Big govt, Issues, Politics

Parents Fighting for Rights in LGBT-Friendly Schools

Parents in Delaware are taking on the transgender agenda at local schools with more than 11,000 filing objections to the Delaware Education Department’s Regulation 225 which sought to allow children to switch their gender at school without parental notification, let alone consent. In the midst of the parental outrage, the Department of Education and Indian River School District’s board of education unanimously voted against the original version, rewriting the decree to put parents back in the decision-making loop, though ‘trans’ students still have the choice of which locker rooms or bathrooms to use. Once upon a time, parents were the stewards of their children’s future;  now they’re just bystanders for the government’s cradle to grave nanny state.

Here’s more from PJ Media…

Larry Mayo, a grandfather with two relatives who are gay, spoke out against the Delaware Education Department’s Regulation 225 when it was released for public debate last November. The regulation was a bureaucratic move to allow school recognition of children wanting to change their gender without notifying their parents.

“The authority to raise children is not for the state. It’s for the parent,” said Mayo during an Indian River School District Board of Education meeting.

In the face of a firestorm of protest — more than 11,000 people filed objections with the Department of Education and the Indian River School District’s board of education voted unanimously to oppose the original version — Regulation 225 has been rewritten to put parents back at the top of the decision-making process. However, the updated version of the regulation still instructs school districts to make sure kids who decide their birth gender is no longer a good fit can use the locker rooms and bathrooms of their choice.

“Transgender youth deserve equal protection under the law. They don’t deserve special protection,” Mayo added. “I got harassed because I was 5 feet, 3 inches in the ninth grade. I dealt with it.”

Like Mayo, Linda Schroeder told the Indian River Board of Education her disagreement with Regulation 225 didn’t come from a dislike or fear of transgender people.

“We are not against a community or a person for their choice that they make,” Schroeder said. “The Department of Education wants to take our rights away as a parent – not knowing these things that are detrimental to our children – and give the authority to somebody else to decide what is best of your child.”


Big govt, Politics

Conservatives Call Out Stagnant Sanctuary City Bills

Remember those sanctuary city bills we were promised? Congress seems to have forgotten all of their tough talk. That is, except for the conservative caucus. Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, is calling for votes on the ‘504 bills they have’ from the House. This includes Kate’s Law and the No Sanctuary for Criminals Act. He went on to suggest that the cancelled August recess would be the perfect opportunity to take care of them. The question is whether House leadership will do anything with them. If they don’t, we advise remembering that in November.
Here’s more from PJ Media…


Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.), the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, urged the Senate to start voting on the “504 bills they have” from the House, especially the legislation dealing with sanctuary cities.

Last year, the House passed Kate’s Law and the No Sanctuary for Criminals Act, which are both pending in the Senate.

U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently ruled that the city of Philadelphia is still able to receive federal grants despite its “sanctuary city” policies that prohibit full cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney was seen on video dancing after the ruling.

Walker shared his reaction to the court ruling.

“Operating under Article I, our legislative powers allow us to be able to cut off funding to the sanctuary cities so we’re going to continue to look for legislative ways to be able to do that,” Walker told PJM after his speech at a Faith and Freedom Coalition town hall on Capitol Hill, organized as part of the group’s “Road to Majority” conference.

“We know the vast majority of the American people think that a sanctuary city is preposterous, that you could literally allow people to have safe harbor, people who have even broken the law, without fear of prosecution or arrest, even outstanding warrants – that’s not how we do things in this country,” he added.


Big govt, Media, Politics

Facebook ‘Fact-checking’ Conservatives Into Oblivion

Remember when Zuckerberg said times were going to change for the users on the social media leviathan’s platform? Well, now under the banner of fighting fake news, Facebook is outsourcing the fact-checking to liberal countries (Canada, for instance). That is when it’s not handing the job off to the agenda-driven hacks at PolitiFact and Snopes who have been proven to be stacked with leftwing ideologues. It may be time for Congress to police the police when comes to ensuring fair and balanced social media.

Here’s more from PJ Media…

Facebook announced last year that they will be using third-party fact-checkers to root out “fake news” on their platform. At the time of the announcement, conservatives sounded the alarm about how some of the fact-checkers they’re using are left-wing hacks like PolitiFact and Snopes (who recently, with straight faces, fact-checked a piece of satire from The Babylon Bee).

A recent warning that accompanied an article I wrote for PJM highlights the fallibility of Facebook’s fact-checking program.:

Why a Canadian outfit is fact-checking U.S. news is anyone’s guess, but they clearly flagged my article in error. [It was brought to my attention after this article was published that AFP Canada is part of France’s state-run Agence France-Presse, so let me rephrase that question: Why has Facebook chosen a state-run French news outlet to fact-check U.S. news?]

