Advertisement

PRAYER MARCH 2020

Saturday, tens of thousands of people came to Washington, DC (on their own dime, not bused in by any deep pockets activists) to join the Rev. Franklin Graham for Prayer March 2020.

Some in the mainstream media mischaracterized it as a rally of Trump supporters, but aside from some MAGA caps (which actually stood for "Make America Godly Again"), it was not. In fact, the organizers requested that there be no political signs. And even though (whether by coincidence or Divine design) President Trump was nominating Amy Coney Barrett to the SCOTUS on the same day very close by, this was a nonpartisan event for anyone who was concerned about the direction our country is heading. As Rev. Graham said, "Let's exalt the name of Jesus Christ. Let's call upon the name of Almighty God. Repent of our sins and ask God to heal our land. And that He would work in the hearts of our politicians.”

If you weren’t able to attend, you can read more, see photos and watch the replay of the live stream on video (hosted by Cissie Graham Lynch and myself) at this link.

And here is more information on Prayer March 2020 and quotes from the speeches.

MUST-READ MINNESOTA VOTER FRAUD

Project Veritas just released a new undercover video expose of alleged voter fraud tied to Rep. Ilhan Omar. It involves accusations of vote buying and ballot harvesting to keep Omar and other members of the DFL (Democratic-Farmers-Labor Party) in power in Minnesota. This is a must-read, and more details are at the link.

Just a few lowlights: alleged ballot harvester Liban Mohamed is on video showing piles of ballots in his car and bragging about harvesting 300 that day for his brother, Minneapolis City Council member Jamal Osman (state law bars anyone from acting as a “designated agent” for more than three absentee voters.)

An anonymous whistleblower also claims that before the August primary, Omar’s ballot harvesters went to the Charles Horn Towers public housing complex and took every ballot from seniors there. She said, “They have perfected this system…They will tell you we are applying for your ballot. They take a picture of your Social Security and your driver’s license. They have a database. When the ballot comes, they track it. Sometimes, they make fake emails. They track the ballot. Then they come and pick up the ballot, unopened…They don’t give a (bleep) about any Somali…The DFL wants to win this state at all costs…and the victims is the Somali people.”

She also claims that young people and women were paid for their votes in the primary and that campaign operatives “were carrying bags of money…When you vote and they mark you off, then you get in the van, they give you the cash.”

Read the whole thing and get justifiably and non-partisanly furious. These tactics not only put corrupt politicians in power over all of us, they also cancel out legitimate votes and disenfranchise real voters. I have little faith in Minneapolis officials to investigate this (they’re too busy defunding their police department), but maybe it will finally convince FBI Director Christopher Wray that vote fraud really is a problem worth dealing with.

HYPOCRISY ALERT

Judge Amy Coney Barrett is under assault for having religious beliefs that leftists think will color her decisions. She already answered this attack brilliantly last year at Hillsdale College. Click this link and must-read her entire response:

In a nutshell, she pointed out that even people with no religious beliefs have personal moral convictions, and setting them aside is “a challenge for those of faith and for those who have no faith.” But it’s the job of a judge to set aside personal convictions and follow the law and the Constitution. She said it’s “a dangerous road to go down to say that only religious people would not be able to separate out moral convictions from their duty.”

In this one response, she not only shot down the loudest leftist objection to her (religious bigotry), but if they continue to press it, then they’ll be admitting that they want judges who don’t make rulings based on their personal beliefs. That would be both a tacit endorsement of non-activist judges and a rejection of all the reasons for which they are currently deifying Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

KUDOS WHERE THEY'RE DUE:

I don’t have much in common politically with Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, but on ABC’s “This Week,” he made some comments that deserve to be taken seriously by his fellow Democrats.

Other Democrats are throwing ridiculous allegations at Judge Amy Coney Barrett (including claiming she’s totally unqualified and suggesting she’s a racist for…adopting two black children?), and threatening to try to disrupt and delay her confirmation hearing with procedural tactics and general tantrum-throwing. But Durbin admitted that Democrats have no power to stop her confirmation, that "we can slow it down perhaps a matter of hours, maybe days at the most. But we can't stop the outcome."

