wnd--2020-09-22--Unpacking the Supreme Court ... just 3 liberals now

Even before the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg created an opening for President Trump to place a third justice on the nine-member Supreme Court , Democrats were planning to take control of the courts next year .
Their dreams include '' packing '' the Supreme Court with a one-time infusion of six additional justices , as Franklin Roosevelt tried to do in 1937 .
FDR 's court-packing plan failed when the president was rebuked by his own Democrat-controlled Congress .
He was never able to push things through Congress after that and struggled even to obtain public support for World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Kamala Harris is still smarting that she was unable to stop Brett Kavanaugh from joining the Court last year .
Along with fellow Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee , Harris tried to derail the nomination with an unproven , absurd accusation of misconduct from 35 years earlier when the future judge was still in high school .
All Democrat-appointed justices on the Supreme Court have voted in lockstep in recent years , always in favor of entrenched liberal interest groups .
They always hear petitions from Planned Parenthood and its allies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the petitions for review by other parties .
With the media on their side , the four Democrat-appointed justices were able to forge a majority on several key issues by peeling off a Republican justice to join them , be it John Roberts or Neil Gorsuch .
But that game will be over with confirmation of another Trump nominee to the high court .
TRENDING : 'Greater shakings ' : Jonathan Cahn foresaw 2020 trouble , warns of even more Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died one day after Constitution Day , the 233rd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Madison and Hamilton completed their long summer of hammering out the structure of our government .
Today that same Constitution is an obstacle to Biden-Harris as they seek to turn our nation into a one-party state like California , which elected Kamala Harris as its senator .
Even before Ginsburg passed away , Democrats were clamoring for unconstitutional goals such as statehood for Washington , D.C. , abolishing the Electoral College , and adding the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution 40 years after the deadline for its ratification expired .
The Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in light of Biden 's declining mental capacity , needs a majority on the Supreme Court to achieve those goals .
D.C. statehood , which Nancy Pelosi has already rammed through the House and could get through the Senate if Democrats win a majority there in November , violates at least two provisions in the Constitution .
Rep. Thomas Massie , R-Ky. , called this legislation `` farcical '' because it is so clearly unconstitutional , and this bad idea should be dead-on-arrival in the courts .
President Trump 's third nomination to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president has achieved in a half-century , will protect our Constitution and break the liberal influence over it .
This achieves a long overdue result of unpacking the Court and freeing it from those who want to rewrite our laws , rather than applying the Constitution as they should .
Now with only three justices voting together for liberal causes and without the sympathetic pull toward the late Justice Ginsburg , the dynamic suddenly changes to a Supreme Court that will interpret the law like an impartial umpire , as it should .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ balls and strikes , as Phyllis Schlafly wrote in 2004 in her seminal book `` The Supremacists . ''
Democrats are openly frustrated that their political base is not as energized by the importance of the Supreme Court as the conservative base is .
Dating back to the notorious rulings of the Warren Court in the 1950s and 1960s , grassroots conservatives have long been aware of how much damage an activist court does and how important it is to elect a president who appoints good judges .
Trump has accomplished more in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieved in two terms on this all-important issue .
As others dithered about whether to fill the sudden vacancy left by RGB passing away , Trump acted boldly and decisively in declaring that he would fill it immediately .
With that masterstroke , it feels like 2016 again , as Trump steps on the accelerator while the media try to catch up with him .
Trump wiped away the tiresome negative publicity about COVID-19 , rioting , and California wildfires , and took charge in a breathtaking way .
The contrast between him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden 's prior statements in favor of filling a vacancy in a presidential year and his refusal to identify whom he would name to the Supreme Court exposes him as the inept , bumbling two-facer that he is .
Biden himself has criticized the suggestion of packing the court , which his leftist supporters rush to now .
It is time to unpack the high court and end the control the left has had over it , and President Trump is keeping America great by doing so .

Even before the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg created an opening for President Trump to place a third justice on the nine-member Supreme Court, Democrats were planning to take control of the courts next year. Their dreams include"packing" the Supreme Court with a one-time infusion of six additional justices, as Franklin Roosevelt tried to do in 1937.
FDR's court-packing plan failed when the president was rebuked by his own Democrat-controlled Congress. He was never able to push things through Congress after that and struggled even to obtain public support for World War II until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.
Kamala Harris is still smarting that she was unable to stop Brett Kavanaugh from joining the Court last year. Along with fellow Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Harris tried to derail the nomination with an unproven, absurd accusation of misconduct from 35 years earlier when the future judge was still in high school.
All Democrat-appointed justices on the Supreme Court have voted in lockstep in recent years, always in favor of entrenched liberal interest groups. They always hear petitions from Planned Parenthood and its allies, while turning down 99% of the petitions for review by other parties.
With the media on their side, the four Democrat-appointed justices were able to forge a majority on several key issues by peeling off a Republican justice to join them, be it John Roberts or Neil Gorsuch. But that game will be over with confirmation of another Trump nominee to the high court.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died one day after Constitution Day, the 233rd anniversary of the day when Washington, Madison and Hamilton completed their long summer of hammering out the structure of our government. Today that same Constitution is an obstacle to Biden-Harris as they seek to turn our nation into a one-party state like California, which elected Kamala Harris as its senator.
Even before Ginsburg passed away, Democrats were clamoring for unconstitutional goals such as statehood for Washington, D.C., abolishing the Electoral College, and adding the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution 40 years after the deadline for its ratification expired. The Harris administration, as Kamala referred to it in light of Biden's declining mental capacity, needs a majority on the Supreme Court to achieve those goals.
D.C. statehood, which Nancy Pelosi has already rammed through the House and could get through the Senate if Democrats win a majority there in November, violates at least two provisions in the Constitution. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., called this legislation "farcical" because it is so clearly unconstitutional, and this bad idea should be dead-on-arrival in the courts.
President Trump's third nomination to the Supreme Court, which no first-term president has achieved in a half-century, will protect our Constitution and break the liberal influence over it. This achieves a long overdue result of unpacking the Court and freeing it from those who want to rewrite our laws, rather than applying the Constitution as they should.
Will Trump's Supreme Court nominee be confirmed before Nov. 3? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 96% (53 Votes) 4% (2 Votes)
Now with only three justices voting together for liberal causes and without the sympathetic pull toward the late Justice Ginsburg, the dynamic suddenly changes to a Supreme Court that will interpret the law like an impartial umpire, as it should. It becomes a new ballgame of calling balls and strikes, as Phyllis Schlafly wrote in 2004 in her seminal book "The Supremacists."
Democrats are openly frustrated that their political base is not as energized by the importance of the Supreme Court as the conservative base is. Dating back to the notorious rulings of the Warren Court in the 1950s and 1960s, grassroots conservatives have long been aware of how much damage an activist court does and how important it is to elect a president who appoints good judges.
Trump has accomplished more in his first term than prior Republican presidents achieved in two terms on this all-important issue. As others dithered about whether to fill the sudden vacancy left by RGB passing away, Trump acted boldly and decisively in declaring that he would fill it immediately.
With that masterstroke, it feels like 2016 again, as Trump steps on the accelerator while the media try to catch up with him. Trump wiped away the tiresome negative publicity about COVID-19, rioting, and California wildfires, and took charge in a breathtaking way.
The contrast between him and "Basement" Biden becomes clearer. Biden's prior statements in favor of filling a vacancy in a presidential year and his refusal to identify whom he would name to the Supreme Court exposes him as the inept, bumbling two-facer that he is.
Biden himself has criticized the suggestion of packing the court, which his leftist supporters rush to now. It is time to unpack the high court and end the control the left has had over it, and President Trump is keeping America great by doing so.


wnd--2020-09-22--Congressman's plan would block expansion of Supreme Court for 10 years

