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 266)

NEW: Special Prosecutor Appointed to Investigate Jussie Smollett, Kim Foxx’s Handling of the Case

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-4-620x434 NEW: Special Prosecutor Appointed to Investigate Jussie Smollett, Kim Foxx’s Handling of the Case state attorney special prosecutor Re-Charged Politics Off the Hook Kim Foxx Jussie Smollett Judge Approved Jesse Jackson Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story corruption Chicago PD CBS Chicago

The Jussie Smollett case had fallen off the front pages over the past few months and it appeared that Kim Foxx was going to get away with her clearly corrupt handling of the situation.

For background on the whole saga, see here and here.

Things changed today though as Judge Michael Tommin approved an order to appoint a special prosecutor to look into not just Smollett, but also Foxx’s handling of the case.

If you click on the above images and read the critique by the judge, it’s not pretty. He’s clearly perturbed by what he sees as an unprecedented move by Foxx to drop all charges in the manner she did.

What this all means is two-fold.

First, Jussie Smollett could be recharged now. In fact, I’d expect that to happen as there was never any justification to let him off the hook. The claims of off the book “community service” were also nonsensical. In reality, he spent a day or two at Kim Foxx associate Jesse Jackson’s outfit “consulting” on their radio program. It was a joke.

Secondly, Kim Foxx is in hot water now. In the above approval letter, the judge specifically notes that Foxx likely broke the law by recusing herself and then not appointing a special prosecutor. Furthermore, he notes that the way she did hand off the case, i.e. to her in-office colleague she still had control over, was not supposed to even be possible under current law. She did it anyway.

I actually speculated months ago that this could be an issue for Foxx. A lot of Twitter lawyers were saying she was in the clear but I never thought it made sense. If the law mandates a special counsel after recusal, then how could she come back and say “well, I wasn’t really recused” to avoid responsibility under the law? That would make the entire statue ineffectual in all situations and pointless.

We’ll see where this goes but I’m assuming there are a lot of happy people within the Chicago PD today.

————————————————-

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 NEW: Special Prosecutor Appointed to Investigate Jussie Smollett, Kim Foxx’s Handling of the Case appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group jussie-smollett-sunglasses-scarf-cropped-SCREENSHOT-300x148 NEW: Special Prosecutor Appointed to Investigate Jussie Smollett, Kim Foxx’s Handling of the Case state attorney special prosecutor Re-Charged Politics Off the Hook Kim Foxx Jussie Smollett Judge Approved Jesse Jackson Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story corruption Chicago PD CBS Chicago  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Britain’s NHS Is Trying to Force a Mentally Ill Woman to Abort Her 22-Week Baby for Her ‘Own Good’

Westlake Legal Group 20-week_fetus Britain’s NHS Is Trying to Force a Mentally Ill Woman to Abort Her 22-Week Baby for Her ‘Own Good’ United Kingdom religious grounds prolife Nigerian NHS mentally ill woman Igbo Front Page Stories Forced Abortion Featured Story catholic Abortion

While the fight for life has made major gains here in the United States, in other parts of the West, “free” citizens face being forced into abortions by the state for their own “health”.

In the U.K., doctors on behalf of the National Healthcare Service (NHS) have petitioned a judge (Mrs. Justice Lieven) to give them permission to perform an abortion on a young mentally ill woman.

The woman (her name has been withheld for legal reasons) is in her 20’s and is 22 weeks pregnant. Specialists claim she has a ‘moderately severe’ learning disorder and a ‘mood disorder’, saying she would not have the mental capacity to recover properly from giving birth.

The justification for forced abortion took an even creepier turn with NHS lawyers claiming that not only would it be difficult for the woman to recover physically but it would be harder on her mental state to experience separation from her baby than it would to simply terminate the life. From the Daily Mail:

Barrister Fiona Paterson, who is leading the trust’s legal team, told Mrs Justice Lieven that specialists thought a termination would be in the woman’s best interests.

‘(Her) treating clinicians consider that on balance, a termination is in her best interests,’ she said, in a written case outline.

‘In broad terms (they) believe that as a result of her learning disabilities, (she) would find labour very difficult to tolerate and the recovery from a Caesarean section very challenging.

‘(They) consider that (she) is likely to find the loss of a pregnancy easier to recover from than separation from the baby if he or she is taken into care.

Let’s ponder this argument for one moment. The government of one of the wealthiest, most influential ‘free’ nations in the world thinks it would be better for a mother to kill her baby before it’s born rather than suffer the emotional trauma of the baby possibly being removed from her care and placed in fostering.

What is worse, the woman’s mother has begged the NHS to allow her daughter to carry the child to term saying she would raise the baby herself. She also has said forcing her daughter into abortion would violate her religious beliefs, both as a Roman Catholic and a member of the Nigerian Igbo community.

That last identifier is enough to make one’s ears prick up. At this very moment, the United Kingdom government is deciding whether or not they will let a Black woman give birth to her Black child, or if they will eliminate yet another minority life before it begins.

