thelibertydaily--2020-02-06--After Her Husband Joined ISIS, She Started Fighting Islamic Extremism

For Tania Joya , who was raised Muslim in London , it was a long journey to life in the United States .
“ I wanted to be in America , but my husband … thought that was bad for my religion and he thought that I would teach my children the wrong values , ” recalls Joya .
“ So he took us to Syria.
” After her husband became an ISIS fighter , Joya worked with U.S. officials , sharing information from her husband .
Now she ’ s working against violent extremism .
Read the interview , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ podcast : We also cover the following stories : • Vice President Mike Pence decried House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ’ s ripping of Trump ’ s State of the Union text .
• FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies and addresses the inspector general ’ s report about the FBI and the FISA courts .
The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet , Apple Podcasts , Pippa , Google Play , or Stitcher .
All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts .
If you like what you hear , please leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at [ email protected ] .
Enjoy the show !
Virginia Allen : I ’ m joined by Tania Joya , a former ISIS bride who fled Syria with her children and now works with Congress , the State Department , and [ the Department of ] Homeland Security to fight for the deradicalization of extremist Muslims .
Tania , thank you so much for joining me .
Tania Joya : Thank you for having me here .
Allen : Tania , your story is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much to unpack .
So I want to start at the beginning .
You were raised in London .
Were you raised in a Muslim home ?
Joya : Yes , I came from a Muslim cultural family .
They weren ’ t radical or extremist in that sense and I was introduced to radical Islam or jihad I would say through my cousin who was radicalized at Oxford University and she taught me about the caliphate .
This is in 2001 .
Allen : And then what happened after Sept. 11 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : It turned my life like completely upside down .
I was studying social studies at a level like a senior high school , so I never really was aware of Muslim politics .
It was alien me , I didn ’ t know it existed .
And when Sept. 11 happened I remember I came home from school , switched on the news , and saw it , and I was horrified .
I went to school the next day and I spoke to my classmate—she was a Pakistani girl—and I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dreadful what happened ?
” And she was like , “ Was it so bad ?
” And I thought , “ Well , she must not have understood my question.
” So I kept rephrasing it and she was like , “ OK , just come home after school and talk to my parents .
They ’ ll help you understand.
” So this is like part of the pull , like that extremist .
The recruiting process is like , “ Come into my home .
Come to a safe space @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t be listened to.
” And then I wasn ’ t hearing it directly from her because even she didn ’ t understand politics .
I was hearing it from her parents who glorified Osama bin Laden as a war hero who had defeated the Soviet Union on the battlefield , and if it wasn ’ t for the Osama bin Laden and the mujahideen , America wouldn ’ t be the superpower , it ’ d be Russia .
So that was making me curious about my heritage and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m a Muslim , [ there ’ s ] nothing I can do about it.
” And growing up in a working-class neighborhood in England , we had this split politically where the English natives were siding with the BNP—that ’ s the British National Parties and neo-Nazi party—and English Defence League and then , as a result of the growing movement of white nationalism in England to oppose that , the Muslim community [ was ] radicalizing with [ its ] Islamic political agenda .
That ’ s how a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America we went down this dark path of , first it was like we had an identity crisis as teenagers .
We didn ’ t know who we were but we weren ’ t allowed to be Western because that ’ s satanic , according to Islam .
And then being Muslim , especially a Muslim woman , means giving up all your freedoms .
But when you think God is on your side and you ’ re young and you want a revolution , you want change and you also want a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life , well , who else is going to fix it better than God ?
So you ’ re under that misconception .
We are also told that Islam will solve all the problems , the world will have a beautiful utopia .
Well , when you ’ re young and vulnerable and from a broken home , especially , you long for that .
That ’ s what draws in so many people into radical Islam as children .
But also with neo-Nazis , we see the same pattern where I call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” that is happening right now and it ’ s phenomenal .
And it ’ s marginalizing white male youth to lean toward neo-Nazism because that gives them a space where they can embrace their masculinity and feel some pride .
So I completely empathize with it .
With the program I ’ m working with now , Preventing Violent Extremism Workshop , which was made by the Clarion Project , it ’ s our solution , it ’ s our way of trying to help the U.S. with this mental health crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re not going to take people ’ s guns away and say , “ Hey , that ’ s going to solve the breakdown of family values.
” It ’ s not , it ’ s instilling the values into children from a young age , from fourth grade up with a value system that is so grounded that when they come across arguments that will draw them into any sort of violent extremist political movement , they ’ re going to say , “ Hang on , my value @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s humane .
It doesn ’ t involve killing people , because if they kill people for bad , it ’ s a bad idea .
And it ’ s basically giving them the arguments , the counternarratives to prejudice and hateful ideas .
Allen : Wow , wow .
And you know , you ’ re so right that this is a situation and an issue that touches men , it touches women , it touches Americans , touches Europeans .
Your first husband was an American .
How did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still is an American .
Joya : He ’ s an American who , it started off as Sept. 11 , he was a military brat .
And in my eyes I thought he born with a silver spoon .
He was born into the life that every non-American wishes they could [ have ] .
They would love to exchange places with him .
He was a white American , upper-middle-class family with a military legacy .
His dad was a colonel in the Air Force for 30 years .
His grandfather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ] was a general and then he turned out to be a commander in ISIS .
Allen : How did that happen ?
That seems like a really radical jump to have your father be in the American military and serve and then you decide to go and become an ISIS fighter .
Joya : Again , it goes back to him not having a good relationship with his dad to begin with and , again , we see this pattern with a lot of people who become neo-Nazis or violent extremists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the stability at home or something adverse happens in their life , which they might need psychological help for but they ’ re not getting it , and then they turn toward movements , political movements that give them meaning and purpose .
Plus , in a society where we live in , where we ’ re told it ’ s all about the material things in your life , they ’ re looking for spiritual enlightenment , but they ’ re not looking in the right direction .
Allen : Wow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s so innate and all of us search for purpose .
So when you met your husband , was he already radicalized ?
Joya : When he was 17 years old , [ it ] started off as a rebellion against his father just to annoy his father as much as possible , he became a Muslim .
That was the worst thing you could do in his family because they were a Greek Orthodox family , they had this whole history of not liking the Ottomans .
Rightfully so—the Ottomans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
But he couldn ’ t live up to his dad ’ s image .
His dad was a quarterback at West Point who became a doctor and a colonel .
His dad was 6-foot-4 .
He was very good looking , but John didn ’ t compare .
John had bone frailties and he was in a wheelchair for six months , he became very depressed .
He started doing drugs at 11 years old .
He was not on the same road as his father was , and so there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So John ’ s feeling of rejection by his dad made him look for family elsewhere or respect elsewhere .
The feminist movement also pushed him toward looking for a community that embraced him as a male .
And Islam certainly does that .
Allen : That ’ s really interesting .
I want to ask you more about that .
So he actually found that kind of the modern-American , in-your-face feminism made him kind of pull back ?
Joya : And seek patriarchy , a patriarchal family .
Even myself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , being told , “ Oh , being a stay-at-home mother … wanting to be a mother in the first place , oh , that ’ s so unambitious.
” … Really , it ’ s like , it was internal for me , it was natural .
I was like , well , I ’ m quite maternal and I ’ d love to have children , but that wasn ’ t the right narrative .
It ’ s like we ’ re all supposed to fall in line and say the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big family .
I wanted to have the family that I didn ’ t grow up in .
And so [ that is ] one of the reasons why I allowed John to come into my life .
I met him online on a website .
He was studying Arabic in Damascus and I was in London , around 19 years old .
And I looked at him and I was like , “ Wow , he ’ s got the life that I want to be.
” So we got married after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know him .
Joya : But sadly , I had grew up in a culture with arranged marriages where girls didn ’ t know the men they were marrying and , boy , did they regret it .
But they didn ’ t have a choice .
I saw forced marriages .
Even , again , the culture they came from was so anti-Western , even though we were living in the West , we weren ’ t allowed to integrate .
There wasn ’ t a place for us , so we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well , where do I come from ?
Well , my roots , but we only stopped to a certain point .
Joya : We thought , we felt we were helpless young kids who were seeking , I won ’ t say power , but it ’ s almost like that .
With neo-Nazis , we find that they want to come off crazy .
They want to come off scary .
It ’ s a power trip .
It ’ s the same with Islamicists .
Same with ISIS .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crazy people to scare civil people .
Allen : Wow .
Let ’ s fast-forward to 2013 , you and your former husband and your children moved to Syria to join a jihadist insurgence .
Can you just paint that picture for us ?
When you all arrived in Syria , what was the atmosphere like ?
The people that were around you , the camp that you all were in ?
What was the atmosphere ?
Joya : Yeah .
I just want to clarify that I didn ’ t want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I had children .
I wanted to be in America , but my husband … thought that was bad for my religion and he thought that I would teach my children the wrong values .
And it ’ s the right values , but in his warped mind , it was the wrong values .
So he took us to Syria from Turkey , we ’ re supposed to be living in Turkey .
And as soon as I got to Syria and as soon as I got a phone , I reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I need to get out because if you don ’ t allow me , if I can ’ t leave Syria and come back to the U.S. , you ’ re not going to have one American terrorist , you ’ re going to have five because he ’ s going to put my children on the front lines and I ’ m going to have to bury them.
” And [ that is ] the last thing I want to do .
So part of my maternal instinct was to save my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not just survive , but I knew that the only place they ’ ll really thrive is here in the U.S. And so while I was there it was terrible , it was a war zone , everything was rubble .