A congressman is proposing a constitutional amendment that would delay any adopted changes in the size of the U.S. Supreme Court for 10 years .
Constitutional amendments rarely succeed – 27 have been adopted in the nation 's history – but Rep. Doug Collins , R-Ga. , said the effort is needed because of Democrats ' threats to pack the court if President Trump goes forward with his constitutional duty to nominate a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who died Friday A constitutional amendments would require two-thirds approval of both the House and the Senate and ratification by 38 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'Greater shakings ' : Jonathan Cahn foresaw 2020 trouble , warns of even more '' By threatening to pack the Supreme Court , Democrats are eroding the integrity of our nation 's highest court , '' Collins said .
`` I will be introducing a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit any changes to the size of # SCOTUS until 10 years after any such legislation is signed into law . ''
The concept of a delay was the focus of the 27th amendment , adopted in 1992 .
It delays laws affecting congressional salaries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election of representatives .
Collins posted on his congressional website a Fox News article about his plan , which he plans to introduce this week .
`` Democrats ' latest threat to pack the Supreme Court throws our nation 's history to the wayside in pursuit of political gain and threatens the very foundation of our democracy , '' Collins said .
Collins noted the Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869 .
`` To make a change during such a tumultuous time in our history diminishes the integrity of our nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremely dangerous precedent , '' Collins said .
`` By introducing a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit any changes to the number of justices until 10 years after any such legislation is signed into law , we can protect our nation ’ s highest court from becoming a political football . ''
Democrats already have discussed adding seats to the Supreme Court .
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler , D-N.Y. , stated the Senate should begin work immediately to change the court .
`` If Sen. McConnell and @ SenateGOP were to force @ @ @ @ @ @ @ session – before a new Senate and President can take office – then the incoming Senate should immediately move to expand the Supreme Court , '' Nadler threatened .
`` Filling the SCOTUS vacancy during a lame duck session , after the American people have voted for new leadership , is undemocratic and a clear violation of the public trust in elected officials . ''
Republicans , with the majority in the Senate , have promised a vote on a nominee forwarded by President Trump .
The president has said there 's no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finished before the election .
However , Democrats such as Rep. Joe Kennedy III , D-Mass , have vowed to retaliate .
`` If he holds a vote in 2020 , we pack the court in 2021 , '' Kennedy said .
`` It ’ s that simple . ''
Sen. Ed Markey , D-Mass.
, made similar threats to banish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court .
Democrats fear that justice selected by Trump to succeed the liberal Ginsburg would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and return regulation of abortions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the majority opinion in the 1973 case , Harry Blackmun , admitted that if science one day established the personhood of the unborn child , it would destroy any `` right '' to abortion .
Frank Wright , president D. James Kennedy Ministries , said the present vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court `` provides an historic opportunity to heal a grievous wound to the fabric of our national humanity . ''
He noted that even some abortion supporters believe Roe was a `` grave constitutional error . ''
`` From the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was even more deeply flawed in denying the personhood of the preborn child and eventually allowing abortionists to kill the preborn up to the moment of birth , '' he said .
`` Because of Roe , more than 60 million not-yet-born boys and girls have been dismembered , burned via saline solution , or starved and suffocated by chemical means .
Now , not later , is the time for President Donald Trump to fill the vacancy created by Justice Ginsburg 's death with a nominee who will uphold the Constitution as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time for the Senate to act with all deliberate speed to confirm that nominee . ''
He said the voters `` who elected this president and this Senate deserve and ought to have their electoral will honored and upheld by a swift nomination and confirmation process . ''
`` Pro-life Americans—and most especially the unborn whose blood cries from the ground for justice—have waited long enough for this opportunity to reverse Roe , a ruling with no basis in the U.S .
Constitution . ''

A congressman is proposing a constitutional amendment that would delay any adopted changes in the size of the U.S. Supreme Court for 10 years.
Constitutional amendments rarely succeed – 27 have been adopted in the nation's history – but Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., said the effort is needed because of Democrats' threats to pack the court if President Trump goes forward with his constitutional duty to nominate a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died Friday
A constitutional amendments would require two-thirds approval of both the House and the Senate and ratification by 38 of the 50 states.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
By threatening to pack the Supreme Court, Democrats are eroding the integrity of our nation’s highest court. I will be introducing a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit any changes to the size of #SCOTUS until 10 years after any such legislation is signed into law. — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) September 21, 2020
"By threatening to pack the Supreme Court, Democrats are eroding the integrity of our nation's highest court," Collins said. "I will be introducing a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit any changes to the size of #SCOTUS until 10 years after any such legislation is signed into law."
The concept of a delay was the focus of the 27th amendment, adopted in 1992. It delays laws affecting congressional salaries from taking effect until after the next election of representatives.
Collins posted on his congressional website a Fox News article about his plan, which he plans to introduce this week.
"Democrats' latest threat to pack the Supreme Court throws our nation's history to the wayside in pursuit of political gain and threatens the very foundation of our democracy," Collins said.
Collins noted the Supreme Court has had nine justices since 1869.
"To make a change during such a tumultuous time in our history diminishes the integrity of our nation’s highest court and sets an extremely dangerous precedent," Collins said. "By introducing a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit any changes to the number of justices until 10 years after any such legislation is signed into law, we can protect our nation’s highest court from becoming a political football."
Democrats already have discussed adding seats to the Supreme Court.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., stated the Senate should begin work immediately to change the court.
"If Sen. McConnell and @SenateGOP were to force through a nominee during a lame duck session – before a new Senate and President can take office – then the incoming Senate should immediately move to expand the Supreme Court," Nadler threatened. "Filling the SCOTUS vacancy during a lame duck session, after the American people have voted for new leadership, is undemocratic and a clear violation of the public trust in elected officials."
Republicans, with the majority in the Senate, have promised a vote on a nominee forwarded by President Trump.
The president has said there's no reason that the process should not be finished before the election.
However, Democrats such as Rep. Joe Kennedy III, D-Mass, have vowed to retaliate.
"If he holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021," Kennedy said. "It’s that simple."
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., made similar threats to banish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court.
Democrats fear that justice selected by Trump to succeed the liberal Ginsburg would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and return regulation of abortions to the states.
Even the author of the majority opinion in the 1973 case, Harry Blackmun, admitted that if science one day established the personhood of the unborn child, it would destroy any "right" to abortion.
Frank Wright, president D. James Kennedy Ministries, said the present vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court "provides an historic opportunity to heal a grievous wound to the fabric of our national humanity."
He noted that even some abortion supporters believe Roe was a "grave constitutional error."
"From the perspective of basic humanity, the decision was even more deeply flawed in denying the personhood of the preborn child and eventually allowing abortionists to kill the preborn up to the moment of birth," he said.
"Because of Roe, more than 60 million not-yet-born boys and girls have been dismembered, burned via saline solution, or starved and suffocated by chemical means. Now, not later, is the time for President Donald Trump to fill the vacancy created by Justice Ginsburg's death with a nominee who will uphold the Constitution as originally written. And now is the time for the Senate to act with all deliberate speed to confirm that nominee."
He said the voters "who elected this president and this Senate deserve and ought to have their electoral will honored and upheld by a swift nomination and confirmation process."
"Pro-life Americans—and most especially the unborn whose blood cries from the ground for justice—have waited long enough for this opportunity to reverse Roe, a ruling with no basis in the U.S. Constitution."


wnd--2020-09-22--Why such acrimony over SCOTUS nominee? Abortion

Now that Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( RBG ) has passed on to her eternal state , there will be an intense debate over whomever President Trump nominates to replace her .
Why the intensity of the coming debate ?
The answer is obvious : Abortion .
• Why did the left 30 years ago pull out all the stops and vilify through vicious lies that man who became one of the most important black Americans in history , Clarence Thomas ?
Answer : Abortion • Why did the left attempt to sully and drag the reputation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusing him of misogyny ?
Ironically , the late Justice Ginsburg even commended Justice Kavanaugh for his true reputation of lifting up women any way he could .
So why was there an unending circus of past accusations of alleged sexual misconduct against him , none of which had the slightest corroboration ?
Answer : Abortion .
• Why is the left gearing up even now for World War III in the Senate ?
Why are some of them seemingly losing their minds over the looming battle ?
For example , CNN host @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f––-g thing down . ''
Again , the answer is obvious : Abortion .
Abortion , even when not directly mentioned in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings , is the 800-pound gorilla in the room .
It is the underlying issue at the heart of the real battle .
On the eve of the Kavanaugh hearings , I interviewed Wendy Wright , president of Christian Freedom International , for D. James Kennedy Ministries television .
Little did we know of the extent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmation that were just around the corner .
TRENDING : 'Greater shakings ' : Jonathan Cahn foresaw 2020 trouble , warns of even more I asked Wendy about abortion and such confirmation battles .
She told me , `` Yes , abortion has become like the symbol , in a sense , of the extreme role of the Supreme Court – a symbol of an atheistic view that God should have no place when it comes to the public square .
Abortion has become this symbol of the extreme role of the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to even insert itself in places that the Supreme Court should not be inserting itself . ''
Indeed , every human being , even in utero , is made in the image of God .
The Greek New Testament uses the word `` brephos , '' meaning `` baby '' to describe both babies in the womb and out of the womb .
Since RBG never met an abortion she did n't like , her replacement will likely change the makeup on the court over the issue of abortion – and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person can not get the issue of abortion right , then they ca n't get many other things right .
And vice versa .
True to his campaign promise , Donald J. Trump has nominated many good pro-life judges and justices to the federal bench , and they are now making a positive difference .
He has promised to replace RBG with a female justice before the election ( which even RBG said in 2016 is in a president 's constitutional purview ) .
A front-runner nominee , of course , is Amy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Notre Dame Law School .
The Wall Street Journal this week noted : `` Judge Barrett has written and spoken favorably of the conservative Justice [ Antonin ] Scalia , who died in 2016 , and his close attention to the texts of statues as written and support for originalism , or interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning . ''
Judge Barrett said , `` I tend to agree with those who say that a justice 's duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks clearly in conflict with it . ''
Abortion is a `` right '' the Supreme Court created – not from within the pages of the text of the Constitution or its amendments .
You can read the Constitution until you 're blue in the face , and nowhere will you see even remotely the right for an abortion , the right to terminate one 's pregnancy .
It 's not there .
It had to be imposed onto the Constitution by activist judges .
In this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans look back , rightfully , with horror at slavery – the evil practice that nearly torpedoed the Constitutional Convention and that tore the country in half during the Civil War .
Hundreds of thousands of Americans died `` to make men free . ''
I believe future generations will look back at us aghast at this horrible practice of abortion , in an age when we have a scientific window into the womb through 3D sonograms and other technology .
We are sacrificing tens of millions of babies on the altar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sanction this barbarity will have to answer to the Almighty one day for this grave injustice .
And from Him there is no higher appeal .