Instead, he said, "I've met with every Supreme Court nominee since I've been in the Senate. I will extend that courtesy, if she requests it, for at least a socially distanced, safe meeting, perhaps over the phone. I want to be respectful. We disagree on some things. And in terms of participating in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, I'll be there to do my job."

Even more stunning, Durbin publicly refuted Hillary Clinton’s plea to Joe Biden not to concede the election under any circumstance (like she’s apparently never conceded that she lost in 2016, and this is what that kind of denial of reality does to your mind.) Durbin said, "I respect her, I like her. But I think she's just flat-out wrong. The election itself is going to be announced, the winner will be announced at some point. If we are going to maintain a democracy, peaceful transition through an election is the only way to do it. Whoever the winner is, if it is clear and legal, that should be announced and the other party should concede." (This is assuming that Hillary was not talking about dragging out the results while enough new ballots could be “found” to win.)

Durbin’s words are a refreshing throwback to a time when political differences took a backseat to the good of the nation, and when all Americans observed the great traditions that have made America such an exceptional nation, like accepting losses, respecting other people’s right to hold different views, working across the aisle and observing a peaceful transfer of power after elections. One of the silliest stories of the past month has been the accusation that if Trump lost, he might not accept the outcome and that would be a “constitutional crisis.” Would it be worse than all the Democrats who still haven’t accepted that they lost four years ago, and are willing to burn the Constitution over it, from blowing up the Electoral College to packing the Supreme Court? They’re like children who scream that no race is “fair” unless they win it.

These days, too many people not only ignore those traditions, they deny that America even has great traditions or is an exceptional nation at all. Yet the things they would replace our traditions with would reduce us to the level of “world’s biggest banana republic.”

May Dick Durbin’s wise words (and courage to speak them aloud) sink into his fellow Democrats’ craniums and inspire some long-overdue soul-searching. At long last, there’s an adult in the room. (Or at least there was until he started endorsing some of the proposed changes Democrats would make if they win back the White House and Senate, but we can all save him from himself by voting to prevent that.)

FOOLS AND THEIR MONEY DEPT:

The founder of Black Lives Matter of Greater Atlanta, Sir Maejor Page (not a typo), was arrested by the FBI on fraud and money-laundering charges for allegedly misappropriating $200,000 in donations. He’d pledged to use those donations “for George Floyd.” The FBI says he used them for food, dining, entertainment, clothing, furniture, a home security system, tailored suits and accessories and a $112,000 house (all for himself, not for George Floyd.)

PJ Media points out that, to be fair, the local branch of BLM had already branded him a con man, a camera hog and a “dangerous person with violent tendencies.” While those sound like job qualifications for many of today’s “community organizers,” they’d already thrown his group out of the Atlanta BLM branch.

That story also points out that in just three months this spring and summer, Page’s Facebook page raked in $466,000 in donations, and as PJ Media points out, it’s unclear if any of it went to any charitable endeavor at all. You might think, “Well, at least it improved one black man’s life,” but check out the Fox News link. I know nothing about his family background, but judging from his mugshot, he looks whiter than I am.

"THE MORE YOU KNOW..."

There are a lot of terms that today’s leftists toss around that they don’t seem to grasp the meaning of, like “Nazi,” “fascist,” “gender,” “impeachable offense,” “illegitimate” and “literally.” We’ll have to add “unprecedented” to the list. Every time Trump does something that many other Presidents have done, they thunder that it’s “unprecedented!”

The latest example is for him to nominate a SCOTUS Justice in an election year. As an example, I’ll cite one of the left's most prominent thinkers, actress Alyssa Milano, who tweeted, “Never before in our nation’s history has a Supreme Court Justice been nominated and installed while an election is already underway. It defied every precedent and every expectation of a nation where the people are sovereign and the rule of law reigns.”

Georgia GOP Chairman David Shaffer responded, “Except when Woodrow Wilson replaced the Chief Justice who resigned to run against him in 1916 or when Dwight Eisenhower appointed William Brennan three weeks before the 1956 election or when it happened a half dozen other times during a Presidential election year.”

