web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Featured Story" (Page 111)

Joy Behar Knows: If the Hurricane Had Hit a Country Full of Only White People, Trump Would Let Them All Come Here

Westlake Legal Group joy-behar-the-view-disgusted-new-SCREENSHOT-620x333 Joy Behar Knows: If the Hurricane Had Hit a Country Full of Only White People, Trump Would Let Them All Come Here Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

[Screenshot from TheDC Shorts, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxF6B6K2ELE]

 

By my estimation, there’s nothing dumber than when critics of Trump — or of any public figure — assume they know the inner workings of the person.

If you think someone’s done or said something wrong, it seems reasonable to point it out. But when you start talking about their heart, their secret ambitions and untold dreams, etc., you’ve jumped the shark.

Wanna watch some impressive waterskiing? Check out MSNBC or CNN any day of the week.

On Tuesday’s installment of The View, co-host Joy Behar put on her life vest, grabbed a rope, and laid back to the sounds of an idling motor about to pick up speed. Jaws was waiting.

It wasn’t Joy’s first time out — she’s previously schooled the world on what the President thinks, what he wants…and that for which he hankers, apparently, is good things for only white people.


During a panel discussion about hurricane-affected Bahamians unable to come to the U.S. — who Trump said must have “proper documentation” — Joy pushed the idea that The Donald doesn’t wanna help because they’re non-Caucasian.

But first, she made a point that completely contradicted that, referencing the President’s assertion that “some very bad people” live there:

“You know, this is a guy who had the Taliban — he’s going to have a big meeting with the Taliban. He loves Kim Jong-Un and Putin, and yet these people who are fleeing a hurricane are suddenly criminals. He’s so despicable. He makes my head stand up — my hair. I can’t stand him.”

So he “loves” a North Korean and Middle Easterners?

Pssst. Joy. Those people aren’t white. You’re neutering your message.

Sunny Hostin added that The Donald “didn’t have a problem with the Bahamas when he hosted the 2009 Miss Universe pageant [there] and he was tweeting about it and wanted everybody to not only go to the Bahamas but watch it live. So, again, it’s the hypocrisy.”

Is it hypocrisy when he hasn’t said he “has a problem” with the Bahamas?

Putting aside the issue of assistance to victims of Hurricane Dorian, as for whether or not there are criminals in the Caribbean commonwealth, enjoy a February write-up from South Florida’s Sun-Sentinel: “Armed Robbery, Burglary and Rape Common in Bahamas, State Department Warns Travelers.”

Or…aw heck, let’s just do insults. Hit it, Joy:

“It’s just cruel. It’s inhumane. He just lacks humanity. … But he’s a person who keeps children in cages. Remember who you’re dealing with here.”

Meghan McCain was sympathetic to the general notion of easing up on hurricane victims:

“I do think when we talk about the border and when we talk about things like natural disasters hitting people’s homes, the humanity seems completely removed from it. The best part about America, is I still believe — like Ronald Reagan said — we are a shining beacon on the hill. So why can’t we help our friends in the Bahamas who, by the way, help a lot of rich people with taxes and tax shelters down there and have 6 million Americans coming from tourism every year?”

Then Joy hit the note for which we’ve all been waiting — that hugbuggin’ lover of Asians and Middle Easterners is clearly exclusively a lover of only whites:

“I think if they had a hurricane in Norway and they were all coming here, I think he would be fine with that.”

Shark jumped.

-ALEX

 

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. For iPhone instructions, see the bottom of this page.



If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post Joy Behar Knows: If the Hurricane Had Hit a Country Full of Only White People, Trump Would Let Them All Come Here appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group joy-behar-the-view-disgusted-new-SCREENSHOT-300x161 Joy Behar Knows: If the Hurricane Had Hit a Country Full of Only White People, Trump Would Let Them All Come Here Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Federal Judge Gives Middle Finger to Higher Court Ruling, Blocks Trump’s New Asylum Policy Again Anyway

Westlake Legal Group MigrantFamilyBorder-620x317 Federal Judge Gives Middle Finger to Higher Court Ruling, Blocks Trump’s New Asylum Policy Again Anyway Politics political partisan obama judge Judge Tigar immigration Illegal Immigration Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats axios Asylum Policy 9th circuit court of appeals

Migrant families cross the Rio Grande to get illegally across the border into the United States, to turn themselves in to authorities and ask for asylum, next to the Paso del Norte international bridge, near El Paso, Texas, Friday, May 31, 2019. The Border Patrol said it has encountered more than 180 groups of over 100 people since October, compared with 13 in the previous 12-month period and two the year before. (AP Photo/Christian Torrez)

It’s almost like the federal judiciary have no respect for constitutional dictations at all.