Chilling.

The woman’s lawyers claim the NHS has not met the standard of proof to force an abortion.

Barrister Susanna Rickard, who is leading the woman’s legal team, said abortion did not appear to be in her best interests.

Barrister John McKendrick QC, who is leading the woman’s mother’s legal team, suggested that doctors were underestimating the woman’s abilities.

‘It is accepted that (the woman) lacks capacity to conduct these proceedings and to make a decision in respect of whether or not to consent to a termination and associated ancillary treatment,’ he told the judge in a written case outline.

‘That being said, (her mother) considers that the applicant has underestimated (her) ability and understanding, and that more weight should be place on her wishes and feelings.’

He added: ‘Termination is not in (the woman’s) best interests.’

Mr McKendrick said the judge had ‘no proper evidence’ to show that allowing the pregnancy to continue would put the woman’s life or long-term health at grave risk.

‘The applicants have failed to carry out a proper best interests analysis,’ he said.

‘Their evidence is premised on a narrow clinical view. The application must be dismissed,’ he added.

While the NHS “bosses” – as they’re called…creepily – say they don’t want the woman to suffer the trauma of becoming a mother they have given no thought to what the trauma of suddenly being forced to abort her growing child might do. She’s already 22 weeks pregnant. At 22 weeks a baby is already nearly fully developed and just growing. Mom is showing quite prominently. Here’s a picture of a fetus at just 16 weeks.

Westlake Legal Group Ultrasound-Baby-in-4th-month-620x444 Britain’s NHS Is Trying to Force a Mentally Ill Woman to Abort Her 22-Week Baby for Her ‘Own Good’ United Kingdom religious grounds prolife Nigerian NHS mentally ill woman Igbo Front Page Stories Forced Abortion Featured Story catholic Abortion

At this point in her pregnancy, the woman in question will have a significant “baby bump”. She’ll be feeling movement, kicks, perhaps even hiccups. She will be very much aware of the life inside her. The powers that be at the NHS must be monsters or delusional to believe a woman carrying a baby at that stage of development would not be severely traumatized by its sudden and violent removal.

It is almost too much to dwell on.

The U.K. is no stranger to such controversy. The NHS has a terrifying record when it comes to the lives of children. Little Alfie Evans died while legally chained to the NHS after British courts not only denied the sick child continuing life support but denied his parents the right to take him to another country for treatment at their own cost. They weren’t even allowed to take Alfie with them so he could die at home.

The next time a European sounds perplexed at our ongoing division over abortion in this country, remind them that this is what happens when you stop fighting for life. The norm shifts and suddenly reasonable people start thinking it is perfectly fine for a government to decide who can and cannot have children.

Terrifying.

The post Britain’s NHS Is Trying to Force a Mentally Ill Woman to Abort Her 22-Week Baby for Her ‘Own Good’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Ultrasound-Baby-in-4th-month-300x215 Britain’s NHS Is Trying to Force a Mentally Ill Woman to Abort Her 22-Week Baby for Her ‘Own Good’ United Kingdom religious grounds prolife Nigerian NHS mentally ill woman Igbo Front Page Stories Forced Abortion Featured Story catholic Abortion  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Friday Humor: Dan Crenshaw Weighs in on Madonna’s New Eye Patch After Being Asked Who Wore It Better

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-1-2-620x317 Friday Humor: Dan Crenshaw Weighs in on Madonna’s New Eye Patch After Being Asked Who Wore It Better washington D.C. Texas Social Media North Carolina Madonna Hollywood Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Allow Media Exception

Earlier this week, Red State‘s Alex Parker wrote about how left-wing pop star Madonna has a game plan for convincing the Pope that he and the Catholic Church are wrong about abortion.

Here’s a brief recap of what the pro-choice “Material Girl” singer had to say in a recent interview:

Madonna revealed she would like a meeting with Pope Francis in a wide-ranging interview with Andrew Denton, which aired on Tuesday night.

In a candid episode of Andrew Denton’s Interview, the 60-year-old told the Australian journalist that she’d be interested in sitting down with the head of the Catholic Church at the Vatican to discuss what Jesus thought about women’s rights.

If she had a chance to speak to the pope, Madonna said she’d ask: ‘Let’s talk about Jesus’ point of view about women. Let’s talk about it.’

‘What do you really think he thought of women? And don’t you think Jesus would agree that a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body?’

While what she said during the interview certainly got people’s attention, something else from the interview also got people talking : Her eye patch:

This prompted Texan News writer Holly Hansen to ask a very important question:

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX-2) saw the tweet, and humorously responded:

The reason Madonna is wearing the eye patch is not due to any type of medical issue. She’s wearing it as a fashion statement which, according to Yahoo News, “is part of the Madame X persona she created for [her new] album.”

Crenshaw is a former Navy SEAL who lost his right eye after an IED explosion in Afghanistan in 2012.

