thelibertydaily--2020-10-24--RNC Chair: Trump’s Debate Performance ‘Motivated Supporters To Contribute In A Historic Way’

The Trump campaign , the Republican National Committee , and associated join committees announced that President Donald Trump ’ s final debate against Democratic nominee Joe Biden yielded a record fundraising haul from supporters , contributing to the “ largest digital fundraising day ever ” for the president ’ s re-election effort .
The digital fundraising haul around the presidential debate surpassed $ 26 million , over 30 % more than funds raised around the first presidential debate back in late September , according to a statement from the campaign on Friday .
Ronna McDaniel , chairwoman of the Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Trump ’ s debate performance , which she said “ motivated supporters to contribute in a historic way.
” “ Voters saw exactly what is at stake in this election : four more years of strengthening the economy , protecting American jobs , and revamping our broken health care system under President Trump versus Joe Biden ’ s ‘ dark winter ’ vision for America .
With only 11 days left until the most important election of our lifetimes , Trump Victory is using every resource to mobilize our volunteer army , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historic wins for President Trump and Republicans up and down the ballot , ” she said .
According to CNBC reporter Brian Schwarz , the Democrats raised $ 6 million in the aftermath of the debate through ActBlue , a fundraising platform used by Democratic politicians .
The Biden campaign has since reportedly sent out a fundraising email , which included the Trump campaign and RNC ’ s figure and said : “ Trump outraised us.
” After the debate , Trump received strong marks from political commentators , including former Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feuded during the 2016 primary .
“ Trump won this debate , handily .
Biden wasn ’ t a force at all .
Trump was substantive , on-point , well-tempered .
Definitely helped himself , when it mattered most , ” said Kelly .
Gary Colby , digital director for the Trump campaign , said that back in the final days of 2016 , the Trump campaign ’ s “ surge in online donations ” ended up preceding “ a rise in public polling , leading directly to victory.
” “ That surge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a week earlier than in 2016 , ” he said .
Earlier this week , the Biden campaign and its associated fundraising arms , including the DNC , had roughly $ 432 million on hand .
The Trump campaign , and its associated fundraising arms , including the RNC , had about $ 250 million on hand two weeks ago , according to NPR .
It ’ s not clear where those respective figures now stand .
Back in 2016 , Trump beat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton despite the substantial cash advantage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which amounted to $ 1.2 billion over the course of the election cycle , according to Politico .
Trump and his allies had half of that over the course of the election cycle .
The Daily Wire is one of America ’ s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news , opinion , and entertainment .
Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member .

The Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee, and associated join committees announced that President Donald Trump’s final debate against Democratic nominee Joe Biden yielded a record fundraising haul from supporters, contributing to the “largest digital fundraising day ever” for the president’s re-election effort.
The digital fundraising haul around the presidential debate surpassed $26 million, over 30% more than funds raised around the first presidential debate back in late September, according to a statement from the campaign on Friday. Ronna McDaniel, chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, attributed the fundraising haul to Trump’s debate performance, which she said “motivated supporters to contribute in a historic way.”
“Voters saw exactly what is at stake in this election: four more years of strengthening the economy, protecting American jobs, and revamping our broken health care system under President Trump versus Joe Biden’s ‘dark winter’ vision for America. With only 11 days left until the most important election of our lifetimes, Trump Victory is using every resource to mobilize our volunteer army, reach every last voter, and deliver historic wins for President Trump and Republicans up and down the ballot,” she said.
According to CNBC reporter Brian Schwarz, the Democrats raised $6 million in the aftermath of the debate through ActBlue, a fundraising platform used by Democratic politicians. The Biden campaign has since reportedly sent out a fundraising email, which included the Trump campaign and RNC’s figure and said: “Trump outraised us.”
This Biden campaign fundraising email says the Trump campaign outraised them around the Thursday night debate. The Trump campaign raised $26 million Thursday. pic.twitter.com/Y9IyY0kJBn — Daniel Strauss (@DanielStrauss4) October 24, 2020
After the debate, Trump received strong marks from political commentators, including former Fox News host Megyn Kelly, with whom Trump feuded during the 2016 primary.
“Trump won this debate, handily. Biden wasn’t a force at all. Trump was substantive, on-point, well-tempered. Definitely helped himself, when it mattered most,” said Kelly.
Trump responded: “Thank you Megyn.”
Gary Colby, digital director for the Trump campaign, said that back in the final days of 2016, the Trump campaign’s “surge in online donations” ended up preceding “a rise in public polling, leading directly to victory.”
“That surge is here again — triple in size and a week earlier than in 2016,” he said.
Earlier this week, the Biden campaign and its associated fundraising arms, including the DNC, had roughly $432 million on hand. The Trump campaign, and its associated fundraising arms, including the RNC, had about $250 million on hand two weeks ago, according to NPR. It’s not clear where those respective figures now stand.
Back in 2016, Trump beat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton despite the substantial cash advantage of both her and her allies, which amounted to $1.2 billion over the course of the election cycle, according to Politico. Trump and his allies had half of that over the course of the election cycle.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--The Open Immorality of Open Borders

The Open Immorality of Open Borders

The Supreme Court is looking at the border wall question again .
Democrats have said the wall is “ immoral , ineffective , and inexpensive.
” In Thursday night ’ s debate , the border focus was on cages .
( Joe Biden didn ’ t come out looking so good on that . )
What about the larger moral question , though ?
Not the wall , not the cages , but open borders ?
Let ’ s recall a few years ago , when long parades of hopeful migrants were streaming north .
Nancy Pelosi told us then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s not who we are as a nation.
” She wasn ’ t just talking about a physical structure , she was talking policy .
The pope agreed emphatically , saying it was “ not Christian ” to keep out migrants .
A Christian should think about “ building bridges , ” he said .
Biden doesn ’ t go that far , but he does intend to reverse most of Trump ’ s border policies , specifically to “ restore our moral leadership.
” Apparently there ’ s some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into this election .
What kind of stain is it , though ?
Is there something immoral about solid border control ?
The answer to that isn ’ t that hard , actually .
Let ’ s look at three levels of sharing , and consider both their morality and their effectiveness .
At the first level , individuals sacrifice their time and their goods to help others in need .
I have seen this done magnificently through a Christian humanitarian organization called “ Unto ” ( formerly Global Aid Network ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from collecting and packing goods to delivering them personally to smiling faces all over the world .
( Life Outreach International , The Stream ’ s parent organization , has similar outreach initiatives in place , though I haven ’ t had the chance to enjoy such an up-close look at them . )
At Level One it ’ s all voluntary .
It is almost completely a moral decision for the one who gives , and ( mixed motives aside ) a good one .
That in itself doesn ’ t make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s possible to see one need and miss a greater one elsewhere , for example .
Morality and wisdom are two different things , so it ’ s possible to have one without the other .
Otherwise the moral status of Level One giving is quite clear .
And quite good .
Level Two sharing is the type favored by liberals and progressives everywhere .
It ’ s about taxing the well-off and distributing it to the needy .
So , what ’ s the moral status at Level Two ?
Let ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that its proponents ’ main motive is to help the poor and the hungry .
That makes it a moral matter , too — but whose morality ?
The taxpayers ’ ?
Hardly !
They ’ re the ones doing the “ giving , ” but not by choice .
The Bible never says , “ God loves a cheerful taxpayer.
” In fact the real message at 2 Cor .
9:7 couldn ’ t be more different : “ Let each one give as he purposes in his heart , not grudgingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cheerful giver.
” There ’ s no moral worth involved in Level Two “ giving.
” It ’ s totally lacking .
What then about its effectiveness in meeting needs ?
I ’ ll surprise my conservative friends and admit that sometimes the government gets it right .
Sometimes .
Not every government dollar spent is an absolute disaster .
I ’ ve benefited myself at times , and been grateful for it .
A lot of it is misspent , though .
If it ’ s true that individuals , churches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where it ’ s not most needed , it ’ s also true that governments can do the same thing even better .
( Or worse , depending on how you look at it . )
I don ’ t need to dive into examples .
I think we all know that government spending has a sad and far-too-frequent record of doing more harm than good .
Level Three : Let Them Come and Take It From Us Level Three sharing tops that , though .
Level Three is what we get with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No enforcement .
Let people come in for asylum , but define it as loosely as possible , so everyone qualifies .
It looks like good , gracious giving on the surface .
These people are hurting .
They ’ re needy .
America has opportunities , we ’ ve got food , we ’ ve got money , we ’ ve got education .
How we can deny them access to it ?
It looks like morality , sure .
But it ’ s actually a travesty .
There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Level One .
There isn ’ t even any Level Two involuntary giving .
There ’ s no giving at all !
It ’ s taking , not giving .
And anyone can do it .
“ Come on in and take it .
Anything you want !
” Progressives will try to tell you this is “ America ” giving .
They ’ re wrong : America never gives , only Americans do .
Almost never , anyway .
I can think of one exception .
If enough Americans united to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and if we all pitched in on it together , we could call that “ America ” speaking , and “ America ” giving .
That might even be a decent description of some of our foreign policy .
That has nothing to do with immigration policy , though .
We ’ re not united in it , and we don ’ t all pitch in with the giving that happens .
This Is Not Christian Giving But hold on !
Did I say “ giving ” ?
This isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so people can come take from us .
More accurately , it ’ s politicians opening doors so immigrants can come take from the rest of us .
How does that stack up morally ?
Need I even ask ?
Acts 20:35 tells us a saying of Jesus ’ that wasn ’ t recorded in the Gospels : “ It is more blessed to give than to receive.
” Who knows ?
Maybe there was even more that got left out .
Maybe Jesus really said , “ Sure , I told you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than to receive , but honestly , folks that ’ s nothing .
You want a real blessing ?
It ’ s yours , as long as you live someplace where the government makes you keep your doors open , so that anyone who wants what you ’ ve got can waltz right in and take it from you.
” I ’ ll admit it : “ waltz ” is a bit anachronistic there .
That ’ s just the beginning of mistakes in that imagined saying , though .
To give can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let people take things from you is just intolerable .
Even where Jesus says ( per some interpretations of Matthew 5:38-42 ) we should give freely to people who want to take from us , the action word there is still “ give , ” not “ take.
” And it ’ s still voluntary .
Level One giving can be wise or unwise , effective or ineffective .
Level Two can , too .
Level Three ?
It ’ s a mess .
Totally worthless , with respect to wise humanitarian distribution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
The people who think they can come in and grab them .
That ’ s not exactly morally targeted giving .
If anything it ’ s committing the immoral act of encouraging others to take .
Joe Biden isn ’ t arguing for open borders , but some of his Democrat colleagues come awfully close to it .
Alexandria Ocasia-Cortez says illegal immigration ( my term , not hers , obviously ) is “ innocent people … pursuing their basic human rights.
” She says it ’ s wrong of us to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She frames it in moral terms .
The pope did , too , even more so .
But this “ morality ” is really no morality at all — not unless Jesus taught his disciples to waltz .
It ’ s inviting people to come in indiscriminately and take from us .
This is not giving .
It ’ s not wise , and it ’ s not effective in humanitarian terms .
Tom Gilson ( @ TomGilsonAuthor ) is a senior editor with The Stream and the author or editor of six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Good To Be False : How Jesus ’ Incomparable Character Reveals His Reality .

