Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Category Archives: Politics

Cheney Calls Trump “Domestic Threat,” Sealing Her fate in Wyoming’s Upcoming Primary

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, June 30, 2022:  

In a speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum on Wednesday, Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney sealed her fate in Wyoming’s upcoming primary in August:

We are confronting a domestic threat we have never faced before. And that is a former president who is attempting to unravel the foundations of our constitutional republic.


And he is aided by Republican leaders and elected officials who have made themselves willing hostages to this dangerous and irrational man.

She added:

It’s undeniable. It’s also painful for Republicans to accept. And I think we all have to recognize and understand what it means to say those words, and what it means that those things happened [at the January 6 incident].


But the reality that we face today as Republicans — as we think about the choice in front of us — we have to choose. Because Republicans cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution.

She is referring, of course, to the president who has nominated enough originalists to the Supreme Court to allow the high court, for the first time in a long time, to begin ruling on the basis of what the framers originally intended. This contrasts with the “living document” approach the former majority used to legislate from the bench, including granting “rights” that the Constitution (and its crafters) never intended.

With her war of words against the former president, Cheney has lost the support of Wyoming Republicans (who outnumber Democrats in the Cowboy State by more than four to one) — and the August 16th primary.

The latest poll from Cygnal shows that just 27% of Wyoming voters have a favorable opinion of Cheney, with 71% holding an unfavorable opinion. And that poll was taken before her last outburst on Wednesday.

In an earlier poll taken by Fabrizio Lee, the pollster wrote that for all intents and purposes, Cheney is history:

Not only is Cheney getting creamed in the ballot, but Wyoming [Republican Primary Voters] are clear that there is no room for her to get back into this race. A huge 71% majority say they will vote against her, including 66% who will definitely vote against Cheney no matter who she runs against.


With only 26% saying they will definitely or probably vote for Cheney, she has hit her ceiling on the ballot.


Furthermore, [Cheney’s challenger Harriet] Hageman has successfully captured the bulk of these anti-Cheney voters by winning over undecideds and some [state Senator Anthony] Bouchard voters over the past six months, leaving little doubt as to who will win this race.

But Cheney is nothing but persistent, even having given up on retaining her seat in the House. A week before her excoriation of the former president on Wednesday she stated: “I won’t waver or back down. I won’t surrender to pressure or intimidation. I know where to draw the line, and I know that some things aren’t for sale.”

But she will be available for hire on August 17, with prospects improving that at least one of the major news outlets will bid for her services as the “respectable Republican voice” providing “balance” among the newsreaders and talking heads currently on staff there.

100 Georgia Sheriffs Condemn Democrat Gubernatorial Candidate Stacey Abrams

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, June 29, 2022:  

More than 100 Georgia Sheriffs issued a statement on Monday supporting Republican Governor Brian Kemp’s campaign for reelection. In that statement the sheriffs decried moves by his opponent, Democrat Stacey Abrams, to defund and abolish law enforcement:

Over the last four years, Governor [Brian] Kemp and his family stood shoulder to shoulder with the men and women serving in Georgia’s law enforcement community.


Working alongside our departments, Governor Kemp has championed legislation to recruit and retain more officers into the profession, strengthen penalties for criminals and help keep Georgia’s streets safe, and prevent rogue local governments from stripping critical funding and resources from police.


In stark contrast, Stacey Abrams has repeatedly shown complete disdain for law enforcement and the risk we take every day putting our lives on the line to serve our communities.


Ms. Abrams actively serves on the governing board of – and has profited from – an anti-police organization which openly advocates for abolishing prisons and stripping local police departments of their funding.

That “anti-police organization” is the Marguerite Casey Foundation. Begun in 2001 by the founder of United Parcel Service (UPS) and named for his sister, it issues grants to various anti-police and anti-capitalist groups and individuals. In May 2021 Abrams joined the board and almost immediately the board approved an anti-law enforcement project, “Answer the Uprising”, using the group’s funds to support numerous liberal anti-police groups.

The foundation has also given grants to left-wing groups like the Movement for Black Lives and the Black Organizing Project, among others.

The foundation has also made no effort to disguise its contempt for law enforcement, often ending its tweets with hashtags “DefundthePolice” and “AbolishthePolice.”

The sheriffs’ complaint, however, just touches the surface of what Abrams really stands for and who supports her. In May Fox News reported that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) revealed that George Soros made a $1 million donation from his Democracy PAC II to One Georgia Inc., launched to support her candidacy for the governorship.

Nor is the first time Soros has aided Abrams in her quest to become governor of the Peach State. In 2018 he poured $1.3 million into the campaign chest of the Democratic Party of Georgia in support of her candidacy.

In that campaign Abrams had the support of all manner of far-left individuals and groups, including Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, Democracy for America, MoveOn Political Action, the Working Families Party, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, Emily’s List, and Our Revolution.

In addition, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker and California Senator Kamala Harris went to Georgia to campaign for her.

Abrams is stridently and vocally opposed to the Second Amendment, having sponsored a bill while minority leader of Georgia’s House of Representatives designating many popular semi-automatic firearms as “contraband.” If it had become law, it would have required Georgia’s Bureau of Investigation to seize these firearms from their rightful owners.

She supports “red flag” laws in her quest to disarm the citizenry. She supports “mandatory gun buybacks.” The list goes on.

Abrams is infamous for losing the election for Georgia governorship to Kemp in 2018 by more than 50,000 votes but declaring it was stolen, and never conceding the election. Yet she is not referred to as an “election denier” by the same major media that will apply that label to Trump supporters who have concluded that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

She supports reparations, declaring that African Americans and Native Americans have “been stripped of their autonomy and their participation in our society.”

She has nothing but contempt for the 45th president, declaring repeatedly that Trump is a racist.

She favors abolishing the Electoral College, declaring that “those in power did not believe that working people had the intellectual capacity to directly elect the leader of the free world.”

She has repeatedly stated that the 2020 presidential election was fair and honest, and that claims that there was massive fraud “is by and large, a myth.” She added: “You are more likely to be struck by lightning than for there to be an incident of voting fraud [in that election].”

If she is being totally honest in that assessment, then she must not have seen 2000 Mules, which provides all the proof one needs about that the vacuity of that “myth.”

Low-information voters in Georgia either don’t know about Abrams’ radical background and intentions, or they don’t care. At the moment Kemp (according to the average of the last five polls reported at RealClear Politics) leads Abrams by a scant five percentage points.

Biden Signs Gun Control Bill After 29 Republicans Sell Out

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, June 27, 2022:  

With the assistance of 14 Republicans in the House and 15 Republicans in the Senate, the present occupant of the White House signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act into law on Friday.

The Senate passed the bill, S. 2938, by a vote of 65-33 on Thursday, with 15 Republicans voting aye to break the 60-vote filibuster threshold that otherwise would have kept the bill from moving forward. Later that day the House rubber-stamped the bill, 234-193, supported by 14 Republicans, before sending it to the Oval Office.

Biden read this from his teleprompter:

From Columbine to Sandy Hook, to Charleston, Orlando, Las Vegas, Parkland, El Paso, Atlanta, Buffalo, Uvalde, and for the shootings that happen every day in the streets … how many times have we heard that, “just do something, for God’s sake just do something”?


Today, we did.

What he did was something that wouldn’t have happened if those Republicans had kept their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution. Instead, they looked the other way and voted aye.

The fourteen House Republicans who voted for the bill include: Steve Chabot (Ohio), Liz Cheney (Wyo.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Penn.), Tony Gonzales (Texas), Anthony Gonzalez (Ohio), Christopher Jacobs (N.Y.), David Joyce (Ohio), John Katko (N.Y.), Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), Peter Meijer (Mich.), Tom Rice (S.C.), Maria Elvira Salazar (Fla.), Michael Turner (Ohio), and Fred Upton (Mich.).

Of those 14, five are retiring at the end of their terms, and Congressman Rice just lost his primary.

The fifteen Senate Republicans who voted for the bill included Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), along with Roy Blunt (Mo.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.), Bill Cassidy (La.), Susan Collins (Maine), John Cornyn (Texas), Joni Ernst (Iowa), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Rob Portman (Ohio), Mitt Romney (Utah), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Pat Toomey (Pa.), and Todd Young (Ind.).