The freshman Congressman has not been shy about talking about his eye patch and the glass eye he wears since being elected to the House.

He tweeted this picture of a new eye patch he debuted at the State of the Union back in February:

Perhaps the biggest high-profile moment where his eye patch took center stage was in March, when he took it off to show “Captain America” star Chris Evans what was underneath it:

“A VERY cool use of vibranium,” Evans tweeted back to him.

As to the question of who wore their eye patches better – Madonna or Crenshaw – I think there is a very clear winner here, but we’ll leave it up to the readers to decide.

—————–
—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 Friday Humor: Dan Crenshaw Weighs in on Madonna’s New Eye Patch After Being Asked Who Wore It Better appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-1-2-300x153 Friday Humor: Dan Crenshaw Weighs in on Madonna’s New Eye Patch After Being Asked Who Wore It Better washington D.C. Texas Social Media North Carolina Madonna Hollywood Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Entertainment Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Jerry Nadler Waddles Into Hearing, Calls Hope Hicks “Ms. Lewandowski” Three Times

Westlake Legal Group hope-hicks-620x367 Jerry Nadler Waddles Into Hearing, Calls Hope Hicks “Ms. Lewandowski” Three Times Politics partisan Ms. Lewandowski media bias judiciary committee john harwood Jerry Nadler Hope Hicks Glenn Thrush Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story farce Excuses democrats

Jerry Nadler is the Chariman of the House Judiciary Committee and he’s currently leading what can only be described as a clown show of an investigation involving the President and his associates. After saying the Mueller report would be the final word, he and other Democrats have decided they want a do-over, which means dragging everyone who’s already been interviewed multiple times back in front of Congress for no real reason whatsoever.

This had Nadler waddling into yet another “hearing,” this time with former Trump associate Hope Hicks being grilled.

And when I saw waddled, I mean that quite literally.

As you can see, his pants have reached new heights. At this rate, he’s going to eventually suffocate before leaving the house.

In the hearing, you got your typical nonsense, except the White House isn’t playing games anymore. That means they are claiming privilege over just about anything they legally can. Most executive communications within the White House in an official capacity were objected to.

For some reason, Jerry Nadler couldn’t seem to get Ms. Hicks’ name correct though.

For the record, Hope Hicks has never been “Ms. Lewandowski.” Furthermore, it’s not even confirmed she and Corey Lewandowski were ever in a relationship. That rumor comes from Michael Wolfe’s garbage dump of a discredited book that came out in years past. Even still, the details involved in those rumors are such that calling Hicks “Ms. Lewandowski” strikes even deeper than it might otherwise.

There are only two explanations here. Nadler is either senile or rabidly sexist, neither of which is much of an excuse given his position.

Because Nadler is a Democrat though, his defenders in the media ran to try to clean up his mess.

How does Harwood know? Would he be so understanding if Donald Trump called a woman the wrong name three times in a row? I’m going to say no with near 100% confidence.

Accused sexual assaulter Glenn Thrush also chimed in.

So Nadler is just incompetent then? That’s not much of a defense.

If he’s so far gone that he can’t get someone’s name right multiple times in an official proceeding, instead using a name that’s never existed in relation to Ms. Hicks, perhaps he shouldn’t be chairing a committee.

Thrush then goes on to blame health issues.

Again, if he’s got health issues this serious, what’s he doing in a leadership position?

The fact is that has any Republican had done this, there’d be three to four days of constant outrage from the mainstream media in response. But because it’s Jerry Nadler, it gets excused and brushed aside.

This entire investigation is a complete joke and deserves to be treated as such. There is nothing new to be gleaned from interviewing the same people over and over, asking the same questions, and getting the same answers. Time to end this farce and move on. All the Democrats are doing is trying to drag this out into late 2020 to affect the election. That’s a complete abuse of their power and if we had any honest brokers at the traditional press outlets, they’d be calling all this out.

————————————————-

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 Jerry Nadler Waddles Into Hearing, Calls Hope Hicks “Ms. Lewandowski” Three Times appeared first on RedState.

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

Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition

Westlake Legal Group combined-logo-620x333 Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

An exclusive podcast from RedState about the connections of politics and entertainment, covering the stories from Burbank to The Beltway.

Our tech issues continue to refine (they’re good, they’re bad, then they’re good again. Just like us!) but always manageable, so thanks much for sticking with us as we grow.

This week, Brad lives us to his Twitter nom de plume (MartiniShark — one day he may live up to the second half of that name, but I’m not sure we want that to happen) by taking advantage of International Martini Day and making one on-air.

We also get into Sarah’s review of “FBI Lovebirds: Undercovers,” a hilarious take on the Lisa Page/Peter Strzok affair that was recorded at the Reagan Building in downtown DC.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-06-14-at-1.38.13-PM-620x411 Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

Actors Dean Cain and Kristy Swanson play Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in the production “FBI Lovebirds: Undercovers” on July 13, 2019 in Washington, DC.