Now that Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG) has passed on to her eternal state, there will be an intense debate over whomever President Trump nominates to replace her.
Why the intensity of the coming debate? The answer is obvious: Abortion.
Why did the left 30 years ago pull out all the stops and vilify through vicious lies that man who became one of the most important black Americans in history, Clarence Thomas? Answer: Abortion
Why did the left attempt to sully and drag the reputation of Brett Kavanaugh through the mud, accusing him of misogyny? Ironically, the late Justice Ginsburg even commended Justice Kavanaugh for his true reputation of lifting up women any way he could. So why was there an unending circus of past accusations of alleged sexual misconduct against him, none of which had the slightest corroboration? Answer: Abortion.
Why is the left gearing up even now for World War III in the Senate? Why are some of them seemingly losing their minds over the looming battle? For example, CNN host Reza Aslan typifies the left: "If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f––-g thing down." Again, the answer is obvious: Abortion.
Abortion, even when not directly mentioned in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. It is the underlying issue at the heart of the real battle.
On the eve of the Kavanaugh hearings, I interviewed Wendy Wright, president of Christian Freedom International, for D. James Kennedy Ministries television. Little did we know of the extent of the fireworks against the justice's confirmation that were just around the corner.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
I asked Wendy about abortion and such confirmation battles. She told me, "Yes, abortion has become like the symbol, in a sense, of the extreme role of the Supreme Court – a symbol of an atheistic view that God should have no place when it comes to the public square. Abortion has become this symbol of the extreme role of the Supreme Court to rule on our day-to-day lives and to even insert itself in places that the Supreme Court should not be inserting itself."
Indeed, every human being, even in utero, is made in the image of God. The Greek New Testament uses the word "brephos," meaning "baby" to describe both babies in the womb and out of the womb.
Since RBG never met an abortion she didn't like, her replacement will likely change the makeup on the court over the issue of abortion – and other issues. I maintain that if a person cannot get the issue of abortion right, then they can't get many other things right. And vice versa.
True to his campaign promise, Donald J. Trump has nominated many good pro-life judges and justices to the federal bench, and they are now making a positive difference. He has promised to replace RBG with a female justice before the election (which even RBG said in 2016 is in a president's constitutional purview).
A front-runner nominee, of course, is Amy Coney Barrett, a former professor at Notre Dame Law School. The Wall Street Journal this week noted: "Judge Barrett has written and spoken favorably of the conservative Justice [Antonin] Scalia, who died in 2016, and his close attention to the texts of statues as written and support for originalism, or interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning."
Judge Barrett said, "I tend to agree with those who say that a justice's duty is to the Constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the Constitution rather than a precedent she thinks clearly in conflict with it."
Abortion is a "right" the Supreme Court created – not from within the pages of the text of the Constitution or its amendments.
You can read the Constitution until you're blue in the face, and nowhere will you see even remotely the right for an abortion, the right to terminate one's pregnancy. It's not there. It had to be imposed onto the Constitution by activist judges.
In this era of "wokeness," millions of Americans look back, rightfully, with horror at slavery – the evil practice that nearly torpedoed the Constitutional Convention and that tore the country in half during the Civil War. Hundreds of thousands of Americans died "to make men free."
I believe future generations will look back at us aghast at this horrible practice of abortion, in an age when we have a scientific window into the womb through 3D sonograms and other technology. We are sacrificing tens of millions of babies on the altar of convenience. Those who promote and sanction this barbarity will have to answer to the Almighty one day for this grave injustice. And from Him there is no higher appeal.


wnd--2020-09-23--Schumer blocks Senate committee from getting election security briefing

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- Senate Republicans chastised Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for blocking the Senate Intelligence Committee from receiving an election security briefing on foreign interference following the New York Democrat ’ s “ temper tantrum ” over the Supreme Court .
“ Just a short time ago , Democratic leaders demanded more briefings on election interference , ” acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Marco Rubio said on Tuesday .
“ The Senate Intelligence Committee was scheduled to have a briefing today with Director Evanina , who leads our nation ’ s election security efforts .
However , Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court and used a procedural move to cancel the committee ’ s briefing.
” Rubio spoke on the Senate floor to request “ unanimous consent ” that the Senate Intelligence Committee be “ authorized ” to meet on Tuesday with National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director Bill Evanina , “ who is also leading the election security efforts on behalf of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
” But Schumer used his power , specifically the invocation of the Senate ’ s “ two-hour rule , ” to block the @ @ @ @ @

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- Senate Republicans chastised Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for blocking the Senate Intelligence Committee from receiving an election security briefing on foreign interference following the New York Democrat’s “temper tantrum” over the Supreme Court.
“Just a short time ago, Democratic leaders demanded more briefings on election interference,” acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Marco Rubio said on Tuesday. “The Senate Intelligence Committee was scheduled to have a briefing today with Director Evanina, who leads our nation’s election security efforts. However, Sen. Schumer had a temper tantrum over the Supreme Court and used a procedural move to cancel the committee’s briefing.”
Rubio spoke on the Senate floor to request “unanimous consent” that the Senate Intelligence Committee be “authorized” to meet on Tuesday with National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director Bill Evanina, “who is also leading the election security efforts on behalf of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.” But Schumer used his power, specifically the invocation of the Senate’s “two-hour rule,” to block the top-secret election meddling update.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-09-23--Bill introduced to stop schools from letting men in women's sports

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- A group of Republican senators introduced a bill that could prohibit transgender women from competing @ @ @ @ @ Georgia Sen. Kelly Loeffler joined Utah Sen. Mike Lee , Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn , @ @ @ @ @ and Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford in introducing legislation on Tuesday that would pull funding from @ @ @ @ @ allows biological males to participate in women 's athletics .
Loeffler , who owns part @ @ @ @ @ Basketball Association team , said the legislation is necessary to ensure women have equal access @ @ @ @ @ Title IX established a fair and equal chance for women and girls to compete , @ @ @ @ @ exception , ” Loeffler said in a statement .
“ As someone who learned invaluable @ @ @ @ @ playing sports throughout my life , I ’ m proud to lead this legislation to @ @ @ @ @ can enjoy those same opportunities .
This commonsense bill protects women and girls by safeguarding @ @ @ @ @ field that Title IX guarantees .
”

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- A group of Republican senators introduced a bill that could prohibit transgender women from competing in women's sports.
Georgia Sen. Kelly Loeffler joined Utah Sen. Mike Lee, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, and Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford in introducing legislation on Tuesday that would pull funding from any Title IX school that allows biological males to participate in women's athletics. Loeffler, who owns part of a Women's National Basketball Association team, said the legislation is necessary to ensure women have equal access to athletic opportunities.
"Title IX established a fair and equal chance for women and girls to compete, and sports should be no exception,” Loeffler said in a statement. “As someone who learned invaluable life lessons and built confidence playing sports throughout my life, I’m proud to lead this legislation to ensure girls of all ages can enjoy those same opportunities. This commonsense bill protects women and girls by safeguarding fairness and leveling the athletic field that Title IX guarantees.”
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-09-24--Man arrested for alleged brutal attack on 77-year-old veteran wearing a MAGA hat

A 77-year-old veteran who survived the war in Vietnam became a casualty of America 's political hate last week when he was attacked at a California post office while displaying his support for President Donald Trump and America 's police .
The attack happened Friday at the Red Bluff , California , post office , according to KRCR-TV , which spoke with the victim but kept his name out of its report .
The man said he was wearing a `` Make America Great Again '' hat and a `` Back the Blue '' protective mask when a man and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the confrontation , he said .
`` She looked at me and she goes , 'We just do n't like people like you . '
Just kind of got shocked a little bit and said , 'Well , that breaks my heart , ' and no more sooner out of my mouth , I get hit on the left side of my head.
`` He said the man did not leave it there .
`` Then somehow he got me in a headlock and started pounding me on top of my head ... @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I 'm trying to figure , you know , where 's my hat , where 's my package ? ''
he said .
An ambulance was called for the man , who was treated for cuts on top of his head and later released .
Three days later , when he spoke to the local TV station , he complained of headaches from the incident .
The man who hit the veteran left the post office after the incident , but officers who responded were able to later arrest him , Red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Daniel Gomez-Martinez , 26 , was charged with battery and elder abuse .
This latest attack on a Trump supporter made many on Twitter express their anger .
The veteran said he should not have been taken by surprise .
`` I just feel kind of bad , seven years in the military , Vietnam veteran and 30 plus years in law enforcement and you 're always taught situational awareness .
And this guy came out of ...
I never saw it coming , '' he said .
Above all , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hatred and intolerance that sparked the confrontation .
`` I was so shocked for the hate that people have , you know .
I do n't hate them .
I never met them .
I just ca n't believe they would do something like that , '' he said .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