If you recall, Trump won a surprising victory in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last month when they ruled in favor of him implementing new asylum rules that he clearly has the constitutional authority to enact. Those revolved around requiring migrants to apply for asylum in the first safe country they arrive in before proceeding to the United States. This is not only common sense, it’s the world standard and the recommendation of the United Nations (who the left constantly tells us we should listen to). Asylum is not for country shopping. It’s to remove yourself from supposed immediate danger, nothing more.

Well, the very same judge who was slapped down originally decided to throw up a middle finger at the higher court that overruled him previously. He made the same judgement again, blocking Trump’s asylum policies on a national level.

This per Axios.

A California federal judge re-issued a nationwide injunction on Monday, blocking the Trump administration from denying asylum to migrants who have not first applied for refuge in a “third country” they’ve traveled through.

Last month, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed federal Judge Jon Tigar’s first preliminary injunction to apply only to the 9th circuit. The move allowed the Trump administration to enforce the policy — which would all but deny asylum to Central American migrants — in Texas and New Mexico. The policy will now be blocked nationwide once again.

To recap, this is a single, low level federal judge who’s jurisdiction does not expand past the 9th circuit. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals made that clear by narrowing his original ruling and removing the nationwide injunction. What’s he do? Puts it right back in place with no better of an explanation for doing so.

Judge Tigar is of course an Obama judge, something I’m assured doesn’t exist by Justice John Roberts. This is just more proof of how wrong he is though.

The judge in question here is ruling completely based on partisan politics. There is no constitutional case for overriding the President’s delegated powers to control immigration policy, nor do non-citizens have a right to claim irreparable harm for him doing so, thereby forcing nationwide injunctions. By that logic, every single part of the constitution could be suspended to prevent some form of irreparable harm to someone on the globe. It’s nonsensical garbage and it’s exactly why nationwide injunctions are terrible policy for the courts. They also have no basis in the delegated powers of the judiciary, seemingly being invented out of nowhere and being in direct contradiction with the Judiciary Act of 1789.

But as I’ve said many times, this will never stop until Justice Roberts gets some courage and deals with this issue. The Supreme Court needs to take on the question of nationwide injunctions and stop this idiocy. Nowhere in our system of governance was it meant for a single, un-elected judge to dictate policy for the entire country. As long as the highest court sits on its hand though, judges will keep going rogue.

Hopefully the 9th Circuit slaps this guy down hard again. They can’t be to happy about being so directly defied.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Federal Judge Gives Middle Finger to Higher Court Ruling, Blocks Trump’s New Asylum Policy Again Anyway appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group illegal-aliens-in-detention-300x200 Federal Judge Gives Middle Finger to Higher Court Ruling, Blocks Trump’s New Asylum Policy Again Anyway Politics political partisan obama judge Judge Tigar immigration Illegal Immigration Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats axios Asylum Policy 9th circuit court of appeals   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Some in the LGBTQ+ Community are Calling Pennywise Homophobic, Upset He is Not a Good Role Model?

Westlake Legal Group it-620x348 Some in the LGBTQ+ Community are Calling Pennywise Homophobic, Upset He is Not a Good Role Model? Popular Culture Pennywise Movies Media LGLBTQ+ LGBT it homophobia Hollywood gay rights Gay Issues Gay Agenda Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment Allow Media Exception

 

Somehow gay voices have found a problem with an evil character driven to bloodlust??? 

The sequel to the 2017 surprise blockbuster film “It” was released this weekend. The box office numbers for “It: Chapter 2” were huge, as expected, but unexpectedly (for some) they found an issue with the central figure of the sequel. A few scenes in this film about a nightmarish circus act are said to be disturbing — not from a horror perspective, but for the social implications.

Over at Out Magazine there is an announcement for readers that the lead villain, the clown Pennywise (referred to as “It” by the residents) is in fact homophobic. The headline declares “Pennywise Is Surprisingly (yea, about that) Anti-Quer In “It Chapter Two”. There is a reason for this declaration in the gay publication. After the first chapter of this rebooted franchise come out in 2017 the character became something of a gay icon.

