westernjournal--2020-02-02--Facebook Follows China’s Lead, Will Remove ‘False’ Coronavirus Posts

Facebook has announced that it will wage war on what it deems to be misinformation about the coronavirus that is spreading across China and popping up around the globe .
The new policy was oultined in a Facebook blog post last week by Kang-Xing Jin , Facebook ’ s head of health “ As the global public health community works to keep people safe , Facebook is supporting their work in several ways , most especially by working to limit the spread of misinformation and harmful content about the virus and connecting people to helpful information , ” Jin wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact-checkers are continuing their work reviewing content and debunking false claims that are spreading related to the coronavirus .
When they rate information as false , we limit its spread on Facebook and Instagram and show people accurate information from these partners .
We also send notifications to people who already shared or are trying to share this content to alert them that it ’ s been fact-checked , ” he wrote .
“ We will also start to remove content with false claims or conspiracy theories that have been flagged by leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that could cause harm to people who believe them .
We are doing this as an extension of our existing policies to remove content that could cause physical harm , ” he wrote .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Jin also said that information about alleged cures will also be blocked .
He specifically cited a claim that drinking bleach cures the coronavirus .
Facebook ’ s action on the coronavirus is in contrast to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which it has said it will allow users to determine the veracity of competing political claims .
In China , officials are also cracking down on anyone who talks about the nation ’ s response to the virus , which has come under attack as the toll of deaths and infected Chinese has risen , the New York Post reported .
WeChat , a Chinese social media app , said users who spread rumors about the virus could face seven years in jail , the Post reported .
Other social media giants are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the coronavirus , CNN reported .
Google will provide information from the World Health Organization to users who search for information on the coronavirus .
Twitter has begun responding to users who search for information by highlighting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
Some commentators said social media is an important conduit for information because Americans have such low trust in government and the mainstream media .
“ Whenever a threat like a potentially global infectious disease appears in the media , members of the public try to make sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Adrian Bangerter , a professor at the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland , said , according to MarketWatch .
“ If trust is low , then there is a risk that alternative explanations like conspiracy theories may complicate efforts to contain disease spread.
” “ The health system in this country is not beloved , ” Matt Jacob , a public health consultant , told MarketWatch .
“ But most Americans have a fairly limited knowledge of science and medicine , and that creates a challenge.
” We are committed to truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Read our editorial standards .

Facebook has announced that it will wage war on what it deems to be misinformation about the coronavirus that is spreading across China and popping up around the globe.
The new policy was oultined in a Facebook blog post last week by Kang-Xing Jin, Facebook’s head of health
“As the global public health community works to keep people safe, Facebook is supporting their work in several ways, most especially by working to limit the spread of misinformation and harmful content about the virus and connecting people to helpful information,” Jin wrote.
“Our global network of third-party fact-checkers are continuing their work reviewing content and debunking false claims that are spreading related to the coronavirus. When they rate information as false, we limit its spread on Facebook and Instagram and show people accurate information from these partners. We also send notifications to people who already shared or are trying to share this content to alert them that it’s been fact-checked,” he wrote.
“We will also start to remove content with false claims or conspiracy theories that have been flagged by leading global health organizations and local health authorities that could cause harm to people who believe them. We are doing this as an extension of our existing policies to remove content that could cause physical harm,” he wrote.
Jin also said that information about alleged cures will also be blocked. He specifically cited a claim that drinking bleach cures the coronavirus.
Facebook’s action on the coronavirus is in contrast to its policy about fact-checking political ads, in which it has said it will allow users to determine the veracity of competing political claims.
In China, officials are also cracking down on anyone who talks about the nation’s response to the virus, which has come under attack as the toll of deaths and infected Chinese has risen, the New York Post reported.
WeChat, a Chinese social media app, said users who spread rumors about the virus could face seven years in jail, the Post reported.
Facebook’s crackdown drew mixed reviews.