The National Review’s Dan McLaughlin dug even deeper into the history. He writes, "There have been 29 such (election year) vacancies, and Presidents made nominations for all of them, in most cases promptly…In 19 cases, the President’s party held the Senate; 17 of the 19 vacancies were filled, the exceptions being the bipartisan filibuster against Lyndon Johnson’s nominees in 1968 and George Washington’s withdrawal and resubmission in the next Congress of a nominee who was ineligible to be confirmed (he’d voted to create the Court, and the Constitution made him wait until there was a new Congress seated). Nine of those 17 were confirmed before the election, and eight after. Three were confirmed in lame duck post-election sessions even though the President had just lost reelection.

If the Democrats would like some help in understanding what “unprecedented” actually means, I’ll use it in a sentence: “It would be unprecedented if one of today’s leftist celebrities did any research before tweeting.”

TWEET OF THE DAY!

From Townhall.com’s Katie Pavlich.

“Harvard professor Lawrence Tribe admits on Fox News Sunday that there is nothing unconstitutional about President Trump nominating Barrett and Senate moving forward and then says, ‘But there are a lot of things in the constitution that are stupid.’ Sums up the left’s view well.”

POTENTIAL GREAT NEWS

Potential Great News: doctors in Florida think they might have found a combination of drugs that cures the COVID-19 (Chinese) coronavirus with nearly 100% effectiveness. The big question: will this finally entice Joe Biden to come out of his basement?

LOW BLOW

It’s become depressingly common for politicians to tar their opponents as Nazis, fascists or “literally Hitler.” This is not only slanderous, it’s reprehensible because it “normalizes” such characterizations and dilutes the meaning and horror of what actually happened in the Holocaust, comparing the death of six million Jews to a petty political disagreement.

Sadly, Joe Biden tried to put a new spin on this low blow by comparing President Trump to Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s minister of propaganda, and his claim that if you tell a big lie often enough, the people will believe it.

This is the latest and ugliest manifestation of the canard that Trump lies all the time (you know, about the FBI being out to get him, about not actually colluding with Russia, etc.) What makes it even more jaw-dropping is that it's being used as a reason for why we need to elect Honest Joe Biden, who aside from his family’s shady financial dealings has repeatedly changed positions, denied he knew about the anti-Trump plot that we know was discussed at a meeting he attended, and who has seen his presidential aspirations repeatedly sunk by incidents of plagiarism and lying about his own background, including his academic background. The latest example is one for which nobody’s been able to find any evidence, and I’m hardly surprised.

Delaware State just confirmed that they can find no proof of Biden’s 2019 claim that he attended that school. He was the commencement speaker twice and got an honorary degree, but no, he didn’t attend a historically black college.

I look forward to tomorrow’s debate, where I wonder if Joe will channel Steve Martin and tell the audience, “I started out as a poor black child…”

DAILY BIBLE VERSE

Calling A "Lid For The Day"

September 28, 2020

I warned you that you’d better learn the media term “called a lid for the day” (meaning a candidate will have no further comments or events for the rest of the day) because we were hearing it a lot from the Biden campaign. But just to be clear how little time Joe is putting into campaigning, his people have put a lid on the day before noon nine times so far this month, and some of those lids dropped before 9 a.m. I’d say that Trump does more before 9 a.m. than Biden does all day, but for Biden, 9 a.m. IS “all day.”

Now, with major news exploding all around us, Biden has nothing scheduled except a trip to Washington to mourn Ruth Bader Ginsburg from now until Tuesday, when the first debate takes place.

Matt Vespa at Townhall.com suggests that this is because they’re panicked that he’ll go off the rails if asked about the blockbuster Senate report on his son Hunter’s financial shenanigans, but seriously, what are the odds that any media outlet he’d talk to would ask him about that? The big liberal news outlets that even mentioned that report presented it not as an in-depth expose of Hunter’s shady influence peddling but as a partisan attack on Biden “without evidence” (Trademark registered.)