I would hear shooting outside .
When we first got there , John was interrogated , and the militants , they weren ’ t ISIS because ISIS came nine months after I left Syria .
And yes , my husband had a lot to do with creating ISIS and he was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it for a long time , but I knew he was and then he finally admitted to it .
Well , while I was there , I was only in Syria for three weeks during the war and I would have left earlier but the roads were blocked .
There were always blockades .
There was very little food coming in where I was staying in Azaz , and I was five months pregnant .
And then my kids and I all got infections because that ’ s pretty normal when you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get sick .
So we all got sick .
But I didn ’ t want to be there , I didn ’ t want to be there for one day .
But as a stay-at-home mother , who … I was raised , I was groomed to be a submissive wife , a doormat wife , I would say .
And that ’ s pretty much how I was at first because … I was indoctrinated to believe that obedience to your husband is obedience to God .
But when I approached @ @ @ @ @ @ @ child , but then I had had enough of that .
I was like , “ I ’ m not going to follow his foolish mistakes over and over again and believe this is a obedience to God.
” It made me really upset because I knew he was dangerous for us .
It ’ s just , as a Muslim woman , when I was a Muslim , I had no real divorce rights .
He wouldn ’ t give me a divorce .
I didn ’ t have the right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think what I wanted to think .
And that ’ s where my husband , my ex-husband John and I clashed .
It was when I came to America , and now you watched Fox Business .
In 2009 I was homeschooling , I was doing laundry and I needed mental stimulation because my kids would drive me crazy , so I would watch the news and I saw Judge Andrew Napolitano discuss the Constitution and the Bill of Rights .
And it opened my mind .
I was like , I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I ’ m missing out.
” You know , “ I need this.
” I believed I was a slave from the time I was born and I used to be told freedom is satanic , freedom is for the people who go to hell , they want freedom .
We ’ re slaves , we ’ re slaves to God , though , it ’ s good to be a slave … When you only hear the same voice over and over again , you just think that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
“ Oh , well , that ’ s me .
I don ’ t have a choice about it.
” Like right now , off the topic a bit , but 1 in 4 Muslims in America don ’ t believe in the religion and that ’ s a great transition .
Ten years ago the numbers weren ’ t that high .
So we ’ re making progress .
American values , especially our generation and the younger generations we ’ re seeing , “ Hang on , American values are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosper and do well and just what the Founding Fathers wanted for us .
And even the Founding Fathers of America understood the threat of jihad and the idea of a caliphate because they understood the Ottoman Empire and they understood that women are property , children are property .
That ’ s all we were .
And we had no rights .
There was no room for us to grow .
It was like our roles in society were assigned .
You ’ d become baby-making machines and for some reason when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oh , that ’ s not so bad.
” But then I got it and I realize it ’ s stressful .
And plus , I was in my 20s I was like , “ I want to do what other women do in their 20s , like have a job.
” Allen : So how did you find that freedom , both physically from Syria to America and then … in your heart and mind and psychologically to find the freedom to say , “ I am not a slave ” ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I had to disassociate myself from the Muslim community .
And it was hard because that ’ s all I knew my entire life .
But I had to do that so that they wouldn ’ t condemn me .
Because when you get condemned so much , you just start allowing people to think for you .
So I needed to remove myself and then I was free to study whatever I wanted .
I started reading a lot of Thomas Paine material and he made so much sense .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and many of his books and … he speaks from my heart , he puts into words what I feel and it ’ s beautiful .
And this is what humans should all embrace .
You know these are American values , not Hollywood values , American values that everyone can benefit from .
It was hard .
I probably had a few mental breakdowns but I bounced back stronger and smarter .
And the reason why I came out with my story , because I could have just stayed quiet , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because I wanted to speak on behalf of all the women who are from the same cultural background that I ’ m from , where they ’ re very suppressed , and I want to speak on their behalf and say there is a better life out there .
You don ’ t have to put up with this dogma .
You should be able to be free and you are still a good human being even if you are free .
Allen : Yeah , yeah .
Was that process of coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you accepted by neighbors , and what was that integration like ?
Joya : I ’ m from Texas , everyone ’ s friendly in the South .
I love it .
And I can ’ t live on the East Coast because people are so friendly in the South .
Joya : Great state .
And it ’ s very welcoming to migrants .
They want to see people do well , they want to see people prosper because that ’ s good for the economy , it ’ s good for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the country with the right values , they ’ re going to be great citizens .
If they ’ re coming in with that Third World mentality and thinking that ’ s what God wants and they have a right to destroy this Earth because God tells them to , then they ’ re dangerous and they can ’ t be allowed in this country .
We ’ ve seen even with [ some recent ] attacks—a Saudi Arabian … was in the military and he shot up some gods , something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have the right value system .
Allen : Yeah , yeah .
And as you mentioned , your former husband did go on to become a very high-ranking ISIS fighter .
Did you stay in contact with him or when you escaped from Syria with your children were you kind of dead to him at that point ?
Joya : Once I left Syria , I was more than happy to help the FBI collect information .
So I would continue conversations with him on Skype and Telegram so that I could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorities , this country , the government , saved me and my children .
My loyalty now was to them only .
I didn ’ t feel bad about it because I knew he was playing the same game with me .
He was lying to me and he was just trying to get my children .
He wanted to get the children back because he ’ s delusional .
I would never agree with it .
But at the time , ISIS was doing well then .
Between 2014 and 2016 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they really thought they were going to establish the state fully .
So we were playing this going back and forth where we ’ re just trying to trick each other to get information .
Then finally [ at the ] end of 2017 , end of 2016 , Graeme Wood came out with The Atlantic article that exposed who he was .
So ISIS started saying , “ Oh , he died , ” to throw everybody off so that no more investigations would go into looking for him .
Joya : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or he might have died , but there ’ s no evidence for his death .
Allen : Wow .
He could still be alive .
Joya : He could be .
And since he is a white American , he could go into Europe easily .
I mean , he [ doesn ’ t ] have to be white to go to Europe , their migration is so open , but there ’ s no point of borders even .
But it ’ s been infiltrated and they ’ re dangerous .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Let ’ s talk a little bit more about the work that you ’ re doing now .
So much I think of the goal is , obviously , to prevent that radicalization in the first place .
How do you do that ?
Joya : Well , we have to start somewhere because it ’ s a health crisis and it ’ s everywhere in every state .
And again , this isn ’ t happening anywhere else in the world .
It ’ s only in America .
We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are such ideologues who feel like by shooting up their schools … that leaves them a legacy .
But it ’ s a mental health crisis .
We feel that if these kids who statistically come from very broken homes—there ’ s missing father figures or their fathers are abusive , that mothers are abusive , or there ’ s a lot of alcoholism in their family—they need to learn at school in the place of education , a space that will teach them the correct values because it ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a gun problem , it ’ s a value problem .
And you know , I always say I ’ ve met the nicest Muslims in the world , but them having the wrong ideology and the right value system can make them horrible people , dangerous people .
So it ’ s about reaching out to children from as early as fourth grade and instilling them , and teaching them empathy , social responsibility , community building , and how to put their grievances into words .
They need training while they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reach the teen period , they already have the skill set to be able to argue their points in a country where we have freedom of speech , fingers crossed it stays that way , but we still have that value .
And we need to teach them how to use their voices and not pick up guns to kill people or drive trucks into crowds .
Allen : How have you as a mother had those conversations with your own children ?
Joya : My children , … they ’ re so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re like , “ Why can ’ t we just have a normal dad who plays baseball ?
Teaches us how to throw ball ?
” Because they struggled with that .
[ They ] didn ’ t know how to when they came to the country .
My ex-husband taught them how to hold a gun but didn ’ t teach them how to throw a ball .
Poor kids , right ?
But they ’ re getting there and they love it and they love American sports and they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It wasn ’ t easy , but children are far more adaptable than adults and they want to fit in .
And it ’ s like my story , I wanted to fit in as a young girl , but I wasn ’ t allowed .
It was forbidden .
It was satanic to be like an English girl .
And we were slut-shamed for wearing jeans .
Joya : I mean , that ’ s American culture for you .
It ’ s like they made everything so ugly for us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So for my children , I just remind them that any form of extremism , and when you mix violence in that equation , is destructive .
So they don ’ t want to go down their dad ’ s path .
And we take them to church .
I go to synagogue , I take them there , too .
We ’ re grounding them in American values and there isn ’ t a day that goes by that I don ’ t remind them that we wouldn ’ t be alive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this country , for this government .
We have to show our loyalty to it .
I drill it into them .
The way my ex-husband would have drilled in jihad , I drill in American values to them and they need it and it gives them structure .
It ’ s very important for human beings .
Allen : Tania , how can our listeners follow your story and find out more about the work that you ’ re doing ?
Joya : So there ’ s a website , [ https @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s PVE .
I ’ m also on social media .
I ’ ve done lots of interviews .
I did a very successful interview with Glenn Beck a month ago .
So I ’ m around .
I ’ m always talking to everybody , going around the country to schools , to law enforcement telling my story .
And it really is proof that America is the land of opportunity .
And it is .
For me , it ’ s the immigrant dream .
You know , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to America .
We can ’ t stifle these values .
It would be such a discredit to the Founders of America if we did .
Allen : Tania , thank you so much for your time .
I really appreciate you sharing your story , it ’ s so powerful .