And Brad’s joy at discovering the marketing jabbing going on between the film “Child’s Play” and the new “Toy Story” movie, which opened at the same time.

Westlake Legal Group Dead-dino-Childs-play-620x860 Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

Westlake Legal Group Woodys-down-Childs-play-620x882 Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

Other topics this week include:

  • Acosta tries to challenge Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson to meet him on the playground after school
  • Black southern Democrats break ranks with pro-aborts
  • Kyle Kashuv learns a lesson about unforgiveness
  • Sen. David Perdue is serious about draining the swamp
  • CNN owns the airports

Come along and enjoy a Friday drive-time listen!

Listen to “Marble Halls & Silver Screens Ep. 74” on Spreaker.

_________________________
for more insightful ridiculousness, follow us:
Podcast: @Lee_Slager
Sarah: @Sarailola
Brad: @MartiniShark

The post Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group combined-logo-300x161 Marble Halls & Silver Screens Podcast Ep. 74 — The International Martini Day Edition Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

SF School Moves to Destroy Masterful Paintings of George Washington Because They’re Traumatizing. So is the Price

Westlake Legal Group mt-vernon-george-washington-mural-SCREENSHOT-620x302 SF School Moves to Destroy Masterful Paintings of George Washington Because They’re Traumatizing. So is the Price westward vision Victor Arnautoff Uncategorized the life of washington Social Justice San Francisco mt. vernon History george washington high school Front Page Stories Featured Story Culture California Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from tweet, https://twitter.com/AbromeEd/status/1129793453146214401?]

 

In early May, RedState’s Sister Toldjah covered the controversy surrounding two George Washington murals at a high school in San Francisco. The images of America’s first president were reportedly leaving black and American Indian students “traumatized.”

EGAD!

Well, now the San Francisco Unified School District’s figuring out how much it’ll cost to cover up the horrifying images, so as to spare students from devastating emotional damage.

And sparin’ ’em ain’t cheap: Reason Magazine reports the school system will meet next week to discuss three options for ruining — I mean, accomplishing justice about — “The Life of Washington” series.

Their choices:

1) Paint over it for $600,000

2) Hide it behind paneling for $875,000

3) Hide it behind curtains for $300,000

Government at work, ladies and gentlemen.

Hold on a sec…

Dear San Francisco,

I’ll gladly cover the mural for the cost of Walmart spray paint plus my fee of only $275,000.

You’re welcome.

$600,000 could could be used to do a lot of things.

But, apparently, the school board has no choice.

The art series — which was painted by Russian-Armenia Victor Arnautoff in 1936 — was actually meant to illustrate history as messy. Therefore, it portrays George working his slaves and sending out men to take control of Indian lands.

And that ain’t gettin’ it with 2019.

The school district put together a group called the Reflection and Action Group to preside over the issue, and here’s what they determined:

“We come to these recommendations due to the continued historical and current trauma of Native Americans and African Americans with these depictions in the mural that glorifies slavery, genocide, colonization, manifest destiny, white supremacy, oppression, etc. This mural doesn’t represent SFUSD values of social justice, diversity, united, student-centered. It’s not student-centered if it’s focused on the legacy of artists, rather than the experience of the students. If we consider the SFUSD equity definition, the “low” mural glorifies oppression instead of eliminating it. It also perpetuates bias through stereotypes rather than ending bias. It has nothing to do with equity or inclusion at all. The impact of this mural is greater than its intent ever was. It’s not a counter-narrative if [the mural] traumatizes students and community members.”

So…history is too traumatic for…people who are, presumably, taking classes in history?

Don’t worry, though: Social justice is eduction’s Job 1.

To be fair, the paintings do indeed show an Indian man on the ground, as though trampled by white men taking his land. And there is certainly a depiction of slavery.

But should they be destroyed? Are they worthy reminders of our past?

The series, it should be noted, has definite artistic worth:

When Arnautoff created the George Washington mural series, he used the rare buon fresco process, painting with earth-tone pigments directly onto the building’s wet plaster before it dried. The artist covered about nine feet of wall per day, and worked ten to twelve hours per day.

“Mr. Arnautoff had to follow right behind the plasterers, and a scene, once begun, had to be completed that same day, in order that the walls did not dry. Carpenters and plasterers worked all around the building, while Mr. Arnautoff was above on a scaffold,” according to outsidelands.org.

It took ten months to complete the mural series. At the time of its completion, Arnautoff’s George Washington murals were the largest WPA-funded, single-artist mural suite on the Pacific Coast.

For many years in American schools, students were told to sit down and shut up and obey the rules. These days, schools are “student-centered.”

Are we better off? Personally, the mural issue aside, I think not.

Either way, students in San Fran have an even bigger problem: The school where the ghastly murals must be destroyed is called George Washington High School.

Maybe they shoulda started with the name.