Four of them are leaving office this year (Portman, Blunt, Burr, and Toomey), while all but two (Murkowski and Young) aren’t up for reelection until 2026 (except Romney, whose election is in 2024).

The law now allows the U.S. Treasury, with the assistance of the Federal Reserve, to create billions in new digital currency in order to fund it. The law contains many onerous and unconstitutional programs, including funding for state mental-health services and school security.

It targets the so-called “boyfriend loophole,” which allows those convicted of domestic abuse to have guns unless they have been married to, lived with, or had a child with the victim.

But the most egregious is the camel’s nose into the tent: $750 million to bribe states without red flag laws to pass them.

The attempt to appease so-called Republican gun rights supporters to go along with the travesty included this hat tip to the Constitution in the bill:

[State red flag laws must include] pre-deprivation and post deprivation due process rights that prevent any violation or infringement of the Constitution of the United States, including but not limited to the Bill of Rights, and the substantive or procedural due process rights guaranteed under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as applied to the States, and as interpreted by State courts and United States courts (including the Supreme Court of the United States).


Such programs must include, at the appropriate phase to prevent any violation of constitutional rights, at minimum, notice, the right to an in-person hearing, an unbiased adjudicator, the right to know opposing evidence, the right to present evidence, and the right to confront adverse witnesses.

First, there is no assurance that states accepting the bribe and creating red flag laws will include such niceties as respecting the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. Second, as a practical matter, judges presented with a demand that they issue immediately an “extreme risk protection order” (ERPO) or else a potential killer might run loose will issue one first and worry about following the law afterwards.

Thirdly, nothing in the law requires states already able to flag their citizens with ERPOs to reinstate the Fourth Amendment’s demand that “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause” in place of the much lower “reasonable suspicion” presently enacted.

Fourth, there is no assurance that red flag laws will have any impact on gun violence. New York has a red flag law in place and it failed to prevent the Buffalo shooter from wreaking havoc. Texas doesn’t have such a law in place, but it has similar laws available to law enforcement that failed to prevent the massacre in Uvalde.

As this writer declared last week:

The “bipartisan” act is an indirect but effective attack on the Second Amendment. It has nothing to do with stemming gun violence. It has everything to do with confiscating, under the color of law, every firearm from every gun owner in the country, thus paving the way for the imposition of a communist dictatorship on the once-free United States of America.

Ten Senate RINOs Poised to Sell Out Fourth, Fifth Amendments to Get to the Second

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, June 23, 2022:  

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) could hardly contain himself. On Wednesday he rejoiced:

I am pleased Congress is on the path to take meaningful action to address gun violence for the first time in nearly 30 years.


This bill is real progress. It will save lives.

He has the support of 10 Republicans (In Name Only):

Senators John Cornyn of Texas, Thom Tillis and Richard Burr of North Carolina, Roy Blunt of Missouri, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Rob Portman of Ohio, Mitt Romney of Utah, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

They all will violate their oaths of office in order to pass what is laughingly called the Bipartisan Safe Communities Act. It should be, and more accurately would be, called “The Bipartisan Fourth and Fifth Amendment Sellout Act to Destroy the Second Amendment.”

For its primary purpose is to bribe states not already inflicting unconstitutional red flag laws on its innocent citizens with federal money — $750 million to start with — so that eventually all of them will accept the bribe — the money along with the strings attached — so that there will soon be in place a de facto federal red flag law.

Such laws, wrote Michelle Malkin at The New American,

empower disgruntled strangers, duplicitous family members, biased police, and ideologically driven judges to disarm [innocent] citizens by labeling them mental health threats to themselves and others.

The unconstitutional nature of red flag laws was made clear by Nikki Goeser, executive director of the Crime Prevention Research Center. In an article co-authored by a Republican congressman who hasn’t sold out his constituents, Kentucky’s Thomas Massie, Goeser said:

These laws allow judges to seize a person’s guns without a trial, based solely on a written complaint that the person might be a danger to themselves or others. All a judge needs is “reasonable suspicion.”

This contrasts with the provisions the Founders of our Republic put in place to prevent such violations of precious rights. The Fourth Amendment requires the much higher standard of “probable cause” instead of the much weaker “reasonable suspicion”:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [Emphasis added.]

The Fifth Amendment requires “due process” against such illegal seizures:

No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. [Emphasis added.]

Red flag laws, freed from those constitutional constraints, pose a direct and immediate threat to everyone who owns a firearm. As Malkin explained:

If you stray from the politically correct position on VA incompetence, guns, masks, vaccines, transgenders in sports, Drag Queen Story Hour, election fraud, demographic transformation, Black Lives Matter, or abortion, you and your children can be tagged, flagged and bagged for life.

She understates the threat. The “reasonable suspicion” standard is so low that ultimately anyone owning a firearm could be “tagged, flagged and bagged” for that reason alone.

The “bipartisan” act is an indirect but effective attack on the Second Amendment. It has nothing to do with stemming gun violence. It has everything to do with confiscating, under the color of law, every firearm from every gun owner in the country, thus paving the way for the imposition of a communist dictatorship on the once-free United States of America.

Dems “Have Thrown In the Towel” on Bidenflation in Latest Poll

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, June 21, 2022:  

Pollster TIPP (TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics) reported on Monday that even Democrats have ceased buying the canard that Vladimir Putin, oil companies, or shipping companies are the underlying cause of inflation. Wrote Terry Jones, an editor with Issues & Insights, which partnered with TIPP:

Most surprising … Democrats have thrown in the towel on Biden’s economic leadership, with 53% blaming Biden’s policies for inflation.

A majority of every other group except those calling themselves “liberals” see Biden and the Democrats’ policies as the root cause of the diminishing purchasing power of their paychecks:

Indeed, of all the major demographic groupings followed by the I&I/TIPP Poll, just one was below 50% overall: self-described “liberals.”


All the other groups, including blacks (61%), Hispanics (61%), men (68%), women (61%), along with every income group, every age group, and every education group, all felt Biden’s policies caused the current inflation mess.

TIPP asked the 1,300 people they polled the first week of June a follow up question: “Does excessive government spending … ‘worsen inflation,’, ‘lessen inflation,’ or ‘not sure.’” Nearly 90 percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents said “excessive government spending” was the root cause, while more than half of Democrats agreed.

This is an astounding result. For years, Keynesian economist Paul Samuelson brainwashed college students into thinking it was a “demand-pull” concoction that was to blame. In his college textbook Economics — the bible taught in introductory economics classes for decades in nearly every major university in the country — Samuelson tried to explain it:

Demand-Pull inflation arises when the aggregate demand increases more than the economy’s potential for productivity which leads to rise in Prices so as to have a new equilibrium with the Aggregate Supply.

Any student who could memorize this for the final exam would pass. Anyone who questioned its falsity — like the little boy declaring that “the emperor is naked!” — would fail.

This writer is a product of that system, and that canard.

Happily, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, with degrees from both Harvard and Yale, has recovered from the Keynesian myth. On Friday, he gave reporters a lesson in real-world economics:

I think it’s sad to see some of the economic numbers with Bidenflation coming out — 8.6 percent. They tried to say — first, they said it wasn’t going to happen, was transitory and it would basically kind of solve itself.


They said it was gonna moderate two months ago and now it’s accelerating, and you have energy, groceries, all the things that really, really matter are just going through the roof … [these] are the results that we’re seeing with this inflation report.


Unfortunately, as a result of a lot of bad policy … you don’t declare war on American energy and undercut our energy independence and think that that’s gonna lead to more affordable energy for people….


You don’t print trillions and trillions of dollars and think that that’s somehow not gonna be reflected in rising prices and rising inflation.

DeSantis failed to clarify that while Biden has supported big government spending, it is Congress, working with and through the U.S Treasury and the Federal Reserve System, which is also to blame. Instead of Keynesian myths it’s common sense: One cannot increase the amount of currency in circulation without diluting the purchasing power of each unit of that currency.

And it was Republican President Richard Nixon who unleashed the inflation tiger back in 1971 when he unilaterally removed the last tie the dollar had to gold. That tiger will, if the present rate of inflation (eight percent per year, using government figures) continues, reduce the purchasing power of today’s already-weak and weakening dollar to just fifty cents in nine years.