For Tania Joya, who was raised Muslim in London, it was a long journey to life in the United States.
“I wanted to be in America, but my husband … thought that was bad for my religion and he thought that I would teach my children the wrong values,” recalls Joya. “So he took us to Syria.”
After her husband became an ISIS fighter, Joya worked with U.S. officials, sharing information from her husband. Now she’s working against violent extremism. Read the interview, pasted below, or listen on the podcast:
We also cover the following stories:
The Senate voted to acquit President Donald Trump.
Vice President Mike Pence decried House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s ripping of Trump’s State of the Union text.
FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies and addresses the inspector general’s report about the FBI and the FISA courts.
The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!
Virginia Allen: I’m joined by Tania Joya, a former ISIS bride who fled Syria with her children and now works with Congress, the State Department, and [the Department of] Homeland Security to fight for the deradicalization of extremist Muslims. Tania, thank you so much for joining me.
Tania Joya: Thank you for having me here.
Allen: Tania, your story is an incredible one and we have so much to unpack. So I want to start at the beginning. You were raised in London. Were you raised in a Muslim home?
Joya: Yes, I came from a Muslim cultural family. They weren’t radical or extremist in that sense and I was introduced to radical Islam or jihad I would say through my cousin who was radicalized at Oxford University and she taught me about the caliphate. This is in 2001.
Allen: OK.
Joya: So actually 2000.
Allen: OK.
Joya: Right before Sept. 11.
Allen: And then what happened after Sept. 11, did that change your perspective?
Joya: It turned my life like completely upside down.
I was studying social studies at a level like a senior high school, so I never really was aware of Muslim politics. It was alien me, I didn’t know it existed. And when Sept. 11 happened I remember I came home from school, switched on the news, and saw it, and I was horrified.
I went to school the next day and I spoke to my classmate—she was a Pakistani girl—and I was like, “Wasn’t it dreadful what happened?” And she was like, “Was it so bad?” And I thought, “Well, she must not have understood my question.” So I kept rephrasing it and she was like, “OK, just come home after school and talk to my parents. They’ll help you understand.”
So this is like part of the pull, like that extremist. The recruiting process is like, “Come into my home. Come to a safe space where we can talk, where we won’t be listened to.”
And then I wasn’t hearing it directly from her because even she didn’t understand politics. I was hearing it from her parents who glorified Osama bin Laden as a war hero who had defeated the Soviet Union on the battlefield, and if it wasn’t for the Osama bin Laden and the mujahideen, America wouldn’t be the superpower, it’d be Russia.
So that was making me curious about my heritage and I was like, “Well, I’m a Muslim, [there’s] nothing I can do about it.”
And growing up in a working-class neighborhood in England, we had this split politically where the English natives were siding with the BNP—that’s the British National Parties and neo-Nazi party—and English Defence League and then, as a result of the growing movement of white nationalism in England to oppose that, the Muslim community [was] radicalizing with [its] Islamic political agenda.
That’s how a lot of youth in Europe and some in America we went down this dark path of, first it was like we had an identity crisis as teenagers. We didn’t know who we were but we weren’t allowed to be Western because that’s satanic, according to Islam. And then being Muslim, especially a Muslim woman, means giving up all your freedoms.
But when you think God is on your side and you’re young and you want a revolution, you want change and you also want a cure for all the problems in your life, well, who else is going to fix it better than God? So you’re under that misconception.
We are also told that Islam will solve all the problems, the world will have a beautiful utopia. Well, when you’re young and vulnerable and from a broken home, especially, you long for that.
That’s what draws in so many people into radical Islam as children. But also with neo-Nazis, we see the same pattern where I call it the “war on white males” that is happening right now and it’s phenomenal. And it’s marginalizing white male youth to lean toward neo-Nazism because that gives them a space where they can embrace their masculinity and feel some pride. So I completely empathize with it.
With the program I’m working with now, Preventing Violent Extremism Workshop, which was made by the Clarion Project, it’s our solution, it’s our way of trying to help the U.S. with this mental health crisis that we’re having right now.
We’re not going to take people’s guns away and say, “Hey, that’s going to solve the breakdown of family values.” It’s not, it’s instilling the values into children from a young age, from fourth grade up with a value system that is so grounded that when they come across arguments that will draw them into any sort of violent extremist political movement, they’re going to say, “Hang on, my value system is way better than this.”
It’s humane. It doesn’t involve killing people, because if they kill people for bad, it’s a bad idea. And it’s basically giving them the arguments, the counternarratives to prejudice and hateful ideas.
Allen: Wow, wow. And you know, you’re so right that this is a situation and an issue that touches men, it touches women, it touches Americans, touches Europeans. Your first husband was an American. How did you all meet?
Joya: He still is an American.
Allen: Yeah.
Joya: He’s an American who, it started off as Sept. 11, he was a military brat. And in my eyes I thought he born with a silver spoon. He was born into the life that every non-American wishes they could [have]. They would love to exchange places with him.
He was a white American, upper-middle-class family with a military legacy. His dad was a colonel in the Air Force for 30 years. His grandfather fought in World War II, [he] was a general and then he turned out to be a commander in ISIS.
Allen: How did that happen? That seems like a really radical jump to have your father be in the American military and serve and then you decide to go and become an ISIS fighter.
Joya: Again, it goes back to him not having a good relationship with his dad to begin with and, again, we see this pattern with a lot of people who become neo-Nazis or violent extremists in particular. They don’t have the stability at home or something adverse happens in their life, which they might need psychological help for but they’re not getting it, and then they turn toward movements, political movements that give them meaning and purpose.
Plus, in a society where we live in, where we’re told it’s all about the material things in your life, they’re looking for spiritual enlightenment, but they’re not looking in the right direction.
Allen: Wow. Yeah. That’s something that’s so innate and all of us search for purpose. So when you met your husband, was he already radicalized?
Joya: Yes.
Allen: He was.
Joya: When he was 17 years old, [it] started off as a rebellion against his father just to annoy his father as much as possible, he became a Muslim. That was the worst thing you could do in his family because they were a Greek Orthodox family, they had this whole history of not liking the Ottomans. Rightfully so—the Ottomans enslaved a lot of Europeans—I could understand it.
But he couldn’t live up to his dad’s image. His dad was a quarterback at West Point who became a doctor and a colonel. His dad was 6-foot-4. He was very good looking, but John didn’t compare. John had bone frailties and he was in a wheelchair for six months, he became very depressed. He started doing drugs at 11 years old.
He was not on the same road as his father was, and so there was conflict between the two of them. So John’s feeling of rejection by his dad made him look for family elsewhere or respect elsewhere. The feminist movement also pushed him toward looking for a community that embraced him as a male. And Islam certainly does that.
Allen: That’s really interesting. I want to ask you more about that. So he actually found that kind of the modern-American, in-your-face feminism made him kind of pull back?
Joya: Want traditional values.
Allen: Interesting.
Joya: And seek patriarchy, a patriarchal family. Even myself, I longed for the same thing, being told, “Oh, being a stay-at-home mother … wanting to be a mother in the first place, oh, that’s so unambitious.” … Really, it’s like, it was internal for me, it was natural.
I was like, well, I’m quite maternal and I’d love to have children, but that wasn’t the right narrative. It’s like we’re all supposed to fall in line and say the same thing. But I wanted a big family. I wanted to have the family that I didn’t grow up in. And so [that is] one of the reasons why I allowed John to come into my life.
I met him online on a website. He was studying Arabic in Damascus and I was in London, around 19 years old. And I looked at him and I was like, “Wow, he’s got the life that I want to be.” So we got married after three days. I didn’t know him.
Allen: Wow. Three days.
Joya: But sadly, I had grew up in a culture with arranged marriages where girls didn’t know the men they were marrying and, boy, did they regret it. But they didn’t have a choice. I saw forced marriages. Even, again, the culture they came from was so anti-Western, even though we were living in the West, we weren’t allowed to integrate.
There wasn’t a place for us, so we ended up looking backward. Like, well, where do I come from? Well, my roots, but we only stopped to a certain point.
Allen: Yeah.
Joya: We thought, we felt we were helpless young kids who were seeking, I won’t say power, but it’s almost like that. With neo-Nazis, we find that they want to come off crazy. They want to come off scary. It’s a power trip. It’s the same with Islamicists. Same with ISIS. They want to come off scary and like crazy people to scare civil people.
Allen: Wow. Let’s fast-forward to 2013, you and your former husband and your children moved to Syria to join a jihadist insurgence. Can you just paint that picture for us? When you all arrived in Syria, what was the atmosphere like? The people that were around you, the camp that you all were in? What was the atmosphere?
Joya: Yeah. I just want to clarify that I didn’t want to be in Syria.
Allen: OK.
Joya: Because I had children. I wanted to be in America, but my husband … thought that was bad for my religion and he thought that I would teach my children the wrong values. And it’s the right values, but in his warped mind, it was the wrong values.
So he took us to Syria from Turkey, we’re supposed to be living in Turkey. And as soon as I got to Syria and as soon as I got a phone, I reported him. And I said, “I need to get out because if you don’t allow me, if I can’t leave Syria and come back to the U.S., you’re not going to have one American terrorist, you’re going to have five because he’s going to put my children on the front lines and I’m going to have to bury them.” And [that is] the last thing I want to do.
So part of my maternal instinct was to save my children. And to see them, not just survive, but I knew that the only place they’ll really thrive is here in the U.S. And so while I was there it was terrible, it was a war zone, everything was rubble. I would hear shooting outside.