Oh — and in case you’re stumped by the price tag, here’s an explanation from Reason:

[I]f you’re wondering why it would cost several hundred thousand dollars to get rid of the [murals], here’s your answer: Officials are required to conduct environmental impact reports before they take any action.

Just nine years ago, by the way, the SF Arts Commission and SF Museum of Modern Art were working to restore the murals.

Nice.

-ALEX

 

See 3 more pieces from me:

Women’s Olympic Medalist Battles The IAFF In Court – The Planet’s Largest Sports Governing Body Insists He’s A Dude

Madonna Wants To Meet With The Pope & Make Him Pro-Choice. She Lays Out Her Simple Plan. Presto-Change-O

Newly Elected Colorado Politician Calls For A Communist Revolution – ‘By Any Means Necessary’

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 SF School Moves to Destroy Masterful Paintings of George Washington Because They’re Traumatizing. So is the Price appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group mt-vernon-george-washington-mural-SCREENSHOT-300x146 SF School Moves to Destroy Masterful Paintings of George Washington Because They’re Traumatizing. So is the Price westward vision Victor Arnautoff Uncategorized the life of washington Social Justice San Francisco mt. vernon History george washington high school Front Page Stories Featured Story Culture California Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Video: Ben Sasse Gives Impassioned Floor Speech on the Left’s Abortion Extremism, Torches Gillibrand’s Absolutism

Westlake Legal Group BenSasseSenate-620x366 Video: Ben Sasse Gives Impassioned Floor Speech on the Left’s Abortion Extremism, Torches Gillibrand’s Absolutism washington D.C. progressives Pro-Life Politics planned parenthood North Carolina Nebraska Kirsten Gillibrand Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture & Faith Culture Conservatives Congress Campaigns Ben Sasse Allow Media Exception Abortion 2020 Elections 2020

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) speaks on the floor of the U.S. Senate – 6/21/19. Screen grab via Sasse’s You Tube channel.

In the aftermath of the Democratic party’s disturbing far leftward lurch on abortion this year, including supporting allowing babies who survive botched abortions to die, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) took to the floor of the U.S. Senate Thursday to decry their position, and note how out of touch they’d become with the American people.

Noting that several of the Democratic candidates for president would be appearing this weekend at a Planned Parenthood forum in South Carolina, Sasse said that the Democratic party has become more extreme over the years on abortion, going from advocating for “safe, legal, and rare” to free abortions on demand, and comparing pro-lifers to racists and anti-Semitics:

And in fact, it’s actually worse than this – because the position of every senator running for the Democratic nomination, and at least one governor, is that a living, breathing baby who survives an abortion procedure can be left to die after birth. All seven senators running for the Democratic presidential nomination voted against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act earlier this year, and Governor Bullock, of Montana, vetoed a state-level version of the bill, just before he entered the race. So as things currently stand, it’s entirely possible that the Democratic nominee for the highest office in our land in 2020 will be publicly agnostic about the moral status of post-abortion infanticide. Morally agnostic about post-abortion infanticide.

[…]

As Democrats’ abortion positions have become more extreme, they have not sought to even persuade fellow citizens with whom they disagree. Rather, they have become openly hostile to Americans who disagree on this great moral challenge. My colleague from New York, for instance, Senator Gillibrand — who will be attending this weekend’s forum in South Carolina — made her feelings clear earlier this month in an interview with the Des Moines Register. In promising that she would only appoint judges who would uphold Roe v. Wade, here’s what she said. Listen to this quote:

“I think there are some issues that have such moral clarity that we have as a society decided that the other side is not acceptable. Imagine saying that it’s okay to appoint a judge who’s racist or anti-Semitic or homophobic. . . .

This is not an issue where there is a fair other side. There is no moral equivalency when you come to racism, and I do not believe there is a moral equivalency when it comes to changing laws that deny women reproductive freedom.”

After pointing out how outside of the mainstream Gillibrand’s stance on abortion is, Sasse went on to talk about the racist origins of Planned Parenthood – specifically its founder Margaret Sanger, who was a eugenicist. Sasse noted that the ugly eugenics and racism of the abortion movement did not die out with Sanger, but is in fact still very much a part of it today:

We could also note that it’s in part because of this ugly history that black women in America are three and a half times more likely to have an abortion than white women. And in some parts of Senator Gillibrand’s home state, black children are actually more likely to be aborted than to be carried to term. Or we could point to the continued eugenic use of abortion. For example, to kill children who have non-life-threatening diseases. In the United States today, two-thirds of all babies in the womb who are found to have down syndrome are aborted. Two-thirds of all babies found to have down syndrome in the U.S. are now aborted. And in some parts of Europe the rate is pushing 100% and there are public ad campaigns in two nations in Europe to celebrate the fact that they’ve gotten rid of all of their down syndrome babies.

But instead of going point by point, I’ll just recommend that anyone who wants to better understand this disturbing history should read Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky last month, which came down late last month. I guess that, according to my Senate colleague, Justice Thomas is one of those racists – those notorious pro-life racists that are stalking America.