A 77-year-old veteran who survived the war in Vietnam became a casualty of America's political hate last week when he was attacked at a California post office while displaying his support for President Donald Trump and America's police.
The attack happened Friday at the Red Bluff, California, post office, according to KRCR-TV, which spoke with the victim but kept his name out of its report.
The man said he was wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat and a "Back the Blue" protective mask when a man and woman approached him.
The woman began the confrontation, he said.
"She looked at me and she goes, 'We just don't like people like you.' Just kind of got shocked a little bit and said, 'Well, that breaks my heart,' and no more sooner out of my mouth, I get hit on the left side of my head. "
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
He said the man did not leave it there.
"Then somehow he got me in a headlock and started pounding me on top of my head ... I got blood all over the place and I'm trying to figure, you know, where's my hat, where's my package?" he said.
An ambulance was called for the man, who was treated for cuts on top of his head and later released. Three days later, when he spoke to the local TV station, he complained of headaches from the incident.
The man who hit the veteran left the post office after the incident, but officers who responded were able to later arrest him, Red Bluff police said, according to KRCR.
Daniel Gomez-Martinez, 26, was charged with battery and elder abuse.
77-year-old military veteran attacked in Red Bluff, California for wearing 'Make America Great Again' #MAGA hat in support of President @realDonaldTrump. 26-year-old man, accused of attack arrested for battery, elder abuse. FULL DETAILS: https://t.co/CJ5tyvogTf pic.twitter.com/B4sw9IrgtM — Preston Phillips (@PrestonTVNews) September 23, 2020
This latest attack on a Trump supporter made many on Twitter express their anger.
I’d like to see this piece of crap try hitting someone his age for wearing a maga hat... this IS a hat crime. Clearly. How big of a story would it be if an old black dude wearing a BLM hat got beat up by a younger white guy? — Jason Jones (@jonesy2316) September 22, 2020
I’m so sick of this happening. https://t.co/wW1tCx6T49 — Carlos Madrigal (@ThinkMadrigal) September 22, 2020
The veteran said he should not have been taken by surprise.
"I just feel kind of bad, seven years in the military, Vietnam veteran and 30 plus years in law enforcement and you're always taught situational awareness. And this guy came out of ... I never saw it coming," he said.
Above all, he said, he was stunned by the hatred and intolerance that sparked the confrontation.
"I was so shocked for the hate that people have, you know. I don't hate them. I never met them. I just can't believe they would do something like that," he said.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-09-24--Jill Biden's first husband: The Bidens' love story is a lie and I'm backing Trump

Jill Biden 's first husband is speaking out about what he claims was then-Sen. Joe Biden 's affair with the woman who is now hoping to become America 's first lady .
“ I was betrayed by the Bidens , ” Bill Stevenson said in a new interview with Inside Edition .
“ Joe was my friend .
Jill was my wife.
” Stevenson said that he is not voting for the Democratic presidential nominee , but will instead support President Donald Trump because he agrees with Trump 's law-and-order positions .
The Bidens have said that they met in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned into a romance and later marriage .
Stevenson said that 's not how he recalls it .
“ We got married in '70 , I introduced Joe to Jill in ‘ 72 .
Right before the election in ‘ 72 , Jill , Joe , Neilia and I were in his kitchen .
How do you forget that ?
” Stevenson said , referring to Biden 's first wife , who was later killed in a car crash along with the Bidens ' infant daughter .
In an interview with the U.K. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he believes Biden and his wife were having an affair by August 1974 .
`` I know exactly when it was , '' he said .
`` Bruce Springsteen was going to play at The Stone Balloon and I had to go to Northern New Jersey to pay him in advance , '' he said , referring to a club he owned '' I asked Jill to go with me and she said no -- she had things to do , she had to look after Joe 's kids , Beau and Hunter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal to go meet Springsteen .
I had no idea she and Joe were that kind of friendly , '' he said .
`` Then one of her best friends told me she thought Joe and Jill were getting a little too close .
I was surprised that she came to me . ''
The final blow , Stevenson said , came when he found out about an accident Jill 's car had been in .
`` I was at work and a guy came in and asked : 'Do you own a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it 's my wife 's car .
He said back in May it had crunched his bumper and they told him to get an estimate and he never heard back from them .
I said : 'Wait a minute .
Who is they ? '
And he said : 'Funnily enough , Senator Biden was driving , ' '' he said .
Stevenson told Inside Edition that when he spoke to Jill , “ she didn ’ t say anything ” and “ just looked at me.
” “ I said : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got ta go get your own place , ’ ” Stevenson recalled .
`` Her father was begging me to take her back when he found out what was going on .
He asked me to give her a second chance , but I was n't interested , '' he told the Daily Mail .
`` I considered Joe a friend .
I 'm not surprised he fell in love with Jill .
Everyone who meets Jill falls in love with her immediately .
It 's hard not to , '' he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1975 .
“ These claims are fictitious , seemingly to sell and promote a book .
The relationship of Joe and Jill Biden is well documented .
Jill Biden separated from her first husband irreconcilably in the fall of 1974 and moved out of their marital home .
Joe and Jill Biden had their first date in March of 1975 , and they married in June of 1977 , '' a Jill Biden spokesman told Inside Edition .
He was convicted on a fraud charge and spent time on probation related to bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out now to set the record straight .
“ It ’ s years ago , but guess what , it 's so current right now , because he 's picking on people about character , ” Stevenson told Inside Edition .
`` I do n't want to hurt anyone , '' he added to the Daily Mail .
`` But facts are facts and what happened , happened . ''
“ Listen .
I ’ ve said from the very beginning , I have no hard feelings about Joe , Jill , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , ” he told Inside Edition .
“ Everybody 's saying : ‘ Bill , you 're being so mean bringing this up now.
’ But if I do n't do it now it 's never going to be able to be brought up.
” This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