When we first got there, John was interrogated, and the militants, they weren’t ISIS because ISIS came nine months after I left Syria. And yes, my husband had a lot to do with creating ISIS and he was a commander, but he lied to me about it for a long time, but I knew he was and then he finally admitted to it.
Well, while I was there, I was only in Syria for three weeks during the war and I would have left earlier but the roads were blocked. There were always blockades. There was very little food coming in where I was staying in Azaz, and I was five months pregnant. And then my kids and I all got infections because that’s pretty normal when you go to a Third World country, to get sick. So we all got sick.
But I didn’t want to be there, I didn’t want to be there for one day. But as a stay-at-home mother, who … I was raised, I was groomed to be a submissive wife, a doormat wife, I would say. And that’s pretty much how I was at first because … I was indoctrinated to believe that obedience to your husband is obedience to God.
But when I approached my mid-20s, I had my second child, but then I had had enough of that. I was like, “I’m not going to follow his foolish mistakes over and over again and believe this is a obedience to God.” It made me really upset because I knew he was dangerous for us. It’s just, as a Muslim woman, when I was a Muslim, I had no real divorce rights.
He wouldn’t give me a divorce. I didn’t have the right to dress the way I wanted, to think what I wanted to think. And that’s where my husband, my ex-husband John and I clashed.
It was when I came to America, and now you watched Fox Business. In 2009 I was homeschooling, I was doing laundry and I needed mental stimulation because my kids would drive me crazy, so I would watch the news and I saw Judge Andrew Napolitano discuss the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And it opened my mind.
I was like, I was a complete FOMO. I was like, “I’m missing out.” You know, “I need this.” I believed I was a slave from the time I was born and I used to be told freedom is satanic, freedom is for the people who go to hell, they want freedom. We’re slaves, we’re slaves to God, though, it’s good to be a slave …
When you only hear the same voice over and over again, you just think that’s the way of life. You know? “Oh, well, that’s me. I don’t have a choice about it.” Like right now, off the topic a bit, but 1 in 4 Muslims in America don’t believe in the religion and that’s a great transition. Ten years ago the numbers weren’t that high. So we’re making progress.
American values, especially our generation and the younger generations we’re seeing, “Hang on, American values are humane values.” This is how humans prosper and do well and just what the Founding Fathers wanted for us. And even the Founding Fathers of America understood the threat of jihad and the idea of a caliphate because they understood the Ottoman Empire and they understood that women are property, children are property.
That’s all we were. And we had no rights. There was no room for us to grow. It was like our roles in society were assigned. You’d become baby-making machines and for some reason when I was 19 I thought, “Oh, that’s not so bad.” But then I got it and I realize it’s stressful. And plus, I was in my 20s I was like, “I want to do what other women do in their 20s, like have a job.”
Allen: So how did you find that freedom, both physically from Syria to America and then … in your heart and mind and psychologically to find the freedom to say, “I am not a slave”?
Joya: Coming back to the U.S., I had to disassociate myself from the Muslim community. And it was hard because that’s all I knew my entire life. But I had to do that so that they wouldn’t condemn me. Because when you get condemned so much, you just start allowing people to think for you.
So I needed to remove myself and then I was free to study whatever I wanted. I started reading a lot of Thomas Paine material and he made so much sense. I read the “Rights of Man” and many of his books and … he speaks from my heart, he puts into words what I feel and it’s beautiful. And this is what humans should all embrace. You know these are American values, not Hollywood values, American values that everyone can benefit from.
It was hard. I probably had a few mental breakdowns but I bounced back stronger and smarter. And the reason why I came out with my story, because I could have just stayed quiet, I came out [with] my story because I wanted to speak on behalf of all the women who are from the same cultural background that I’m from, where they’re very suppressed, and I want to speak on their behalf and say there is a better life out there.
You don’t have to put up with this dogma. You should be able to be free and you are still a good human being even if you are free.
Allen: Yeah, yeah. Was that process of coming to America difficult for you? Were you accepted by neighbors, and what was that integration like?
Joya: I’m from Texas, everyone’s friendly in the South. I love it. And I can’t live on the East Coast because people are so friendly in the South.
Allen: Texas is a good state.
Joya: Great state. And it’s very welcoming to migrants. They want to see people do well, they want to see people prosper because that’s good for the economy, it’s good for everybody.
And if immigrants are coming to the country with the right values, they’re going to be great citizens. If they’re coming in with that Third World mentality and thinking that’s what God wants and they have a right to destroy this Earth because God tells them to, then they’re dangerous and they can’t be allowed in this country.
We’ve seen even with [some recent] attacks—a Saudi Arabian … was in the military and he shot up some gods, something like that, because he didn’t have the right value system.
Allen: Yeah, yeah. And as you mentioned, your former husband did go on to become a very high-ranking ISIS fighter. Did you stay in contact with him or when you escaped from Syria with your children were you kind of dead to him at that point?
Joya: Once I left Syria, I was more than happy to help the FBI collect information. So I would continue conversations with him on Skype and Telegram so that I could pass it onto the authorities because the authorities, this country, the government, saved me and my children. My loyalty now was to them only.
I didn’t feel bad about it because I knew he was playing the same game with me. He was lying to me and he was just trying to get my children. He wanted to get the children back because he’s delusional. I would never agree with it.
But at the time, ISIS was doing well then. Between 2014 and 2016, they were rising and he thought, they really thought they were going to establish the state fully. So we were playing this going back and forth where we’re just trying to trick each other to get information.
Then finally [at the] end of 2017, end of 2016, Graeme Wood came out with The Atlantic article that exposed who he was. So ISIS started saying, “Oh, he died,” to throw everybody off so that no more investigations would go into looking for him.
Allen: Wow.
Joya: But he could be hiding in Turkey or he might have died, but there’s no evidence for his death.
Allen: Wow. He could still be alive.
Joya: He could be. And since he is a white American, he could go into Europe easily. I mean, he [doesn’t] have to be white to go to Europe, their migration is so open, but there’s no point of borders even. But it’s been infiltrated and they’re dangerous. These people are really dangerous.
Allen: Let’s talk a little bit more about the work that you’re doing now. So much I think of the goal is, obviously, to prevent that radicalization in the first place. How do you do that?
Joya: Well, we have to start somewhere because it’s a health crisis and it’s everywhere in every state. And again, this isn’t happening anywhere else in the world. It’s only in America. We’ve got mass shooters and young people who are such ideologues who feel like by shooting up their schools … that leaves them a legacy. But it’s a mental health crisis.
We feel that if these kids who statistically come from very broken homes—there’s missing father figures or their fathers are abusive, that mothers are abusive, or there’s a lot of alcoholism in their family—they need to learn at school in the place of education, a space that will teach them the correct values because it’s a value problem. It’s not a gun problem, it’s a value problem.
And you know, I always say I’ve met the nicest Muslims in the world, but them having the wrong ideology and the right value system can make them horrible people, dangerous people.
So it’s about reaching out to children from as early as fourth grade and instilling them, and teaching them empathy, social responsibility, community building, and how to put their grievances into words.
They need training while they’re young so that when they reach the teen period, they already have the skill set to be able to argue their points in a country where we have freedom of speech, fingers crossed it stays that way, but we still have that value. And we need to teach them how to use their voices and not pick up guns to kill people or drive trucks into crowds.
Allen: How have you as a mother had those conversations with your own children?
Joya: My children, … they’re so disappointed in their dad and they’re like, “Why can’t we just have a normal dad who plays baseball? Teaches us how to throw ball?” Because they struggled with that. [They] didn’t know how to when they came to the country. My ex-husband taught them how to hold a gun but didn’t teach them how to throw a ball. Poor kids, right?
But they’re getting there and they love it and they love American sports and they’re getting there. It was a transition. It wasn’t easy, but children are far more adaptable than adults and they want to fit in. And it’s like my story, I wanted to fit in as a young girl, but I wasn’t allowed. It was forbidden. It was satanic to be like an English girl. And we were slut-shamed for wearing jeans.
Allen: Terrible. Wow.
Joya: I mean, that’s American culture for you. It’s like they made everything so ugly for us. Everything was black and white.
So for my children, I just remind them that any form of extremism, and when you mix violence in that equation, is destructive. So they don’t want to go down their dad’s path.
And we take them to church. I go to synagogue, I take them there, too. We’re grounding them in American values and there isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t remind them that we wouldn’t be alive today if it wasn’t for this country, for this government. We have to show our loyalty to it. I drill it into them.
The way my ex-husband would have drilled in jihad, I drill in American values to them and they need it and it gives them structure. It’s very important for human beings.
Allen: Tania, how can our listeners follow your story and find out more about the work that you’re doing?
Joya: So there’s a website, [https://clarionproject.org/pve/]. The workshops, it’s PVE. I’m also on social media. I’ve done lots of interviews. I did a very successful interview with Glenn Beck a month ago. So I’m around.
I’m always talking to everybody, going around the country to schools, to law enforcement telling my story. And it really is proof that America is the land of opportunity. And it is. For me, it’s the immigrant dream. You know, I’m living the American dream thanks to America. We can’t stifle these values. It would be such a discredit to the Founders of America if we did.
Allen: Tania, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate you sharing your story, it’s so powerful.
Joya: Thank you.