The Supreme Court is looking at the border wall question again. Democrats have said the wall is “immoral, ineffective, and inexpensive.” In Thursday night’s debate, the border focus was on cages. (Joe Biden didn’t come out looking so good on that.) What about the larger moral question, though? Not the wall, not the cages, but open borders?
Let’s recall a few years ago, when long parades of hopeful migrants were streaming north. Nancy Pelosi told us then that a wall is “an immorality, it’s not who we are as a nation.” She wasn’t just talking about a physical structure, she was talking policy. The pope agreed emphatically, saying it was “not Christian” to keep out migrants. A Christian should think about “building bridges,” he said.
Biden doesn’t go that far, but he does intend to reverse most of Trump’s border policies, specifically to “restore our moral leadership.” Apparently there’s some moral stain here that Trump supposedly carries into this election. What kind of stain is it, though? Is there something immoral about solid border control?
The answer to that isn’t that hard, actually. Let’s look at three levels of sharing, and consider both their morality and their effectiveness.
Level One: Voluntary Giving
At the first level, individuals sacrifice their time and their goods to help others in need. I have seen this done magnificently through a Christian humanitarian organization called “Unto” (formerly Global Aid Network). Volunteers take part at every stage, from collecting and packing goods to delivering them personally to smiling faces all over the world. (Life Outreach International, The Stream’s parent organization, has similar outreach initiatives in place, though I haven’t had the chance to enjoy such an up-close look at them.)
At Level One it’s all voluntary. It is almost completely a moral decision for the one who gives, and (mixed motives aside) a good one.
That in itself doesn’t make it wise or effective. It’s possible to see one need and miss a greater one elsewhere, for example. Morality and wisdom are two different things, so it’s possible to have one without the other. Otherwise the moral status of Level One giving is quite clear. And quite good.
Level Two: Involuntary Giving
Level Two sharing is the type favored by liberals and progressives everywhere. It’s about taxing the well-off and distributing it to the needy.
So, what’s the moral status at Level Two? Let’s grant for the sake of argument that its proponents’ main motive is to help the poor and the hungry. That makes it a moral matter, too — but whose morality? The taxpayers’? Hardly! They’re the ones doing the “giving,” but not by choice.
The Bible never says, “God loves a cheerful taxpayer.” In fact the real message at 2 Cor. 9:7 couldn’t be more different: “Let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” There’s no moral worth involved in Level Two “giving.” It’s totally lacking.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
What then about its effectiveness in meeting needs? I’ll surprise my conservative friends and admit that sometimes the government gets it right. Sometimes. Not every government dollar spent is an absolute disaster. I’ve benefited myself at times, and been grateful for it.
A lot of it is misspent, though. If it’s true that individuals, churches, and mission agencies can send money where it’s not most needed, it’s also true that governments can do the same thing even better. (Or worse, depending on how you look at it.) I don’t need to dive into examples. I think we all know that government spending has a sad and far-too-frequent record of doing more harm than good.
Level Three: Let Them Come and Take It From Us
Level Three sharing tops that, though. Level Three is what we get with seriously progressive border policy: No walls. No enforcement. Let people come in for asylum, but define it as loosely as possible, so everyone qualifies.
It looks like good, gracious giving on the surface. These people are hurting. They’re needy. America has opportunities, we’ve got food, we’ve got money, we’ve got education. How we can deny them access to it?
It looks like morality, sure. But it’s actually a travesty. There’s no voluntary giving here, as in Level One. There isn’t even any Level Two involuntary giving. There’s no giving at all! It’s taking, not giving. And anyone can do it. “Come on in and take it. Anything you want!”
Progressives will try to tell you this is “America” giving. They’re wrong: America never gives, only Americans do.
Almost never, anyway. I can think of one exception. If enough Americans united to say, “We want to give,” and if we all pitched in on it together, we could call that “America” speaking, and “America” giving. That might even be a decent description of some of our foreign policy. That has nothing to do with immigration policy, though. We’re not united in it, and we don’t all pitch in with the giving that happens.
This Is Not Christian Giving
But hold on! Did I say “giving”? This isn’t giving, this is opening ours doors so people can come take from us. More accurately, it’s politicians opening doors so immigrants can come take from the rest of us. How does that stack up morally? Need I even ask?
Acts 20:35 tells us a saying of Jesus’ that wasn’t recorded in the Gospels: “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Who knows? Maybe there was even more that got left out. Maybe Jesus really said, “Sure, I told you it’s more blessed to give than to receive, but honestly, folks that’s nothing. You want a real blessing? It’s yours, as long as you live someplace where the government makes you keep your doors open, so that anyone who wants what you’ve got can waltz right in and take it from you.”
But this “morality” is really no morality at all — not unless Jesus taught his disciples to waltz.
I’ll admit it: “waltz” is a bit anachronistic there. That’s just the beginning of mistakes in that imagined saying, though. To give can be very moral. Being forced to let people take things from you is just intolerable. Even where Jesus says (per some interpretations of Matthew 5:38-42) we should give freely to people who want to take from us, the action word there is still “give,” not “take.” And it’s still voluntary.
Level One giving can be wise or unwise, effective or ineffective. Level Two can, too. Level Three? It’s a mess. Totally worthless, with respect to wise humanitarian distribution. Who decides who gets the goods? The people who think they can come in and grab them. That’s not exactly morally targeted giving. If anything it’s committing the immoral act of encouraging others to take.
Open Immorality
Joe Biden isn’t arguing for open borders, but some of his Democrat colleagues come awfully close to it. Alexandria Ocasia-Cortez says illegal immigration (my term, not hers, obviously) is “innocent people … pursuing their basic human rights.” She says it’s wrong of us to make them to remain in Mexico. She frames it in moral terms. The pope did, too, even more so.
But this “morality” is really no morality at all — not unless Jesus taught his disciples to waltz. It’s inviting people to come in indiscriminately and take from us. This is not giving. It’s not wise, and it’s not effective in humanitarian terms.
Tom Gilson (@TomGilsonAuthor) is a senior editor with The Stream and the author or editor of six books, including the recently released Too Good To Be False: How Jesus’ Incomparable Character Reveals His Reality.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Growing Up in Communist China: My Life Under Marxist Socialism