(possible spoilers in the next paragraph)

That has all changed however in the sequel. In this film the children are now grown-ups, and there are some scenes in which the murderous entity actually behaves in an unapproved fashion! As explained by writer Rose Dummu, “after seeing It Chapter Two, I’m sad to announce that Pennywise is not gay, or even an ally. In fact, Pennywise is surprisingly anti-queer.”

The primary reason for this summation is that in an early scene a homosexual couple is attacked by a group of youths, with one of them ultimately meeting his end at the hand of the clown. Later scenes have Pennywise taunting the character Richie (played by Bill Hader) who is gay, threatening him with his “secret”.

These are the kind of cultural fights many in the gay community undertake which make little sense. The clown in the film kills far more than the gay characters. By this reasoning why is Pennywise not looked at as heterophobic? This balance of victimhood should be regarded as a positive, given that the clown is indiscriminate.  Homosexuality is presented as not being a motivation, and is therefore shown as a norm.

But not in the eyes of Out, which declares that this portrayal is indicative of contemporary mores. Says Dommu of Pennywise in this sequel: “He’s a homophobe. Trump’s America strikes again!” Seriously, with this…

To explain (since it clearly needs correction) to call the clown in this film “surprisingly anti-queer” ignores a central fact of the story. The scenes are pulled from the original Stephen King novel, which was published in 1986. How is this a surprise?! If this is such a shocking development in the LGTBQ+ community why has there been no outrage over the source material? Taken further, Donald Trump in no way was a motivator nor inspiration of this plot point over three decades ago.

This is the ridiculous lengths one needs to go to find outrage. The elements of murder, of attacks on children, and terrorizing of innocents are not looked at as problematic…yet perceived homophobia is crossing a line! But hey, I understand that I am not supposed to get it. I am just a person here wondering how it is deemed disappointing that a homicidal clown that consumes the hearts of its victims can no longer be looked at as a role model. I hope the community can pull through this loss of an icon.

The post Some in the LGBTQ+ Community are Calling Pennywise Homophobic, Upset He is Not a Good Role Model? appeared first on RedState.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Remember When Comey Insisted Steele Dossier Wasn’t Used To Start Investigation Into Trump Campaign? Yeah, About That…

Westlake Legal Group obama-comey-620x413 Remember When Comey Insisted Steele Dossier Wasn’t Used To Start Investigation Into Trump Campaign? Yeah, About That… Steele dossier Russia Collusion Probe Origins Russia collusion john durham Front Page Stories Featured Story comey Abuse of Power

On Oct. 28, 2013, President Barack Obama and James Comey participate in the installation ceremony for Mr. Comey as FBI director at the bureau’s Washington headquarters. PHOTO: CHARLES DHARAPAK/ASSOCIATED PRESS

A key focus of U.S. Attorney John Durham’s probe into the origins of the Russia collusion investigation into the Trump campaign has been to determine the time frame of exactly when the FBI received former British spy Christopher Steele’s now-discredited dossier, financed by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee through Fusion GPS.

FBI agent Peter Strzok acknowledged in his testimony before Congress that he relied on the dossier’s content but was unwilling to say when he received information contained in its pages. Former FBI Director Jim Comey, in his memoir “A Higher Loyalty” insisted that the FBI opened the collusion investigation on July 31, 2016, and denied having seen any dossier materials before that time. Comey has always insisted that George Papadopoulos’ loose lips were the reason for the investigation into what we now know were drummed up links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Now, however, according to a report from The Washington Times, Durham seems to be investigating whether or not the dossier showed up in the hands of FBI agents before July 21. And it all hinges on the testimony of one Rome-based FBI agent named Michael Gaeta who met with Glenn Simpson in London in early July.

There is evidence that dossier material arrived before July 31.

⦁ Mr. Steele beseeched Rome-based FBI agent Michael J. Gaeta to visit London in early July 2016 to hear his sensational allegations against candidate TrumpMr. Gaeta won trip approval from Victoria Nuland, who was assistant secretary of state.

Mr. Gaeta arrived at Mr. Steele’s Orbis Business Intelligence office in London on July 5 and was greeted with horror stories. Mr. Steele handed him dossier pages. FBI practice would be for Mr. Gaeta to fill out a Form 302 containing Mr. Steele’s charges and circulate it to headquarters in Washington.

⦁ That same month, Ms. Nuland has said, she was given several dossier pages. She said she instructed staff to give the documents to the FBI.