It’s nice to know that Democrats are finally owning up to their part in the destruction of it.

Texas GOP Convention Declares Biden “Not Legitimately Elected”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, June 20, 2022:  

After the more than 5,000 delegates and alternates attending the Texas GOP Convention in Houston this past weekend viewed Dinesh D’Souza’s new documentary 2000 Mules, the convention passed the following resolution:

2020 Election: We believe that the 2020 election violated Article 1 and 2 of the US Constitution, that various secretaries of state illegally circumvented their state legislatures in conducting their elections in multiple ways, including by allowing ballots to be received after November 3, 2020.


We believe that substantial election fraud in key metropolitan areas significantly affected the results in five key states in favor of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.


We reject the certified results of the 2020 Presidential election, and we hold that acting President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was not legitimately elected by the people of the United States.

While such resolutions are more “mission statements” than legal doctrine, they represent broad indicators of sentiments of the most active and engaged voters. As such, they are later often reflected in legislative action.

In this case the resolution reflects the impact that D’Souza’s documentary is having across the country.

This writer viewed 2000 Mules and was persuaded that, even using D’Souza’s threshold of 10 visits by mules to ballot drop boxes, averaging five ballots per visit, there were enough illegal votes cast to negate the 2020 presidential election:

Michigan: 500 mules visited 50 boxes = 125,000 illegal votes

Wisconsin: 100 mules visited 28 boxes = 14,000 illegal votes

Georgia: 250 mules visited 24 boxes = 30,000 illegal votes

Arizona: 200 mules visited 20 boxes = 20,000 illegal votes

Pennsylvania: 1150 mules visited 45 boxes = 275,000 illegal votes.

That was more than enough to swing the election to Trump.

However, when D’Souza lowered the criteria for what constitutes a “mule” — from 10 drop boxes being visited in the dark of night to five — there were 54,000 mules casting 810,000 illegal votes, giving the final vote in every key state to Donald Trump, who would have won the vote in an Electoral College landslide, 305 to 233.

D’Souza included a clip from Greg Phillips (of True the Vote, which helped D’Souza with the documentary). Phillips interviewed an informant from Yuma County, Arizona, who said she was instructed to receive ballots as a receptionist at a non-profit organization. She also witnessed people dropping ballots off at what D’Souza called “stash” houses. Each phony ballot generated income for the mules paid by the non-profit.

The informant said that she personally dropped off hundreds of ballots at night where there were no cameras. She said (as this writer remembers), “They know who’s gonna win before the election happens.”

This revelation from 2000 Mules led local prosecutors to charge Guillermina Fuentes, the ex-Mayor of San Luis, Arizona, with forgery, conspiracy, and ballot abuse. She was originally scheduled to appear on May 12 and expected to plead “not guilty.” But, because of the evidence provided by the film, she changed her plea to “guilty.”

Her case is pending, but the investigation continues into the evidence she is offering as part of the plea bargain.

Even though Texas underwent a recount that revealed little, if any, vote fraud there, GOP delegates were so incensed at what they saw and learned that they pushed through the resolution condemning voter fraud and declaring Donald Trump the winner in 2020.

This is not news to many. According to a poll from Economist/YouGov, nearly 40 percent of U.S. voters don’t believe that Biden is the legitimate winner of the 2020 election. The Texas GOP just confirmed what so many already believe.

No More Abortion in South Dakota as of Monday

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, June 17, 2022:  

On Monday, the last abortion in South Dakota took the life of an unborn child as the last Planned Parenthood abortion center has stopped scheduling abortions. Governor Kristi Noem tweeted: “Abortions have stopped in South Dakota. We have prayed for this day, and now it is here.”

In an official statement issued in January, Noem noted:

The two bills I am signing today are crucial, because they are also protections for mothers. We must remember that abortion has two victims: both the unborn child who loses their life, and the mother who must go through the physical and emotional trauma of the procedure.

Those two bills followed eight others she signed into law the previous year. The first was a “heartbeat” bill similar to Texas’ law; the second was a bill banning so-called “telemedicine” abortions.

Telemedicine abortions were facilitated by two drugs previously available online: mifepristone, which deprives the fetus of nutrients, and misoprostol, which induces labor to expel the remains of the dead baby.

Now, the only time those two drugs may be administered is by a physician licensed in the state following an in-person consultation with the pregnant mother.

But if Roe v. Wade is overturned — the Supreme Court decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is expected momentarily — South Dakota’s “trigger law,” passed in 2015, will ban those abortions as well.

The ending of abortions at South Dakota’s only Planned Parenthood clinic in Sioux Falls makes South Dakota the second abortion-free state in the country, after Oklahoma. Texas allows abortions up until a fetal heartbeat can be detected.

Idaho had four abortion clinics, but the Planned Parenthood facility in Boise closed on June 1, and one of the other three is closed for the summer and is not likely to reopen after the Dobbs decision has been rendered.

Pro-abortion states such as Colorado and California are seeking to become abortion “sanctuaries” for mothers determined to end their pregnancies but prohibited from doing so by state laws.

In California, the Democrat-controlled state legislature is presently considering a package of 13 bills that would include paying for the travel costs and accommodations for out-of-state women seeking abortion.

The Biden administration is going further. The White House is considering announcing numerous possible executive decrees that would hinder states such as South Dakota from enforcing its laws. One is allowing the Department of Health and Human Services to suspend a pro-life state’s medical licensing regulations so that abortion doctors could perform abortions in that state regardless of the state’s prohibition.

Another move would be to sue states that prohibit dispensing abortifacient drugs that happen to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

Still another is allowing abortions in federal facilities located in pro-life states, such as military bases. That would turn Ellsworth Air Force Base located in Rapid City into an abortuary, outside the reach of state prohibitions.

The war to protect life as stated in the Declaration of Independence — We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness — continues, and will likely increase in intensity if the high court overturns Roe v. Wade.

Recall Gascon Committee Has Enough Signatures

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, June 16, 2022: 

Officials with the Recall District Attorney George Gascon campaign announced on Wednesday that they now have enough signatures to put Gascon’s future in the hands of voters in November. They needed 567,857 valid signatures — 10 percent of registered voters in Los Angeles — to put the question before the voters.

The tally was boosted by a last-minute surge of 30,000 signatures following the murder of two LA police officers — Michael Paredes and Joseph Santana — by one of Gascon’s criminals who was enjoying his freedom despite a long history of felonies.

Justin Flores was in violation of his parole and was seeking to harm or kill his ex-wife, Diana, when the two officers confronted him at a motel where she was hiding. They exchanged gunfire, and Flores and the two officers died at the scene.

The incident outraged Texas Senator Ted Cruz, who tweeted:

It is outrageous [that] the murderer was not in jail due to the reckless actions of George Gascon, a radical, soft-on-crime, Soros-backed DA.

Kurt Schlichter, an Army veteran with more than 450,000 followers on Twitter, was more direct: “Gascon flat out murdered those guys. Recall this piece of garbage.”

According to the Los Angeles Times, Flores had been prohibited from carrying a gun since 2011 but was free after pleading no contest last year to a charge of possessing a firearm. A conviction could have sent him to prison for three years for the violation, but instead Gascon was able to free him, counting the time Flores waited in jail as sufficient punishment.

This is the same agenda that ended the career of San Francisco’s Soros-backed communist District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was recalled last week in a special election.

As The New American reported in May:

Almost immediately after taking office in December 2020, Gascón began to implement the same far-left liberal policies that got him in trouble as San Francisco’s DA: eliminating cash bail for certain offenses, not seeking the death penalty no matter how violent or outrageous the crime, reopening closed cases against LAPD officers, and “reevaluating” sentences for which the convict had already served time.


And the results were the same. In 2021, there were 52 percent more homicides and 59 percent more shootings than in 2019. LA has seen a 15-percent increase in violent crimes, while arrests decreased by more than 23 percent.

The recall committee’s website expanded on Gascon’s crimes against the citizens of Los Angeles:

As soon as he was sworn into office, District Attorney George Gascón began issuing directives to his prosecutors, instructing them to go soft on crime, coddle criminals, and trample upon the dignity and rights of crime victims.


