thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Jerry Nadler: Hunter Biden ‘Not A Relevant Witness’ At Impeachment Trial

Democratic New York Rep. Jerry Nadler , chairman of the House Judiciary Committee , said Wednesday that Hunter Biden is “ not a relevant witness ” at the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
Nadler , who was named an impeachment manager Wednesday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , was speaking at a news conference where he described Democratic expectations for the trial .
The congressman insisted that Trump had “ betrayed his country by trying to extort Ukraine by withholding $ 391 million in military aid … in order to get Ukraine to announce an investigation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the allegation.
” Nadler suggested that “ any witness who has information about whether that is true or not true is a relevant witness .
Anybody , like Hunter Biden , who has no information about any of that , is not a relevant witness.
” ( RELATED : House Votes To Send Articles Of Impeachment To The Senate , Approve Impeachment Managers ) The impeachment manager then claimed that “ any trial judge in this country would rule such a witness is irrelevant and inadmissible.
” But for many Republicans , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the impeachment question .
The president ’ s personal attorney , Rudy Giuliani , has repeatedly called for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the activities of both Bidens vis-a-vis Ukraine .
Burisma Holdings , Ukraine ’ s largest private gas company , gave Hunter Biden a lucrative seat on its board of directors in April 2014 , reportedly to cozy up to prominent Americans who might be able to free the company from being investigated .
Former Vice President Joe Biden has bragged about how he successfully applied pressure to Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that investigation , but direct evidence has yet to be found proving that removal to be linked to the Burisma probe .
( RELATED : Giuliani Says Ukraine Paid Hunter Biden $ 3M In Laundered Money , While Joe Biden And Obama Looked The Other Way ) Nadler also suggested Wednesday at the news conference that impeachment was no longer just about the president because now “ the Senate is on trial.
” House Republicans wanted Biden to testify before the House Intelligence Committee impeachment inquiry but that request was denied by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump has said that if witnesses do appear at the impeachment trial , his top two choices are Schiff and Hunter Biden .

Democratic New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday that Hunter Biden is “not a relevant witness” at the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
Nadler, who was named an impeachment manager Wednesday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was speaking at a news conference where he described Democratic expectations for the trial.
The congressman insisted that Trump had “betrayed his country by trying to extort Ukraine by withholding $391 million in military aid … in order to get Ukraine to announce an investigation of a domestic political opponent. That is the allegation.”
Nadler suggested that “any witness who has information about whether that is true or not true is a relevant witness. Anybody, like Hunter Biden, who has no information about any of that, is not a relevant witness.” (RELATED: House Votes To Send Articles Of Impeachment To The Senate, Approve Impeachment Managers)
The impeachment manager then claimed that “any trial judge in this country would rule such a witness is irrelevant and inadmissible.”
But for many Republicans, including the president, Biden is central to the impeachment question. The president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, has repeatedly called for the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the activities of both Bidens vis-a-vis Ukraine. Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest private gas company, gave Hunter Biden a lucrative seat on its board of directors in April 2014, reportedly to cozy up to prominent Americans who might be able to free the company from being investigated.
Former Vice President Joe Biden has bragged about how he successfully applied pressure to Ukraine to remove the prosecutor who was leading that investigation, but direct evidence has yet to be found proving that removal to be linked to the Burisma probe. (RELATED: Giuliani Says Ukraine Paid Hunter Biden $3M In Laundered Money, While Joe Biden And Obama Looked The Other Way)
Nadler also suggested Wednesday at the news conference that impeachment was no longer just about the president because now “the Senate is on trial.”
House Republicans wanted Biden to testify before the House Intelligence Committee impeachment inquiry but that request was denied by the chairman, Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff.
Trump has said that if witnesses do appear at the impeachment trial, his top two choices are Schiff and Hunter Biden.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--We Asked The Exiled Shah Of Iran What He Thinks About The MEK, A Marxist-Islamist Cult That Has Big-

We Asked The Exiled Shah Of Iran What He Thinks About The MEK, A Marxist-Islamist Cult That Has Big-Shot Backers In Washington

The exiled shah of Iran spoke at the Hudson Institute in Washington , D.C. Wednesday , and the Daily Caller @ @ @ @ @ he had to say .
Daily Caller Video Director Richie McGinnis asked Reza Pahlavi about @ @ @ @ @ s Mujahedin of Iran ( MEK ) .
See what the exiled Shah had to @ @ @ @ @ below .
Make sure to check out the rest of our behind-the-scenes , Patriots–only videos @ @ @ @ @ if you haven ’ t already — go and subscribe to our channel .
In @ @ @ @ @ know in the comments what YOU want to hear discussed in our upcoming videos .
@ @ @ @ @ .
This is your chance to become part of the conversation and help us shape @ @ @ @ @ .
Make sure you go and follow us on all of our social media pages @

The exiled shah of Iran spoke at the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C. Wednesday, and the Daily Caller was there to see what he had to say.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Clinton-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump’s Executive Order On Refugee Resettlement

A federal judge in Maryland ruled Wednesday to stop President Donald Trump ’ s executive order allowing states and localities to choose whether they wish to accept refugees .
Peter Messitte , a judge on the Maryland District Court , issued a temporary injunction against the Trump administration ’ s order giving states and counties the option to decline refugees on an annual basis .
Messitte said in his 31-page memorandum opinion that the refugee resettlement groups that sued “ are clearly likely to succeed in showing , that , by giving states and local governments veto power over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the order is unlawful , ” according to The Wall Street Journal .
Messitte — who former President Bill Clinton appointed to the position in 1993 — said that giving authority to the states to decide whether to accept refugees “ flies in the face of clear congressional intent ” as it conflicts with the Refugee Act .
Trump issued an executive order in September 2019 that gave authority to state and local governments over whether they would want to accept refugees .
The directive was the administration ’ s latest move to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country .
The administration had already set the 2020 refugee cap at 18,000 , the lowest number since the U.S. refugee program began in 1980 .
A vast majority of governors — both Republican and Democrats — have so far chosen to keep accepting refugees .
To date , 42 governors have notified the White House that they will keep taking them in , including 19 GOP governors .
( RELATED : ‘ Height Of Hypocrisy ’ : ICE Rips New York For Not Turning Over Illegal Alien Now Accused Of Killing 92-Year-Old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Greg Abbott became the first to take Trump up on his offer .
Abbott announced on Jan. 10 that Texas would not accept refugees for the year and said that , since Texas has accepted more of them than any other state for years , it was time for other state governments to step up .
Messitte ’ s ruling nullifies Abbott ’ s decision for the time being , but the case will continue to play out in court .
The Trump administration blasted the decision in a statement released Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has asserted its own preferred immigration policy in place of the laws of the United States — and , in so doing , robbed millions of American citizens of their voice and their say in a vital issue directly affecting their communities , ” read a statement from the White House Press Secretary .
“ President Trump rightly and justly recognized that your communities are unique , and while some cities have the resources to adequately support refugees and help them be successful , not all communities can sustain the substantial and costly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruling , one more example of nationwide district court injunctions run amok , and we are expeditiously reviewing all options to protect our communities and preserve the integrity of the refugee resettlement process , ” the statement continued .
Update : This article was updated to include comment from the White House .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

A federal judge in Maryland ruled Wednesday to stop President Donald Trump’s executive order allowing states and localities to choose whether they wish to accept refugees.
Peter Messitte, a judge on the Maryland District Court, issued a temporary injunction against the Trump administration’s order giving states and counties the option to decline refugees on an annual basis. Messitte said in his 31-page memorandum opinion that the refugee resettlement groups that sued “are clearly likely to succeed in showing, that, by giving states and local governments veto power over the resettlement of refugees within their borders, the order is unlawful,” according to The Wall Street Journal.
Messitte — who former President Bill Clinton appointed to the position in 1993 — said that giving authority to the states to decide whether to accept refugees “flies in the face of clear congressional intent” as it conflicts with the Refugee Act.
The ruling marks a major victory for the group of faith-based organizations that filed the lawsuit and places a hurdle in front of the Trump administration days before the order was supposed to go into effect. The State Department originally established a Jan. 21 deadline for local officials to declare their positions on the resettlement program.
Trump issued an executive order in September 2019 that gave authority to state and local governments over whether they would want to accept refugees. The directive was the administration’s latest move to restrict the flow of refugees into the country. The administration had already set the 2020 refugee cap at 18,000, the lowest number since the U.S. refugee program began in 1980.
A vast majority of governors — both Republican and Democrats — have so far chosen to keep accepting refugees. To date, 42 governors have notified the White House that they will keep taking them in, including 19 GOP governors. (RELATED: ‘Height Of Hypocrisy’: ICE Rips New York For Not Turning Over Illegal Alien Now Accused Of Killing 92-Year-Old Woman)
However, Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott became the first to take Trump up on his offer. Abbott announced on Jan. 10 that Texas would not accept refugees for the year and said that, since Texas has accepted more of them than any other state for years, it was time for other state governments to step up.
Messitte’s ruling nullifies Abbott’s decision for the time being, but the case will continue to play out in court.
The Trump administration blasted the decision in a statement Wednesday evening from the White House press secretary. It said:
Another lawless district court has asserted its own preferred immigration policy in place of the laws of the United States — and, in so doing, robbed millions of American citizens of their voice and their say in a vital issue directly affecting their communities. President Trump rightly and justly recognized that your communities are unique, and while some cities have the resources to adequately support refugees and help them be successful, not all communities can sustain the substantial and costly burden.
“This is a preposterous ruling, one more example of nationwide district court injunctions run amok, and we are expeditiously reviewing all options to protect our communities and preserve the integrity of the refugee resettlement process,” the statement continued.
Update: This article was updated to include comment from the White House.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--FACT CHECK: 3 Claims From The 7th Democratic Primary Debate