“The dossier, he passed two to four pages of short points of what he was finding, and our immediate reaction to that was, this is not in our purview,” Ms. Nuland said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “This needs to go to the FBI if there is any concern here that one candidate or the election as a whole might be influenced by the Russian Federation. That’s something for the FBI to investigate. And that was our reaction when we saw this. It’s not our — we can’t evaluate this.”

⦁ In testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Glenn R. Simpson, co-founder of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, said he gave Mr. Steele permission in early July to start talking to the FBI. Mr. Simpson was a paid Clinton campaign agent and handled Mr. Steele.

“And by approximately early July, like 1st or 2nd, I had given my assent to him doing it as a professional obligation or a citizenship obligation. And then that’s when he did it, sometime around the Fourth of July,” Mr. Simpson testified.

Question: “So in early July, is it fair to say in early July that you knew that Mr. Steele had taken some information to the FBI?”

Answer: “I think he said he was going to, and then later he told me he did.”

A 113 page transcript of an interview with Mr. Gaeta by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence apparently exists and is in the hands of investigators. They are said to be working out how they can release it to the public. It’s so secretive, in fact, that Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton indicated to the Times that even he was unable to retreive any information from Gaeta’s testimony.

“They are giving us nothing on Gaeta. Unusually secretive on him and the whole cabal,” Mr. Fitton told The Times.

If it comes out that the discredited dossier — paid for by the political opponent of Donald Trump — was in fact used to start the investigation into whether or not Trump was colluding with the Russians, the whole ball game could change, not only from a public perception perspective, but from a “justification for indictments” perspective.

And if that happens, it will be fascinating to watch the players begin to point their fingers at each other. Stay tuned…

The post Remember When Comey Insisted Steele Dossier Wasn’t Used To Start Investigation Into Trump Campaign? Yeah, About That… appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ap-comey-eyes-closed-300x200 Remember When Comey Insisted Steele Dossier Wasn’t Used To Start Investigation Into Trump Campaign? Yeah, About That… Steele dossier Russia Collusion Probe Origins Russia collusion john durham Front Page Stories Featured Story comey Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Diabolical: Read The ‘Options’ Civil Rights Lawyer Lisa Bloom Offered To New Client Harvey Weinstein When The Scandal Broke

Westlake Legal Group harvey-weinstein-new-yorker-SCREENSHOT-620x345 Diabolical: Read The ‘Options’ Civil Rights Lawyer Lisa Bloom Offered To New Client Harvey Weinstein When The Scandal Broke Sexual Assault Rose McGowan lisa bloom Hollywood harvey weinstein Front Page Stories Featured Story David Boies Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power

 

A new book is out today, entitled “She Said,” by the New York Times reporters, Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, whose investigation of Harvey Weinstein was instrumental in his downfall.

The book is said to reveal previously unknown details about the case including the many ways Weinstein and “his representatives tried to kill” the story.

Huffington Post writer Yashar Ali posted a copy of lawyer Lisa Bloom’s opening memo to her new client, Harvey Weinstein, about the best way to deal with actress Rose McGowan. It was written in December 2016.

(This memo is included in the book and can be viewed in Ali’s tweet below.)

McGowan alleges that Weinstein raped her in 1997 at a Sundance film festival. She was one of the first women to publicly accuse the notorious producer of rape.

Bloom proves she is high-profile feminist attorney Gloria Allred’s daughter. She’s on this. Here are your options Harvey.

Bloom tells Weinstein, “I feel equipped to help you against the Roses of the world, because I have represented so many of them. We can place an article re her becoming increasingly unglued, so that when someone Googles her this is what pops up and she’s discredited.”

Here is one of Bloom’s options:

Counterops online campaign to push back and call her out as a pathological liar. A few well placed articles now will go a long way if things blow up for us down the line. We can place an article re her becoming increasingly unglued so that when someone Googles her, this is what pops up and she is discredited. We have all the facts based on publicly available information.

Bloom also writes, “A reminder: would you please connect me with David Boies so that I can get retained?” This is interesting because Boies represents Virginia Giuffre, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims. Bloom herself had gained a reputation as a victim’s advocate. However, in the Weinstein case, both unleash their knowledge of the law against Weinstein’s victims. Variety writes that both Bloom and Boies “emerge as ruthless advocates on behalf of Weinstein.”

“She Said” evidently portrays Bloom in a very negative light. A New York Times review of the book says “Maybe the most appalling figure in this constellation of collaborators and enablers is Lisa Bloom, Allred’s daughter.”