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--James O’Keefe Finds New Evidence That Breadline Bernie is Paying Violent Communist Revolutionaries;

James O’Keefe Finds New Evidence That Breadline Bernie is Paying Violent Communist Revolutionaries; Twitter Bans Him for It

Another day , another prominent conservative figure in the doghouse with Silicon Valley social media giant Twitter .
According to a recent news release from Project Veritas , famed right-wing guerrilla journalist and publication founder James O ’ Keefe was suspended by the platform Tuesday for allegedly breaking site policies which prohibit the posting of people ’ s “ private information.
” The suspension comes nearly two weeks after O ’ Keefe used the platform to publicize documents revealing that at least one Bernie Sanders supporter caught on video discharging deeply violent rhetoric recently was in fact a paid campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Of course , such campaign payroll information , coming directly from the Federal Election Commission , is both generally accepted and legally regarded as public knowledge .
Not to mention the document was posted in the interest of fighting political disinformation — an issue that has supposedly risen to the top of every widely regarded social media corporation ’ s list of primary concerns for the 2020 election cycle .
In fact , it was not until Washington Post reporter David Weigel downplayed recent controversial videos of Sanders ’ staffers , labeling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign “ volunteers , ” that O ’ Keefe came forward with FEC documentation and publicly requested that a retraction be made .
“ Weigel said the subjects of our investigations were campaign volunteers , not true , ” Project Veritas reporter Eric Spracklen wrote .
“ To prove the inaccuracy our Tweet linked to page found on the Federal Election Commission website showing the ‘ volunteer ’ was in fact a paid staffer of the Sanders campaign , ” Spracklen continued .
“ The information we reported is in the public domain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it.
” None of this , however , was enough to stop the big tech powers that be from suspending O ’ Keefe ’ s Twitter account indefinitely .
“ UPDATE : @ Twitter has still not responded to @ JamesOKeefeIII appeal for reinstatement after being LOCKED for reporting an @ FEC paystub of @ BernieSanders campaign staffer Kyle Jurek ; information that is publicly available and easily accessible , ” Project Veritas tweeted Thursday .
RELATED : Former Obama Adviser Bashes Pelosi : ' I Just Do n't Recognize the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information under the auspices of The Washington Post , had done no wrong in Twitter ’ s eyes .
After deleting his initial false claim , the reporter seems to have walked off without so much as a slap on the wrists from the platform .
O ’ Keefe ’ s posting of important political information legally regarded as public domain , on the other hand , was somehow worthy of punishment .
Apparently , it was unacceptable for a professional journalist to air out in the public forum a political document you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the web .
That is , it was unacceptable because those documents could potentially damage the candidacy of a wealthy , socialist candidate who ’ s well-liked by the snobbish millennials of California ’ s big tech boardrooms .
Heaven forbid you know the Sanders campaign has under its employ a notable handful of fringe individuals who would gladly see violent class warfare — if not outright “ revolution ” a la Russia 1917 — on the streets of the modern United States .
As Project Veritas itself noted , the statements of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders supporters should drag journalists “ out by their hair and light them on fire in the streets ” should the Democratic National Committee nominate another candidate are news , plain and simple .
Field organizer Martin Weissgerber ’ s open praise for Soviet gulags and re-education camps responsible for the deaths of millions in the late 20th century was news as well .
And Twitter ’ s willingness to silence those who report such things over wrongful claims of disinformation , doxing or other forms of misbehavior only reveals one thing : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care in the world for drawing a line between sources that deliver truth and sources that deliver disinformation .
All they care about is ensuring as many users as possible are engaging with their approved sources of information .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Another day, another prominent conservative figure in the doghouse with Silicon Valley social media giant Twitter.
According to a recent news release from Project Veritas, famed right-wing guerrilla journalist and publication founder James O’Keefe was suspended by the platform Tuesday for allegedly breaking site policies which prohibit the posting of people’s “private information.”
The suspension comes nearly two weeks after O’Keefe used the platform to publicize documents revealing that at least one Bernie Sanders supporter caught on video discharging deeply violent rhetoric recently was in fact a paid campaign employees, rather than simply a volunteer.
Of course, such campaign payroll information, coming directly from the Federal Election Commission, is both generally accepted and legally regarded as public knowledge.
BREAKING: @JamesOKeefeIII Twitter account has been locked for reporting on Sanders campaign staff He recieved this message: pic.twitter.com/civAjzngMc — Jack Posobiec ?? (@JackPosobiec) February 5, 2020
Not to mention the document was posted in the interest of fighting political disinformation — an issue that has supposedly risen to the top of every widely regarded social media corporation’s list of primary concerns for the 2020 election cycle.
In fact, it was not until Washington Post reporter David Weigel downplayed recent controversial videos of Sanders’ staffers, labeling those spewing the aggressive rhetoric as simple campaign “volunteers,” that O’Keefe came forward with FEC documentation and publicly requested that a retraction be made.
“Weigel said the subjects of our investigations were campaign volunteers, not true,” Project Veritas reporter Eric Spracklen wrote.
Do you think Twitter's policy enforcement is biased against conservative figures? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (1231 Votes) No: 2% (22 Votes)
“To prove the inaccuracy our Tweet linked to page found on the Federal Election Commission website showing the ‘volunteer’ was in fact a paid staffer of the Sanders campaign,” Spracklen continued.
“The Post reporter retracted his story.
“The information we reported is in the public domain, there is nothing ‘private’ about it.”
None of this, however, was enough to stop the big tech powers that be from suspending O’Keefe’s Twitter account indefinitely.
“UPDATE: @Twitter has still not responded to @JamesOKeefeIII appeal for reinstatement after being LOCKED for reporting an @FEC paystub of @BernieSanders campaign staffer Kyle Jurek; information that is publicly available and easily accessible,” Project Veritas tweeted Thursday.
UPDATE: @Twitter has still not responded to @JamesOKeefeIII appeal for reinstatement after being LOCKED for reporting an @FEC paystub of @BernieSanders campaign staffer Kyle Jurek; information that is publicly available and easily accessible.#FreeOKeefepic.twitter.com/7EyeKoVKaI — Project Veritas (@Project_Veritas) February 6, 2020
This is what @jack is worried you will see. This is why @JamesOKeefeIII account remains locked. #Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/6i3TEqIn7S — Project Veritas Action (@PVeritas_Action) February 5, 2020
Weigel, posting patently false political information under the auspices of The Washington Post, had done no wrong in Twitter’s eyes.
After deleting his initial false claim, the reporter seems to have walked off without so much as a slap on the wrists from the platform.
O’Keefe’s posting of important political information legally regarded as public domain, on the other hand, was somehow worthy of punishment.
Apparently, it was unacceptable for a professional journalist to air out in the public forum a political document you or I could simply search for on the web.
That is, it was unacceptable because those documents could potentially damage the candidacy of a wealthy, socialist candidate who’s well-liked by the snobbish millennials of California’s big tech boardrooms.
Heaven forbid you know the Sanders campaign has under its employ a notable handful of fringe individuals who would gladly see violent class warfare — if not outright “revolution” a la Russia 1917 — on the streets of the modern United States.
As Project Veritas itself noted, the statements of field organizers like Jurek, who implied Sanders supporters should drag journalists “out by their hair and light them on fire in the streets” should the Democratic National Committee nominate another candidate are news, plain and simple.
Field organizer Martin Weissgerber’s open praise for Soviet gulags and re-education camps responsible for the deaths of millions in the late 20th century was news as well.
And Twitter’s willingness to silence those who report such things over wrongful claims of disinformation, doxing or other forms of misbehavior only reveals one thing: The technology industry hasn’t a care in the world for drawing a line between sources that deliver truth and sources that deliver disinformation.
All they care about is ensuring as many users as possible are engaging with their approved sources of information.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--Children in All 50 States Being Brainwashed That Revolutionary War Was Fought To Promote Slavery