Life News HQ has the full transcript of the speech, which you can read here. You can also watch it below:

Sasse has a 100% rating with the National Right to Life, and 0% ratings with both Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.

—————–
—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 Video: Ben Sasse Gives Impassioned Floor Speech on the Left’s Abortion Extremism, Torches Gillibrand’s Absolutism appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group BenSasseSenate-300x177 Video: Ben Sasse Gives Impassioned Floor Speech on the Left’s Abortion Extremism, Torches Gillibrand’s Absolutism washington D.C. progressives Pro-Life Politics planned parenthood North Carolina Nebraska Kirsten Gillibrand Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture & Faith Culture Conservatives Congress Campaigns Ben Sasse Allow Media Exception Abortion 2020 Elections 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Top House Democrat James Clyburn Accuses Pelosi, Democrats of “Tokenism”

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-9-620x317 Top House Democrat James Clyburn Accuses Pelosi, Democrats of “Tokenism” Tokenism steny hoyer rashida tlaib Politics Nancy Pelosi James Clyburn Inter-sectionalism infighting Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats Democrat House civil war AOC

Here’s your daily dose of evidence that the Democrat party is burning itself down over inter-sectionalism.

Rep. James Clyburn rcently did an interview with the Wall Street Journal where he took some shots at Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, specifically over the racial makeup of leadership and how it got that way.

Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Hoyer were unopposed in the House Democratic caucus but Mr. Clyburn got a challenge from Rep. Diana DeGette (D., Colo.), who eventually stepped aside. Mr. Clyburn ended up on the ballot unopposed but he still resents the ordeal. Some of his critics looked at him as a “figurehead,” he says, which he effectively took as a racial slur—that he was in Mrs. Pelosi’s inner circle only because of his race.

Mr. Clyburn said he brings something to the table. “I’ve always managed a fully-integrated staff. Pelosi doesn’t have that experience, nor does Hoyer have that experience. To them, tokenism is all right with them,” he said.

Clyburn took offense to the fact that Pelosi called in the fix for him in 2007. His opponent for his eventual leadership role dropped out, leaving Clyburn to run unopposed. Why? Because Pelosi wanted a black Representative in a leadership position. It also gave the appearance that he Clyburn couldn’t win on the merits and he didn’t like that. I can actually understand his thinking on some level.

To further push the point, Clyburn then goes right at Pelosi and Hoyer.

What does he mean by tokenism? “What I mean is, how many black folks are on Hoyer’s staff?”

He added: “I’m going to let you check it out.”

Have Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Hoyer been told they should hire more black people? “I don’t have to tell them,” Mr. Clyburn said. “They’re grown people. They can read. They can see.”

Clyburn would then go on to “clarify” his remarks when it became clear he had went too far.

“I did not intend anything as any criticism of Steny or Nancy, because I don’t think they deserve to be criticized on hiring practices,” Mr. Clyburn said. “Nancy’s got a whole lot of black folks on her staff.” (Mr. Clyburn’s office is 58% black, according to a spokeswoman.)

The larger point here is the back-biting taking place within the Democrat party, not whether Clyburn is correct about the racial makeup of Pelosi’s staff. The fact that they are even sniping over such things shows the problems they are dealing with. There’s an older guard who simply didn’t see racial quotas on their staffs as important while the new left is demanding such things not just on the Hill, but in all manner of corporate and other private settings.

While Clyburn eventually backed down here, would AOC back down in a similar situation? What about Ilhan Omar? Recent history says they’d simply double and triple down. In fact, Rashida Tlaib has already accused House Democrats of tokenism while complaining about her lack of standing. To any normal person, a freshman Representative would be expected to have little to no say in policy direction but the most radical elements of the Democrat party do not care about that. They feel entitled to it.

Pelosi is probably glad on some level that this will likely be her last stint. Whoever gets the job as Speaker (or hopefully Minority Leader) in her party next is going to have an inter-sectional mess on his or her hands.

————————————————-

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 Top House Democrat James Clyburn Accuses Pelosi, Democrats of “Tokenism” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group james-clyburn-300x200 Top House Democrat James Clyburn Accuses Pelosi, Democrats of “Tokenism” Tokenism steny hoyer rashida tlaib Politics Nancy Pelosi James Clyburn Inter-sectionalism infighting Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats Democrat House civil war AOC  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

News of a Third Scope Memo Emerges; Why Is No One Talking About The Role Of The Conflicted Rod Rosenstein?

Westlake Legal Group ap-rod-rosenstein-620x413 News of a Third Scope Memo Emerges; Why Is No One Talking About The Role Of The Conflicted Rod Rosenstein? Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

Deputy Attorney General-designate, federal prosecutor Rod Rosenstein, listens on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 7, 2017, during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

 

The Washington Examiner’s Byron York reported the existence of a third scope memo, signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on October 20, 2017.