McGowan spoke to Variety and said, “What these people have done to my standing in the world has been systematic — it’s been evil. It’s one of the worst cases of gaslighting I’ve ever heard, and it’s starring me.”

(How does she think Trump must feel?)

McGowan continued:

Her [Bloom] email [memo] is staggering. Staggering! This woman should never work again. Lisa Bloom should be disbarred. So should David Boies…I hope this book will go a long way to exonerating me and the other victims who’ve dealt with slander and mental assault for years now. But in my own life, I’m incredibly happy now and feeling very balanced. And that’s something they can’t take from me.

To her credit, Bloom left Weinstein’s legal team in October 2017, amid mounting criticism. And she reiterated an apology she had made in at that time on twitter over the weekend.

And today, David Boies issued a statement (not an apology) through a spokesperson which said:

David Boies is focused among many things on reforming the country’s electoral college voting system — big argument tomorrow in Boston — and deeply committed to his work representing the leading voices of victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s horrific international sex trafficking operation. Ms. McGowan is unquestionably entitled to her deeply held beliefs and opinions but her suggestion regarding David’s bar status is a bridge too far for any reasonable conversation.

Read the memo.

 

 

The post Diabolical: Read The ‘Options’ Civil Rights Lawyer Lisa Bloom Offered To New Client Harvey Weinstein When The Scandal Broke appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group harvey-weinstein-new-yorker-SCREENSHOT-300x167 Diabolical: Read The ‘Options’ Civil Rights Lawyer Lisa Bloom Offered To New Client Harvey Weinstein When The Scandal Broke Sexual Assault Rose McGowan lisa bloom Hollywood harvey weinstein Front Page Stories Featured Story David Boies Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Fifty State and Territorial Attorney’s General Unleash Anti-Trust Investigation On Google

Westlake Legal Group social-media-6-620x413 Fifty State and Territorial Attorney’s General Unleash Anti-Trust Investigation On Google Texas republicans Politics Ken Paxton Google Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Business & Economy Anti-Trust Enforcement anti-trust Allow Media Exception

Image by Erik Lucatero from Pixabay

This is nothing but good.

Attorneys general for 50 U.S. states and territories on Monday officially announced an antitrust investigation of Google, embarking on a wide-ranging review of a tech giant that Democrats and Republicans said may threaten competition, consumers and the continued growth of the web.

Appearing on the steps of the Supreme Court, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton charged that Google “dominates all aspects of advertising on the Internet and searching on the Internet,” though he cautioned that despite his criticism the states had launched an investigation for now and not a lawsuit.

Paxton said the probe’s initial focus is online advertising. Google is expected to rake in more than $48 billion in U.S. digital ad revenue this year, far rivaling its peers, while capturing 75 percent of all spending on U.S. search ads, according to eMarketer.

“They dominate the buyer side, the seller side, the auction side and the video side with YouTube,” he said during a news conference alongside officials from 11 states and the District of Columbia.

If you are a libertarian or in the thrall of a pure form of free market capitalism, you can just skip the rest of this. I’m not. I trust large business even less than I trust large government because it is rarely constrained by fear of exposure (when was the last time the Department of Interior sent surreptitious recordings of you rogering the old lady off to an independent contractor for them to use do develop better Artificial Intelligence? Didn’t think so, but if you use Apple’s Siri you have aided in their research) and are much more likely to do illegal stuff because the currency in business is pleasing the boss and getting promotions while in the bureaucracy it is hitting the door at 4:30 and getting a pension.

There is zero doubt that Google is a bad actor. There is no doubt that it is a monopoly and any competitor that exists is allowed to stay in business simply to provide the window-dressing of an open market.

My personal hope is that this coalition of state attorneys general crushes Google as it is currently configured and breaks it up into smaller business units that are forbidden from using the massive amount of consumer data compiled by Google to dominate markets. Then I hope they go after Facebook and Twitter.

