dailysignal--2020-09-04--The Left’s Dangerous Delegitimization of the Election

A recent article in The Washington Post ’ s Outlook section , “ What ’ s the Worst That Could Happen ?
” —which explores various potential outcomes of the 2020 presidential election—found that in “ every scenario except a [ Joe ] Biden landslide , our simulation ended catastrophically.
” According to the Post , any other outcome is destined to spark “ violence ” and a “ constitutional crisis.
” Or , in other words , nice country you got there… Every assumption in the article , written by Rosa Brooks , a Georgetown University law professor and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is awash in the conspiratorial paranoia .
It ’ s a world where Trump officials are “ ruthless and unconstrained right out of the gate ” but the genteel statesmen of Team Biden “ struggled to get out of reaction mode.
” It is a place where Republicans aren ’ t only reflexively seditious and autocratic , but where a “ highly politicized ” Supreme Court tries to steal the election .
In their “ war game ” scenarios , however , it ’ s the Democrats who refuse to accept the will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prescribed system rather than hysteria , and it ’ s the Democrats who wish-cast the wholly imaginary “ popular vote ” into existence .
One of the scenarios , we learn , “ doesn ’ t look that different from 2016″—a contest in which , it must be pointed out , not one vote has been proven to be uncounted or altered .
In that outcome , America is confronted with “ a big popular win for Mr. Biden , and a narrow electoral defeat.
” In the real world , incidentally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victory.
” In the fictional war game , however , John Podesta , playing the role of Biden , contends that his party won ’ t let him concede the race , and instead alleges “ voter suppression ” —the catchall go-to every time a liberal loses—and persuades the Democratic governors of Trump-won states such as Wisconsin and Michigan to send pro-Biden electors to the Electoral College .
In the meantime , California , Oregon , and Washington threaten to secede from the union if Trump takes office .
The Democrat-led House unilaterally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point in the scenario , ” The New York Times ’ Ben Smith explains , “ the nation stopped looking to the media for cues , and waited to see what the military would do.
” This scenario is what a real-life “ coup ” might resemble .
It is , needless to say , utterly insane that the left would destroy the nation ’ s longstanding and peaceful transition because they refuse to accept the mandated process of electing the president .
All of which is to say the proactive—and retroactive—delegitimization of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four-year project .
It permeates the entire Democratic Party ’ s information complex .
First , liberals convinced millions of Americans that a handful of inept and puerile social media ads were enough to overturn a presidential election in the most powerful nation on earth .
By 2017 , a majority of Democrats believed that vote tallies had been tampered with by Russians , somehow without a trace of evidence .
Since then , the left has been working to convince themselves there is no legitimate way in which Trump could win the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high-profile left-wing columnists have laid the groundwork to make this case and high-profile politicians have joined them .
Hillary Clinton ’ s advice to Biden not long ago was to not concede defeat on the night of the Nov. 3 election no matter what happens .
In January , during the impeachment trial , Rep. Adam Schiff , D-Calif. , said , “ The president ’ s misconduct can not be decided at the ballot box , for we can not be assured that the vote will be fairly won.
” House Speaker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that to “ let the election decide ” is a “ dangerous position ” because Trump is already “ jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections.
” It ’ s worth pointing out as well that the dynamics of the presidential election would be completely different if the popular vote actually existed .
But candidates do not compete for the popular vote , so they can neither “ win ” nor “ lose ” it .
If they did try to win the popular vote , they would cater to the largest population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and elections would look very different .
I ’ m not sure that that setup would work out for Democrats exactly as they imagine , but it doesn ’ t matter .
A popular vote undercuts federalism , one of the foundational ideas of the founding .
And that ’ s the point .
A recent USA Today poll found that 28 % of Biden ’ s supporters say they aren ’ t prepared to accept a Trump victory as “ fairly won , ” and 19 % of Trump ’ s supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victory .
So a significant minority of American voters don ’ t believe the next election will be legitimate before it has even been conducted .
What happens when every long line at the polls and every Facebook meme and every delayed mail-in ballot is turned into a nefarious plot by the enemy to snatch democracy from the rightful winner ?
It ’ s going to be ugly , indeed .
If their “ war games ” are to be believed , then that ’ s what the left is counting on .

A recent article in The Washington Post’s Outlook section, “What’s the Worst That Could Happen?”—which explores various potential outcomes of the 2020 presidential election—found that in “every scenario except a [Joe] Biden landslide, our simulation ended catastrophically.” According to the Post, any other outcome is destined to spark “violence” and a “constitutional crisis.”
Or, in other words, nice country you got there…
Every assumption in the article, written by Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown University law professor and co-founder of the Transition Integrity Project, is awash in the conspiratorial paranoia. It’s a world where Trump officials are “ruthless and unconstrained right out of the gate” but the genteel statesmen of Team Biden “struggled to get out of reaction mode.”
It is a place where Republicans aren’t only reflexively seditious and autocratic, but where a “highly politicized” Supreme Court tries to steal the election.
In their “war game” scenarios, however, it’s the Democrats who refuse to accept the will of courts to adhere to the constitutionally prescribed system rather than hysteria, and it’s the Democrats who wish-cast the wholly imaginary “popular vote” into existence.
One of the scenarios, we learn, “doesn’t look that different from 2016″—a contest in which, it must be pointed out, not one vote has been proven to be uncounted or altered. In that outcome, America is confronted with “a big popular win for Mr. Biden, and a narrow electoral defeat.”
In the real world, incidentally, that scenario is called a “Trump victory.”
In the fictional war game, however, John Podesta, playing the role of Biden, contends that his party won’t let him concede the race, and instead alleges “voter suppression”—the catchall go-to every time a liberal loses—and persuades the Democratic governors of Trump-won states such as Wisconsin and Michigan to send pro-Biden electors to the Electoral College.
In the meantime, California, Oregon, and Washington threaten to secede from the union if Trump takes office. The Democrat-led House unilaterally names Biden president. “At that point in the scenario,” The New York Times’ Ben Smith explains, “the nation stopped looking to the media for cues, and waited to see what the military would do.”
This scenario is what a real-life “coup” might resemble. It is, needless to say, utterly insane that the left would destroy the nation’s longstanding and peaceful transition because they refuse to accept the mandated process of electing the president. All of which is to say the proactive—and retroactive—delegitimization of the Trump presidency has been a successful four-year project. It permeates the entire Democratic Party’s information complex.
First, liberals convinced millions of Americans that a handful of inept and puerile social media ads were enough to overturn a presidential election in the most powerful nation on earth. By 2017, a majority of Democrats believed that vote tallies had been tampered with by Russians, somehow without a trace of evidence.
Since then, the left has been working to convince themselves there is no legitimate way in which Trump could win the election again. A large number of high-profile left-wing columnists have laid the groundwork to make this case and high-profile politicians have joined them.
Hillary Clinton’s advice to Biden not long ago was to not concede defeat on the night of the Nov. 3 election no matter what happens. In January, during the impeachment trial, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said, “The president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has noted that to “let the election decide” is a “dangerous position” because Trump is already “jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections.”
It’s worth pointing out as well that the dynamics of the presidential election would be completely different if the popular vote actually existed. But candidates do not compete for the popular vote, so they can neither “win” nor “lose” it. If they did try to win the popular vote, they would cater to the largest population centers, and no one else, and elections would look very different.
I’m not sure that that setup would work out for Democrats exactly as they imagine, but it doesn’t matter. A popular vote undercuts federalism, one of the foundational ideas of the founding. And that’s the point.
A recent USA Today poll found that 28% of Biden’s supporters say they aren’t prepared to accept a Trump victory as “fairly won,” and 19% of Trump’s supporters say the same about a potential Biden victory.
So a significant minority of American voters don’t believe the next election will be legitimate before it has even been conducted. What happens when every long line at the polls and every Facebook meme and every delayed mail-in ballot is turned into a nefarious plot by the enemy to snatch democracy from the rightful winner?
It’s going to be ugly, indeed. If their “war games” are to be believed, then that’s what the left is counting on.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM


dailysignal--2020-09-04--‘Beyond Shameful’: Emotional Salon Owner Rips Into Pelosi for Claiming She Was Set Up