The New York Times ’ 1619 Project — a curriculum that makes the fantastical claim that a primary cause of the Revolutionary War was the colonists ’ desire to protect slavery — has been adopted in 3,500 classrooms across all 50 states .
For this reason , some of the nation ’ s most renowned historians have called for The Times to correct this and other factual errors .
The Pulitzer Center , which is partnering with The Times to promote The 1619 Project , recounted in its 2019 annual report , “ Good journalism , innovative educational resources , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bridging the divisions that threaten to rip our democracy apart .
It is this belief that has driven the Pulitzer Center for the last 14 years.
” Nikole Hannah-Jones , The Times ’ lead writer on the project , argued in her introductory essay to it , “ The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie .
Our Declaration of Independence , approved on July 4 , 1776 , proclaims that ‘ all men are created equal ’ and ‘ endowed by their Creator with certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.
” TRENDING : Romney Gave This Note to Every Republican Before His Impeachment Vote Hannah-Jones went on to contend “ that the year 1619 is as important to the American story as 1776.
” That was the year , she explained , that British colonists in Jamestown purchased 20 to 30 enslaved Africans .
“ Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery , ” Hannah-Jones wrote .
The reporter is honest enough to admit that slavery in America predated the nation ’ s founding by over 150 years .
However , she alleges by 1776 , Britain “ had grown deeply conflicted over its role in the barbaric institution.
” There were calls to abolish slavery , which “ would have upended the economy of the colonies , in both the North and the South , ” Hannah-Jones wrote .
Slavery was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over a half-century after the founding of the United States .
Also working completely against Hannah-Jones ’ narrative is the fact that almost all the states north of the Mason-Dixon Line had voted to abolish slavery by the end of the Revolutionary War in 1783 .
By 1804 , all the Northern states had passed legislation ending slavery .
RELATED : Dershowitz Shames Dems by Listing Each Pres .
Who Should Have Been Impeached Using Their Logic The preposterous notion that protecting slavery was one of the “ primary ” reasons the American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the documentary evidence from the period , either , as my research for my book “ We Hold These Truths ” made clear .
Any middle school history student should be taught that the Stamp Act in 1765 , followed by the Declaratory Act in 1766 , were what began rallying colonists against Mother England .
In the Declaratory Act , Parliament claimed the legislative body held “ full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America … in all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Colonies became , “ No taxation without representation.
” Thomas Jefferson , a slave owner , made the case against King George III and Parliament in his 1774 essay “ A Summary View of the Rights of British America , ” pointing to Britain ’ s tax and trade policies toward the Colonies , the decision to suspend the New York legislature and the imposition of martial law in Massachusetts as unjust acts that must be opposed .
Thomas Paine , in his widely read political pamphlet “ Common Sense , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ list a fear that Great Britain would end slavery in the Colonies as a reason for declaring independence .
Over 500,000 copies of the pamphlet were published just three months after its release at a time when the entire population of the 13 Colonies was only 4 million at most .
Paine was an abolitionist who wrote the preamble to Pennsylvania ’ s abolition act in 1780 ( during the heart of the Revolutionary War ) , which freed 6,000 slaves in the state , according to History.com .
The Declaration of Independence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Colonies had against the king and Parliament , makes just a passing reference to slavery by pointing to England ’ s efforts to “ excite domestic insurrections.
” Jefferson ’ s original draft submitted to the Continental Congress included a condemnation of the king ’ s support for the African slave trade , writing it was a violation of the “ most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him , captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere , or to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” This language was struck from the Declaration ’ s final text out of deference to South Carolina and Georgia , which wanted to continue the African slave trade , according to the Claremont Institute ’ s Founding.com .
“ The British had encouraged slave and Indian revolts against the colonists , ” the institute reported .
“ For example , in 1775 , [ British Governor ] Lord Dunmore of Virginia , swore to members of the Virginia House of Burgesses that if ‘ any Injury or insult were offered to himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Slaves , and reduce the City of Williamsburg to Ashes . '
” So the issue for the British rulers in America wasn ’ t really a desire to free to slaves , but to wreak havoc in the rebellious Colonies .
Some of the nation ’ s top historians sent a letter to The New York Times in December taking The 1619 Project to task for claiming that protecting slavery was a primary cause of the Revolution .
Among the signers of the letter were Princeton University American history professor emeritus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emeritus Gordon Wood and Princeton University history professor Sean Wilentz .
McPherson is the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of “ Battle Cry Freedom : The Civil War Era , ” while Wood won the Pulitzer Prize for his work “ The Radicalism of the American Revolution.
” Wilentz was a Pulitzer finalist for his book , “ The Rise of American Democracy : Jefferson to Lincoln.
” So by Pulitzer ’ s estimation , these historians know what they are talking about when it comes to American history .
In their letter to The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Project ’ s desire “ to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history.
” “ Nevertheless , we are dismayed at some of the factual errors in the project and the closed process behind it , ” they wrote .
“ On the American Revolution , pivotal to any account of our history , the project asserts that the founders declared the colonies ’ independence of Britain ‘ in order to ensure slavery would continue.
’ This is not true .
If supportable , the allegation would be astounding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ project to validate it is false.
” The historians went on to list their concern that this and other unsupported claims were “ offered as an authoritative account that bears the imprimatur and credibility of The New York Times.
” Woods told RealClearInvestigations the only way The 1619 Project should be used in the classroom is “ as a way of showing how history can be distorted and perverted.
” The New York Times Magazine ’ s editor in chief , Jake Silverstein , issued a response last month disputing the charge that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ errors and is driven by ideology rather than historical understanding.
” “ The project was intended to address the marginalization of African-American history in the telling of our national story and examine the legacy of slavery in contemporary American life , ” Silverstein wrote .
In a December radio interview , Hannah-Jones said , “ When my editor asks me , like , what ’ s your ultimate goal for the project , my ultimate goal is that there ’ ll be a reparations bill passed.
” “ If you read the whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can come away from it without understanding the project is an argument for reparations , ” she told the Chicago Tribune in October .
It sure sounds like The 1619 Project is ideologically driven .
The Atlantic reported in December that Hannah-Jones has not “ budged from her conviction that slavery helped fuel the Revolution.
” “ I do still back up that claim , ” she told The Atlantic ’ s Adam Serwer , but she conceded her essay phrased it too strongly to make readers think slavery was universally supported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone reading that would assume that this was the case : All 13 Colonies and most people involved .
And I accept that criticism , for sure , ” Hannah-Jones said , while promising to better contextualize the claim when The 1619 Project is published in textbook form by Random House .
That promise does not sound too reassuring when the entire proposition is bunk .
Further proof against Hannah-Jones ’ s claim is in the Constitution itself , which rather than protect slavery put it on a path to extinction , Abraham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Constitution specifically authorized the federal government to ban the importation of slaves in 1808 ( approximately 20 years from the date the document was ratified ) .
Congress did so in 1808 , and President Thomas Jefferson signed the bill into law .
An additional compromise that the Founders reached was counting three-fifths of the state ’ s slave population when calculating the overall population for determining how many representatives a state would have in Congress .
The Southern states wanted to count their entire slave populations for representation purposes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
The impact was to lessen the number of votes slaveholding interests held in the House of Representatives .
Both of these constitutional provisions were a recognition that slavery was a present evil but not something many of the Founders wanted to see continue in perpetuity .
Finally , one other triumph in the fight against slavery during the founding period took place right across the street from the Constitutional Convention in 1787 .
The Continental Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance , which established the laws governing the territorial land encompassing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indiana , Illinois and Wisconsin .
The ordinance outlawed the introduction of slavery in the territory .
All of these facts from the founding era demonstrate that slavery was not a primary reason the Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain , and our nation ’ s students should not be taught that it was .
Not satisfied to push their liberal ideological perspective in reporting current events , The Times has moved on to propagate false narratives about America ’ s founding .
What motivated the founding generation to pledge their lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect slavery but to secure their God-given right to liberty .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The New York Times’ 1619 Project — a curriculum that makes the fantastical claim that a primary cause of the Revolutionary War was the colonists’ desire to protect slavery — has been adopted in 3,500 classrooms across all 50 states.
For this reason, some of the nation’s most renowned historians have called for The Times to correct this and other factual errors.
The Pulitzer Center, which is partnering with The Times to promote The 1619 Project, recounted in its 2019 annual report, “Good journalism, innovative educational resources, and deep community engagement are absolutely essential to bridging the divisions that threaten to rip our democracy apart. It is this belief that has driven the Pulitzer Center for the last 14 years.”
Nikole Hannah-Jones, The Times’ lead writer on the project, argued in her introductory essay to it, “The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that ‘all men are created equal’ and ‘endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.’
“But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.”
Hannah-Jones went on to contend “that the year 1619 is as important to the American story as 1776.”
That was the year, she explained, that British colonists in Jamestown purchased 20 to 30 enslaved Africans.
“Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery,” Hannah-Jones wrote.
The reporter is honest enough to admit that slavery in America predated the nation’s founding by over 150 years.
Do you think we should be proud of our nation's founding? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (964 Votes) No: 0% (4 Votes)
However, she alleges by 1776, Britain “had grown deeply conflicted over its role in the barbaric institution.”
There were calls to abolish slavery, which “would have upended the economy of the colonies, in both the North and the South,” Hannah-Jones wrote.
Slavery was abolished in Great Britain in 1833 — over a half-century after the founding of the United States.
Also working completely against Hannah-Jones’ narrative is the fact that almost all the states north of the Mason-Dixon Line had voted to abolish slavery by the end of the Revolutionary War in 1783.
By 1804, all the Northern states had passed legislation ending slavery.
The preposterous notion that protecting slavery was one of the “primary” reasons the American Colonies declared independence is not supported by the documentary evidence from the period, either, as my research for my book “We Hold These Truths” made clear.
Any middle school history student should be taught that the Stamp Act in 1765, followed by the Declaratory Act in 1766, were what began rallying colonists against Mother England.
In the Declaratory Act, Parliament claimed the legislative body held “full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America … in all cases whatsoever.”
The rallying cry in the Colonies became, “No taxation without representation.”
Thomas Jefferson, a slave owner, made the case against King George III and Parliament in his 1774 essay “A Summary View of the Rights of British America,” pointing to Britain’s tax and trade policies toward the Colonies, the decision to suspend the New York legislature and the imposition of martial law in Massachusetts as unjust acts that must be opposed.
Jefferson, in fact, hammered the king for blocking efforts to “exclude all further importations of slaves,” which he wrote would be the first step in abolishing the institution in the Colonies, “where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state.”
Thomas Paine, in his widely read political pamphlet “Common Sense,” published in January 1776, did not list a fear that Great Britain would end slavery in the Colonies as a reason for declaring independence.
Over 500,000 copies of the pamphlet were published just three months after its release at a time when the entire population of the 13 Colonies was only 4 million at most.
Paine was an abolitionist who wrote the preamble to Pennsylvania’s abolition act in 1780 (during the heart of the Revolutionary War), which freed 6,000 slaves in the state, according to History.com.
The Declaration of Independence itself, which lists dozens of grievances the Colonies had against the king and Parliament, makes just a passing reference to slavery by pointing to England’s efforts to “excite domestic insurrections.”
Jefferson’s original draft submitted to the Continental Congress included a condemnation of the king’s support for the African slave trade, writing it was a violation of the “most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither.”
This language was struck from the Declaration’s final text out of deference to South Carolina and Georgia, which wanted to continue the African slave trade, according to the Claremont Institute’s Founding.com.
“The British had encouraged slave and Indian revolts against the colonists,” the institute reported. “For example, in 1775, [British Governor] Lord Dunmore of Virginia, swore to members of the Virginia House of Burgesses that if ‘any Injury or insult were offered to himself’ he would ‘declare Freedom to the Slaves, and reduce the City of Williamsburg to Ashes.'”
So the issue for the British rulers in America wasn’t really a desire to free to slaves, but to wreak havoc in the rebellious Colonies.
Some of the nation’s top historians sent a letter to The New York Times in December taking The 1619 Project to task for claiming that protecting slavery was a primary cause of the Revolution.
Among the signers of the letter were Princeton University American history professor emeritus James McPherson, Brown University history professor emeritus Gordon Wood and Princeton University history professor Sean Wilentz.
McPherson is the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of “Battle Cry Freedom: The Civil War Era,” while Wood won the Pulitzer Prize for his work “The Radicalism of the American Revolution.”
Wilentz was a Pulitzer finalist for his book, “The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln.”
So by Pulitzer’s estimation, these historians know what they are talking about when it comes to American history.
In their letter to The Times, the academics applauded The 1619 Project’s desire “to address the enduring centrality of slavery and racism to our history.”
“Nevertheless, we are dismayed at some of the factual errors in the project and the closed process behind it,” they wrote.
“On the American Revolution, pivotal to any account of our history, the project asserts that the founders declared the colonies’ independence of Britain ‘in order to ensure slavery would continue.’ This is not true. If supportable, the allegation would be astounding — yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false.”
The historians went on to list their concern that this and other unsupported claims were “offered as an authoritative account that bears the imprimatur and credibility of The New York Times.”
Wood told RealClearInvestigations the only way The 1619 Project should be used in the classroom is “as a way of showing how history can be distorted and perverted.”
The New York Times Magazine’s editor in chief, Jake Silverstein, issued a response last month disputing the charge that The 1619 Project contains “significant factual errors and is driven by ideology rather than historical understanding.”
“The project was intended to address the marginalization of African-American history in the telling of our national story and examine the legacy of slavery in contemporary American life,” Silverstein wrote.
In a December radio interview, Hannah-Jones said, “When my editor asks me, like, what’s your ultimate goal for the project, my ultimate goal is that there’ll be a reparations bill passed.”
“If you read the whole project, I don’t think you can come away from it without understanding the project is an argument for reparations,” she told the Chicago Tribune in October.
It sure sounds like The 1619 Project is ideologically driven.
The Atlantic reported in December that Hannah-Jones has not “budged from her conviction that slavery helped fuel the Revolution.”
“I do still back up that claim,” she told The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer, but she conceded her essay phrased it too strongly to make readers think slavery was universally supported in the Colonies.
“I think someone reading that would assume that this was the case: All 13 Colonies and most people involved. And I accept that criticism, for sure,” Hannah-Jones said, while promising to better contextualize the claim when The 1619 Project is published in textbook form by Random House.
That promise does not sound too reassuring when the entire proposition is bunk.
Further proof against Hannah-Jones’s claim is in the Constitution itself, which rather than protect slavery put it on a path to extinction, Abraham Lincoln and abolitionists like Frederick Douglass argued.
The Constitution specifically authorized the federal government to ban the importation of slaves in 1808 (approximately 20 years from the date the document was ratified).
Congress did so in 1808, and President Thomas Jefferson signed the bill into law.
An additional compromise that the Founders reached was counting three-fifths of the state’s slave population when calculating the overall population for determining how many representatives a state would have in Congress.
The Southern states wanted to count their entire slave populations for representation purposes, but the Northern states did not allow it.
The impact was to lessen the number of votes slaveholding interests held in the House of Representatives.
Both of these constitutional provisions were a recognition that slavery was a present evil but not something many of the Founders wanted to see continue in perpetuity.
Finally, one other triumph in the fight against slavery during the founding period took place right across the street from the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
The Continental Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance, which established the laws governing the territorial land encompassing the future states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin. The ordinance outlawed the introduction of slavery in the territory.
All of these facts from the founding era demonstrate that slavery was not a primary reason the Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain, and our nation’s students should not be taught that it was.
Not satisfied to push their liberal ideological perspective in reporting current events, The Times has moved on to propagate false narratives about America’s founding.
What motivated the founding generation to pledge their lives, fortunes and sacred honor was not to protect slavery but to secure their God-given right to liberty.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--Tim Tebow Kicks Off 6th Annual ‘Night To Shine’ Which Has Become Global Experience ‘Centered on God’