=========
=========
Promoted from the diaries by streiff. Promotion does not imply endorsement.
=========
=========

The post Fifty State and Territorial Attorney’s General Unleash Anti-Trust Investigation On Google appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group social-media-6-300x200 Fifty State and Territorial Attorney’s General Unleash Anti-Trust Investigation On Google Texas republicans Politics Ken Paxton Google Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Business & Economy Anti-Trust Enforcement anti-trust Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

City of San Antonio Hit With Lawsuit From Texas Chick-fil-A Supporters Over Airport Banning

Westlake Legal Group ChickfilaApimage-620x317 City of San Antonio Hit With Lawsuit From Texas Chick-fil-A Supporters Over Airport Banning Texas San Antonio republicans Politics North Carolina LGBTQ LGBT law gay rights Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Faith democrats Culture & Faith Culture Courts Chick-Fil-A Allow Media Exception

FILE – This Thursday, July 19, 2012 file photo shows a Chick-fil-A fast food restaurant in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Mike Stewart, File)

The city of San Antonio landed itself in hot water earlier this year over its March decision to effectively ban Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant at the city’s airport for the next seven years. The stated reason why was a report on the company’s 2017 charitable contributions to organizations characterized by the actvist left as “anti-gay.”

As outrage ensued, the FAA launched an investigation in May into the actions of the San Antonio city council. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit against them in June over documents the state had requested but not received over the issue.

Now some Texas fans of the America’s favorite fast food chicken chain are filing a lawsuit of their own.

Fox News reports:

Five Texas fans of Chick-fil-A have filed a lawsuit against the city of San Antonio for its decision to ban the chicken-centric chain from opening up shop in the local airport. In March, city council officials rejected the restaurant’s bid to open a new location in San Antonio International Airport due to the company’s alleged “legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior.”

On Sept. 5, plaintiffs Patrick Von Dohlen, Brian Greco, Kevin Jason Khattar, Michael Knuffke and Daniel Petri filed suit against the city under S.B. 1978, otherwise known as the “Save Chick-fil-A Bill.”

Supporters of the bill argue that the provision, signed by Gov. Greg Abbott in June, defends the fast-food restaurant and protects religious freedoms, while opponents say it discriminates against the LGBTQ community.

What does the lawsuit call for? To allow for Chick-fil-A to resume plans for a restaurant at the airport, and to take away the ability of the city council to do this to any other business on the same grounds in the future:

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs pushed for the court to declare that the city of San Antonio “violated and continues to violate” the law by banning Chick-fil-A from the San Antonio airport and issue an injunction to block the city and airport shop operator Paradies Lagardère from banning the chain at the air hub in the future.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs also hope to issue another injunction to have a Chick-fil-A open at the airport and issue an order to stop the city from “taking any adverse action against Chick-fil-A or any other person or entity, which is based wholly or partly on that person or entity’s support for religious organizations that oppose homosexual behavior” and receive attorney’s fees and other relief.

Do the plaintiffs have a case? Stay tuned.

Related:
<li>Watch: Chick-fil-A Toronto Protest Video Shows Engaged Gay Customers Talking About “Foolishness” of Protests

  • Video: Unhinged ‘Die-In’ Held at Toronto Chick-Fil-A Interrupted by Hungry Customers Stepping Over Protesters
  • ——-
    — Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

    The post City of San Antonio Hit With Lawsuit From Texas Chick-fil-A Supporters Over Airport Banning appeared first on RedState.

    Westlake Legal Group ChickfilaApimage-300x153 City of San Antonio Hit With Lawsuit From Texas Chick-fil-A Supporters Over Airport Banning Texas San Antonio republicans Politics North Carolina LGBTQ LGBT law gay rights Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Faith democrats Culture & Faith Culture Courts Chick-Fil-A Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

    It’s Not a Right, Democrats

    Westlake Legal Group gs-bernie-sanders-620x413 It’s Not a Right, Democrats the rich socialism rights property Politics Guns Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats Constitution Bill of Rights Beto O'Rourke Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Abortion

    Bernie Sanders by Gage Skidmore, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

    Americans have God-given rights that are outlined conveniently in a document appropriately called the “Bill of Rights.” It’s a list that essentially tells the government that it cannot deprive an American citizen of certain things or oblige certain things unless a strict set of requirements are met that allows a government body to deprive or take away said right.

    It’s a pretty simple document to follow and is pretty clear about what is and isn’t a right. According to the left, however, everything that their voting base wants, no matter how picayune, is a right.

    Abortion? That’s a right. Education, even into college? That’s a right too. Migrating here illegally? Also a right. Sen. Bernie Sanders alone seems to come up with a new right every day and throws them around like Oprah giving out free cars.

    Then we have failed Texas Senate candidate and failing 2020 Presidential candidate Robert “Beto” O’Rourke who is telling everyone that it’s a right to be able to live close to your work.