This is actually big news on the coronavirus and how dangerous it is! MSM and social media like Twitter and Facebook can try to cover it up but the truth is coming out! https://t.co/PeFCRqQG1W — Suze Michelini (@emilia_suze) February 1, 2020
NEW: Facebook, Google and Twitter are scrambling to confront an early wave of misinformation about coronavirus, with hoaxes on cures and its origin. I took a look at the private groups, YouTube channels and fast-spreading tweets: https://t.co/y08CQHZlxM — Tony Romm (@TonyRomm) January 27, 2020
Other social media giants are also trying to manage information readers get about the coronavirus, CNN reported.
Google will provide information from the World Health Organization to users who search for information on the coronavirus. Twitter has begun responding to users who search for information by highlighting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Should Facebook be censoring coronavirus posts? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 8% (3 Votes) No: 92% (33 Votes)
Some commentators said social media is an important conduit for information because Americans have such low trust in government and the mainstream media.
“Whenever a threat like a potentially global infectious disease appears in the media, members of the public try to make sense of the nature of the threat,” Adrian Bangerter, a professor at the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland, said, according to MarketWatch.
“If trust is low, then there is a risk that alternative explanations like conspiracy theories may complicate efforts to contain disease spread.”
“The health system in this country is not beloved,” Matt Jacob, a public health consultant, told MarketWatch. “But most Americans have a fairly limited knowledge of science and medicine, and that creates a challenge.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--China Gut-Punched as 2nd Deadly Disease Breaks Out

The Chinese province adjacent to the one where the coronavirus first appeared is facing an outbreak of H5N1 bird flu , according to news reports .
What officials said was a highly pathogenic strain was reported in Hunan province , just south of Hunei province where the coronavirus-plagued city of Wuhan is located , the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs announced Saturday , according to Reuters .
The government reported that the outbreak took place on a farm that had 7,850 chickens , 4,500 of which died due to the disease .
More than 17,000 poultry were later killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the government reported .
The World Health Organization said the bird flu causes severe respiratory disease in birds and is contagious to humans .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ Human cases of H5N1 avian influenza occur occasionally , but it is difficult to transmit the infection from person to person .
When people do become infected , the mortality rate is about 60 percent , ” WHO reported on its website .
Despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ panic .
“ Almost all cases of H5N1 infection in people have been associated with close contact with infected live or dead birds , or H5N1-contaminated environments .
The virus does not infect humans easily , and spread from person to person appears to be unusual .
There is no evidence that the disease can be spread to people through properly prepared and thoroughly cooked food , ” the WHO said .
However , the organization said that if the virus were to mutate and become easily transmissible to humans , there could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H5N1 infection in humans can cause severe disease and has a high mortality rate .
If the H5N1 virus were to change and become easily transmissible from person to person while retaining its capacity to cause severe disease , the consequences for public health could be very serious , ” it said .
This is not the first report of bird flu in China .
Last June , an outbreak of H5N6 flu was reported in western China , according to Reuters , while in January another outbreak of H5N6 was reported there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The bird flu outbreak comes as a gut-punch to a China already reeling from a coronavirus outbreak .
As of Saturday , 259 Chinese had died from the virus and about 12,000 infections had been confirmed , according to The New York Times .
The spread of the virus has been linked to Chinese unwillingness to announce in December that the initial cases reported in Wuhan posed a serious threat to public health .
“ This was an issue of inaction , ” Yanzhong Huang , a senior fellow for global health at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to The New York Times .
“ There was no action in Wuhan from the local health department to alert people to the threat.
” Initial Chinese statements , instead , suggested the virus was under control “ Projecting optimism and confidence , if you don ’ t have the data , is a very dangerous strategy , ” Alexandra Phelan , a faculty research instructor in microbiology and immunology at Georgetown University , told The Times .
“ It undermines the legitimacy of the government in messaging .
And public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The Chinese province adjacent to the one where the coronavirus first appeared is facing an outbreak of H5N1 bird flu, according to news reports.
What officials said was a highly pathogenic strain was reported in Hunan province, just south of Hubei province where the coronavirus-plagued city of Wuhan is located, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs announced Saturday, according to Reuters.
The government reported that the outbreak took place on a farm that had 7,850 chickens, 4,500 of which died due to the disease.
More than 17,000 poultry were later killed to avoid the spread of the disease, the government reported.
The World Health Organization said the bird flu causes severe respiratory disease in birds and is contagious to humans.
