that many international airlines refuse to fly there. People stand in lines for hours just to get food. Sometimes they walk away empty-handed. A recent survey found that 75 percent of Venezuelan adults lost weight in 2016 – an average of 19 pounds. This national weight-loss program is known cynically as “the Maduro diet.”  Still, Maduro holds onto power. Opposition leaders and journalists who report the truth are jailed. Venezuela is a cautionary tale. Once a country goes down a socialist path, there’s no easy way back. And the longer a country stays socialist, the harder it is to reform it. Venezuela has been socialist for two decades. If you don’t think it can happen here, whether “here” is the United States or Europe or anywhere else, you’re fooling yourself. When people get used to depending on the government – no matter how poor they remain – that dependency is hard to break. That’s why you should never buy the socialist lie. Socialism is a drug. And like a drug, it feels great – at first. But eventually, it will ruin your country. Just like it ruined Venezuela. I’m Debbie D’Souza for Prager University.

President Trump - Presidential Address to the Nation on Afghanistan Terrorists take heed -  America will never let up until you are dealt a lasting defeat. 0 - 00 The President -  Vice President Pence, 0 - 03 Secretary of State Tillerson, 0 - 05 members of the Cabinet, General Dunford, 0 - 10 Deputy Secretary Shanahan, 0 - 13 and Colonel Duggan. 0 - 16 Most especially, thank you to the men 0 - 20 and women of Fort Myer 0 - 22 and every member of the United States 0 - 24 military at home and abroad. 0 - 28 We send our thoughts and prayers 0 - 30 to the families of our brave sailors 0 - 33 who were injured and lost 0 - 34 after a tragic collision at sea, 0 - 37 as well as to those conducting 0 - 39 the search and recovery efforts. 0 - 43 I am here tonight to lay out our path forward 0 - 45 in Afghanistan and South Asia. 0 - 50 But before I provide the details 0 - 52 of our new strategy, 0 - 54 I want to say a few words 0 - 55 to the servicemembers here with us tonight, 0 - 59 to those watching from their posts, 1 - 02 and to all Americans listening at home. 1 - 08 Since the founding of our republic, 1 - 09 our country has produced a special class of heroes 1 - 14 whose selflessness, courage, 1 - 17 and resolve is unmatched in human history. 1 - 21 American patriots from every generation 1 - 24 have given their last breath on the battlefield 1 - 28 for our nation 1 - 30 and for our freedom. 1 - 33 Through their lives -- 1 - 36 and though their lives were cut short, 1 - 40 in their deeds they achieved 1 - 42 total immortality. 1 - 45 By following the heroic example of those 1 - 49 who fought to preserve our republic, 1 - 52 we can find the inspiration 1 - 54 our country needs to unify, to heal, 1 - 58 and to remain one nation under God. 2 - 04 The men and women of our military operate 2 - 07 as one team, 2 - 09 with one shared mission, 2 - 11 and one shared sense of purpose. 2 - 15 They transcend every line of race, 2 - 19 ethnicity, creed, 2 - 20 and color to serve together -- 2 - 22 and sacrifice together -- 2 - 25 in absolutely perfect cohesion. 2 - 29 That is because all servicemembers 2 - 32 are brothers and sisters. 2 - 36 They're all part of the same family; 2 - 40 it's called the American family. 2 - 43 They take the same oath, fight for the same flag, 2 - 48 and live according to the same law. 2 - 53 They are bound together by common purpose, 2 - 56 mutual trust, 2 - 57 and selfless devotion to our nation 3 - 00 and to each other. 3 - 02 The soldier understands what we, as a nation, 3 - 06 too often forget that a wound 3 - 09 inflicted upon a single member of our community 3 - 14 is a wound inflicted upon us all. 3 - 19 When one part of America hurts, we all hurt. 3 - 25 And when one citizen suffers an injustice, 3 - 28 we all suffer together. 3 - 32 Loyalty to our nation demands loyalty 3 - 35 to one another. 3 - 37 Love for America 3 - 38 requires love for all of its people. 3 - 43 When we open our hearts to patriotism, 3 - 46 there is no room for prejudice, 3 - 49 no place for bigotry, 3 - 51 and no tolerance for hate. 3 - 55 The young men and women we send to fight our wars abroad 4 - 00 deserve to return to a country 4 - 02 that is not at war with itself at home. 4 - 07 We cannot remain a force for peace in the world 4 - 11 if we are not at peace with each other. 4 - 15 As we send our bravest 4 - 16 to defeat our enemies overseas -- 4 - 19 and we will always win -- 4 - 21 let us find the courage 4 - 23 to heal our divisions within. 4 - 27 Let us make a simple promise to the men 4 - 29 and women we ask to fight in our name that, 4 - 32 when they return home from battle, 4 - 35 they will find a country 4 - 37 that has renewed 4 - 39 the sacred bonds of love and loyalty 4 - 42 that unite us together as one. 4 - 45 Thanks to the vigilance and skill 4 - 48 of the American military 4 - 50 and of our many allies throughout the world, 4 - 54 horrors on the scale of September 11th -- 4 - 59 and nobody can ever forget that -- 5 - 02 have not been repeated on our shores. 5 - 06 But we must also acknowledge 5 - 08 the reality I am here to talk about tonight - 5 - 11 that nearly 16 years after September 11th attacks, 5 - 15 after the extraordinary sacrifice of blood and treasure, 5 - 20 the American people are weary of war 5 - 25 without victory. 5 - 28 Nowhere is this more evident 5 - 30 than with the war in Afghanistan, 5 - 32 the longest war in American history -- 5 - 36 17 years. 5 - 38 I share the American people s frustration. 5 - 42 I also share their frustration 5 - 46 over a foreign policy 5 - 47 that has spent too much time, energy, money, 5 - 51 and most importantly lives, 5 - 53 trying to rebuild countries 5 - 55 in our own image, 5 - 57 instead of pursuing our security interests 6 - 00 above all other considerations. 6 - 04 That is why, shortly after my inauguration, 6 - 09 I directed Secretary of Defense Mattis 6 - 12 and my national security team 6 - 15 to undertake a comprehensive review 6 - 18 of all strategic options in Afghanistan 6 - 21 and South Asia. 6 - 24 My original instinct was to pull out -- 6 - 29 and, historically, I like following my instincts. 6 - 34 But all my life I've heard 6 - 36 that decisions are much different 6 - 39 when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office; 6 - 43 in other words, 6 - 44 when you're President of the United States. 6 - 48 So I studied Afghanistan in great detail 6 - 51 and from every conceivable angle. 6 - 55 After many meetings, over many months, 6 - 59 we held our final meeting last Friday 7 - 02 at Camp David, 7 - 03 with my Cabinet and generals, 7 - 06 to complete our strategy. 7 - 10 I arrived at three fundamental conclusions 7 - 12 about America s core interests in Afghanistan. 7 - 16 First, our nation must seek an honorable 7 - 20 and enduring outcome 7 - 22 worthy of the tremendous sacrifices 7 - 25 that have been made, 7 - 27 especially the sacrifices of lives. 7 - 32 The men and women who serve our nation 7 - 34 in combat deserve a plan for victory. 7 - 38 They deserve the tools they need, 7 - 40 and the trust they have earned, 7 - 43 to fight and to win. 7 - 45 Second, the consequences of a rapid exit 7 - 50 are both predictable and unacceptable. 7 - 55 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, 7 - 59 was planned and directed from Afghanistan 8 - 03 because that country was ruled by a government 8 - 07 that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists. 8 - 11 A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum 8 - 15 that terrorists, 8 - 16 including ISIS and al Qaeda, 8 - 19 would instantly fill, 8 - 21 just as happened before September 11th. 8 - 26 And, as we know, in 2011, 8 - 30 America hastily 8 - 33 and mistakenly withdrew from Iraq. 8 - 38 As a result, our hard-won gains slipped back 8 - 42 into the hands of terrorist enemies. 8 - 46 Our soldiers watched as cities 8 - 48 they had fought for, 8 - 49 and bled to liberate, and won, were occupied 8 - 53 by a terrorist group called ISIS. 8 - 57 The vacuum we created by leaving too soon 8 - 59 gave safe haven for ISIS to spread, 9 - 02 to grow, recruit, and launch attacks. 9 - 07 We cannot repeat in Afghanistan the mistake 9 - 11 our leaders made in Iraq. 9 - 15 Third and finally, I concluded 9 - 18 that the security threats 9 - 19 we face in Afghanistan 9 - 21 and the broader region are immense. 9 - 25 Today, 20 U.S.-designated 9 - 28 foreign terrorist organizations 9 - 31 are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan -- 9 - 34 the highest concentration in any region 9 - 39 anywhere in the world. 9 - 41 For its part, 9 - 42 Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, 9 - 49 violence, and terror. 9 - 52 The threat is worse because 9 - 53 Pakistan and India 9 - 55 are two nuclear-armed states 9 - 58 whose tense relations 9 - 59 threaten to spiral into conflict. 10 - 03 And that could happen. 10 - 05 No one denies that we have inherited 10 - 07 a challenging and troubling situation 10 - 10 in Afghanistan and South Asia, 10 - 13 but we do not have the luxury 10 - 15 of going back in time 10 - 17 and making different or better decisions. 10 - 20 When I became President, 10 - 22 I was given a bad and very complex hand, 10 - 26 but I fully knew what I was getting into - 10 - 28 big and intricate problems. 10 - 31 But, one way or another, 10 - 32 these problems will be solved -- 10 - 35 I'm a problem solver -- 10 - 37 and, in the end, we will win. 10 - 41 We must address the reality of the world 10 - 44 as it exists right now -- the threats we face, 10 - 49 and the confronting of all of the problems 10 - 52 of today, 10 - 54 and extremely predictable consequences 10 - 58 of a hasty withdrawal. 11 - 01 We need look no further than last week's vile, 11 - 04 vicious attack in Barcelona to understand 11 - 09 that terror groups will stop at nothing to commit 11 - 13 the mass murder of innocent men, 11 - 17 women and children. 11 - 19 You saw it for yourself. 11 - 21 Horrible. 11 - 23 As I outlined in my speech 11 - 25 in Saudi Arabia three months ago, 11 - 27 America and our partners are committed 11 - 30 to stripping terrorists of their territory, 11 - 33 cutting off their funding, 11 - 35 and exposing the false allure 11 - 37 of their evil ideology. 11 - 41 Terrorists who slaughter innocent people 11 - 43 will find no glory in this life or the next. 11 - 49 They are nothing but thugs, 11 - 50 and criminals, and predators, 11 - 52 and -- that's right -- losers. 11 - 56 Working alongside our allies, 11 - 58 we will break their will, dry up their recruitment, 12 - 02 keep them from crossing our borders, 12 - 04 and yes, we will defeat them, 12 - 07 and we will defeat them handily. 12 - 10 In Afghanistan and Pakistan, 12 - 12 America's interests are clear - 12 - 15 We must stop the resurgence of safe havens 12 - 19 that enable terrorists to threaten America, 12 - 22 and we must prevent nuclear weapons and materials 12 - 25 from coming into the hands of terrorists 12 - 28 and being used against us, 12 - 30 or anywhere in the world for that matter. 12 - 34 But to prosecute this war, 12 - 37 we will learn from history. 12 - 39 As a result of our comprehensive review, 12 - 42 American strategy in Afghanistan 12 - 44 and South Asia 12 - 45 will change dramatically in the following ways - 12 - 50 A core pillar of our new strategy 12 - 53 is a shift from a time-based approach 12 - 57 to one based on conditions. 13 - 00 I've said it many times 13 - 02 how counterproductive it is 13 - 03 for the United States to announce in advance 13 - 06 the dates we intend to begin, 13 - 08 or end, military options. 13 - 11 We will not talk about numbers of troops 13 - 15 or our plans for further military activities. 13 - 19 Conditions on the ground -- 13 - 21 not arbitrary timetables -- 13 - 24 will guide our strategy from now on. 13 - 28 America's enemies must never know our plans 13 - 31 or believe they can wait us out. 13 - 34 I will not say when we are going to attack, 13 - 38 but attack we will. 13 - 41 Another fundamental pillar 13 - 43 of our new strategy 13 - 45 is the integration of all instruments 13 - 47 of American power -- 13 - 49 diplomatic, economic, and military -- 13 - 53 toward a successful outcome. 13 - 56 Someday, after an effective 13 - 58 military effort, 14 - 00 perhaps it will be possible 14 - 01 to have a political settlement 14 - 03 that includes elements 14 - 04 of the Taliban in Afghanistan, 14 - 07 but nobody knows if or when 14 - 10 that will ever happen. 14 - 12 America will continue its support 14 - 15 for the Afghan government 14 - 17 and the Afghan military 14 - 19 as they confront the Taliban 14 - 22 in the field. 14 - 23 Ultimately, it is up to the people of Afghanistan 14 - 26 to take ownership of their future, 14 - 28 to govern their society, 14 - 31 and to achieve an everlasting peace. 14 - 35 We are a partner and a friend, 14 - 37 but we will not dictate to the Afghan people 14 - 40 how to live, 14 - 41 or how to govern their own complex society. 14 - 45 We are not nation-building again. 14 - 48 We are killing terrorists. 14 - 51 The next pillar of our new strategy 14 - 54 is to change the approach 14 - 57 and how to deal with Pakistan. 15 - 01 We can no longer be silent about 15 - 03 Pakistan's safe havens 15 - 04 for terrorist organizations, 15 - 07 the Taliban, and other groups 15 - 09 that pose a threat to the region and beyond. 15 - 13 Pakistan has much to gain 15 - 15 from partnering 15 - 16 with our effort in Afghanistan. 15 - 19 It has much to lose by continuing 15 - 22 to harbor criminals and terrorists. 15 - 26 In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner. 15 - 30 Our militaries have worked together 15 - 32 against common enemies. 15 - 34 The Pakistani people have suffered greatly 15 - 37 from terrorism and extremism. 15 - 40 We recognize those contributions 15 - 43 and those sacrifices. 15 - 45 But Pakistan has also sheltered the same 15 - 48 organizations 15 - 49 that try every single day to kill our people. 15 - 54 We have been paying Pakistan billions 15 - 58 and billions of dollars at the same time 16 - 01 they are housing the very terrorists 16 - 04 that we are fighting. 16 - 06 But that will have to change, 16 - 09 and that will change immediately. 16 - 11 No partnership can survive a country's 16 - 14 harboring of militants 16 - 15 and terrorists who target 16 - 16 U.S. servicemembers and officials. 16 - 19 It is time for Pakistan 16 - 21 to demonstrate its commitment 16 - 23 to civilization, order, and to peace. 16 - 27 Another critical part of the South Asia 16 - 30 strategy for America 16 - 32 is to further develop 16 - 33 its strategic partnership with India -- 16 - 36 the world's largest democracy 16 - 39 and a key security 16 - 40 and economic partner of the United States. 16 - 43 We appreciate India's important contributions 16 - 47 to stability in Afghanistan, 16 - 49 but India makes billions of dollars 16 - 52 in trade with the United States, 16 - 54 and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, 16 - 58 especially in the area 17 - 00 of economic assistance 17 - 02 and development. 17 - 04 We are committed to pursuing 17 - 05 our shared objectives 17 - 07 for peace and security in South Asia 17 - 10 and the broader Indo-Pacific region. 17 - 13 Finally, my administration 17 - 15 will ensure that you, 17 - 17 the brave defenders of the American people, 17 - 21 will have the necessary tools 17 - 23 and rules of engagement 17 - 24 to make this strategy work, 17 - 26 and work effectively and work quickly. 17 - 29 I have already lifted restrictions 17 - 31 the previous administration 17 - 33 placed on our warfighters 17 - 36 that prevented the Secretary of Defense 17 - 38 and our commanders in the field from fully 17 - 41 and swiftly waging battle against the enemy. 17 - 46 Micromanagement from Washington, D.C. 17 - 48 does not win battles. 17 - 51 They are won in the field drawing upon the judgment 17 - 54 and expertise of wartime commanders 17 - 58 and frontline soldiers 18 - 01 acting in real time, with real authority, 18 - 04 and with a clear mission to defeat the enemy. 18 - 09 That's why we will also expand authority 18 - 12 for American armed forces 18 - 14 to target the terrorist and criminal networks 18 - 17 that sow violence 18 - 18 and chaos throughout Afghanistan. 18 - 22 These killers need to know 18 - 24 they have nowhere to hide; 18 - 25 that no place is beyond the reach of American 18 - 29 might and Americans arms. 18 - 31 Retribution will be fast and powerful. 18 - 36 As we lift restrictions 18 - 37 and expand authorities in the field, 18 - 40 we are already seeing dramatic results 18 - 42 in the campaign to defeat ISIS, 18 - 45 including the liberation of Mosul in Iraq. 18 - 49 Since my inauguration, 18 - 50 we have achieved record-breaking 18 - 53 success in that regard. 18 - 55 We will also maximize sanctions 18 - 58 and other financial and law enforcement actions 19 - 01 against these networks 19 - 02 to eliminate their ability to export terror. 19 - 07 When America commits its warriors to battle, 19 - 10 we must ensure they have every weapon to apply 19 - 13 swift, decisive, 19 - 15 and overwhelming force. 19 - 18 Our troops will fight to win. 19 - 21 We will fight to win. 19 - 24 From now on, victory will have a clear definition - 19 - 29 attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, 19 - 32 crushing al Qaeda, 19 - 34 preventing the Taliban 19 - 35 from taking over Afghanistan, 19 - 38 and stopping mass terror attacks against America 19 - 41 before they emerge. 19 - 43 We will ask our NATO allies 19 - 45 and global partners 19 - 46 to support our new strategy 19 - 48 with additional troop 19 - 49 and funding increases in line with our own. 19 - 53 We are confident they will. 19 - 55 Since taking office, I have made clear 19 - 58 that our allies and partners 19 - 59 must contribute much more money 20 - 03 to our collective defense, 20 - 06 and they have done so. 20 - 09 In this struggle, 20 - 11 the heaviest burden will continue to be borne 20 - 14 by the good people of Afghanistan 20 - 16 and their courageous armed forces. 20 - 19 As the prime minister of Afghanistan has promised, 20 - 23 we are going to participate 20 - 25 in economic development 20 - 27 to help defray the cost of this war to us. 20 - 32 Afghanistan is fighting to defend 20 - 35 and secure their country 20 - 36 against the same enemies who threaten us. 20 - 39 The stronger the Afghan security forces become, 20 - 42 the less we will have to do. 20 - 45 Afghans will secure and build their own nation 20 - 49 and define their own future. 20 - 52 We want them to succeed. 20 - 54 But we will no longer use American military 20 - 57 might to construct democracies 20 - 59 in faraway lands, 21 - 01 or try to rebuild other countries 21 - 03 in our own image. 21 - 04 Those days are now over. 21 - 07 Instead, we will work with allies and partners 21 - 10 to protect our shared interests. 21 - 12 We are not asking others 21 - 14 to change their way of life, 21 - 16 but to pursue common goals 21 - 17 that allow our children 21 - 19 to live better and safer lives. 21 - 22 This principled realism 21 - 24 will guide our decisions moving forward. 21 - 27 Military power alone will not bring peace 21 - 30 to Afghanistan 21 - 31 or stop the terrorist threat 21 - 33 arising in that country. 21 - 35 But strategically applied force 21 - 37 aims to create the conditions 21 - 39 for a political process 21 - 41 to achieve a lasting peace. 21 - 44 America will work with the Afghan government 21 - 48 as long as we see determination 21 - 51 and progress. 21 - 53 However, our commitment is not unlimited, 21 - 56 and our support is not a blank check. 22 - 01 The government of Afghanistan 22 - 03 must carry their share 22 - 06 of the military, 22 - 07 political, and economic burden. 22 - 11 The American people expect to see 22 - 12 real reforms, 22 - 14 real progress, and real results. 22 - 17 Our patience is not unlimited. 22 - 21 We will keep our eyes wide open. 22 - 24 In abiding by the oath I took on January 20th, 22 - 27 I will remain steadfast in protecting American lives 22 - 31 and American interests. 22 - 34 In this effort, we will make common cause 22 - 38 with any nation 22 - 39 that chooses to stand and fight alongside us 22 - 42 against this global threat. 22 - 45 Terrorists take heed -  America will never let up 22 - 49 until you are dealt a lasting defeat. 22 - 53 Under my administration, many billions of dollars 22 - 56 more is being spent on our military. 22 - 59 And this includes vast amounts being spent 23 - 02 on our nuclear arsenal and missile defense. 23 - 06 In every generation, we have faced down evil, 23 - 09 and we have always prevailed. 23 - 13 We prevailed because we know who we are 23 - 17 and what we are fighting for. 23 - 19 Not far from where we are gathered tonight, 23 - 22 hundreds of thousands 23 - 23 of America's greatest patriots 23 - 25 lay in eternal rest 23 - 28 at Arlington National Cemetery. 23 - 32 There is more courage, sacrifice, 23 - 35 and love in those hallowed grounds 23 - 39 than in any other spot on the face of the Earth. 23 - 44 Many of those who have fought and died 23 - 46 in Afghanistan enlisted in the months 23 - 49 after September 11th, 2001. 23 - 53 They volunteered for a simple reason - 23 - 56 They loved America, 23 - 57 and they were determined to protect her. 24 - 01 Now we must secure the cause 24 - 02 for which they gave their lives. 24 - 05 We must unite to defend America 24 - 08 from its enemies abroad. 24 - 10 We must restore the bonds of loyalty 24 - 13 among our citizens at home, 24 - 16 and we must achieve an honorable 24 - 19 and enduring outcome 24 - 21 worthy of the enormous price 24 - 24 that so many have paid. 24 - 26 Our actions, and in the months to come, 24 - 29 all of them will honor 24 - 31 the sacrifice 24 - 32 of every fallen hero, 24 - 35 every family who lost a loved one, 24 - 37 and every wounded warrior who shed their blood 24 - 40 in defense of our great nation. 24 - 44 With our resolve, we will ensure that your service 24 - 49 and that your families 24 - 51 will bring about the defeat of our enemies 24 - 54 and the arrival of peace. 24 - 57 We will push onward to victory with power 25 - 00 in our hearts, 25 - 01 courage in our souls, 25 - 03 and everlasting pride in each 25 - 06 and every one of you. 25 - 09 Thank you. May God bless our military. 25 - 14 And may God bless the United States of America. 25 - 18 Thank you very much, thank you.  