To keep our communities safe, to mete out just punishment to those who break our laws, and to provide justice to crime victims throughout Los Angeles County, we must recall District Attorney George Gascón.

One of Gascon’s many citizen-victims is a woman and her eight-month-old baby, who were run down and nearly killed by a teenaged driver in a stolen vehicle. Gascon wanted to send the driver to “juvie camp” for a few months rather than charging him as an adult.

In a “victim” statement, she said:

George Gascón doesn’t value my life or the life of my child, or any other victim out there and would rather reward the monsters … by demonstrating to them that their actions have no consequences.


DA Gascón is telling him and every other thug in LA County that it doesn’t matter if you try to murder people.


Why are Gascón’s policies prioritizing the livelihood of rotten monsters when my child, my baby, who is incapable of protecting himself, is left to fend for himself, and is essentially being told his life doesn’t matter?

The monsters have enjoyed the lifting of sanctions under Gascon’s policies, while others are urging their attorneys to speed up their trials to take advantage of Gascon’s leniency while he is still in office.

Fox News journalist Bill Melugin tweeted last week:

In jailhouse audio we’ve obtained, Willie Wilkerson, a gang member charged with murder, says his attorney wants to hurry up and make a deal before LA DA @GeorgeGascon possibly gets recalled and “they bring back that [obscenity deleted] life without parole & death penalty.”

The committee to recall Gascon is continuing to gather additional signatures as “insurance” that they’ll have more than enough after validation to put Gascon’s future on the ballot in November.

Their goal is 750,000 signatures. With Gascon continuing his soft-on-crime policies continuing to hurt and kill Los Angeles citizens, the committee should have no trouble not only in obtaining those signatures but also assuring that Los Angeles’ voters’ failed experiment with “woke” policies under Gascon will end in November.

More Black Americans Are Exercising the Right

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, June 15, 2022:  

The sale of firearms to black Americans rose an astonishing 58% in 2020, and that growth is continuing. A recent survey by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) revealed that nearly every gun-store owner in the country has seen growth, especially among black, brown, and Asian-American customers.

One of them, Michael Moody, a black federal employee working in Washington, D.C., drove to Maryland to purchase a firearm and was surprised at the number of black customers in the store. He told NBC News:

You look at Buffalo [the May mass shooting at a grocery store there] and the feeling of “This could have been me” is there.


We could be the next target. And when it’s you, what are you going to do? Are you going to run and hide? Or are you going to be able to protect yourself? Protect your family?


I didn’t want a gun. I’m not a gun person. But this world has made me get one.

Next, he said, is one for his wife.

The surge is reflected in the growth of the National African American Gun Association (NAAGA). Started in 2015 by Philip Smith, the group has been adding more than 1,000 new members every month since 2020 and now has a membership approaching 50,000. On Facebook it enjoys more than 100,000 followers.

Americans are buying more than 20 million firearms every year, and almost 40% of them are first-time buyers. The reasons include fear that the Biden administration will be successful in passing more gun (people) control laws, including banning the sale, purchase, and possession of the most popular rifle in the country, the semi-automatic AR-15.

There’s also the fear that inflation will drive up the price of firearms (along with everything else) and that government pressure on gun manufacturers will reduce the available supply.

There’s the rising crime, mostly in anti-gun, Democrat-controlled cities. There’s the increasing sense of self-reliance that comes from owning and becoming familiar with a firearm.

And there’s a sense of camaraderie that’s encouraged by local gun clubs. One such is the Freedom Firearms & Safety Gun Club in Phoenix, where divorcee Onnie Brown now serves as vice president. The club’s co-founder Scott Dias said:

It only made sense to me that we should have someone in the forefront that’s a female … [female guests] feel more comfortable and they’re more motivated when they see other women and when they connect with other women.

Along the way, new black gun owners not only learn how to handle a firearm, but likely also learn some true black history concerning firearms. As The Trace pointed out:

Black Americans carried guns before the Founding Fathers gathered in secret to draft the Constitution.


They carried them during the Civil War and again afterward as members of the Buffalo Soldiers, established in 1866 as the nation’s first all-Black military regiments.


They carried them for protection after their emancipation from slavery, although the Black Codes of the Reconstruction Era tried to put a stop to that.


They carried them out West on what was then America’s frontier, in search of greater freedoms.


They carried them throughout the South to guard against white lynch mobs.


Later, they carried them to protect scions of the civil rights movement, including Martin Luther King Jr., who famously preached nonviolence; less well known is that King applied for, and was denied, a permit to carry a gun, and his Alabama home at one point held so many firearms it was described as “an arsenal.”

They’re also likely to learn that the Second Amendment is color-blind, and that the present resident of the White House is no friend of that amendment.

This is likely to have political implications. In the past the Democratic Party could bank on 90% of black voters supporting whomever they put up for president.

Now, however, that present resident is suffering from dismal approval ratings, dragging down that black support. According to a Marquette University Law School poll taken in April, Biden’s approval rating among blacks has dropped from 88% in July 2021 to 56%, a dizzying decline of 32 points.

The more all Americans — including blacks, browns, and Asian-Americans — exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, the more difficult it will be for tyrants, present administration included, to take them away.

Cheney Seals Her Doom With Wyoming Voters at Jan 6 Show Trial

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, June 10, 2022:  

Liz Cheney effectively ended her political career in Wyoming Thursday evening. As co-chair of the January 6 committee (which Democrat lawyer Alan Dershowitz dismissed as a “kangaroo court”), she called the January 6, 2021 protest and riot an “invasion” of the Capitol aided and abetted by President Donald Trump. She said Trump “claim[ed] that the election was stolen,” which justified the “invasion.”

Two recent polls have revealed the growing support among Wyoming Republican voters — who make up three-quarters of the electorate in the Cowboy State — for Cheney’s opponent in the August 16 Republican primary, Harriet Hageman. The latest, conducted by Tony Fabrizio with results released on Monday, reported:

Over the past six months, Harriet Hageman has become known to nearly all Wyoming [Republican Primary Voters], and as she has done so, her net favorable image has increased from +21 to +29.


A 58% majority now view her favorably while just 29% have an unfavorable opinion.

The incumbent, four-term representative Cheney, on the other hand, has lost what little ground she previously occupied among those voters:

Conversely, the already unpopular Congresswoman Liz Cheney has become even more disliked, with her net favorable falling from -40 to -47.


A whopping 73% of GOP primary voters have an unfavorable view of Cheney, including 66% who view her very unfavorably.

Fabrizio allayed any fears that Cheney could somehow pull out a victory in the primary by appealing to the few Democrats and Independents in the state to change their party affiliations and register as Republicans the day of the election:

Hageman has successfully captured the bulk of these anti-Cheney voters by winning over undecideds and some Bouchard [third candidate running] voters, leaving little doubt as to whom will win this race….


Harriet Hageman is now the overwhelming favorite to remove Liz Cheney from Congress.

The disaster awaiting Cheney in August could be even worse. Fabrizio’s survey occurred before Cheney’s remarks on Thursday night. And, when asked, “Do you approve or disapprove of the job Liz Cheney is doing as Congresswoman?” 70 percent of those polled by Fabrizio disapproved.

A straw poll conducted by the Wyoming State Central Committee in January showed Hageman winning 59 votes and Cheney only six.

Angry Voters Boot Chesa Boudin, San Francisco’s Far-left DA

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, June 8, 2022: 

San Francisco voters recalled far-left District Attorney Chesa Boudin on Tuesday, as expected. What wasn’t expected is that the margin of his recall was nearly twice what polls had forecast: Instead of being recalled by 10 points, the margin was closer to 20.

This reflects the frustration voters had over Boudin’s determination to “reform” the DA’s office into a safe harbor for repeat criminals. He lied when he tried to cover his intentions with words such as “equity” and eliminating the “legacy” of “mass incarceration.” He promised reform, and San Franciscans got it, good and hard.

Boudin began by releasing criminals from prison on the pretext of limiting the spread of Covid. He eliminated cash bail for what he called “minor” offenses. He failed to prosecute criminals. He worked hard to empty prisons by reviewing the convictions of many serving time.

The results were predictably catastrophic: Property crimes soared, along with open drug use. Car and home break-ins jumped. Homicides rose. Panhandling increased. Homelessness and the related squalid conditions he inherited got worse.