Jill Biden's first husband is speaking out about what he claims was then-Sen. Joe Biden's affair with the woman who is now hoping to become America's first lady.
“I was betrayed by the Bidens,” Bill Stevenson said in a new interview with Inside Edition. “Joe was my friend. Jill was my wife.”
Stevenson said that he is not voting for the Democratic presidential nominee, but will instead support President Donald Trump because he agrees with Trump's law-and-order positions.
The Bidens have said that they met in 1975, and that a blind date turned into a romance and later marriage.
Stevenson said that's not how he recalls it.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
“We got married in '70, I introduced Joe to Jill in ‘72. Right before the election in ‘72, Jill, Joe, Neilia and I were in his kitchen. How do you forget that?” Stevenson said, referring to Biden's first wife, who was later killed in a car crash along with the Bidens' infant daughter.
In an interview with the U.K. Daily Mail last month, Stevenson said he believes Biden and his wife were having an affair by August 1974.
"I know exactly when it was," he said. "Bruce Springsteen was going to play at The Stone Balloon and I had to go to Northern New Jersey to pay him in advance," he said, referring to a club he owned
"I asked Jill to go with me and she said no -- she had things to do, she had to look after Joe's kids, Beau and Hunter. It was kind of a big deal to go meet Springsteen. I had no idea she and Joe were that kind of friendly," he said. "Then one of her best friends told me she thought Joe and Jill were getting a little too close. I was surprised that she came to me."
Is the 'love story' of Joe and Jill Biden a lie? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 80% (393 Votes) 20% (99 Votes)
The final blow, Stevenson said, came when he found out about an accident Jill's car had been in.
"I was at work and a guy came in and asked: 'Do you own a brown Corvette?' I said yes, it's my wife's car. He said back in May it had crunched his bumper and they told him to get an estimate and he never heard back from them. I said: 'Wait a minute. Who is they?' And he said: 'Funnily enough, Senator Biden was driving,'" he said.
Stevenson told Inside Edition that when he spoke to Jill, “she didn’t say anything” and “just looked at me.”
“I said: ‘You gotta go. You gotta go get your own place,’” Stevenson recalled.
"Her father was begging me to take her back when he found out what was going on. He asked me to give her a second chance, but I wasn't interested," he told the Daily Mail.
"I considered Joe a friend. I'm not surprised he fell in love with Jill. Everyone who meets Jill falls in love with her immediately. It's hard not to," he said.
The divorce took effect in May 1975.
Jill Biden denied Stevenson's allegations.
“These claims are fictitious, seemingly to sell and promote a book. The relationship of Joe and Jill Biden is well documented. Jill Biden separated from her first husband irreconcilably in the fall of 1974 and moved out of their marital home. Joe and Jill Biden had their first date in March of 1975, and they married in June of 1977," a Jill Biden spokesman told Inside Edition.
Stevenson's life took some bad turns.
He was convicted on a fraud charge and spent time on probation related to bad checks.
He said he is speaking out now to set the record straight.
“It’s years ago, but guess what, it's so current right now, because he's picking on people about character,” Stevenson told Inside Edition.
"I don't want to hurt anyone," he added to the Daily Mail. "But facts are facts and what happened, happened."
“Listen. I’ve said from the very beginning, I have no hard feelings about Joe, Jill, the affair. It means nothing to me now,” he told Inside Edition.
“Everybody's saying: ‘Bill, you're being so mean bringing this up now.’ But if I don't do it now it's never going to be able to be brought up.”
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-09-24--GOP becoming party 'of American workers'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
Like others before him , Donald Trump wore the finest attire on the day he became the most powerful man in the world .
His well-coifed and well-dressed adult children looked the part also as they watched him become not just the president but also the wealthiest man to ever occupy the Oval Office .
But Trump , who likes his name in gold on the side of tony buildings , focused in his inaugural address more on rusting factories , depleted industries , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ American carnage.
” He promised it would end .
He said that “ the forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.
” House Republicans are still trying to deliver on that promise four years later .
The 147-member Republican Study Committee , which represents the majority of the minority party , this morning is releasing its 66-page report on the state of the American worker .
First reviewed by RealClearPolitics , the white paper and its sweeping proposals come just weeks before Republicans will count on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the polls .
Policy wonks might pour over the dry prescriptions .
Voters ?
Probably not so much .
But the ideas are what matter , and Rep. Andy Barr insists that after the tax cuts and the regulatory reform of the president ’ s first term , bolstering worker productivity is “ the final piece of the puzzle.
” The Kentucky conservative ( pictured ) chaired the working group that drafted the document and believes that “ the only thing that was missing from the great economy we had until last February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enjoy portraying Republicans as cold-hearted guardians of corporate capital and patrons of a wealthy donor class .
But Rep. Mike Johnson , who chairs the RSC , counters that “ we can make a compelling argument that we are indeed the party of American workers.
” The president clearly feels comfortable on factory floors .
He has toured assembly lines throughout his White House tenure , making multiple stops more recently to chat with the workers manufacturing the medical supplies needed to fight the pandemic .
He likes building things , and Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the building — even if his heralded “ manufacturing miracle ” has not stopped industrial bleeding in the Midwest .
Perhaps that affection is because white working-class voters were key to his 2016 victory .
While this blue-collar demographic turned out in Pennsylvania , Ohio , Michigan and Wisconsin for Mitt Romney in 2012 by 12 percentage points , they flocked in even greater numbers to Trump in 2020 .
Exit polling by NBC showed the billionaire real-estate magnate winning their support by 30 points .
More good news for Trump : While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the polls , the economy remains a bright spot for him .
Voters regularly rank the economy as their top priority , and despite the pandemic-induced downturn , a majority still trust Trump over Biden on the issue .
A recent PBS/NPR/Marist poll reported that 50 % of Americans saw the incumbent as a more effective leader on the economy while 43 % favored the challenger .
House Republicans want to lean into that advantage , and Barr has boiled it down to a maxim .
“ Republicans are for workers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Democrats are for government and dependency.
” This is the more digestible version of the argument .
The Republican Study Committee recommends no less than 118 changes to education , labor , and welfare policy to further their goals .
“ Reclaiming the American Dream ” means challenging “ the bachelor 's degree or bust mentality , ” Johnson and Barr explain .
The traditional “ college try ” -- pushing every student toward a four-year degree , often saddled with student debt -- can be counterproductive and even harmful , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for higher education while promoting secondary and post-secondary instruction in trade and other skills education .
Some of the prescription is conservative orthodoxy , such as school vouchers .
Other suggestions are new innovations , including income sharing agreements where a student agrees to pay a percentage of future wages to a lender rather than accepting a traditional loan .
The RSC embraces “ right to work ” laws on the labor front , policies that bar employers and unions from forcing workers to join a collective bargaining arrangement .
They also take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they argue , create undue burdens on the workforce .
Both are longtime hallmarks of Republican policy , and much of the document embraces existing executive orders along those lines .
But the committee also put forward new reforms such as making skills training costs tax deductible and , among other changes , opening up trucking apprenticeships to those under 21 years old .
The Republicans also float a raft of reforms to welfare , including requiring states to integrate home visits into “ food stamp ” allocation , enacting drug testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep illegal immigrants from qualifying for benefits .
Of course , the entire agenda — all 118 proposed changes — has little to no chance of making it into law this year .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has little patience for pet academic projects of the minority party in her chamber , especially in an election year .
Johnson admits as much .
The effort is instead aspirational and designed to be flexible enough to be of use regardless of who wins the White House in November .
Republicans learned the hard way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority but not on the same page .
Carefully laid plans came crashing down when they took up Obamacare repeal in the early stages of Trump ’ s term .
Unified government -- complete control of Congress and the White House -- came to naught .
“ We frankly squandered the first half of that year , ” Johnson says .
“ We fumbled the repeal-and-replace effort.
” The workforce paper is the latest in a series of policy publications designed to find consensus in the caucus .
The Louisiana congressman says all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from House Republicans from across the spectrum and “ in very close coordination with the administration and the president himself.
” If Trump wins , he says that the GOP will have an ideas platform ready to roll “ on day one.
” If Biden gets the job , then the white paper will serve instead as “ a line over which we will not cross.
” Either way , Johnson believes it could be a keystone to returning the economy to its pre-pandemic splendor , and then some .
[ Editor 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Real Clear Politics . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Philip Wegmann
Real Clear Politics
Like others before him, Donald Trump wore the finest attire on the day he became the most powerful man in the world. His well-coifed and well-dressed adult children looked the part also as they watched him become not just the president but also the wealthiest man to ever occupy the Oval Office.
But Trump, who likes his name in gold on the side of tony buildings, focused in his inaugural address more on rusting factories, depleted industries, and downtrodden workers. He said it was “American carnage.” He promised it would end. He said that “the forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.”
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
House Republicans are still trying to deliver on that promise four years later. The 147-member Republican Study Committee, which represents the majority of the minority party, this morning is releasing its 66-page report on the state of the American worker. First reviewed by RealClearPolitics, the white paper and its sweeping proposals come just weeks before Republicans will count on blue-collar voters turning out in droves at the polls. Policy wonks might pour over the dry prescriptions. Voters? Probably not so much.
But the ideas are what matter, and Rep. Andy Barr insists that after the tax cuts and the regulatory reform of the president’s first term, bolstering worker productivity is “the final piece of the puzzle.” The Kentucky conservative (pictured) chaired the working group that drafted the document and believes that “the only thing that was missing from the great economy we had until last February was a shortage of workers.”
Democrats enjoy portraying Republicans as cold-hearted guardians of corporate capital and patrons of a wealthy donor class. But Rep. Mike Johnson, who chairs the RSC, counters that “we can make a compelling argument that we are indeed the party of American workers.”
The president clearly feels comfortable on factory floors. He has toured assembly lines throughout his White House tenure, making multiple stops more recently to chat with the workers manufacturing the medical supplies needed to fight the pandemic. He likes building things, and Trump insists he likes the people who do the building — even if his heralded “manufacturing miracle” has not stopped industrial bleeding in the Midwest. Perhaps that affection is because white working-class voters were key to his 2016 victory.
While this blue-collar demographic turned out in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin for Mitt Romney in 2012 by 12 percentage points, they flocked in even greater numbers to Trump in 2020. Exit polling by NBC showed the billionaire real-estate magnate winning their support by 30 points. More good news for Trump: While he trails former vice president Joe Biden in the polls, the economy remains a bright spot for him. Voters regularly rank the economy as their top priority, and despite the pandemic-induced downturn, a majority still trust Trump over Biden on the issue. A recent PBS/NPR/Marist poll reported that 50% of Americans saw the incumbent as a more effective leader on the economy while 43% favored the challenger.
House Republicans want to lean into that advantage, and Barr has boiled it down to a maxim. “Republicans are for workers and self-sufficiency,” he says, while “Democrats are for government and dependency.” This is the more digestible version of the argument. The Republican Study Committee recommends no less than 118 changes to education, labor, and welfare policy to further their goals.
“Reclaiming the American Dream” means challenging “the bachelor's degree or bust mentality,” Johnson and Barr explain. The traditional “college try” -- pushing every student toward a four-year degree, often saddled with student debt -- can be counterproductive and even harmful, they argue. The RSC would reduce subsidies for higher education while promoting secondary and post-secondary instruction in trade and other skills education.
Some of the prescription is conservative orthodoxy, such as school vouchers. Other suggestions are new innovations, including income sharing agreements where a student agrees to pay a percentage of future wages to a lender rather than accepting a traditional loan.
The RSC embraces “right to work” laws on the labor front, policies that bar employers and unions from forcing workers to join a collective bargaining arrangement. They also take aim at occupational licensing laws, which, they argue, create undue burdens on the workforce. Both are longtime hallmarks of Republican policy, and much of the document embraces existing executive orders along those lines. But the committee also put forward new reforms such as making skills training costs tax deductible and, among other changes, opening up trucking apprenticeships to those under 21 years old.
The Republicans also float a raft of reforms to welfare, including requiring states to integrate home visits into “food stamp” allocation, enacting drug testing for welfare recipients, and policies to keep illegal immigrants from qualifying for benefits.
Of course, the entire agenda — all 118 proposed changes — has little to no chance of making it into law this year. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has little patience for pet academic projects of the minority party in her chamber, especially in an election year. Johnson admits as much. The effort is instead aspirational and designed to be flexible enough to be of use regardless of who wins the White House in November.
Republicans learned the hard way what happens when they are in the majority but not on the same page. Carefully laid plans came crashing down when they took up Obamacare repeal in the early stages of Trump’s term. Unified government -- complete control of Congress and the White House -- came to naught. “We frankly squandered the first half of that year,” Johnson says. “We fumbled the repeal-and-replace effort.”
The workforce paper is the latest in a series of policy publications designed to find consensus in the caucus. The Louisiana congressman says all of those products were drafted with input from House Republicans from across the spectrum and “in very close coordination with the administration and the president himself.”
If Trump wins, he says that the GOP will have an ideas platform ready to roll “on day one.” If Biden gets the job, then the white paper will serve instead as “a line over which we will not cross.” Either way, Johnson believes it could be a keystone to returning the economy to its pre-pandemic splendor, and then some.
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]