President Trump  Pulling no punches, both sides are to blame Charlottesville Va And some really good news on the Country's Infrastructure    0-00 hello everybody great to be back in New 0-06 York with all of our friends and some 0-10 great friends outside the building I 0-11 must tell you I want to thank all of our 0-14 distinguished guests who are with us 0-17 today including members of our cabinet 0-20 Treasury Secretary Stephen minuchin OMB 0-24 director Mick Mulvaney and of course our 0-27 transportation secretary who is doing a 0-30 fabulous job Elaine Chao thank you all 0-34 for doing a really incredible and 0-38 creative job on what we're going to be 0-41 discussing today which is infrastructure 0-44 we've just had a great set of briefings 0-48 upstairs on our infrastructure agenda my 0-52 administration is working every day to 0-54 deliver the world-class infrastructure 0-56 that our people deserve and frankly that 0-59 our country deserves that's why I just 1-03 signed a new executive order to 1-05 dramatically reform the nation's badly 1-07 broken infrastructure permitting process 1-11 just blocks away as the Empire State 1-13 Building it took 11 months to build the 1-17 Empire State Building but today it can 1-20 take as long as a decade and much more 1-22 than that many many stores where it 1-25 takes 20 and 25 years just to get 1-28 approvals to start construction of a 1-32 fairly routine highway highway builders 1-36 must get up to 16 different approvals 1-38 involving nine different federal 1-40 agencies governed by 29 different 1-43 statutes one agency alone can stall a 1-46 project for many many years and even 1-48 decades not only does this cost our 1-52 economy billions of dollars but it also 1-55 denies our citizens the safe and modern 1-57 infrastructure they deserve this 2-00 over-regulated permitting process is a 2-02 massive self-inflicted wound on our 2-06 country it's disgraceful denying our 2-10 people much-needed investments in their 2-12 community and 2-13 just want to show you this because it 2-15 was just showing me and I think I think 2-16 I'm going to show it to the media both 2-21 real and fake media by the way this is 2-24 what it takes to get something approved 2-26 today melanne you see that so this is 2-31 what it takes permitting process flow 2-33 chart that's a float yard so that can go 2-36 out to 20 years this shows about 10 but 2-39 that could go out to about 20 years to 2-41 get something approved this is for a 2-44 highway I've seen a highway recently in 2-47 a certain state I won't manage to 2-48 mention its name it's 17 years I could 2-52 have built it for 4 or 5 million dollars 2-54 without the permitting process it costs 2-58 hundreds of millions of dollars but it 3-00 took 17 years to get it approved and 3-04 many many many many pages of 3-09 environmental impact studies this is 3-11 what we will bring it down to this is 3-13 less than 2 years this is gonna happen 3-16 quickly that's what I'm signing today 3-17 this will be less than 2 years for a 3-20 highway so it's going to be quick it's 3-24 going to be a very streamlined process 3-27 and by the way if it doesn't meet 3-29 environmental safeguards we're not going 3-31 to approve it very simple we're not 3-34 going to approve it so this is maybe 3-36 this one will say let's throw the other 3-38 one away would anybody like it from the 3-40 media would anybody like that long 3-42 beautiful chart you can have it 3-44 so my executive order also requires 3-47 agencies to work together efficiently by 3-50 requiring one lead agency for each major 3-54 infrastructure project it also holds 3-58 agencies accountable if they fail to 4-00 streamline their review process so each 4-02 agency is accountable we're gonna get 4-05 infrastructure built quickly 4-09 inexpensively relatively speaking and 4-11 the permitting process will go very very 4-13 quickly no longer will we tolerate one 4-16 job-killing delay after another no 4-19 longer will we accept a broken system 4-21 that benefits consultants and lobbyists 4-25 at the expense of hard-working 4-26 Americans now I knew the process very 4-29 well probably better than anybody I had 4-31 to get permits for this building and 4-33 many of the buildings I built all of the 4-34 buildings I built in Manhattan and many 4-36 other places and I will tell you that 4-40 the consultants are rich people they go 4-44 around making it very difficult they 4-46 lobby Congress they lobby state 4-49 government city governments to make it 4-51 very difficult so that you have to hire 4-52 consultants and that you have to take 4-55 years and pay them a fortune 4-56 so we're streamlining lining the process 4-59 and we won't be having so much of that 5-01 anymore no longer will we allow the 5-02 infrastructure of our magnificent 5-05 country to crumble and decay while 5-09 protecting the environment we will build 5-11 Leeming new roads bridges railways 5-13 waterways tunnels and highways we will 5-17 rebuild our country with American 5-19 workers American iron American aluminum 5-23 American steel we will create millions 5-27 of new jobs and make millions of 5-29 American dreams come true our 5-32 infrastructure will again be the best in 5-34 the world we used to have the greatest 5-35 infrastructure anywhere in the world and 5-38 today we're like a third-world country 5-41 we are literally like a third-world 5-43 country our infrastructure will again be 5-47 the best and we will restore the pride 5-51 in our communities our nation and all 5-55 over the United States will be proud 5-56 again so I want to thank everybody for 5-59 being here god bless you god bless the 6-01 United States and if you have any 6-04 questions we have Mick you could come up 6-07 here please come on up Mick Mulvaney if 6-13 you have any questions please feel free 6-15 to ask 6-19 because they're not taking their job 6-22 seriously as it pertains to this country 6-25 we want jobs manufacturing in this 6-28 country if you look at some of those 6-30 people that you're talking about they're 6-32 outside of the country they're having a 6-35 lot of their product made outside if you 6-37 look at Merck as an example take a look 6-39 where excuse me take a look at where 6-41 their product is made it's made outside 6-44 of our country we want products made in 6-47 the country now I have to tell you some 6-48 of the folks that will leave they're 6-51 leaving out of embarrassment because 6-53 they make their products outside and 6-55 I've been lecturing them including the 6-57 gentleman that you're referring to about 6-59 you have to bring it back to this 7-01 country you can't do it necessarily in 7-04 Ireland and all of these other places 7-06 you have to bring this work back to this 7-09 country that's what I want I want 7-11 manufacturing to be back into the United 7-14 States so that American workers can 7-16 benefit I didn't I wanted to make sure 7-26 unlike most politicians that what I said 7-29 was correct not make a quick statement 7-32 the statement I made on Saturday the 7-34 first statement was a fine statement but 7-37 you don't make statements that direct 7-39 unless you know the fact it takes a 7-42 little while to get the facts you still 7-44 don't know the facts and it's a very 7-46 very important process to me and it's a 7-50 very important statement so I don't want 7-52 to go quickly and just make a statement 7-54 for the sake of making a political 7-55 statement I want to know the facts if 7-57 you go back to my effect I brought it I 8-01 brought it I brought it as I said on 8-06 remember the Saturday we condemn in the 8-09 strongest possible terms this egregious 8-12 display of hatred bigotry and violence 8-15 it has no place in America and then I 8-18 went on from there now here's the thing 8-20 as to excuse me excuse me take it nice 8-22 and easy here's the thing when I make a 8-26 statement I like to be correct I want 8-28 the facts this event just happened in 8-30 fact a lot of the event didn't even 8-32 happen yet 8-33 as we were speaking this event just 8-35 happened before I make a statement I 8-37 need the facts so I don't want to rush 8-40 into a statement so making the statement 8-42 when I made it was excellent in fact the 8-45 young woman who I hear is a fantastic 8-48 young woman and it was on NBC 8-51 her mother wrote me and said through I 8-56 guess Twitter social media the nicest 9-00 things and I very much appreciated that 9-02 I hear she was a fine really actually an 9-06 incredible young woman but her mother on 9-08 Twitter thanked me for what I said and 9-11 honestly if the press were not fake and 9-14 if it was honest the press would have 9-16 said what I said was very nice but 9-18 unlike you and unlike excuse me unlike 9-21 you and unlike the media before I make a 9-23 statement I like to know the facts they 9-28 don't say what not at all 9-47 I think the country look you take a look 9-49 I've created over a million jobs in some 9-52 president the country is booming the 9-55 stock market is setting records we have 9-56 the highest employment numbers we've 9-58 ever had in the history of our country 10-00 we're doing record business we have the 10-02 highest levels of enthusiasm so the head 10-06 of Walmart who I know was a very nice 10-08 guy was making a political statement I 10-10 mean you know because I want to make 10-17 sure when I make a statement that the 10-20 statement is correct and there was no 10-22 way there was no way of making a correct 10-26 statement that early I had to see the 10-28 facts unlike a lot of reporters I didn't 10-34 know David Duke was there I wanted to 10-37 see the facts and the facts as they 10-39 started coming out were very well stated 10-43 in fact everybody said his statement was 10-45 beautiful if he would have made it 10-47 sooner that would have been good I 10-49 couldn't have made it sooner because I 10-51 didn't know all of the facts frankly 10-54 people still don't know all of the facts 10-56 it was a really important excuse me 10-58 excuse me 10-59 it was very important to me to get the 11-03 facts out and correctly because if I 11-05 would have made a fast statement and the 11-07 first statement was made without knowing 11-09 much other than what we were seeing the 11-12 second statement was made after with 11-14 knowledge with great knowledge there's 11-16 still things excuse me there's still 11-19 things that people don't know I want to 11-21 make a statement with knowledge I wanted 11-23 to know the facts okay 11-26 two questions was this terrorism and you 11-29 tell us that your feeling about it your 11-30 chief strategy well the driver of the 11-32 car is a disgrace to himself his family 11-36 in this country and that is you can call 11-40 it terrorism you can call it murder you 11-44 can call it whatever you want I would 11-46 just call it as the fastest one to come 11-49 up with a good verdict that's what I'd 11-50 call it 11-51 because there is a question is it murder 11-53 is a terrorism and then you get into 11-55 legal semantics the driver of the car is 11-59 a murderer and what he did was a 12-01 horrible horrible inexcusable thing I 12-11 never spoke to mr. Bannon about it I 12-18 like mr. Bennish he's a friend of mine 12-20 but mr. banek came on very late you know 12-23 that I went through 17 senators 12-26 governors and I want all the primaries 12-28 Bannon came on very much later than 12-30 that and I liked him 12-33 he's a good man he is not a racist I can 12-36 tell you that he's a good person 12-38 he actually gets a very unfair press in 12-40 that regard but we'll see what happens 12-43 with mr. Bannon but he's a good person 12-46 and I think the press treats him frankly 12-47 very unfairly 12-56 [Music] 13-08 us getting good health care well I don't 13-21 know I can't tell you I'm sure Senator 13-23 McCain must know what he's talking about 13-25 but when you say the alt-right define 13-28 all right to me you define excuse me 13-38 what about the alt left they came 13-40 charging at the as you say the alt right 13-42 do they have any semblance of guilt what 13-49 about the fact that came charging that 13-51 they came charging with clubs in the 13-52 hands swinging clubs do they have any 13-55 problem I think they do that was a 14-00 horrible horrible day wait a minute I'm 14-03 not finished 14-04 I'm not finished fake news that was a 14-07 horrible day I watched those very 14-15 closely much more closely than you 14-16 people watched it and you have you had a 14-20 group on one side that was bad and you 14-22 had a group on the other side that was 14-23 also very violent and nobody wants to 14-26 say that but I'll say it right now you 14-29 had a group you had a group on the other 14-30 side that came charging in without a 14-33 permit and they were very very violent 14-41 what you call the alt left is the same 14-44 as neo-nazis I owe those people all of 14-47 those people excuse me I've condemned 14-50 neo-nazis I've condemned many different 14-53 groups but not all of those people were 14-56 neo-nazis believe me not all of those 14-59 people were white supremacist by any 15-01 stretch those people to protest the 15-07 taking down of a statue robert e lee so 15-10 excuse me and you take a look at some of 15-13 the groups and you see and you know it 15-15 if you were honest reporters which in 15-16 many cases you're not but many of those 15-18 people were there to protest the taking 15-21 down of the statue of robert e lee so 15-23 this week it's robert e lee i noticed 15-26 that stonewall jackson's coming down I 15-28 wonder is it George Washington next week 15-31 and is it Thomas Jefferson the week 15-33 after 15-33 you know you oh you really do have to 15-35 ask yourself where does it stop but they 15-38 were there to protest excuse me you take 15-41 a look the night before they were there 15-43 to protest the taking down of the statue 15-46 of Robert Ely infrastructure question go 15-48 ahead the property lease they up I would 15-52 say that's up to a local town community 15-56 or the federal government depending on 15-58 where it is located 16-05 I think they've gotten better or the 16-08 same I look they've been frayed for a 16-10 long time and you can ask President 16-12 Obama about that because he'd make 16-14 speeches about it but I believe that the 16-17 fact that I brought in it will be soon 16-20 millions of jobs you see where companies 16-22 are moving back into our country I think 16-25 that's going to have a tremendous 16-26 positive impact on race relations we 16-29 have companies coming back into our 16-31 country we have two car companies that 16-33 just announced we have Foxconn in 16-35 Wisconsin just announced we have many 16-37 companies I say pouring back into the 16-40 country I think that's going to have a 16-42 huge positive impact on race relations 16-45 you know why it's jobs what people want 16-48 now they want jobs they want great jobs 16-50 with good pay 16-52 and when they have that you watch how 16-54 race relations will be and I'll tell you 16-56 we're spending a lot of money on the 16-58 inner cities we're gonna fix we're 17-00 fixing the inner cities we're doing far 17-01 more than anybody's done with respect to 17-04 the inner cities it's a priority for me 17-06 and it's very important 17-14 I'm not putting anybody on a moral plan 17-16 what I'm saying is this you had a group 17-18 on one side and you had a group on the 17-20 other and they came at each other with 17-22 clubs and it was vicious and it was 17-24 horrible and it was a horrible thing to 17-26 watch but there is another side there 17-29 was a group on this side you can call 17-31 him the lefty you've just called him the 17-33 left that came violently attacking the 17-36 other group so you can say what you want 17-38 but that's the way it is there's Blaine 17-46 yes I think there's blame on both sides 17-48 you look at you look at both sides 17-50 I think there's blame on both sides and 17-53 I have no doubt about it and you don't 17-55 have any doubt about it either oh and if 17-59 you reported it accurately you would say 18-13 but you also had people that were very 18-17 fine people on both sides 18-19 you had people in that group excuse me 18-21 excuse me I saw the same pictures as you 18-24 did you had people in that group that 18-27 were there to protest the taking down of 18-29 to them a very very important statue and 18-32 the renaming of a park from robert e lee 18-35 to another name George Washington was a 18-39 slave owner was George Washington a 18-41 slave owner so will George Washington 18-44 now lose his status are we gonna take 18-46 down excuse me are we gonna take down 18-49 are we gonna take down statues to George 18-51 why how about Thomas Jefferson what do 18-54 you think of Thomas Jefferson you like 18-55 him okay good 18-57 are we gonna take down the statute 18-59 because he was a major slave owner now 19-01 we're gonna take down his statue so you 19-03 know what it's fine 19-04 you're changing history you're changing 19-06 culture and you had people and I'm not 19-09 talking about the neo-nazis and the 19-11 white nationalist because they should be 19-12 condemned 19-13 totally but you had many people in that 19-15 group other than neo-nazis and white 19-18 nationalists okay and the press has 19-21 treated them absolutely unfairly now in 19-24 the other group also you had some fine 19-27 people but you also had troublemakers 19-29 and you see them come with a with the 19-31 black outfits and with the helmets and 19-34 with the baseball bats you got a you had 19-37 a lot of beds you had a lot of bad 19-38 people in the other groups we were 19-42 saying you were saying the press has 19-43 treated white nationalists unfairly 19-45 there were people in that rally and I 19-47 looked the night before if you look they 19-50 were people protesting very quietly the 19-55 taking down of the statue of Robert Ely 19-59 I'm sure in that group there were some 20-01 bad ones the following day it looked 20-02 like they had some rough bad people 20-06 neo-nazis white nationalists whatever 20-09 you want to call them but you had a lot 20-11 of people in that group that were there 20-12 to innocently protest and very legally 20-15 protest because you know I don't know if 20-17 you know they had a permit the other 20-19 group didn't have a permit so I 20-23 we tell you this there are two sides to 20-25 a story I thought what took place was a 20-28 horrible moment for our country 20-31 a horrible moment but there are two 20-33 sides of the country 20-34 does anybody have a final does anybody 20-36 have any leaven infrastructure what 20-38 makes you think you can get an 20-39 infrastructure bill you didn't get 20-40 healthcare we came very close with 20-43 healthcare unfortunately john mccain 20-45 decided to vote against it at the last 20-47 minute you'll have to ask john mccain 20-49 why he did that but we came very close 20-51 to health care we will end up getting 20-53 healthcare but we'll get the 20-55 infrastructure and actually 20-56 infrastructure something that i think 20-57 will have bipartisan support on i 20-59 actually think I actually think 21-01 democrats will go along with the 21-03 infrastructure to the family of the 21-07 victim of the car now be reaching out I 21-11 was very i I thought that the statement 21-14 put out the the mother's statement I 21-17 thought was a beautiful statement I was 21-20 tell you it was it was something that I 21-23 really appreciate it I thought it was 21-25 terrific and really under the under the 21-27 kind of stress that she's under and the 21-30 heartache that she's under I thought 21-32 putting out that statement to me was 21-34 really something I won't forget thank 21-36 you all very much thank you thank you 21-47 no I own a house and where is it oh boy 21-50 it's gonna be it's in Charlottesville 21-53 you'll see where is it say it is the 21-55 winery I mean I know a lot about 21-59 Charlotte's well Charlottesville is a 22-01 great place that's been very badly hurt 22-03 over the last couple of days I own 22-07 actually one of the largest wineries in 22-09 the United States it's enjoys overcome 22-17 the racial divides as well I really 22-18 think jobs can have a big impact I think 22-20 if we continue to create jobs over a 22-23 million substantially more than a 22-24 million and you see just the other day 22-27 the car companies coming in with Fox you 22-29 know fuck I think if we continue to 22-32 create jobs at levels that I'm people 22-35 i'm creating jobs i think that's gonna 22-37 have a tremendous impact positive impact 22-39 on race relations and what you said 22-42 today how do you think that will impact 22-43 the racial sort of thing are they 22-46 working they're gonna be making a lot of 22-47 money much more money than they ever 22-48 thought possible that's gonna happen and 22-51 the other thing be very important I 22-53 believe wages will start going up they 22-55 haven't gone up for a long time I 22-56 believe wages now because the economy is 22-59 doing so well with respect to employment 23-01 and unemployment 23-03 I believe wages will start to go up I 23-05 think that will have a tremendously 23-07 positive impact on race relations 23-18 you  

Google fires Whistleblower, Women gathering to file class action lawsuit Google to employees, keep your mouths shut!     Why Did Google Freak Out and Fire an Employee for Spurring ‘Honest Discussion’? Genevieve Wood The tolerance police at Google just struck another blow against increasing diversity in Silicon Valley by firing an employee who wrote a memo critiquing the company’s politically correct culture. Now, let’s be clear - While the Google software engineer who authored the memo had the right to say and write what he did—it’s called free speech—Google is a private company and has every right to fire an employee it deems not in line with its mission or culture. But it’s fair to ask why Google reacted so negatively to an employee who, in a 10-page memo, laid out a case for why Google’s diversity programs weren’t working and how it might rethink its attempt to reduce the gender gap.   Could it be that Google is feeling just a little bit paranoid? For all the talk about inclusiveness and diversity, here’s the reality - If you’re not white or Asian, that means there is only a 5 percent chance you’re part of Google’s leadership team. And while 31 percent of Google’s employees are women, only 20 percent of its technical employees are—and it was primarily the memo’s focus on this gender gap that seems to have caused the recent unpleasantness in Silicon Valley. In addition to bad PR, perhaps what the larger left-leaning community there doesn’t want to admit is that for all its diversity programs and safe spaces, and who knows how many millions of dollars spent promoting them, they have done very little to change the outcomes. When it comes to computer and mathematical occupations, the numbers clearly show that women and men are not equally represented. Women held 27 percent of such jobs in 1960. Thirty years later, they held 35 percent. But fast forward to 2013, and the number of women in computing and mathematical occupations had fallen back to 26 percent. And it’s not because fewer women are going to college.   In fact, a Department of Education study from 2014 shows more women than men are attending and graduating from college, and they are receiving the majority of bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees. But when it comes to college majors, women and men choose differently. A recent Georgetown University study showed over 80 percent of petroleum engineering majors are male. So are almost 70 percent of those majoring in mathematics and computer science.   Women, on the other hand, tend to major in what might be called more people-oriented professions, such as counseling, education, and social work. Why men and women make such different choices is not 100 percent clear cut, but the idea that biology plays no role and it’s all because America is a sexist culture seems like an outdated and disproven theory. And it was hiring and personnel practices based on that politically correct theory that the now-former Google employee was criticizing.    As he stated in the memo that got him fired - “If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.” Apparently at Google, and much of Silicon Valley, the discussion is over.   Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber How bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion go/pc-considered-harmful James Damore - damore@ July 2017 Feel free to comment (they aren’t disabled, the doc may just be overloaded). For longer form discussions see g/pc-harmful-discuss Reply to public response and misrepresentation TL;DR Background Google’s biases Possible non bias causes of the gender gap in tech Personality differences Men’s higher drive for status Non discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap The harm of Google’s biases Why we’re blind Suggestions Reply to public response and misrepresentation I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can't have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I've gotten many†personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change. Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety . This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed. The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology. ○ Extreme - all disparities in representation are due to oppression ○ Authoritarian - we should discriminate to correct for this oppression Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don't have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business. Background 1 People generally have good intentions, but we all have biases which are invisible to us. Thankfully, open and honest discussion with those who disagree can highlight our blind spots and help us grow, which is why I wrote this document 2 . Google has several biases and honest discussion about these biases is being silenced by the dominant ideology. What follows is by no means the complete story, but it’s a perspective that desperately needs to be told at Google. Google’s biases At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases. Political orientation is actually a result of deep moral preferences and thus biases. Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media , and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices - ___________________________________________________________________________ This document is mostly written from the perspective of Google’s Mountain View campus, I can’t speak about other offices or countries. 2 Of course, I may be biased and only see evidence that supports my viewpoint. In terms of political biases, I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason . I'd be very happy to discuss any of the document further and provide more citations. 1 Neither side is 100% correct and both viewpoints are necessary for a functioning society or, in this case, company. A company too far to the right may be slow to react, overly hierarchical, and untrusting of others. In contrast, a company too far to the left will constantly be changing (deprecating much loved services), over diversify its interests (ignoring or being ashamed of its core business), and overly trust its employees and competitors. Only facts and reason can shed light on these biases, but when it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence. This silence removes any checks against encroaching extremist and authoritarian policies. For the rest of this document, I’ll concentrate on the extreme stance that all differences in outcome are due to differential treatment and the authoritarian element that’s required to actually discriminate to create equal representation. Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech 3 At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story. On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because - ● They’re universal across human cultures ● They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone ● Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males ● The underlying traits are highly heritable ● They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions. ____________________________________________________________________________ 3 Throughout the document, by “tech”, I mostly mean software engineering. Personality differences Women, on average, have more - ● Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things , relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing ). ○ These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics. ● ● Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. ○ This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Note that these are just average differences and there’s overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women’s issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support. Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance). ○ This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs. Note that contrary to what a social constructionist would argue, research suggests that "greater nation-level gender equality leads to psychological dissimilarity in men’s and women’s personality traits." Because as “society becomes more prosperous and more egalitarian, innate dispositional differences between men and women have more space to develop and the gap that exists between men and women in their personality traits becomes wider.” We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism . Men’s higher drive for status We always ask why we don't see women in top leadership positions, but we never ask why we see so many men in these jobs. These positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life. Status is the primary metric that men are judged on 4 , pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for the status that they entail. Note, the same forces that lead men into high pay/high stress jobs in tech and leadership cause men to take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths. Non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap Below I'll go over some of the differences in distribution of traits between men and women that I outlined in the previous section and suggest ways to address them to increase women's representation in tech without resorting to discrimination. Google is already making strides in many of these areas, but I think it's still instructive to list them - ● Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things ○ We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people-oriented certain roles at Google can be and we shouldn't deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this). ● Women on average are more cooperative ○ Allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive. Recent updates to Perf may be doing this to an extent, but maybe there's more we can do. ○ This doesn't mean that we should remove all competitiveness from Google. Competitiveness and self-reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn't necessarily disadvantage those that have them, like what's been done in education. ● Women on average are more prone to anxiety ____________________________________________________________________________ For heterosexual romantic relationships, men are more strongly judged by status and women by beauty . Again, this has biological origins and is culturally universal. 4 Make tech and leadership less stressful. Google already partly does this with its many stress reduction courses and benefits. Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average ○ Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech. The male gender role is currently inflexible ○ Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow men to be more "feminine," then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally "feminine" roles. Philosophically, I don't think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. For each of these changes, we need principled reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google—with Google's diversity being a component of that. For example, currently those willing to work extra hours or take extra stress will inevitably get ahead and if we try to change that too much, it may have disastrous consequences. Also, when considering the costs and benefits, we should keep in mind that Google's funding is finite so its allocation is more zero-sum than is generally acknowledged. The harm of Google’s biases I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices - ● Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race 5 ● ● ● A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias) ● Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination 6 ____________________________________________________________________________ 5 Stretch, BOLD, CSSI, Engineering Practicum (to an extent), and several other Google funded internal and external programs are for people with a certain gender or race. 6 Instead set Googlegeist OKRs, potentially for certain demographics. We can increase representation at an org level by either making it a better environment for certain groups (which would be seen in survey scores) or discriminating based on a protected status (which is illegal and I’ve seen it done). Increased representation OKRs can incentivize the latter and create zero-sum struggles between orgs. These practices are based on false assumptions generated by our biases and can actually increase race and gender tensions . We’re told by senior leadership that what we’re doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology 7 that can irreparably harm Google. Why we’re blind We all have biases and use motivated reasoning to dismiss ideas that run counter to our internal values. Just as some on the Right deny science that runs counter to the “God > humans > environment” hierarchy (e.g., evolution and climate change), the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ 8 and sex differences). Thankfully, climate scientists and evolutionary biologists generally aren’t on the right. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of humanities and social sciences lean left ( about 95% ), which creates enormous confirmation bias , changes what’s being studied, and maintains myths like social constructionism and the gender wage gap 9 . Google’s left leaning makes us blind to this bias and uncritical of its results, which we’re using to justify highly politicized programs. In addition to the Left’s affinity for those it sees as weak, humans are generally biased towards protecting females. As mentioned before, this likely evolved because males are biologically disposable and because women are generally more cooperative and agreeable than men. We have extensive government and Google programs, fields of study, and legal and social norms to protect women, but when a man complains about a gender issue issue affecting men, he’s labelled as a misogynist and a whiner 10 . Nearly every difference between men and women is interpreted as a form of women’s oppression. As with many things in life, gender differences are often a case of “grass being greener on the other side”; unfortunately, taxpayer and Google money is being spent to water only one side of the lawn. ____________________________________________________________________________ 7 Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism, but every attempt became morally corrupt and an economic failure. As it became clear that the working class of the liberal democracies wasn’t going to overthrow their “capitalist oppressors,” the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics. The core oppressor-oppressed dynamics remained, but now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.” 8 Ironically, IQ tests were initially championed by the Left when meritocracy meant helping the victims of aristocracy. 9 Yes, in a national aggregate, women have lower salaries than men for a variety of reasons . For the same work though, women get paid just as much as men. Considering women spend more money than men and that salary represents how much the employee sacrifices (e.g. more hours, stress, and danger), we really need to rethink our stereotypes around power. 10 “The traditionalist system of gender does not deal well with the idea of men needing support. Men are expected to be strong, to not complain, and to deal with problems on their own. Men’s problems are more often seen as personal failings rather than victimhood, due to our gendered idea of agency. This discourages men from bringing attention to their issues (whether individual or group-wide issues), for fear of being seen as whiners, complainers, or weak.” This same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness 11 , which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn’t harbored the violent leftist protests that we’re seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silent, psychologically unsafe environment. Suggestions I hope it’s clear that I'm not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn't try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite - treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism). My concrete suggestions are to - ● De-moralize diversity. ○ As soon as we start to moralize an issue , we stop thinking about it in terms of costs and benefits, dismiss anyone that disagrees as immoral, and harshly punish those we see as villains to protect the “victims.” ● Stop alienating conservatives . ○ Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently. ○ In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility . We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves. ○ Alienating conservatives is both non-inclusive and generally bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness , which is required for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company. ● Confront Google’s biases. ○ I’ve mostly concentrated on how our biases cloud our thinking about diversity and inclusion, but our moral biases are farther reaching than that. ○ I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation and personality to give a fuller picture into how our biases are affecting our culture. ● Stop restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races. ○ These discriminatory practices are both unfair and divisive. Instead focus on some of the non-discriminatory practices I outlined. ____________________________________________________________________________ 11 Political correctness is defined as “the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against,” which makes it clear why it’s a phenomenon of the Left and a tool of authoritarians. Have an open and honest discussion about the costs and benefits of our diversity programs. ○ Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women’s representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts. ○ There’s currently very little transparency into the extent of our diversity programs which keeps it immune to criticism from those outside its ideological echo chamber. ○ These programs are highly politicized which further alienates non-progressives. ○ I realize that some of our programs may be precautions against government accusations of discrimination, but that can easily backfire since they incentivize illegal discrimination. Focus on psychological safety, not just race/gender diversity. ○ We should focus on psychological safety, which has shown positive effects and should (hopefully) not lead to unfair discrimination. ○ We need psychological safety and shared values to gain the benefits of diversity. ○ Having representative viewpoints is important for those designing and testing our products, but the benefits are less clear for those more removed from UX. De-emphasize empathy. ○ I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases . Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts. Prioritize intention. ○ Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive - sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offence and our self censorship, leading to authoritarian policies. Speaking up without the fear of being harshly judged is central to psychological safety, but these practices can remove that safety by judging unintentional transgressions. ○ Microaggression training incorrectly and dangerously equates speech with violence and isn’t backed by evidence . Be open about the science of human nature. ○ Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems. Reconsider making Unconscious Bias training mandatory for promo committees. We haven’t been able to measure any effect of our Unconscious Bias training and it has the potential for overcorrecting or backlash, especially if made mandatory. Some of the suggested methods of the current training (v2.3) are likely useful, but the political bias of the presentation is clear from the factual inaccuracies and the examples shown. Spend more time on the many other types of biases besides stereotypes. Stereotypes are much more accurate and responsive to new information than the training suggests (I’m not advocating for using stereotypes, I just pointing out the factual inaccuracy of what’s said in the training). Rush Limbaugh on the firing of the Google Guy. Google Manifesto Author Canned   Aug 8, 2017  RUSH: The Google guy got canned. I told everybody it was gonna happen. No mystery there. The fascinating thing about the Google guy getting canned is everybody in Silicon Valley is all for it. The land of free speech, the land of equality and no discrimination, they’re all excited, ’cause this guy broke Google’s rules. You may not like ’em, but Google has rules, and if you break ’em, you’re out, which there is some logic to that. Anyway, they’re happy to get rid of the guy because they just can’t handle anything other than their preordained cocoon-generated truth, which, of course, isn’t truth. That’s the whole point. They can’t allow anything to challenge what they have convinced themselves is true because that shakes and rattles and rolls their existence. Google Manifesto Rips Political Correctness Aug 7, 2017 RUSH: Also big news over the weekend. I was kind of fascinated by this. Have you heard about the secret memo that went around Google? (interruption) You’re frowning. You hadn’t heard about this? (interruption) Some Google employee sent around an anonymous — posted an anonymous note — manifesto, on the inherent bigotry and political correctness at Google. It suggested that their pitch, their effort on diversity was misguided, that they need ideological diversity at Google, that all the conservative employees are scared to death to speak up and say anything. And then the guy — or girl. We don’t know who it is yet. All we know is, it’s gonna get fired when they’re discovered. The guy said — and he was I think ripping off Larry Summers when he was the president of Harvard. He said (summarized), “Look, the reason why,” and this was on his diversity kick. “The reason why there aren’t more women in tech positions is they’re not good at it. They’re not as interested in it as men are. So this effort to be diverse and have equal number of men and women in the tech workforce is silly ’cause it’s never gonna happen. Women are just not that inclined.”   Larry Summers said the same thing at Harvard. The reason why there aren’t more female math teachers is women don’t do as well in it, and they ran him out of the place. So this guy’s gonna get fired as soon as they find out who he is. But this story has captivated countless people over the weekend, and it is not over yet, and there’s much more straight ahead. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: You lady engineers at Google? I want to say something to you. Google is playing defense right now on the issue of diversity. This memo by a Google employee… I mean, this guy has just thrown a political correctness bomb right into the executive suite, ’cause this memo asserts that Google… When you strip it all away, the memo is an allegation that Google has fewer female engineers because men are better suited for the job, that essentially natural selection has taken over, and men are just more oriented toward math and science and engineering in those fields. Now, what generally happens in a situation like this is that the feminists and leaders women’s groups that get all hot and bothered and run around start making noise about discrimination and unfairness. Ladies, forget that. There’s a much better path that you should take here. Don’t get lost in the diversity argument. Don’t get caught up in it. That’s what Google expects you to do. Don’t go acting offended, and don’t get on some soapbox claiming that whoever wrote that is a bigot. Google is reeling right now. This is the kind of thing, this is the kind of charge that just sends leftists up the tree, that they’re unfair, that they’re discriminating on the basis of gender. Ladies, tell Google to prove it to you that the guy who wrote the memo is wrong. What you say to Google is, “Show me the money.” Go to the money. Tell ’em you want money. Tell ’em you want raises. Tell Google to prove it. Don’t join the protest march and start throwing underwear and bras. Just demand the money. They’re reeling right now. Hit ’em! BREAK TRANSCRIPT Bill in Ridgefield, Connecticut. I’m glad you called, sir. You’re up first. How are you? CALLER: Hi, Rush. I was just talking to Snerdley. Let me get to the point. I’m rich. I’m a big chess player and a damn good one. In fact, the New York AC I was the (call drops out) of the chess club. But backing up a second, of the top — RUSH: Wait. Wait a minute. Your call — hey, hang on, hang on. Your call is bucking up. Did you say the New York Athletic Club? Is that what you said? CALLER: Yes. RUSH: New York AC. Okay. And you said you’re a rich guy in New York. CALLER: That’s right. RUSH: The New York Athletic Club would say that. So you’re a great chess player. Okay. Got that. Go. CALLER: Okay. Of the top hundred chess players in the world — RUSH: Yeah. CALLER: — you know how many are women? Zero. RUSH: What does that mean? CALLER: I think they gravitate. I’m not saying women aren’t smarter. I have a daughter that went to Smith. I have a daughter that’s a doctor. I’m not saying women aren’t smarter. But they gravitate to the nurturing areas of society, as maybe they should. But they are not competitive with the mechanical and sciences. There may be a great scientist, but that would be an anomaly. But women, that can’t God for them, do a great job raising kids, God forbid, the feminazis, you know, one daughter that went to Smith, loaded with feminazis, she has our values. You know, common sense, down to earth, she got four kids, whatever. RUSH: Let me get back to your chess question. CALLER: Yeah. RUSH: ‘Cause you’re probably right. You’re not saying women aren’t capable of learning it and excelling at it, you’re just saying they’re not interested in it, right? CALLER: For the most part. But there are grandmaster female players. They’re just not in that top tier. The Polgar sisters, they’re from I believe Poland. Both of them are grandmasters. RUSH: Well, how much of it is that they don’t want to do what it takes to get there because they have other — CALLER: That’s right. You know, you take, you know, whether it was Bobby Fischer, God rest his soul. You take Kasparov who is going back, apparently, into the competition area. I read it in I think yesterday’s Journal — RUSH: He wants to beat the computers, yeah. CALLER: Well, the computer is a different ball game. RUSH: I don’t know. Elon Musk says they’re gonna take us over and Bill Gates and Hawking say if we don’t get to Mars, the machines are gonna eat us. What do we do? 0-00 the tolerance police at Google just 0-02 struck another blow against increasing 0-04 diversity in Silicon Valley by firing an 0-07 employee who wrote a memo critiquing the 0-09 company's politically correct culture 0-16 now let's be clear while the Google 0-19 software engineer who authored the memo 0-22 had the right to say and write what he 0-23 did it's called free speech Google's a 0-26 private company and has every right to 0-28 fire an employee it deems not in line 0-31 with this position or its culture but 0-33 it's fair to ask why Google reacted so 0-35 negatively to an employee to in a 10 0-38 page memo laid out a case for why Google 0-41 diversity programs weren't working and 0-44 how it might rethink its attempt to 0-46 reduce the gender gap could it be that 0-48 Google is feeling just a little bit 0-50 paranoid for all the talk about 0-52 inclusiveness and diversity here's the 0-55 reality if you're not white or Asian 0-57 that means there is only a 5% chance 1-00 you're part of Google's leadership piece 1-02 and while 31% of Google's employees are 1-05 women only 20% of its technical 1-08 employees are and it was primarily the 1-10 memos focus on this gender gap it seems 1-13 to have caused the recent unpleasantness 1-14 in Silicon Valley in addition to bad PR 1-18 perhaps what the larger left-leaning 1-20 community there doesn't want to admit is 1-22 that for all its diversity programs and 1-24 safe spaces and who knows how many 1-27 millions of dollars spent promoting them 1-29 they have done very little to change the 1-31 outcome when it comes to computer and 1-34 mathematical occupations the numbers 1-36 clearly show that women and men are not 1-38 equally represented women held 27% of 1-42 such jobs in 1960 30 years later they 1-45 held 35% but bath towards 2013 and the 1-50 number of women in computing and 1-51 mathematical occupations had fallen back 1-54 to 26% and it's not because fewer women 1-57 are going to college in fact a US 2-00 Department of Education study from 2014 2-03 shows more women the men are attending 2-05 and graduating from college and they are 2-07 receiving the majority of bachelor's 2-09 master's and doctorate degree 2-12 but when it comes to college majors 2-14 women and men choose differently 2-16 a recent Georgetown University study 2-19 showed over 80% of petroleum engineer 2-21 majors are male 2-23 so we're almost 70% of those majoring in 2-25 mathematics and computer science women 2-28 on the other hand in the major what 2-30 might be called more people oriented 2-32 professions such as counseling education 2-35 and Social Work why men and women make 2-38 such different choices is not 100% clear 2-41 cut but the idea that biology plays no 2-44 role and it's all because America is a 2-46 sexist culture seems like an outdated 2-48 and disproven theory and it was hiring 2-51 and personnel practices based on that 2-54 politically correct theory that the 2-56 now-former Google employee was 2-58 criticizing as he stated in the memo 3-00 that got him fired quote if we can't 3-03 have an honest discussion about this 3-04 then we can never truly solve the 3-07 problem apparently at Google and much of 3-09 Silicon Valley the discussion is over

Prager U - a young, single, black woman, recently discovered she is a racist, sexist, misogynist How in the world did this happen? None other than Antonia Okafor explains. Antonia Okafor, a young, single, black woman, recently discovered that's she's a racist, sexist, misogynist. How in the world did this happen? None other than Antonia Okafor explains. This video is part of an exciting partnership between PragerU and Turning Point USA that will include videos with other young conservatives like Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, and more!  Visit FreetoThink.org to learn more.    FACTS & SOURCES  DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT  VIEW TRANSCRIPT I recently discovered something startling about myself. It turns out that I’m a racist, sexist, misogynist. This came as quite a shock to me. How did this happen? As a person of color, a single woman with a graduate degree who grew up poor in a home without a father, I had a clear political path to follow. And I followed it. I voted for Barack Obama…twice. After all, we share the same skin color. His father was from Africa. Mine was, too! What other reasons did I need? I was inspired to see a black man rise to the highest office in the land. I believed his ascent would herald a new beginning, a new era of racial healing and harmony. We would finally have that frank discussion about race that everyone always talks about. I was also inspired by his wife. I was thrilled to see such a strong, opinionated black woman take the national stage. But then something happened… actually, several somethings. I realized there was a big contradiction in my own life. I considered myself a free-thinker, but I was thinking exactly what I was supposed to. I decided to start asking questions. I belonged to several campus feminist groups. I was even teaching feminism to inner-city girls. Part of that teaching involved making the case for abortion. These girls needed to know that they had the right to make decisions about their own bodies. Surely, I thought, that’s empowerment. But one day I asked myself: Isn’t it men who benefit most from consequence-free sex? Doesn’t that give them even more power over women? And, of course, abortion certainly doesn’t empower the women it prevents from ever being born. When I began to ask my other feminist friends how they reconciled these issues, they just got angry. I was called anti-woman. Even by progressive men! “But I’m not anti-woman,” I thought. “I am a woman!” I just don’t want to be a weak one. I want to be strong – like Michelle. At about the same time, while I was a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, the UT Austin Department of African Diaspora Studies released a statement in which they said, and I quote, “African Americans are disproportionately affected by the saturation of our society by firearms … We demand that firearms be banned in all spaces occupied by black people on our campus.” Wait a second, I thought. Why would you want to ban firearms only in black areas? Doesn’t that mean that you either think black people are more dangerous than other people, or less worthy of protection? These questions did not endear me to my progressive friends. I was called a race traitor…even by white people. But I’m not anti-black. I am black. I just want to be safe – like Barack. I realized I didn’t have a good answer; I only had more questions – like, why were blacks doing so poorly in cities that had been run by Democrats for decades? Was it racism and sexism that was holding people back, or was it something else? The more questions I asked, the less popular I became. But here’s the funny thing: I started to feel better about myself. I decided that the very definition of empowerment required me to take responsibility for my own life. I wasn’t going to be anyone’s victim. Which meant I had to protect myself. So, I bought a gun. I started to advocate for gun rights. That cost me more friends. I joined the pro-life movement and walked in The March for Life. More friends...gone. Then, I crossed the line. I voted Republican – the party that views me as an empowered individual, able to shape my own destiny; not as a member of a victim group. And that’s how I became a racist, sexist, misogynist. I’m Antonia Okafor for Prager University.