San Francisco salon owner Erica Kious said Thursday that it is “ beyond shameful ” for Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to accuse Kious of setting her up .
“ For the speaker of the House of the United States to go on TV and falsely claim she was set up and publicly defame me and send out PR firms to spin more lies about Jonathan in support of the speaker ’ s own lies is bad enough , ” Kious said on a Thursday evening press call to reporters .
“ But for Speaker Pelosi to frame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued , “ under a total false narrative while small businesses and workers all over California , the state she represents in Congress , suffer and struggle just to survive is beyond shameful.
” Kious provided Fox News with security footage showing a wet-haired Pelosi walking through eSalon in San Francisco on Monday at 3:08 p.m. as she attended her appointment for a wash and blow-out .
San Francisco hair salons have been closed since March and were permitted to open Sept. 1 for outdoor hair appointments only .
Pelosi responded to backlash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a victim of a set up .
The salon owner said that Pelosi contacted Jonathan DeNardo , an independent contractor who rents a chair in eSalon , and asked if he could provide a hair service at her private residence .
DeNardo informed Pelosi that this was not possible , according to Kious , and instead offered to perform the service at the salon .
“ I have nothing to do with this and have never approved or rejected any particular client or service at the salon , ” she said , adding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to seek authorization to do Mrs. Pelosi ’ s care .
The appointment has already been made by him.
” She said that DeNardo did call her to express his excitement about cutting Pelosi ’ s hair , during which call she told him that if Pelosi “ came to the salon and felt safe doing so , he should speak to her about trying to get other salons to open everywhere.
” This suggestion upset DeNardo , she said , who told her that Pelosi had bigger things to worry about .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ added .
“ Jonathan actually texted me and conveyed that he did have a discussion with her about not only not being allowed to open to do hair inside the salon , ” Kious said .
“ Not only was the speaker fully aware that salons were closed for such services , but she and Jonathan actually discussed that fact during her appointment .
The speaker ’ s excuse that she was set up is false.
” Kious repeatedly emphasized that if anyone set up Pelosi , it could only have been DeNardo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not believe DeNardo set up the speaker of the House and that Pelosi has made him the scapegoat of the situation .
“ I don ’ t owe anyone an apology , ” Kious said with emotion .
“ Mrs .
Pelosi owes the entire country an apology.
” Pelosi did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ email protected ]

San Francisco salon owner Erica Kious said Thursday that it is “beyond shameful” for Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to accuse Kious of setting her up.
“For the speaker of the House of the United States to go on TV and falsely claim she was set up and publicly defame me and send out PR firms to spin more lies about Jonathan in support of the speaker’s own lies is bad enough,” Kious said on a Thursday evening press call to reporters.
“But for Speaker Pelosi to frame herself as a victim,” she continued, “under a total false narrative while small businesses and workers all over California, the state she represents in Congress, suffer and struggle just to survive is beyond shameful.”
Kious provided Fox News with security footage showing a wet-haired Pelosi walking through eSalon in San Francisco on Monday at 3:08 p.m. as she attended her appointment for a wash and blow-out. San Francisco hair salons have been closed since March and were permitted to open Sept. 1 for outdoor hair appointments only.
Pelosi responded to backlash over the footage by saying she was a victim of a set up.
The salon owner said that Pelosi contacted Jonathan DeNardo, an independent contractor who rents a chair in eSalon, and asked if he could provide a hair service at her private residence. DeNardo informed Pelosi that this was not possible, according to Kious, and instead offered to perform the service at the salon.
“I have nothing to do with this and have never approved or rejected any particular client or service at the salon,” she said, adding that DeNardo “did not call me to seek authorization to do Mrs. Pelosi’s care. The appointment has already been made by him.”
She said that DeNardo did call her to express his excitement about cutting Pelosi’s hair, during which call she told him that if Pelosi “came to the salon and felt safe doing so, he should speak to her about trying to get other salons to open everywhere.”
This suggestion upset DeNardo, she said, who told her that Pelosi had bigger things to worry about. DeNardo later apologized to her, she added.
“Jonathan actually texted me and conveyed that he did have a discussion with her about not only not being allowed to open to do hair inside the salon,” Kious said. “Not only was the speaker fully aware that salons were closed for such services, but she and Jonathan actually discussed that fact during her appointment. The speaker’s excuse that she was set up is false.”
Kious repeatedly emphasized that if anyone set up Pelosi, it could only have been DeNardo, but also emphasized that she does not believe DeNardo set up the speaker of the House and that Pelosi has made him the scapegoat of the situation.
“I don’t owe anyone an apology,” Kious said with emotion. “Mrs. Pelosi owes the entire country an apology.”
Pelosi did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


dailysignal--2020-09-04--New COVID-19 Findings Confirm What We Have Learned Since the Beginning. A Targeted Response Is More

New COVID-19 Findings Confirm What We Have Learned Since the Beginning. A Targeted Response Is More Important Than Ever.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ’ s most recent weekly provisional mortality update has caused a stir .
It says : Does this mean that only 6 % of those who have died with COVID-19 had no pre-existing medical conditions ?
> > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Disease Control and Prevention didn ’ t differentiate between medical conditions a patient may have had before contracting COVID-19 , and conditions that actually resulted fromthe virus .
But the update does reinforce what we know about the disease : Severe illness and death is very strongly correlated with age and chronic conditions .
The update shows us yet again why our COVID-19 strategy needs to be smartly targeted to protect the most vulnerable .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention update looked at “ conditions contributing to deaths involving coronavirus.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are complications of COVID-19 .
For instance , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ’ s table classifies pneumonia and respiratory distress as contributing conditions .
These conditions are common complications in severe respiratory diseases , and these commonly lead to respiratory failure .
Respiratory failure is when the body is no longer able to properly oxygenate the blood without assisted breathing , and is generally when physicians will put their patients on ventilators .
It ’ s understandable then that the table lists more than 57,000 deaths associated with respiratory failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t tell the entire story .
The table also shows the occurrence of these conditions in different age groups , and in every listed condition , the number increases dramatically either at the 55-and-over or the 65-and-over age group .
For instance , the incidence in respiratory failure more than doubles from 3,153 in the 45-to-54 age group to 7,632 in the 55-to-65 age group .
This nearly doubles again in the next age group ( 66-to-74 ) , with 13,264 incidences .
Of all COVID-19 deaths that were reported with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were 65 or older .
Over 90 % were over 55 .
This trend is consistent in every acute condition listed on this table and reinforces what we know about the disease—that this virus is particularly deadly to the elderly and those with preexisting conditions .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also lists many chronic conditions that are known to be risk factors for severe outcomes in COVID-19 .
After respiratory failure , the condition with the next highest incidence is “ hypertensive diseases , ” which is a group of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diseases .
Advanced COVID-19 often involves the heart , and thus those who already had chronic heart conditions were at increased risk of serious outcomes and mortality due to COVID-19 .
The condition with the next highest incidences , unsurprisingly , is another chronic disease well known for making disease outcomes worse : diabetes .
Again , this reinforces what we have learned since the beginning of the pandemic : that there are certain risk factors the increase a person ’ s risk of mortality .
It adds to the overwhelming volume of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particular risk , which only increases over 85 .
We continue to learn more about this virus , and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should continue providing such updates and must improve its information collection .
But more important than the information itself is what we do with it .
Policymakers largely have—rightly—given up broad and untargeted lockdown measures .
We know exactly who this virus attacks the most , and our public health measures should be aimed at protecting them .

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s most recent weekly provisional mortality update has caused a stir. It says:
For 6% of deaths [involving COVID-19], COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.
Does this mean that only 6% of those who have died with COVID-19 had no preexisting medical conditions?
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
No. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention didn’t differentiate between medical conditions a patient may have had before contracting COVID-19, and conditions that actually resulted fromthe virus.
But the update does reinforce what we know about the disease: Severe illness and death is very strongly correlated with age and chronic conditions. The update shows us yet again why our COVID-19 strategy needs to be smartly targeted to protect the most vulnerable.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention update looked at “conditions contributing to deaths involving coronavirus.” These contributing conditions include many that are complications of COVID-19.
For instance, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s table classifies pneumonia and respiratory distress as contributing conditions. These conditions are common complications in severe respiratory diseases, and these commonly lead to respiratory failure.
Respiratory failure is when the body is no longer able to properly oxygenate the blood without assisted breathing, and is generally when physicians will put their patients on ventilators. It’s understandable then that the table lists more than 57,000 deaths associated with respiratory failure.
That number, though significant, doesn’t tell the entire story. The table also shows the occurrence of these conditions in different age groups, and in every listed condition, the number increases dramatically either at the 55 and over or the 65 and over age group.
For instance, the incidence in respiratory failure more than doubles from 3,153 in the 45 to 54 age group to 7,632 in the 55 to 65 age group. This nearly doubles again in the next age group (66 to 74), with 13,264 incidences. Of all COVID-19 deaths that were reported with respiratory failure, 78% of them were 65 or older. Over 90% were over 55.
This trend is consistent in every acute condition listed on this table and reinforces what we know about the disease—that this virus is particularly deadly to the elderly and those with preexisting conditions.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also lists many chronic conditions that are known to be risk factors for severe outcomes in COVID-19.
After respiratory failure, the condition with the next highest incidence is “hypertensive diseases,” which is a group of diagnoses made up of several chronic high blood pressure diseases. Advanced COVID-19 often involves the heart, and thus those who already had chronic heart conditions were at increased risk of serious outcomes and mortality due to COVID-19.
The condition with the next highest incidences, unsurprisingly, is another chronic disease well known for making disease outcomes worse: diabetes.
Again, this reinforces what we have learned since the beginning of the pandemic: that there are certain risk factors that increase a person’s risk of mortality. It adds to the overwhelming volume of evidence that those over 65 are at particular risk, which only increases over 85.
We continue to learn more about this virus, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should continue providing such updates and must improve its information collection.
But more important than the information itself is what we do with it. Policymakers largely have—rightly—given up broad and untargeted lockdown measures. We know exactly who this virus attacks the most, and our public health measures should be aimed at protecting them.