“Human cases of H5N1 avian influenza occur occasionally, but it is difficult to transmit the infection from person to person. When people do become infected, the mortality rate is about 60 percent,” WHO reported on its website.
Despite the high mortality rate, WHO cautioned against panic.
“Almost all cases of H5N1 infection in people have been associated with close contact with infected live or dead birds, or H5N1-contaminated environments. The virus does not infect humans easily, and spread from person to person appears to be unusual. There is no evidence that the disease can be spread to people through properly prepared and thoroughly cooked food,” the WHO said.
However, the organization said that if the virus were to mutate and become easily transmissible to humans, there could be a major health concern.
Does this make you more worried about possible health problems spreading out of China? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 92% (1122 Votes) No: 8% (96 Votes)
“H5N1 infection in humans can cause severe disease and has a high mortality rate. If the H5N1 virus were to change and become easily transmissible from person to person while retaining its capacity to cause severe disease, the consequences for public health could be very serious,” it said.
This is not the first report of bird flu in China. Last June, an outbreak of H5N6 flu was reported in western China, according to Reuters, while in January another outbreak of H5N6 was reported there, according to another Reuters report.
Fantastic. A brand new bird flu outbreak in China that has a 60% death rate.
On top of the #CoronaVirus pandemic they are dealing with.
This will go well. pic.twitter.com/STX9nFMVIa — SpartanWire (@SpartanWire) February 1, 2020
The bird flu outbreak comes as a gut-punch to a China already reeling from a coronavirus outbreak. As of Saturday, 259 Chinese had died from the virus and about 12,000 infections had been confirmed, according to The New York Times.
The spread of the virus has been linked to Chinese unwillingness to announce in December that the initial cases reported in Wuhan posed a serious threat to public health.
“This was an issue of inaction,” Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, said, according to The New York Times. “There was no action in Wuhan from the local health department to alert people to the threat.”
Initial Chinese statements, instead, suggested the virus was under control
“Projecting optimism and confidence, if you don’t have the data, is a very dangerous strategy,” Alexandra Phelan, a faculty research instructor in microbiology and immunology at Georgetown University, told The Times.
“It undermines the legitimacy of the government in messaging. And public health is dependent on public trust,” she said.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Watch Kamala’s Face as Schumer Scolds Her for Laughing During Live Impeachment Conference

Looks like Kamala Harris is going to be in for detention when Principal Schumer gets done with her .
The impeachment of President Trump , as we know from the Democrats , is nothing if not a somber affair .
It was a moment of sadness .
Somber sadness for our imperiled republic that made sad Americans feel somber about their sadness , and even sad about those somber pens Democrats handed out when they signed the sad articles of impeachment that would somberly address this grave and somber peril Donald Trump had put us in .
One gets the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and “ somber ” are repeated not because that ’ s now any of the Democrats really feel , but instead as a kind of mantra they have to remember in order to act that way .
It ’ s difficult for them to pretend this is anything but a moment of glee for liberals — a realization of three years of effort that finally ended with something they could use to justify branding President Trump with the scarlet “ I.
” Sen. Harris had a bit of trouble remembering herself in public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment in which Senate Minority Leader Schumer ended up scolding the California Democrat on camera .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted According to Fox News , the incident happened as Schumer was holding a Capitol Hill news conference , flanked by some Democrat heavies , to discuss in somber tones how Republicans were blocking additional witnesses to the Trump impeachment trial .
( Additional witnesses that should never , ever include Hunter or Joe Biden , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re a filthy conspiracy theorist , of course . )
So , as you could see , this was a super-serious moment — right up until Kamala Harris decided to break character .
This very quickly got some notice .
It almost feels a little unfair that Kamala Harris was the one who got in trouble for this .
Sen. Sherrod Brown from Ohio was also messing around on the Democrat dais .
Only Sen. Patty Murray of Washington was well-behaved .
Dare I say sexism and racism were involved here ?
Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viral .
One user deployed Joe Biden ’ s infamous “ look , fat ” insult : RELATED : Biden Goes on Defense as Next Democratic Debate Features All White Candidates So Far Oh , look , someone noticed the same thing I did !