As EMC Research noted, burglaries spiked by 49 percent during his 18-month administration, and an astonishing 84 percent of charged perpetrators were back on the streets within two days!

What happens now? First, Boudin will remain DA until later this month or early July, when the Board of Supervisors certifies the election results. Next, San Francisco Mayor London Breed will appoint his successor to complete the remainder of his term.

Mayor Breed is already considering several candidates for the interim position. District 2 Supervisor Catherine Stefani should top that list, as she was the first elected official to endorse Boudin’s recall vote. Unfortunately, she is a rare moderate on the city’s Board of Supervisors and Breed needs her there to balance the crazies.

There’s Nancy Tung, an Asian-American who came in third in 2019 behind Boudin. When Breed tried to name her for a position on the police commission in 2020, the Board of Supervisors rejected her because of her tough-on-crime stance. Instead, they preferred someone more amenable to Boudin’s far-left “reform” efforts.

There’s Brooke Jenkins, one of the more than 50 prosecuting attorneys who left the DA’s office. She was also a vocal supporter of the recall effort.

There’s Joe Alioto Veronese, a former police officer who would have the support of the SFPD, which suffered under Boudin’s efforts at “reform.”

The impact of the successful recall of San Francisco’s radical DA is likely to be felt in Los Angeles, where a recall effort is underway to rid that city of its own Soros-backed District Attorney, George Gascon.

It could have national ramifications as well. As the liberal New York Times lamented in its commentary following the recall of Boudin, “voters are sending a message of frustration and [are] hankering for change.”

According to Ballotpedia, there are 123 ongoing recall votes, many of them fueled by the same “frustration and hankering” that turned out three San Francisco school-board members in February and the city’s DA on Tuesday.

Ilya Shapiro Resigns From Georgetown Law Over Biden Tweet

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, June 7, 2022:  

When Ilya Shapiro, the chief editor of the Cato Supreme Court Review, was offered a position at the prestigious Georgetown University Law Center, he took it. He served as an executive director and senior lecturer.

He had been on leave since February over a tweet that some found offensive.

When a left-wing blogger at Slate uncovered an “inartful” tweet that Shapiro had made criticizing Biden’s pick for a Supreme Court vacancy, Shapiro never had a chance. The dean of the law school suspended him pending an “investigation” into that tweet and how it likely offended the school’s so-called free speech policy.

After a four-month-long investigation, the school allowed Shapiro to return to his position, but on Monday, he resigned.

His “offending tweets”:

Is Joe Biden a racist and sexist for saying his Supreme Court nominee will be a black woman?


Because Biden said he’d only consider black women for SCOTUS, his nominee will always have an asterisk attached. Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term.


Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan [an Indian-American judge appointed by Barack Obama], who is solid prog[ressive] & v[ery] smart. Even has identity politics benefit for being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn’t fit into latest intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get lesser black woman. Thank heaven for small favors?

The suspension and investigation were a sham. Shapiro was clearly a non-conformist conservative and would likely disrupt the ideological monopoly extant at the law school. His tweet gave the school the excuse to rid itself of this potential annoyance.

Shapiro didn’t just pack up and disappear into the night. His letter of resignation to the dean, William Treanor, exposed his and the school’s hypocrisy:

After full consideration of the report [following the four-month investigation] … it has become apparent that my remaining at Georgetown has become untenable.… You’ve made it impossible for me to fulfil the duties of my appointed post.

He defended his tweets, which were twisted into a tool to oust him:

Contrary to your June 2 statement, no reasonable person acting in good faith could construe what I tweeted to be “objectively offensive.”


It’s a complete miscomprehension to read what I said to suggest that “the best Supreme Court nominee could not be a Black woman,” as you did in your very first statement back on January 27, or that I considered all black women to be “lesser than” everyone else.


Although my tweet was inartful, as I’ve readily admitted many times, its meaning that I considered one possible candidate to be best and thus all others to be less qualified is clear.


Only those acting in bad faith to get me fired because of my political beliefs would misconstrue what I said to suggest otherwise.

Shapiro noted that the school only allows freedom of speech for those in agreement with the liberal agenda, and certainly not for a potential disruptor likely to speak his mind and challenge the school’s groupthink:

In 2018, Georgetown protected this tweet from Professor Carol Christine Fair during Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation process: “Look at this chorus of entitled white men justifying a serial rapist’s arrogated entitlement. All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine? Yes.”


When Prof. Fair advocated mass murder and castration based on race and gender, Georgetown did not initiate an investigation, but instead invoked Georgetown’s free-expression policy.


In 2020, Georgetown took no action when law professor Heidi Feldblum tweeted “law professors and law school deans” should “not support applications from our students to clerk for” judges appointed by President Donald Trump.


“To work for such a judge,” Prof. Feldblum continued, “indelibly marks a lawyer as lacking in the character and judgment necessary for the practice of law.”


These comments have the potential to threaten the careers of all of our conservative and libertarian students, or indeed anyone who clerks for duly confirmed Article III judges.


In April of this year — well after my own tweet — Prof. Feldblum tweeted, “we have only one political party in this country, the Democrats. The other group is a combination of a cult and an insurrection-supporting crime syndicate.”


She went on to reference Ron DeSantis, Ted Cruz, and Mitch McConnell and say, “The only ethically and politically responsible stance to take toward the Republican ‘party’ is to consistently point out that it is no longer a legitimate participant in U.S. constitutional democracy.”

Were these tweets investigated as violating the school’s policy that “values intellectual diversity, freedom of speech, tolerance, respect [and] good faith”? Noted Shapiro:

All of these tweets were protected under Georgetown’s free-expression policy.


But now they would all merit at least an “investigation” to determine whether they violate the IDEAA’s theory of hostile educational environment that was selectively applied in my case.


Apparently, it’s free speech for thee, not for me.

He ended his resignation letter with this:

In contrast to the Jesuitical values that you’re fond of reciting, this institution no longer stands for tolerance, respect, good faith, self-reflective learning, and generous service to others.


On the GULC website it reads: “Our motto ‘Law is but the means, justice is the end’ sums up the core commitment of Georgetown Law.”


But your and [the committee’s] treatment of me suggests that neither the due process of law nor justice actually prevails.

The incident shines a light, as Jarrett Stepman wrote at The Daily Signal, “on the deep rot in modern academia.”

San Francisco Voters Poised to Recall DA Chesa Boudin on Tuesday

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, June 6, 2022:  

On Tuesday, San Francisco voters will boot their communist/progressive District Attorney Chesa Boudin from office. Recent polls assure his departure, including the latest one from Public Policy Polling. That poll showed that Boudin will be recalled by at least a 10-point margin.

His recall is likely to have statewide, if not nationwide, consequences. Los Angeles DA George Gascon is facing efforts to recall him for his wildly progressive/destructive policies. Gascon served as San Francisco’s DA before moving to LA, leaving the way open for Boudin to take his place.

As The New American reported on Boudin’s background back in March 2019, just as Boudin was announcing his campaign to replace Gascon,

The Boudin name has a long pedigree in communist and terrorist circles. His maternal grandfather, attorney Leonard Boudin, in addition to being a member of the Communist Party USA, was the longtime legal counsel for Fidel Castro’s communist dictatorship, and was infamous for defending communists, terrorists, and leftists of every stripe.


Chesa Boudin’s parents were members of the terrorist Weather Underground. What’s more, they helped build a bomb factory in San Francisco to aid in their war against “Amerika.”


Chesa Boudin says he is committed to the same goals to which his parents were, and are, committed. They have not repudiated their past violence — which included bombings, rioting, mayhem, and murder.

Even Wikipedia reveals Boudin’s radical communist background:

Boudin was born in New York City to Jewish parents. His parents, Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, were Weather Underground members.


When Boudin was 14 months old, both were arrested and convicted of murder for their role as getaway car drivers in the Brink’s robbery of 1981 in Rockland County, New York. His mother was sentenced to 20 years to life and his father to 75 years to life for the felony murders of two police officers and a security guard.


After his parents were incarcerated, Boudin was raised in Chicago by adoptive parents Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who, like his parents, had been members of the Weather Underground….