The first memo, the letter which appointed Robert Mueller to the Special Counsel and outlined his mission in general terms was released to the public and can be viewed here. Mueller was authorized to investigate the following:

i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; [and] iii) any other matters within the scope of [obstruction of justice laws].

The second scope memo was released in heavily redacted form during the Paul Manafort trial in April 2018 and can be viewed here. The redacted version authorized Mueller “to investigate Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election and related matters.”

In addition to addressing allegations against Paul Manafort, the second scope memo authorizes the Special Counsel to investigate “four sets of allegations” against former national security adviser Michael Flynn. “It also granted Mueller approval to investigate whether Papadopoulos, another Trump aide, was working as an agent for Israel.”

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) recently saw an  unredacted copy of this document. Although he couldn’t disclose any details, he said, “I was finally able to see the scope memo and remember, I had these concerns that it was based upon the Steele dossier and look, I can’t talk about what’s in there, but we know from what Judge Sullivan put out. We know that it was probably largely based on the Steele dossier.”

Byron York writes that the DOJ recently provided access to several members of Congress to a third scope memo, written by Rosenstein and dated October 20, 2017. According to York:

At the moment, the third scope memo, like most of the second scope memo, remains a secret. Mueller included a brief description of it in his report, revealing that Rosenstein reauthorized him to investigate Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, and Roger Stone “as part of a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.” But the report, as released, blacked out other names on the grounds of “personal privacy.” It is not clear what parts of the investigation they represented, and it is not clear why a third scope memo was necessary in the first place.

Most of all, it is not clear whether all that secrecy is warranted. Perhaps the memos concern matters that are still ongoing that need to remain under wraps. On the other hand, Mueller announced that his investigation into conspiracy and coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign — the core area of his jurisdiction — was over and done. “The office has concluded its investigation into links and coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign,” the Mueller report said.

It was Rosenstein’s role to supervise the activities of the Special Counsel, and his apparent submission to Mueller suggests that Mueller was actually driving the bus.

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last summer that, at the time Rosenstein appointed Mueller to the Special Counsel in May 2017, the FBI had found no evidence that Trump had colluded with the Russians to win the presidency. The ten-month FBI counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign had been unable to find evidence of collusion.

Why then did Rod Rosenstein find it necessary to appoint a Special Counsel at all?

Why, of all people, did he choose the highly conflicted Robert Mueller?  There were three valid reasons why Mueller was a poor choice:

According to Special Counsel regulations, the Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government. Robert Mueller spent his entire life in U.S. government. He was the quintessential Washington insider.

He had interviewed with President Trump to return to his old position of FBI Director and was rejected the day before Rosenstein appointed him.

There was bad blood between Mueller and Trump stemming from a years prior dispute over a refund for a club membership.

I wrote a post entitled, “https://www.redstate.com/diary/ElizabethVaughn/2018/07/26/rod-rosenstein-major-conflicts-interest-trump-collusion-case-–-signature-fisa-app-latest/,” in which I detailed the reasons why he should have recused himself from this case. For starters, he had signed off on the last FISA Court application for a Carter Page surveillance warrant. Throughout the 2018 Congressional investigations, Rosenstein stalled and/or refused to provide DOJ/FBI documents the committees had requested. At one point, House Republicans filed articles of impeachment against him. When questioned about this development, Rosenstein said “The DOJ won’t be extorted by  Congress.” It sure appeared as if he were protecting someone. And, there were other very compelling reasons.

1. In May 2017, Rosenstein wrote the memo outlining the case for firing FBI Director James Comey. Shortly after Trump fired Comey, Rosenstein appointed his mentor and friend, Robert Mueller, to head the investigation of Trump’s Russia collusion.

2. Rush Limbaugh reminds us that Rod Rosenstein was on the prosecution team that fully exonerated Hillary Clinton in the Whitewater scandal (and both Clintons in the Travelgate and Filegate scandals). Shortly after Rod Rosenstein cleared Hillary, his wife, Lisa Barsoomian, represented Bill Clinton in a 1998-99 civil case in federal court.

3. Limbaugh also points out that Rosenstein gave Mueller “https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/03/20/rod-rosensteins-clinton-connection/” in his investigation of Trump, which is not allowed under DOJ regulations. “DOJ regulations require that a crime be named and that is what the special counsel shall pursue and, if during said investigation, the special counsel encounters something else that is not within the purview of the crime being investigated, he’s got to go back to the person who appointed him and seek permission to add this newly discovered crime to the investigation. None of that has happened.”

4. Rosenstein signed off on the raid of  Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen’s office, home and hotel room in April, an incident which infuriated the President. Some believe this raid, particularly the manner in which it was carried out, was a calculated move intended to provoke Trump into firing Mueller.

The former DAG has major conflicts of interest and should have recused himself from the beginning.

Rosenstein is the keeper of the secrets who knows where all the bodies are buried. He knows this because he was in on it.