President Donald Trump Speech in Poland - Rush Limbaugh said one of the best Presidential Speeches of all time A Reaganesque speech, you will not hear this on the Drive By FAKE NEWS, but you can here it here. President Donald Trump delivers a speech at Krasinski Square at the Royal Castle,  Thursday, July 6, 2017, in Warsaw, Poland. By ROGER KIMBALL of PJMedia Read the rest here If you want to know why Donald Trump will go down in history as a great president, listen to (or read, when it is available) his speech in Krasinski Square, Warsaw today. Yes, there is a lot of the usual diplomatic persiflage: “Thank you, President Duda. Thank you, Poland.” But be an adult and distinguish the gem from the setting. While the anti-Trump press was busy running stories warning about “unease in Brussels” over Trump’s visit to Poland, Trump once again totally outflanked his critics.  Those who have ears, let them hear:       The United States is absolutely committed to securing Poland’s access to alternative sources of energy.  Now, to whom do you think that was addressed?  What country would use access to oil and gas as political blackmail (do what we say or you can’t warm your homes, light your streets, run your factories)? Who would do such a thing?     The United States is absolutely committed to its trans-Atlantic partnership. That partnership, said Trump in his aspirational mode, has never been stronger: suitably translated, that means that he wishes to assure that it will never be stronger.  It was a proffered hand.  Will the EU bureaucrats reach out and grasp it?     Speaking of bureaucrats, Trump also—mirabile dictu—warned about “steady creep of government bureaucracy” that, left unchecked, saps a people's will and makes the flourishing of individual initiative, the very marrow of freedom, impossible.  This was a direct kick against the administrative state: I like to see it. Drain the Swamp.     Trump reaffirmed his absolute commitment to Article 5 of the NATO agreement -- the bit that pledges members to “collective defense”: an attack on one member is an attack on all. He praised Poland for stepping up to meet its statutory financial commitment to NATO and urged other European countries to do the same. A strong NATO means a strong Europe. Rush Limbaugh - In Poland, Trump Plays the Media Again Jul 6, 2017 RUSH: CNN, folks, it’s hilarious. It is amazing. It’s unbelievable to watch what this collection of people claiming to be journalists is doing to themselves. It’s a circular firing squad. They’re shooting themselves in the foot. They’re setting themselves on fire, and they’re doing it all with righteous indignation at a man they hate running intellectual and tactical rings around them. So Trump is over there in Poland and in Germany and he’s doing his no-apology tour, as opposed to Obama’s, which were apology tours. You know, Trump’s not apologizing for anything. And the press, “So, are you ready to admit that the Russians and you colluded? Are you ready to admit it?” And Trump says, “I don’t know what you’re talking about. Nobody knows for sure.” And they blow up. For the last year these people have been devoted to proving something that didn’t happen, collusion, Trump, Russia, to screw Hillary out of the presidency. It’s nothing but lies. It’s nothing but manufactured, total BS that has now become a reality to these people. And all Trump has to say, “Well, you know, nobody really knows.” (laughing) And they blow up. And this Little Jim Acosta is literally making a fool of himself. He’s a CNN reporter, and he’s the guy that went bat nuts about two weeks ago over Trump refusing to call on him and then referring to CNN as fake news. And then the CNN mock wrestling gif. He’s losing his mind. They all are at CNN. And so today Jim Acosta accused Trump of engaging in fake news. The definition of fake news at CNN is if Trump takes a question from a conservative reporter, a friendly reporter. That is fake news. Acosta actually tweeted, “Isn’t it a fake news conference to take a question from a reporter who is essentially an ally of the White House.” Now, in order to understand what comes next, you have to understand who Acosta is. He’s like everybody else in Washington. These are pseudointellectuals. You must understand the way they see themselves. They see themselves as better, smarter, more important, more relevant, more necessary, just generally better people than all the rest of us. They have no humility whatsoever. They do not know what they don’t know. They have no capability of humility. They have no ability to admit that there are things that they don’t know. As such they are ripe to be made fools of. And this Acosta guy is basically putting his own bag of manure in front of himself and stepping in it every day. Trump is just assisting a little bit, but he’s not even collecting the manure. CNN’s doing that. Trump may be furnishing the bag, but these people are putting it in front of themselves and then stepping in it. So Acosta tweets, “Isn’t it a fake news conference to take a question from a reporter who is essentially an ally of the White House?” Donald Trump Jr. responds. “So by that logic, Little Jim, every news conference for the last eight years with Obama was fake news. You would know.” But it isn’t just Donald Trump Jr. Ari Fleischer: “Jim, do you care to guess how many questions I took from reporters who went on to join the Obama White House?” Ari Fleischer was Bush’s first press secretary. Here’s Acosta saying these conservative reporters, you know, they’re Trump’s allies, they’re supporters of Trump, these conservative people. That means it’s fake news. And Ari Fleischer is pointing out, you know, Jim, how many of your buddies who are in the press corps during the Bush administration then went on to join the actual Obama administration? The tweets, the memes, the gifs making fun of CNN with Trump savaging them, they’re getting too many to watch, too many to count. CNN has become a laughingstock and doesn’t know it. That’s what’s funny about it. They don’t know it. They’re aware of all of this, but because they have no humility and because they have no sense of their true place in the universe, they are incapable of actually having this register in terms of its reality. So Trump’s press conference is in Poland — oh, by the way, let me tell you about this. There’s another thing about Poland. The Drive-By Media today, a couple different places, reported that Trump is so unpopular in Poland. This is a flat-out lie. I mean, this is just total flat-out fake news. They reported Trump as so unpopular in Poland that they had to bus in the few supporters in the country they could find that would cheer Trump. That’s not at all what happened. Trump is so popular the Polish government had to organize the numbers of people and they sponsored bus trips to facilitate traffic management and logistics and all that. There were so many people that wanted to see Trump that they found a way to bus them in and keep it somewhat organized. But the Drive-By Media, including CNN, wants you to believe, they are reporting that Poland could only find 5,000 citizens in the whole country who cared to see Trump. That they don’t like Trump, that they wish Trump would go away, because Trump likes Merkel and Trump likes Putin and the Polish people hate Putin and they hate Merkel. It’s just the exact opposite. Trump is on the exact same page as Polish people via Merkel and Putin, and the Polish people know it. I’ve never seen anything like this. I’ve never seen a professional organization of any kind become so consumed with rage and hatred and other destructive emotions that they are actually self-destructing before our eyes and unaware that that’s what they’re doing. They made the common mistake, as I continue to point out, that they believe that everybody thinks like they do, everybody out there across the fruited plain, everybody inside the Beltway. When you stand aside from this and gaze upon it, Trump is just a master at playing these people. He also got a dig in at Obama, and he ripped into American intel sources and the intel community. And the Drive-Bys are outraged. CNN’s been running a banner all day: “Trump Blasts America on Foreign Trip.” “Trump Blasts Intel Community on Foreign Trip.” “Trump Blasts Obama.” Of course, in a sense it’s true, but they have no context. What Trump’s referring to is the intel community, weapons of mass destruction. He’s being asked by the media, “So… so do you think the intel community was right when they said 17 different agencies realized that you colluded with Russia? Do you think that’s right?” And Trump said, “Well, I don’t know that anybody really knows for sure what happened,” and they blow gaskets. Carotid arteries are about to burst, and Trump says, “Look at weapons of mass destruction. The intelligence communities all over the world said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. We get over there; we couldn’t find any.” CNN with a banner: “Trump Bashes Intel Community While in Poland on Foreign Soil.” Well, let’s not forget who led the charge in bashing the intel community over weapons of mass destruction. The Drive-By Media! The Drive-By Media not only bashed the intel community, they tried to destroy George W. Bush, whether he was on domestic soil or foreign soil. They hate Trump. David Gelernter has a great, great piece today in the Wall Street Journal. Now, his piece is actually about why conservative intellectuals are flat-out wrong in their opposition to Trump and how they’re flat-out phony in their opposition to Trump. And in the process he describes (I think accurately( why much of the hatred for Trump inside the Beltway exists. I’ll get to it in just a moment. Like I tell you today, folks, I am sitting here overwhelmed with opportunities to share things with you. So as I think of these things the brain synapses fire. I guarantee you, I promise you: If I reference it here, I will get the details later in the program before we wrap up today. But it’s a perfect analogy. You know, when asked for the hundredth time if he believed the intel claims… Here’s another thing. (chuckles) We’re back to Jim Acosta again. Trump today, in answering the question for the hundredth time if he believed the intelligence community claims that the Russians meddled in the election, Trump said, “Well, I don’t think it’s all 17. I think it was only three now.”       Jim Acosta ran to Twitter (paraphrased), “Trump is an idiot! Trump is a buffoon! It is 17 intelligence agencies who all agree that the Russians tampered with the election to try to benefit Trump!” Well, as you’ll remember from yesterday’s show, the New York Times and the AP had to do massive corrections and massive deletions and massive pullbacks because it isn’t 17; it was only three people — three people who agreed with James Clapper, who was Obama’s Director of National Intelligence. It was reported in January that 17 intel agencies all agreed that Russia tampered with Putin to benefit Trump. They had to pull that back. They did the correction over the weekend. We heralded it major yesterday. Jim Acosta doesn’t know. Jim Acosta, a reporter at CNN, simply doesn’t know that the AP and the New York Times had to issue the corrections. It isn’t 17. So he’s out there tweeting what an idiot Trump is. He’s tweeting what a liar Trump is, that Trump doesn’t know, that Trump is ignorant. When in fact it’s Acosta who is the CNN reporter who — according to job description — should be on top of this stuff. I mean, these people, the New York Times is their bible. They should know everything in the New York Times, and it is becoming clear that people that work for CNN are among the least informed people in Washington. It’s just delicious. It is fascinating. I was reminded. I didn’t even… I had forgotten this. John Hinderaker at Power Line had posted something back in 2009 about CNN. The title of the tweet I think, I think, is, “Rush Is Out.” The post was about was how CNN knowingly broadcast fake quotes attributed to me during the period of time it had been announced that I was part of a minority ownership group to buy the St. Louis Rams. CNN happily bannered and broadcast all of these fake quotes from me, and this post from Power Line in 2009 was among their most clicked on yesterday, and they wanted to find out why. They found it was because of a tweet from Dan Riehl and also an old tweet from Andrew Breitbart about CNN being evil. The Power Line people used it just to illustrate that the fake news business is nothing new to CNN, that they have been doing it for years. It was 2009. That’s eight years ago, and they broadcast a quote of something I never said. It was later learned to be manufactured out of thin air by a scraggly little left-wing author who had written a book filled with fake quotes attributed to countless conservatives, most of them about me. It was about how I supported slavery. I supposedly supported slavery ’cause the streets were safer at night, and CNN ran with this quote. The Power Line post was all about how anybody who listens would know it’s BS, that CNN was behaving irresponsibly. But the context of it was that the fake news that is CNN is not exclusive to Trump, and it isn’t anything new. It is what and who CNN has been for years. Trump is playing them like a Stradivarius. Trump said, “I think it was Russia. I think it could have been other people. Nobody really knows for sure. I remember when I was sitting back listening about Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, how everybody was 100% sure that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction,” Trump said. “Well, guess what? That led to one big mess. They were wrong, and it led to a mess.” The media is literally blowing gaskets at this. They can’t handle it. They have their meme. They have their narrative. The intel community now is unassailable. The intelligence community is universally, always 1,000% right. And they are all agreeing (but they don’t) that Putin attempted to interfere in the American election so that Trump would win. It’s a BS pack of lies that they have now reported for so long they actually believe it. And if anybody comes along and raises questions about the veracity, the honesty, the accuracy of the intelligence community? Why, the Drive-Bys can’t handle it. This self-immolation, this meltdown is occurring in public in front of everyone’s eyes, not behind the scenes. In other words, everybody is able to watch it. And Trump is just masterful at tweaking these people, at playing them off of each other. He knows how to push their buttons. It’s funny, because they’re sitting there in these press conferences thinking, “This is the day we’re gonna destroy Trump! This is the day we’re gonna expose Trump. This is the day we’re gonna prove that Trump is a poseur. We’re gonna prove that Trump’s a fraud.” And every day it is Trump making fools of them, except they don’t know that. They don’t have the humility or the sense of awareness to understand that they’re being made fools of. It’s fascinating to watch.   Rush Limbaugh - Trump Defends Western Values in Historic Warsaw Speech Jul 6, 2017   RUSH: Angela Merkel says that success is based on open societies and shared values. Not the way she means, and I’m gonna explain why I say that in quoting from Donald Trump today in his speech in Poland. It is amazing. It is the first such speech of its kind since Ronald Reagan. I’m not kidding you. George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush got close. But what Trump did today with his speech in Poland — actually, with his conclusion. The whole thing is awesome. But he started about 75% of the way in, and it is stunning. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: I’m gonna share with you the salient point of Trump’s speech in Poland today that — well, Roger Kimball of PJ Media says this speech is one of many that’s going to end up defining Donald Trump as one of the greatest presidents ever. And this speech that Trump gave today has not been given, has not even been attempted by any president since Ronald Reagan. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Here is a salient point or part of the Trump speech in Poland today that sets up what I think is phenomenal. It’s audio sound bite number 6. Here it is. THE PRESIDENT: Your oppressors tried to break you, but Poland could not be broken. And when the day came on June 2nd, 1979, and one million Poles gathered around Victory Square for their very first Mass with their Polish pope, that day every communist in Warsaw must have known that their oppressive system would soon come crashing down. They must have known it at the exact moment during Pope John Paul II’s sermon when a million Polish men, women, and children suddenly raised their voices in a single prayer. A million Polish people did not ask for wealth. They did not ask for privilege. Instead, one million Poles saying three simple words: “We want God.” RUSH: And he’s right. That was a huge moment in the destruction of Soviet communism, Pope John Paul, part of the troika with Margaret Thatcher, Ronaldus Magnus, bringing down the Soviet Union. And Pope John Paul II, a fervent anti-communist went to Poland as pope, and the country went crazy for him. But after that comment is where Trump got to the heart of his speech. He said, “The prerequisite for the success of Western civilization is not material riches. Economic prosperity and military might on their own are not sufficient. The critical leaven is the confidence in core Western values, such things as free speech, the equality of women, respect for individual rights, the rule of law, the affirmation of faith and family. Hence, the fundamental question facing Western nations today is whether the people continue to nurture the cultural self-confidence in those fundamental values. If they do, the West is unbeatable. If those values dissipate, the West is lost. As long as we know our history,” Trump said, “We will know how to build our future.” Then he spent a lot of time rehearsing Poland’s heroic resistance to Nazi atrocities in the Warsaw uprising, heroic resistance to Soviet aggression. Roger Kimball, who heard the speech, wrote at PJ Media: “Not since Ronald Reagan has an American president gone so clearly to the nub of what makes the West great and what threatens that greatness.” And he’s talking about Western civilization, Western values, American culture. This distinct American culture that resulted from our founding that is now under assault, not just from enemies around the world, but from enemies within. That distinctive American culture which has given freedom its greatest repository and chance in the world is under assault from the American media and its agents in the Democrat Party and in academia and in Hollywood. The threat to American Western civilization is now primarily domestic, and it has to be beaten back if we are to survive. It’s a battle to the death, folks, and we’re smack-dab in the middle of it. And Trump’s the only president since Reagan to acknowledge it. Transcript English 0-00 Mrs. Trump- Hello, Poland! 0-08 Thank you very much. 0-11 My husband and I have enjoyed visiting 0-13 your beautiful country. 0-16 I want to thank President and Mrs. Duda 0-20 for the warm welcome and their generous hospitality. 0-25 I had the opportunity to visit the Copernicus Science Centre today, 0-30 and found it not only informative but thoughtful, 0-35 its mission, which is to inspire people to observe, experiment, 0-42 ask questions, and seek answers. 0-45 I can think of no better purpose for such a wonderful science center. 0-54 Thank you to all who were involved in giving us 0-57 the tour, especially the children who made it 1-01 such a wonderful experience. 1-04 As many of you know, a main focus of my husband's 1-08 presidency is safety and security of the American people. 1-13 I think all of us can agree people should be able 1-19 to live their lives without fear, no matter 1-23 what country they live in. 1-27 That is my wish for all of us around the world. 1-32 (Applause.) 1-36 Thank you again for this wonderful welcome 1-40 to your very special country. 1-42 Your kindness and gracious hospitality 1-46 will not be forgotten. 1-50 (Applause.) 1-52 And now it is my honor to introduce 1-55 to you my husband, the President of the United States, 2-00 Donald J. Trump. 2-03 (Applause.) 2-11 The President- Thank you very much. 2-30 That's so nice. 2-33 The United States has many great diplomats, 2-35 but there is truly no better ambassador for our country 2-40 than our beautiful First Lady, Melania. 2-43 Thank you, Melania. 2-44 That was very nice. 2-46 (Applause.) 2-48 We've come to your nation to deliver 2-50 a very important message- America loves Poland, 2-55 and America loves the Polish people. 2-58 (Applause.) 2-59 Thank you. 3-02 The Poles have not only greatly enriched this region, 3-05 but Polish-Americans have also 3-08 greatly enriched the United States, and I was 3-12 truly proud to have their support in the 2016 election. 3-18 (Applause.) 3-23 It is a profound honor to stand 3-25 in this city, by this monument to the Warsaw Uprising, 3-31 and to address the Polish nation that 3-34 so many generations have dreamed of- a Poland that 3-40 is safe, strong, and free. 3-46 (Applause.) 3-49 President Duda and your wonderful First Lady, Agata, 3-54 have welcomed us 3-56 with the tremendous warmth and kindness for which Poland 3-59 is known around the world. 4-02 Thank you. 4-04 (Applause.) 4-06 My sincere -- and I mean sincerely thank both of them. 4-15 And to Prime Minister Syzdlo, a very special thanks also. 4-22 (Applause.) 4-25 We are also pleased that former President Leck Walesa, 4-31 so famous for leading 4-32 the Solidarity Movement, has joined us today, also. 4-36 (Applause.) 4-38 Thank you. 4-39 Thank you. 4-44 Thank you. 4-47 On behalf of all Americans, let me also thank 4-51 the entire Polish people for the generosity 4-55 you have shown in welcoming our soldiers 4-58 to your country. 4-59 These soldiers are not only brave defenders of freedom, 5-02 but also symbols of America's commitment 5-06 to your security and your place in a strong 5-11 and democratic Europe. 5-18 We are proudly joined on stage by American, 5-22 Polish, British, and Romanian soldiers. 5-25 Thank you. 5-28 (Applause.) 5-29 Thank you. 5-31 Great job. 5-33 President Duda and I have just come from 5-36 an incredibly successful meeting with the leaders 5-39 participating in the Three Seas Initiative. 5-44 To the citizens of this great region, 5-47 America is eager to expand our partnership with you. 5-51 We welcome stronger ties of trade and commerce 5-55 as you grow your economies. 