wnd--2020-09-24--'Trump has been proven right to follow his own agenda'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
Did you notice how the once-dreaded Ukrainian influence scheme is now “ the impeachment that shall not be named ” ?
I mean , what about that ?
When the U.S. Senate acquitted President Trump on both articles of impeachment on Feb. 5 of this year , Speaker Nancy Pelosi assured the nation , “ He ’ s impeached forever.
” But actually , he was impeached for about the length of a television news cycle — one day , maybe two , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Forget about the fact that Trump is also acquitted forever .
That ’ s not even relevant .
In the mind of the average voter , it ’ s as if he were never impeached at all .
You would think Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden at least would want to remind folks that his opponent was accused of abuse of power , but that would mean reminding voters that Biden was accused of corruption and , oh yeah , abuse of power for using federal funds to bribe a Ukrainian official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that employed Biden ’ s ne ’ er-do-well son , Hunter .
So here we are seven months later , and the president who was deemed a threat to national security by the House ( Lack of ) Intelligence Committee led by Rep. Adam Schiff ( remember him ? )
is now nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize .
In fact , he ’ s been nominated twice — once by a member of the Norwegian parliament for his administration ’ s successful brokering of a historic peace deal between Israel and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days later by a Swedish legislator for bringing Kosovo and Serbia together to create an economic cooperation agreement between two nations that 12 years ago were in a state of virtual war .
Maybe none of that seems important to the average voter right now .
After all , millions of Americans are still out of work as a result of the COVID-19 lockdown , millions are living in fear as a result of the anti-establishment riots and shootings in cities across the country , and millions more worry about racial tensions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus itself .
Nonetheless , as we get ever closer to the Nov. 3 election , it is important to keep at least one eye turned toward national security issues , and increasingly those issues accrue to the president ’ s benefit .
Democrats have spent the last four years painting Trump as a man who can ’ t be trusted with the safety of the nation .
Of course , we now know that the Russian collusion narrative , the idea that Trump was “ Putin ’ s puppet , ” was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been supplanted by other false narratives painting the president as a narcissist who craves the attention of despots and who has pursued policy goals that are “ inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency , '' as infamously put it during the aforesaid impeachment hearings .
No surprise that Vindman , who was fired by Trump months after the impeachment , has now come out as a Never Trumper .
If you talk to proponents of “ the interagency consensus , ” you will find out that they don ’ t like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which means they don ’ t like Donald Trump .
It is so obvious it should go without saying , but for Washington Post editor emeritus Bob Woodward it was big breaking news , which is why he sucked up the nasty vignettes of betrayal provided by fired and failed Cabinet officials like James Mattis and Rex Tillerson , while writing a book called “ Rage ” to highlight the hatred directed at Trump by the powers that used to be .
Those blowhards were convinced they knew more than the non-politician president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after issue , and decision after decision , Trump has been proven right to follow his own agenda and to distrust both the “ consensus views of the interagency ” and the bureaucrats and elites who formulated them .
His decisive leadership in tearing up the Iran nuclear deal , wiping out the ISIS caliphate , ending the life of the Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani , demanding equity in NATO dues and responsibilities , talking directly to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un , reducing fighting forces in Iraq and Afghanistan , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the coronavirus all show that he was willing to act in the interest of the American people rather than the interest of the interagency , whatever that is .
No wonder the Washington ruling class hates him .
But Woodward did the president an unintentional favor when he got Mattis , Tillerson , and former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats to go on the record attacking the president .
Why ?
Because now Trump ’ s decision to fire those disloyal know-it-alls is vindicated .
Thanks to Woodward , we now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There may come a time when we have to take collective action ” since Trump is “ dangerous .
He ’ s unfit.
” In other words , we know that Mattis failed to respect the chain of command , contemplated a putsch , and that he was probably supported in that “ dangerous ” fantasy by Coats .
On another occasion , Mattis told Coats , “ The president has no moral compass , ” to which Coats replied : “ True .
To him , a lie is not a lie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinks .
He doesn ’ t know the difference between the truth and a lie.
” Woodward echoes this conclusion and actually went so far as to suggest Trump suffers from a psychotic disorder , telling Anderson Cooper on CNN , “ I don ’ t know , to be honest , whether he ’ s got it straight in his head what is real and what is unreal.
” That ’ s more apt to be a description of voters , who want to trust the pronouncements of media savants like Woodward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After all , as Woodward himself confesses , his opinion of Trump is steeped in the murky swamp water that comes from having “ discussions with ... people in the White House , people in the CIA , people in the Pentagon , people in the State Department , trying to get the whole picture of what this administration is.
” Those are the people who have been proven , time and again , to be wrong about matters of state and matters of policy .
They are also the people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the more that the mainstream press tries to shove their bureaucratic pronouncements down our throats , the less we trust either the media or the meddling minions whose leaks and lies are their mother ’ s milk .
Given that distrust of reporters and their elevation of generals like Mattis and John Kelly , Trump ’ s former White House chief of staff , as the self-appointed protectors of the people , it was instructive that last week imploring the American people to follow the president into battle “ to defend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign and domestic.
” Do you think Woodward will interview any of these decorated soldiers and sailors ?
Do you think anyone in the Washington press corps will give them the same attention they gave to the self-adulating memoirs of John Bolton , Jim Comey , Vindman , or master of the FBI universe Peter Strzok ?
Hell no , so I will at least share the view of these sober men of the military — the ones who get the job done — about their commander-in-chief : “ At present , our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and abroad , as well as a once in a century pandemic .
As retired military officers , we believe that Donald J. Trump has been tested as few other presidents have and is the proven leader to confront these dangers .
It can be argued that this is the most important election since our country was founded .
With the Democratic Party welcoming to socialists and Marxists , our historic way of life is at stake .
… For these reasons , we support Donald Trump ’ s re-election .
We believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a strong America .
As president , he will continue to secure our borders , defeat our adversaries , and restore law and order domestically .
”

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Frank Miele
Real Clear Politics
Did you notice how the once-dreaded Ukrainian influence scheme is now “the impeachment that shall not be named”?
I mean, what about that? When the U.S. Senate acquitted President Trump on both articles of impeachment on Feb. 5 of this year, Speaker Nancy Pelosi assured the nation, “He’s impeached forever.” But actually, he was impeached for about the length of a television news cycle — one day, maybe two, then on to bigger and better Fake News.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Forget about the fact that Trump is also acquitted forever. That’s not even relevant. In the mind of the average voter, it’s as if he were never impeached at all. You would think Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden at least would want to remind folks that his opponent was accused of abuse of power, but that would mean reminding voters that Biden was accused of corruption and, oh yeah, abuse of power for using federal funds to bribe a Ukrainian official into halting an investigation of the company that employed Biden’s ne’er-do-well son, Hunter.
So here we are seven months later, and the president who was deemed a threat to national security by the House (Lack of) Intelligence Committee led by Rep. Adam Schiff (remember him?) is now nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, he’s been nominated twice — once by a member of the Norwegian parliament for his administration’s successful brokering of a historic peace deal between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, and then two days later by a Swedish legislator for bringing Kosovo and Serbia together to create an economic cooperation agreement between two nations that 12 years ago were in a state of virtual war.
Maybe none of that seems important to the average voter right now. After all, millions of Americans are still out of work as a result of the COVID-19 lockdown, millions are living in fear as a result of the anti-establishment riots and shootings in cities across the country, and millions more worry about racial tensions, oppression of free speech, and the coronavirus itself.
Nonetheless, as we get ever closer to the Nov. 3 election, it is important to keep at least one eye turned toward national security issues, and increasingly those issues accrue to the president’s benefit.
Democrats have spent the last four years painting Trump as a man who can’t be trusted with the safety of the nation. Of course, we now know that the Russian collusion narrative, the idea that Trump was “Putin’s puppet,” was a partisan invention. But that has been supplanted by other false narratives painting the president as a narcissist who craves the attention of despots and who has pursued policy goals that are “inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency," as Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman infamously put it during the aforesaid impeachment hearings.
No surprise that Vindman, who was fired by Trump months after the impeachment, has now come out as a Never Trumper. If you talk to proponents of “the interagency consensus,” you will find out that they don’t like presidents who disregard the interagency consensus, which means they don’t like Donald Trump. It is so obvious it should go without saying, but for Washington Post editor emeritus Bob Woodward it was big breaking news, which is why he sucked up the nasty vignettes of betrayal provided by fired and failed Cabinet officials like James Mattis and Rex Tillerson, while writing a book called “Rage” to highlight the hatred directed at Trump by the powers that used to be.
Those blowhards were convinced they knew more than the non-politician president, but when we look at issue after issue, and decision after decision, Trump has been proven right to follow his own agenda and to distrust both the “consensus views of the interagency” and the bureaucrats and elites who formulated them. His decisive leadership in tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, wiping out the ISIS caliphate, ending the life of the Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani, demanding equity in NATO dues and responsibilities, talking directly to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, reducing fighting forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and ending flights from China during the advent of the coronavirus all show that he was willing to act in the interest of the American people rather than the interest of the interagency, whatever that is.
No wonder the Washington ruling class hates him. But Woodward did the president an unintentional favor when he got Mattis, Tillerson, and former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats to go on the record attacking the president. Why? Because now Trump’s decision to fire those disloyal know-it-alls is vindicated.
Thanks to Woodward, we now know that Mattis told Coats, “There may come a time when we have to take collective action” since Trump is “dangerous. He’s unfit.” In other words, we know that Mattis failed to respect the chain of command, contemplated a putsch, and that he was probably supported in that “dangerous” fantasy by Coats.
On another occasion, Mattis told Coats, “The president has no moral compass,” to which Coats replied: “True. To him, a lie is not a lie. It’s just what he thinks. He doesn’t know the difference between the truth and a lie.”
Woodward echoes this conclusion and actually went so far as to suggest Trump suffers from a psychotic disorder, telling Anderson Cooper on CNN, “I don’t know, to be honest, whether he’s got it straight in his head what is real and what is unreal.”
That’s more apt to be a description of voters, who want to trust the pronouncements of media savants like Woodward, but increasingly have no reason to. After all, as Woodward himself confesses, his opinion of Trump is steeped in the murky swamp water that comes from having “discussions with ... people in the White House, people in the CIA, people in the Pentagon, people in the State Department, trying to get the whole picture of what this administration is.”
Those are the people who have been proven, time and again, to be wrong about matters of state and matters of policy. They are also the people who want you to elect Joe Biden president, but the more that the mainstream press tries to shove their bureaucratic pronouncements down our throats, the less we trust either the media or the meddling minions whose leaks and lies are their mother’s milk.
Given that distrust of reporters and their elevation of generals like Mattis and John Kelly, Trump’s former White House chief of staff, as the self-appointed protectors of the people, it was instructive that last week a collection of 235 general officers signed a letter imploring the American people to follow the president into battle “to defend the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Do you think Woodward will interview any of these decorated soldiers and sailors? Do you think anyone in the Washington press corps will give them the same attention they gave to the self-adulating memoirs of John Bolton, Jim Comey, Vindman, or master of the FBI universe Peter Strzok? Hell no, so I will at least share the view of these sober men of the military — the ones who get the job done — about their commander-in-chief:
“At present, our country is now confronted with enemies here and abroad, as well as a once in a century pandemic. As retired military officers, we believe that Donald J. Trump has been tested as few other presidents have and is the proven leader to confront these dangers. It can be argued that this is the most important election since our country was founded. With the Democratic Party welcoming to socialists and Marxists, our historic way of life is at stake. … For these reasons, we support Donald Trump’s re-election. We believe that President Donald Trump is committed to a strong America. As president, he will continue to secure our borders, defeat our adversaries, and restore law and order domestically.”
Hooyah!