    Just real fast, let’s take a look at what rights we have in the Bill of Rights.

    I’m seeing the right to free speech and to practice whatever religion I please. I’m seeing the right to own a firearm and protection from being unreasonably searched, as well as due process.

    What I’m not seeing is the right to an abortion or higher education. I’m definitely not seeing the right to live in or around a rich neighborhood when I’m not rich myself.

    What rights we have are outlined clearly. Some things may be legal, but that does not make them rights. For instance, you can legally get an abortion, but you have no right to it. If a state wants to ban abortions, they can do that. However, a state cannot tell its residents that it can’t have a gun. They can complicate and restrict it, but they can’t ban ownership.

    This is the important thing to remember about rights. They’re a boundry for the government. It says the government cannot interfere or hamper the listed right and if and when a citizen needs to practice any given right, the government will oblige whether it likes it or not.

    In short, you cannot force the government to provide you with a place next to Rich Uncle Pennybags. It can legally provide you with one under various circumstances, but that doesn’t make it a right.

    So why are they saying these things are rights when they’re not? It’s multiple reasons.

    The first is that they believe they can get away with it because they’re pretty sure you haven’t read the bill of rights yourself, or they’re relying on the fact that you think they know how the Constitution works better than you do. In other words, they’re banking on ignorance they hope you have.

    I advise going through the Constitution. It’s an easy read.

    The second reason is that they’re hoping you’ll buy their “it’s a right” talk in order to convince you that they’re going to provide things that are being denied to you by those people, and “those people” can be whichever boogie man they need at the time. In O’Rourke’s video, you can see the role of the villain is played by “the rich.”

    So he wants you to believe that he’ll force the rich to back down from blocking your right to having a house near them. The truth is that the rich can’t stop you from practicing your right to have a house next to them because you don’t have a right to have a house next to them in the first place.

    It sure does sound heroic of him, though, doesn’t it? Almost as if he’s willing to fight for the little guy.

    And that brings me to reason three of why he’s telling you it’s a right. He wants you to believe he’s a man of good character who will stand up for the underprivileged. In fact, it’s a common thing among Democrats be it Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. They pretend to be champions of the downtrodden.

    They’re not. Sanders is a rich man who owns multiple homes despite his supposed love of socialism. Warren is an elitist whose lifestyle is far removed from the people she claims to be one with. O’Rourke actually has a history of screwing over the poor and taking their property away via eminent domain.

    For a guy who says living somewhere is a right, he sure seems willing to take it away from you if it’s beneficial to him.

    Look into what Democrats are promising you and you may be surprised with how much they’re lying to you. If you’re a little insulted, you have the right to be angry and give voice to that anger. I encourage it.

    The post It’s Not a Right, Democrats appeared first on RedState.

    Westlake Legal Group gs-beto-orourke-300x200 It’s Not a Right, Democrats the rich socialism rights property Politics Guns Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats Constitution Bill of Rights Beto O'Rourke Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception Abortion   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

    That Democratic Party Favorability Advantage Just Went Poof

    Westlake Legal Group Bernie-620x317 That Democratic Party Favorability Advantage Just Went Poof woke poll Politics leftist Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story favorability Elizabeth Warren Election donald trump democrats David Leonhardt Bernie Sanders 2020

    Some more moderate Democrats (well, moderate by today’s standards) have been sounding the alarm on this for a while. Their presidential candidates haven’t been listening.

    During the 2018 election, the Democrats enjoyed a sizable advantage in favorability among the electorate. We would eventually see that play out as the votes were cast, with a somewhat sizable blue wave sweeping over the country. Democrats retook the House with over 40 seat pickups and Republicans, while gaining seats in the Senate, didn’t get up to the 55 that looked possible earlier in the summer.

    Now, that favorability advantage is gone.

    As Ed Morrisey over at HotAir writes, this can be almost completely laid at the feet of the leftward lurch the 2020 Democrat presidential candidates have taken.

    What happened? Leonhardt reaches back to a July NPR/Marist poll to argue that the party’s progressives are pushing away from populism into straight-out socialism — and that voters won’t buy it. Decriminalizing the border and slavery reparations are now practically de rigueur for presidential hopefuls, but it runs right into a brick wall with the electorate:

    Westlake Legal Group nyt-npr-marist That Democratic Party Favorability Advantage Just Went Poof woke poll Politics leftist Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story favorability Elizabeth Warren Election donald trump democrats David Leonhardt Bernie Sanders 2020

    The simple answer is that the crazy things the left are pushing, the majority of Americans simply don’t support. Even something like “free public college” can only garner 51%, and that’s before it’s articulated that taxes will have to go up to pay for it.