The post News of a Third Scope Memo Emerges; Why Is No One Talking About The Role Of The Conflicted Rod Rosenstein? appeared first on RedState.

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

The Media’s Turn On Joe Biden Is Complete, But Will The Voters Take Heed?

Westlake Legal Group bidendummy-620x388 The Media’s Turn On Joe Biden Is Complete, But Will The Voters Take Heed? Social Media Polling networks Media Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump Allow Media Exception agenda setting 2020

Over the past few days, what we’ve seen is nothing short of a full-on media dogpile on Joe Biden.

His statements on James Eastland, a segregationist he served in the Senate with, were just the start. Then, it turned into a public feud with Corey Booker, who is also a candidate in the Democratic primary.

And now, we have stories with staffers saying they tried to warn Biden about making these statements and keeping him from making other problematic gaffes, more on his time with racists and segregationists in Washington, and even a piece at POLITICO titled “Grandpa Simpson runs for president.

As thunderbolts crash around him, Joe Biden is facing an urgent question: What exactly is the rationale for his presidential candidacy?

The answers given by Biden sympathizers usually are rooted in character and personal history. Here is a decent man who has lived long and seen a lot, through setbacks and tragedy, and knows enough to understand and defend the timeless virtues that are so absent but also so needed in modern Washington. Late in life, the man and moment are in harmony at last for a heroic final chapter.

The hope is that voters will embrace Biden as a kind of American Churchill.

The past 24 hours raise, not for the first time, a more painful possibility: Grampa Simpson is running for president.

While it’s nice to see it happen to a Democrat for a change, it does raise some very interesting questions about the effect the media’s coverage will have on the voters. It’s a question that is being raised by some right-leaning elections analysts on Twitter, many of whom were also burned by the “Hillary Clinton is gonna win” polling of 2016.

As I’ve explained before, much of the mainstream media operates under a theory in the mass communications world that states the goal of the media is to set the agenda for the day through their coverage. They believe it is their job to tell us what’s important and what’s not. This is done in many ways, starting with the stories that lead the newscast and the stories that barely get mentioned. Then comes the framing of the story, the angle they take to tell it, and other editorial decisions like that.

Finally, it’s the presentation – how it all comes together.

At least, that is how it’s supposed to be. And, in fact, if you look at the leaked internal polling and the job approval polling for Trump, it is clear that the public does not seem to like him. When that polling comes out, it’s a major story. “Nobody likes Trump!” they scream.

But didn’t they say the same thing in 2016? The national polling showed Hillary would win. In fact, the percentages ended up being close to right. The problem is that no one focused on the state-level polling, and no one really got a feel of how the actual voters felt. We only knew what the numbers suggested.

So… what happened? Did the polls lie? I don’t think so, but I do think that polls focused on the wrong questions. It wasn’t a matter of whether or not you liked Trump over Hillary, but whether people were happy where the country was at the time – a time when Democrats ran it.

The answer, as it turned out, was “No.” And Trump won the election.

So the media’s narrative didn’t prevail there. And, in fact, people are still answering that question in the polling, just in a different way.

If you look at the RealClearPolitics average of the polling on the direction of the country, you see that way more people disapprove of the direction we’re headed than approve. But, if you look at the polling on Trump’s job approval, it’s not as bad – he’s holding his head above 50 percent for much of the polling that’s available.

Breaking down the job approval, you see that job approval on foreign policy is about as bad as the direction of the country polling. However, job approval on the economy is on top of the disapproval. When you have a nation of several million, and only a few of those million watch cable news and get their information from the agenda-setting networks, some of the messages won’t reach everyone.

But, the ability to get a job when you couldn’t before, get a bigger tax refund, pay less in interest, etc. does reach many millions more people. The media’s narrative doesn’t have that much of an impact when people can respond with “Yeah… but things for me are better than they were before him.” That is going to mean something over the next couple of years.

That’s why I have to wonder what the impact of Biden’s gaffes will be now. I’m not saying he won’t take a hit, but I don’t think it’s going to be as pronounced as the media are trying to make it out to be. Talking about how closely he worked with segregationists isn’t a good look, and people will not like that he’s bragging about it. Biden will see a gradual decline, but will still be a player in this primary as long as he wants to be, regardless of what the media class wants.

I have a hard time buying into the idea that the media’s ability to set the tone of the political debate is as strong as it was before. It still has some impact, but other media – partisan, social, etc. – are able to soften the blow of the bad news and pump up the good news (and vice versa!) with more ease than they had prior to, say, the Obama Administration.

That is going to mean something in 2020, but I don’t think many have figured that out yet.

The post The Media’s Turn On Joe Biden Is Complete, But Will The Voters Take Heed? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group bidendummy-300x188 The Media’s Turn On Joe Biden Is Complete, But Will The Voters Take Heed? Social Media Polling networks Media Joe Biden Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump Allow Media Exception agenda setting 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com