And then there were some who noticed other things : I ’ m sure that had nothing to do with anything .
The media would never cover for Democrats at a moment like this .
But then there were those on Twitter who remembered what this was really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all about a somber and sad moment for our nation .
It ’ s so somber and sad House Speaker Nancy Pelosi actually said she was “ prayerful ” on several occasions .
( I was under the impression only Pete Buttigieg was allowed to reference religion within the Democratic Party these days . )
Well , if this was all prayerfulness , it looks like Sen. Harris got caught making faces in the back pews while they were asking for new witnesses .
Principal Schumer will no doubt have given her a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruler after this one .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Looks like Kamala Harris is going to be in for detention when Principal Schumer gets done with her.
The impeachment of President Trump, as we know from the Democrats, is nothing if not a somber affair. It was a moment of sadness. Somber sadness for our imperiled republic that made sad Americans feel somber about their sadness, and even sad about those somber pens Democrats handed out when they signed the sad articles of impeachment that would somberly address this grave and somber peril Donald Trump had put us in.
One gets the feeling that the words “sadness” and “somber” are repeated not because that’s how any of the Democrats really feel, but instead as a kind of mantra they have to remember in order to act that way.
It’s difficult for them to pretend this is anything but a moment of glee for liberals — a realization of three years of effort that finally ended with something they could use to justify branding President Trump with the scarlet “I.”
Sen. Harris had a bit of trouble remembering herself in public on Friday — which led to a moment in which Senate Minority Leader Schumer ended up scolding the California Democrat on camera.
According to Fox News, the incident happened as Schumer was holding a Capitol Hill news conference, flanked by some Democrat heavies, to discuss in somber tones how Republicans were blocking additional witnesses to the Trump impeachment trial. (Additional witnesses that should never, ever include Hunter or Joe Biden, and if you say so you’re a filthy conspiracy theorist, of course.)
So, as you could see, this was a super-serious moment — right up until Kamala Harris decided to break character.
Chuck Schumer scolds Kamala Harris for messing around at impeachment press conferencehttps://t.co/i2eUI8vEbM pic.twitter.com/khIlDx67Kr — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) January 31, 2020
This very quickly got some notice.
When you worked really hard on the presentation but the rest of the team that didn’t do any work won’t stop giggling behind you pic.twitter.com/OeorVn44a7 — Anang Mittal अनंग मित्तल (@anangbhai) January 31, 2020
It almost feels a little unfair that Kamala Harris was the one who got in trouble for this. Sen. Sherrod Brown from Ohio was also messing around on the Democrat dais. Only Sen. Patty Murray of Washington was well-behaved. Dare I say sexism and racism were involved here?
Well, whatever the case, this went viral. One user deployed Joe Biden’s infamous “look, fat” insult:
Oh, look, someone noticed the same thing I did!
Oh my! Is Schumer a racist? Sexist? — WontDance4Soros (@WontMarch4Soros) January 31, 2020
Speak some truth:
If a Republican did it they would call it mansplaining. — “By the book” is a bit of a tell, no? (@FollowFew1) January 31, 2020
And then there were some who noticed other things:
Watch: Chuck Schumer scolded Kamala Harris this morning for laughing & smiling during an impeachment press conference. Notice how the reporter starts their question over so the clip they use won’t have Kamala smiling & laughing? ?pic.twitter.com/PRKXCZAXVs — Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) January 31, 2020
I’m sure that had nothing to do with anything. The media would never cover for Democrats at a moment like this.
But then there were those on Twitter who remembered what this was really all about:
Remember: Democrats said that #impeachment was “sad” and “somber.” Did Senator Harris not get the memo? ? https://t.co/GdK3vlooCC — Oversight Committee Republicans (@GOPoversight) January 31, 2020
Chuck Schumer, quite literally, wants Kamala Harris to
? curb her enthusiasm ?#Somber #Solemn pic.twitter.com/sSkayf9MbE — The Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) January 31, 2020
Remember, this was all about a somber and sad moment for our nation.