dailysignal--2020-09-09--Disney Threatened to Pull Out of Georgia Over Abortion Law, but Filmed in Region Where Chinese Uighu

Disney Threatened to Pull Out of Georgia Over Abortion Law, but Filmed in Region Where Chinese Uighurs Are Imprisoned

Disney is facing criticism for filming where China ’ s Uighurs are allegedly being interned more than a year after CEO Bob Iger suggested the company might be forced to cut ties with Georgia after the state passed an anti-abortion law .
In the credits for the live-action version of “ Mulan , ” Disney thanked a Chinese agency called Turpan Municipal Bureau of Public Safety , which is allegedly responsible for running internment camps housing individuals from the country ’ s Muslim minority groups , the BBC reported Monday .
Disney filmed the movie in Xinjiang , China , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Iger told Reuters in May 2019 that it would be “ very difficult ” to do business in the state of Georgia after Republican Gov .
Brian Kemp signed a law banning abortion if a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat .
Disney has made several movies in the state , including “ Black Panther ” and “ Avengers : Endgame.
” The law took effect in January of 2020 .
Georgia offers film studios tax credits and the film industry is responsible for creating more than 92,000 jobs in the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of America .
More than 450 productions were shot in Georgia in 2018 , Reuters reported , citing state data .
“ I rather doubt we will , ” Iger said during an interview in 2019 , referring to whether the company will stay in Georgia .
“ I think many people who work for us will not want to work there , and we will have to heed their wishes in that regard .
Right now we are watching it very carefully.
” He added : “ I don ’ t see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to continue to shoot there ” if the law takes effect .
“ Why did Disney need to work in Xinjiang ?
It didn ’ t .
There are plenty of other regions in China , and countries around the world , that offer the starkly beautiful mountain scenery present in the film .
But in doing so , Disney helps normalize a crime against humanity , ” he said .
“ While the CCP is committing crimes against humanity in Xinjiang , @ Disney thanked four of the propaganda departments that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin wrote in a tweet Tuesday , referring to the Chinese Communist Party .
Numerous reports have shown Uighurs being held in concentration camps and being subjected to forced sterilization .
Chinese officials deny any wrongdoing in Xinjiang , and claimed in an April statement that there is no “ detention of a million Muslims from Xinjiang.
” The Chinese government is working to lower the birthrates of Uighurs while encouraging other native populations to have more children , an Associated Press investigation published in June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interviews with former detainees , family members , and a former detention camp instructor , as well as government statistics and documents , AP said .
Meanwhile , Disney opened a $ 5.5 billion entertainment resort in Shanghai , China , in 2016 , Variety reported .
Iger called Shanghai Disney the company ’ s “ greatest opportunity since buying land in Florida.
” Disney partnered with a state-owned company , Shanghai Shendi Group , for the resort .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large audience .
For licensing opportunities of this original content , email [ email protected ]

Disney is facing criticism for filming where China’s Uighurs are allegedly being interned more than a year after CEO Bob Iger suggested the company might be forced to cut ties with Georgia after the state passed an anti-abortion law.
In the credits for the live-action version of “Mulan,” Disney thanked a Chinese agency called Turpan Municipal Bureau of Public Safety, which is allegedly responsible for running internment camps housing individuals from the country’s Muslim minority groups, the BBC reported Monday. Disney filmed the movie in Xinjiang, China, where Uighur people have reportedly been imprisoned.
Iger told Reuters in May 2019 that it would be “very difficult” to do business in the state of Georgia after Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a law banning abortion if a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat. Disney has made several movies in the state, including “Black Panther” and “Avengers: Endgame.” The law took effect in January of 2020.
Georgia offers film studios tax credits and the film industry is responsible for creating more than 92,000 jobs in the state, according to the Motion Picture Association of America. More than 450 productions were shot in Georgia in 2018, Reuters reported, citing state data.
Missouri and other states passed similar laws afterward, media reports show.
“I rather doubt we will,” Iger said during an interview in 2019, referring to whether the company will stay in Georgia. “I think many people who work for us will not want to work there, and we will have to heed their wishes in that regard. Right now we are watching it very carefully.”
He added: “I don’t see how it’s practical for us to continue to shoot there” if the law takes effect.
Washington Post columnist Isaac Stone Fish criticized Disney in a column Monday.
“Why did Disney need to work in Xinjiang? It didn’t. There are plenty of other regions in China, and countries around the world, that offer the starkly beautiful mountain scenery present in the film. But in doing so, Disney helps normalize a crime against humanity,” he said.
“While the CCP is committing crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, @Disney thanked four of the propaganda departments that are lying to the world about these crimes,” Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin wrote in a tweet Tuesday, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.
Numerous reports have shown Uighurs being held in concentration camps and being subjected to forced sterilization. Chinese officials deny any wrongdoing in Xinjiang, and claimed in an April statement that there is no “detention of a million Muslims from Xinjiang.”
The Chinese government is working to lower the birthrates of Uighurs while encouraging other native populations to have more children, an Associated Press investigation published in June found.
The study was based on interviews with former detainees, family members, and a former detention camp instructor, as well as government statistics and documents, AP said.
Meanwhile, Disney opened a $5.5 billion entertainment resort in Shanghai, China, in 2016, Variety reported. Iger called Shanghai Disney the company’s “greatest opportunity since buying land in Florida.” Disney partnered with a state-owned company, Shanghai Shendi Group, for the resort.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


dailysignal--2020-09-10--Conservative Shareholder Calls Disney’s Embrace of China ‘Wildly Offensive’

Disney ’ s embrace of China despite its reported oppression of the Uighur Muslims is akin to “ normalizing genocide , ” according to one company stockholder who claims investors are preparing to formally demand answers from the company .
It ’ s inconceivable that Disney was unaware that Xinjiang , China , is the location where China is imprisoning the country ’ s Uighur population , stockholder Justin Danhof told The Daily Caller News Foundation .
Disney is facing intense criticism for filming in 2019 the live-action version of “ Mulan ” in Xinjiang , where the minority group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be hearing from us in a formal way on this issue .
We will be engaging with Disney in that way , ” Danhof said , referring to his fellow stockholders .
“ Other investors who are not aware of what Disney is doing will be made aware.
” Danhof did not elaborate on what he and the other stockholders supposedly have planned , noting that he does not like to discuss such internal matters .
In the credits for “ Mulan , ” Disney thanked a Chinese agency called Turpan Municipal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegedly responsible for running internment camps housing China ’ s Muslim minority groups , the BBC reported Monday .
Numerous reports show Uighurs held in concentration camps and subjected to forced sterilization .
“ It ’ s wildly offensive , ” said Danhof , general counsel and director of the Free Enterprise Project , which is a product of conservative think tank National Center for Public Policy Research .
“ There can be no doubt that Disney has to be aware of this .
Some executives probably even saw some of the centers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history of grilling executives on conservative matters .
He presented CEO Bob Chapek with research at an annual meeting of Disney shareholders in March supposedly showing bias in Disney ’ s ABC News division .
The Media Research Center study Danhof prepared at the meeting suggested ABC News ’ coverage of President Donald Trump is overwhelmingly negative .
Danhof asked Disney Executive Chairman Bob Iger during a stakeholder meeting in 2018 about ABC host Joy Behar ’ s past criticisms of Vice President Mike Pence ’ s Christian faith .
Iger , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CEO in 2020 , said he took exception to Behar ’ s remarks .
That meeting ultimately resulted in Behar apologizing for mocking Christians , Danhof told The Daily Caller News Foundation .
Disney won ’ t be able to hide from its ties to China , according to Peter Flaherty , chairman and CEO of the National Legal and Policy Center , a 501 ( c ) 3 nonprofit that promotes ethics in public life .
Flaherty is an “ anti-corruption activist who has successfully pursued some of the most powerful members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Legal and Policy Center ’ s website .
“ Disney can not stonewall this , ” Flaherty told The Daily Caller News Foundation .
“ Unlike other issues , human rights in China is something that does concern both conservatives and liberals , so they could have a pretty broad coalition allied against them even though we live in polarized times .
Disney ignores the protests at their own risk .
“ The Chinese government is working to lower the birthrates of Uighurs while encouraging other native populations to have more children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ June found .
The study was based on interviews with former detainees , family members , and a former detention camp instructor , as well as government statistics and documents , AP said .
Meanwhile , Disney opened a $ 5.5 billion entertainment resort in Shanghai , China , in 2016 , Variety reported .
Iger called Shanghai Disney the company ’ s “ greatest opportunity since buying land in Florida.
” Disney partnered with a state-owned company , Shanghai Shendi Group , for the resort .
“ Certain anti-Chinese forces abroad are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said about Disney ’ s work in Xinjiang at a briefing Tuesday .
Disney has not responded to The Daily Caller News Foundation ’ s request for comment .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of this original content , email [ email protected ]