Facebook deprioritized my article after AFP Canada reported this:

No, it is not illegal to take a shower and do laundry on the same day in California

While some media outlets did indeed report (more or less) falsely that California had made it illegal to shower and do laundry on the same day, I made no such claims. In fact, having seen other reporting making that claim (stretching the truth a bit, in my opinion) I conscientiously avoided making it.


Big govt, Issues, Politics

Trump Offers Warren A Million for Proof

President Trump is still not finished taking Sen. Elizabeth ‘Fauxcahontas’ Warren (D-MA) to task over her alleged Native American heritage. While on the campaign trail stumping for Republicans, he offered a million greenbacks if Warren would take a genetics/ancestry test to ‘learn her heritage’. Warren has made a career of trolling Republicans with her socialist-light agenda. Now the shoe’s on the other foot. 

Here’s more from The Hill…

President Trump said Thursday that if he were facing Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) during a debate, he would offer her $1 million to take a test to prove her Native American heritage.

“But let’s say I’m debating Pocahontas, I’ll do this,” Trump said during a campaign rally in Great Falls, Mont., referring to Warren by the racially charged nickname he gave her during the 2016 presidential campaign.

“I promise you I’ll do this, you know those little kits they sell on television for $2? Learn your heritage,” Trump said.

“I’m going to get one of those little kits and in the middle of the debate, when she proclaims she’s of Indian heritage — because her mother said she has high cheekbones, that’s her only evidence,” Trump continued.

“We will take that little kit, we have to do it gently because we’re in the “Me Too” generation, we have to be very gentle,” Trump said mocking the movement that seeks to expose sexual misconduct in media, entertainment and politics.

“And we will say, ‘I will give you a million dollars, paid for by Trump, to your favorite charity if you take the test and it shows you’re an Indian,” Trump said. “And we’ll see what she does. I have a feeling she will say no but we will hold it for the debates.”


Big govt, Courts, Politics

NAACP Plays Race Card Against Trump Nominee

The NAACP is playing the race card again, this time about potential Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett. Barrett is rumored to be one of the two likely picks to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, which is slated to be announced on Monday. Quoth the race-baiters: “Amy Coney Barrett sided against a Black worker in favor of a company’s ‘separate-but-equal arrangement’. But, per usual, the devil’s in the details. The only case that comes close to that description is one that was decided BEFORE Barrett was appointed to the Court. Typical liberal strategy: if facts are against you, make up some new ‘facts’.

An arm of the NAACP on Monday falsely accused a potential Trump nominee of ruling against a black worker in a discrimination claim.

“As a judge, Amy Coney Barrett sided against an Black worker in favor of a company’s ‘separate-but-equal arrangement,’ flying in the face of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” read a now-deleted tweet from the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund. “Now, she’s being considered for a lifetime seat on our nation’s highest court.

Other progressive organizations making the same claim against the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge and former Notre Dame law professor include the Alliance for Justice and the Center for American Progress.
“As a judge, Barrett sided against an African American worker who had been transferred to another store because of a company’s policy of segregating their employees by race and ethnicity, finding that the company’s ‘separate-but-equal arrangement is permissible,'” complained AFJ


Big govt, Courts, Politics

Majority Want SCOTUS Justice Confirmed Before Elections

Unfortunately Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, his hope for a post-election SCOTUS confirmation is among the minority in America…by 2-to-1.
According to a new NBC/SurveyMonkey poll released Tuesday, 62% of Americans want Trump’s yet-to-be-named nominee confirmed before the November elections.
A mere 33% want the confirmation vote to occur after the elections.
Independents also support a pre-election vote on the nominee by a near mirror number of 61%.
So the catch-22 for Dems is that they’ll likely lose more momentum in that ‘blue wave’ if they press the issue of waiting on Trump’s nominee.
Here’s more from Breitbart…
Americans want the President to appoint, and the Senate to confirm, a new Supreme Court justice before the 2018 midterm elections — by a staggering 2-to-1 margin, according to a new poll released Tuesday.


According to a new NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll:

More than six in 10 Americans, or 62 percent, said Trump’s nominee, who will be announced on Monday, should be confirmed or rejected before the elections in which control of the House and Senate are at stake. About three in 10, or 33 percent, said the Senate should wait until after the elections, the poll found.

The vast majority of Republicans surveyed, 85 percent, said the Senate’s vote on the nominee should take place before the election. Roughly six in 10 Independents, or 61 percent, agreed. However, more than half of Democrats, 55 percent, believe the voting on a new justice should wait.


Big govt, Courts, Politics

Breaking: FBI’s Peter Strzok Subpoenaed

It’s official: disgraced, pro-Hillary former FBI agent Peter Strzok will appear at a public hearing next week on July 10 following a subpoena from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA).
The subpoena came after Strzok’s attorney announced that his client had withdrawn a previous offer to testify publically.
Hmm, what could Strzok possibly be hiding from the American people concerning his work both on the Hillary email and Russian election meddling investigations?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Here’s more from The Daily Caller…

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed former FBI official Peter Strzok to appear at a public hearing July 10.