5-57 And we are committed to securing your access 6-00 to alternate sources of energy, so Poland and its neighbors 6-05 are never again held hostage 6-08 to a single supplier of energy. 6-15 (Applause.) 6-17 Mr. President, I congratulate you, 6-19 along with the President of Croatia, on your leadership 6-26 of this historic Three Seas Initiative. 6-30 Thank you. 6-32 (Applause.) 6-35 This is my first visit to Central Europe as President, 6-39 and I am thrilled that it could be right here 6-43 at this magnificent, beautiful piece of land. 6-49 It is beautiful. 6-51 (Applause.) 6-53 Poland is the geographic heart of Europe, 6-57 but more importantly, in the Polish people, 7-00 we see the soul of Europe. 7-06 Your nation is great because your spirit 7-11 is great and your spirit is strong. 7-15 (Applause.) 7-21 For two centuries, Poland suffered constant 7-24 and brutal attacks. 7-26 But while Poland could be invaded and occupied, 7-30 and its borders even erased from the map, 7-34 it could never be erased from history or from your hearts. 7-39 In those dark days, you have lost your land 7-45 but you never lost your pride. 7-49 (Applause.) 7-53 So, it is with true admiration 7-55 that I can say today, that from the farms and villages 8-00 of your countryside to the cathedrals and squares 8-05 of your great cities, Poland lives, Poland prospers, 8-10 and Poland prevails. 8-13 (Applause.) 8-17 Despite every effort to transform you, 8-20 oppress you, or destroy you, you endured and overcame. 8-25 You are the proud nation of Copernicus -- think of that -- 8-35 (Applause.) 8-36 -- Chopin, Saint John Paul II. 8-41 Poland is a land of great heroes. 8-46 (Applause.) 8-50 And you are a people who know the true value 8-53 of what you defend. 8-57 The triumph of the Polish spirit over centuries 9-01 of hardship gives us all hope for a future in which good 9-06 conquers evil, and peace achieves victory over war. 9-13 For Americans, Poland has been a symbol of hope 9-17 since the beginning of our nation. 9-20 Polish heroes and American patriots fought side by side 9-26 in our War of Independence and in many wars that followed. 9-32 Our soldiers still serve together today 9-34 in Afghanistan and Iraq, combatting the enemies 9-38 of all civilization. 9-41 For America's part, we have never given up 9-44 on freedom and independence as the right and destiny 9-49 of the Polish people, and we never, ever will. 9-54 (Applause.) 9-59 Our two countries share a special bond 10-02 forged by unique histories and national characters. 10-07 It's a fellowship that exists only among people 10-10 who have fought and bled and died for freedom. 10-15 (Applause.) 10-18 The signs of this friendship 10-20 stand in our nation's capital. 10-23 Just steps from the White House, we've raised statues 10-28 of men with names like Pulaski and Kosciuszko. 10-34 (Applause.) 10-38 The same is true in Warsaw, 10-40 where street signs carry the name of George Washington, 10-44 and a monument stands to one of the world's 10-47 greatest heroes, Ronald Reagan. 10-54 (Applause.) 10-58 And so, I am here today not just to visit an old ally, 10-59 but to hold it up as an example 11-01 for others who seek freedom and who wish 11-04 to summon the courage and the will 11-07 to defend our civilization. 11-14 (Applause.) 11-15 The story of Poland is the story 11-18 of a people who have never lost hope, who have never 11-22 been broken, and who have never, ever forgotten 11-26 who they are. 11-31 (Applause) 11-35 Audience- Donald Trump! 11-38 Donald Trump! 11-40 Donald Trump! 11-47 The President- Thank you. 11-52 Thank you so much. 11-53 Thank you. 11-56 Thank you so much. 11-57 Such a great honor. 11-59 This is a nation more than one thousand years old. 12-03 Your borders were erased for more than a century 12-07 and only restored just one century ago. 12-13 In 1920, in the Miracle of Vistula, 12-18 Poland stopped the Soviet army bent on European conquest. 12-31 (Applause.) 12-33 Then, 19 years later in 1939, 12-34 you were invaded yet again, this time by Nazi Germany 12-37 from the west and the Soviet Union from the east. 12-41 That's trouble. 12-45 That's tough. 12-48 Under a double occupation the Polish people endured 12-51 evils beyond description- the Katyn forest massacre, 12-57 the occupations, the Holocaust, the Warsaw Ghetto 13-02 and the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, 13-04 the destruction of this beautiful capital city, 13-08 and the deaths of nearly one in five Polish people. 13-15 A vibrant Jewish population -- the largest 13-17 in Europe -- was reduced to almost nothing after 13-21 the Nazis systematically murdered millions 13-25 of Poland's Jewish citizens, along with countless 13-29 others, during that brutal occupation. 13-33 In the summer of 1944, the Nazi and Soviet armies 13-38 were preparing for a terrible and bloody battle 13-42 right here in Warsaw. 13-43 Amid that hell on earth, the citizens of Poland 13-46 rose up to defend their homeland. 13-49 I am deeply honored to be joined on stage today 13-52 by veterans and heroes of the Warsaw Uprising. 14-01 (Applause.) 14-08 Audience- (Chanting.) 14-26 The President- What great spirit. 14-29 We salute your noble sacrifice and we pledge 14-31 to always remember your fight for Poland 14-35 and for freedom. 14-36 Thank you. 14-38 Thank you. 14-38 (Applause.) 14-41 This monument reminds us that more than 150,000 Poles died 14-48 during that desperate struggle 14-50 to overthrow oppression. 14-53 From the other side of the river, the Soviet armed forces 14-57 stopped and waited. 15-00 They watched as the Nazis ruthlessly destroyed the city, 15-06 viciously murdering men, women, and children. 15-09 They tried to destroy this nation forever 15-11 by shattering its will to survive. 15-14 But there is a courage and a strength deep 15-16 in the Polish character that no one could destroy. 15-20 The Polish martyr, Bishop Michael Kozal, said it well, 15-27 "More horrifying than a defeat of arms 15-30 is a collapse of the human spirit." 15-35 Through four decades of communist rule, Poland 15-38 and the other captive nations of Europe endured a brutal 15-43 campaign to demolish freedom, your faith, 15-46 your laws, your history, your identity -- 15-50 indeed the very essence of your culture and your humanity. 15-55 Yet, through it all, you never lost that spirit. 16-03 (Applause.) 16-06 Your oppressors tried to break you, but Poland could not be broken. 16-14 (Applause.) 16-18 And when the day came on June 2nd, 1979, 16-22 and one million Poles gathered around 16-25 Victory Square for their very first mass with their 16-29 Polish Pope, that day, every communist in Warsaw 16-33 must have known that their oppressive system would 16-37 soon come crashing down. 16-41 (Applause.) 16-44 They must have known it at the exact moment 16-47 during Pope John Paul II's sermon 16-49 when a million Polish men, women, and children 16-53 suddenly raised their voices in a single prayer. 16-57 A million Polish people did not ask for wealth. 17-04 They did not ask for privilege. 17-06 Instead, one million Poles sang three simple words, 17-11 "We Want God." 17-16 (Applause.) 17-21 In those words, the Polish people recalled the promise 17-24 of a better future. 17-26 They found new courage to face down their oppressors, 17-30 and they found the words to declare 17-34 that Poland would be Poland once again. 17-38 As I stand here today before this incredible crowd, 17-43 this faithful nation, we can still hear those voices 17-48 that echo through history. 17-51 Their message is as true today as ever. 17-55 The people of Poland, the people of America, 17-59 and the people of Europe still cry out "We want God." 18-06 (Applause.) 18-10 Together, with Pope John Paul II, 18-12 the Poles reasserted their identity as a nation 18-17 devoted to God. 18-19 And with that powerful declaration of who you are, 18-23 you came to understand what to do and how to live. 18-28 You stood in solidarity against oppression, 18-31 against a lawless secret police, against a cruel 18-35 and wicked system that impoverished your cities 18-38 and your souls. 18-40 And you won. 18-42 Poland prevailed. 18-44 Poland will always prevail. 18-48 (Applause.) 18-56 Audience- Donald Trump! 18-58 Donald Trump! 19-01 Donald Trump! 19-13 The President- Thank you. 19-15 You were supported in that victory over communism 19-18 by a strong alliance of free nations in the West 19-21 that defied tyranny. 19-24 Now, among the most committed members 19-27 of the NATO Alliance, Poland has resumed its place 19-31 as a leading nation of a Europe that is strong, whole, and free. 19-37 A strong Poland is a blessing to the nations of Europe, 19-42 and they know that. 19-43 A strong Europe is a blessing to the West 19-46 and to the world. 19-52 (Applause.) 19-54 One hundred years after the entry 19-56 of American forces into World War I, the transatlantic bond 20-00 between the United States and Europe is as strong as ever 20-05 and maybe, in many ways, even stronger. 20-09 This continent no longer confronts 20-12 the specter of communism. 20-15 But today we're in the West, and we have to say 20-19 there are dire threats to our security 20-22 and to our way of life. 20-25 You see what's happening out there. 20-28 They are threats. 20-30 We will confront them. 20-32 We will win. 20-33 But they are threats. 20-36 (Applause.) 20-42 Audience- Donald Trump! 20-44 Donald Trump! 20-48 Donald Trump! 21-00 The President- We are confronted by another 21-01 oppressive ideology -- one that seeks to export 21-05 terrorism and extremism all around the globe. 21-09 America and Europe have suffered one terror attack 21-14 after another. 21-17 We're going to get it to stop. 21-20 (Applause.) 21-23 During a historic gathering in Saudi Arabia, 21-26 I called on the leaders of more than 50 Muslim nations 21-29 to join together to drive out this menace 21-33 which threatens all of humanity. 21-36 We must stand united against these shared enemies 21-39 to strip them of their territory and their funding, 21-43 and their networks, and any form of ideological support 21-50 that they may have. 21-52 While we will always welcome new citizens 21-54 who share our values and love our people, our borders 21-58 will always be closed to terrorism and extremism 22-02 of any kind. 22-05 (Applause.) 22-08 Audience- Donald Trump! 22-11 Donald Trump! 22-15 Donald Trump! 22-25 The President- We are fighting hard against 22-29 radical Islamic terrorism, and we will prevail. 22-38 We cannot accept those who reject our values 22-41 and who use hatred to justify violence against the innocent. 22-46 Today, the West is also confronted by the powers 22-49 that seek to test our will, undermine our 22-52 confidence, and challenge our interests. 22-56 To meet new forms of aggression, including 22-59 propaganda, financial crimes, and cyberwarfare, 23-04 we must adapt our alliance to compete effectively 23-08 in new ways and on all new battlefields. 23-13 We urge Russia to cease its destabilizing activities 23-17 in Ukraine and elsewhere, and its support 23-21 for hostile regimes -- including Syria and Iran 23-26 -- and to instead join the community of responsible 23-29 nations in our fight against common enemies 23-33 and in defense of civilization itself. 23-41 (Applause.) 23-43 Finally, on both sides of the Atlantic, 23-45 our citizens are confronted by yet another 23-47 danger -- one firmly within our control. 23-51 This danger is invisible to some but familiar to 23-55 the Poles- the steady creep of government 23-58 bureaucracy that drains the vitality and wealth 24-02 of the people. 24-04 The West became great not because of paperwork and 24-07 regulations but because people were allowed to chase 24-11 their dreams and pursue their destinies. 24-16 Americans, Poles, and the nations of Europe value 24-20 individual freedom and sovereignty. 24-23 We must work together to confront forces, whether 24-26 they come from inside or out, from the South or the East, 24-30 that threaten over time to undermine these values 24-34 and to erase the bonds of culture, 24-37 faith and tradition that make us who we are. 24-44 (Applause.) 24-47 If left unchecked, these forces will undermine our courage, 24-51 sap our spirit, 24-53 and weaken our will to defend ourselves 24-55 and our societies. 24-58 But just as our adversaries and enemies 25-00 of the past learned here in Poland, we know that these 25-05 forces, too, are doomed to fail if we want them to fail. 25-11 And we do, indeed, want them to fail. 25-16 (Applause.) 25-20 They are doomed not only because our alliance is strong, 25-23 our countries are resilient, 25-25 and our power is unmatched. 25-27 Through all of that, you have to say everything is true. 25-33 Our adversaries, however, are doomed because we will 25-38 never forget who we are. 25-40 And if we don't forget who are, we just can't be beaten. 25-45 Americans will never forget. 25-48 The nations of Europe will never forget. 25-51 We are the fastest and the greatest community. 25-55 There is nothing like our community of nations. 25-59 The world has never known anything like 26-03 our community of nations. 26-05 We write symphonies. 26-06 We pursue innovation. 26-09 We celebrate our ancient heroes, embrace our timeless 26-12 traditions and customs, and always seek 26-15 to explore and discover brand-new frontiers. 26-20 We reward brilliance. 26-22 We strive for excellence, and cherish inspiring 26-27 works of art that honor God. 26-30 We treasure the rule of law and protect the right 26-35 to free speech and free expression. 26-39 (Applause.) 26-42 We empower women as pillars of our society and of our success. 26-48 We put faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, 26-52 at the center of our lives. 26-54 And we debate everything. 26-56 We challenge everything. 26-57 We seek to know everything so that we can better 27-00 know ourselves. 27-04 (Applause.) 27-05 And above all, we value the dignity of every human life, 27-09 protect the rights 27-10 of every person, and share the hope of every soul 27-15 to live in freedom. 27-17 That is who we are. 27-19 Those are the priceless ties that bind us together 27-23 as nations, as allies, and as a civilization. 27-28 What we have, what we inherited from our -- 27-33 and you know this better than anybody, and you see it 27-35 today with this incredible group of people -- 27-39 what we've inherited from our ancestors has never 27-43 existed to this extent before. 27-46 And if we fail to preserve it, it will never, 27-51 ever exist again. 27-53 So, we cannot fail. 27-55 This great community of nations has something else 27-58 in common- In every one of them, it is the people, 28-02 not the powerful, who have always formed 28-05 the foundation of freedom and the cornerstone of our defense. 28-10 The people have been that foundation here in Poland -- 28-14 as they were right here in Warsaw -- and they were 28-17 the foundation from the very, very beginning in America. 28-24 Our citizens did not win freedom together, 28-28 did not survive horrors together, did not face down 28-32 evil together, only to lose our freedom to a lack of pride 28-37 and confidence in our values. 28-39 We did not and we will not. 28-42 We will never back down. 28-46 (Applause.) 29-04 Audience- Donald Trump! 29-05 Donald Trump! 29-06 Donald Trump! 29-07 The President- As long as we know our history, 29-08 we will know how to build our future. 29-11 Americans know that a strong alliance of free, 29-14 sovereign and independent nations is the best defense 29-18 for our freedoms and for our interests. 29-22 That is why my administration has 29-24 demanded that all members of NATO finally meet 29-30 their full and fair financial obligation. 29-37 As a result of this insistence, billions of dollars 29-42 more have begun to pour into NATO. 29-46 In fact, people are shocked. 29-49 But billions and billions of dollars more are coming 29-52 in from countries that, in my opinion, would not have 29-56 been paying so quickly. 29-58 To those who would criticize our tough 30-00 stance, I would point out that the United States 30-03 has demonstrated not merely with words but with its actions 30-08 that we stand firmly behind Article 5, 30-12 the mutual defense commitment. 30-16 (Applause.) 30-18 Words are easy, but actions are what matters. 30-21 And for its own protection -- and you know this, 30-25 everybody knows this, everybody has to know this -- 30-29 Europe must do more. 30-32 Europe must demonstrate that it believes in its 30-35 future by investing its money to secure that future. 30-40 That is why we applaud Poland for its decision 30-43 to move forward this week on acquiring from the United States 30-47 the battle-tested Patriot air and missile 30-50 defense system -- the best anywhere in the world. 30-58 (Applause.) 31-00 That is also why we salute the Polish people 31-01 for being one of the NATO countries that 31-03 has actually achieved the benchmark for investment 31-07 in our common defense. 31-09 Thank you. 31-10 Thank you, Poland. 31-12 I must tell you, the example you set 31-15 is truly magnificent, and we applaud Poland. 31-19 Thank you. 31-22 (Applause.) 31-24 We have to remember that our defense is not just a commitment 31-28 of money, it is a commitment of will. 31-31 Because as the Polish experience reminds us, 31-35 the defense of the West ultimately rests not only 31-39 on means but also on the will of its people to prevail 31-42 and be successful and get what you have to have. 31-46 The fundamental question of our time is whether 31-50 the West has the will to survive. 31-53 Do we have the confidence in our values to defend 31-56 them at any cost? 31-58 Do we have enough respect for our citizens 32-00 to protect our borders? 32-03 Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve 32-06 our civilization in the face of those who would 32-10 subvert and destroy it? 32-14 (Applause.) 32-15 We can have the largest economies 32-20 and the most lethal weapons anywhere on Earth, 32-23 but if we do not have strong families and strong 32-26 values, then we will be weak and we will not survive. 32-35 (Applause.) 32-36 If anyone forgets the critical importance of these things, 32-41 let them come to one country that never has. 32-44 Let them come to Poland. 32-47 (Applause.) 32-51 And let them come here, to Warsaw, 32-54 and learn the story of the Warsaw Uprising. 32-58 When they do, they should learn about Jerusalem Avenue. 33-03 In August of 1944, Jerusalem Avenue 33-07 was one of the main roads running east and west 33-10 through this city, just as it is today. 33-14 Control of that road was crucially important 33-17 to both sides in the battle for Warsaw. 33-21 The German military wanted it as their most direct route 33-24 to move troops and to form a very strong front. 33-30 And for the Polish Home Army, the ability to pass 33-33 north and south across that street was critical 33-36 to keep the center of the city, and the Uprising itself, 33-41 from being split apart and destroyed. 33-45 Every night, the Poles put up sandbags amid machine 33-49 gun fire -- and it was horrendous fire -- 33-55 to protect a narrow passage across Jerusalem Avenue. 34-00 Every day, the enemy forces knocked them down 34-03 again and again and again. 34-05 Then the Poles dug a trench. 34-07 Finally, they built a barricade. 34-10 And the brave Polish fighters began to flow 34-12 across Jerusalem Avenue. 34-15 That narrow passageway, just a few feet wide, 34-19 was the fragile link that kept the Uprising alive. 34-24 Between its walls, a constant stream 34-26 of citizens and freedom fighters made their perilous, 34-30 just perilous, sprints. 34-33 They ran across that street, they ran through 34-36 that street, they ran under that street -- 34-39 all to defend this city. 34-42 "The far side was several yards away," 34-46 recalled one young Polish woman named Greta. 34-49 That mortality and that life was so important to her. 34-57 In fact, she said, "The mortally dangerous sector 35-02 of the street was soaked in the blood. 35-05 It was the blood of messengers, liaison girls, 35-09 and couriers." 35-11 Nazi snipers shot at anybody who crossed. 35-15 Anybody who crossed, they were being shot at. 35-18 Their soldiers burned every building 35-20 on the street, and they used the Poles as human shields 35-24 for their tanks in their effort to capture 35-27 Jerusalem Avenue. 35-29 The enemy never ceased its relentless assault 35-32 on that small outpost of civilization. 35-36 And the Poles never ceased its defense. 35-40 The Jerusalem Avenue passage required constant protection, 35-45 repair, and reinforcement, but the will of its defenders 35-49 did not waver, even in the face of death. 35-53 And to the last days of the Uprising, 35-56 the fragile crossing never, ever failed. 36-00 It was never, ever forgotten. 36-03 It was kept open by the Polish people. 36-07 The memories of those who perished in the Warsaw Uprising 36-11 cry out across the decades, and few are clearer 36-16 than the memories of those who died 36-18 to build and defend the Jerusalem Avenue crossing. 36-22 Those heroes remind us that the West 36-25 was saved with the blood of patriots; 36-29 that each generation must rise up and play their part 36-33 in its defense -- 36-42 (Applause.) 36-44 -- and that every foot of ground, and every last inch 36-46 of civilization, is worth defending with your life. 36-50 Our own fight for the West does not begin 36-53 on the battlefield -- it begins with our minds, our wills, 36-56 and our souls. 36-57 Today, the ties that unite our civilization 37-00 are no less vital, and demand no less defense, than that bare 37-06 shred of land on which the hope of Poland 37-10 once totally rested. 37-13 Our freedom, our civilization, 37-16 and our survival depend on these bonds of history, culture, 37-21 and memory. 37-22 And today as ever, Poland is in our heart, 37-26 and its people are in that fight. 37-32 (Applause.) 37-35 Just as Poland could not be broken, I declare today 37-39 for the world to hear 37-40 that the West will never, ever be broken. 37-45 Our values will prevail. 37-47 Our people will thrive. 37-50 And our civilization will triumph. 37-55 (Applause.) 38-01 Audience- Donald Trump! 38-03 Donald Trump! 38-05 Donald Trump! 38-18 The President- Thank you. 38-19 So, together, let us all fight like the Poles -- 38-22 for family, for freedom, for country, and for God. 38-27 Thank you. 38-27 God Bless You. 38-28 God bless the Polish people. 38-30 God bless our allies. 38-33 And God bless the United States of America. 38-36 Thank you. 38-36 God bless you. 38-37 Thank you very much. 38-39 (Applause.)  