Disney’s embrace of China despite its reported oppression of the Uighur Muslims is akin to “normalizing genocide,” according to one company stockholder who claims investors are preparing to formally demand answers from the company.
It’s inconceivable that Disney was unaware that Xinjiang, China, is the location where China is imprisoning the country’s Uighur population, stockholder Justin Danhof told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Disney is facing intense criticism for filming in 2019 the live-action version of “Mulan” in Xinjiang, where the minority group is allegedly being interned.
“Disney will be hearing from us in a formal way on this issue. We will be engaging with Disney in that way,” Danhof said, referring to his fellow stockholders. “Other investors who are not aware of what Disney is doing will be made aware.”
Danhof did not elaborate on what he and the other stockholders supposedly have planned, noting that he does not like to discuss such internal matters.
In the credits for “Mulan,” Disney thanked a Chinese agency called Turpan Municipal Bureau of Public Safety, which is allegedly responsible for running internment camps housing China’s Muslim minority groups, the BBC reported Monday. Numerous reports show Uighurs held in concentration camps and subjected to forced sterilization.
“It’s wildly offensive,” said Danhof, general counsel and director of the Free Enterprise Project, which is a product of conservative think tank National Center for Public Policy Research. “There can be no doubt that Disney has to be aware of this. Some executives probably even saw some of the centers housing the Uighurs.”
Danhof has a history of grilling executives on conservative matters. He presented CEO Bob Chapek with research at an annual meeting of Disney shareholders in March supposedly showing bias in Disney’s ABC News division. The Media Research Center study Danhof prepared at the meeting suggested ABC News’ coverage of President Donald Trump is overwhelmingly negative.
Danhof asked Disney Executive Chairman Bob Iger during a stakeholder meeting in 2018 about ABC host Joy Behar’s past criticisms of Vice President Mike Pence’s Christian faith. Iger, who stepped down as the company’s CEO in 2020, said he took exception to Behar’s remarks. That meeting ultimately resulted in Behar apologizing for mocking Christians, Danhof told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Disney won’t be able to hide from its ties to China, according to Peter Flaherty, chairman and CEO of the National Legal and Policy Center, a 501(c)3 nonprofit that promotes ethics in public life.
Flaherty is an “anti-corruption activist who has successfully pursued some of the most powerful members of Congress,” according to the National Legal and Policy Center’s website.
“Disney cannot stonewall this,” Flaherty told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Unlike other issues, human rights in China is something that does concern both conservatives and liberals, so they could have a pretty broad coalition allied against them even though we live in polarized times. Disney ignores the protests at their own risk. “
The Chinese government is working to lower the birthrates of Uighurs while encouraging other native populations to have more children, an Associated Press investigation published in June found. The study was based on interviews with former detainees, family members, and a former detention camp instructor, as well as government statistics and documents, AP said.
Meanwhile, Disney opened a $5.5 billion entertainment resort in Shanghai, China, in 2016, Variety reported. Iger called Shanghai Disney the company’s “greatest opportunity since buying land in Florida.” Disney partnered with a state-owned company, Shanghai Shendi Group, for the resort.
“Certain anti-Chinese forces abroad are smearing and attacking China in Xinjiang,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said about Disney’s work in Xinjiang at a briefing Tuesday. Disney has not responded to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


dailysignal--2020-09-10--A Reprise of 1876? Liberal Academic Group Predicts Electoral Showdown for 2020

Dystopian tales are typically based in some time far into the future and feature fictional characters .
More recently , a group of academics and politicos calling itself the Transition Integrity Project detailed some shocking scenarios of what they think could happen after the 2020 election .
Whether intentional or not , one of the group ’ s scenarios actually has historical precedent from the 1876 election , and in part from the 1800 and 1824 elections , as detailed in my book “ Tainted by Suspicion : The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Election Day , either in Congress or the courts .
The Transition Integrity Project presents one scenario in which , after the Republican candidate wins the Electoral College vote , but the Democrat wins the popular vote , states go rogue and send two different sets of votes to the Electoral College .
That ’ s almost identical to the 1876 clash between Republican nominee Rutherford B. Hayes and Democratic standard-bearer Samuel Tilden , which led to a political battle almost up until Inauguration Day , which back then was on March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Then as now , there was a Democrat-controlled House and a Republican-controlled Senate .
For those who recall the 2000 presidential race—Republican George W. Bush versus Democrat Al Gore—in which the Supreme Court settled the dispute between them over Florida ’ s electoral votes , the assumption might be that a postelection dispute would be settled in court .
But the 2000 battle was a historical anomaly , as three other disputed outcomes were decided in Congress .
The Transition Integrity Project , co-founded by Georgetown University law professor Rosa Brooks and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Berggruen Institute think tank , included numerous political veterans for “ war games.
” They included former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele and former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol , both critics of President Donald Trump , to represent Republicans , and John Podesta , chairman of Hillary Clinton ’ s 2016 presidential campaign , former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile , and former Michigan Gov .
Jennifer Granholm for the Democratic side .
One of the project ’ s 2020 “ war games ” has former Vice President Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump winning the Electoral College .
Podesta , playing the role of Biden , refuses to concede the race and claims “ voter suppression.
” The party persuades Democratic governors in states Trump carried to send Democratic electors to the Electoral College .
The project ’ s scenario says the Democratic majority in the House would unilaterally name the Democrat president , but the Republican-controlled Senate would recognize the incumbent president .
Under the Constitution , the House is authorized to decide the presidency if no candidate has a majority of Electoral College @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1824 .
As an aside to this hypothetical scenario , California , Oregon , and Washington threaten to secede from the union if Trump becomes president for a second term .
In 1876 , the country was barely a decade removed from the Civil War and seemed to begin the year with the goodwill of patriotically celebrating the centennial of the Declaration of Independence .
However , growing Northern fatigue with Reconstruction in the South and a string of scandals in the administration of President Ulysses S. Grant , a Republican , presented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House .
On Nov. 7 , 1876 , Tilden , the governor of New York , won the national popular vote 4,288,546 to 4,034,311 votes for Hayes , the governor of Ohio , and what appeared at first to be a margin of 184 for Tilden to 165 for Hayes in the Electoral College .
Most historians today think it ’ s difficult to know who really won the popular vote because of the mass voter suppression in the South of freed slaves , as Democrats used lynching and riots to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of reports of Democrats voting twice and shredding other ballots , Republican Party operative Daniel Sickles telegraphed the Republican governors of South Carolina , Florida , and Louisiana to say , “ With your state sure for Hayes , he is elected .
Hold your state.
” South Carolina Gov .
Daniel Chamberlain was first to respond on a telegraph , “ All right .
South Carolina is for Hayes .
Need more troops.
” Three days after the election , Nov. 10 , Grant told Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman , commanding federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Either party can afford to be disappointed by the result , but the country can not afford to have the result tainted by suspicion of illegal or false returns.
” Hayes carried Oregon .
But , to stir mischief , Oregon ’ s Democratic governor , La Fayette Grover , named one elector for Tilden after a Republican elector was disqualified .
He used a DNC legal opinion as a rational .
The 1876 dispute was different from those of 1800 and 1824 , when no candidate had a majority of votes in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1876 , the question wasn ’ t what candidate had a majority of the Electoral College vote , but about states providing competing returns , or parallel pictures of who won the states .
So , it wasn ’ t just up to the House .
The Republican-controlled Senate and Democrat-run House established a 15-member commission with five House members , five senators , and five U.S. Supreme Court justices .
With a Republican edge , the commission decided each disputed state by a 8-7 vote in favor of Hayes .
The result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ houses of Congress , and the Democratic House wasn ’ t going to give up easily , facing immense pressure from constituents .
The Transition Integrity Project predicts the potential for violence after the 2020 presidential contest .
There were certainly threats of violence in 1876 .
Angry Democratic mobs across the country held rallies , chanting “ Tilden or blood , ” and in a dozen states , club-wielding “ Tilden Minutemen ” had formed , threatening to march into Washington to take the White House for their candidate .
Tilden himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic partisan still building a vast newspaper empire at the time , called for 100,000 people “ fully armed and ready for business ” to ensure that Tilden became president .
They had more time in those days to settle election disputes , as presidents weren ’ t inaugurated until March .
On the night of Feb. 26 , 1877 , four Southern Democrats—Rep .
John Y .
Brown , newspaper publisher Henry Watterson of Kentucky , Sen. J.B. Gordon of Georgia , and Rep. W. M. Levy of Louisiana—met with four Ohio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ) and Charles Foster , Sen. Stanley Matthews , and U.S. Senator-elect John Sherman—at the Wormley House Hotel in Washington to negotiate to stop the House Democrats ’ delaying tactics to block the 15-member bipartisan commission ’ s recommendation before Inauguration Day .
They agreed to end Reconstruction , appointing a Southern Democrat to the Hayes Cabinet , as well as provide federal money for Southern infrastructure projects .
Hayes also agreed to serve only one term .
A potential second civil war was averted .
Hayes believed better infrastructure in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic growth .
He had also considered a bipartisan Cabinet , given the closeness of the election .
But the legacy of the 1876 compromise was the abrupt end to Reconstruction , which allowed generations of racist laws and what amounted to a caste system in the South for about 90 more years before federal civil rights laws .
Hayes shouldn ’ t get all the blame for that , as a Tilden administration almost surely would have made matters worse in the South .
Also , public sentiment in the North had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won outright , it might have had a more orderly wind-down , but likely would have ended .
The bigger point in the present context is that should the country face a disputed election in 2020 , there is a precedent to turn to , aside from the Supreme Court .
It was a messy precedent in 1876 , but ultimately most closely resembles what the Transition Integrity Project is expecting from 2020 .