Tim Tebow Kicks Off 6th Annual ‘Night To Shine’ Which Has Become Global Experience ‘Centered on God’s Love’

Tim Tebow is in Europe this week celebrating the 6th annual “ Night to Shine ” event , a prom-themed party for people with physical and mental disabilities .
The Tim Tebow Foundation has hosted the annual event every year since 2015 , “ an unforgettable prom night experience , centered on God ’ s love ” that continues to grow as more churches in more countries participate each year .
The party gives people with disabilities an opportunity to dress up , dance , and enjoy a night that makes them feel valued , special and loved .
Tebow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans to honor 115,000 guests around the world this year with the help of 215,000 volunteers .
Tebow kicked off this year ’ s prom night experience , available to people with special needs who are 14 and older , in Albania , according to an Instagram post .
Tebow and his wife , Demi-Leigh Nel-Peters , then moved on to Rome to debut Night to Shine for the city .
“ So grateful to be a part of Rome ’ s first-ever Night to Shine !
” the athlete and philanthropist wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s history that means to much to this world and to Christianity , humbled to see the love being poured out on tonight ’ s Kings & Queens for what I pray continues to be an unstoppable movement of God ’ s love !
” An excited Tebow shared that while he could not communicate with many people verbally , he was encouraged and overwhelmed by how the love of God cut through any language barrier he might have encountered .
“ There are some things that transcend language , ” Tebow said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ God ’ s love , hugging people , smiling , joy transcended and that ’ s what tonight was all about.
” According to the TTF website , Night to Shine 2020 will be celebrated by 721 churches across all 50 United States and in 34 countries .
RELATED : Tim Tebow and Demi-Leigh Nel-Peters Wed in South Africa : 'My Dreams Have Come True' “ Night to Shine is a night for the churches to shine , the volunteers to shine , our honored guests to shine , and most importantly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reads .
Night to Shine is particularly sentimental for Tebow and Nel-Peters , who met during a Night to Shine event that Demi-Leigh attended with her sister Franje .
Franje , who lived with cerebellar agenesis , passed away in 2019 at the age of 13 .
“ Our loss but heavens gain , ” Tebow wrote after Franje ’ s passing last May .
This year ’ s Night to Shine marks the first time Tebow and Nel-Peters got to attend the celebration as husband and wife , and they will hopefully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Tim Tebow is in Europe this week celebrating the 6th annual “Night to Shine” event, a prom-themed party for people with physical and mental disabilities.
The Tim Tebow Foundation has hosted the annual event every year since 2015, “an unforgettable prom night experience, centered on God’s love” that continues to grow as more churches in more countries participate each year.
The party gives people with disabilities an opportunity to dress up, dance, and enjoy a night that makes them feel valued, special and loved.
Tebow, who got married last month, plans to honor 115,000 guests around the world this year with the help of 215,000 volunteers.
Tebow kicked off this year’s prom night experience, available to people with special needs who are 14 and older, in Albania, according to an Instagram post.
Tebow and his wife, Demi-Leigh Nel-Peters, then moved on to Rome to debut Night to Shine for the city.
“So grateful to be a part of Rome’s first-ever Night to Shine!” the athlete and philanthropist wrote on Instagram.
“A city’s history that means to much to this world and to Christianity, humbled to see the love being poured out on tonight’s Kings & Queens for what I pray continues to be an unstoppable movement of God’s love!”
An excited Tebow shared that while he could not communicate with many people verbally, he was encouraged and overwhelmed by how the love of God cut through any language barrier he might have encountered.
“There are some things that transcend language,” Tebow said in an Instagram video. “And God’s love, hugging people, smiling, joy transcended and that’s what tonight was all about.”
According to the TTF website, Night to Shine 2020 will be celebrated by 721 churches across all 50 United States and in 34 countries.
“Night to Shine is a night for the churches to shine, the volunteers to shine, our honored guests to shine, and most importantly, God to shine!” the website reads.
Night to Shine is particularly sentimental for Tebow and Nel-Peters, who met during a Night to Shine event that Demi-Leigh attended with her sister Franje.
Franje, who lived with cerebellar agenesis, passed away in 2019 at the age of 13.
“Our loss but heavens gain,” Tebow wrote after Franje’s passing last May.
This year’s Night to Shine marks the first time Tebow and Nel-Peters got to attend the celebration as husband and wife, and they will hopefully continue to do so for many years to come.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--Wokey: Straight Actress Criticized For Role in LGBT TV Show Suddenly Announces She’s “Queer”