President Donald Trump Speech at The Celebrate Freedom Rally Paying tribute to those who have proudly served our nation in uniform. On this my very first Independence Day celebration as President, there is no place I'd rather be than with you President Trump recognized and introduced Harry Miller who fought in the Battle of the Bulge And Captain Luis Avila  https://youtu.be/HaQc1i7eYMw      0-00 thank you but thank you very much this 0-04 is some group some group nice to win 0-08 isn't it isn't it nice to wear Robert 0-12 thank you very much for that incredible 0-14 introduction and thank you to everyone 0-16 from First Baptist Dallas 0-19 Thank You pastor you and Amy have stood 0-25 with us since the very very beginning 0-27 and I will always stand with you I've 0-30 told you that and I mean that I will 0-32 always be with you I appreciate it thank 0-34 you and I'm honored to join you at the 0-42 first ever fourth of July freedom rally 0-46 taking place here at the Kennedy Center 0-48 as we pay tribute to those who have 0-51 proudly served our nation in uniform 0-54 thank you very much 0-56 [Applause] 1-05 tonight we have been inspired by music 1-08 that fills our heart stirs ourselves and 1-11 reminds us all of who we are one nation 1-14 under God 1-17 [Applause] 1-24 to First Baptist music director Doran 1-28 bug and to every musician and member of 1-32 the choir who has performed with such 1-35 incredible grace and skill and I heard 1-38 them backstage I said let me out there 1-41 that is the most beautiful music 1-49 I just want to say that your music 1-52 honors our heroes more eloquently than 1-55 words could ever do and I just want to 1-59 thank you that's real talent standing 2-01 behind me thank you folks 2-03 [Applause] 2-07 and let me say to the hundreds of 2-10 veterans with us tonight that for my 2-13 very first Independence Day celebration 2-16 as president there is no place I'd 2-19 rather be than with you 2-22 tell you that 2-24 [Applause] 2-31 and I promise you then you see it 2-34 happening day by day just the other day 2-37 we signed veterans accountability 2-40 they've been trying to do it for 40 2-42 years 2-43 [Applause] 2-52 for 40 years they've been trying you 2-55 couldn't fire somebody if they were 2-56 horrible doing a terrible job for the 2-58 veterans robbing stealing hurting people 3-02 you couldn't do anything it's called the 3-05 Veterans Accountability Act and now you 3-07 can say you're fired 3-27 thank you and I promise you that we will 3-31 always take care of our great veterans 3-35 always right Louie you better believe it 3-37 and Paula's up there 3-40 Paula White has been so helpful you've 3-43 thank you I love you too actually you've 3-50 shed your blood you've poured your love 3-52 and you've bared your soul in defense of 3-55 our country our people and our great 3-59 American flag your loyalty to our nation 4-03 is measured not merely in words but in 4-06 deeds you race through gunfire stare 4-09 down enemy forces and ran past the gates 4-12 of hell to fight and to win for America 4-18 and you won for America and we're going 4-20 to take care of it 4-21 [Applause] 4-34 the story of America's men and women in 4-36 uniform is the story of freedom and 4-39 overcoming oppression the strong 4-42 protecting the weak and the good 4-44 defeating evil there's a lot of evil out 4-48 there I want to tell you there's a lot 4-50 of evil I was left a mess the fact is 4-54 but we're cleaning it up 4-56 you watch cleaning it up cleaning it up 5-06 we are awed by your service and your 5-09 sacrifice and so to the veterans here 5-12 tonight of which there are many will you 5-15 please stand right now please stand 5-18 thank you 5-43 [Applause] 5-56 on behalf of our very grateful nation 5-59 thank you very much thank you very much 6-03 we will always always remember what you 6-07 did for us tonight we celebrate veterans 6-11 we also reflect on everything we cherish 6-15 as Americans we love our country we love 6-18 our families we love our freedom and we 6-22 love our God 6-24 [Applause] 6-36 since the signing of the Declaration of 6-39 Independence 241 years ago America 6-42 always affirmed that Liberty comes from 6-46 our Creator our our rights are given to 6-50 us by God and no earthly force can ever 6-54 take those rights away 6-57 [Applause] 7-06 that is why my administration is 7-08 transferring power out of Washington and 7-11 returning that power back to where it 7-15 belongs to the people to the people the 7-26 fake media is trying to silence us but 7-31 we will not let them because the people 7-36 know the truth 7-39 the fake media tried to stop us from 7-42 going to the White House but I'm 7-45 president and they're not 7-47 [Applause] 8-22 we won and they lost the fact is the 8-28 press has destroyed themselves because 8-32 they went too far 8-36 instead of being subtle and smart they 8-41 use the hatchet and the people saw it 8-44 right from the beginning 8-49 the dishonest media will never keep us 8-53 from accomplishing our objectives on 8-56 behalf of our great American people will 9-01 never happen their agenda is not your 9-09 agenda you've been saying it I will 9-11 never stop fighting for you I am 9-14 delivering on trade on the economy on 9-17 the Supreme Court on the Second 9-20 Amendment on our military for our 9-22 veteran and on our borders 9-27 where we are doing record record 9-31 stoppage 9-32 [Applause] 9-40 thank you 9-45 and we are supporting our incredible 9-50 police and law enforcement 10-05 [Applause] 10-08 we will save American lives protect 10-11 American sovereignty and we will ensure 10-15 the Forgotten men and women of our 10-18 country are never forgotten again for 10-28 too long 10-29 politicians have tried all have they 10-31 tried to centralize authority among the 10-35 hands of a small few in our nation's 10-39 capital I see them all the time 10-43 bureaucrats think they can run over your 10-45 lives overrule your values meddle in 10-49 your faith and tell you how to live what 10-53 to say and where to pray but we know 10-57 that parents not bureaucrats know best 11-01 how to raise their children and create a 11-05 thriving Society 11-07 [Applause] 11-19 and we know that families and churches 11-23 not government officials know best how 11-27 to create a strong and loving community 11-35 and above all else we know this in 11-39 America we don't worship government we 11-42 worship God 11-43 [Applause] 12-11 our religious liberty is enshrined in 12-15 the very first amendment in the Bill of 12-19 Rights the American founders invoked our 12-23 Creator four times in the Declaration of 12-27 Independence Benjamin Franklin reminded 12-31 his colleagues at the Constitutional 12-34 Convention to begin by bowing their 12-38 heads in prayer I remind you that we're 12-43 going to start saying Merry Christmas 12-46 again 12-59 hmm 13-03 inscribed on our currency are the words 13-07 In God We Trust but not only has God 13-15 bestowed on us the gift of freedom he's 13-18 also given us the gift of heroes willing 13-22 to give their lives to defend that 13-25 freedom you just stood in every struggle 13-32 against evil throughout our history as 13-34 America's service members have huddled 13-36 around campfires and sought refuge in 13-39 foxholes they've called on their Creator 13-43 for support in world war two when 13-46 General George Patton that was a real 13-49 general we got some patents today too I 13-58 found them Mad Dog matters 14-03 [Applause] 14-10 and he doesn't like doing a lot of 14-12 talking but I want to tell you Isis the 14-15 whole different ball game folks they're 14-22 going fast but when Patton ran into a 14-26 problem that he couldn't solve he knew 14-30 what to do he prayed frustrated by range 14-33 that were stalling the advance of his 14-36 third army across Europe in early 14-39 December 1944 horrible weather Patton 14-45 asked an army chaplain to come up with a 14-48 good prayer for the weather Patton then 14-53 had a quarter of a million copies of 14-55 that prayer printed and distributed to 14-57 the soldiers of the Third Army just 14-59 before the Battle of the Bulge that was 15-02 a big one did very well there 15-06 five hundred thousand American soldiers 15-09 fought that pivotal battle of the Second 15-12 World War one of those soldiers is here 15-16 with us tonight his name is Harry F 15-20 Miller where's Harry where's Harry Harry 15-26 stand up Harry 15-28 [Applause] 15-58 like many of the heroes of his 16-00 generation 16-01 Harry wasn't exactly straightforward 16-03 about his age when he enlisted in the 16-08 Army Reserves shame on you how he was 16-13 just 15 but he told them he was old 16-15 enough to join then he immediately asked 16-19 for a transfer to active duty six months 16-23 after he had listed private Miller was 16-26 on his way to Europe to fight for our 16-29 country 16-33 [Applause] 16-39 a couple of months after that he was in 16-41 the freezing cold how cold cold he said 16-46 really cold and driving range of Belgium 16-51 with the 740 of tank battalion attached 16-56 to the 82nd airborne as the Battle of 17-00 the Bulge began Harry got his orders to 17-03 go find tanks at a weapon storage 17-06 facility 17-07 when he arrived he says he and his 17-09 friends found nothing but tanks they 17-12 were all over the place right nothing 17-14 but tanks but they didn't let the tanks 17-18 stop them out of what spare parts they 17-23 could find and through sheer grit and 17-26 resolve they somehow managed to repair 17-29 three of those tanks and get them all 17-32 set for action and ready to fight and 17-35 before long those three tanks were nose 17-38 to nose with the lead elements of a 17-40 German SS Panzer Division and that was 17-43 tough stuff in a short time those tanks 17-47 had knocked out the first three tanks of 17-49 the enemy and the entire German division 17-52 retreated they left 18-00 that's good Harry 18-02 [Applause] 18-04 that's good Harry 18-09 [Applause] 18-40 Herry fought through the battle and the 18-43 rest of the war and he went on to serve 18-46 our armed forces for 22 years retiring 18-49 as a Senior Master Sergeant a lot of 18-52 guts 18-52 tomorrow Harry will be 89 tomorrow so on 19-04 behalf of this very large group in this 19-06 beautiful building senior master 19-09 sergeant Miller happy birthday thank you 19-11 for your lifetime of service and thank 19-14 you for helping out thank you very much 19-17 [Applause] 19-25 every veteran with us tonight from every 19-27 branch of the military Army Navy Marines 19-31 Air Force and Coast Guard I want you to 19-34 know that we will always keep our 19-36 promises to those who have kept us free 19-40 since my very first day in office we've 19-43 taken one action after another to make 19-45 sure that our veterans get the care they 19-48 so richly deserve 19-50 we've published wait times those wait 19-54 times were bad weren't they but boy are 19-57 they getting better and fast and we've 20-00 published them at every VA facility 20-03 delivered same day mental health 20-05 services at every VA Medical Center 20-09 nearly doubled 20-11 [Applause] 20-18 the number of veterans given approvals 20-21 to see the doctor of their choice and as 20-31 I said just signed brand-new legislation 20-35 went through the house went through the 20-38 Senate and I signed it so fast we didn't 20-42 want to take any chances right Harry to 20-46 ensure every VA worker is held 20-48 accountable for the quality of care they 20-51 provide to our veterans 20-54 [Applause] 20-59 tonight we are deeply honored to be 21-01 joined by a number of wounded warriors 21-04 from Walter Reed I was over there 21-07 recently these are incredible people the 21-09 enthusiasm and the spirit and some of 21-13 them were hurt really badly 21-15 they've got so much spirit and they love 21-17 this country so much these American 21-20 heroes risked everything so that you and 21-23 I can live in freedom they gave all they 21-26 had everything for their comrades their 21-31 country and for victory they liked 21-33 winning we like winning again don't we 21-36 [Applause] 21-42 you know the old days we used to win we 21-45 sort of just keep fighting and fighting 21-47 and fighting gonna win again folks 21-50 we applaud their strength their courage 21-54 and we really support that incredible 21-59 wind that they have the will the will is 22-03 so strong and that's what they want to 22-06 do is they want to win and they want to 22-07 win for you so thank you all very much 22-09 for being here that was great 22-11 [Applause] 22-16 one such hero is Captain Luis Avila 22-22 where is he 22-24 Luis Luis 22-27 [Applause] 22-30 we love you Louise 22-32 [Applause] 22-35 the ways Wow 22-36 [Applause] 22-55 Louisa's here tonight along with his 22-57 wife Claudia Thank You Claudia thank you 23-00 darling 23-01 thank you thank you Louise served in the 23-06 Army for 16 years he held many different 23-09 positions on five combat tours and he 23-13 was always a leader and everybody always 23-15 said I did some checking on you Louise 23-17 that you did a great job no matter where 23-20 you were no matter where you went on his 23-24 fifth deployment Louise bravely led his 23-27 company on a successful mission to 23-29 recover vital intelligence during this 23-33 critical mission his vehicle was struck 23-36 by explosives Louise was gravely wounded 23-40 and lost his leg he received a Purple 23-43 Heart for service and sacrifice to Lewis 23-47 and Claudia we will never forget the 23-50 courageous sacrifice that you made for 23-52 all of us in this room tonight and for 23-55 everyone in our country thank you thank 23-57 you 23-58 [Applause] 24-23 I want you all and all of our incredible 24-29 wounded warriors to know you have an 24-32 entire nation of more than 300 million 24-37 people behind you and our nations 24-39 getting strong again you notice getting 24-42 strong again our hearts and our prayers 24-47 are joined with yours 24-49 your legacy like our gratitude will live 24-54 forever and I want to thank you thank 24-56 you very much and Claudia thank you very 24-58 much thank you 25-05 I also want to speak to all of the 25-09 people see you thought I forgot in our 25-12 faith community who are here with us 25-15 tonight veterans and non-veterans alike 25-25 you're never gonna be forgotten you'll 25-28 never be forgotten my administration 25-32 will always support and defend your 25-35 religious liberty 25-37 [Applause] 25-43 we don't want to see God forced out of 25-45 the public square driven out of our 25-48 schools or pushed out of our civic life 25-52 we want to see prayers before football 25-55 games if they want to give prayers 26-17 we want all children to have the 26-19 opportunity to know the blessings of God 26-24 we will not allow the government to 26-27 censor sermons to restrict the free 26-32 speech of our pastors and our preachers 26-35 and the people that we most respect like 26-42 Robert 26-54 that is why just as I promised pastor 27-00 Jeffress and other faith leaders I just 27-04 signed an executive order following and 27-07 this is something that makes me very 27-08 happy and very proud following through 27-12 on my campaign pledge to stop the 27-16 Johnson amendment from interfering with 27-19 your First Amendment rights 27-37 as long as I am president no one is 27-41 going to stop you from practicing your 27-44 faith or from preaching what is in your 27-48 heart we want to hear him one of the 27-55 most grave and dire threats to religious 27-58 freedom in the world today is the threat 28-01 of terrorism and specifically it just 28-05 seems it's called radical Islamic 28-08 terrorism and we cannot allow this 28-15 terrorism and extremism to spread in our 28-19 country or to find sanctuary on our 28-23 shores or in our cities 28-33 we want to make sure that anyone who 28-36 seeks to join our country shares our 28-39 values and has the capacity to love our 28-44 people 28-45 [Applause] 29-01 thank you 29-04 together we will protect our families 29-07 our nations and our borders and yes by 29-11 the way for those that are curious we 29-13 will build the wall okay because we 29-19 understand that a country is more than 29-22 just its geography a nation is the sum 29-27 of its citizens their hopes their dreams 29-30 their aspirations America is a land rich 29-34 with history traditions and values and 29-36 as we have seen tonight what a group 29-40 this is tonight America is also a land 29-44 rich with heroes 29-47 [Applause] 29-55 and though we have many stories we all 29-59 share one home and one glorious destiny 30-05 a destiny that's getting better and 30-08 better every single day 30-15 and whether we are black or brown or 30-18 white and you've heard me say this 30-21 before we all bleed the same red blood 30-32 we all salute the same great American 30-38 flag and we are all made by the same 30-46 Almighty God 30-48 [Applause] 31-09 we face many challenges there are many 31-12 hills and mountains to climb but with 31-16 the strength and courage of the Patriots 31-19 assembled in this room tonight we will 31-23 scare I mean and you say it and you see 31-25 it all the time and we're doing it all 31-27 the time because we're scaling those 31-30 summits and we will get the job done we 31-41 will all prove worthy of this very 31-45 important moment in history and we will 31-48 prove worthy of the sacrifice that our 31-52 brave veterans have made as long as we 31-56 have pride in our beliefs courage in our 31-59 convictions and faith in our God we will 32-04 not fail 32-07 [Applause] 32-16 as long as our country remains true to 32-19 its values loyal to its heroes and 32-24 devoted to its creator then our best 32-28 days are yet to come because we will 32-32 make America great again 32-35 [Applause] 32-46 thank you 32-52 - my friend pastor Jeffers and dePaula 32-57 and to Louie into Harry and de lewis and 33-03 everybody in this room and everybody in 33-05 this country thank you for your great 33-09 support I appreciate it 33-12 I will not let you down - all of our 33-16 incredible veterans 33-17 - the people in the military and - 33-21 evangelical Christians who came out in 33-24 record record record numbers thank you 33-27 have a wonderful Independence Day god 33-31 bless you god bless our nation's 33-34 veterans 33-34 god bless the United States of America 33-39 thank you very much 33-44 you   Army Veteran Harry Miller shares his story from Battle of the Bulge   https://youtu.be/tDLcEomh474    On December 16, 1944, the Germans launched what is considered their last major offensive of World War II. Just shortly after the Allied force’s successfully invaded Normandy, France, the surprise attack from Hitler’s forces caught them off guard. The battle lasted until January 25, 1945. The United States suffered 19,000 fatalities and more than 89,000 casualties. In commemoration of the 72nd anniversary of this historic battle of courage and fortitude, we invite you to meet Army Veteran, Harry Miller. Harry served in the Army from 1944 – 1953 during World War II. He first served as a member of a tank crew, then transitioned to a messenger center clerk. He fought in the Battle of the Bulge. During the battle, the 1st Army Headquarters instructed the tank crews to go down to an ordnance depot and take whatever they needed for the tanks. “We had to take good parts off of one tank and put it on another. We finally got three tanks and a tank destroyer that would operate and run, and had a gun,” he said in an interview with VA. They took the three working tanks and sent them to their C Company. Those three tanks ended up taking out three German tanks, which ended up being members of the 1st SS Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler being, Hitler’s old bodyguards. After World War II, Harry went on to serve in Korea and Vietnam and served enlistments in both the Army and the Air Force. Listen to the audio below for Harry’s full account of his service before, during, and shortly after the Battle of Bulge.   nscript English 0-00 HARRY F. MILLER- Your life is dependent on everybody that's around you. 0-03 I mean, I know of cases where 0-06 a man would be talking to another man, 0-08 a round would come in and hit the one guy, 0-11 and the other guy not get a scratch, 0-13 and you depend on the guy next to you, 0-18 you depend on the people in back of you, and 0-21 you depend on everybody. 0-25 Everything was going fine until the 16th of 0-28 December, 1944 and the Germans broke 0-32 through, and at first nobody was too 0-35 concerned about it except for the fact 0-37 that we had only green divisions in the 0-39 Ardennes at that time. And so, they kept 0-44 pressing further and further. Well, 0-45 finally the first Army headquarters told 0-47 us to go down to this ordinance depot 0-51 and take anything we want. The only thing 0-54 that was there was old shot up tanks 0-56 and one with holes in them and worn-out 0-59 engines messed up. And we had to take 1-03 good parts of one tank and put it on another. 1-05 We finally got three tanks and a 1-07 tank destroyer that would operate, and 1-11 would run, and had a gun and it would fire. 1-14 So, we got those and they 1-17 gave them to our C-Company and they told them 1-20 to go down to the railroad station at 1-23 Stoumont, Belgium. To approach this train 1-26 station -- it sat here and there was a row 1-28 that came around a curve and right 1-31 down to the train station. 1-33 Well, our C-Company met them at this 1-36 curve, and the first American tank saw the 1-39 first German tank, and they fired at him 1-41 and the round -- 'course the guns and had not been 1-44 checked to see how accurate they were -- 1-46 but they fired and the round bounced, and 1-49 went into the German tank and knocked it out. 1-54 It was just ... just a lucky shot... knocked out the 1-57 first tank. Well, he reloaded -- the American 2-00 tank reloaded, and round got stuck so he 2-03 motioned for the next tank to come 2-04 around. When he came around the curve he 2-08 caught the second tank, and he fired on it, 2-10 and knocked it out. 2-11 Same thing happened on the next round. 2-14 The third tank was a tank destroyer which 2-16 has a 90 millimeter gun on rather than 2-18 75 or 76, so he hit this German tank and 2-22 knocked it out. Well, this was the First SS 2-25 Panzer Division, which was Hitler's old bodyguard. 2-29 And they were a tough bunch of so-and-sos. 2-33 And they were treated that way 2-35 for the rest of the war, by the way. By us.  