The official excuses for Biden spending less time campaigning than Hillary Clinton (and I mean less time than she’s spending NOW) are that he’s “modeling good coronavirus behavior” by not appearing in front of crowds like Trump (I thought the virus didn’t spread in crowds of Democrats who hate Trump) and that he’s “preparing for the debate.”

This was dutifully echoed by his media peanut gallery. But the debate was over five days away when his campaign put a lid on that day, the next day, the weekend and the first two days of next week. Trump is preparing for the debate while dealing with many major issues and campaigning all over the US. In other words, working all day long, like a President has to. Plus, we know what the debate topics will be and that Chris Wallace will ask both candidates to describe their visions for America under their leadership.

If, after 47 years in Washington, 8 years as Vice President and three Presidential runs, Joe Biden can’t tell us off the top of his head what he would do if he became President, then there’s nothing on the top of his head other than hair plugs.

Madness

September 28, 2020

On his Fox News show Thursday, Tucker Carlson shined a spotlight on how out of control the power-mad enforcers of arbitrary coronavirus “safety” measures have become. It’s obvious that in some jurisdictions, exerting power over certain groups far outweighs any objective standards of safety or any consideration for the Bill of Rights.

At that link is the segment from Carlson’s show, featuring absolutely shocking (in the first case, literally shocking) footage that as he rightly says, makes you question whether we are still living in America.

The first part is a video of a mom in Logan, Ohio, who was watching her son in a sports event when a large cop and a couple of other people, presumably from the school, came over to tell her she was in violation of the state mandate to wear a face mask. She said she has asthma and can’t wear a mask. Besides, the event was outdoors, and she was sitting well away from anyone else in the sparsely-filled bleachers, and the mandate applies only indoors and in places where social-distancing is impossible.

Nevertheless, when she refused to put on a mask or leave, the cop grappled with her, handcuffed her, TASED her (the jolt also shocked a nearby child on the metal bleachers) then forcibly hauled her away under arrest. I don’t know what’s more shocking: the taser, the behavior of the cop and officials, or the fact that so many other Americans just sat there quietly watching this outrage.

Here is more about the story, with a link to the police department’s response. They claim she was not arrested for nor wearing a mask but for criminal trespass, because she refused to leave (note: because she refused to leave a public event where the mask mandate did not apply. Try again.)

I’m normally not a big fan of lawsuits, but I hope she has a real shark lawyer. The same goes for the church in Moscow (as Tucker points out: Idaho, not Russia) where worshippers were handcuffed and arrested for singing hymns at an OUTDOOR worship service.

In what I hope and pray is the start of a new trend that will inspire churches like the one in Idaho, the Capitol Hill Baptist Church has filed a lawsuit against the DC government, arguing that its never-ending ban on gatherings of over 100 people (even outdoors with masks and social distancing) places an impossible burden on the fundamental First Amendment right to freedom of religious expression. The lawsuit points out that DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, who refuses to let churches hold services, has given her approval to mass anti-police protests and even appeared among a crowd of tens of thousands of protesters on June 6 and called the event “a wonderful thing.”

The DC church is being represented by the Texas-based First Liberty Institute, which defends religious freedom rights. Click the link if you’d like to learn more and maybe contribute to the legal expenses.

I’m glad to see Americans finally standing up and saying “no more” to this partisan tyranny hiding behind the name of “public safety.” If you can safely attend a protest rally, you can safely attend a worship service. Those who defend the protesters by claiming it’s their First Amendment right might want to read a little further in that Amendment.

This also drives home how vitally important it is that President Trump appoint a Supreme Court Justice who cares about protecting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and that the Senate confirm that person with all possible speed.

From our “Voter Fraud Is A Rightwing Myth” File: Authorities investigating election issues in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, found nine mail-in military ballots that had been discarded. All nine were votes for Trump.

Skeptics may scoff that it’s “only nine ballots,” but those would be nine US military members who would’ve been disenfranchised from selecting the commander-in-chief who has the power to send them into endess, pointless wars or not, just as every fake vote cast disenfranchises a real voter. Also, we don’t know at this point how many ballots were discarded, only that nine were recovered.