Dystopian tales are typically based in some time far into the future and feature fictional characters.
More recently, a group of academics and politicos calling itself the Transition Integrity Project detailed some shocking scenarios of what they think could happen after the 2020 election.
Whether intentional or not, one of the group’s scenarios actually has historical precedent from the 1876 election, and in part from the 1800 and 1824 elections, as detailed in my book “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.” The book describes four presidential contests litigated long after Election Day, either in Congress or the courts.
The Transition Integrity Project presents one scenario in which, after the Republican candidate wins the Electoral College vote, but the Democrat wins the popular vote, states go rogue and send two different sets of votes to the Electoral College.
That’s almost identical to the 1876 clash between Republican nominee Rutherford B. Hayes and Democratic standard-bearer Samuel Tilden, which led to a political battle almost up until Inauguration Day, which back then was on March 4, rather than on Jan. 20.
Then as now, there was a Democrat-controlled House and a Republican-controlled Senate.
For those who recall the 2000 presidential race—Republican George W. Bush versus Democrat Al Gore—in which the Supreme Court settled the dispute between them over Florida’s electoral votes, the assumption might be that a postelection dispute would be settled in court. But the 2000 battle was a historical anomaly, as three other disputed outcomes were decided in Congress.
The Transition Integrity Project, co-founded by Georgetown University law professor Rosa Brooks and Nils Gilman, a vice president at the Berggruen Institute think tank, included numerous political veterans for “war games.”
They included former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele and former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, both critics of President Donald Trump, to represent Republicans, and John Podesta, chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Donna Brazile, and former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm for the Democratic side.
One of the project’s 2020 “war games” has former Vice President Joe Biden winning the popular vote, but Trump winning the Electoral College.
Podesta, playing the role of Biden, refuses to concede the race and claims “voter suppression.” The party persuades Democratic governors in states Trump carried to send Democratic electors to the Electoral College.
The project’s scenario says the Democratic majority in the House would unilaterally name the Democrat president, but the Republican-controlled Senate would recognize the incumbent president. Under the Constitution, the House is authorized to decide the presidency if no candidate has a majority of Electoral College votes, as happened in 1800 and 1824.
As an aside to this hypothetical scenario, California, Oregon, and Washington threaten to secede from the union if Trump becomes president for a second term.
In 1876, the country was barely a decade removed from the Civil War and seemed to begin the year with the goodwill of patriotically celebrating the centennial of the Declaration of Independence.
However, growing Northern fatigue with Reconstruction in the South and a string of scandals in the administration of President Ulysses S. Grant, a Republican, presented an opportunity for the Democrats to recapture the White House.
On Nov. 7, 1876, Tilden, the governor of New York, won the national popular vote 4,288,546 to 4,034,311 votes for Hayes, the governor of Ohio, and what appeared at first to be a margin of 184 for Tilden to 165 for Hayes in the Electoral College.
Most historians today think it’s difficult to know who really won the popular vote because of the mass voter suppression in the South of freed slaves, as Democrats used lynching and riots to scare blacks away from voting.
Aware of reports of Democrats voting twice and shredding other ballots, Republican Party operative Daniel Sickles telegraphed the Republican governors of South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana to say, “With your state sure for Hayes, he is elected. Hold your state.” South Carolina Gov. Daniel Chamberlain was first to respond on a telegraph, “All right. South Carolina is for Hayes. Need more troops.”
Three days after the election, Nov. 10, Grant told Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman, commanding federal troops in Florida and Louisiana: “Either party can afford to be disappointed by the result, but the country cannot afford to have the result tainted by suspicion of illegal or false returns.”
Hayes carried Oregon. But, to stir mischief, Oregon’s Democratic governor, La Fayette Grover, named one elector for Tilden after a Republican elector was disqualified. He used a DNC legal opinion as a rational.
The 1876 dispute was different from those of 1800 and 1824, when no candidate had a majority of votes in the Electoral College.
However, in 1876, the question wasn’t what candidate had a majority of the Electoral College vote, but about states providing competing returns, or parallel pictures of who won the states. So, it wasn’t just up to the House.
The Republican-controlled Senate and Democrat-run House established a 15-member commission with five House members, five senators, and five U.S. Supreme Court justices. With a Republican edge, the commission decided each disputed state by a 8-7 vote in favor of Hayes.
The result still had to be certified by both houses of Congress, and the Democratic House wasn’t going to give up easily, facing immense pressure from constituents.
The Transition Integrity Project predicts the potential for violence after the 2020 presidential contest. There were certainly threats of violence in 1876.
Angry Democratic mobs across the country held rallies, chanting “Tilden or blood,” and in a dozen states, club-wielding “Tilden Minutemen” had formed, threatening to march into Washington to take the White House for their candidate.
Tilden himself discouraged that. Joseph Pulitzer, a Democratic partisan still building a vast newspaper empire at the time, called for 100,000 people “fully armed and ready for business” to ensure that Tilden became president.
They had more time in those days to settle election disputes, as presidents weren’t inaugurated until March.
On the night of Feb. 26, 1877, four Southern Democrats—Rep. John Y. Brown, newspaper publisher Henry Watterson of Kentucky, Sen. J.B. Gordon of Georgia, and Rep. W. M. Levy of Louisiana—met with four Ohio Republicans—Reps. James Garfield (a future president) and Charles Foster, Sen. Stanley Matthews, and U.S. Senator-elect John Sherman—at the Wormley House Hotel in Washington to negotiate to stop the House Democrats’ delaying tactics to block the 15-member bipartisan commission’s recommendation before Inauguration Day.
They agreed to end Reconstruction, appointing a Southern Democrat to the Hayes Cabinet, as well as provide federal money for Southern infrastructure projects. Hayes also agreed to serve only one term.
A potential second civil war was averted. Hayes believed better infrastructure in the South would help heal racial divisions through economic growth. He had also considered a bipartisan Cabinet, given the closeness of the election.
But the legacy of the 1876 compromise was the abrupt end to Reconstruction, which allowed generations of racist laws and what amounted to a caste system in the South for about 90 more years before federal civil rights laws.
Hayes shouldn’t get all the blame for that, as a Tilden administration almost surely would have made matters worse in the South. Also, public sentiment in the North had turned sharply against Reconstruction. Had Hayes won outright, it might have had a more orderly wind-down, but likely would have ended.
The bigger point in the present context is that should the country face a disputed election in 2020, there is a precedent to turn to, aside from the Supreme Court. It was a messy precedent in 1876, but ultimately most closely resembles what the Transition Integrity Project is expecting from 2020.


dailysignal--2020-09-11--How a $600 Million ‘Dark Money’ Monster Helped Leftists Gain Power