Montage on Illegal Immigration by Bill Clinton - Harry Reid - Tim Kaine - Hillary Clinton - Barack Hussein Obama Can you say, Hypocrite? Montage on Illegal Immigration by Bill Clinton - Harry Reid - Tim Kaine - Hillary Clinton - Barack Hussein Obama 0-00 all Americans not only in the state's 0-02 most heavily affected but in every place 0-03 in this country are rightly disturbed by 0-05 the large numbers of illegal aliens 0-08 entering our country the jobs they hold 0-11 might otherwise be held by citizens or 0-13 legal immigrants the public service they 0-15 use impose burdens on our taxpayers 0-17 that's why our administration has moved 0-19 aggressively to secure our borders more 0-21 by hiring a record number of new border 0-23 guards by deporting twice as many 0-25 criminal aliens as ever before by 0-28 cracking down on illegal hiring by 0-30 borrowing welfare benefits to illegal 0-32 aliens in the budget I will present to 0-35 you we will try to do more to speed the 0-37 deportation of illegal aliens who are 0-39 arrested for crimes to better identify 0-41 illegal aliens in the work face as 0-43 recommended by the Commission headed by 0-45 former congresswoman Barbara Jordan we 0-48 are a nation of immigrants but we are 0-51 also a nation of laws it is wrong and 0-54 ultimately self-defeating for a nation 0-57 of immigrants to permit the kind of 0-58 abuse of our immigration laws we have 1-00 seen in recent years and we must do more 1-04 to stop it if making it easy to be an 1-11 illegal alien is enough how about 1-13 offering a reward for being an illegal 1-15 immigrant no son no sane country would 1-19 do that right guess again if you break 1-23 our laws by entering this country 1-25 without permission and give birth to a 1-27 child we reward that child with US 1-30 citizenship and guarantee of full access 1-34 to all public and social services this 1-36 society provides and that's a lot of 1-38 services is it any wonder that 1-41 two-thirds of the babies born at 1-43 taxpayer expensive country county run 1-45 hospitals in Los Angeles are born to 1-49 illegal alien mothers we've got to do 1-52 several things and I am you know 1-53 adamantly against illegal immigrants I 1-56 made this exception basically on 1-57 humanitarian grounds because of the 1-59 individual stories but certainly we've 2-02 got to do more at our borders and people 2-04 have to stop employing illegal 2-06 immigrants 2-07 to Westchester go to Suffolk and Nassau 2-10 County stand in the street corners on in 2-12 Brooklyn or the Bronx you're gonna see 2-14 loads of people waiting to get picked up 2-16 to go do yard work and construction work 2-19 and domestic work 2-20 I'm deeply opposed to illegal 2-22 immigration and I call on the federal 2-24 government the President and the 2-26 Immigration Services to stop the in 2-28 flood of illegal immigrants into this 2-29 country and I've supported wise state 2-31 policies to try to make sure that we do 2-34 not provide services to folks in this 2-36 state who are not here legally and less 2-38 public health or safety demands it but 2-40 there is a serious local problem in 2-42 Northern Virginia caused by the federal 2-44 government's intentional policy of not 2-46 enforcing the immigration laws folks 2-48 congregate on a street corner in Herndon 2-50 and Herndon local elected officials 2-53 decided that the best thing to do was to 2-55 have them come in doors I wouldn't 2-57 support state efforts for that we all 2-59 agree on the need to better secure the 3-03 border and a punish employers who choose 3-05 to hire illegal immigrants you know we 3-08 are a generous and welcoming people here 3-10 in the United States but those who enter 3-12 the country illegally and those who 3-14 employ them disrespect the rule of law 3-16 and they are showing disregard for those 3-21 who are following the law we simply 3-24 cannot allow people to pour into the 3-26 United States undetected undocumented 3-30 unchecked and circumventing the line of 3-33 people who are waiting patiently 3-35 diligently and lawfully to become 3-38 immigrants in this country what 3-40 difference at this point does it make  

Is this a true statement? “97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real.” It’s one of the most illogical, unscientific arguments you can make How many times have you heard that statement? Probably hundreds. It may seem like a compelling and scientific argument against fossil fuels, but it’s one of the most illogical, unscientific arguments you can make. To see how, let’s use this form of argument for another controversial product, vaccines. An anti-vaccine person approaches you and says, “97 percent of doctors say that the side effects of vaccines are real?” What would you say in response? You’d probably say, “Yeah but the benefits far outweigh the side effects.” By saying that “97% of doctors agree that vaccine side effects are real” without mentioning any of the benefits of vaccines, the anti-vaccine activist is trying to get you to look at the potential dangers of vaccines out of context.  When fossil fuel opponents say “97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real,” they are doing the same. Yes, using fossil fuels for energy has a side effect—increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Okay. But what about the upside? In the case of fossil fuel that upside is enormous: the cheap, plentiful, and reliable energy that makes modern life possible, and at a scale no other energy source can match. So, how significant is the side effect? This raises another problem with the statement “97% percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is real.” It tells us nothing about the meaning or magnitude of “climate change”—whether it’s a mild, manageable warming or a runaway, catastrophic warming. This is an example of the fallacy of equivocation—using the same term in different, contradictory ways. If someone were to say “97% of doctors agree that vaccine side effects are real,” what exact “vaccine side effects” do the doctors agree on? That a certain number of babies will get a rash? Or that large percentages will get full-blown autism? Precision is key, right? But fossil fuel opponents don’t want you to know the precise magnitude of climate change. Because if you did you wouldn’t be scared of climate change, you would be scared of losing the benefits of fossil fuels. For example, listen to how Secretary of State John Kerry manipulates the “97 percent of scientists” line. “97 percent of climate scientists have confirmed that climate change is happening and that human activity is responsible,” he said in a speech in Indonesia in 2014. Later, in the same speech, he claimed that Scientists agree that, “The world as we know it will change—and it will change dramatically for the worse.” 97 percent of climate scientists never said any such thing. So what did the 97 percent actually say? It turns out, nothing remotely resembling catastrophic climate change. One of the main studies justifying 97 percent was done by John Cook, a climate communications fellow for the Global Change Institute in Australia. Here’s his own summary of his survey: “Cook et al. (2013) found that over 97 percent [of papers surveyed] endorsed the view that the Earth is warming up and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause.” “Main cause” means “over 50 percent. But the vast majority of papers don’t say that human beings are the main cause of recent warming. In fact, one analysis showed that less than 2 percent of papers actually said that. How did Cook get to 97 percent, then? First, he added papers that explicitly said there was man-made warming but didn’t say how much. Then, he added papers that didn’t even say there was man-made warming, but he thought it was implied. A scientific researcher has a sacred obligation to accurately report his findings. Cook and researchers like him have failed us—as have the politicians and media figures who have blindly repeated the 97 percent claim to support their anti-fossil fuel goals. How can we protect ourselves against this kind of manipulation? Whenever someone tells you that scientists agree on something, ask two questions: “What exactly do they agree on? And, “How did they prove it?” I’m Alex Epstein, author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, for Prager University.

Ken Starr - Clinton era Special Prosecutor on the FAKE NEWS of Trump Obstructing Justice Ken Star says there is no obstruction of justice, and questions need for Special Counsel  0-00 so joining me now Ken Starr who served 0-02 as independent counsel for five special 0-04 investigations including the whitewater 0-05 investigation involving then President 0-08 Clinton mr. Starr welcome good to have 0-10 you with us tonight great to be with you 0-13 thank you so you watch this testimony 0-15 today and I know that you've said that 0-17 there is no obstruction of justice that 0-19 you have seen in any of this and you've 0-21 questioned even the need for a special 0-23 counsel given the evidence what did you 0-25 think about Jeff Sessions testimony 0-27 today 0-27 I thought the attorney general was 0-30 terrific 0-31 first of all I've known the Attorney 0-33 General since 1981 and I know him to be 0-36 a man of honor a man of the law and I 0-41 thought that came through his passion 0-43 and commitment to the rule of law 0-45 I came shining through so I don't think 0-48 a lot was revealed today and I think 0-50 we're much farther down the road but I 0-52 think that the American people saw that 0-54 this Attorney General is just a great 0-57 human being with an enormous amount of 0-59 passion and determination to try his 1-02 very best to do the right thing I like 1-05 his sense of moral indignation so given 1-08 that what do you think in reflection 1-10 about James Comey and what he suggested 1-12 about Jeff Sessions well a lot of what 1-17 director Comey suggested if I may say so 1-20 was innuendo but we've now seen a very 1-23 honorable person defend himself and I 1-27 thought he recorded himself beautifully 1-30 I thought he was very very plausible 1-32 and I have stated previously that I have 1-35 serious problems with the way director 1-37 Comey conducted himself and those were 1-40 really explored again today by virtue of 1-42 the senators going through meticulously 1-45 the Rosenstein memorandum which 1-47 enumerated the various areas in which 1-50 the director really violated perhaps law 1-54 but he certainly violated policy time 1-56 and time again 1-57 all right so in terms of investigations 1-59 which you are very familiar with one of 2-01 the things that the Democrats took issue 2-03 with today primarily we're moments like 2-05 this let's play number 5 I did not have 2-09 any private meetings no other do I 2-12 recall any Congress 2-13 stations with any Russian officials at 2-15 the Mayflower Hotel I did not attend any 2-18 meetings at that event to the best of 2-20 your memory you had no conversation 2-22 within that ambassador kishlak at that 2-25 meeting I don't recall it senator Morra 2-27 it would been certainly I can assure you 2-29 nothing improper if I'd had a 2-31 conversation with him and it's 2-33 conceivable that occurred I just don't 2-35 remember well I guess I could say that 2-38 possibly at a meeting but I still do not 2-41 recall it there's a lot of counting of 2-43 the times he said I don't recall and 2-45 people saying you know how could that 2-47 possibly be your that well I'm very 2-51 sympathetic with with that my goodness 2-53 it's difficult for us to recall what 2-55 happened last week we're going back some 2-58 considerable time and also it was not 3-00 one of those interactions that you would 3-02 automatically say you should remember 3-04 that a reasonable person would remember 3-06 that because no Americans back all the 3-08 time and he was a very permanent figure 3-10 around Washington and showed up at a lot 3-12 of these things right exactly and it was 3-14 a social kind of gathering etc or at 3-17 least it was a social context as opposed 3-19 to we're going over to the Russian 3-21 embassy or the Ambassador is coming to 3-23 your Senate office for a meeting  

Oliver Stone heaps compliments on Vladimir Putin, calls news reports about hacking FAKE NEWS   BBC Fake News reporter Laura Trevelyan, is taken aback by Oliver Stone's positive comments on Putin and the Russia FAKE NEWS The Liberal Fake News BBC's Laura Trevelyan spoke to the filmmaker Oliver Stone about his upcoming documentary with Vladimir Putin. Oliver Stone asked the Russian president about the US election hacking situation. The liberal fake news journalist was not ready for what she heard. Oliver Stone interview with Vladimir Putin, Stone was extremely complimentary of the man, yet the BBC/PBS pushed it, and Stone said the Russia election thing was all smoke with no fire, Russia had nothing to do with Trump and the 2016 election. And he even labeled the coverage of it as FAKE NEWS 0-00 Vladimir Putin is a former KGB operative 0-02 he understands the importance of 0-04 television he understands the importance 0-05 of image is it possible that he's using 0-07 you to send a message 0-09 perhaps you that isn't really a true one 0-11 that he doesn't really want okay well in 0-12 one he certainly know it's an elaborate 0-14 ruse but I'm he knows that I'm not going 0-17 to change American policy but what I 0-18 should I'd like to do is contribute to a 0-20 consciousness of what he's saying you 0-25 have had unparalleled access to Vladimir 0-28 Putin for a Western filmmaker what do 0-31 you hope all that access is revealing 0-34 about him I hope to it would lead to a 0-36 serious interesting and discussion about 0-39 world affairs particularly US and Russia 0-42 she wouldn't yeah at the instability she 0-44 is previously understood tell me it's I 0-46 use Nick over he lays out a world that 0-49 we don't know you know Russia's referred 0-51 to rather than eleven only in the 0-52 Western media but let's get beyond those 0-55 those images those caricatures and 0-57 that's what I wanted to do is it your 0-59 impression from these hours of 1-01 interviews that Vladimir Putin genuinely 1-03 wants a better relationship with the 1-04 West absolutely there's just no doubt in 1-07 my mind he referred to the United States 1-09 consistently as our partner I never 1-11 heard a bad word there was some 1-13 criticism under Miss unjust he said I 1-15 didn't understand why our partners were 1-17 doing this and the Ukraine point and the 1-20 Syrian point when he explained 1-21 Ukrainians it in a way that perhaps a 1-24 westerner can understand that the 1-25 Russians look at this completely 1-26 differently than we do so I have to 1-28 wonder where is the the threat that we 1-30 talked about where the NATO commanders 1-32 are perhaps exaggerating this to get 1-35 make sure that the Alliance stays 1-37 together and they've implied that 1-40 Russia's behind everything in the West 1-42 that was wrong what's their concerns not 1-44 it's not bespoke with practically any 1-46 traditions you are Adam a Putin directly 1-49 did Russia hack the u.s. election and he 1-52 tells you it's all lies do you accept 1-55 that he didn't put it that way but he 1-57 thought it was a preposterous statement 1-59 but did you believe him when he said I 2-01 probably I absolutely believe that 2-03 there's all smoke and no fire are there 2-05 would you agree with President Donald 2-06 Trump them when he says that stories 2-08 about Russia hacking to influence the US 2-11 election a fake news 2-13 oh definitely as Putin said I think it's 2-16 an internal political battle in America 2-18 and I think it's worked I mean it's 2-20 obscured the possibility of resetting 2-23 the relations it's installed everything 2-26 you've spent all this time with a man 2-28 who has been called a ruthless opponent 2-31 accused of killing his political 2-33 opponents did you ever worry that you 2-35 might be unwittingly a tool of Putin 2-38 propaganda if I was and you know it's 2-41 certainly an adventure but I don't buy 2-43 those old spy Wars you know the English 2-47 are great at inventing James Bond sort 2-49 of scenarios I didn't see him as doctor 2-51 no no he's a very rational man  

President Trump’s personal attorney Marc Kasowitz response to the former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation James Comey Testimony at the Senate 0-00 ladies and gentlemen I'm mark Kassovitz 0-03 president Trump's personal lawyer 0-06 contrary to numerous false press 0-09 accounts leading up to today's hearing 0-12 Comey has now finally confirmed 0-15 publicly what he repeatedly told 0-18 President Trump privately that is that 0-22 the president was not under 0-24 investigation as part of any probe into 0-28 Russian interference the president he 0-32 Comey also admitted that there is no 0-34 evidence that a single vote change as a 0-38 result of any Russian interference 0-40 commies testimony also makes clear 0-44 that the president never sought to 0-47 impede the investigation into attempted 0-50 Russian interference in the 2016 0-53 election and in fact according to mr. 0-57 Comey the president told mr. Comey quote 1-00 it would be good to find out close quote 1-04 in that investigation if there was quote 1-07 some satellite Associates of his who did 1-11 something wrong 1-12 close quote and he President Trump did 1-17 not exclude anyone from that statement 1-21 consistent with that statement the 1-24 president never in form or substance 1-27 directed or suggested that mr. Comey 1-31 stop investigating anyone including the 1-36 president never suggested that mr. Comey 1-39 quote let Flynn go close quote as the 1-45 president publicly stated the next day 1-46 he did say to mr. Comey quote general 1-51 Flynn is a good guy he has been through 1-54 a lot close quote and also quote asked 1-58 how general Flynn is doing close quote 2-01 Admiral Rogers testified today that the 2-05 president never quote directed him to do 2-09 anything illegal immoral 2-13 unethical or inappropriate close quote 2-17 and never never quote pressured him to 2-22 do so 2-22 close quote director Coates said the 2-25 same thing the president likewise 2-29 never pressured mr. Comey the president 2-33 also never told mr. Comey quote I need 2-38 loyalty I expect loyalty close quote 2-41 he never said it in form and he never 2-44 said it in substance of course the 2-47 office of the president is entitled to 2-50 expect loyalty from those who are 2-52 serving the administration and from 2-55 before this president it and from before 2-58 this President took office to this day 3-01 it is overwhelmingly clear that there 3-04 have been and continue to be those in 3-07 government who are actively attempting 3-10 to undermine this administration with 3-13 selective and illegal leaks of 3-17 classified information and privileged 3-20 communications mr. Comey has now 3-23 admitted that he is one of these leakers 3-27 today mr. Comey admitted that he 3-31 unilaterally and surreptitiously made 3-35 unauthorized disclosures to the press of 3-38 privileged communications with the 3-41 president the leaks of this privileged 3-44 information began no later than March 3-47 2017 when friends of mr. Comey have 3-51 stated that he disclosed to them the 3-55 conversations that he had with the 3-57 president during their January 27th 2017 4-02 dinner