Editor ’ s Note : Chenyuan was raised in China and experienced firsthand the tragic effects of communism .
Be advised that her story includes an unpleasantly disturbing yet true description of how she was able to survive great poverty .
It ’ s in the section labeled “ My Mother ’ s Extraordinary Act.
” It is a reminder that socialism can never achieve its promised utopia .
Living in America , I ’ m reminded of how blessed I am to live in this free country with the free market as its basic economic system .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve seen a steady increase of socialist ideas in our society .
As a Christian , I support , advocate and participate in helping the poor and the needy because Jesus commanded us to do so .
But I fervently oppose socialistic systems in which the government controls the distribution of resources .
I lived through the worst of it .
Here ’ s my story .
I spent the first decade of my life during the Cultural Revolution ( 1966-1976 ) in China .
Power was centralized as it is in all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employer in the country .
The government held a super monopoly .
Everything was distributed through a system of rationing .
“ Scarcity ” defined every aspect of life at that time .
My family ate meat only once or twice a year .
If I got a piece of candy , I did not just put it in my mouth .
I held it in the wrapper and licked it so it could last all day long .
Pain So Intense I Lost the Ability to Cry Being malnourished , I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infections .
One day my mom told me that she was able to use her connections to secure a spot at the hospital for me to have my tonsils removed .
When we reached the hospital , I saw a long line of children waiting to get their tonsils removed .
A nurse stayed at the end of the line holding a spray bottle .
She sprayed some anesthetic in my mouth .
I felt a little numb .
Soon there were other kids standing behind me .
I could not see the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
By the time I was near the operating room , the numbness in my mouth was gone .
My mom knew that it was fortunate enough for me to have had even a little anesthetic .
She did not ask for a second dose .
I was thrown onto the operating table after the pain killer had worn off .
A clamp-like device was used to keep my mouth open .
A surgical scissor entered my mouth… The pain and shock were so intense that I lost the ability to cry .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ where a nurse checked us to see if the operation was successful .
I never saw even a glimpse of sympathy in any of the adults ’ eyes .
After examining me , the nurse told my mom that I needed to go back to the operating room because the doctor did not make a clean cut .
I heard this and I took off running as fast as I could .
My mom chased after me shouting : “ Think about Lei Feng !
Be as brave as he !
” Lei @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zedong wanted us to emulate .
( This is one of the propaganda methods socialists/communists often use to control people ’ s minds . )
But at that moment , nothing could keep me from running away from that dreadful operating table .
Finally , both of us were exhausted .
My mom agreed that we should just go home .
The operation did not improve my health .
What I needed was nutrition .
Without better options , my mom took an extraordinary act .
She stole a placenta from the hospital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a semi-jerky substance so it could last a long time because there was no refrigerator in any household .
She then threw away all the utensils that the placenta had touched — chopping board , knife , pot… That was quite a loss since we did not have many household goods .
She told me it was beef and I could only take two pieces a day .
I still remember the secrecy surrounding the meat .
Years later , when I had real beef for the first time , I asked my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Then I learned the truth — and then came the shock , shame and disbelief… and my attempt to remove the smell , the taste and the texture from my memory .
These are just two examples of many miserable events that happened to me and my family under socialism .
And by all means , I was not an extraordinary case at all .
Economists have come up with different explanations as to why socialism failed under the regimes of the Soviet Union , Eastern Europe , China , Cuba , North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on my experience and my subsequent study of theology .
One reason is that socialism puts too much hope on human beings .
It is a secular attempt to create heaven on earth without taking into consideration that we are infected with sin .
Capitalism , in contrast , acknowledges people for what they are : self-centered .
People are more willing to do good if it is for their own interest .
Capitalism recognizes that free market competition is the best option among sinful humans , albeit an imperfect one .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will try to treat customers better than their competitors do — not because they are loving , but because they care about their own financial gain .
The result benefits both consumers and business owners and gives rise to an improved economy .
This is totally absent in a socialist society .
Socialism ignores market principles and eliminates rational incentives .
When performance is not tied to a benefit , why work hard ?
If you can get paid without working , why work ?
Socialism claims to be morally superior to selfish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though it is a powerful lure , it is a fruitless endeavor .
Using Their Greed for Good Greedy capitalism , on the other hand , has benefited the poor around the globe .
The word “ sweatshop ” may cause us to cringe , but if you had just two options : starving with no sweatshop or having meals by working at a sweatshop ?
That ’ s an extreme example , obviously .
But the principle behind it tells us how capitalism has lifted over 700 million human beings out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
China is a good example .
Even though its political system is still run by communists , it has embraced the tenets of capitalism , free market and less government regulations on business .
My mom , who once stole a placenta to feed her ailing daughter , is making good money under the benefits of capitalism — even though she ’ s been retired for more than 20 years .
Thirty years ago , she never imagined that she would one day send money to her daughter living in the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Capitalism makes this world a better place .
But socialism wants to make this world a perfect place .
Advocates of socialism believe that under a good and smart government ’ s control and management , we can achieve perfection — a world without inequality and injustice .
History tells us , however , that when power is centralized in the hands of a few , they are more inclined to abuse it than to implement it properly .
J.R.R .
Tolkien , author of The Lord of the Rings , recognized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ring .
So did our Founding Fathers , who designed our Republic with checks and balances to ensure the decentralization of power .
I know there are some who still romanticize about socialism ’ s promise of perfection .
You have good intention .
You care about the poor and are indignant about injustice .
Scripture commands us to take care of the disadvantaged and do justice .
But Jesus never told us to help the poor by delegating that responsibility to Caesar !
It should be done by individuals on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
History has proven that the condition of the poor can never be improved through a socialist structure anyway .
It ’ s outcome is always the exact opposite of what it promises .
Socialism is only good on paper .
In reality , it is the biggest generator of universal poverty known to man .
Just look at Venezuela and North Korea .
Socialism did not create heaven on earth there , it created hell on earth !
And that is how it will always be .
Churchill sums it up well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blessings ; socialism is equal share of misery.
” Now is a good time to ponder the U.S. and what it stands for .
Our founding fathers understood human nature and the danger of centralized power and devised a system accordingly .
If we allow socialism to prevail , we will lose our republic .
The day will come when we will only be able to look back with nostalgia on the liberties and prosperity that we once enjoyed .
As the election is coming , if a candidate tells you that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this and free that , DON ’ T be fooled .
Socialism can only lure you down a road of misery !
Think about the operating table I was put on .
There is no healing there .
Run away , and run away as fast as you can !
Chenyuan Snider was raised in Communist China and majored in Chinese language and literature in college .
After immigrating to the U.S. and having studied at Assemblies of God Theological Seminary and Duke Divinity School , she became a professor and taught at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this year , she sensed God was leading her to use her unique voice to provide a warning about various kinds of Marxist influences in our society .
She lives in northern California with her husband and has two grown children .

Editor’s Note: Chenyuan was raised in China and experienced firsthand the tragic effects of communism. Be advised that her story includes an unpleasantly disturbing yet true description of how she was able to survive great poverty. It’s in the section labeled “My Mother’s Extraordinary Act.” It is a reminder that socialism can never achieve its promised utopia.
Living in America, I’m reminded of how blessed I am to live in this free country with the free market as its basic economic system. I’m concerned, though. I’ve seen a steady increase of socialist ideas in our society. As a Christian, I support, advocate and participate in helping the poor and the needy because Jesus commanded us to do so. But I fervently oppose socialistic systems in which the government controls the distribution of resources. I lived through the worst of it. Here’s my story.
I spent the first decade of my life during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) in China. Power was centralized as it is in all socialist countries. We had only one employer in the country. The government held a super monopoly. Everything was distributed through a system of rationing. “Scarcity” defined every aspect of life at that time. My family ate meat only once or twice a year. If I got a piece of candy, I did not just put it in my mouth. I held it in the wrapper and licked it so it could last all day long.
Pain So Intense I Lost the Ability to Cry
Being malnourished, I was sick all the time and constantly had infections. One day my mom told me that she was able to use her connections to secure a spot at the hospital for me to have my tonsils removed. When we reached the hospital, I saw a long line of children waiting to get their tonsils removed. A nurse stayed at the end of the line holding a spray bottle. She sprayed some anesthetic in my mouth. I felt a little numb. Soon there were other kids standing behind me. I could not see the beginning or the end of the line.
By the time I was near the operating room, the numbness in my mouth was gone. My mom knew that it was fortunate enough for me to have had even a little anesthetic. She did not ask for a second dose. I was thrown onto the operating table after the pain killer had worn off. A clamp-like device was used to keep my mouth open. A surgical scissor entered my mouth… The pain and shock were so intense that I lost the ability to cry.
I fervently oppose socialistic systems in which the government controls the distribution of resources. I lived through the worst of it.
I was then shoveled to another line where a nurse checked us to see if the operation was successful. I never saw even a glimpse of sympathy in any of the adults’ eyes. After examining me, the nurse told my mom that I needed to go back to the operating room because the doctor did not make a clean cut. I heard this and I took off running as fast as I could. My mom chased after me shouting: “Think about Lei Feng! Be as brave as he!” Lei Feng was one of the heroes Mao Zedong wanted us to emulate. (This is one of the propaganda methods socialists/communists often use to control people’s minds.)
But at that moment, nothing could keep me from running away from that dreadful operating table. Finally, both of us were exhausted. My mom agreed that we should just go home.
My Mother’s Extraordinary Act
The operation did not improve my health. What I needed was nutrition. Without better options, my mom took an extraordinary act. She stole a placenta from the hospital delivery room. She cooked it into a semi-jerky substance so it could last a long time because there was no refrigerator in any household. She then threw away all the utensils that the placenta had touched — chopping board, knife, pot… That was quite a loss since we did not have many household goods.
She told me it was beef and I could only take two pieces a day. I still remember the secrecy surrounding the meat. Years later, when I had real beef for the first time, I asked my mom why the taste was different. Then I learned the truth — and then came the shock, shame and disbelief… and my attempt to remove the smell, the taste and the texture from my memory. These are just two examples of many miserable events that happened to me and my family under socialism. And by all means, I was not an extraordinary case at all.
People Are Selfish
Economists have come up with different explanations as to why socialism failed under the regimes of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. My take is based on my experience and my subsequent study of theology. One reason is that socialism puts too much hope on human beings. It is a secular attempt to create heaven on earth without taking into consideration that we are infected with sin. Capitalism, in contrast, acknowledges people for what they are: self-centered. People are more willing to do good if it is for their own interest. Capitalism recognizes that free market competition is the best option among sinful humans, albeit an imperfect one.
When there is competition, business owners will try to treat customers better than their competitors do — not because they are loving, but because they care about their own financial gain. The result benefits both consumers and business owners and gives rise to an improved economy.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
This is totally absent in a socialist society. Socialism ignores market principles and eliminates rational incentives. When performance is not tied to a benefit, why work hard? If you can get paid without working, why work? Socialism claims to be morally superior to selfish capitalism. But in the end, though it is a powerful lure, it is a fruitless endeavor.
Using Their Greed for Good
Greedy capitalism, on the other hand, has benefited the poor around the globe. The word “sweatshop” may cause us to cringe, but if you had just two options: starving with no sweatshop or having meals by working at a sweatshop? That’s an extreme example, obviously. But the principle behind it tells us how capitalism has lifted over 700 million human beings out of deep poverty in the last few decades.
China is a good example. Even though its political system is still run by communists, it has embraced the tenets of capitalism, free market and less government regulations on business. My mom, who once stole a placenta to feed her ailing daughter, is making good money under the benefits of capitalism — even though she’s been retired for more than 20 years. Thirty years ago, she never imagined that she would one day send money to her daughter living in the U.S., the richest country on the planet.
Capitalism makes this world a better place. But socialism wants to make this world a perfect place. Advocates of socialism believe that under a good and smart government’s control and management, we can achieve perfection — a world without inequality and injustice. History tells us, however, that when power is centralized in the hands of a few, they are more inclined to abuse it than to implement it properly.
J.R.R. Tolkien, author of The Lord of the Rings, recognized the seduction of power as illustrated by the ring. So did our Founding Fathers, who designed our Republic with checks and balances to ensure the decentralization of power.
Socialism’s Promise of Perfection
I know there are some who still romanticize about socialism’s promise of perfection. You have good intention. You care about the poor and are indignant about injustice. Scripture commands us to take care of the disadvantaged and do justice. But Jesus never told us to help the poor by delegating that responsibility to Caesar! It should be done by individuals on a voluntary basis, not through the government.
As the election is coming, if a candidate tells you that he or she wants to give you free this and free that, DON’T be fooled. Socialism can only lure you down a road of misery!
History has proven that the condition of the poor can never be improved through a socialist structure anyway. It’s outcome is always the exact opposite of what it promises. Socialism is only good on paper. In reality, it is the biggest generator of universal poverty known to man. Just look at Venezuela and North Korea. Socialism did not create heaven on earth there, it created hell on earth! And that is how it will always be. Churchill sums it up well: “Capitalism is unequal share of blessings; socialism is equal share of misery.”
Now is a good time to ponder the U.S. and what it stands for. Our founding fathers understood human nature and the danger of centralized power and devised a system accordingly. If we allow socialism to prevail, we will lose our republic. The day will come when we will only be able to look back with nostalgia on the liberties and prosperity that we once enjoyed.
As the election is coming, if a candidate tells you that he or she wants to give you free this and free that, DON’T be fooled. Socialism can only lure you down a road of misery! Think about the operating table I was put on. There is no healing there. Run away, and run away as fast as you can!
Chenyuan Snider was raised in Communist China and majored in Chinese language and literature in college. After immigrating to the U.S. and having studied at Assemblies of God Theological Seminary and Duke Divinity School, she became a professor and taught at Christian colleges and seminary. After March of this year, she sensed God was leading her to use her unique voice to provide a warning about various kinds of Marxist influences in our society. She lives in northern California with her husband and has two grown children.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Joe Biden Brags About Having ‘The Most Extensive and Inclusive VOTER FRAUD Organization in the Histo