As the linked story notes, this follows a report of three trays of mail, including absentee ballots, being found in a ditch in Wisconsin.

For those who dismiss the Pennsylvania story because it’s “only nine ballots,” we have news that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed 134 felony charges, including election fraud, mail-in ballot fraud and tampering with a government record, against four people in an alleged scheme to steal a Democratic primary election in Gregg County in 2018. In that race, incumbent County Commissioner Shannon Brown was losing to his primary challenger by a handful of votes until mail-in ballots put him five votes ahead, and he went on to be reelected.

Brown is now facing 23 charges with the others filed against three associates. Paxton says the accused engaged in a scheme to swing the election by targeting young, able-bodied voters to cast ballots by mail by fraudulently claiming the voters were “disabled,” in most cases without the voters’ knowledge or consent. 239 of those ballots bore the signatures of just five people supposedly helping the voters fill them out. The investigation came after the challenger smelled a rat and sued, noting that over a third of the ballots cast were by mail and 29% claimed to be disabled, which must make Gregg the most disabled county in Texas.

It’s interesting that as the Democrats are denying mail-in vote fraud exists, we keep getting evidence that it does and is largely used by Democrats (ahem…New Jersey!) In this case, it was (allegedly) used by a Democrat to cheat another Democrat out of an election win! You’d think that would at last raise their concerns about voter fraud.

But then it appears Democrats might be getting concerned about their big “everyone vote by mail” push blowing up in their faces, since they’re changing their position faster than Joe Biden has on…well, name any issue. They’ve been pushing hard for universal voting by mail (not requesting an absentee ballot, but just mailing out blank ballots to everyone on the voter rolls, which would flood the nation with easily-falsified ballots (again, see “New Jersey.”) But now, they’re urging their voters to vote in person.

Previously, the cover story fed to the media for why Democrats had to vote by mail was that while the coronavirus doesn’t spread at leftist protests and riots, it’s wildly contagious among people in masks standing six feet apart in orderly polling station lines. But now, there’s a new cover story: if Trump loses to mail-in voters, he might refuse to leave office and institute “fascism,” something he’s never threatened and that is laughable coming from the people who’ve given us masked thugs threatening people with violence if they don’t vow allegiance to the thugs’ political views and vote the way they’re told.

Stacey Lennox at PJ Media suggests a more believable reason for the sudden flip-flop: while Republicans are listening to Trump (and me, I hope!) and planning to vote in person, far more Democrats say they plan to vote by mail. And while that does make voter fraud easier, they suddenly realized that mail-in ballots are far more likely to be disqualified because voters on their own are more likely to fill in the ballots incorrectly.

Naturally, the Biden campaign denies that they’ve never encouraged anyone to vote by any particular method. So the advice to Democrats remains what it has always been: Vote early and vote often.

(Correction: our editor wishes to apologize for pulling a "Joe Biden" with Agent BARNETT's name in this piece when it ran originally, adding that 3AM might have been the time for performance-enhancing drugs. Also, Amy Coney Barrett had been in the news all day. We promise never to refer to her as Amy Comey Barrett. Please enjoy the corrected version in its entirety.)

I don’t know if Maria Bartiromo had something in her eye during this weekend's edition of SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES, but it sure looked like a small tear running down her cheek as she reported that, according to her sources, John Durham’s report on the “Trump/Russia” investigation would not be out until after the election.

Durham’s office reportedly had concerns that delivering his conclusions this close to the election would be considered too politicizing, but I strongly disagree. I’m with Sen. Ron Johnson, who appeared on her show later in the hour. We’ve long been saying that it’s the withholding of information until after the election that should be seen as politicizing, not the releasing, as voters deserve all the information they can get before casting their ballots. Sen. Johnson said essentially the same thing on Sunday.

One of Bartiromo’s guests, Sen. Lindsay Graham, did have encouraging news: the Senate Judiciary Committee intends to call William Barnett, the FBI agent who opened the Michael Flynn case –- after being personally selected by Joe Pientka, who supervised “Crossfire Hurricane” –- and learned over time that it was all about “getting Trump.” Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway have a new report on the interview with Barnett conducted just under two weeks ago by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, who was appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr to review the special counsel’s handling of the Michael Flynn case.