Virginia Republican Rep. Bob Goodlatte issued the subpoena to force Strzok to appear before both the House Judiciary and House Oversight and Government Reform Committees. The hearing will focus on Strzok’s work on both the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign.

Strzok’s attorney, Aitan Goelman, said on Monday that his client had retracted a previous offer to testify publicly. Goelman cited a closed-door interview on June 27 with the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees as evidence that Republicans were setting “a trap” for the embattled FBI agent.

“Having sharpened their knives behind closed doors, the committee would now like to drag back Special Agent Strzok and have him testify in public — a request that we originally made and the committee denied,” Goelman said in a letter first reported by CNN.


Big govt, Courts, Politics

FBI Refuses to Turn Over Docs on Lynch/Hillary Investigation

According to a report by RealClearInvestigations, the FBI is refusing to fork over intelligence that alleges Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch meddled in the Hillary Clinton email investigation.

While we’re wondering ‘why’ this information has yet to be turned over, we can only wonder also if some of that intelligence is a transcription of Lynch’s Phoenix tarmac meeting with Mr. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Every week that passes without the DOJ/FBI’s compliance with congressional requests is just one more reason to begin impeaching people until they recognize the constitutional authority of the people’s house.

Here’s more from Breitbart…

The FBI had little problem leaking “unverified” dirt from Russian sources on Donald Trump and his campaign aides – and even basing FISA wiretaps on it. But according to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the bureau is refusing to allow even members of Congress with top security clearance to see intercepted material alleging political interference by President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch:

The FBI had little problem leaking “unverified” dirt from Russian sources on Donald Trump and his campaign aides – and even basing FISA wiretaps on it. But according to the Justice Department’s inspector general, the bureau is refusing to allow even members of Congress with top security clearance to see intercepted material alleging political interference by President Obama’s attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

That material – which has been outlined in press reports – consists of unverified accounts intercepted from putative Russian sources in which the head of the Democratic National Committee allegedly implicates the Hillary Clinton campaign and Lynch in a secret deal to fix the Clinton email investigation.


Big govt, Politics

Gowdy Roasts Rosentein at Russian Investigation Hearing

South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy made clear at a congressional hearing on Thursday that he is not impressed with ongoing investigation of Russian influence operations in the 2016 presidential election.

He is particularly irked by the slow-walking of presenting evidence (or thereof) and turning over said evidence to the Congress.

“Whatever you got, finish it the hell up,” Gowdy fired at FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

“Right now this country is being torn apart.”

Gowdy’s laconic approach is refreshing in the otherwise swamping morass of bureaucratic creep in DC.

Here’s more from Daily Caller…

South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy criticized investigators Thursday for not moving faster on their investigation into the extent of Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

“If you have evidence of wrongdoing by any member of the Trump campaign, present it to the damn grand jury,” Gowdy, a Republican who chairs the House Committee on Oversight, told FBI Director Christopher Wray and deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at a congressional hearing.



Big govt, Politics

Reckoning: Peter Strzok to Appear on Capitol Hill

Anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok will be making a long-awaited appearance before two House Committees on Wednesday for ‘interviews’ concerning his role (and bias) in the Hillary Clinton email and Trump-Russia investigations.

According to a Judiciary Committee aide, a public hearing will be following ‘soon’.

Which may come after Strzok and the Swamp get their stories straight for the cameras.

The problem is there’s almost no way to Strzok’s defense will jive with what Comey and McCabe have testified.

It’s a classic prisoner’s dilemma, and they all may become prisoners in the end regardless.

Here’s more from Hotair…

FBI agent Peter Strzok will be on Capitol Hill tomorrow to meet with two House Committees. Politico reports that an open-session, like the one proposed Monday by President Trump, is expected to follow sometime soon:

Strzok — whose role in the investigations of Hillary Clinton’s email use and the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia was one focus of a recent Justice Department watchdog report — will meet with the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees. The interview will be held behind closed doors, but is set to be followed “soon” by a public hearing, according to a Judiciary Committee aide…

Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages, which were sent to an FBI colleague throughout 2016 and 2017, have become the centerpiece of Republican claims that the FBI’s Trump campaign probe was politically motivated. While the DOJ’s inspector general report concluded Strzok appeared to show willingness to use his official capacity to hurt Trump politically, it didn’t weigh in on whether his opinions affected the opening of the Trump-Russia investigation. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has indicated he is still reviewing Strzok’s role in the Russia investigation.

The IG’s report did conclude that there was no evidence political animus toward Trump affected any official FBI action taken during the Clinton investigation.