    The support for the “Green New Deal” continues to baffle, but again, when polls ask about it in relation to the government control and cost, public support plummets for it.

    It’s still really, really early. Nothing we are seeing now is dispositive of what will happen in 2020. That includes polls that are both good and bad for Republicans. But, what this does show is that the strategy of preaching radical socialism isn’t working for Democrats. Their only real hope is that Biden somehow coasts to the nomination without his eye completely exploding next time.

    Here’s the reason this trend extremely important for Trump. The President is never going to garner 50+% favorability. He’s likely to never cross 50% approval outside of Rasmussen’s polling. The way Trump wins is how he won in 2016. He gets his opponent down in the mud and exposes them. If the Democratic party favorability is at parity with Republicans, that’s a huge advantage to Trump because it’s basically giving him a head start.

    If the nominee ends up being an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, Trump will immediately have the foil he needs to propel himself to reelection. Neither of them are going to tack to the center, as has been shown necessary in essentially every presidential race in the modern era. Of course, the stakes become much higher if it’s Warren and not Biden though. At that point, we enter Flight 93 election territory.

    ————————————————

    Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

    I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

    The post That Democratic Party Favorability Advantage Just Went Poof appeared first on RedState.

    Westlake Legal Group ElizabethWarrenAPimage-300x153 That Democratic Party Favorability Advantage Just Went Poof woke poll Politics leftist Joe Biden Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story favorability Elizabeth Warren Election donald trump democrats David Leonhardt Bernie Sanders 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

    There is a New Feminist Version of the Monopoly Game That Pays Female Players More Than the Males

    Westlake Legal Group Ms-Monopoly There is a New Feminist Version of the Monopoly Game That Pays Female Players More Than the Males The Sexes Social Justice Sex Discrimination Popular Culture political correctness pay inequality Gender Issues gender Front Page Stories Front Page female issues Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment Culture Capitalism Business & Economy board gamess Allow Media Exception

    promotional image via Hasbro

    Hasbro will address the Patriarchy by instilling female-privilege into its iconic game.

    In a move that supposedly will empower women and is not in any fashion whatsoever pandering, it has been announced that a new version of the generationally popular board game MONOPOLY is getting a makeover (unless, it is sexist to say so…) The new version is being dubbed “Ms. Monopoly’, and there will be new rules.

    One of America’s most recognizable board games is getting an upgrade. Hasbro is debuting a new game celebrating women’s empowerment — Ms. Monopoly, marking the first time in Monopoly history when a new mascot will be featured on the cover of the game. The twist? In Ms. Monopoly, female players will get more money.
    The most notable change is that when women pass GO they will receive a 20% increase over the male players, receiving $240.00 each time they pass, while men are paid at the standard $200 limit. In addition, other changes will be seen, such as instead of buying properties you will be buying inventions created by women.

    ‘It’s a fun new take on the game that creates a world where women have an advantage often enjoyed by men,” the company said in a press release. It seems a rather wrong message to think you are empowering girls who play by delivering the message they can only succeed if the standards are tilted to favor them. Nothing is being repaired by this rule change, because in the original game there was no gender pay imbalance — everyone received the same income and all players had an equal opportunity to succeed.

    Now the message to young females is they need to have a built-in advantage in order to succeed, and then deal with the resentment when they end up winning. It would be deeply instructive if one of the businesses that players could invest in was the Handsome Her Bakery. This was the Australiaan eatery that made global headlines when it was going to charge male customers eighteen percent more than women — and promptly went out of business. There is your teachable roll of the dice.

    Of course if you are going to insert social engineering into the rules that means that the exact same tactic can be used to undermine those same rules. The fix to any player who feels slighted by the gender dynamics simply has to declare that they self-identify as a female — and just that easy you have found yourself on the receiving end of more income!

    The post There is a New Feminist Version of the Monopoly Game That Pays Female Players More Than the Males appeared first on RedState.

    Westlake Legal Group Ms-Monopoly-300x192 There is a New Feminist Version of the Monopoly Game That Pays Female Players More Than the Males The Sexes Social Justice Sex Discrimination Popular Culture political correctness pay inequality Gender Issues gender Front Page Stories Front Page female issues Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment Culture Capitalism Business & Economy board gamess Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com