One thing that stood out to me in reading this was that Barnett said special counsel agents would actually joke about it being a game of “Collusion ‘CLUE.’” In this game, he said, investigators choose any character, in any location, conducting any activity, and pair this person with another character and interpret it as evidence of collusion. Hilarious.

Barnett is essentially a whistleblower now –- not the kind Democrats like –- and the transcript of his interview with Jensen, or at least the summary, was obtained by Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell and filed with Judge Emmet Sullivan. (If Durham isn’t going to release any report before the election, we’re dependent on this sort of process to get the facts out.)

Barnett said in his interview that there was never any basis for the Trump/Russia “collusion” theory. He told DOJ investigators that “the handling of the probes [Flynn and Paul Manafort] troubled him so much that he threatened to quit working on it in one case, and threatened to go to the Inspector General in another."

In 2016, when Barnett was first assigned to the case, he thought that reading through the evidence would give him a better understanding of why the investigation into Trump’s “collusion” with Russia was launched. But after about six weeks, he still couldn’t figure it out. He characterized their theory as “groping.”

Barnett is the agent who moved to close the Flynn case due to lack of evidence. He’s the one who was told by Peter Strzok that the “7th Floor” wanted to keep it open and that Flynn should be investigated for a Logan Act violation. (Recall that then-Vice President Joe Biden was present at the January 5 Oval Office meeting during which this was discussed and, according to Sally Yates, was the one to bring up the Logan Act.) Barnett was not familiar with the Logan Act –- who was? –- but after researching it, knew that it didn’t apply to Flynn, who was not a private citizen but the incoming national security adviser.

Read the Davis/Hemingway piece for details of how Barnett was cut out of Strzok and Pientka’s “ambush” interview with Flynn. Apparently, Barnett was left out of other meetings as well, as the Flynn probe was directed “from the top down,” meaning all the direction was coming from senior officials. (My speculation is that by then, they would've liked to have him off the case but were worried about what he might say publicly.)

By February, 2017, Barnett had had his fill and asked to be removed from the case. In his interview, he said that the Flynn investigation “was problematic and could result in an IG investigation.” (He didn’t need a crystal ball for that one!)

Ironically, it was the supervision by top officials that had made him think it must be legal, as uncomfortable as it made him. Barnett added that one analyst who was “very skeptical of the Flynn collusion investigation” ---name not provided, but it wasn’t Barnett --- was indeed removed from the Flynn investigation. (Surely Jensen has interviewed that person.)

When the Flynn investigation was made part of Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe in May, 2017, Barnett told team member Jeannie Rhee that there was “no evidence of a crime” committed by Flynn. She dismissed his concerns. He said he didn’t want to be involved in the special counsel, but Peter Strzok urged him to move over there. Davis and Hemingway report that Barnett “decided to work at the special counsel office in the hope his perspective would keep them from ‘group think.’”

Once Barnett was working with the special counsel, he could see the “group think” in action --- what he characterized as “GET TRUMP.” The investigation was run in the opposite way of how an FBI investigation would be. He said, “There was always someone at SCO (special counsel’s office) who claimed to have a lead on information that would prove the collusion, only to have the information be a dead end.” It happened over and over.

Incidentally, Barnett never wiped his phone, though he testified that other members of the special counsel would joke about wiping theirs.

The notes from Barnett’s interview ended with this: “Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to “get TRUMP.”

It seems there might be much more behind Durham’s delay than we even imagined. RedState.com has some interesting observations on that.

This report came in after Maria Bartiromo’s show, and I hope she’s had a chance to read it. This writer doesn’t think that Jensen and Barr were prepared for what has been revealed by Barnett about the political calculations involved in the Russia Hoax investigation. There is speculation that Barr is extremely upset that Mueller, now aging and perhaps fading a bit mentally, was being used as cover by Andrew Weissmann and others to overstep wildly in their desire to “get Trump.”