Boudin descends from a long left-wing lineage. His great-grand-uncle, Louis B. Boudin, was a Marxist theoretician and author of a two-volume history of the Supreme Court’s influence on American government, and his grandfather Leonard Boudin was an attorney who represented controversial clients such as Fidel Castro and Paul Robeson.

After 90,000 low-information San Francisco voters put Boudin into office in January 2020, they soon learned of their error. In March 2020, he used the Covid pandemic as an excuse to release from prison hard-core criminals onto the streets, claiming that this would help limit the spread of the virus. What it actually did was increase the rate of violent crime to the point where even Democrats have revolted and are supporting his recall.

Nima Rahimi currently serves as a board member of the California Democratic Party. He wrote a scathing article supporting the recall of his fellow Democrat on Friday:

I am a California Democratic Party Executive Board member, and I support the recall of San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin … because I’m sick of Boudin’s disingenuous campaign, and I believe recalling Boudin will save lives … because people have died and will continue to die as a result of his choices and his policies.


We have to hold our own accountable.

Crime jumped, thanks to Boudin’s “choices and policies.” Homicides in the city increased, wrote CBS News, by 16 percent, while larceny theft jumped more than 24 percent during his reign as DA.

The “RecallChesaBoudin” campaign explained:

Since he took office, burglaries, car break-ins, homicides and overdose-related deaths are at a crisis level.


Boudin is not keeping San Francisco safe. He refuses to adequately prosecute criminals and fails to take the drug dealing crisis seriously. He doesn’t hold serial offenders accountable, getting them released from custody, and his response to victims is that “hopefully” home burglaries will go down.


Boudin said he wouldn’t prosecute “victimless” DUI offenses, and he failed to charge a repeat offender who then killed two pedestrians on New Year’s Eve while driving intoxicated in a stolen car.

The recall campaign was highly successful, obtaining 83,000 signatures when only 51,000 were required to put Boudin’s future up to the voters in Tuesday’s recall election. That is almost one in every 10 San Franciscans.

Three recent polls show Boudin losing heavily. And the result is likely to impact a similar recall effort in Los Angeles where DA George Gascon has implemented similar policies, with similar results.

Rittenhouse Hires Sandmann’s Attorney to Go After Facebook for Defamation

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, June 3, 2022:  

After learning that Johnny Depp won a $15 million defamation lawsuit, Kyle Rittenhouse tweeted: “[the] Johnny Depp trial is just fueling me. You can fight back against the lies in the media, and you should!”

Rittenhouse is the young man whom the media called a murderer after the Kenosha, Wisconsin, riots that occurred the summer of 2020 but before his trial had begun. In a unanimous decision, the jury acquitted Rittenhouse of all charges, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, and attempted first-degree intentional homicide.

Rittenhouse became acquainted with Nicholas Sandmann, the Covington Catholic High School student whom the media also defamed after an incident involving a Native American activist near the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., in January 2019.

On Thursday, Sandmann’s attorney, Todd McMurtry, told Fox News that he’d been hired by Rittenhouse “to determine whom to sue, when to sue, [and] where to sue. We’re going to look at everything that’s been said, determine which of those comments are legally actionable and proceed from there.”

McMurtry had significant success in representing Sandmann in multi-million-dollar lawsuits against CNN, NBC Universal, and The Washington Post. In each case, settlements were made before the lawsuits made it to trial, but the amounts remain undisclosed. Simple math, however, serves well: The amounts were likely very large because fighting a losing battle with McMurtry was going to be costly. And checkbook math won out.

The lawsuit against The Washington Post, filed in February 2019 in the amount of $250 million, claimed that the Post wanted to lead a “mainstream and social media mob of bullies which attacked, vilified, and threatened” Sandmann. They targeted the high school student “because he was white, [a] Catholic student wearing a red ‘Make America Great Again’ souvenir cap,” and the Post “knew and intended that its allegedly defamatory accusations would be republished by others.”

In speaking with Fox News, McMurtry noted the similarity of the two defamation cases: Both involved young men who were minors during the incidents and who “were falsely wrongfully condemned by the media and social media.”

Mark Zuckerberg is at the top of the list, McMurtry said:

Facebook has an outsized voice. They can do a lot of damage … but we’re going to look at everything … and decide which ones are actionable.

He added:

Let’s just use for an example what Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg said about [Rittenhouse]. They said that he was involved in a mass murder incident.


This was not a mass murder incident. It was clearly factually false.


To call somebody a mass murderer is seriously defamatory.


And then to use the power of social media to basically … censor any views that would take opposition to that mass murderer statement is a serious effort to destroy his character.… It was seriously mistaken and seriously defamatory.

The list of potential defendants is a long one, according to McMurtry, who said it’s “pretty much assured that there’s probably 10 to 15 solid” cases against “large defendants.”

Rittenhouse said he was going to go after everyone who defamed him. On February 21, he appeared on Tucker Carson Tonight:

RITTENHOUSE: I don’t want to see anybody else have to deal with what I went through. So, I want to hold them accountable for what they did to me, because I don’t want to see anybody have to go through what I went through.


CARLSON: Yeah. They tried to imprison you for the rest of your life. It wasn’t coverage. It was advocacy.

You have a lot of potential targets to sue, yourself. Will you be suing any of these news organizations, and if so, when?


RITTENHOUSE: Well, right now we’re looking at quite a few politicians, celebrities, athletes.…


Whoopi Goldberg is on the list. She called me a murderer after I was acquitted by a jury of my peers. She went on to still say that, and there’s others, don’t forget about Cenk [Uygur] from The Young Turks. They called me a murderer before a verdict and continue to call me a murderer.


CARLSON: And what about the people who called you groundlessly a white supremacist, which makes it pretty hard to get a job for the rest of your life if you are a white supremacist. Will you be responding to them?


RITTENHOUSE: Absolutely. We are going to hold everybody who’s lied about me accountable. Such as — everybody who lied [who] called me a white supremacist. They’re all going to be held accountable and we’re going to handle them in a courtroom.

Rittenhouse has formed The Media Accountability Project (TMAP) to “hold the media accountable for the lies they said and [to] deal with them in court.”

Cook Raises House GOP Gains, Shifting 10 More Seats Toward Republicans

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 31, 2022:  

Support for Republicans is gaining so rapidly that the Cook Political Report was forced to revise its forecast for the House of Representatives in November. A month ago, the non-partisan pollster predicted a GOP win with a gain of between 15 and 25 seats. On Thursday, its revised forecast is now showing a GOP gain of between 20 and 35 seats.

Said Cook: “The midterm outlook for House Democrats is so bleak that even members in districts … Biden won by 10 to 15 points are in danger of losing their seats.”

Democrat losses could be even worse, according to the pro-Democrat Washington Post. Wrote Henry Olsen:

[Democrats] hold 42 seats [where members won in districts Biden allegedly carried by eight percentage points or more]. Politico rates 13 of those 42 seats as “safe” for Democrats. If that doesn’t hold, the GOP could gain as many as 40 seats [in November].

Dave Wasserman, a Cook pollster, explained:

Given that President Biden’s job approval is underwater in dozens of districts he carried in 2020, any Democrat sitting in a single-digit Biden seat (or a Trump seat) is at severe risk, and even a few in seats Biden carried by 10 to 15 points could lose.

The GOP’s chances grew by another four seats after Florida revealed its revised redistricting, bringing to 20 Republican-leaning districts from its present 16 GOP-favored districts.

The situation is increasingly fluid. So far 30 Democrats have announced they are not running for reelection, and Biden’s polling numbers have moved from abysmal to disastrous. So even these predictions could be too conservative, come November.

Other pollsters give little hope for Democrats, including polls conducted by them. An internal poll conducted for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee showed that, on a generic basis, Republicans beat Democrats by eight percentage points, 47-39. And a poll conducted by the Republican super-PAC Congressional Leadership Fund revealed that 49 percent of voters in so-called battleground districts prefer having a “Republican in Congress to provide a check on Biden, rather than a Democrat to help pass Biden’s and Pelosi’s agenda.”

In the Senate, Cook gives Republicans a one-seat advantage, with senate races in three states — Arizona, Geogia, and Nevada — rated as a “toss-up.” RealClear Politics confirms the one-seat Republican advantage, but considers that eight seats are considered “toss-ups” in November, giving Republicans an opportunity to widen its predicted advantage.