CNN and The Des Moines Register jointly held the seventh Democratic presidential primary debate Tuesday night in Iowa , where six candidates covered topics ranging from election records to relations with North Korea to childcare worker wages .
It was the last primary debate before the Iowa ’ s caucuses on Feb. 3 .
Here are three checks on their claims .
Claim 1 : “ And the only person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican any time in the past 30 years is me , ” said Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren .
In 2012 , Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his seat , according to Clerk of the House records , but she ’ s not the only candidate on the debate stage to defeat an incumbent Republican during her 30-year time frame .
“ Well , just to set the record straight , I defeated an incumbent Republican running for Congress , ” said Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders , adding that his win occurred in 1990 .
Indeed , Sanders did defeat an incumbent Republican in 1990 , with his successful campaign to represent Vermont ’ s at-large congressional district concluding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
During that election , he beat Peter Smith , a Republican , by more than 34,500 votes , according to Vermont state records .
Former Vice President Joe Biden also unseated a Republican incumbent , J. Caleb Boggs , for one of Delaware ’ s Senate seats in the state ’ s closely contested 1972 senatorial election , but that win falls outside Warren ’ s 30-year time frame by nearly 20 years .
Claim 2 : “ The President showed up , met with him , gave him legitimacy , weakened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Biden of President Donald Trump meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un .
Some lawmakers , including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer , have criticized Trump ’ s approach to diplomacy with Kim as giving “ international legitimacy ” to North Korea .
Since assuming the presidency , Trump has met with Kim three times : a June 2018 summit in Singapore , a February 2019 summit in Hanoi and a June 2019 meeting in the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea .
Although Trump did once create confusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sanctions that had not yet been announced in March 2019 , the president has actually increased sanctions from the previous levels in the Obama administration .
In September 2017 , Trump instituted new sanctions via executive order targeting individuals , companies and financial institutions that do business with North Korea , according to NBC News .
The Treasury Department imposed sanctions Jan. 14 on two companies , North Korea-based Namgang Trading Corporation and China-based Beijing Sukbakso , that it says are involved in sending North Koreans to work abroad in violation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Childcare workers are making wages lower than McDonald ’ s workers , ” said Sanders .
Federal data shows that U.S. childcare workers not only earn higher average annual salaries but also higher mean and median hourly salaries than fast food workers , though it ’ s possible some individual childcare workers take home less than some McDonald ’ s workers .
The average annual salary of a childcare worker was $ 24,610 in May 2018 , according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics .
That equates to a mean hourly salary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ salary of $ 11.17 .
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows fast food and counter workers made average annual salaries of $ 22,260 in May 2018 , meaning they made on average $ 2,350 less than childcare workers .
The mean and median hourly salaries for fast food and counter workers were also lower , at $ 10.70 and $ 10.32 respectively .
McDonald ’ s median employee , a part-time crew member in Hungary , received a total of $ 7,473 in compensation for 2018 , according to the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an employment website , estimates that the average hourly rate for McDonald ’ s crew members is $ 9 , while PayScale.com puts the average hourly rate for a “ fast food worker ” slightly lower , at $ 8.72 .

CNN and The Des Moines Register jointly held the seventh Democratic presidential primary debate Tuesday night in Iowa, where six candidates covered topics ranging from election records to relations with North Korea to childcare worker wages. It was the last primary debate before the Iowa’s caucuses on Feb. 3.
Here are three checks on their claims.
Claim 1: “And the only person on this stage who has beaten an incumbent Republican any time in the past 30 years is me,” said Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
In 2012, Warren beat Republican incumbent Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown for his seat, according to Clerk of the House records, but she’s not the only candidate on the debate stage to defeat an incumbent Republican during her 30-year time frame.
“Well, just to set the record straight, I defeated an incumbent Republican running for Congress,” said Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, adding that his win occurred in 1990.
Indeed, Sanders did defeat an incumbent Republican in 1990, with his successful campaign to represent Vermont’s at-large congressional district concluding roughly 29 years and two months ago. During that election, he beat Peter Smith, a Republican, by more than 34,500 votes, according to Vermont state records.
Former Vice President Joe Biden also unseated a Republican incumbent, J. Caleb Boggs, for one of Delaware’s Senate seats in the state’s closely contested 1972 senatorial election, but that win falls outside Warren’s 30-year time frame by nearly 20 years.
Claim 2: “The President showed up, met with him, gave him legitimacy, weakened the sanctions we have against him,” said Biden of President Donald Trump meeting with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.
Some lawmakers, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, have criticized Trump’s approach to diplomacy with Kim as giving “international legitimacy” to North Korea. Since assuming the presidency, Trump has met with Kim three times: a June 2018 summit in Singapore, a February 2019 summit in Hanoi and a June 2019 meeting in the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea.
Although Trump did once create confusion when he tweeted he ordered the removal of sanctions that had not yet been announced in March 2019, the president has actually increased sanctions from the previous levels in the Obama administration. In September 2017, Trump instituted new sanctions via executive order targeting individuals, companies and financial institutions that do business with North Korea, according to NBC News.
The Treasury Department imposed sanctions Jan. 14 on two companies, North Korea-based Namgang Trading Corporation and China-based Beijing Sukbakso, that it says are involved in sending North Koreans to work abroad in violation of United Nations sanctions.
Claim 3: “Childcare workers are making wages lower than McDonald’s workers,” said Sanders.
Federal data shows that U.S. childcare workers not only earn higher average annual salaries but also higher mean and median hourly salaries than fast food workers, though it’s possible some individual childcare workers take home less than some McDonald’s workers.
The average annual salary of a childcare worker was $24,610 in May 2018, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That equates to a mean hourly salary of $11.83 or a median hourly salary of $11.17.
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows fast food and counter workers made average annual salaries of $22,260 in May 2018, meaning they made on average $2,350 less than childcare workers. The mean and median hourly salaries for fast food and counter workers were also lower, at $10.70 and $10.32 respectively.
McDonald’s median employee, a part-time crew member in Hungary, received a total of $7,473 in compensation for 2018, according to the company’s 2019 proxy statement. Glassdoor.com, an employment website, estimates that the average hourly rate for McDonald’s crew members is $9, while PayScale.com puts the average hourly rate for a “fast food worker” slightly lower, at $8.72.
Brad Sylvester contributed to this report.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--A Guide For The Cancelled: What To Do When The Mob Comes For You

So you ’ ve been cancelled .
You said something regrettable , or regretted , and now the mob has come for you .
What do you do next ?
The traditional response to being canceled involves an apology and a promise to be better and more aware of whatever group one has ostensibly offended .
“ Cancel culture is more about power than it is actual offense , ” Christian Toto , Editor-in-Chief of Entertainment In Toto , a right-leaning entertainment website , told the Daily Caller .
Which is to say , cancel culture , which claims to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an expression of them .
It ’ s an exercise of power , not a challenge to it .
It ’ s also a political tool to enforce a certain point of view , Toto added , “ as opposed to general concern for other people.
” If you find yourself on the wrong end of a cancellation , perhaps you can get some ideas from those who have been cancelled before you .
The famous Harry Potter author faced down an attempted cancellation this month after she expressed support for May Forstater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for saying she believes in biological sex differences .
After her initial tweet , she has refused to engage the critics .
( RELATED : How J.K. Rowling Went From Resistance Hero To LGBTQ Enemy ) Rowling has not tweeted since and has left the tweet up with no apology .
She also did not respond to any media outlets that reached out for comment .
“ I do think J.K. Rowling went about this the right way .
She ’ s a multi-millionaire , she has lots of power , she has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t really hurt her in any significant way , ” Toto said .
Toto also pointed to an Adam Carolla podcast in which Carolla observes an important principle for the cancelled : “ if you retreat , they will encroach , ” meaning , if you try to placate them they will only grow bolder .
Had Rowling apologized there would have been more attention drawn to the apology and the original tweet .
Her choice not to engage may have helped her avoid being canceled .
Carolla did not immediately respond to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comment .
“ It does help at a cultural level when our biggest stars stand up to these scolds , where they don ’ t do the apology tour , ” Toto said .
Ellen DeGeneres was also nearly cancelled for sitting next to George W. Bush at a Cowboys game , and while Ellen did explain herself , she didn ’ t take it back .
“ We can disagree with certain people about certain things and not cancel them , we are complex people , we can have different views , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something , ” Toto said echoing Ellen ’ s point that its okay to disagree .
“ Two years ago Jim Jefferies had a sketch on his comedy central show and he referred to [ Melania Trump ] as wooden and he sexualized her , and that would never be acceptable with Michelle Obama , ” Toto says , noting the difference in the likelihood of being cancelled for offending the left or the right .
Ricky Gervais , on the other hand , provoked a quite different reaction from the left and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ monologue at the Golden Globes .
“ That ’ s why Ricky Gervais is important , ” Toto said , “ not just because he ’ s a comedian , not just because he ’ s funny but he ’ s a guy saying ‘ I ’ m not going to apologize , you can come after me , you can attack me , look elsewhere.
’ ” “ Welcome to the 300,000 new followers I acquired today .
I promise you won ’ t like everything I say , but here ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted after his appearance .
Gervais kept his responses lighthearted and funny , but also didn ’ t give an inch , which likely had an effect on the overall response to his comments .
Referring to “ the reviews ” of Gervais after the Golden Globes , Toto notes that the commentariat “ called it ‘ tame.
’ What he did was the absolute polar opposite of tame .
But they needed to diminish him because they didn ’ t like his message.
” Comedian , actress and writer Roseanne Barr , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” was canceled after her controversial tweet about former Obama Advisor Valerie Jarrett .
“ Look at Roseanne Barr , she said that awful tweet , she said she was on Ambien whether she ’ s right or wrong , and she apologized profusely , it didn ’ t save her it didn ’ t save her show , it didn ’ t save her career , ” Toto said of the Barr situation .
Barr has always had a complex , run-your-mouth relationship with Twitter and has consistently pushed boundaries .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ her .
“ What that did was wipe out a woman who set the standard for sitcoms , who gave voice to blue-collar America , who according to her cowriters was very welcoming of women of color in the writing .
All those wonderful things are gone , and it didn ’ t matter that she apologized , ” he continued .
“ She has been canceled.
” “ You do need to be careful of what you say , but I am a little fearful you know , I use Twitter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decided to cancel me , that would be a blow to my career , ” Toto said when asked about avoiding being canceled .
( RELATED : Is Anti-Trumper Stephan King About To Be Canceled After Commenting On Diversity ? )
Is there a clear-cut path to avoid being canceled , or how to respond to it ?
No , since it depends on the situation and the controversy .
Gervais and J.K. Rowling were among the more successful , who did not retreat or retract their comments .
For Roseanne Barr , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