Do you think the Democrats are taking impeachment with the seriousness it deserves? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 2% (32 Votes) No: 98% (1453 Votes)
It’s so somber and sad House Speaker Nancy Pelosi actually said she was “prayerful” on several occasions. (I was under the impression only Pete Buttigieg was allowed to reference religion within the Democratic Party these days.)
Well, if this was all prayerfulness, it looks like Sen. Harris got caught making faces in the back pews while they were asking for new witnesses.
Principal Schumer will no doubt have given her a good rap on the knuckles with a ruler after this one.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--NYC Subway Equipment Sabotaged by Antifa-Backed Protesters Demanding Free Rides

Hundreds of demonstrators took to the streets and subways of New York City on Friday to protest the police presence on the New York City subway system and to demand that the subways be free .
The protests took place in Brooklyn and Manhattan , culminating in a group of 500 demonstrators jamming Grand Central Station at the 5 p.m. rush hour , according to the U.K .
Guardian .
The New York Police Department reported that it arrested 13 demonstrators and gave out 11 summonses , while Metropolitan Transit Authority police made three arrests and issued eight summonses , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fare card readers and turnstiles , scrawled graffiti on subway station walls and in some instances held open turnstiles to allow riders to get on the subway without paying .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ We pay for the metro with our taxes .
Why are we being charged then hounded if we don ’ t pay to use it ?
And of course , it ’ s disproportionately brown and black people being hounded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only gave her name as Brandy told CBS .
The MTA said the protests on the city ’ s sometimes-dangerous subways were nothing more than an added cost to the public .
“ This demonstration activity follows the dangerous pattern of previous activities that have resulted in vandalization and defacement of MTA property – clearly violating laws .
Those actions divert valuable time , money and resources away from investments in transit services that get New Yorkers to their jobs , schools , doctors and other places they need to go , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to The Guardian .
“ The MTA has zero-tolerance for any actions that threaten the safety of the public and our employees , and impede service for millions of customers .
We are monitoring conditions as we cooperate with the NYPD and MTA PD to maintain service while ensuring everyone ’ s safety.
” The protest was orchestrated by protesters who oppose the current $ 2.75 fare and the increase in police announced after a spike in crime on the subways .
According to Fox News , the protests were announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” on Tuesday .
“ The streets are ours .
The trains our ours .
The walls are ours .
This moment is ours , ” the group DecolonizeThisPlace posted .
“ There ’ s so much in the budget that can cover free transportation instead of more police .
I don ’ t understand why it ’ s going that way instead of the other way , ” protester Sydney Daniels told CBS .
Some commuters were not sympathetic .
“ I think it ’ s absurd , things aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the New York Post quoted what it said was a Westchester-bound traveler as saying .
“ Asking for free stuff , it ’ s like they ’ re 12 year olds .
They ’ re acting like children !
” Video of the events was shared on Twitter .
In an editorial on the protests , the New York Post showed little tolerance for the demonstrators .
“ This isn ’ t protest — it ’ s vandalism , at the public ’ s expense .
And the efforts to block subway entrances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much better .
And for what ?
The group ’ s goals are ‘ no cops in the MTA , free transit [ and ] no harassment.
’ These aren ’ t radicals , they ’ re children ( of whatever age ) acting out , ” the Post wrote .
“ We hope subway cameras capture enough evidence to lead to arrests and real punishment .
Someone needs to force these infants to grow up , ” it wrote .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism @ @ @ @ @ @

Hundreds of demonstrators took to the streets and subways of New York City on Friday to protest the police presence on the New York City subway system and to demand that the subways be free.
The protests took place in Brooklyn and Manhattan, culminating in a group of 500 demonstrators jamming Grand Central Station at the 5 p.m. rush hour, according to the U.K. Guardian.
The New York Police Department reported that it arrested 13 demonstrators and gave out 11 summonses, while Metropolitan Transit Authority police made three arrests and issued eight summonses, according to WCBS.
Protesters also vandalized fare card readers and turnstiles, scrawled graffiti on subway station walls and in some instances held open turnstiles to allow riders to get on the subway without paying.
I wonder where the candidates who advocate free college, free healthcare, free child care, and loan forgiveness stand on free subway rides? https://t.co/P7OjW6LWPE — Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) February 1, 2020
“We pay for the metro with our taxes. Why are we being charged then hounded if we don’t pay to use it? And of course, it’s disproportionately brown and black people being hounded and arrested,” a protester who only gave her name as Brandy told CBS.