Democrats had hoped to ameliorate some of the impending disaster through political manipulating of voting districts. But, as Wasserman noted:

The string of legal setbacks the Democrats have suffered since late February [in redistricting battles] has been staggering. When you put it all together, just about everything’s going right for Republicans.

Liz Cheney Launches Reelection Campaign in the Face of Negative Polling

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, May 30, 2022:

Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney launched her reelection campaign on Thursday, the same day a pollster showed her down 30 points to her likely primary opponent, Harriet Hageman.

Her quest for a fourth term is likely to be her first step into political oblivion. The Republican primary is on August 16th and will for all intents and purposes end her political career. Even if Wyoming’s “open ballot” rules result in every Democrat in the state changing their party affiliation the day of the election so they can vote in the Republican primary, Cheney is history.

She knows this is the end and yet she insists on not leaving the scene without a noisy exit. Because of her vocal and strident defiance of Donald Trump, House Republicans ousted her from her role as conference chair in May 2021. Up until then she held the Number Three position behind the Republican Minority Leader (Kevin McCarthy) and Republican Minority Whip (Steve Scalise).

Six months later Wyoming’s Republican Party voted to no longer recognize her has a Republican. And yet she continues to campaign as a Republican, hoping, somehow, that enough Democrats and Independents will come to her aid in August to salvage what’s left of her political career.

The poll released on Thursday by the polling firm WPAi (conducted on behalf of the conservative Club for Growth) shows Hageman leading Cheney 56-26, a 30-point advantage for the challenger.

On Saturday former President Donald Trump put his endorsement of Hageman on display before a crowd of thousands in Casper:

Over the next six months the people of Wyoming are going to vote to dump your RINO congresswoman Liz Cheney, and you’re going to send the incredible Harriet Hageman to Congress.

He reminded the crowd that it was Cheney who, touting herself as a Republican, now serves as vice chair of the January 6 investigation committee alongside House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Said Trump: “It’s time you finally had a representative who will put America First and who is looking to Make America Great Again.”

Trump called out Cheney for her betrayals:

Worse than the terrible Democrats are the backstabbing RINO Republicans that are helping them do their act. And there is no RINO in America who has thrown in her lot with the radical left more than Liz Cheney….


[Cheney is] a lapdog for Pelosi, and a human soundbite machine for CNN and MSNBC.

In her reelection launch video Cheney avoided naming Trump but instead focused on appealing to disaffected Republicans in Wyoming, along with Democrats and Independents:

As we work together to fight for Wyoming, and the issues that matter to us, there are some things you can count on. When I know something is wrong, I will say so. I won’t waver or back down. I won’t surrender to pressure or intimidation. I know where to draw the line.

She wisely avoided mentioning inflation, gas prices, or the Biden administration’s crimps on energy production. After all, Wyoming is the eighth largest energy producing state in the union.

And she just might be using the video to angle a position as a “respectable Republican voice” on one of the major media platforms like CNN, CNBC, or Fox News after she is removed from political life starting August 17.

National Media Ignore Mass Shooting Prevented by Armed Citizen

This article appeared at TheNewAmerican.com on Saturday, May 28, 2022:  

With the mainstream media in thrall with covering recent mass shootings, they have ignored another one that never happened. The event was covered by MetroNews out of Charleston, West Virginia, on Thursday: “There was a shooting last night in Charleston after a man opened fire at a party at an apartment complex.”

The shooter, Dennis Butler, was stopped by local police for speeding through the apartment complex. He returned later with a semi-automatic rifle and began shooting indiscriminately at a crowd of people celebrating the graduation of a young person in the complex.

When two police officers arrived, they confronted Butler, who fired a shotgun at them, wounding them and taking them both out of action. A woman carrying concealed confronted Butler, who received fire from her and died at the scene.

Said Police Chief Tyke Hunt: “It looks like the person who fired upon Mr. Butler does not have any reason to prohibit [her] from carrying a firearm lawfully.” Chief of detectives Tony Hazelett added: “Instead of running from the threat, she engaged with the threat and saved several lives last night.”

The incident doesn’t fit the media narrative: That NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre is wrong when he declared in 2012 that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

But, according to numerous sources, incidents such as Charleston’s on Wednesday night happen millions of times every year.

According to the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, armed citizens use guns to defend themselves “at least 989,883 times” every year. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology published a study by scholars Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz that revealed that gun owners use their legally owned firearms to defend themselves an average of 1,884,348 times per year.

Another study, this one by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), estimated “annual defensive gun uses range from about 500,000 to more than 3 million.”

Almost never mentioned in any of the media or in those studies, however, is how often an armed citizen comes to the rescue of a law-enforcement officer who is neutralized in a confrontation with an armed suspect. For instance, in a residential area of Maple Falls, Washington, two sheriff’s deputies responded to a “shots fired” report on February 14. When they challenged the shooter, he shot both of them, knocking them to the ground. Two military veterans heard the commotion and the shots, put their children inside, and confronted the shooter. The shooter was arrested and charged with a felony, and his bail was set at $5 million.

Whatcom County Sheriff Bill Elfo said: “We are extraordinarily blessed that [these] armed citizens came to the deputies’ assistance at the critical moments when they were most vulnerable.”

Last October, in Tonopah, Arizona, a suspect accused of critically wounding a Maricopa County sheriff’s deputy was captured after a homeowner shot him.

Similar instances of armed citizens coming to the aid of law-enforcement officers are reported at length by John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center.

Also left unreported by any media is the number of times an individual with criminal intent is deterred not just by the presence of an armed citizen, but by the mere suggestion that the citizen might be armed. As horrific as the recent mass shootings are, one needs to balance the mainstream media’s 24/7 blood-red coverage of those events with the fact that, without armed citizens present, there would be many more such ghastly atrocities being committed.

Biden Disapproval Rating Hits 59 Percent

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, May 25, 2022:  

The latest poll results from Reuters/IPSO released on Tuesday show Joe Biden’s approval reaching new lows. The pollster reported his approval rating dropping to 36 percent, the lowest of his administration. His approval rating last week was at 42 percent.

Remarkable isn’t that Republicans can’t stand him (at 90-percent disapproval) but that Democrats are losing patience with their man. His approval rating among his loyalists dropped to 72 percent, down four points from the week before, and down nearly 20 points from the start of his term last January.

More remarkable is that the polling favored Democrats, with 456 being asked their opinion while just 358 Republicans were quizzed.

Conclusion: As bad as these results appear, in a fair poll Biden would likely fall closer to a 70-percent disapproval rating.

His cataclysmic collapse shows up in other pro-Dem polls as well. FiveThirtyEight reported a disapproval rating for the man at 54.4 percent on Thursday morning, while Quinnipiac University polls reported a Biden disapproval rating of 57 percent last week.

A day earlier, the AP/NORC Center poll reported a 61-percent disapproval rating for the man in the Oval Office while the NewsNation/Decision Desk HQ poll results released the same time showed a 57-percent disapproval rating.

Even CNN — formerly known as the “Clinton News Network” but now more accurately called the Communist News Network — had to report that their man in the White House is suffering a disapproval rating of 56 percent.

Gallup said the same thing, giving Biden a 54-percent thumbs down rating on Tuesday.

The question isn’t whether voters are giving him a failing rating no matter who asks the question or who answers. The question is, how is this likely to pan out in November?

Biden’s failing is beginning to move the numbers in favor of House Republicans. According to Roll Call, eight House races have moved toward the Republican candidate, even in so-called safe Democrat districts. They include California’s 47th District, Georgia’s 2nd District, Indiana’s 1st District, Nevada’s 1st, 3rd, and 4th Districts, Oregon’s 5th District, and Rhode Island’s 2nd District.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s razor-thin majority is most assuredly going to disappear in the coming November midterms. She has suggested that, at age 82 and after having been in the House since 1987, it’s time for her to retire. The midterm results will give her the excuse she has been waiting for.


Navy Board Rules Against High Command’s Orders Mandating Covid Shots

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 24, 2022:  

A Navy administrative separation board voted unanimously last Friday that Navy Lieutenant Billy Moseley did not violate the command that he take the Covid vaccine. He refused the order, but rather than file a religious exemption request, he went straight to the board for its decision. Moseley knew that under orders from the Secretary of Defense the branches of the military weren’t allowing religious exemptions to be granted.