Watchdog group Americans for Public Trust recently blew the whistle on the “ news ” website Courier Newsroom , which was operating as a front for ACRONYM , a Democratic-aligned group , to target 2020 swing states .
It ’ s a win for transparency , but the font of “ dark money ” for leftists is bigger— $ 600 million bigger .
Courier Newsroom is a creation of Arabella Advisors , a little-known liberal behemoth and consultancy responsible for a hidden river of cash that poured out $ 600 million in 2018 .
Arabella is the left ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have failed to notice : nonprofits—not the parties—drive our politics .
Consider two key factors that influenced the 2018 midterm elections : rivers of hidden spending by groups on the left and historic turnout among liberal voters .
If leftists gain more positions of power in the near term , they ’ ll owe much of their victory to Arabella Advisors ’ shadowy nonprofit machine .
> > > Read the Capital Research Center ’ s newest report on Arabella Advisors ’ dark money network here .
Arabella specializes in moving dark money—that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by nonprofits , who are free to keep the identities of their donors a secret—between the biggest liberal donors to activist groups that attack conservatives on health care , the courts , and everything in between .
A nexus of four in-house nonprofits , each created and run by Arabella Advisors , works hand-in-glove with professional activists to run over 300 “ pop-up ” groups : slick websites posing as grassroots activist groups that can appear and vanish in an instant .
Call it the “ Arabella Effect ” : Legions of pop-ups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into politics through nonprofits in order to tilt elections , laws , and courts in directions their donors ’ favor .
The Sixteen Thirty Fund , Arabella ’ s in-house 501 ( c ) ( 4 ) lobbying shop , sponsors numerous pop-ups intended to fool voters with names like North Carolinians for a Fair Economy and Michigan Families for Opportunity .
Virtually none of these groups reveal any connection to Arabella Advisors or the Arabella nonprofits that run them , making it nearly impossible to discover which donor actually funds them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” as you can get .
During the midterms , Arabella pop-ups like Protect Our Care and Health Care Voter—each run by hardened Democratic operatives—savaged Republicans on health care , an issue many observers agree damaged the Republican brand and helped elect politicians aligned with Arabella ’ s donors .
Arabella ’ s nonprofits funneled millions of dollars into dozens of leftist get-out-the-vote groups like the Voter Registration Project , which seeks to hike voter turnout among left-leaning constituencies .
In 2018 alone , Sixteen Thirty passed over $ 27 million through to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” for coordinating the left ’ s get-out-the-vote operations with the goal of painting the congressional map blue .
And let ’ s not forget the paid activists from Demand Justice—a front for the Sixteen Thirty Fund—who blasted Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation and regularly demand Democrats pack the Supreme Court with leftist judges .
Our research reveals that Arabella ’ s activism ramps up considerably during election years .
We can expect even more dark money and pop-up activism in 2020 .
Arabella ’ s Protect Our Care already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ room ” —not to fight the virus , but to sink Republicans in the coming election .
And the Arabella machine recently popped up a new group , the Trusted Elections Fund , with which it hopes to raise millions of dollars to take advantage of the coronavirus in order to push vote-by-mail and other schemes favored by the left .
These groups have also spent millions of dollars lobbying Congress on “ protecting ” special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into the 2016 election , federal funding of abortions , term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even—irony of ironies—the For the People Act , a bill introduced by Democrats attacking “ dark money.
” Arabella is headed by Eric Kessler , a former Clinton administration staffer who ’ s closely connected with leftist mega-donors .
We at the Capital Research Center first exposed the scheme in a groundbreaking report on the Arabella empire last year .
Since then , it ’ s only grown bigger .
Our latest report , “ The Shadow Over America , ” exposes the staggering surge of Arabella ’ s “ dark money machine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 billion between 2006 and 2018 ( the latest available year for data ) .
The network hauled in $ 635 million in 2018 alone—seven times more than the conservative Heritage Foundation and almost six times more than the billionaire Koch brothers ’ Americans for Prosperity raised that year , including their respective “ action ” arms .
Again , nonprofits—not parties—dominate .
Arabella nonprofits ’ revenues dwarfed the combined fundraising of both the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committee in the 2017-2018 election .
Both parties ’ committees together raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the Arabella network raised more than twice as much : over $ 1.2 billion .
Other than limited reporting by left-leaning Politico , this vast political machine receives almost no scrutiny from mainstream media—let alone from liberal “ dark money hawks ” like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse , D-R.I .
If liberals really want to shut big donors out of politics , they should start with the dark money powerhouses funding their own agenda .

Watchdog group Americans for Public Trust recently blew the whistle on the “news” website Courier Newsroom, which was operating as a front for ACRONYM, a Democratic-aligned group, to target 2020 swing states. It’s a win for transparency, but the font of “dark money” for leftists is bigger—$600 million bigger.
Courier Newsroom is a creation of Arabella Advisors, a little-known liberal behemoth and consultancy responsible for a hidden river of cash that poured out $600 million in 2018. Arabella is the left’s best-kept secret that proves something money-in-politics reporters have failed to notice: nonprofits—not the parties—drive our politics.
Consider two key factors that influenced the 2018 midterm elections: rivers of hidden spending by groups on the left and historic turnout among liberal voters.
If leftists gain more positions of power in the near term, they’ll owe much of their victory to Arabella Advisors’ shadowy nonprofit machine.
>>> Read the Capital Research Center’s newest report on Arabella Advisors’ dark money network here.
Arabella specializes in moving dark money—that is, funds raised for political purposes by nonprofits, who are free to keep the identities of their donors a secret—between the biggest liberal donors to activist groups that attack conservatives on health care, the courts, and everything in between.
A nexus of four in-house nonprofits, each created and run by Arabella Advisors, works hand-in-glove with professional activists to run over 300 “pop-up” groups: slick websites posing as grassroots activist groups that can appear and vanish in an instant.
Call it the “Arabella Effect”: Legions of pop-ups and gobs of unaccountable cash is pumped into politics through nonprofits in order to tilt elections, laws, and courts in directions their donors’ favor.
The Sixteen Thirty Fund, Arabella’s in-house 501(c)(4) lobbying shop, sponsors numerous pop-ups intended to fool voters with names like North Carolinians for a Fair Economy and Michigan Families for Opportunity.
Virtually none of these groups reveal any connection to Arabella Advisors or the Arabella nonprofits that run them, making it nearly impossible to discover which donor actually funds them. That’s about as “dark” as you can get.
During the midterms, Arabella pop-ups like Protect Our Care and Health Care Voter—each run by hardened Democratic operatives—savaged Republicans on health care, an issue many observers agree damaged the Republican brand and helped elect politicians aligned with Arabella’s donors.
Arabella’s nonprofits funneled millions of dollars into dozens of leftist get-out-the-vote groups like the Voter Registration Project, which seeks to hike voter turnout among left-leaning constituencies.
In 2018 alone, Sixteen Thirty passed over $27 million through to America Votes, a self-described “hub” for coordinating the left’s get-out-the-vote operations with the goal of painting the congressional map blue.
And let’s not forget the paid activists from Demand Justice—a front for the Sixteen Thirty Fund—who blasted Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation and regularly demand Democrats pack the Supreme Court with leftist judges.
Our research reveals that Arabella’s activism ramps up considerably during election years. We can expect even more dark money and pop-up activism in 2020.
Arabella’s Protect Our Care already brags about its new “coronavirus war room”—not to fight the virus, but to sink Republicans in the coming election. And the Arabella machine recently popped up a new group, the Trusted Elections Fund, with which it hopes to raise millions of dollars to take advantage of the coronavirus in order to push vote-by-mail and other schemes favored by the left.
These groups have also spent millions of dollars lobbying Congress on “protecting” special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the 2016 election, federal funding of abortions, term limits for the Supreme Court, and even—irony of ironies—the For the People Act, a bill introduced by Democrats attacking “dark money.”
Arabella is headed by Eric Kessler, a former Clinton administration staffer who’s closely connected with leftist mega-donors.
We at the Capital Research Center first exposed the scheme in a groundbreaking report on the Arabella empire last year. Since then, it’s only grown bigger.
Our latest report, “The Shadow Over America,” exposes the staggering surge of Arabella’s “dark money machine,” which poured out nearly $2 billion between 2006 and 2018 (the latest available year for data).
The network hauled in $635 million in 2018 alone—seven times more than the conservative Heritage Foundation and almost six times more than the billionaire Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity raised that year, including their respective “action” arms.
Again, nonprofits—not parties—dominate. Arabella nonprofits’ revenues dwarfed the combined fundraising of both the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committee in the 2017-2018 election. Both parties’ committees together raised roughly $501 million in that period, but the Arabella network raised more than twice as much: over $1.2 billion.
Other than limited reporting by left-leaning Politico, this vast political machine receives almost no scrutiny from mainstream media—let alone from liberal “dark money hawks” like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. If liberals really want to shut big donors out of politics, they should start with the dark money powerhouses funding their own agenda.


dailysignal--2020-09-12--Sen. Josh Hawley Calls on Netflix to Remove ‘Cuties’

Sen. Josh Hawley , R-Mo.
, demanded Friday that Netflix remove the film “ Cuties ” after the company defended it the night before in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation .
“ In early 2019 , journalists first began to report that YouTube videos of children in partial states of exposure were being ‘ inundated with comments ’ by pedophiles , exposing the children involved in the videos and other children visiting the platform to potential harm , ” Hawley writes in a letter to Netflix released Friday afternoon .
“ Now Netflix is airing a film @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coached to engage in simulated sexual acts , for cameras both onscreen and off , ” he continues in the letter .
“ Your decision to do so raises major questions of child safety and exploitation , including the possibility of copycat behavior and exploitation of child actors.
” Hawley ’ s letter comes after Netflix defended “ Cuties ” in a Thursday evening statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation , calling the film “ powerful ” and “ award-winning.
” “ Cuties is a social commentary against the sexualization of young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It ’ s an award-winning film and a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society more generally growing up–and we ’ d encourage anyone who cares about these important issues to watch the movie.
” Why did your company designate this film with a ‘ TV-MA ’ for ‘ language ’ without any mention of its graphic sexual content ?
In marketing this film , did Netflix consult with any experts or authorities on combating child sexual exploitation or the psychological and emotional impacts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his letter , Hawley also asks whether Netflix took measures to protect the “ physical , mental , and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways , ” and whether Netflix chose to market the film “ with a poster solely depicting scantily clad preteens in sexually suggestive positions.
” Why did your company choose to market this film with a poster different from the French original , which depicts children throwing confetti in the street .
What internal algorithmic designations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and what are the primary algorithmic characteristics of the film ’ s primary viewership as of today , September 11 , 2020 ?
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of this original content , email [ email protected ] .