The MTA said the protests on the city’s sometimes-dangerous subways were nothing more than an added cost to the public.
“This demonstration activity follows the dangerous pattern of previous activities that have resulted in vandalization and defacement of MTA property – clearly violating laws. Those actions divert valuable time, money and resources away from investments in transit services that get New Yorkers to their jobs, schools, doctors and other places they need to go,” said MTA Chief Security Officer Patrick Warren, according to The Guardian.
Do you think these protesters should have been arrested? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (281 Votes) No: 1% (3 Votes)
“The MTA has zero-tolerance for any actions that threaten the safety of the public and our employees, and impede service for millions of customers. We are monitoring conditions as we cooperate with the NYPD and MTA PD to maintain service while ensuring everyone’s safety.”
The protest was orchestrated by protesters who oppose the current $2.75 fare and the increase in police announced after a spike in crime on the subways.
According to Fox News, the protests were announced by an “Antifa-backed social media account” on Tuesday.
“The streets are ours. The trains our ours. The walls are ours. This moment is ours,” the group DecolonizeThisPlace posted.
“There’s so much in the budget that can cover free transportation instead of more police. I don’t understand why it’s going that way instead of the other way,” protester Sydney Daniels told CBS.
Some commuters were not sympathetic.
“I think it’s absurd, things aren’t free; things cost money,” the New York Post quoted what it said was a Westchester-bound traveler as saying. “Asking for free stuff, it’s like they’re 12 year olds. They’re acting like children!”
Video of the events was shared on Twitter.
Doing some call and response chants. “How do you spell racist?” “NYPD” and “From the A to the Z” “Public transit should be free” – cops looking on. pic.twitter.com/AF58owHb06 — Lauren Aratani (@LaurenAratani) January 31, 2020
Gathered in Restoration Plaza in Bed-Stuy, protestors facing police and shouting “cops go home” #FTP3 pic.twitter.com/nH92mrBGwE — Lauren Aratani (@LaurenAratani) January 31, 2020
I wonder where the candidates who advocate free college, free healthcare, free child care, and loan forgiveness stand on free subway rides? https://t.co/P7OjW6LWPE — Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) February 1, 2020
In an editorial on the protests, the New York Post showed little tolerance for the demonstrators.
“This isn’t protest — it’s vandalism, at the public’s expense. And the efforts to block subway entrances and otherwise disrupt service aren’t much better. And for what? The group’s goals are ‘no cops in the MTA, free transit [and] no harassment.’ These aren’t radicals, they’re children (of whatever age) acting out,” the Post wrote.
“We hope subway cameras capture enough evidence to lead to arrests and real punishment. Someone needs to force these infants to grow up,” it wrote.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Video Shows Chuck Schumer Chiding Kamala Harris for Impeachment Behavior

Prior to a news conference regarding President Donald Trump ’ s impeachment on Friday , Sen. Kamala Harris was caught on camera goofing around on stage in front of reporters .
The reporter in the video was about to ask a question , but paused when she was interrupted .
Once Harris stopped laughing , the reporter started over with her question .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted The video quickly got the attention of many viewers who saw it as an opportunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former contender for the Democratic presidential nomination — and the Democratic Party itself .
RELATED : Beyoncé and Jay-Z Caught on Camera Remaining Seated for Super Bowl National Anthem The Daily Wire reported that this wasn ’ t the first time Harris has been caught acting goofy during a time of seriousness on camera .
Two weeks ago , after Harris was sworn in as a juror in the Senate impeachment trial , she was caught with a very cheerful smile on her face before her interview with MSNBC ’ s Kasie Hunt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial .
Harris ’ facial expression changed to appear somber as soon as the cameras started rolling .
“ This is a solemn , serious moment , ” Harris said during the interview .
“ These are the most serious charges ever brought in the history of our country against a president .