Joe Biden Brags About Having ‘The Most Extensive and Inclusive VOTER FRAUD Organization in the History of American Politics’

Some people who have seen the hastily hatched post-COVID voter rules in Democrat states know there are some serious ballot shenanigans going on this election .
Now , Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has wittingly – or unwittingly – confirmed it .
You just never know with Joe .
Was he misspeaking or just opening his mouth and removing the filter between his brain and mouth ?
Was it a Joe Bidenesque Freudian sniff ?
Biden was holding a rare campaign event – via video – when he boastfully proclaimed that his campaign operates “ the most extensive and inclusive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American politics.
” Worse ?
He was cribbing from notes .
The problem is that though Joe may have just misspoken in another bumbling , Zoom campaign appearance using his crib notes , out here in the real world there is serious concern about real-time election manipulation .
The CEO of the polling company , The Trafalgar Group , believes President Trump will win Pennsylvania and could very well have it stolen through election fraud .
Recent decisions by the Democrat secretary of state and upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have changed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting , not requiring validated signatures or postmarks .
None of these drastic , last-minute changes have been done by the state legislatures .
Editor ’ s Note : Want to support PJ Media so we can continue telling the truth about the Biden-Harris campaign ?
Join PJ Media VIP TODAY and use the promo code LAWANDORDER to get 25 % off your VIP membership .
No Signature Match ?
No Postmark ?
No Problemo !
It ’ s This Week in Ballot Shenanigans !
Pollster Who Called Trump Win In 2016 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Big Red Flag in Pennsylvania The Left : Biden Had Better Win or the Country Gets It !
Weeks of Riots Threatened Even MSNBC Says Joe Biden ’ s in Trouble After He Opened His Mouth and AOC ’ S Anti-Oil Words Came Spilling Out

Some people who have seen the hastily hatched post-COVID voter rules in Democrat states know there are some serious ballot shenanigans going on this election. Now, Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has wittingly – or unwittingly – confirmed it. You just never know with Joe.
Was he misspeaking or just opening his mouth and removing the filter between his brain and mouth? Was it a Joe Bidenesque Freudian slip sniff?
Biden was holding a rare campaign event – via video – when he boastfully proclaimed that his campaign operates “the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.”
Worse? He was cribbing from notes.
👀👀 Joe Biden brags about having “the most extensive and inclusive VOTER FRAUD organization in the history of American politics” pic.twitter.com/PfkqrFXu7i — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) October 24, 2020
C’mon, man!
The problem is that though Joe may have just misspoken in another bumbling, Zoom campaign appearance using his crib notes, out here in the real world there is serious concern about real-time election manipulation.
The CEO of the polling company, The Trafalgar Group, believes President Trump will win Pennsylvania and could very well have it stolen through election fraud. Recent decisions by the Democrat secretary of state and upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have changed voting rules on the fly, extending voting, not requiring validated signatures or postmarks.
None of these drastic, last-minute changes have been done by the state legislatures.
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can continue telling the truth about the Biden-Harris campaign? Join PJ Media VIP TODAY and use the promo code LAWANDORDER to get 25% off your VIP membership.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Chinese Billionaire Dissident Leaking Hunter Biden Emails Says There Will Be “10,000” More Pictures

A Chinese billionaire who published a tape of Hunter Biden seemingly engaging in a sex act while smoking crack cocaine on Saturday warned that more than 10,000 pictures and more videos would be released .
Wang Ding Gang is the founder of Lude Media and the Whistle Blower Movement , both of which are staunch critics of China ’ s ruling Communist Party .
He appears to have been made privy to the contents of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop , which he published on his website , gtv.org .
( Warning- the contents of Hunter Biden ’ s sex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that much more would be coming on his Parler account .
take our poll - story continues below As a reminder , Hunter Biden was never “ hacked.
” He legally and carelessly forfeited his laptop to the owner of a Delaware computer repair store , according to the terms of an agreement he signed with the store ’ s owner .
There are certainly privacy implications to be considered in release of this kind of content , but Hunter Biden is no mere private figure , having used his connections to his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dealings in Ukraine and seemingly China for his own benefit .
Biden is identifiable visually and through his tone of voice in at least several of the videos .
Who knows what can be used to compromise Hunter Biden in the event that his father is elected President .
Both men continue to meekly look the other way , refusing to address the email scandal .

Chinese Billionaire Dissident Leaking Hunter Biden Emails Says There Will Be “10,000” More Pictures After Sex Tape
A Chinese billionaire who published a tape of Hunter Biden seemingly engaging in a sex act while smoking crack cocaine on Saturday warned that more than 10,000 pictures and more videos would be released.
Wang Ding Gang is the founder of Lude Media and the Whistle Blower Movement, both of which are staunch critics of China’s ruling Communist Party. He appears to have been made privy to the contents of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, which he published on his website.
Gang announced that much more would be coming on his Parler account.
As a reminder, Hunter Biden was never “hacked.” He legally and carelessly forfeited his laptop to the owner of a Delaware computer repair store, according to the terms of an agreement he signed with the store’s owner.
There are certainly privacy implications to be considered in release of this kind of content, but Hunter Biden is no mere private figure, having used his connections to his Vice President father to leverage significant business dealings in Ukraine and seemingly China for his own benefit.
Biden is identifiable visually and through his tone of voice in at least several of the videos.
Who knows what can be used to compromise Hunter Biden in the event that his father is elected President. Both men continue to meekly look the other way, refusing to address the email scandal.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--“Just Vote Again”: Ballot Shenanigans Rampant In Democrat Oregon; Residents Report Receiving Multipl

“Just Vote Again”: Ballot Shenanigans Rampant In Democrat Oregon; Residents Report Receiving Multiple Ballots, Some From Old Addresses

Earlier in the year The Gateway Pundit launched a series of stories chronicling the ballot scandal in Oregon , in which untold scores of voters were seemingly switched from their party of choice to non-affiliated , effectively denying them the right to vote in the primary .
As we head closer to the general election , we ’ re seeing more reports of various different examples of ballot “ accidents ” and “ mishaps ” from people in Oregon , including once instance where an elections official instructed the person to vote a second time .
Perusing the My Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ central hub for the previous scandal , we see many members posting various accounts of what they are experiencing this time around ( names have been redacted to prevent against retaliation from Governor Kate Brown ) : In this first story , the person voted , then received a second ballot in the mail , was told to throw that one away , then received yet a third ballot , then was instructed by an elections official to “ just vote again ” , the whole while the Secretary Of State website shows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counted yet .
This woman here randomly received a ballot from the state she used to live in : Someone , somehow , fraudulently changed this guy ’ s mother-in-law ’ s address : This woman received what looks to be three different ballots ; Two from California , and one from Multnomah County in Oregon , all to her address in Costa Mesa , California : And of course the identity thieves are licking their chops over this , and they are using this as an opportunity to steal people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political operatives looking to steal the information : This couple was forwarded two sets of ballots that had originally been sent to their old California address , where they haven ’ t lived since 2004 .
Larger version of the pictures : Yet another one : Then on the reverse , there are stories of people who never received a ballot : Then there ’ s this guy , who reports he and his wife both received duplicates : KPTV channel 12 made a post soliciting for people to come forward who have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the responses on that thread : The Gateway Pundit is following up with many of these people .
The company line from the state officials will surely be “ Oh these are just some rare mistakes .
The extra ballots wouldn ’ t be counted even if someone filled them out.
” So if there are this many mistakes that lead to the printing and sending of this many extra ballots , who ’ s to say more “ mistakes ” can ’ t happen further down the line ?
I guess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and if they “ accidentally ” place the ballot in the stack to be counted or in the stack to undergo scrutiny .