wnd--2020-09-24--DOJ: Here's our plan to hold online platforms accountable for 'unlawfully censoring' speech

The Department of Justice on Wednesday proposed changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to combat censorship .
President Trump said in a discussion at the White House that `` a small group of powerful technology platforms have tightened their grip over commerce and communications in America . ''
`` They ’ ve used this power to engage in unscrupulous business practices while simultaneously waging war on free enterprise and free expression , '' he said .
The radical left has convinced the platforms to be `` intolerant of diverse political views , '' Trump charged .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressing conservative views , even from a president of the United States , while at the same time it allows Iran ’ s Supreme Leader to freely spew vile , anti-Semitic hate and even death threats , '' he pointed out .
Consequently , each year `` countless Americans are banned , blacklisted , and silenced through arbitrary or malicious enforcement of ever-shifting rules . ''
`` Some platforms exploit their power , acquire vast sums of personal data without consent , or rig their terms of service to coerce , mislead , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr said the DOJ had forwarded to Congress proposed legislation to reform Section 230 .
`` And that legislation addresses concerns about online censorship by requiring greater transparency and accountability when platforms remove lawful speech , '' he said .
`` Online platforms play a vital role in our society .
Nearly everyone relies on platforms now for – on a daily basis – to communicate , to share private information , buy goods , receive news and information .
And we ’ ve grown to depend on it , and necessarily , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trust in these platforms . ''
But Barr said the platforms `` can abuse those positions of trust , whether by deciding which voices they ’ re going to amplify and which they ’ re going to throttle , and by improperly tracking and collecting user data and even facilitating criminal activity . ''
The DOJ addressed the issue of transparency .
The proposed changes would replace `` the vague catch-all 'otherwise objectionable ' language … with 'unlawful ' and 'promotes terrorism , ' '' the DOJ explained .
`` This reform would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moderation decisions on the core objective of Section 230 – to reduce online content harmful to children – while limiting a platform 's ability to remove content arbitrarily or in ways inconsistent with its terms of service simply by deeming it 'objectionable . '
'' The DOJ also wants a definition of `` good faith '' that would be used to `` limit immunity for content moderation decisions to those done in accordance with plain and particular terms of service and accompanied by a reasonable explanation . ''
Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an important step in reforming Section 230 `` to further its original goal : providing liability protection to encourage good behavior online . ''
`` The proposal makes clear that , when interactive computer services willfully distribute illegal material or moderate content in bad faith , Section 230 should not shield them from the consequences of their actions , '' he said .
Bad-faith censorship would result in an open door to civil claims against online platforms , the presentation explained .
The DOJ said Section 230 immunity `` is meant to incentivize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` Platforms that purposely solicit and facilitate harmful criminal activity — in effect , online Bad Samaritans — should not receive the benefit of this immunity .
Nor should a platform receive blanket immunity for continuing to host known criminal content on its services , despite repeated pleas from victims to take action . ''
The Washington Examiner reported the DOJ was concerned `` that online platforms have used the immunity from liability to censor certain types of lawful speech , and its proposal would revise and clarify the existing language while also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and courts . ''
The proposals come only a few months after the president issued an executive order to battle what he called unfair censorship of conservative voices online .
The order said Twitter , Facebook , Instagram and YouTube hold huge power to shape the interpretation of public events and were `` engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse . ''

The Department of Justice on Wednesday proposed changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to combat censorship.
President Trump said in a discussion at the White House that "a small group of powerful technology platforms have tightened their grip over commerce and communications in America."
"They’ve used this power to engage in unscrupulous business practices while simultaneously waging war on free enterprise and free expression," he said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The radical left has convinced the platforms to be "intolerant of diverse political views," Trump charged.
"For example, Twitter routinely restricts posts expressing conservative views, even from a president of the United States, while at the same time it allows Iran’s Supreme Leader to freely spew vile, anti-Semitic hate and even death threats," he pointed out.
Consequently, each year "countless Americans are banned, blacklisted, and silenced through arbitrary or malicious enforcement of ever-shifting rules."
"Some platforms exploit their power, acquire vast sums of personal data without consent, or rig their terms of service to coerce, mislead, or defraud."
Attorney General William Barr said the DOJ had forwarded to Congress proposed legislation to reform Section 230.
"And that legislation addresses concerns about online censorship by requiring greater transparency and accountability when platforms remove lawful speech," he said.
"Online platforms play a vital role in our society. Nearly everyone relies on platforms now for – on a daily basis – to communicate, to share private information, buy goods, receive news and information. And we’ve grown to depend on it, and necessarily, we’ve had to put our trust in these platforms."
But Barr said the platforms "can abuse those positions of trust, whether by deciding which voices they’re going to amplify and which they’re going to throttle, and by improperly tracking and collecting user data and even facilitating criminal activity."
The DOJ addressed the issue of transparency.
The proposed changes would replace "the vague catch-all 'otherwise objectionable' language … with 'unlawful' and 'promotes terrorism,'" the DOJ explained.
"This reform would focus the broad blanket immunity for content moderation decisions on the core objective of Section 230 – to reduce online content harmful to children – while limiting a platform's ability to remove content arbitrarily or in ways inconsistent with its terms of service simply by deeming it 'objectionable.'"
The DOJ also wants a definition of "good faith" that would be used to "limit immunity for content moderation decisions to those done in accordance with plain and particular terms of service and accompanied by a reasonable explanation."
Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen said the department’s proposal is an important step in reforming Section 230 "to further its original goal: providing liability protection to encourage good behavior online."
"The proposal makes clear that, when interactive computer services willfully distribute illegal material or moderate content in bad faith, Section 230 should not shield them from the consequences of their actions," he said.
Bad-faith censorship would result in an open door to civil claims against online platforms, the presentation explained.
The DOJ said Section 230 immunity "is meant to incentivize and protect online Good Samaritans."
"Platforms that purposely solicit and facilitate harmful criminal activity — in effect, online Bad Samaritans — should not receive the benefit of this immunity. Nor should a platform receive blanket immunity for continuing to host known criminal content on its services, despite repeated pleas from victims to take action."
The Washington Examiner reported the DOJ was concerned "that online platforms have used the immunity from liability to censor certain types of lawful speech, and its proposal would revise and clarify the existing language while also providing greater guidance to platforms, users, and courts."
The proposals come only a few months after the president issued an executive order to battle what he called unfair censorship of conservative voices online.
The order said Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube hold huge power to shape the interpretation of public events and were "engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse."


wnd--2020-09-24--Seattle City Council votes to strip funding from police after 'ferocious' pressure from BLM