So you’ve been cancelled. You said something regrettable, or regretted, and now the mob has come for you. What do you do next?


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--WEISS: Bloomberg Is Wasting His Money Attacking Teflon Don

They say money can ’ t buy you love , but billionaire Michael Bloomberg is living proof that it can ’ t buy you common sense , either .
Bloomberg has now spent $ 200 million on his campaign to defeat President Donald Trump — but that hasn ’ t put him on track to earn a single delegate .
The long-shot Democratic presidential candidate announced that he is also shelling out roughly $ 10 million for a 60-second ad during the Super Bowl .
His campaign previously announced that it would spend $ 100 million on an online ad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does anyone understand what Bloomberg plans to do for America ?
Has all that money passed on a clear political message ?
Bloomberg remains fifth in the crowded Democratic field with only eight weeks to go until Super Tuesday .
Internal data from one of his rivals suggested he is not polling above 10 percent in any of the four early voting states or the 15 that follow in March .
The massive campaign spending coming from the former mayor is unheard of politically .
No one is setting up a field operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is spending to influence American politics .
“ Mike Bloomberg is either going to be the nominee or the most important person supporting the Democratic nominee for president , ” Kevin Sheekey , Bloomberg ’ s campaign manager , recently told NBC News .
“ He is dedicated to getting Trump out of the White House.
” Since his late entrance into the race in November , he has hired more than 800 staff members and is opening a dozen offices in Ohio , nine in Michigan , and 17 in Florida .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ mission is to make sure Trump loses in 2020 , whether Bloomberg wins the nomination or not .
Apparently , like other Democrats and media bigwigs , Bloomberg hasn ’ t been paying attention for the past few years .
Ever since Donald Trump walked down the escalator in Trump Tower and announced he was running for president , he has been the target of a relentless attack by the media .
A recent study found that 90 percent of all coverage he received in 2018 was negative .
From the “ Access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , opponents of Trump have thrown everything they can at him to change public opinion , but nothing sticks .
A Media Research Center analysis found that 93 percent of the coverage of the impeachment on ABC , CBS and NBC was negative .
Evening news viewers of these networks heard 72 positive statements vs. 981 negative statements about the president since September 24 .
This week , Vanity Fair even published a ridiculous anecdote from a party claiming that Trump said his middle initial , J. , stands for “ genius.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ absolute mockery with their disdain for the president .
They have become so completely blinded by their hatred that any attempts at appearing unbiased were long ago thrown out the window .
Despite the barrage of negative coverage and finger-wagging about every move he makes , the sustained campaign against him has had almost no impact on public approval .
Trump maintains an average 41 percent approval rating , according to a RealClear Politics poll , up 3 percent from the previous year .
Among Republicans , Trump is currently enjoying the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a Hill-HarrisX poll .
The pollsters found that a whopping 90 percent approve of his job performance , the highest favorable rating since the survey began asking the question in 2018 .
Bloomberg can run the nastiest and most outlandish ads he can dream up , but every single thing the president says or does is spun negatively — and has been for years .
It hasn ’ t worked .
Perhaps he should focus on donating to colleges and hoping that future students are indoctrinated enough to care about Democratic policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a crazy idea , maybe it is time for the Democrats to stop their failing campaign of smearing the president and actually present some new and original policy ideas instead of blaming others for their shortcomings .
Enough with what you won ’ t do .
We ’ re waiting for the what you will do .
Adam Weiss ( @ AdamMatthew ) is the CEO of AMW PR , a New York political strategy and communications firm .
His firm has represented Kimberly Guilfoyle , Judge Jeanine Pirro , Corey Lewandowski @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more .

They say money can’t buy you love, but billionaire Michael Bloomberg is living proof that it can’t buy you common sense, either.
Bloomberg has now spent $200 million on his campaign to defeat President Donald Trump — but that hasn’t put him on track to earn a single delegate.
The long-shot Democratic presidential candidate announced that he is also shelling out roughly $10 million for a 60-second ad during the Super Bowl. His campaign previously announced that it would spend $100 million on an online ad campaign going after the president. But does anyone understand what Bloomberg plans to do for America? Has all that money passed on a clear political message?
Bloomberg remains fifth in the crowded Democratic field with only eight weeks to go until Super Tuesday. Internal data from one of his rivals suggested he is not polling above 10 percent in any of the four early voting states or the 15 that follow in March.
The massive campaign spending coming from the former mayor is unheard of politically. No one is setting up a field operation that is even close to what Bloomberg is spending to influence American politics.
“Mike Bloomberg is either going to be the nominee or the most important person supporting the Democratic nominee for president,” Kevin Sheekey, Bloomberg’s campaign manager, recently told NBC News. “He is dedicated to getting Trump out of the White House.”
Since his late entrance into the race in November, he has hired more than 800 staff members and is opening a dozen offices in Ohio, nine in Michigan, and 17 in Florida. His campaign has repeatedly said that their mission is to make sure Trump loses in 2020, whether Bloomberg wins the nomination or not.
Apparently, like other Democrats and media bigwigs, Bloomberg hasn’t been paying attention for the past few years.
Ever since Donald Trump walked down the escalator in Trump Tower and announced he was running for president, he has been the target of a relentless attack by the media. A recent study found that 90 percent of all coverage he received in 2018 was negative. From the “Access Hollywood” tape to voting to impeach him, opponents of Trump have thrown everything they can at him to change public opinion, but nothing sticks.
A Media Research Center analysis found that 93 percent of the coverage of the impeachment on ABC, CBS and NBC was negative. Evening news viewers of these networks heard 72 positive statements vs. 981 negative statements about the president since September 24.
This week, Vanity Fair even published a ridiculous anecdote from a party claiming that Trump said his middle initial, J., stands for “genius.” The mainstream media has become an absolute mockery with their disdain for the president. They have become so completely blinded by their hatred that any attempts at appearing unbiased were long ago thrown out the window.
Despite the barrage of negative coverage and finger-wagging about every move he makes, the sustained campaign against him has had almost no impact on public approval. Trump maintains an average 41 percent approval rating, according to a RealClear Politics poll, up 3 percent from the previous year.
Among Republicans, Trump is currently enjoying the most support he has ever had, according to a Hill-HarrisX poll. The pollsters found that a whopping 90 percent approve of his job performance, the highest favorable rating since the survey began asking the question in 2018.
Bloomberg can run the nastiest and most outlandish ads he can dream up, but every single thing the president says or does is spun negatively — and has been for years. It hasn’t worked. Perhaps he should focus on donating to colleges and hoping that future students are indoctrinated enough to care about Democratic policies.
Or, and I realize this is a crazy idea, maybe it is time for the Democrats to stop their failing campaign of smearing the president and actually present some new and original policy ideas instead of blaming others for their shortcomings.
Enough with what you won’t do. We’re waiting for the what you will do.
Adam Weiss (@AdamMatthew) is the CEO of AMW PR, a New York political strategy and communications firm. His firm has represented Kimberly Guilfoyle, Judge Jeanine Pirro, Corey Lewandowski, David Bossie, Anthony Scaramucci and more.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Prince Harry Jumps Back Into Royal Duties With Announcement Of Invictus Games

Prince Harry announced the details for the 2022 Invictus Games on Wednesday .
The announcement comes a week after Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle announced they would be taking a “ step back ” from their “ senior ” roles .
The details were announced in a video on the Invictus Foundation ’ s Twitter account .
“ In 2022 , the Invictus Games will travel to a new country , a new home for respect for our Armed Forces , ” Harry announced in the clip .
The games will be held in Dusseldorf , Germany .
Prince @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of his royal duties for years .
The announcement of the games highlights the question of how Markle and Prince Harry will fit into the royal family moving forward .
( RELATED : Prince Harry , Prince William Deny ‘ Bullying ’ Played A Part In The Decision To Leave For Prince Harry , Meghan Markle ) Last week , the couple announced they would be stepping back from their roles , cut themselves off financially and split their time between both the United Kingdom and Canada .
A meeting was called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II to discuss the decision further .
“ There are complex matters for my family to resolve , and there is some more work to be done , but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days , ” the Queen said in a statement released following the meeting .