The moment we just experienced is , I think , highlighting the importance of doing impartial justice and taking seriously the importance of listening to the evidence and the importance of receiving evidence , both in terms of witnesses and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American people and the Constitution of the United States , and in honor of the Constitution of the United States , require that we demand all evidence so that we can follow the facts and the evidence where they lead.
” Hunt asked Harris if she thought the Senate would run a fair trial .
“ If the United States can not conduct a fair trial , then we can talk about the beginning of the end to our democracy and our system of justice , ” Harris answered .
We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Prior to a news conference regarding President Donald Trump’s impeachment on Friday, Sen. Kamala Harris was caught on camera goofing around on stage in front of reporters.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer quickly rebuked her actions.
The reporter in the video was about to ask a question, but paused when she was interrupted.
Once Harris stopped laughing, the reporter started over with her question.
Chuck Schumer scolds Kamala Harris for messing around at impeachment press conferencehttps://t.co/i2eUI8vEbM pic.twitter.com/khIlDx67Kr — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) January 31, 2020
The video quickly got the attention of many viewers who saw it as an opportunity to poke fun at Harris — a former contender for the Democratic presidential nomination — and the Democratic Party itself.
Ol’ Chucky is so well respected within his own party pic.twitter.com/JRU84XIJSR — Justin van Sant (@justinvansant) January 31, 2020
Did he just use his body and white privilege to control a black woman? — Fruhmann (@Fruhmann1) January 31, 2020
She is not gonna like that, lol ? Schumer just scolded her like a petulant child ? Where’s the girl power squad coming to her defense ? Will she let this MAN embarrass her and get away w/ it ? — Stephanie???????? (@real_Stephanie) January 31, 2020
So glad they think this big waste of time, money and energy is funny. — Donna Kohn (@drkohn52) January 31, 2020
The Daily Wire reported that this wasn’t the first time Harris has been caught acting goofy during a time of seriousness on camera.
Two weeks ago, after Harris was sworn in as a juror in the Senate impeachment trial, she was caught with a very cheerful smile on her face before her interview with MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt in regards to the seriousness of the trial.
Harris’ facial expression changed to appear somber as soon as the cameras started rolling.
“If the Senate does not conduct a fair trial, then we can begin to talk about the end of our democracy.” @KamalaHarris discusses the Senate impeachment trial with @Kasie, calls for witnesses to be included pic.twitter.com/t04I1LyISe — Kasie DC (@KasieDC) January 16, 2020
“This is a solemn, serious moment,” Harris said during the interview.
Do Harris' actions prove that Democrats don't really view impeachment as seriously as they're pretending? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 97% (435 Votes) No: 3% (13 Votes)
“These are the most serious charges ever brought in the history of our country against a president. The moment we just experienced is, I think, highlighting the importance of doing impartial justice and taking seriously the importance of listening to the evidence and the importance of receiving evidence, both in terms of witnesses and in terms of documents.
“Because the American people and the Constitution of the United States, and in honor of the Constitution of the United States, require that we demand all evidence so that we can follow the facts and the evidence where they lead.”
Hunt asked Harris if she thought the Senate would run a fair trial.
“If the United States cannot conduct a fair trial, then we can talk about the beginning of the end to our democracy and our system of justice,” Harris answered.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Biden Falls Apart Explaining Why Impeachment Wasn’t Partisan Even Though Vote Was Down Party Lines

One of cardinal rules of linguistics is that the usage of words can and do change over time .
“ Clue ” once meant a ball of yarn .
Given that a clue is metaphorically untangling a ball of yarn , the old definition became archaic while the new one became the only one anyone knew .
“ Awful ” once meant “ reverential or respectful fear.
” My fear for the buffet at a cheap hotel is indeed respectful because I treat the possibility of food poisoning with grave respect , but “ reverential ” isn ’ t a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I would definitely call it “ awful ” in a different , more modern context .
Meanwhile , “ literally ” … well , let ’ s just not discuss the specifics of that one , because this one literally makes me want to get that aforementioned buffet food poisoning rather than contemplate that usage shift .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted However , as words that will be tough to effect some kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” seems a lot more difficult than “ literally.
” The meaning is actually very explicit .
“ Partisan , ” as an adjective , means “ feeling , showing , or deriving from strong and sometimes blind adherence to a particular party , faction , cause , or person.