Earlier in the year The Gateway Pundit launched a series of stories chronicling the ballot scandal in Oregon, in which untold scores of voters were seemingly switched from their party of choice to non-affiliated, effectively denying them the right to vote in the primary. As we head closer to the general election, we’re seeing more reports of various different examples of ballot “accidents” and “mishaps” from people in Oregon, including one instance where an elections official instructed the person to vote a second time.
Perusing the My Party Was Changed group that served as the central hub for the previous scandal, we see many members posting various accounts of what they are experiencing this time around (names have been redacted to prevent against retaliation from Governor Kate Brown):
In this first story, the person voted, then received a second ballot in the mail, was told to throw that one away, then received yet a third ballot, then was instructed by an elections official to “just vote again”, the whole while the Secretary Of State website shows that his vote hasn’t been counted yet.
This woman here randomly received a ballot from the state she used to live in:
Someone, somehow, fraudulently changed this guy’s mother-in-law’s address:
This woman received what looks to be three different ballots; Two from California, and one from Multnomah County in Oregon, all to her address in Costa Mesa, California:
And of course the identity thieves are licking their chops over this, and they are using this as an opportunity to steal people’s information. Scarier, this could be political operatives looking to steal the information:
This couple was forwarded two sets of ballots that had originally been sent to their old California address, where they haven’t lived since 2004. Larger version of the pictures:
Yet another one:
Then on the reverse, there are stories of people who never received a ballot:
Then there’s this guy, who reports he and his wife both received duplicates:
KPTV channel 12 made a post soliciting for people to come forward who have received multiple ballots. Here are some of the responses on that thread:
The Gateway Pundit is following up with many of these people.
The company line from the state officials will surely be “Oh these are just some rare mistakes. The extra ballots wouldn’t be counted even if someone filled them out.” So if there are this many mistakes that lead to the printing and sending of this many extra ballots, who’s to say more “mistakes” can’t happen further down the line? I guess it depends on who opens the envelopes, and if they “accidentally” place the ballot in the stack to be counted or in the stack to undergo scrutiny.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--If Masks Don’t Work, Why Do We Keep Wearing Them?

According to a recent study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , more than 70 percent of the people who tested positive for COVID-19 wore masks regularly .
By contrast , under 4 percent of those testing positive never wore masks .
Coupled with this was an extensive review of mask studies worldwide in which the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons ( AAPS ) determined that typical cloth masks did little to stop the transmission of COVID-19 .
Although experts like to claim that cloth masks will prevent droplets carrying the virus from reaching others when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality is that most people are probably better off using their elbow and turning away from others .
Moreover , the virus can still pass through a cloth mask , and the eyes , which aren ’ t covered , can act as “ a portal of entry.
” The scientific evidence here strongly suggests that masks do nothing at best , and may actually increase the spread of infection at worst .
This is probably why countries that haven ’ t imposed mask mandates do just as well or better than those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the symbolism behind masks is significant enough for mask mandates and mask-shaming to continue .
Despite the rhetoric , the science was always secondary—as the AAPS writers note , this is shown in the fact that “ The recommendation [ for universal masking ] was published without a single scientific paper or other information provided to support that cloth masks actually provide any respiratory protection.
” Rather , masks were a tool for spreading awareness and keeping Americans in fear of a virus that posed minimal risk to the great majority of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year , such an environment could turn Americans against Trump and the Republican Party .
That ’ s why the masks mandates likely will only end after the election .
In light of the evolving narrative and multiplying meanings behind masks , however , there is reason to think that masking will continue for a much longer time .
It has become bigger than politics .
Masks may not be able to block COVID-19 , but increasingly they have blocked common sense from the wearers .
After so many months of mandates and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their understanding of what it means to be a good faithful American embodied in the face mask .
It wasn ’ t this way at first .
In May and June , soon after states were reopening from their lockdowns , masks were an extra precaution taken by people simply being courteous towards others .
The idea wasn ’ t to prevent one from being infected , but from infecting others .
At that time , the mask conferred easy moral superiority to the wearer who could claim he was doing his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , governors and mayors mandated masking .
Businesses and churches that failed to turn out customers without masks would be subject to heavy fines along with the individual offenders themselves .
Even though masks were intended to enable safe reopening for states , most governments maintained closures of public areas and tight restrictions on building capacity .
It was not enough to stand 6+ feet apart ; people had to wear a mask now , too .
This was when masks became a partisan issue .
Conservatives mainly saw them as yet more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis .
Progressives saw them as badges of civic duty , and many were willing to go even further , wearing their masks outdoors , at home , and alone in their cars .
In its final phase the mask ’ s symbolism has now taken on spiritual and psychological dimensions .
While some advocates of masking might insist on the science or the expert testimonials behind masking , most of them now treat it as an unquestionable article of faith .
Like the Christian cross representing Christ ’ s overcoming sin , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is like the Muslim hijab or Catholic veil indicating modesty and reverence before God .
The mask indicates modesty and reverence before the virus .
Like the yin-yang circle reflecting the cosmic forces of light and dark in harmony with one another , the mask reflects the life forces of infection and recovery in harmony with one another .
The mask doesn ’ t just signal virtue to others , it is a transcendent union with other people who treat the virus with sufficient seriousness .
Whereas church services are unsafe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people can form a community of COVID-19 believers by wearing their masks and nodding at one another from a safe distance .
They can share in the feeling that they are saving lives , respecting science , and taking concrete action against the virus .
No one should underestimate how strong and widespread the belief in masks is .
For many , they are a source of profound security .
They are secure from the virus , immorality , and in the promise of societal approval .
Their masks even empower them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conviction , they will blame victims of COVID-19 for not wearing masks and for lacking sufficient faith in the mask .
They will insist on quarantining them and their family members for two-weeks no matter what .
In most cases , it ’ s difficult to determine whether this is a health precaution designed to mitigate spread or a punishment for being near the virus in the first place .
Many people who are frustrated with the masking simply want to return to mask-free normality .
It isn ’ t so simple anymore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his mask now means asking him to take off all that the masking has come to mean .
Removing it means removing one ’ s safety , one ’ s sense of belonging , and one ’ s values .
This is probably why face mask-wearing has even become an addiction in a developed country like Japan .
They were originally used to help with hay fever , but are now used all year round for whatever reason .
Facts or even a Republican victory in November won ’ t be enough in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be constantly yet gently reminded of the reality that masks took away : real community , real science , real safety , and real meaning .
The goal should be not revenge , but rather a release from a symbol that hides people from one another and perpetuates fear .
Many people were wrong about the masks , even the experts .
This is forgivable , and therefore forgiveness is offered .
Once Americans come to terms with masks , they will be able to clear the air both figuratively and literally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nightmare .