Prince Harry announced the details for the 2022 Invictus Games on Wednesday.
The announcement comes a week after Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle announced they would be taking a “step back” from their “senior” roles. The details were announced in a video on the Invictus Foundation’s Twitter account.
HRH The Duke of Sussex announces the 2022 Invictus Games will be held in Düsseldorf, Germany: #InvictusGames #DukeofSussex #IG2022 #Dusseldorf pic.twitter.com/PGGb2teKnA — Invictus Games Foundation (@WeAreInvictus) January 15, 2020
“In 2022, the Invictus Games will travel to a new country, a new home for respect for our Armed Forces,” Harry announced in the clip. The games will be held in Dusseldorf, Germany.
Prince Harry has hosted the Invictus Games as part of his royal duties for years.
The announcement of the games highlights the question of how Markle and Prince Harry will fit into the royal family moving forward. (RELATED: Prince Harry, Prince William Deny ‘Bullying’ Played A Part In The Decision To Leave For Prince Harry, Meghan Markle)
Last week, the couple announced they would be stepping back from their roles, cut themselves off financially and split their time between both the United Kingdom and Canada.
A meeting was called Monday between Prince Charles, Prince Harry, Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II to discuss the decision further.
“There are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days,” the Queen said in a statement released following the meeting.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Eddie Murphy Recalls The One ‘SNL’ Sketch That Saved His Job When Everyone Got Fired

Eddie Murphy recalled the one sketch he did that saved his job on “ Saturday Night Live ” when everyone else on the show was being fired , except himself and Joe Piscopo .
“ Like I said the whole cast was getting a lot of shit and they hated the show and then they fired everybody , ” the 58-year-old actor/comedian shared in a clip posted Wednesday on YouTube by “ SNL ” new web series titled “ Stories From the Show .
“ [ Head writer ] Michael O ’ Donoghue came and fired everybody , and just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : ‘ SNL ’ Alum Rob Schneider : ‘ Saturday Night Live ’ Is Now Ruining The Joke ) “ And the reason he kept me because there was a sketch where there was an article in the paper about old people eating pet food and I went to the news desk and did some kind of thing about it , ” he added .
“ So it looked like I was eating dog food .
O ’ Donoghue fired everybody and he came in and he said , ‘ The only reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get fired is because he ate that dog food ! '
” ( RELATED : REPORT : Eddie Murphy In Talks Over $ 70 Million Standup Deal With Netflix ) Murphy continued , “ And I was like , ‘ But that wasn ’ t dog food , that was hash !
’ And he looked at me like , What the fuck ?
But it was too late , and I kept the show .
It was just that close .
If he had known that was hash , none of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ Coming To America ” star talked about his career in a cover story with Vanity Fair revealing the one and only time he ever had to audition for a job and that was for “ SNL.
’ “ I had been doing stand-up , ” the “ Dolemite ” star explained .
“ I started doing stand-up when I was 15 , so I got like three years before I get that audition .
The first audition is literally a guy sitting in a room by himself , and he just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' ” “ Well , that would be daunting to most people , but because I had been doing stand-up I had 15 to 20 minutes of an act , ” he added .
“ I was used to going up late at night at the Comic Strip .
When you ’ re a young comic you don ’ t get good spots , so you ’ re going up in front of five or six people anyway.
” Murphy continued , while explaining that he did several impressions .
“ I did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing him , ” the legendary comedian shared .
“ I did Muhammad Ali , and Howie Cosell , and Bill Cosby .
So all that stuff was in my little five-minute audition .
He didn ’ t laugh at anything .
I was just doing it , he was just sitting there watching me , and looking me up and down .
After I did all my shit , he was like , ‘ Thank you . '
” Clearly , everything worked out and he landed the gig .
And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history .

Eddie Murphy recalled the one sketch he did that saved his job on “Saturday Night Live” when everyone else on the show was being fired, except himself and Joe Piscopo.
“Like I said the whole cast was getting a lot of shit and they hated the show and then they fired everybody,” the 58-year-old actor/comedian shared in a clip posted Wednesday on YouTube by “SNL” new web series titled “Stories From the Show. “[Head writer] Michael O’Donoghue came and fired everybody, and just kept me and Piscopo.” (RELATED: ‘SNL’ Alum Rob Schneider: ‘Saturday Night Live’ Is Now Ruining The Joke)
WATCH:
“And the reason he kept me because there was a sketch where there was an article in the paper about old people eating pet food and I went to the news desk and did some kind of thing about it,” he added. “So it looked like I was eating dog food. O’Donoghue fired everybody and he came in and he said, ‘The only reason [Eddie] Murphy didn’t get fired is because he ate that dog food!'” (RELATED: REPORT: Eddie Murphy In Talks Over $70 Million Standup Deal With Netflix)
Murphy continued, “And I was like, ‘But that wasn’t dog food, that was hash!’ And he looked at me like, What the fuck? But it was too late, and I kept the show. It was just that close. If he had known that was hash, none of this would be happening.”
On Tuesday, the “Coming To America” star talked about his career in a cover story with Vanity Fair revealing the one and only time he ever had to audition for a job and that was for “SNL.’
“I had been doing stand-up,” the “Dolemite” star explained. “I started doing stand-up when I was 15, so I got like three years before I get that audition. The first audition is literally a guy sitting in a room by himself, and he just says, ‘Make me laugh.'”
“Well, that would be daunting to most people, but because I had been doing stand-up I had 15 to 20 minutes of an act,” he added. “I was used to going up late at night at the Comic Strip. When you’re a young comic you don’t get good spots, so you’re going up in front of five or six people anyway.”
Murphy continued, while explaining that he did several impressions.
“I did Jimmy Carter, back then I was doing him,” the legendary comedian shared. “I did Muhammad Ali, and Howie Cosell, and Bill Cosby. So all that stuff was in my little five-minute audition. He didn’t laugh at anything. I was just doing it, he was just sitting there watching me, and looking me up and down. After I did all my shit, he was like, ‘Thank you.'”
Clearly, everything worked out and he landed the gig. And the rest, as they say, is history.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--FISA Court’s Pick To Monitor Surveillance Reform Calls FBI Proposals ‘A Step In The Right Direction’

FISA Court’s Pick To Monitor Surveillance Reform Calls FBI Proposals ‘A Step In The Right Direction’ But ‘Insufficient’

A former Justice Department official said Wednesday that the FBI ’ s proposed revisions to its surveillance procedures are “ a step in the right direction ” yet “ insufficient ” to address problems laid out in a Justice Department inspector general ’ s ( IG ) report.
” David Kris , a former Justice Department official , provided the assessment in a letter to Judge James Boasberg , who presides over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ( FISC ) .
Boasberg picked Kris on Friday to assist the court in implementing the FBI ’ s plans to address a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IG report regarding surveillance against Carter Page , a former Trump campaign adviser .
Some House Republicans criticized Boasberg ’ s pick because Kris has long denied that the FBI misled the FISC in order to obtain the Carter Page wiretaps .
Kris also criticized Republicans who accused the FBI of misleading the FISC .
In an essay published on March 1 , 2018 at Lawfare , Kris asserted that Rep. Devin Nunes had “ falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.
” ( RELATED : Ex-DOJ Official Picked To Assist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FBI Surveillance Of Carter Page ) Kris , who was assistant attorney general for national security from 2009 to 2011 , also endorsed the possibility that Nunes could face obstruction of justice charges because of his efforts to investigate the FBI .
The IG report found that the FBI committed “ basic , fundamental , and serious errors ” in the process to obtain wiretap warrants on Page .
FBI Director Christopher Wray said in a letter to the FISC on Friday that he “ deeply regrets the errors and omissions ” identified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kris ’ s selection on Saturday , telling The Daily Caller News Foundation that the choice was “ shocking and inexplicable.
” Carter Page also expressed doubt that Kris will held the FBI usher in reforms to the FISA process .
“ You appoint Kris for only one reason : you don ’ t want the system fixed .
You just want it to look like you do , ” he told The DCNF .
The FBI has proposed 12 reforms to its process for seeking FISAs , including increased training for FBI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and a change to FBI procedures for collecting and sharing information used to obtain FISA orders .
Wray said in his letter last week that one of the reforms is the use of a new form used to verify information included in FISA requests .
Wray told the FBI that the form has been “ significantly revised to elicit a fulsome picture of the FBI ’ s cases.
” Kris said in his letter that the proposed reforms “ point in the right direction , ” but “ do not go far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary assurance of accuracy.
” “ The FBI is subject to an obligation of scrupulous accuracy in representations made to this Court .
It breached that obligation through a series of significant and serious errors and omissions , ” he wrote in a 15-page letter .
It is still unclear why the FISC chose Kris to assist with the FBI reform process .
Kris is one of eight non-governmental arbitrators , known as amici curiae , that the FISC uses to provide technical expertise in issues involving the use of FISA .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicly on the Trump-Russia investigation , or the Carter Page FISA issue .
A spokesman for the FISC declined comment about the decision to choose Kris as amicus curiae .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