and February 14th 2017 White 4-06 House meeting today mr. Comey admitted 4-10 that he leaked to friends of his 4-13 purported memos of those privileged 4-16 communications one of which he testified 4-19 was classified mr. Comey also testified 4-24 that immediately after 4-26 was terminated he authorized his friends 4-29 to leak the contents of those memos to 4-33 the press in order to in mr. commis 4-36 words quote prompt the appointment of a 4-40 special counsel close quote although mr. 4-43 Comey testified that he only leaked the 4-46 memos in response to a tweet the public 4-50 record reveals that the New York Times 4-52 was quoting from those memos the day 4-55 before the referenced tweet which belies 4-58 commis excuse for this unauthorized 5-01 disclosure of privileged information and 5-05 appears to be entirely retaliatory we 5-09 will leave it to the appropriate 5-12 authorities to determine whether these 5-14 leaks should be investigated along with 5-17 all the others that are being 5-19 investigated in some it is now 5-22 established that the president was not 5-25 being investigated for colluding with or 5-28 attempting to obstruct any investigation 5-32 as the committee pointed out today these 5-35 important facts for the country to know 5-37 are virtually the only facts that have 5-40 not been leaked during the course of 5-42 these events as he said yesterday the 5-46 president feels completely vindicated 5-48 and is eager to continue moving forward 5-51 with his agenda with the business of 5-55 this country and with this public cloud 5-57 removed thank you   LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM MARC KASOWITZ. PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PERSONAL LAWYER. CONTRARY TO NUMEROUS FALSE PRESS ACCOUNTS LEADING UP TO TODAY'S HEARING, MR. COMEY HAS NOW CONFIRMED PUBLICLY WHAT HE REPEATEDLY TOLD THE PRESIDENT TRUMP PRIVATELY THAT IS, THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION AS PART OF ANY PROBE INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE. THE PRESIDENT -- MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT A SINGLE VOTE CHANGE AS A RESULT OF ANY RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE. MR. COMEY'S SYSTEM TESTIMONY ALSO MAKES CLEAR THAT THE PRESIDENT NEVER SOUGHT TO IMPEDE THE INVESTIGATION INTO ATTEMPTED RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION. IN FACT, ACCORDING TO MR. COMEY, THE PRESIDENT TOLD MR. COMEY, QUOTE, "IT WOULD BE GOOD TO FIND OUT" IN THAT INVESTIGATION IF THERE WERE SOME SATELLITE ASSOCIATES OF HIM WHO DID SOMETHING WRONG. AND HE, PRESIDENT TRUMP, DID NOT EXCLUDE ANYONE FROM THAT STATEMENT. CONSISTENT WITH THAT STATEMENT, THE PRESIDENT NEVER INFORMED OR SUBSTANCE DIRECTED OR SUGGESTED THAT MR. COMEY STOP INVESTIGATING ANYONE INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT NEVER SUGGESTED THAT MR. COMEY "LET FLYNN GO." AS THE PRESIDENT PUBLICLY STATED THE NEXT DAY, HE DID SAY TO MR. COMEY, QUOTE, "GENERAL FLYNN IS A GOOD GUY AND HE'S BEEN THROUGH A LOT" AND ALSO "ASK HOW GENERAL FLYNN IS DOING." THE PRESIDENT NEVER DIRECTED HIM TO DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL, IMMORAL AND UNETHICAL OR INAPPROPRIATE CLOSED QUOTE AND NEVER, NEVER, QUOTE, PRESSURED HIM TO DO SO." DIRECTOR COATS SAID THE SAME THING. THE PRESIDENT LIKE WISE NEVER PRESSURED MR. COMEY. THE PRESIDENT ALSO NEVER TOLD MR. COMEY, QUOTE, "I NEED LOYALTY, I EXPECT LOYALTY." HE NEVER SAID IT IN FORM OR SUBSTANCE. OF COURSE, THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT LOYALTY FROM THOSE WHO ARE SERVING THE ADMINISTRATION. BEFORE THIS, PRESIDENT TOOK OFFICE TO THIS DAY, IT IS OVERWHELMINGLY CLEAR THAT THERE HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUED TO BE THOSE IN GOVERNMENT WHO ARE ACTIVELY ATTEMPTING URN MIND THIS ADMINISTRATION WITH SELECTIVE AND ILLEGAL LEAKS OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATION IS. MR. COMEY HAS NOW ADMITTED THAT HE IS ONE OF THESE LEAKERS. TODAY, MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT HE UNILATERALLY MADE UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURES TO THE PRESS OF PRIVILEGE COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PRESIDENT. THE LEAK OF THIS PRIVILEGE BEGAN NO LATER THAN MARCH OF 2017 WHEN FRIENDS OF MR. COMEY STATED THAT HE DISCLOSED TO THEM THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HE HAD WITH THE PRESIDENT DURING THEIR JANUARY 27TH, 2017 DINNER AND FEBRUARY 14TH, 2017 WHITE HOUSE MEETING. TODAY, MR. COMEY ADMITTED THAT HE LEAKED TO FRIENDS OF HIS PROPORTED MEMOS OF THOSE PRIVILEGED IMMUNE COMMUNICATIONS. ONE OF WHICH HE TESTIFIED WAS CLASSIFIED. MR. COMEY ALSO TESTIFIED THAT AFTER HE WAS TERMINATED, HE AUTHORIZED HIS FRIENDS TO LEAK THE CONTENTS OF THOSE MEMOS TO THE PRESS IN ORDER TO MR. COMEY'S WORDS PROMPT THE APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL. ALTHOUGH MR. COMEY TESTIFIED THAT HE ONLY LEAKED THE MEMO IN RESPONSE TO A TWEET. THE NEW YORK TIMES WAS QUOTING FROM THOSE MEMOS, THE DAY BEFORE THE REFERENCE TWEETS WHICH -- IT APPEARS TO BE ENTIRELY RETALIATORY. WE'LL LEAVE IT TO THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES TO DETERMINE WHETHER THESE LEAKS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHERS THAT ARE BEING INVESTIGATED. IN SOME, IT IS NOW A ESTABLISHES THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS NOT BEING INVESTIGATED FOR COLLUDING WITH OR ATTEMPTING TO OBSTRUCT ANY INVESTIGATION. AS THE COMMITTEE POINTED OUT TODAY OF THESE IMPORTANT FACTS FOR R THE THE COUNTRY TO KNOW ARE VIRTUALLY THE ONLY FACTS THAT'S NOT BEEN LEAKED DURING THE COURSE OF THESE EVENTS. YESTERDAY, THE PRESIDENT FEELS INDICATE VITAMIN VINDICATED AND EAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUSINESS OF THIS COUNTRY AND HIS PUBLIC CLOUD REMOVED. MR. MARC

BUILD THE WALL BUILD THE WALL Charles Krauthammer with an ending from Bill Clinton Can America solve its illegal immigration problem both justly and humanely? Yes, but it requires first building a border wall. Washington Post columnist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Charles Krauthammer explains why.   Presented by CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER Can America solve its illegal immigration problem both justly and humanely? Yes, but it requires first building a border wall. Washington Post columnist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Charles Krauthammer explains why.   DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT  VIEW TRANSCRIPT Every sensible immigration policy has two objectives: 1) to regain control of our borders so that we decide who enters; and 2) to find a humane way to deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants who now live among us.  Start with the second. For both practical and moral reasons, America cannot and will not and should not expel 11 million people.  That leaves us with two choices: ignore them or figure out a way to legalize them. Ignoring them hasn’t worked. But there is also a huge problem with legalization: it creates an irresistible incentive for new illegal immigrants to come. We say, of course, that this will be the very last, very final, never-again, we're-not-kidding-this-time amnesty. And everyone knows it's phony. That’s what was said in 1986, when we passed the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration reform. It turned out to be the largest legalization program in American history -- nearly 3 million people got permanent residency. There was no enforcement. We now have 11 million new illegal immigrants in our midst. The irony of this whole debate, which bitterly splits the country, is that there is a silver bullet that would not just solve the problem, but also create a national consensus behind it. A vast number of Americans who oppose legalization and fear new waves of immigration would change their minds if we could radically reduce new -- i.e., future -- illegal immigration. And we can. First, build a barrier. Call it a wall. Call it a fence. Call it what you will. Add cameras and sensors. Add drones. Beef up the patrols. All that matters is that we regain control of the border. Fences work. The triple fence outside San Diego led to a 90 percent reduction in infiltration. Israel’s border fence with the West Bank produced a similar decline. Even holier-than-thou Europeans have conceded the point: Hungary, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Austria, Greece, Spain – why, even Norway -- have all started building border fences to stem the tide of Middle Eastern refugees. Then enforce two other measures: a national E-Verify system that makes it just about impossible to work if you are here illegally, and a functioning visa tracking system, since 40% of illegal immigrants are visa overstays. The wall/fence will, of course, be ugly. So are the concrete barriers to keep truck bombs from driving into the White House. Sometimes function has to supersede form.  And don't tell me that this is our Berlin Wall. When you build a wall to keep people in, that's a prison. When you build a wall to keep people out, that's an expression of sovereignty. Of course, no barrier will be foolproof. But it doesn't have to be. It simply has to reduce the river to a manageable trickle. Once we do, everything becomes possible -- including dealing with our 11 million illegal immigrants. So, let’s fix that. Track the visas, do E-Verify, build the damn barrier. It’s ridiculous to say that it can’t be done. And who would certify that the border is back in our control? I would have a neutral party, perhaps a commission of retired jurists, issue the judgment. Once they do, we legalize the 11 million, granting them the right to stay and work here. We can’t give them citizenship. That’s a bridge too far. You don’t get to join the political destiny of the country by entering it illegally. But any children born here would be American -- which means that over time the issue resolves itself. The American people are legitimately angry at the price American society has paid due to illegal immigration. But they are also a generous people. Once they are assured that we do indeed control our borders, that anger will abate. A national consensus will emerge.  Radical border control, followed by radical legalization. No mushy compromise. A solution requires two acts of national will: putting up a wall (along with E-Verify and visa tracking) and absorbing those who broke our laws to come to America. This is not a compromise meant to appease both sides without achieving anything. It’s not some piece of hybrid legislation that arbitrarily divides illegals into those with five-year-old "roots" in America and those without – or some such mischief-making nonsense. If we do it right, not only will we solve the problem, we will get it done as one nation. I’m Charles Krauthammer for Prager University.

President Trump Discusses his Trip Abroad Highlights The first sitting US president to visit the Western Wall and Church of the Holy Sepulchre Country Location Date Details Saudi Arabia Riyadh May 20–22 President Trump met with King Salman and Muslim leaders at the Riyadh Summit. He signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, the largest in world history, and was honored with the Collar of Abdulaziz Al Saud, his first foreign order. President Trump, along with First Lady Melania Trump, visited the National Museum of Saudi Arabia. Israel Jerusalem May 22–23 President Trump met with President Reuven Rivlin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He was the first sitting US president to visit the Western Wall and Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The next day, the President visits the Yad Vashem and later delivers an address at the Israel Museum. Palestinian National Authority Bethlehem 23-May President Trump met with Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Bethlehem Italy Rome May 23–24 President Trump met with President Sergio Mattarella and Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni Vatican City Vatican City 24-May President Trump met with Pope Francis. Belgium Brussels May 24–25 President Trump met with King Philippe of Belgium, Prime Minister Charles Michel and attended the 28th NATO summit. He also met with newly-elected French President Emmanuel Macron. Italy Taormina May 25–27 President Trump attended the 43rd G7 summit. He met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe. 0-00English The President- From Saudi Arabia to Israel to NATO 0-03 to the G7, we made extraordinary gains 0-09 on this historic trip to advance the security 0-12 and prosperity of the United States, our friends, 0-17 and our allies. 0-19 We paved the way for a new era of cooperation among 0-22 the nations of the world to defeat the common enemy 0-26 of terrorism, and provide our children with 0-29 a much more hopeful future. 0-33 I was deeply encouraged to hear from the leaders 0-36 of many Muslim and Arab nations that they are ready 0-39 to take on a greater role in combating 0-41 terrorism and providing young Muslims, in their 0-44 region, with a future of safety and a future 0-48 of opportunity. 0-49 I went to Jerusalem, where I reaffirmed 0-53 our unbreakable bond with the State of Israel. 0-56 I was awed by the majesty and beauty of the Holy Land 0-59 and the faith and reverence of the devoted 1-03 people who live there. 1-05 All children from all faiths deserve a future 1-08 of hope and peace. 1-10 In Rome, I was inspired by the beauty, and even more 1-14 inspired by meeting with Pope Francis. 1-18 Then, I traveled to two summits. 1-20 First, at a NATO summit in Brussels, where we agreed 1-23 to improve the burden sharing among members 1-26 of our alliance, and to further confront 1-29 the shared threat of terrorism. 1-32 Next, I attended the G7. 1-34 I laid out my vision for economic growth and fair 1-37 trade and support of good paying jobs, and I called 1-41 for much greater security and cooperation on matters 1-46 of both terrorism, immigration, migration, 1-49 to protect our citizens. 1-52 We concluded a truly historic week 1-54 for our country. 1-56 We traveled the world to strengthen long-standing 1-58 alliances, and to form a new partnership among 2-01 nations devoted to the task of eradicating 2-05 the terrorism that plagues our planet. 2-09 And I am now more hopeful than ever 2-12 in the possibility that nations of many faiths, many religions, 2-16 and from many regions can join together 2-20 in a common cause.  

The Inconvenient Truth About the Democratic Party Did you know that the Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, founded the KKK, and fought against every major civil rights act in U.S. history? Watch as Carol Swain, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University, shares the inconvenient history of the Democratic Party. When you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party comes to mind? The Republicans? Or, the Democrats? Most people would probably say the Democrats. But this answer is incorrect.   Since its founding in 1829, the Democratic Party has fought against every major civil rights initiative, and has a long history of discrimination. The Democratic Party defended slavery, started the Civil War, opposed Reconstruction, founded the Ku Klux Klan, imposed segregation, perpetrated lynchings, and fought against the civil rights acts of the 1950s and 1960s. In contrast, the Republican Party was founded in 1854 as an anti-slavery party. Its mission was to stop the spread of slavery into the new western territories with the aim of abolishing it entirely. This effort, however, was dealt a major blow by the Supreme Court. In the 1857 case Dred Scott v. Sandford, the court ruled that slaves aren’t citizens; they’re property. The seven justices who voted in favor of slavery? All Democrats. The two justices who dissented? Both Republicans. The slavery question was, of course, ultimately resolved by a bloody civil war. The commander-in-chief during that war was the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln – the man who freed the slaves. Six days after the Confederate army surrendered, John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, assassinated President Lincoln. Lincoln’s vice president, a Democrat named Andrew Johnson, assumed the presidency. But Johnson adamantly opposed Lincoln’s plan to integrate the newly freed slaves into the South’s economic and social order. Johnson and the Democratic Party were unified in their opposition to the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery; the 14th Amendment, which gave blacks citizenship; and the 15th Amendment, which gave blacks the vote. All three passed only because of universal Republican support. During the era of Reconstruction, federal troops stationed in the south helped secure rights for the newly freed slaves. Hundreds of black men were elected to southern state legislatures as Republicans, and 22 black Republicans served in the US Congress by 1900. The Democrats did not elect a black man to Congress until 1935. But after Reconstruction ended, when the federal troops went home, Democrats roared back into power in the South. They quickly reestablished white supremacy across the region with measures like black codes – laws that restricted the ability of blacks to own property and run businesses. And they imposed poll taxes and literacy tests, used to subvert the black citizen’s right to vote. And how was all of this enforced? By terror -- much of it instigated by the Ku Klux Klan, founded by a Democrat, Nathan Bedford Forrest. As historian Eric Foner - himself a Democrat - notes: “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party.” President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat, shared many views with the Klan. He re-segregated many federal agencies, and even screened the first movie ever played at the White House - the racist film “The Birth of a Nation,” originally entitled “The Clansman.” A few decades later, the only serious congressional opposition to the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 came from Democrats. Eighty percent of Republicans in Congress supported the bill. Less than 70 percent of Democrats did. Democratic senators filibustered the bill for 75 days, until Republicans mustered the few extra votes needed to break the logjam. And when all of their efforts to enslave blacks, keep them enslaved, and then keep them from voting had failed, the Democrats came up with a new strategy: If black people are going to vote, they might as well vote for Democrats. As President Lyndon Johnson was purported to have said about the Civil Rights Act, “I’ll have them n*****s voting Democrat for two hundred years.” So now, the Democratic Party prospers on the votes of the very people it has spent much of its history oppressing. Democrats falsely claim that the Republican Party is the villain, when in reality it’s the failed policies of the Democratic Party that have kept blacks down. Massive government welfare has decimated the black family. Opposition to school choice has kept them trapped in failing schools.  Politically correct policing has left black neighborhoods defenseless against violent crime. So, when you think about racial equality and civil rights, which political party should come to mind? I’m Carol Swain, professor of political science and law at Vanderbilt University, for Prager University.