Moseley, a 22-year Naval officer, risked everything in taking his case to the board. But his religious convictions prevailed. As his attorney, Davis Younts, explained:

LT Moseley opposes the vaccine for religious reasons and could have submitted a religious accommodation request. However, when he learned that the Navy and the other services intended to implement a blanket denial policy, he began to prayerfully consider other options.


After consulting with legal and medical experts, he became convinced that as an officer he had an obligation to take a stand against the unlawful order and be a voice for thousands of enlisted Sailors.


LT Moseley risked his twenty-two-year career and his military retirement because of his faith and his commitment to his oath of office as a military leader.

Younts successfully argued before the board that “the order for military members to receive the experimental COVID 19 injection was not a lawful order.”

Under orders from U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, the branches of the military began dismissing those requesting a religious exemption. According to the Military Times, by the end of April the Marine Corps had dismissed 1,968 corpsmen, the Navy had dismissed 798 sailors, the Army had dismissed 345 soldiers, and the Air Force had dismissed 287 airmen.

Others chose to apply for religious exemptions, and when they were denied, some went to court. Court rulings in February revealed the blatant anti-religious and anti-Christian bias of Austin’s order.

Steven Merryday, U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, heard a lawsuit from 23 such service members and, after hearing of the blatant religious discrimination being practiced in the blanket denials, wrote:

The plaintiffs claim the regulations … in reality disguise an unlawful and pervasive policy of the Secretary of Defense and each branch of the armed forces to deny individual consideration of each claim for a religious exemption, to instead “deny them all,” and to punish, possibly by discharge, without exemption or accommodation, those who assert a sincere religious objection and accordingly refuse the vaccine.

Two weeks later, Tilman Self, a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, found the same pattern of discrimination. He heard the complaint from an Air Force member who had not only been denied a religious exemption but had been harassed and punished for even making the request, and wrote:

Although the Air Force claims to provide a religious accommodation process, it proved to be nothing more than a quixotic quest for Plaintiff because it was [quoting from another judge’s ruling on the same issue] “by all accounts … theater.”…


Despite thousands of requests for religious exemption, the Air Force hadn’t granted a single one of them when Plaintiff filed her Complaint.

Since then, the military branches have been very slow in granting religious exemptions in spite of the rulings. As of April 27, the Air Force had granted only nine exemptions, the Marine Corps just three, and the Army but one.

However, Moseley’s attorney is optimistic as other cases that he and other attorneys are handling are being heard across the country, putting additional pressure on Austin. As Younts wrote:

Although this [is] only one case of thousands and we have many more clients facing prosecution by the military, we are encouraged that the truth was revealed in this Board, and we hope this ground-breaking case sends a strong message to the Department of Defense.

Trump’s Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn Files $50 Million Damage Claim Against FBI, DOJ

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, May 23, 2022:  

Retired Gen. Michael Flynn, once briefly President Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor, quietly filed a damage claim against the Department of Justice, FBI, and other federal offices for $50 million in February.

Having heard nothing since, the three-star general exploded on “The Absolute Truth with Emerald Robinson” last week:

I have gone back into the Department of Justice to let them know, to put them on notice, that I am going to sue these people….


We are going after these people.

After being given a “pardon of innocence” by then-President Trump in November 2020, Flynn has spent his time speaking at various patriotic events and rallies, including Clay Clark’s “ReAwaken America Tour.”

Flynn’s attorney, Jesse Binnall, has also been busy, gathering and collating the evidence he needed to build Flynn’s case. Not only is the conspiracy against Flynn and Trump laid out in detail in the supplementary pages filed with the damage claim, but Binnall names the individuals who will likely be named in the subsequent lawsuit: FBI Director James Comey, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Also included in the conspiracy are FBI agents Peter Strzok and his lover, Lisa Page.

The conspiracy began “on or about July 2016,” says the claim, when “the FBI began to express disdain for candidate Donald J. Trump and began to consider ways in which it could hamper Donald Trump as candidate or as President, were he to win the 2016 election.”

The conspiracy grew to include the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the allegedly “independent” Special Counsel’s Office (SCO). It reached the top level of the Obama administration, with approval granted and aided by then-President Barack Obama and then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Of all of President Trump’s appointees, Flynn was the most hated by the Obama White House . As the Associated Press reported, “Of all the [sic] Trump’s choices, White House officials said it was the selection of Flynn that felt like the most devastating blow, given the immense authority the national security adviser has over matters of war and peace.”

With White House approval and assistance, the conspiracy gained traction:

The Obama White House was in so much “despair” and so distraught by the “devastating blow” of Flynn’s selection as NSA that they calculatingly, and with actual malice and corrupt motives, conspired to and did use the tremendous power of their positions in the Executive Office of the President (and their influence of the DOJ and FBI) to personally oppress and harm Flynn.


The outrageous conduct they determined to take, along with the FBI and other allies in the Department of Justice, was executed knowingly, purposely, and in complete disregard of Flynn’s rights.

The Special Counsel’s Office initiated the attack on Flynn:

SCO initiated the prosecution despite knowing that Flynn had not made false statements, and it therefore had no reasonable belief that Flynn had committed the criminal offense and therefore no probable cause….


SCO knew that Flynn was innocent of any illegal contacts with any foreign power, and yet it commenced the prosecution of Flynn in accordance with its charter: to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The purpose was pure evil:

These federal employees and officials decided to try to prosecute and damage Flynn anyway, to destroy Flynn professionally, block him from holding a position of influence in the government, thwart President Trump, and potentially get Flynn to turn on Trump.

The SCO was the driving force behind the conspiracy:

The SCO willfully failed to disclose exculpatory evidence [that] includes, but is not limited to, the notes from Strzok and [FBI agent Joe] Pientka that show that the FBI believed that Flynn did not lie to them, and the notes describing the Oval Office meeting wherein Comey stated that Flynn’s calls with [Russian ambassador] Kislyak were “legit” and wherein Vice President Biden suggested using the Logan Act as a basis for prosecuting Flynn.

The SCO knew it was all a lie, and proceeded with the attack on Flynn anyway:

The SCO prosecuted Flynn despite knowing his factual and legal innocence and the abuse of process engaged in during the investigation and prosecution of Flynn, and the FBI continued investigating him even when it knew that he was not a Russian agent.

Flynn’s lawyer added to the damning case with this:

The FBI agents who interviewed Flynn knew that he did not intentionally make any false statements, and yet SCO charged him with intentionally making false statements during that very interview.


Further, the FBI certified that it did not believe Flynn was acting as an agent of Russia. Because the SCO prosecuted Flynn when it knew that he was innocent, the SCO had malicious intent.

It got worse: the forces against Flynn threatened his son unless he pleaded guilty:

Further, the SCO and FBI lied to the FISA court, proceeded with an investigation into Flynn’s supposed “Russian ties” when they knew he had none, and threatened his son, Michael Flynn, Jr., with prosecution unless he pled guilty to the §1001 offense [making a false statement].


All of these facts and others demonstrate that the SCO and FBI acted with malice in prosecuting Flynn.

The damage claim for $50 million concluded with this:

Flynn was the target of a politically motivated investigation and prosecution that had no merit when it began, no merit during its course, and no merit in the end when the charges were withdrawn by the DOJ and ultimately dismissed by the Court after Flynn received a full pardon.


During that meritless and unlawful investigation and prosecution, Flynn was falsely and maliciously painted by the conspirators as a traitor to his nation who acted in concert with a foreign power, and the SCO even threatened Flynn’s son with prosecution unless Flynn were to plead guilty.


The fact that it was orchestrated and carried out at the highest levels of the FBI, DOJ, and White House makes it all the more outrageous.


And the fact it was done intentionally, purposefully, and with reckless disregard for the rights of Flynn as the President’s highest ranking national security advisor, as a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General with 33 years of honorable military service to our country, as a citizen of the United States, and as a human being, makes the conduct despicable, even for partisan Washington standards.

Expect the lawsuit against these miscreants and traitors to drop shortly. The New American will continue to follow the story to keep its readers informed.

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2021 Bob Adelmann