A former Justice Department official said Wednesday that the FBI’s proposed revisions to its surveillance procedures are “a step in the right direction” yet “insufficient” to address problems laid out in a Justice Department inspector general’s (IG) report.”
David Kris, a former Justice Department official, provided the assessment in a letter to Judge James Boasberg, who presides over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
Boasberg picked Kris on Friday to assist the court in implementing the FBI’s plans to address a series of errors laid out in the IG report regarding surveillance against Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser.
Some House Republicans criticized Boasberg’s pick because Kris has long denied that the FBI misled the FISC in order to obtain the Carter Page wiretaps.
Kris also criticized Republicans who accused the FBI of misleading the FISC. In an essay published on March 1, 2018 at Lawfare, Kris asserted that Rep. Devin Nunes had “falsely accused the FBI of deceiving the FISA Court.” (RELATED: Ex-DOJ Official Picked To Assist With FISA Reforms Was Ardent Defender Of FBI Surveillance Of Carter Page)
Kris, who was assistant attorney general for national security from 2009 to 2011, also endorsed the possibility that Nunes could face obstruction of justice charges because of his efforts to investigate the FBI.
The IG report found that the FBI committed “basic, fundamental, and serious errors” in the process to obtain wiretap warrants on Page. FBI Director Christopher Wray said in a letter to the FISC on Friday that he “deeply regrets the errors and omissions” identified in the IG report.
Nunes blasted Kris’s selection on Saturday, telling The Daily Caller News Foundation that the choice was “shocking and inexplicable.”
Carter Page also expressed doubt that Kris will held the FBI usher in reforms to the FISA process.
“You appoint Kris for only one reason: you don’t want the system fixed. You just want it to look like you do,” he told The DCNF.
The FBI has proposed 12 reforms to its process for seeking FISAs, including increased training for FBI personnel, more audits of FISA applications, and a change to FBI procedures for collecting and sharing information used to obtain FISA orders.
Wray said in his letter last week that one of the reforms is the use of a new form used to verify information included in FISA requests. Wray told the FBI that the form has been “significantly revised to elicit a fulsome picture of the FBI’s cases.”
Kris said in his letter that the proposed reforms “point in the right direction,” but “do not go far enough to provide the Court with the necessary assurance of accuracy.”
“The FBI is subject to an obligation of scrupulous accuracy in representations made to this Court. It breached that obligation through a series of significant and serious errors and omissions,” he wrote in a 15-page letter.
It is still unclear why the FISC chose Kris to assist with the FBI reform process. Kris is one of eight non-governmental arbitrators, known as amici curiae, that the FISC uses to provide technical expertise in issues involving the use of FISA. The other seven amici curiae have not commented publicly on the Trump-Russia investigation, or the Carter Page FISA issue.
A spokesman for the FISC declined comment about the decision to choose Kris as amicus curiae.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Everything We Know About A Kentucky Judge Who Allegedly Had A Threesome In Her Courthouse

Kentucky family court Judge Dawn Gentry is the subject of an extensive investigation , having been accused of nine counts of corruption and misconduct , which includes an allegation that she had a threesome in her courthouse .
The Kenton County judge was officially suspended with pay by Kentucky ’ s commission on judicial conduct earlier this month .
The commission outlined the multitude allegations against Gentry in its letter , writing that she has “ engaged in a pattern of conduct that constitutes misconduct in office and violates the Code of Judicial Conduct.
” The hearing last week which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was full of lewd details , including details of “ unwanted kissing , ” and an odd reference to a “ daddy bull.
” Most of the allegations levied against Gentry revolve around her 2018 campaign .
Gentry was serving her first full term as a judge since being elected in November of 2018 .
Gentry was appointed to the bench by former Republican Kentucky Gov .
Matt Bevin in 2016 .
( RELATED : Latest Budget Deal A Tough Pill To Swallow For Conservatives ) The 38-year-old Gentry is alleged to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ad litem panel to donate the maximum amount of money allowed to her campaign , required panel members to serve on her campaign ’ s finance committee , and solicited donations while in court .
Gentry is also accused of making sexual advances towards at least one attorney that came through her court room , and retaliating against the attorney after he rejected her .
Gentry is also alleged to have used her Snapchat to flirt with members she appointed to the panel that deals with abused children .
The harassment allegedly caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to quit her role .
( RELATED : Pregnant Florida Woman Fights Off Home Invaders With AR-15 ) Katherine Schulz , a former member of that panel is behind some of the most serious allegations against Gentry .
Schulz alleged in an affidavit that Gentry made a rather salacious proposal over Snapchat , offering Schulz a higher paying job on the panel if she seduced Gentry ’ s husband .
Gentry and her husband were divorced last year , and Schulz stated that she believed Gentry ’ s intentions were to make her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( RELATED : Massachusetts Judge Indicted For Allegedly Blocking ICE From Detaining Illegal Alien ) Gentry didn ’ t stop there .
The affidavit alleges that Gentry continued to pursue Schulz , offering her a threesome with the judge and her alleged lover Stephen Penrose , which she also declined .
After repeatedly rejecting Gentry ’ s advances , Schulz claims that she started to become “ ostracized ” by the judge .
However , the allegation against Gentry that has generated the most news coverage involves a threesome she is alleged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her secretary .
Gentry hired Penrose , who also happens to be her former church pastor , who she is in a band with .
The commission alleges that Gentry had sex with Penrose and her female secretary , Laura Aubrey , while at work last year , and the trio were often seen leaving the court house together , according to the complaint .
The commission also alleges that Gentry signed off on false time sheets for Aubrey , making it seem like she was working when she was not .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To Make Some Conservatives Nervous ) On the surface , Gentry ’ s saga appears to be a classic case of sex , family court , and rock n roll .
Gentry is a bassist in the band “ South Of Cincy , ” a band in which Penrose also participates in .
The band drew its inspiration from popular alternative rock bands such as as the Foo Fighters .
While the salacious allegations against Gentry have resulted in many internet jokes , the judge is facing serious charges , and if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have serious consequences .
Kentuckians who have received unfavorable rulings from Gentry are likely to be up in arms in light of the allegations , and a Facebook group has already been created to advocate for past cases involving Judge Gentry to be re-opened .
A Facebook group titled “ Those wrongly judged by Hon .
Dawn Gentry ” had already been created by the time the allegations against her broke last month .
‘ We have been ordered to ‘ split ’ parent our child ( ren ) , despite what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agenda doesn ’ t line up for the needs of our children , ” the group ’ s founder wrote .
“ We need to rise up and make the county and state know as parents our voices need to be heard.
” Gentry has denied the allegations against her , and will receive another hearing in a few months .
While the judge ’ s scandal has resulted in many jokes and much mockery , this saga is no laughing matter for parents and lawyers who have been in her courtroom .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ just unfolding , and the results could have a long-lasting impact on Kentucky ’ s family court .

Kentucky family court Judge Dawn Gentry is the subject of an extensive investigation, having been accused of nine counts of corruption and misconduct, which includes an allegation that she had a threesome in her courthouse.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Make Baby-Making Great Again: Give Parents A ‘Baby Bonus’

The United States is facing a fertility crisis .
The facts are indisputable .
Our nation ’ s birth rate has dropped to its lowest point in decades , and year after year , it continues to fall .
If these trends continue , the consequences for America ’ s future could be devastating .
Many natalist-minded conservatives have already written on the causes of this crisis , with some attributing it primarily to cultural changes in the modern U.S .
However , while such changes have no doubt played a role , it is also impossible to ignore the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particularly those facing millennials .
While the prospect of having children has always been daunting , this generation of would-be parents is experiencing a number of unique economic stressors — issues which must be addressed by any would-be solution to our crisis .
Here ’ s an example : Did you know the average cost of having a baby in the United States in 2019 was almost $ 11,000 ?
And that ’ s without complications , according to data from FAIR Health .
Add health issues for the mother or even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and suddenly you ’ re looking at years of health care bills .
While having insurance certainly helps , it doesn ’ t exactly solve the problem — for example , according to the same data , a complication-free birth in Virginia while insured still costs north of $ 6,500 , and that bill spikes to $ 10,000 if you happen to be one of the nearly one in three women who need a cesarean section .
( RELATED : Here Are The Best And Worst States For Becoming New Parents ) The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thanks to our society ’ s overemphasis on higher education , more and more millennials are taking on five ( and sometimes even six ! )
figures of student loan debt .
With that debt comes monthly minimum payments that eat up would-be parents ’ disposable income .
Moreover , in addition to its economic cost , this debt appears to be contributing to a delay in some of the more important coming-of-age moments in adulthood .
Acting as a sort of reverse dowry , the burden of debt encourages young people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , of course , having children , all in an endless pursuit to get ahead financially long enough to finally break even again .
And let ’ s not forget the cost of living issues that are affecting everyone , not just millennials .
Although real wages have increased over the past couple years , prior to President Donald Trump we saw nearly two decades of stagnant wages .
Working-class people are still feeling the effects of that stagflation — their money simply doesn ’ t go as far as it used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done ?
Naturally , big problems such as these will ultimately require big solutions : perhaps reworking our tax code to put families on the same footing as corporations , or changing our economic policy to treat labor and capital formation equally .
Fortunately , however , there are also small , politically practical steps we can take to start moving in the right direction .
Here ’ s one especially good idea : a proposal I ’ ve dubbed the “ baby bonus.
” ( RELATED : American Renewal : Republicans Need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ First introduced late in 2019 by Democratic Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Republican Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy , the “ baby bonus ” would provide new parents with immediate financial assistance using the already existing Child Tax Credit ( CTC ) .
Upon the birth or adoption of a child , new parents who qualify for the full CTC would have the option to immediately receive a $ 5,000 check from the federal government .
They would then pay that back at 0 % interest in the form of reduced Child Tax Credits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) over the next 10 years .
A reduced option also exists for low-income families — those with a household income under $ 11,830 in 2019 — who would not qualify for the full , refundable CTC .
These families would have the option to receive a check for the equivalent of 12 weeks wage replacement , and then pay back that amount ( at 0 % interest ! )
via a reduced CTC over the next 15 years .
Unlike some family leave plans , the baby bonus bill is not tied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents can use their FMLA ( Family and Medical Leave Act ) time , or not — there are quite literally no strings attached .
Parents can do whatever they want with it : pay down their credit cards , put it in an HSA or a different interest-bearing account , or even buy a year ’ s supply of diapers .
It ’ s a $ 5,000 check , available to you immediately upon the birth or adoption of your child , and it is paid back automatically via a reduced credit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s it .
( RELATED : Sen. Rubio : America Is Coming Apart — Here ’ s How We Start The Revival ) And importantly for the fiscally conscious , this proposal is also almost entirely budget-neutral .
It is just front-loaded money to which parents are already entitled , giving them the ability to change the timing of their CTC to help them get a financial leg up in the first year .
Does this proposal solve everything ?
Will America ’ s birth rate double upon passage ?
Of course not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do .
But the baby bonus bill is a good start — and a concrete proposal for a truly pro-family economic agenda .
For members of Congress concerned about our growing fertility crisis ( or just concerned with helping the average family ) , passing this bill in 2020 should be a no-brainer .
Terry Schilling is the executive director at American Principles Project .
Follow him on Twitter @ Schilling1776 .
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