According to a recent study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 70 percent of the people who tested positive for COVID-19 wore masks regularly. By contrast, under 4 percent of those testing positive never wore masks.
Coupled with this was an extensive review of mask studies worldwide in which the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) determined that typical cloth masks did little to stop the transmission of COVID-19. Although experts like to claim that cloth masks will prevent droplets carrying the virus from reaching others when a person sneezes or coughs, the reality is that most people are probably better off using their elbow and turning away from others. Moreover, the virus can still pass through a cloth mask, and the eyes, which aren’t covered, can act as “a portal of entry.”
The scientific evidence here strongly suggests that masks do nothing at best, and may actually increase the spread of infection at worst. This is probably why countries that haven’t imposed mask mandates do just as well or better than those that have required them.
And yet, the symbolism behind masks is significant enough for mask mandates and mask-shaming to continue.
Despite the rhetoric, the science was always secondary—as the AAPS writers note, this is shown in the fact that “The recommendation [for universal masking] was published without a single scientific paper or other information provided to support that cloth masks actually provide any respiratory protection.”
Rather, masks were a tool for spreading awareness and keeping Americans in fear of a virus that posed minimal risk to the great majority of the population. And in an election year, such an environment could turn Americans against Trump and the Republican Party. That’s why the masks mandates likely will only end after the election.
In light of the evolving narrative and multiplying meanings behind masks, however, there is reason to think that masking will continue for a much longer time. It has become bigger than politics.
Masks may not be able to block COVID-19, but increasingly they have blocked common sense from the wearers. After so many months of mandates and propaganda, people have a lot invested in their understanding of what it means to be a good faithful American embodied in the face mask.
It wasn’t this way at first. In May and June, soon after states were reopening from their lockdowns, masks were an extra precaution taken by people simply being courteous towards others. The idea wasn’t to prevent one from being infected, but from infecting others. At that time, the mask conferred easy moral superiority to the wearer who could claim he was doing his part to help others.
Soon enough, governors and mayors mandated masking. Businesses and churches that failed to turn out customers without masks would be subject to heavy fines along with the individual offenders themselves. Even though masks were intended to enable safe reopening for states, most governments maintained closures of public areas and tight restrictions on building capacity. It was not enough to stand 6+ feet apart; people had to wear a mask now, too.
This was when masks became a partisan issue. Conservatives mainly saw them as yet more proof of a busybody government exploiting a crisis. Progressives saw them as badges of civic duty, and many were willing to go even further, wearing their masks outdoors, at home, and alone in their cars.
In its final phase the mask’s symbolism has now taken on spiritual and psychological dimensions. While some advocates of masking might insist on the science or the expert testimonials behind masking, most of them now treat it as an unquestionable article of faith. Like the Christian cross representing Christ’s overcoming sin, the mask represents mankind overcoming the virus. It is like the Muslim hijab or Catholic veil indicating modesty and reverence before God. The mask indicates modesty and reverence before the virus. Like the yin-yang circle reflecting the cosmic forces of light and dark in harmony with one another, the mask reflects the life forces of infection and recovery in harmony with one another.
The mask doesn’t just signal virtue to others, it is a transcendent union with other people who treat the virus with sufficient seriousness. Whereas church services are unsafe for communities of believers to meet, people can form a community of COVID-19 believers by wearing their masks and nodding at one another from a safe distance. They can share in the feeling that they are saving lives, respecting science, and taking concrete action against the virus.
No one should underestimate how strong and widespread the belief in masks is. For many, they are a source of profound security. They are secure from the virus, immorality, and in the promise of societal approval. Their masks even empower them to become puritanical and judgmental. With full-throated conviction, they will blame victims of COVID-19 for not wearing masks and for lacking sufficient faith in the mask. They will insist on quarantining them and their family members for two-weeks no matter what. In most cases, it’s difficult to determine whether this is a health precaution designed to mitigate spread or a punishment for being near the virus in the first place.
Many people who are frustrated with the masking simply want to return to mask-free normality. It isn’t so simple anymore. Asking a person to take off his mask now means asking him to take off all that the masking has come to mean. Removing it means removing one’s safety, one’s sense of belonging, and one’s values. This is probably why face mask-wearing has even become an addiction in a developed country like Japan. They were originally used to help with hay fever, but are now used all year round for whatever reason.
Facts or even a Republican victory in November won’t be enough in the fights against masks. Maskers need to be constantly yet gently reminded of the reality that masks took away: real community, real science, real safety, and real meaning. The goal should be not revenge, but rather a release from a symbol that hides people from one another and perpetuates fear.
Many people were wrong about the masks, even the experts. This is forgivable, and therefore forgiveness is offered. Once Americans come to terms with masks, they will be able to clear the air both figuratively and literally and finally make it past the pandemic nightmare.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Decision Time for the Costco Mom

Decision Time for the Costco Mom

Earlier this year , a strange spectacle kept recurring at one of the country ’ s most popular big box stores .
Costco shoppers across the land wrestled each other for industrial-sized packages of toilet paper ; as panic set in about the looming coronavirus pandemic , well-heeled suburbanites quickly depleted the retailers ’ nationwide supply of Charmin and Quilted Northern .
Even the store ’ s discount Kirkland brand sold out fast .
It ’ s unclear exactly why toilet paper topped the list of the COVID-19 survival kit but the scenes were instructive as far as observing upscale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The toilet paper rush of 2020 probably started with a few comments at the monthly Bunco game or the ladies ’ league liquid lunch or at a bespoke med spa house party .
Soon enough , premium membership card in hand , suburban women cruised their Range Rovers to the nearest Costco ready to fight for their right to a 30-roll pack like it was the last size 4 Veronica Beard camo blazer at Nordstrom .
Photos of TP booty were proudly posted on Facebook ; the booties of Jacob and Olivia would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And thus we had a peek into the workings of the hivemind of modern-day suburban moms .
In 2018 , the sorority of suburban sisterhood found a common enemy : Donald Trump .
Suburban congressional districts from Washington , D.C. and Chicago to Orange County , California flipped from Republican to Democrat , giving Nancy Pelosi enough new members to take back her coveted speaker ’ s gavel .
Like nearly all midterm elections , the outcome was a rebuke of the sitting president .
Millions of white suburban women , amid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peace , cried “ but his tweets !
” all the way to their polling places .
High on fumes from their daily doses of “ The View ” and desperate to mimic the groupthink that easily penetrates their consciousness—a cul de sac consensus they nevertheless describe as “ independent thinking ” —suburban women succeeded in sending a message to the Bad Orange Man while inflicting the likes of Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) and Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) on the body politic .
In a way , the country owes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because she helped to fully expose the depravity of the Left .
Had Democrats not won Congress and the governorships of several states , Americans still would be blissfully ignorant about the insidious agenda of the radicalized Democratic Party beholden , as it is , to its most anti-American , anti-capitalist , anti-freedom element .
Major American cities remain occupied by America-hating thugs as Democratic governors and mayors pledge solidarity .
The founding fathers are on posthumous trial for “ systemic racism ” as statues are removed , schools are renamed , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history slowly is erased .
The police must be defunded ; Black Lives Matter more than anyone else ’ s ; looting is reparations .
Bend the knee or else .
Petty tyrants shutter businesses and schools on a whim as college campuses resemble surveillance states .
Yet even in this dangerously divisive climate , suburban women appear poised once again to give Democrats an edge in the election .
According to one recent analysis , 54 percent of white suburban women back Joe Biden versus the 45 percent who are for President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one that might make the difference in battleground states from Pennsylvania to Georgia .
But it ’ s utterly baffling why any suburban woman , especially a mother , would vote to put Democrats in power .
Like him or not , Donald Trump is the only thing standing between the typical suburban lifestyle and the Democratic Party intent on destroying it .
Privileged white families safely ensconced in the suburbs represent everything the Democratic Party detests .
And if Democrats capture the White House and the Senate while keeping control of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waste no time turning on the very voters who helped put them in power .
Under a Biden-Harris Administration , federal bureaucrats could seize control of local zoning decisions .
Central planners—longtime foes of what they view as the banal existence of suburban bourgeois—would seek to recreate the densely-populated dysfunction of the cities that so many suburbanites fled .
Mandates to adjust housing , income , employment , and educational disparities could drastically reconfigure American suburbs ; federal decrees would supersede local efforts .
Suburban residents and leaders would be rendered powerless .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamentally and irrevocably destroy the modern economy ; even a “ lite ” version of the proposal will impose astronomical taxes on electricity , gas , food , travel , and yes , toilet paper .
Biden scoffed when the president mentioned the Green New Deal ’ s $ 100 trillion price tag , but even that might be optimistic .
And Biden ’ s slip-of-the-tongue about transitioning away from the oil industry wasn ’ t a senior moment , it is the stated goal of every climate activist who will dominate not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
Climate lockdowns will replace coronavirus lockdowns with far worse consequences .
Critical race theory will be mandated in public schools , and the long-desired reparations paid by white Americans to black Americans won ’ t settle racial grievances , only deepen them .
The borders will be open and illegal immigrants will be entitled to all the benefits of citizenship including voting rights , diminishing the voice of legal citizens .
The Supreme Court will expand , the Electoral College will be eliminated , and Washington , D.C. will earn statehood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including children , who step out of line .
Business owners will be forced to prove their “ woke ” cred lest they face the social media mob .
Conservative views will be censored by Big Tech .
Every young white man will live in fear of being “ Kavanaughed.
” The long march to socialism will get a big jump .
The president is asking—begging ?
—for suburban women to back him like they did in 2016 .
“ Suburban women are flocking over to us , ” he tweeted last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am saving the Suburbs—the American Dream !
I terminated the Regulation that would bring projects and crime to Suburbia .
Not on my watch !
Biden will bring the Regulation back , but bigger and worse.
” Let ’ s hope the president is right .
So to my fellow suburban moms : This is legit .
Voting for Donald Trump might not be as fashionable as the “ Hate Has No Home Here ” decal in your front picture window .
But voting for Joe Biden is a vote against your family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If you get this wrong , those toilet paper scrums at Costco might become a routine occurrence .
And if you vote for Trump—I promise I won ’ t tell .