Something had to trigger Barr’s decision to have Barnett interviewed by Jensen. It’s possible that this has to do with Judge Emmet Sullivan’s (mis)handling of the Michael Flynn case, as it shows the case to be even more obviously politically motivated than we knew. The message to Sullivan: “Sure, you idiot, go ahead and keep this case open. The longer you keep it open, the more we’ll reveal.”

And apparently there is more. What we’ve seen has to do with “Crossfire Razor,” the investigation into Flynn. The rest is known only to investigators. It seems that the information that Jensen got from Agent Barnett may indeed be a game-changer. Even so, it’s wrong to keep it under wraps, for whatever reason, until after the election. Two words: interim report.

When I write negative commentary about Democrats, I hope my readers know that I’m using that as a shorthand term to refer to certain current party leaders and office holders whom I believe are taking the country and their party in a very dangerous and radical direction. I’m not referring to working class Americans who have traditionally voted Democrat, many of whom are alarmed at the direction their party is heading. I’m also not referring to all Democrat politicians.

For instance, while Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and I might disagree on a number of issues, I find her to be a rare example of an open-minded liberal who’s willing to reach out and find common ground, as you can see in this interview with her from last weekend’s episode of “Huckabee” on TBN.

Of course, that refusal to treat anyone who disagrees with her as a monster and a pariah could be why she was the only presidential candidate who won delegates and still wasn’t asked to speak at the Democratic Convention.

Another rare Democrat is West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, who scolded his fellow Democrats for attacking Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Catholic religious faith just because she’s rumored to be a potential Trump SCOTUS nominee.

On Fox News, Manchin gave them a much-needed lesson about something fundamental to the American system:

“I’m Catholic, OK. And religion should not enter into it. It sure doesn’t with me…The freedom of religion is one of the basic rights we all have as an American citizen. Whether you’re Catholic, whether you’re Protestant, whether you’re Jewish, evangelical, whatever it may be, God bless you. You worship who you want and you worship how you want. You worship the same God. All of us do.”

That actually sounds like something you’d read here!

So in case you think I’m just being a political partisan when I criticize Democrats, remember that I’ve always said I think it’s good for America to have a robust two-party system. But that requires both sides to respect the free exchange of ideas and everyone’s right to hold their own views, even if you disagree with them. I might even be saying many more nice things about Democratic leaders if they’d have the guts to stand up and strongly denounce mob rule, character assassination and the attempt to influence elections by making threats.

A Very Hollywood Story

September 25, 2020

Actress Alyssa Milano, a Twitter leftwing activist and proponent of defunding the police, made embarrassing headlines after she reportedly called 911 about an “armed gunman” in black clothing on her property (she later claimed a neighbor called 911, but admitted her husband made a follow-up call to police.) She lives in an 8,000-square-foot, $2.5 million home in a gated community in an upscale area north of L.A.

The call elicited a massive police response, including a K-9 unit and a helicopter. They determined that the “armed gunman” was a teenager shooting at squirrels with an air rifle.

Milano praised the police, but blamed “rightwing trolls” for “targeting” her with ridicule, which you must admit would be extremely hard to resist doing.

Let it be known, though, that I am not singling her out for mockery. She did the right thing in calling the police. I think that by now, we should have all learned that if you see a young person in black clothing carrying what appears to be a rifle, the police should definitely be called in to deal with the situation in whatever numbers are needed. If that had happened in Portland, Minneapolis, Seattle, etc., a lot of black neighborhoods and businesses might not be smoking ruins today.

I also don’t think it’s fair to single her out for hypocrisy for denouncing the police while expecting them to pull out all the stops to protect her. In that regard, she’s simply like virtually every liberal celebrity in Hollywood, like the ones who want to defund the police and ban you from owning a gun to protect your family while they’re protected by armed bodyguards and battalions of cops at awards shows.

And it’s not even a new story. Back on June 2nd, I wrote about a certain former NBA and ESPN star who was tweeting “Burn it all down” about the Minneapolis riots, and just one day later, frantically tweeting about some “animals” trying to get into his gated community, then expressing relief when the cops showed up and repelled them.

But I will ask this: what’s with all these liberal celebrities living in “gated communities”? I thought walls were useless for providing security.