The United States is facing a fertility crisis. The facts are indisputable. Our nation’s birth rate has dropped to its lowest point in decades, and year after year, it continues to fall. If these trends continue, the consequences for America’s future could be devastating.
Many natalist-minded conservatives have already written on the causes of this crisis, with some attributing it primarily to cultural changes in the modern U.S. However, while such changes have no doubt played a role, it is also impossible to ignore the difficult economic realities of our day, particularly those facing millennials. While the prospect of having children has always been daunting, this generation of would-be parents is experiencing a number of unique economic stressors — issues which must be addressed by any would-be solution to our crisis.
Here’s an example: Did you know the average cost of having a baby in the United States in 2019 was almost $11,000? And that’s without complications, according to data from FAIR Health. Add health issues for the mother or even a short NICU stay for the infant, and suddenly you’re looking at years of health care bills. While having insurance certainly helps, it doesn’t exactly solve the problem — for example, according to the same data, a complication-free birth in Virginia while insured still costs north of $6,500, and that bill spikes to $10,000 if you happen to be one of the nearly one in three women who need a cesarean section. (RELATED: Here Are The Best And Worst States For Becoming New Parents)
The disincentives don’t stop there. Thanks to our society’s overemphasis on higher education, more and more millennials are taking on five (and sometimes even six!) figures of student loan debt. With that debt comes monthly minimum payments that eat up would-be parents’ disposable income. Moreover, in addition to its economic cost, this debt appears to be contributing to a delay in some of the more important coming-of-age moments in adulthood. Acting as a sort of reverse dowry, the burden of debt encourages young people to delay marriage, purchasing a home, and, of course, having children, all in an endless pursuit to get ahead financially long enough to finally break even again.
And let’s not forget the cost of living issues that are affecting everyone, not just millennials. Although real wages have increased over the past couple years, prior to President Donald Trump we saw nearly two decades of stagnant wages. Working-class people are still feeling the effects of that stagflation — their money simply doesn’t go as far as it used to.
So, what can be done?
Naturally, big problems such as these will ultimately require big solutions: perhaps reworking our tax code to put families on the same footing as corporations, or changing our economic policy to treat labor and capital formation equally. Fortunately, however, there are also small, politically practical steps we can take to start moving in the right direction. Here’s one especially good idea: a proposal I’ve dubbed the “baby bonus.” (RELATED: American Renewal: Republicans Need To Think Big On Family Policy)
About one in every 9 or 10 kids starts talking late. “More than half the time, nothing is wrong and late talking is just a stage,” Camarata told me. If you follow a group of 2- and 3-year olds who have language delays, as many as 60 percent will be speaking just fine a year or two later. If your child still isn’t saying words at 18 months, be sure to bring it up with his or her doctor. Don’t just assume your child will simply grow out of it. A physical exam and a hearing test to rule out problems is always the best first step, Camarata says. Then a speech pathologist can check for language disorders.
First introduced late in 2019 by Democratic Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and Republican Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the “baby bonus” would provide new parents with immediate financial assistance using the already existing Child Tax Credit (CTC). Upon the birth or adoption of a child, new parents who qualify for the full CTC would have the option to immediately receive a $5,000 check from the federal government. They would then pay that back at 0% interest in the form of reduced Child Tax Credits ($1,500 instead of $2,000) over the next 10 years.
A reduced option also exists for low-income families — those with a household income under $11,830 in 2019 — who would not qualify for the full, refundable CTC. These families would have the option to receive a check for the equivalent of 12 weeks wage replacement, and then pay back that amount (at 0% interest!) via a reduced CTC over the next 15 years.
Unlike some family leave plans, the baby bonus bill is not tied to taking time off work. New parents can use their FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act) time, or not — there are quite literally no strings attached. Parents can do whatever they want with it: pay down their credit cards, put it in an HSA or a different interest-bearing account, or even buy a year’s supply of diapers. It’s a $5,000 check, available to you immediately upon the birth or adoption of your child, and it is paid back automatically via a reduced credit on future tax returns. That’s it. (RELATED: Sen. Rubio: America Is Coming Apart — Here’s How We Start The Revival)
And importantly for the fiscally conscious, this proposal is also almost entirely budget-neutral. It is just front-loaded money to which parents are already entitled, giving them the ability to change the timing of their CTC to help them get a financial leg up in the first year.
Does this proposal solve everything? Will America’s birth rate double upon passage? Of course not. There’s still much to do. But the baby bonus bill is a good start — and a concrete proposal for a truly pro-family economic agenda. For members of Congress concerned about our growing fertility crisis (or just concerned with helping the average family), passing this bill in 2020 should be a no-brainer.
Terry Schilling is the executive director at American Principles Project. Follow him on Twitter @Schilling1776.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--‘I Was Kind Of A Mess’: Selena Gomez Reveals Her Mental State While Writing ‘Lose You To Love Me’

Selena Gomez opened up about her mental health and admitted she was “ kind of a mess ” while writing her hit “ Lose You To Love Me , ” but has since healed .
“ When I wrote the song ‘ Lose You to Love Me , ’ I was kind of a mess , ” the 27-year-old singer shared with Billboard magazine in a piece published Tuesday .
( RELATED : Report : Selena Gomez Takes Break From Spotlight Following Justin Bieber Breakup ) “ It was really difficult for me , ” she added of the song @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notice its connection to her high-profile past romances .
“ And by the time we shot the music video at the end of the year , it had a completely different meaning , and it was so freeing.
” Gomez continued , “ It was actually fun for me — I think , because I let it go , it actually meant that I let it go within myself as well .
And I couldn ’ t have asked for a better way to close a chapter in my life.
” ( RELATED @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Baldwin Tied Knot After 2-Month Engagement ) The “ Wolves ” hitmaker then talked about how working on this new album “ Rare ” was terrifying , but necessary because she was done being “ afraid ” of putting out her thoughts and feelings .
“ I ’ ve said this before , but I used to be terrified of saying anything , ” Selena explained .
“ I would find myself protecting people that never protected me or cared for me .
And I wouldn ’ t want to say the wrong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want people to think that I had any other motive , other than just being a kind person — though that is who I am and I am proud of that.
” “ I was just done , you know , ” she added .
“ Just done being silent , and I felt like I deserved to have a moment for myself , after going through so much , and throwing that all into this album .
It wasn ’ t even a thought in my mind that I was doing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think I got to a place where I just said , this is what I ’ m gon na do and I ’ m not gon na be afraid of it .
And people might react however they might react , but I know that I ’ m proud of putting out the music that I did with the content that it has , because I want nothing more than to relate to people — and I want them to know that they ’ re not alone , and that all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Selena Gomez opened up about her mental health and admitted she was “kind of a mess” while writing her hit “Lose You To Love Me,” but has since healed.
“When I wrote the song ‘Lose You to Love Me,’ I was kind of a mess,” the 27-year-old singer shared with Billboard magazine in a piece published Tuesday. (RELATED: Report: Selena Gomez Takes Break From Spotlight Following Justin Bieber Breakup)
“It was really difficult for me,” she added of the song that many can’t help but notice its connection to her high-profile past romances. “And by the time we shot the music video at the end of the year, it had a completely different meaning, and it was so freeing.”
View this post on Instagram A post shared by Selena Gomez (@selenagomez) on Jan 11, 2020 at 4:49pm PST
Gomez continued, “It was actually fun for me — I think, because I let it go, it actually meant that I let it go within myself as well. And I couldn’t have asked for a better way to close a chapter in my life.” (RELATED: Report: Justin Bieber, Hailey Baldwin Tied Knot After 2-Month Engagement)
The “Wolves” hitmaker then talked about how working on this new album “Rare” was terrifying, but necessary because she was done being “afraid” of putting out her thoughts and feelings.
“I’ve said this before, but I used to be terrified of saying anything,” Selena explained. “I would find myself protecting people that never protected me or cared for me. And I wouldn’t want to say the wrong thing, and I wouldn’t want people to think that I had any other motive, other than just being a kind person — though that is who I am and I am proud of that.”
“I was just done, you know,” she added. “Just done being silent, and I felt like I deserved to have a moment for myself, after going through so much, and throwing that all into this album. It wasn’t even a thought in my mind that I was doing the wrong thing.”
Gomez continued, “I think I got to a place where I just said, this is what I’m gonna do and I’m not gonna be afraid of it. And people might react however they might react, but I know that I’m proud of putting out the music that I did with the content that it has, because I want nothing more than to relate to people — and I want them to know that they’re not alone, and that all of these feelings are completely normal.”