Earlier this year, a strange spectacle kept recurring at one of the country’s most popular big box stores.
Costco shoppers across the land wrestled each other for industrial-sized packages of toilet paper; as panic set in about the looming coronavirus pandemic, well-heeled suburbanites quickly depleted the retailers’ nationwide supply of Charmin and Quilted Northern. Even the store’s discount Kirkland brand sold out fast.
It’s unclear exactly why toilet paper topped the list of the COVID-19 survival kit but the scenes were instructive as far as observing upscale suburban women in their natural habitat. The toilet paper rush of 2020 probably started with a few comments at the monthly Bunco game or the ladies’ league liquid lunch or at a bespoke med spa house party.
Soon enough, premium membership card in hand, suburban women cruised their Range Rovers to the nearest Costco ready to fight for their right to a 30-roll pack like it was the last size 4 Veronica Beard camo blazer at Nordstrom. Photos of TP booty were proudly posted on Facebook; the booties of Jacob and Olivia would be safely clean for years to come.
And thus we had a peek into the workings of the hivemind of modern-day suburban moms.
In 2018, the sorority of suburban sisterhood found a common enemy: Donald Trump. Suburban congressional districts from Washington, D.C. and Chicago to Orange County, California flipped from Republican to Democrat, giving Nancy Pelosi enough new members to take back her coveted speaker’s gavel. Like nearly all midterm elections, the outcome was a rebuke of the sitting president. Millions of white suburban women, amid a booming economy and period of international peace, cried “but his tweets!” all the way to their polling places.
High on fumes from their daily doses of “The View” and desperate to mimic the groupthink that easily penetrates their consciousness—a cul de sac consensus they nevertheless describe as “independent thinking”—suburban women succeeded in sending a message to the Bad Orange Man while inflicting the likes of Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on the body politic.
In a way, the country owes the Costco Mom a debt of gratitude because she helped to fully expose the depravity of the Left. Had Democrats not won Congress and the governorships of several states, Americans still would be blissfully ignorant about the insidious agenda of the radicalized Democratic Party beholden, as it is, to its most anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-freedom element.
Major American cities remain occupied by America-hating thugs as Democratic governors and mayors pledge solidarity. The founding fathers are on posthumous trial for “systemic racism” as statues are removed, schools are renamed, and our nation’s imperfect yet glorious history slowly is erased. The police must be defunded; Black Lives Matter more than anyone else’s; looting is reparations. Bend the knee or else. Petty tyrants shutter businesses and schools on a whim as college campuses resemble surveillance states.
Yet even in this dangerously divisive climate, suburban women appear poised once again to give Democrats an edge in the election. According to one recent analysis, 54 percent of white suburban women back Joe Biden versus the 45 percent who are for President Trump. Not a huge chasm but one that might make the difference in battleground states from Pennsylvania to Georgia.
But it’s utterly baffling why any suburban woman, especially a mother, would vote to put Democrats in power. Like him or not, Donald Trump is the only thing standing between the typical suburban lifestyle and the Democratic Party intent on destroying it.
Privileged white families safely ensconced in the suburbs represent everything the Democratic Party detests. And if Democrats capture the White House and the Senate while keeping control of the House of Representatives, they’ll waste no time turning on the very voters who helped put them in power.
Under a Biden-Harris Administration, federal bureaucrats could seize control of local zoning decisions. Central planners—longtime foes of what they view as the banal existence of suburban bourgeois—would seek to recreate the densely-populated dysfunction of the cities that so many suburbanites fled. Mandates to adjust housing, income, employment, and educational disparities could drastically reconfigure American suburbs; federal decrees would supersede local efforts. Suburban residents and leaders would be rendered powerless.
Passage of the Green New Deal will fundamentally and irrevocably destroy the modern economy; even a “lite” version of the proposal will impose astronomical taxes on electricity, gas, food, travel, and yes, toilet paper. Biden scoffed when the president mentioned the Green New Deal’s $100 trillion price tag, but even that might be optimistic. And Biden’s slip-of-the-tongue about transitioning away from the oil industry wasn’t a senior moment, it is the stated goal of every climate activist who will dominate not just the Biden Administration but Congress as well. Climate lockdowns will replace coronavirus lockdowns with far worse consequences.
Critical race theory will be mandated in public schools, and the long-desired reparations paid by white Americans to black Americans won’t settle racial grievances, only deepen them. The borders will be open and illegal immigrants will be entitled to all the benefits of citizenship including voting rights, diminishing the voice of legal citizens. The Supreme Court will expand, the Electoral College will be eliminated, and Washington, D.C. will earn statehood.
Cancel culture will apply to everyone, including children, who step out of line. Business owners will be forced to prove their “woke” cred lest they face the social media mob. Conservative views will be censored by Big Tech. Every young white man will live in fear of being “Kavanaughed.”
The long march to socialism will get a big jump.
That’s just a partial list.
The president is asking—begging?—for suburban women to back him like they did in 2016. “Suburban women are flocking over to us,” he tweeted last week. “They realize that I am saving the Suburbs—the American Dream! I terminated the Regulation that would bring projects and crime to Suburbia. Not on my watch! Biden will bring the Regulation back, but bigger and worse.”
Let’s hope the president is right.
So to my fellow suburban moms: This is legit. Voting for Donald Trump might not be as fashionable as the “Hate Has No Home Here” decal in your front picture window.
But voting for Joe Biden is a vote against your family’s—and your country’s—best interests. If you get this wrong, those toilet paper scrums at Costco might become a routine occurrence.
And if you vote for Trump—I promise I won’t tell.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-26--POWERFUL: Tens of Thousands Gather on National Mall to Worship Jesus in Defiance of Democrat Despoti

POWERFUL: Tens of Thousands Gather on National Mall to Worship Jesus in Defiance of Democrat Despotism

If you watch the Main Stream media , you probably have no idea this is happening right now : Tens @ @ @ @ @ the name of Jesus in unity on the National Mall in Washington DC , crying @ @ @ @ @ # LetUsWorship pic.twitter.com/CCqiyYvqfw

If you watch the Main Stream media, you probably have no idea this is happening right now:
Tens of Thousands of people lifting the name of Jesus in unity on the National Mall in Washington DC, crying out: LET US WORSHIP#LetUsWorship pic.twitter.com/CCqiyYvqfw
— Major Patriot (@MajorPatriot) October 25, 2020


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Russian Bankers Seek Deposition Of Steele Dossier Source Igor Danchenko

• Lawyers for the owners of Alfa Bank have asked a federal judge to force Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko to appear for a deposition .
• The bankers subpoenaed Danchenko in August , but he has refused to voluntarily appears for a deposition , according to the lawyers .
• Danchenko has recently come out of hiding through several interviews about his work for Christopher Steele .
Lawyers for a trio of Russian bankers asked a federal judge on Friday to order Igor Danchenko , the primary source for the Steele dossier , to appear for a deposition regarding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The lawyers , who represent Alfa Bank , said in a court filing on Friday that Danchenko had rejected a subpoena to appear voluntarily for a deposition in a lawsuit against Fusion GPS , which commissioned the infamous dossier on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC .
The Alfa Bank owners , German Khan , Peter Aven and Mikhail Fridman , are suing Fusion GPS for defamation over one of the memos from Christopher Steele ’ s 35-page dossier .
Fusion GPS hired Steele in June 2016 to investigate Donald Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a memo dated Sept. 14 , 2016 , Steele alleged that the owners of the bank had bribed Russian president Vladimir Putin .
( RELATED : FBI Investigated Igor Danchenko As A Possible Russian Spy ) Steele has said that he relied on only one source — identified in July as Danchenko — to collect information on Trump , members of the Trump campaign , and Russian government officials ’ election meddling efforts .
The owners of Alfa Bank have vehemently denied the allegation that they have bribed Putin .
In addition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have sued Steele in London , where he is based .
In the dossier , Steele alleged that the Trump campaign and the Kremlin were part of a “ well-developed conspiracy of cooperation ” to influence the 2016 election .
That allegation was largely debunked by the special counsel ’ s report , which said that prosecutors found no evidence that Trump associates conspired with Russians .
The special counsel ’ s office also debunked Danchenko ’ s allegation that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met secretly with Kremlin insiders in August 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Steele to pay damages to the Alfa Bank owners in July , saying that the allegations in the dossier about Alfa Bank were “ inaccurate or misleading.
” Steele revealed during the course of that case that he began investigating Alfa Bank at the request of Fusion GPS owner Glenn Simpson .
He also acknowledged that some aspects of the memo regarding Alfa Bank were inaccurate , according to a transcript of the court proceedings .
The Alfa Bank owners filed a request in August to depose Steele in the lawsuit against Fusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Alfa Bank owners , said in a declaration filed on Friday that Danchenko was served with a subpoena for documents and his deposition on Aug. 19 .
He said that Danchenko ’ s lawyer , Mark Schamel , said his client does not have any documents relevant to the lawsuit .
“ Schamel also informed me that Danchenko would not voluntarily appear for a deposition pursuant to the deposition subpoena and intended to file a motion for a protective order , ” Lewis said in an affidavit .
Schamel did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Danchenko came out of hiding this week , giving interviews to The Guardian and The New York Times to defend his work for Steele and to push back against allegations that he is a Russian spy .
He said that he still believes the dossier ’ s most explosive allegation : that the Kremlin secretly recorded Trump with prostitutes in Moscow in 2013 .
But Danchenko indicated that he did not verify that a tape of Trump existed .
He said he spoke to three people in Russia in June 2016 who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Danchenko did not address the errors in the dossier regarding Trump campaign collusion with Russia or Michael Cohen ’ s alleged visit to Prague during his interviews with The Guardian and The Times .
Danchenko set up an online fundraiser last week in which he called himself “ the investigator who first exposed Trump-Russia threats to American national security on behalf of Christopher Steele in 2016.
” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