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., demanded Friday that Netflix remove the film “Cuties” after the company defended it the night before in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.
“In early 2019, journalists first began to report that YouTube videos of children in partial states of exposure were being ‘inundated with comments’ by pedophiles, exposing the children involved in the videos and other children visiting the platform to potential harm,” Hawley writes in a letter to Netflix released Friday afternoon.
“Now Netflix is airing a film called ‘Cuties’ depicting children being coached to engage in simulated sexual acts, for cameras both onscreen and off,” he continues in the letter.
“Your decision to do so raises major questions of child safety and exploitation, including the possibility of copycat behavior and exploitation of child actors.”
Hawley’s letter comes after Netflix defended “Cuties” in a Thursday evening statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation, calling the film “powerful” and “award-winning.”
“Cuties is a social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” a Netflix spokeswoman said. “It’s an award-winning film and a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society more generally growing up–and we’d encourage anyone who cares about these important issues to watch the movie.”
Hawley’s letter poses several questions to Netflix:
Why did your company designate this film with a ‘TV-MA’ for ‘language’ without any mention of its graphic sexual content? In marketing this film, did Netflix consult with any experts or authorities on combating child sexual exploitation or the psychological and emotional impacts of the sexualization of minors?
In marketing this film, did Netflix consult with any law enforcement authorities or experts about the possibility of copycat behavior, such as the viewing and imitation of hardcore pornography, by children who may see this film?
In his letter, Hawley also asks whether Netflix took measures to protect the “physical, mental, and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways,” and whether Netflix chose to market the film “with a poster solely depicting scantily clad preteens in sexually suggestive positions.”
Hawley adds:
Why did your company choose to market this film with a poster different from the French original, which depicts children throwing confetti in the street. What internal algorithmic designations has Netflix appended to this film, and what are the primary algorithmic characteristics of the film’s primary viewership as of today, September 11, 2020?
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


dailysignal--2020-09-14--Trump, Newsom Shun Heated Partisanship in Confronting California Wildfires

California Gov .
Gavin Newsom personally thanked President Donald Trump on Monday for responding in “ record ” time to requests for assistance as wildfires rage across his state ’ s forests .
“ I want to thank you and acknowledge the work that you ’ ve done to be immediate in terms of your response to our requests , ” Newsom , a Democrat , said in meeting on the wildfires with Trump , a Republican , and other federal officials during a briefing at the Sacramento McClellan Airport in McClellan Park , California .
“ This may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the [ fire management assistance grant ] support , as well as the major disaster declaration , which you referenced on Aug. 22 , which was profoundly significant , not only to help us support our mutual aid system , but also individuals that are in desperate need of support , ” the California governor added .
Trump and Newsom were joined by federal , state , and local emergency management officials .
“ I know we come from different sides of the planet , but we actually have a good relationship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Newsom during their meeting , according to pool press reports .
“ It ’ s a big problem , and it will get solved , ” the president said of the wildfires .
“ We say , ‘ God bless you ’ to those who were killed in this serious fire .
We are showing and giving support to the people of California.
” Accompanying Trump were acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf and Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Peter Gaynor , among others .
“ We ’ ve known each other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I value , ” Newsom told Trump , as he built a case for blaming climate change for the wildfires , adding : We feel very strongly the hots are getting hotter , the dries are getting drier .
Something has happened to the plumbing of the world , and we come from a perspective , humbly , that we assert the science that climate change is real .
Please respect the difference of opinion out here with respect to the fundamental issue of climate change .
But when another speaker mentioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president , Trump said : “ It will start getting cooler .
… Just watch .
I don ’ t think science knows , actually.
” Newsom said 56 % of the land in California is federally owned , and pressed Trump on the federal government ’ s responsibility for better forest management .
“ It ’ s good to have you back in the state , ” Newsom told Trump , before explaining the severity of the wildfire problem : We ’ ve got fires all the way at the border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the border with Mexico ; 2.8 million acres just in the last 30 days have burned—3.2 million over the course of this calendar year .
We ’ ve made great progress over the last few weeks—though , tragically , we ’ ve lost 24 lives so far .
We can agree to disagree on the politics of this , but let me just acknowledge two things briefly : There ’ s no question … that we have not done justice on our forest management .
I want to thank you for supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involved in combating the fires .
“ I want to thank all of the FEMA people for doing a great job .
And thank you to Gavin Newsom , acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf , and all of the people joining us today.
” After the event Trump delivered remarks in McClellan Park during a ceremony in which he awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross to seven members of the California National Guard for their rescue efforts Sept. 5 during the wildfires .

California Gov. Gavin Newsom personally thanked President Donald Trump on Monday for responding in “record” time to requests for assistance as wildfires rage across his state’s forests.
“I want to thank you and acknowledge the work that you’ve done to be immediate in terms of your response to our requests,” Newsom, a Democrat, said in meeting on the wildfires with Trump, a Republican, and other federal officials during a briefing at the Sacramento McClellan Airport in McClellan Park, California.
“This may be a record that the state has received in the [fire management assistance grant] support, as well as the major disaster declaration, which you referenced on Aug. 22, which was profoundly significant, not only to help us support our mutual aid system, but also individuals that are in desperate need of support,” the California governor added.
Trump and Newsom were joined by federal, state, and local emergency management officials.
“I know we come from different sides of the planet, but we actually have a good relationship. Good man,” Trump said of Newsom during their meeting, according to pool press reports.
“It’s a big problem, and it will get solved,” the president said of the wildfires. “We say, ‘God bless you’ to those who were killed in this serious fire. We are showing and giving support to the people of California.”
Accompanying Trump were acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf and Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Peter Gaynor, among others.
“We’ve known each other too long, and the working relationship, I value,” Newsom told Trump, as he built a case for blaming climate change for the wildfires, adding:
We feel very strongly the hots are getting hotter, the dries are getting drier. Something has happened to the plumbing of the world, and we come from a perspective, humbly, that we assert the science that climate change is real. Please respect the difference of opinion out here with respect to the fundamental issue of climate change.
Trump responded: “Absolutely.”
But when another speaker mentioned climate change and that science disagrees with the president, Trump said: “It will start getting cooler. … Just watch. I don’t think science knows, actually.”
Newsom said 56% of the land in California is federally owned, and pressed Trump on the federal government’s responsibility for better forest management.
“It’s good to have you back in the state,” Newsom told Trump, before explaining the severity of the wildfire problem:
We’ve got fires all the way at the border of Oregon, all the way down to the border with Mexico; 2.8 million acres just in the last 30 days have burned—3.2 million over the course of this calendar year. We’ve made great progress over the last few weeks—though, tragically, we’ve lost 24 lives so far. We can agree to disagree on the politics of this, but let me just acknowledge two things briefly: There’s no question … that we have not done justice on our forest management. I want to thank you for supporting that effort.
Trump praised all those involved in combating the fires.
“I want to thank all of the FEMA people for doing a great job. And thank you to Gavin Newsom, acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, and all of the people joining us today.”
After the event Trump delivered remarks in McClellan Park during a ceremony in which he awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross to seven members of the California National Guard for their rescue efforts Sept. 5 during the wildfires.


dailysignal--2020-09-17--4 Key Moments From Trump’s Speech on History, Critical Race Theory