‘ Woke ’ actress Jameela Jamil responded to criticism that as a straight woman she shouldn ’ t be cast in a new LGBT-interest TV show by suddenly announcing that she was “ queer.
” Jamil , who relentlessly hypes identity politics and “ diversity , ” is set to be a judge on a new HBO dance contest show called Legendary .
“ The news prompted an online backlash from people who said The Good Place star was not representative of the black LGBT community , ” reports the BBC .
Jamil reacted by tweeting a statement that she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only revealed this now at 33-years-old because “ it ’ s not easy within the south Asian community to be accepted.
” She then announced she was logging off from Twitter “ because I don ’ t want to read mean comments dismissing this.
” According to her Wikipedia bio , Jamil has been in a relationship with musician James Blake ( a man ) since 2015 .
“ Here you go , Twitter falls for it .
SHE ’ S GOT A BOYFRIEND .
You don ’ t think it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” after being criticised for possibly taking a gay person ’ s place on a show ?
” asked one respondent .
Next time a woman tells you that as a man you have no right to an opinion on abortion , just respond by announcing you now identify as a woman .
Same goes for voicing your view on race relations .
If someone accuses you of engaging in “ white privilege , ” just say you ’ re transracial .
And if you face accusations of “ Islamophobia ” for criticizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re now a Muslim .
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

‘Woke’ actress Jameela Jamil responded to criticism that as a straight woman she shouldn’t be cast in a new LGBT-interest TV show by suddenly announcing that she was “queer.”
Checkmate, bigots.
Jamil, who relentlessly hypes identity politics and “diversity,” is set to be a judge on a new HBO dance contest show called Legendary.
“The news prompted an online backlash from people who said The Good Place star was not representative of the black LGBT community,” reports the BBC.
Jamil reacted by tweeting a statement that she now identifies “as queer” and only revealed this now at 33-years-old because “it’s not easy within the south Asian community to be accepted.”
She then announced she was logging off from Twitter “because I don’t want to read mean comments dismissing this.”
According to her Wikipedia bio, Jamil has been in a relationship with musician James Blake (a man) since 2015.
“Here you go, Twitter falls for it. SHE’S GOT A BOYFRIEND. You don’t think it’s odd she comes out as “queer” after being criticised for possibly taking a gay person’s place on a show?” asked one respondent.
Here you go, Twitter falls for it. SHE’S GOT A BOYFRIEND. You don’t think it’s odd she comes out as “queer” after being criticised for possibly taking a gay person’s place on a show? #Mugs #Coincidence #Gayface — India Willoughby (@IndiaWilloughby) February 5, 2020
Next time a woman tells you that as a man you have no right to an opinion on abortion, just respond by announcing you now identify as a woman.
Same goes for voicing your view on race relations. If someone accuses you of engaging in “white privilege,” just say you’re transracial.
And if you face accusations of “Islamophobia” for criticizing Islam, just temporarily say you’re now a Muslim.
Foolproof. Works every time.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--Breadline Bernie Sanders Declares Victory Over Pete Buttplug in Iowa

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont declared victory over rival Pete Buttigieg , by pointing to the popular initial vote of @ @ @ @ @ of Buttigieg .
“ Even though the vote tabulations have been extremely slow , we @ @ @ @ @ with some 97 percent of the precincts reporting , where our campaign is winning the @ @ @ @ @ 6,000 votes , ” Sanders said .
“ In other words , some 6,000 more @ @ @ @ @ night to support our candidacy than the candidacy of anyone else .
And when 6,000 @ @ @ @ @ you in an election than your nearest opponent , we here in northern New England @ @ @ @ @ he added .
“ In an election with voter turnout of approximately 180,000 people , @ @ @ @ @ competing , a victory margin of some 6,000 votes is pretty decisive , ” concluded @ @

War on drugs: agents seized enough to kill U.S. population 19 times
The war on drugs being fought on a daily basis at our borders has been able to be quantified with...


thelibertydaily--2020-02-07--Republicans Propose Making Sham Impeachments Harder in the Future

Democrats just managed to ram two ambiguous articles of impeachment through the House , with no underlying crimes , and then tie up the Senate with a long , boring trial despite the fact that everyone already knew the whole thing was going nowhere .
So lots of people are now thinking the impeachment process needs to be a little bit harder , otherwise MSNBC will just spend the remainder of Trump 's presidency dreaming up novel ways to remove the president from office .
On Thursday , Sen. Rick Scott ( R-FL ) announced that he would introduce a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pass articles of impeachment in the House to a three-fifths majority instead .
But unlike passing articles of impeachment , adding a proposed amendment to the Constitution is actually somewhat difficult .
Ratification requires two-thirds approval by both bodies of Congress , or a convention of the states , as well as the approval of three-fourths of state legislatures .
`` It should be harder – much harder – for either political party to take the process our Founders created as a last resort against a tyrannical leader and use it instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a political majority , '' Sen. Scott said in a statement .
`` I look forward to all of my colleagues , on both sides of the aisle , joining me in this effort to protect the integrity of our nation and our constitution . ''
Additionally , 16 GOP senators are backing a proposed rules change by Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri .
Under Hawley 's proposal , the Speaker of the House could n't sit on the articles of impeachment in an effort to extract concessions from the upper chamber @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received if the House failed to transmit the articles after 25 days of passage .
It would also allow a senator to try to dismiss the articles of impeachment .
The rules change was sparked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) delaying sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate after they first cleared the House late last year .
Democrats say the hold up allowed them to put a spotlight on their request for new witnesses and to let a slew of new reports come out about Trump 's decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get the country to help `` look into '' Democrats , including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden .
But Hawley told The Hill in a recent interview that he wants to move forward with his proposed rules change so that it would be in place for any potential future trials .
`` I think it 's a good idea just because I think procedurally we want to make sure that basically the disjuncture between the House and the Senate rules are n't exploited in the future , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rule change could pass the Senate -- Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is backing it -- Democrats are unlikely to support any change to the impeachment process that concedes the past few months were nothing more than a partisan witch hunt orchestrated by House Democrats .
But keeping the passage of impeachment articles to a simple majority in the House would make it easier for Republicans to give Democrats a taste of their own medicine the next time Democrats find themselves in control of the White House .

Democrats just managed to ram two ambiguous articles of impeachment through the House, with no underlying crimes, and then tie up the Senate with a long, boring trial despite the fact that everyone already knew the whole thing was going nowhere. So lots of people are now thinking the impeachment process needs to be a little bit harder, otherwise MSNBC will just spend the remainder of Trump's presidency dreaming up novel ways to remove the president from office.
On Thursday, Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) announced that he would introduce a constitutional amendment upping the simple majority needed to pass articles of impeachment in the House to a three-fifths majority instead. But unlike passing articles of impeachment, adding a proposed amendment to the Constitution is actually somewhat difficult. Ratification requires two-thirds approval by both bodies of Congress, or a convention of the states, as well as the approval of three-fourths of state legislatures.
"It should be harder – much harder – for either political party to take the process our Founders created as a last resort against a tyrannical leader and use it instead as a tool for the tyranny of a political majority," Sen. Scott said in a statement. "I look forward to all of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, joining me in this effort to protect the integrity of our nation and our constitution."
Additionally, 16 GOP senators are backing a proposed rules change by Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri. Under Hawley's proposal, the Speaker of the House couldn't sit on the articles of impeachment in an effort to extract concessions from the upper chamber. The articles would be deemed as received if the House failed to transmit the articles after 25 days of passage.
(Via The Hill)
It would also allow a senator to try to dismiss the articles of impeachment. The rules change was sparked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) delaying sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate after they first cleared the House late last year. Democrats say the hold up allowed them to put a spotlight on their request for new witnesses and to let a slew of new reports come out about Trump's decision to delay Ukraine aid and his effort to get the country to help "look into" Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. But Hawley told The Hill in a recent interview that he wants to move forward with his proposed rules change so that it would be in place for any potential future trials. "I think it's a good idea just because I think procedurally we want to make sure that basically the disjuncture between the House and the Senate rules aren't exploited in the future," he said.
While the proposed rule change could pass the Senate -- Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is backing it -- Democrats are unlikely to support any change to the impeachment process that concedes the past few months were nothing more than a partisan witch hunt orchestrated by House Democrats. But keeping the passage of impeachment articles to a simple majority in the House would make it easier for Republicans to give Democrats a taste of their own medicine the next time Democrats find themselves in control of the White House.