Lawyers for the owners of Alfa Bank have asked a federal judge to force Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko to appear for a deposition.
The bankers subpoenaed Danchenko in August, but he has refused to voluntarily appears for a deposition, according to the lawyers.
Danchenko has recently come out of hiding through several interviews about his work for Christopher Steele.
Lawyers for a trio of Russian bankers asked a federal judge on Friday to order Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the Steele dossier, to appear for a deposition regarding his work on the salacious document.
The lawyers, who represent Alfa Bank, said in a court filing on Friday that Danchenko had rejected a subpoena to appear voluntarily for a deposition in a lawsuit against Fusion GPS, which commissioned the infamous dossier on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC.
The Alfa Bank owners, German Khan, Peter Aven and Mikhail Fridman, are suing Fusion GPS for defamation over one of the memos from Christopher Steele’s 35-page dossier. Fusion GPS hired Steele in June 2016 to investigate Donald Trump’s possible ties to Russia.
In a memo dated Sept. 14, 2016, Steele alleged that the owners of the bank had bribed Russian president Vladimir Putin. (RELATED: FBI Investigated Igor Danchenko As A Possible Russian Spy)
Steele has said that he relied on only one source — identified in July as Danchenko — to collect information on Trump, members of the Trump campaign, and Russian government officials’ election meddling efforts.
The owners of Alfa Bank have vehemently denied the allegation that they have bribed Putin. In addition to their lawsuit against Fusion GPS, they have sued Steele in London, where he is based.
In the dossier, Steele alleged that the Trump campaign and the Kremlin were part of a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” to influence the 2016 election.
That allegation was largely debunked by the special counsel’s report, which said that prosecutors found no evidence that Trump associates conspired with Russians.
The special counsel’s office also debunked Danchenko’s allegation that former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met secretly with Kremlin insiders in August 2016 in Prague.
A British court ordered Steele to pay damages to the Alfa Bank owners in July, saying that the allegations in the dossier about Alfa Bank were “inaccurate or misleading.”
Steele revealed during the course of that case that he began investigating Alfa Bank at the request of Fusion GPS owner Glenn Simpson. He also acknowledged that some aspects of the memo regarding Alfa Bank were inaccurate, according to a transcript of the court proceedings.
The Alfa Bank owners filed a request in August to depose Steele in the lawsuit against Fusion GPS.
Alan Lewis, a lawyer for the Alfa Bank owners, said in a declaration filed on Friday that Danchenko was served with a subpoena for documents and his deposition on Aug. 19.
He said that Danchenko’s lawyer, Mark Schamel, said his client does not have any documents relevant to the lawsuit.
“Schamel also informed me that Danchenko would not voluntarily appear for a deposition pursuant to the deposition subpoena and intended to file a motion for a protective order,” Lewis said in an affidavit.
Schamel did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Danchenko came out of hiding this week, giving interviews to The Guardian and The New York Times to defend his work for Steele and to push back against allegations that he is a Russian spy.
He said that he still believes the dossier’s most explosive allegation: that the Kremlin secretly recorded Trump with prostitutes in Moscow in 2013. But Danchenko indicated that he did not verify that a tape of Trump existed. He said he spoke to three people in Russia in June 2016 who mentioned the existence of a tape.
Danchenko did not address the errors in the dossier regarding Trump campaign collusion with Russia or Michael Cohen’s alleged visit to Prague during his interviews with The Guardian and The Times.
Danchenko set up an online fundraiser last week in which he called himself “the investigator who first exposed Trump-Russia threats to American national security on behalf of Christopher Steele in 2016.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Left Eats Itself: Ocrazio-Cortex Won’t Say If She’ll Support Nutty Nancy for Speaker

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez appeared to violate her truce with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday , sparking what could become renewed infighting between the progressive wing and moderate congressional Democrats if the party retains control of the House in 2020 .
Ocasio-Cortez told CNN host Jake Tapper Sunday morning that she plans to support the `` most progressive '' candidate for House speaker , and that she would consider other Democratic candidates to replace Pelosi 's position if the California Democrat does n't measure up .
`` If Speaker Pelosi runs again , as she just indicated she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House , will you support her ? ''
Tapper asked .
`` I want to make sure that we win the House , '' the freshman congresswoman responded .
`` I do believe that we will , but it 's critically important that we are supporting Democrats in tight swing races , making sure that not only all of them come back but that we grow our majority . ''
But , she added , `` I believe that we have to see those races as they come , see what candidates are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure that we have the most progressive candidate there .
But , if Speaker Pelosi is that most progressive candidate , then I will be supporting her . ''
Pelosi , 79 , who has served in the House for more than 30 years , clashed with Ocasio-Cortez and allied freshmen lawmakers last year over their policy differences -- which span everything from their approach to immigration to their early calls for impeachment against President Trump .
The lawmakers claimed to have reached an understanding after meeting privately in July 2019 , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good graces since .

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez appeared to violate her truce with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday, sparking what could become renewed infighting between the progressive wing and moderate congressional Democrats if the party retains control of the House in 2020.
Ocasio-Cortez told CNN host Jake Tapper Sunday morning that she plans to support the "most progressive" candidate for House speaker, and that she would consider other Democratic candidates to replace Pelosi's position if the California Democrat doesn't measure up.
"If Speaker Pelosi runs again, as she just indicated she will, if the Democrats keep the House, will you support her?" Tapper asked.
"I want to make sure that we win the House," the freshman congresswoman responded. "I do believe that we will, but it's critically important that we are supporting Democrats in tight swing races, making sure that not only all of them come back but that we grow our majority."
But, she added, "I believe that we have to see those races as they come, see what candidates are there. I am committed to making sure that we have the most progressive candidate there. But, if Speaker Pelosi is that most progressive candidate, then I will be supporting her."
Pelosi, 79, who has served in the House for more than 30 years, clashed with Ocasio-Cortez and allied freshmen lawmakers last year over their policy differences -- which span everything from their approach to immigration to their early calls for impeachment against President Trump.
The lawmakers claimed to have reached an understanding after meeting privately in July 2019, and have publicly reamined in each other's good graces since.


thelibertydaily--2020-10-25--Beijing Biden Gaslights, Lashed Out at Reporter During Question About Biden Crime Family: ‘There is

Beijing Biden Gaslights, Lashed Out at Reporter During Question About Biden Crime Family: ‘There is No Controversy About My Son’

Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden cut off a Wilkes-Barre , Pennsylvania , television reporter on Saturday who was attempting to ask a question about his son , Hunter Biden .
WYOU reporter Andy Mehalshick began saying , “ Questions and controversy continue today about Hunter Biden , your son , ” before Biden jumped on him : “ There is no controversy , ” he snapped .
“ That ’ s all a lie.
” “ It ’ s a flat lie because the president has nothing else to run on .
If you noticed , while the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to their families ; he has no plan and at the debate , he has no plan , ” Biden said .
“ Everything from Wall Street Journal , other major news outlet said what he is saying is simply not true about my son , but it ’ s classic Trump , ” responded Biden .
Biden , who has held small events where attendees stay in their vehicles and honk their approval , criticized President Donald Trump ’ s massive rallies .
“ He ’ s going around the country holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Biden said .
WYOU ’ s question came as the Journal reported on Thursday about a former Biden business associate , Tony Bobulinski : An ex-business partner of Hunter Biden , in a news conference organized by the Trump campaign , alleged that former Vice President Joe Biden was part of discussions around his son ’ s efforts to form an investment venture with a Chinese oil company .
… In a statement to reporters Thursday , Anthony Bobulinski said that in 2017 Hunter Biden consulted his father about a planned venture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Co. to invest in the U.S. and elsewhere .
Mr. Bobulinski was also a partner .
The venture—set up in 2017 after Mr. Biden left the vice presidency and before his presidential campaign—never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals , according to people familiar with the matter .
Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden .
The paper reported that Biden ’ s campaign denied his involvement in the business dealings .
Bobulinski addressed reporters prior to the final presidential debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporter for Breitbart News .
He is also host of “ The Kyle Olson Show , ” syndicated on Michigan radio stations on Saturdays .
Listen to segments on YouTube or download full podcast episodes .
Follow him on Twitter , like him on Facebook , and follow him on Parler .

Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden cut off a Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, television reporter on Saturday who was attempting to ask a question about his son, Hunter Biden.
WYOU reporter Andy Mehalshick began saying, “Questions and controversy continue today about Hunter Biden, your son,” before Biden jumped on him:
Interviewer: "Questions and controversy continue today about Hunter Biden, your son-" Biden: "There is no controversy about my son. That's a hell of a lie. That's a flat lie because the president has nothing to run on… it's classic Trump." pic.twitter.com/MQQGvddrHO — Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) October 24, 2020
“There is no controversy,” he snapped. “That’s all a lie.”
“It’s a flat lie because the president has nothing else to run on. If you noticed, while the American people are talking about what’s happening to their families; he has no plan and at the debate, he has no plan,” Biden said.
“Everything from Wall Street Journal, other major news outlet said what he is saying is simply not true about my son, but it’s classic Trump,” responded Biden.
Biden, who has held small events where attendees stay in their vehicles and honk their approval, criticized President Donald Trump’s massive rallies.
“He’s going around the country holding these great spreaders of more virus,” Biden said.
WYOU’s question came as the Journal reported on Thursday about a former Biden business associate, Tony Bobulinski:
An ex-business partner of Hunter Biden, in a news conference organized by the Trump campaign, alleged that former Vice President Joe Biden was part of discussions around his son’s efforts to form an investment venture with a Chinese oil company. … In a statement to reporters Thursday, Anthony Bobulinski said that in 2017 Hunter Biden consulted his father about a planned venture with Chinese oil company CEFC China Energy Co. to invest in the U.S. and elsewhere. Mr. Bobulinski was also a partner. The venture—set up in 2017 after Mr. Biden left the vice presidency and before his presidential campaign—never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden.
The paper reported that Biden’s campaign denied his involvement in the business dealings.
Bobulinski addressed reporters prior to the final presidential debate on Thursday.
Kyle Olson is a reporter for Breitbart News. He is also host of “The Kyle Olson Show,” syndicated on Michigan radio stations on Saturdays. Listen to segments on YouTube or download full podcast episodes. Follow him on Twitter, like him on Facebook, and follow him on Parler.