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Chief Justice Roberts Brings ‘Ok Boomer’ To The Supreme Court

“ So calling somebody a ‘ Boomer ’ and considering them for a position would be actionable ?
” Roberts @ @ @ @ @ decision makers are sitting around the table and they say , ‘ we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ s 35 ’ and ‘ we ’ ve got Candidate B who ’ s 55 @ @ @ @ @ — and is probably tired and you know , doesn ’ t have a lot @ @ @ @ @ think that absolutely would be actionable .
” ( RELATED : Lawyers Will Ask Supreme @ @ @ @ @ , Financial Support Of State Bars ) Roberts let the line of questioning end there @ @ @ @ @ before the chief justice is due to preside over President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment @ @ @ @ @

“So calling somebody a ‘Boomer’ and considering them for a position would be actionable?” Roberts continued.
“If the decision makers are sitting around the table and they say, ‘we’ve got Candidate A who’s 35’ and ‘we’ve got Candidate B who’s 55 and is a Boomer’ — and is probably tired and you know, doesn’t have a lot of computer skills, I think that absolutely would be actionable. ” (RELATED: Lawyers Will Ask Supreme Court To End Mandatory Membership, Financial Support Of State Bars)
Roberts let the line of questioning end there. His comment comes days before the chief justice is due to preside over President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Dark Money Group Linked To Ocasio-Cortez To Spend $500,000 Attacking Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg

A dark money group with ties to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announced Tuesday it will spend over $ 500,000 on digital ads attacking former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg .
Ocasio-Cortez has in the past called dark money the “ enemy to democracy , ” saying groups that use it do so to “ manipulate electorates ” and silence grassroots candidates .
The group , Organize for Justice , is a 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) nonprofit organization , meaning it can raise unlimited sums of money without having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public .
Organize for Justice calls itself the “ sister organization ” of Justice Democrats , a PAC whose board Ocasio-Cortez served on throughout most of her pivotal 2018 primary campaign .
Organize for Justice plans on spending $ 500,000 on Facebook ads promoting news articles that highlight Biden and Buttigieg ’ s lack of progressive bonafides , according to HuffPost .
The dark money group has already spent about $ 20,000 on about 40 Facebook ads , all of which were run on a month-old page called “ Watercooler Politics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa , New Hampshire and South Carolina .
“ We need leaders who can connect with diverse communities and work for ordinary people , not big donors , to take on the big challenges we ’ re facing , ” states one of the Organize for Justice ads linking to an article titled , “ Why 2020 Won ’ t Be Won By Centrists.
” Organize for Justice spokesman Waleed Shahid did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation when asked if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contributors funding its digital ad blitz .
Ocasio-Cortez did not immediately return a request for comment .
Ocasio-Cortez and her then-campaign chair Saikat Chakrabarti served on the three-member board of Justice Democrats PAC while it simultaneously supported her primary campaign in 2018 .
But Ocasio-Cortez never disclosed to the Federal Election Commission that she controlled the political action committee during her campaign .
Multiple former FEC commissioners previously told the DCNF that Ocasio-Cortez ’ s unreported affiliation with Justice Democrats during her 2018 primary campaign could land her in legal trouble .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Staff ‘ Could Be Facing Jail Time ’ If Their Control Over PAC Was Intentionally Hidden , Former FEC Commissioner Says ) The Coolidge Reagan Foundation , a conservative watchdog group , filed an FEC complaint against Ocasio-Cortez in April 2019 over her unreported affiliation with Justice Democrats .
A total of three FEC complaints were filed against Ocasio-Cortez over her relationship with Justice Democrats .
Ocasio-Cortez acknowledged in August 2019 that she was “ in conversation ” with the FEC over the complaints , saying she was in “ total compliance ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a “ form of legal trolling ” from “ fringe , Republican groups.
” ( RELATED : Left-Wing Groups Reject Bipartisan Plea For Fully Functional FEC Before 2020 Elections ) However , the FEC is currently unable to take any official action to enforce campaign finance laws as it has had only three active commissioners on its six-member board since the end of August 2019 .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

A dark money group with ties to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announced Tuesday it will spend over $500,000 on digital ads attacking former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
Ocasio-Cortez has in the past called dark money the “enemy to democracy,” saying groups that use it do so to “manipulate electorates” and silence grassroots candidates.
The group, Organize for Justice, is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization, meaning it can raise unlimited sums of money without having to disclose the identity of its donors to the public. Organize for Justice calls itself the “sister organization” of Justice Democrats, a PAC whose board Ocasio-Cortez served on throughout most of her pivotal 2018 primary campaign.
Dark money is used to manipulate electorates. It is the enemy to democracy. Period. When politicians and corporations weaved their dark web of campaign finance, they created a ticking time bomb for foreign adversaries. To make our democracy safer, we need to get big money OUT. https://t.co/OYX62jboZH — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 17, 2018
Organize for Justice plans on spending $500,000 on Facebook ads promoting news articles that highlight Biden and Buttigieg’s lack of progressive bonafides, according to HuffPost.
The dark money group has already spent about $20,000 on about 40 Facebook ads, all of which were run on a month-old page called “Watercooler Politics,” Quartz reported. The ads targeted voters in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
“We need leaders who can connect with diverse communities and work for ordinary people, not big donors, to take on the big challenges we’re facing,” states one of the Organize for Justice ads linking to an article titled, “Why 2020 Won’t Be Won By Centrists.”
Organize for Justice spokesman Waleed Shahid did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation when asked if the group planned on releasing the identity the contributors funding its digital ad blitz.
Ocasio-Cortez did not immediately return a request for comment.
Ocasio-Cortez and her then-campaign chair Saikat Chakrabarti served on the three-member board of Justice Democrats PAC while it simultaneously supported her primary campaign in 2018.
But Ocasio-Cortez never disclosed to the Federal Election Commission that she controlled the political action committee during her campaign.
Multiple former FEC commissioners previously told the DCNF that Ocasio-Cortez’s unreported affiliation with Justice Democrats during her 2018 primary campaign could land her in legal trouble. (RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez And Her Chief Of Staff ‘Could Be Facing Jail Time’ If Their Control Over PAC Was Intentionally Hidden, Former FEC Commissioner Says)
The Coolidge Reagan Foundation, a conservative watchdog group, filed an FEC complaint against Ocasio-Cortez in April 2019 over her unreported affiliation with Justice Democrats. A total of three FEC complaints were filed against Ocasio-Cortez over her relationship with Justice Democrats.
Ocasio-Cortez acknowledged in August 2019 that she was “in conversation” with the FEC over the complaints, saying she was in “total compliance” with the law while dismissing the measures as a “form of legal trolling” from “fringe, Republican groups.” (RELATED: Left-Wing Groups Reject Bipartisan Plea For Fully Functional FEC Before 2020 Elections)
However, the FEC is currently unable to take any official action to enforce campaign finance laws as it has had only three active commissioners on its six-member board since the end of August 2019.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--Exclusive: Reggie Love, President Barack Obama’s White House Body Man, Explains Why He Endorsed Pete

Exclusive: Reggie Love, President Barack Obama’s White House Body Man, Explains Why He Endorsed Pete Buttigieg Over Joe Biden

Reggie Love , White House body man to President Barack Obama , made recent headlines for his decision to endorse @ @ @ @ @ Buttigieg over former Vice President Joe Biden in the 2020 election .
Love joined Daily @ @ @ @ @ for a wide-ranging interview on why he sided with Buttigieg , Democrats ’ chances to @ @ @ @ @ in the general election , Mayor Pete ’ s controversial platform to legalize all drugs @ @ @ @ @ the Obama legacy .
( RELATED : Patriots Only – Pres .
Obama ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Barack ’ s Hollywood Turn , Secret White House Cigarettes , And New Martha ’ @ @ @ @

Reggie Love, White House body man to President Barack Obama, made recent headlines for his decision to endorse former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg over former Vice President Joe Biden in the 2020 election.
Love joined Daily Caller’s Christian Datoc for a wide-ranging interview on why he sided with Buttigieg, Democrats’ chances to take down President Donald Trump in the general election, Mayor Pete’s controversial platform to legalize all drugs and how Trump has impacted the Obama legacy. (RELATED: Patriots Only – Pres. Obama’s Body Man Opens Up On Barack’s Hollywood Turn, Secret White House Cigarettes, And New Martha’s Vineyard Mansion)
WATCH:


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--The Ratings Are In For Kansas City Chiefs’ Victory Against Houston Texans In The Playoffs

The Kansas City Chiefs ’ 51-31 victory over the Houston Texans equaled huge ratings for CBS , making it the most-watched Sunday AFC Divisional Playoffs game in four years .
The Patrick Mahomes-lead Chiefs ’ surprising comeback from behind win Sunday at Arrowhead Stadium scored 35.396 million viewers , which was an increase of 21 percent over last year ’ s playoff ’ s game between the New England Patriots and the San Diego Chargers , according to the Kansas City Star in a piece published Wednesday .
Not only did the Chiefs overcame a 24-point second-quarter deficit to beat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an increase of 19 percent in the ratings from the Patriot ’ s game , with a 20.3/44 average national household rating/share .
( RELATED : David Hookstead Is The True King In The North When It Comes To College Football ) The peak audience viewership for the AFC battle between the two teams hit between 4:45 p.m. to 5 p.m. , with the network scoring 41.063 million viewers in the time slot on Sunday .
This was not only a win for CBS , but the NFL as well , which overall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 percent from the games in 2018 .
( RELATED : Here ’ s A Glorious Video Of Matthew Stafford Throwing 56 Touchdowns To Calvin Johnson ) Crazy to think that there are only three games left in the 2019 season , the NFC Title Game , the AFC Title Game , and the Superbowl .
The fun kicks off Sunday at 3:05 p.m .
ET on CBS when the Chiefs go against the Titans .
Can hardly wait !