President Donald Trump , in Constitution Day remarks , drew a direct connection between the riots and mayhem in the streets to what schools are teaching about America .
“ Our mission is to defend the legacy of America ’ s founding , the virtue of America ’ s heroes , and the nobility of the American character , ” the president said at the National Archives Museum Thursday for White House Conference on American History .
“ We must clear away the twisted web of lies in our schools and classrooms , and teach our children the magnificent truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump announced actions to promote “ patriotic education , ” and unleashed an attack on several sacred cows of the left such as cancel culture , critical race theory , The New York Times ’ 1619 Project and the looting and arson occurring across the country .
Delivering the speech on the 233rd anniversary of the Constitution , Trump praised the historical document as being “ the product of centuries of tradition , wisdom , and experience.
” “ No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ Yet , as we gather this afternoon , a radical movement is attempting to demolish this treasured and precious inheritance .
We can ’ t let that happen.
” Here ’ s four key moments from the speech .
The president announced two actions to promote more pro-American education in schools .
“ Our youth will be taught to love America with all of their heart and soul , ” Trump said .
“ We will save this cherished inheritance for our children , for their children , and for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the National Endowment for the Humanities is awarding a grant to support a pro-American curriculum in schools .
He also announced that he will be signing an executive order establishing the 1776 Commission to promote patriotic education .
“ It will encourage our educators to teach our children about the miracle of American history and make plans to honor the 250th anniversary of our founding , ” the president said of the 1776 Commission .
This is an important point to draw attention to , said Lindsey Burke , director of the Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The president is right to shine a spotlight on the negative effects of critical theory , taught throughout colleges , particularly colleges of education , and which makes its way down through K-12 schools , ” Burke told The Daily Signal .
“ And the administration is right to point to the inaccuracies of the 1619 Project , which should continue to be noted .
More parents will now be aware of this content — which paints a negative picture of America — making its way into their children ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation , and that ’ s a message that children should hear.
” The president added that a “ radical movement ” is attempting to demolish this treasured American history .
“ The left-wing mobs have torn down statues of our founders , desecrated our memorials , and carried out a campaign of violence and anarchy , ” Trump said .
“ Far left demonstrators have chanted the words , ‘ America was never great.
’ The left has launched a vicious and violent assault on law enforcement – the universal symbol of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump added that politicians , establishment media and even large corporations have sided with those causing the mayhem .
“ Whether it is the mob on the street or the cancel culture in the boardroom , the goal is the same : To silence dissent , to scare you out of speaking the truth and to bully Americans into abandoning their values , their heritage and their very way of life , ” Trump said .
“ We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our history , and our country , for citizens of every race , color , religion and creed.
” During his speech , Trump drew a correlation between the riots and education .
“ The left-wing rioting and mayhem are the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools , ” Trump said .
“ It has gone on far too long .
Our children are instructed from propaganda tracts , like those of Howard Zinn , that try to make students ashamed of their own history.
” Howard Zinn is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost entirely on the negative aspects of American history .
The Times ’ 1619 Project contends the United States was founded on principle of advancing slavery .
The claims of the project have been challenged by historians on the right and left .
The president said the narratives pushed by the left resemble anti-American propaganda pushed by the country ’ s adversaries .
Trump talked about critical race theory as an example , which he called a Marxist doctrine that says even children are complicit in racism and society must be radically transformed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ framework that contends individuals are either oppressed or are oppressors based on their skin color .
“ Teaching this horrible doctrine to our children is a form of child abuse in the truest sense of those words , ” Trump said .
“ For many years now , the radicals have mistaken Americans ’ silence for weakness .
They are wrong.
” “ There is no more powerful force than a parent ’ s love for their children – and patriotic moms and dads are going to demand that their children are no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Trump added .
“ American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools , cancel culture at work , or the repression of traditional faith , culture , and values in the public square.
” Trump noted that he banned the promotion of critical race theory being promoted in the federal government through employee training programs that focus on “ white privilege ” or that the United States is an inherently racist country .
“ Critical race theory , the 1619 Project , and the crusade against American history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if not removed , will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together , ” Trump said .
“ That is why I recently banned training in this prejudiced ideology from the federal government and banned it in the strongest matter possible.
” The president said such propaganda is a departure from the civil rights movement .

President Donald Trump, in Constitution Day remarks, drew a direct connection between the riots and mayhem in the streets to what schools are teaching about America.
“Our mission is to defend the legacy of America’s founding, the virtue of America’s heroes, and the nobility of the American character,” the president said at the National Archives Museum Thursday for the White House Conference on American History. “We must clear away the twisted web of lies in our schools and classrooms, and teach our children the magnificent truth about our country.”
In his remarks, Trump announced actions to promote “patriotic education,” and unleashed an attack on several sacred cows of the left such as cancel culture, critical race theory, The New York Times’ 1619 Project, and the looting and arson occurring across the country.
Want to better access to more videos from The Daily Signal? Subscribe to our YouTube channel! Just go here: youtube.com/dailysignal
Delivering the speech on the 233rd anniversary of the Constitution, Trump praised the historical document as being “the product of centuries of tradition, wisdom, and experience.”
“No political document has done more to advance the human condition or propel the engine of progress,” Trump said. “Yet, as we gather this afternoon, a radical movement is attempting to demolish this treasured and precious inheritance. We can’t let that happen.”
Here’s four key moments from the speech.
1. Policy Actions for ‘Patriotic Education’
The president announced two actions to promote more pro-American education in schools.
“Our youth will be taught to love America with all of their heart and soul,” Trump said. “We will save this cherished inheritance for our children, for their children, and for every generation to come.”
Trump announced the National Endowment for the Humanities is awarding a grant to support a pro-American curriculum in schools. He also announced that he will be signing an executive order establishing the 1776 Commission to promote patriotic education.
“It will encourage our educators to teach our children about the miracle of American history and make plans to honor the 250th anniversary of our founding,” the president said of the 1776 Commission.
This is an important point to draw attention to, said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at The Heritage Foundation.
“The president is right to shine a spotlight on the negative effects of critical theory, taught throughout colleges, particularly colleges of education, and which makes its way down through K-12 schools,” Burke told The Daily Signal. “And the administration is right to point to the inaccuracies of the 1619 Project, which should continue to be noted. More parents will now be aware of this content—which paints a negative picture of America—making its way into their children’s schools. America is a truly exceptional nation, and that’s a message that children should hear.”
2. Cancel Culture and the ‘Left-Wing Mobs’
The president added that a “radical movement” is attempting to demolish this treasured American history.
“The left-wing mobs have torn down statues of our Founders, desecrated our memorials, and carried out a campaign of violence and anarchy,” Trump said. “Far-left demonstrators have chanted the words, ‘America was never great.’ The left has launched a vicious and violent assault on law enforcement—the universal symbol of the rule of law in America.”
Trump added that politicians, establishment media, and even large corporations have sided with those causing the mayhem.
“Whether it is the mob on the street or the cancel culture in the boardroom, the goal is the same: To silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth and to bully Americans into abandoning their values, their heritage and their very way of life,” Trump said.
“We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny,” the president added. “We will reclaim our history, and our country, for citizens of every race, color, religion, and creed.”
3. 1619 Project, Howard Zinn, and ‘Warped, Distorted’ History
During his speech, Trump drew a correlation between the riots and education.
“The left-wing rioting and mayhem are the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools,” Trump said. “It has gone on far too long. Our children are instructed from propaganda tracts, like those of Howard Zinn, that try to make students ashamed of their own history.”
Howard Zinn is a liberal historian whose work has focused almost entirely on the negative aspects of American history.
Trump continued:
The left has warped, distorted the American story with deception, falsehoods, and lies. There is no better example than The New York Times’ totally discredited 1619 Project. … America’s founding set in motion the unstoppable chain of events that abolished slavery, secured civil rights, defeated communism and fascism, and built the most fair, equal, and prosperous nation in human history.
The Times’ 1619 Project contends the United States was founded on principle of advancing slavery. The claims of the project have been challenged by historians on the right and left.
The president said the narratives pushed by the left resemble anti-American propaganda pushed by the country’s adversaries.
4. Teaching Critical Race Theory Is ‘Child Abuse’
Trump talked about critical race theory as an example, which he called a Marxist doctrine that says even children are complicit in racism and society must be radically transformed.
Critical race theory is a theoretical framework that contends individuals are either oppressed or are oppressors based on their skin color.
“Teaching this horrible doctrine to our children is a form of child abuse in the truest sense of those words,” Trump said. “For many years now, the radicals have mistaken Americans’ silence for weakness. They are wrong.”
“There is no more powerful force than a parent’s love for their children—and patriotic moms and dads are going to demand that their children are no longer fed hateful lies about this country,” Trump added. “American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools, cancel culture at work, or the repression of traditional faith, culture, and values in the public square.”
Trump noted that he banned the promotion of critical race theory in the federal government through employee training programs that focus on “white privilege” or that the United States is an inherently racist country.
“Critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda—an ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together,” Trump said. “That is why I recently banned training in this prejudiced ideology from the federal government and banned it in the strongest matter possible.”
The president said such propaganda is a departure from the civil rights movement.