The Seattle City Council voted Tuesday evening to override Mayor Jenny Durkan 's vetoes of three council budget bills that would have stopped sharp budget cuts of the Seattle Police Department .
The veto-override vote capped hours of online public debate about the three bills and many speakers urged council members to `` hold the line '' against the mayor and listen to the Black Lives Matter movement , The Seattle Times reported .
`` We need you to stand with black lives , not Jenny Durkan , '' public commenter Evelyn Chow said .
Mayor Durkan and council members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 city budget and respond to the protests that have swept the country following George Floyd 's death in Minneapolis after a police officer knelt on his neck for roughly nine minutes during an arrest .
The budget bills were passed by the council and vetoed by Durkan last month before the council voted to override the Democratic mayor 's veto Tuesday .
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said Tuesday 's vote was the result of `` ferocious '' pressure from the Black Lives Matter movement .
The new spending plan will cut the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , eliminate the Navigation Team that serves as an outreach to the homeless and trim the SPD 's command staff salaries , KOMO-TV reported .
It will also borrow $ 14 million to fund community-based public safety programs and use $ 3 million of emergency reserves to fund a community-led public safety research project .
The amended budget will strip the department of roughly $ 3 million , a less than 1 percent defunding of the department 's budget .
Prior to the vote , Durkan said she was concerned about insufficient plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smaller police force , addressing the homeless encampments without a dedicated team and funding to pay off the loan .
Decriminalize Seattle and King County Equity Now said they were `` encouraged '' by the veto-override vote , but said the budget cuts were modest .
`` As we head into the 2021 budget cycle , we expect council members to maintain their conviction , elevate Black lives , and uphold their public commitments to divest from policing and reinvest in Black communities , ” the community coalitions said in a statement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a `` down payment '' on future changes to the department .
The Downtown Seattle Association was disappointed by Tuesday 's vote and said it `` wo n't result in real police reform , '' according to The Seattle Times .
`` The council needs to listen to constituents from across the city , not just those who gather outside their front doors , '' the association said .
Mayor Durkan is expected to unveil her plan for Seattle 's 2021 budget next week and several council members said they were open to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better meet the city 's public safety needs .
`` One of our shared responsibilities is to find common ground , '' Durkan said .
`` Even when we disagree , I have always believed we could work together on actual solutions that can be done and make the change we want to see . ''
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

The Seattle City Council voted Tuesday evening to override Mayor Jenny Durkan's vetoes of three council budget bills that would have stopped sharp budget cuts of the Seattle Police Department.
The veto-override vote capped hours of online public debate about the three bills and many speakers urged council members to "hold the line" against the mayor and listen to the Black Lives Matter movement, The Seattle Times reported.
"We need you to stand with black lives, not Jenny Durkan," public commenter Evelyn Chow said.
Mayor Durkan and council members have been working for months to rework the 2020 city budget and respond to the protests that have swept the country following George Floyd's death in Minneapolis after a police officer knelt on his neck for roughly nine minutes during an arrest.
The budget bills were passed by the council and vetoed by Durkan last month before the council voted to override the Democratic mayor's veto Tuesday.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said Tuesday's vote was the result of "ferocious" pressure from the Black Lives Matter movement.
The new spending plan will cut the police department staff by roughly 100 officers, eliminate the Navigation Team that serves as an outreach to the homeless and trim the SPD's command staff salaries, KOMO-TV reported.
It will also borrow $14 million to fund community-based public safety programs and use $3 million of emergency reserves to fund a community-led public safety research project.
The amended budget will strip the department of roughly $3 million, a less than 1 percent defunding of the department's budget.
Prior to the vote, Durkan said she was concerned about insufficient plans for responding to emergency calls with a smaller police force, addressing the homeless encampments without a dedicated team and funding to pay off the loan.
Decriminalize Seattle and King County Equity Now said they were "encouraged" by the veto-override vote, but said the budget cuts were modest.
"As we head into the 2021 budget cycle, we expect council members to maintain their conviction, elevate Black lives, and uphold their public commitments to divest from policing and reinvest in Black communities,” the community coalitions said in a statement.
The council members described the cuts as a "down payment" on future changes to the department.
The Downtown Seattle Association was disappointed by Tuesday's vote and said it "won't result in real police reform," according to The Seattle Times.
"The council needs to listen to constituents from across the city, not just those who gather outside their front doors," the association said.
Mayor Durkan is expected to unveil her plan for Seattle's 2021 budget next week and several council members said they were open to working with Durkan on a deal to better meet the city's public safety needs.
"One of our shared responsibilities is to find common ground," Durkan said.
"Even when we disagree, I have always believed we could work together on actual solutions that can be done and make the change we want to see."
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-09-24--Costco yanks product after founder calls BLM a 'terrorist' group

Costco removed a popular pimento cheese brand from 120 of its stores after the owner called the Black Lives Matter movement a `` terror organization '' on his public Facebook , reported Today.com Brian Henry , founder of Palmetto Cheese and mayor of Pawleys Island , South Carolina , was reacting to the murder of two local residents when he made the post Aug. 25 .
`` I am sickened by the senseless killings in Georgetown last night , '' Henry wrote .
`` 2 innocent people murdered .
Not 2 thugs or people wanted on multiple warrants .
2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black man .
So why do we stand by and allow BLM to lawlessly destroy great American cities and threaten their citizens on a daily basis ... this has gone on too long .
Rise up America .
This BLM and Antifa movement must be treated like the terror organizations they are . ''
Screenshots of the now-deleted post circulated on social media , calling on customers to # BoycottPalmetto .
Today.com , citing the Georgetown County Sheriff 's Office , said Henry was referring to 23-year-old Ty Sheem Ha Sheem Walters III @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shooting three people and killing two .
The Post and Courier , which broke the Costco story , published a photo of a sign from the wholesale giant in Myrtle Beach , South Carolina , that said the cheese was `` discontinued '' and would `` not be re-ordered . ''
Today.com said the Georgetown , South Carolina , NAACP branch president Marvin Neal called for Henry 's resignation as mayor .
`` When two White people were allegedly killed by a Black man in Georgetown , SC , Mayor Brian Henry of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Island Beach had the opportunity to bring citizens closer together .
He instead chose to use his platform to cause further racial divide and controversy by venting his frustrations on social media , '' Neal told Today Food .
Henry issued an apology Sept. 3 for the Facebook post .
`` I am profoundly sorry to those I offended with my post last week , '' he said .
`` My comments were hurtful and insensitive , '' Henry said he had spent the past 10 days `` listening and learning . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends , our staff , the community and faith-based leaders provided me with a deeper understanding of racial inequality and the importance of diversity sensitivity , which is very much needed to heal Pawleys Island , Georgetown and our country , '' he said .
On his company 's website , Henry announced an endowment called Grace and Grits in which his family and Palmetto Cheese will donate $ 100,000 in the first year .
The company will also hire a `` diversity and community liaison '' to manage the endowment .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its label , removing a photo of Vertrella Brown , a black cook who died in April .
There was no explanation for the move , but Today.com noted critics have accused the company of exploiting an image of a back woman for profit .
The NAACP 's Neal said the endowment and the diversity liaison are n't good enough .
`` Mayor Henry used the power and privilege afforded to his office to further his personal agenda and spread hateful , racist rhetoric with the potential of inciting violence , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These situations must be taken seriously .
Racism can not and will not be tolerated by the citizens of Pawley ’ s Island Beach and Georgetown County .
Mayor Henry 's actions reflected negatively upon himself and the community in which he serves , '' he said .

Costco removed a popular pimento cheese brand from 120 of its stores after the owner called the Black Lives Matter movement a "terror organization" on his public Facebook, reported Today.com
Brian Henry, founder of Palmetto Cheese and mayor of Pawleys Island, South Carolina, was reacting to the murder of two local residents when he made the post Aug. 25.
"I am sickened by the senseless killings in Georgetown last night," Henry wrote. "2 innocent people murdered. Not 2 thugs or people wanted on multiple warrants. 2 white people defenselessly gunned down by a black man. So why do we stand by and allow BLM to lawlessly destroy great American cities and threaten their citizens on a daily basis ... this has gone on too long. Rise up America. This BLM and Antifa movement must be treated like the terror organizations they are."
Screenshots of the now-deleted post circulated on social media, calling on customers to #BoycottPalmetto.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Today.com, citing the Georgetown County Sheriff's Office, said Henry was referring to 23-year-old Ty Sheem Ha Sheem Walters III, who was arrested Aug. 24 for shooting three people and killing two.
The Post and Courier, which broke the Costco story, published a photo of a sign from the wholesale giant in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, that said the cheese was "discontinued" and would "not be re-ordered."
Today.com said the Georgetown, South Carolina, NAACP branch president Marvin Neal called for Henry's resignation as mayor.
"When two White people were allegedly killed by a Black man in Georgetown, SC, Mayor Brian Henry of the neighboring town of Pawley’s Island Beach had the opportunity to bring citizens closer together. He instead chose to use his platform to cause further racial divide and controversy by venting his frustrations on social media," Neal told Today Food.
Henry issued an apology Sept. 3 for the Facebook post.
"I am profoundly sorry to those I offended with my post last week," he said. "My comments were hurtful and insensitive,"
Henry said he had spent the past 10 days "listening and learning."
"The conversations I've had with friends, our staff, the community and faith-based leaders provided me with a deeper understanding of racial inequality and the importance of diversity sensitivity, which is very much needed to heal Pawleys Island, Georgetown and our country," he said.
On his company's website, Henry announced an endowment called Grace and Grits in which his family and Palmetto Cheese will donate $100,000 in the first year.
The company will also hire a "diversity and community liaison" to manage the endowment.
And Palmetto announced it will change the graphics on its label, removing a photo of Vertrella Brown, a black cook who died in April. There was no explanation for the move, but Today.com noted critics have accused the company of exploiting an image of a back woman for profit.
The NAACP's Neal said the endowment and the diversity liaison aren't good enough.
"Mayor Henry used the power and privilege afforded to his office to further his personal agenda and spread hateful, racist rhetoric with the potential of inciting violence," Neal told "Today."
"These situations must be taken seriously. Racism cannot and will not be tolerated by the citizens of Pawley’s Island Beach and Georgetown County. Mayor Henry's actions reflected negatively upon himself and the community in which he serves," he said.