The Kansas City Chiefs’ 51-31 victory over the Houston Texans equaled huge ratings for CBS, making it the most-watched Sunday AFC Divisional Playoffs game in four years.
The Patrick Mahomes-lead Chiefs’ surprising comeback from behind win Sunday at Arrowhead Stadium scored 35.396 million viewers, which was an increase of 21 percent over last year’s playoff’s game between the New England Patriots and the San Diego Chargers, according to the Kansas City Star in a piece published Wednesday.
Not only did the Chiefs overcame a 24-point second-quarter deficit to beat the Texans, the game also saw an increase of 19 percent in the ratings from the Patriot’s game, with a 20.3/44 average national household rating/share. (RELATED: David Hookstead Is The True King In The North When It Comes To College Football)
The peak audience viewership for the AFC battle between the two teams hit between 4:45 p.m. to 5 p.m., with the network scoring 41.063 million viewers in the time slot on Sunday.
This was not only a win for CBS, but the NFL as well, which overall saw the ratings in 2019 increase by 4 percent from the games in 2018. (RELATED: Here’s A Glorious Video Of Matthew Stafford Throwing 56 Touchdowns To Calvin Johnson)
Crazy to think that there are only three games left in the 2019 season, the NFC Title Game, the AFC Title Game, and the Superbowl. The fun kicks off Sunday at 3:05 p.m. ET on CBS when the Chiefs go against the Titans. Can hardly wait!


thedailycaller--2020-01-15--CNN Posts Low Debate Ratings Again

CNN Posts Low Debate Ratings Again

CNN ’ s latest Democratic debate once again posted low ratings despite hype involving Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders .
The network drew just over 7 million viewers for Tuesday night ’ s debate , according to Nielsen Media Research , which is slightly more than last month ’ s debate , which drew just over 6 million viewers .
( RELATED : CNN Hits Three-Years Ratings Low Amid Impeachment Drama ) While Tuesday night ’ s debate slightly out-rated December ’ s debate , it still fell well short of previous Democratic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential debate last summer brought in 15 million viewers on MSNBC , the most ever in a Democratic primary debate .
The record was topped in a debate hosted by ABC in September , which drew 18 million viewers on its second night .
The most watched primary debate in U.S. history remains the first Republican debate of the 2016 election cycle , which drew 24 million viewers on Fox News .
Ahead of the debate , Warren ’ s campaign accused Sanders of telling Warren in a private meeting in 2018 that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win the presidency .
“ How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States ?
” Sanders remarked during the debate .

CNN’s latest Democratic debate once again posted low ratings despite hype involving Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
The network drew just over 7 million viewers for Tuesday night’s debate, according to Nielsen Media Research, which is slightly more than last month’s debate, which drew just over 6 million viewers. (RELATED: CNN Hits Three-Years Ratings Low Amid Impeachment Drama)
While Tuesday night’s debate slightly out-rated December’s debate, it still fell well short of previous Democratic and Republican primary debates. The first Democratic presidential debate last summer brought in 15 million viewers on MSNBC, the most ever in a Democratic primary debate. The record was topped in a debate hosted by ABC in September, which drew 18 million viewers on its second night.
The most watched primary debate in U.S. history remains the first Republican debate of the 2016 election cycle, which drew 24 million viewers on Fox News.
Ahead of the debate, Warren’s campaign accused Sanders of telling Warren in a private meeting in 2018 that he did not believe a woman could win the presidency.
“How could anybody in a million years not believe that a woman could become president of the United States?” Sanders remarked during the debate.


thedailycaller--2020-01-16--MORGAN: California Aims To Take Nonprofit Donors’ Right To Privacy

Several cases currently before the U.S. Supreme Court ask the question : will the court ’ s landmark case law from the civil rights era be lost to history , or do those cases reflect enduring constitutional principles , available to all ?
One of those cases was brought by my organization , the Institute for Free Speech .
In February of 2014 , we received an odd letter from the California attorney general .
It stated that we would be barred from soliciting money in California unless we provided our major donor list .
The Institute for Free Speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) ( 3 ) nonprofit organization — legalese for charities and civil society groups .
Our mission is to defend freedom of speech and association , so when we received this missive from the California attorney general , we instantly realized this was an unconstitutional demand .
In the 1950s and 1960s , the NAACP and its allies waged a hard-fought judicial campaign to ensure the right of privacy in association .
Their victories established that the First Amendment protects private giving to civil society groups .
As Justice Thurgood Marshall put it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as the ACLU the right to maintain in confidence the names of those who belong or contribute to the organization , absent a compelling governmental interest requiring disclosure.
” After we filed a federal lawsuit , it became apparent that California did not have such a “ compelling governmental interest ” to justify its demand .
Instead , the state claimed that it needed the information to enforce other laws , but never defined how that would actually work given the limited powers of the California attorney general ’ s office .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ record that the attorney general has never needed the donors for any law enforcement purpose — asking the question as to why California really is warehousing this constitutionally-sensitive information .
Unfortunately , the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals broke with Marshall and the storied civil rights precedents of the Warren court .
Instead , it limited those cases to a specific time and place , ignoring that the civil rights era court had clearly stated these protections apply to “ all legitimate organizations.
” Freedom of association is the bulwark of civil society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration from digging through the records of # Resistance groups , and it ’ s what keeps San Francisco from knowing the donors to crisis pregnancy centers .
To be sure , this right is not unlimited .
Candidates have to disclose donors so that we know where members of Congress get their campaign funds .
But the law bars 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) groups from participating in candidate campaigns .
These philanthropic and ideas-based organizations should not be forced to bear the brunt of excessive government regulation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters ’ personal information to state officials — especially when speaking about sensitive or unpopular issues .
The First Amendment exists precisely to protect dissenters and conventional wisdom heretics .
Sixty years ago , the Supreme Court declared that all Americans enjoy the liberty to “ pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing.
” This freedom is essential for the flourishing of our society — allowing each American to pair with like-minded others without government interference .
Hopefully , the court takes our case and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an attorney at the Institute for Free Speech .
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller .

Several cases currently before the U.S. Supreme Court ask the question: will the court’s landmark case law from the civil rights era be lost to history, or do those cases reflect enduring constitutional principles, available to all?
One of those cases was brought by my organization, the Institute for Free Speech. In February of 2014, we received an odd letter from the California attorney general. It stated that we would be barred from soliciting money in California unless we provided our major donor list.
The Institute for Free Speech is a nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization — legalese for charities and civil society groups. Our mission is to defend freedom of speech and association, so when we received this missive from the California attorney general, we instantly realized this was an unconstitutional demand.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the NAACP and its allies waged a hard-fought judicial campaign to ensure the right of privacy in association. Their victories established that the First Amendment protects private giving to civil society groups. As Justice Thurgood Marshall put it: “The First Amendment gives organizations such as the ACLU the right to maintain in confidence the names of those who belong or contribute to the organization, absent a compelling governmental interest requiring disclosure.”
After we filed a federal lawsuit, it became apparent that California did not have such a “compelling governmental interest” to justify its demand. Instead, the state claimed that it needed the information to enforce other laws, but never defined how that would actually work given the limited powers of the California attorney general’s office. In fact, it later became public record that the attorney general has never needed the donors for any law enforcement purpose — asking the question as to why California really is warehousing this constitutionally-sensitive information.
Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals broke with Marshall and the storied civil rights precedents of the Warren court. Instead, it limited those cases to a specific time and place, ignoring that the civil rights era court had clearly stated these protections apply to “all legitimate organizations.”
Freedom of association is the bulwark of civil society. It’s what prevents the Trump administration from digging through the records of #Resistance groups, and it’s what keeps San Francisco from knowing the donors to crisis pregnancy centers.
To be sure, this right is not unlimited. Candidates have to disclose donors so that we know where members of Congress get their campaign funds. But the law bars 501(c)(3) groups from participating in candidate campaigns. These philanthropic and ideas-based organizations should not be forced to bear the brunt of excessive government regulation. Nor should they have to expose their supporters’ personal information to state officials — especially when speaking about sensitive or unpopular issues. The First Amendment exists precisely to protect dissenters and conventional wisdom heretics.
Sixty years ago, the Supreme Court declared that all Americans enjoy the liberty to “pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing.” This freedom is essential for the flourishing of our society — allowing each American to pair with like-minded others without government interference.
Hopefully, the court takes our case and reaffirms this constitutional truth.
Zac Morgan is an attorney at the Institute for Free Speech.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.