” To former Vice President Joe Biden , however , a non-partisan vote means getting the left wing of the Democratic Party together with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party .
Call it a linguistic hunch , but I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ catch on .
Biden ’ s attempt at introducing a language shift came during an appearance on “ Good Morning America ” on Friday .
Most of it was stuff that was written for him , one feels , because it sounded exactly like what everyone else is saying about impeachment .
One also feels he deviated from the script slightly , which is so seldom a good idea for Joe Biden because it means he ’ ll talk about how you need to leave the record player on for Republicans at night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Like , you know , “ partisan.
” Biden — incidentally one of the country ’ s most notorious abusers of the word “ literally ” — was asked by “ Good Morning America ” host George Stephanopoulos why he thought a partisan impeachment would have been wrong in 1974 with Nixon and 1998 with Clinton but right in the case of President Donald Trump .
“ I find this defense astounding .
‘ Yeah , he did it , but it doesn ’ t matter , ' ” Biden said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican ’ s defense , but if that qualified as a Biden gaffe on this occasion we wouldn ’ t be here frittering away our time talking about it , now , would we ? )
“ I mean , George Washington is rolling over in his grave in his farewell address saying , ‘ The greatest threat to the Republic is being interfered with by foreign countries.
” And then boom went the etymological dynamite .
“ It ’ s not a partisan impeachment .
He violated the Constitution , period , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s a party-line vote , it just … reflects on those who know , in fact , in their heart and their head that , in fact , it ’ s a violation of the Constitution to do what he did.
” [ Emphasis mine ] Even if it ’ s a party-line vote , it ’ s not partisan , even though that ’ s what partisan literally means — as in literally literally , not just hipster guy talking about how he thought the latest Wes Anderson movie was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because the vote “ reflects on those who know , in fact , in their heart ” what Donald Trump did was wrong .
This is the weakest way I ’ ve heard of explaining away how partisan impeachment was by saying it wasn ’ t really partisan because , um , shrug emoji ?
In short , this is preposterous junk weasel language that somehow manages to sink beneath the dignity of a career politician .
It ’ s like saying a circle isn ’ t a circle because it doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s technically true and deliberately inaccurate at the same time .
I mean , the rest of that clip is wrong in so many ways , and not just because he ’ s lying about Trump supposedly violating the Constitution or everyone else on the Republican side knowing what they did was wrong .
It ’ s because Biden appears to be claiming that a party-line vote isn ’ t a partisan impeachment because — apparently — his party is the one involved , and he wants to pretend the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for simply “ partisan ” reasons .
America knows better than to believe that .
Even Democrats know better than to believe that .
Unfortunately for Biden , acknowledging the truth would basically invalidate everything he ’ s said about an impeachment being a divisive political decision if it were a party-line vote .
What ’ s funny is that Biden is not the only major Democrat who ’ s said something like this in the past .
In fact , I can think of one who said something arguably far more problematic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jerrold Nadler is one of the House impeachment managers behind the effort to oust Trump , but he had a different view in 1998 : I know “ that didn ’ t age well ” isn ’ t aging too well as sarcastic online commentary , but if you can think of any better summation of that speech that Nadler would literally spend taxpayer dollars to develop a nuclear-powered DeLorean so he could go back in time and erase it , I ’ d like to hear it .
That DeLorean , alas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anytime soon .
( Besides , I get the feeling our friend , former Sen. Biden of Delaware , would use it to go back and properly cite Neil Kinnock during a certain speech in the 1988 election cycle , which could theoretically change our presidential timeline considerably . )
So now , Biden is trying to turn “ partisan ” into “ bipartisan.
” To quote “ Mean Girls ” : That is so fetch !
In short : Biden , stop trying to make “ partisan ” bipartisan .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

One of cardinal rules of linguistics is that the usage of words can and do change over time.
“Clue” once meant a ball of yarn. Given that a clue is metaphorically untangling a ball of yarn, the old definition became archaic while the new one became the only one anyone knew.
“Awful” once meant “reverential or respectful fear.” My fear for the buffet at a cheap hotel is indeed respectful because I treat the possibility of food poisoning with grave respect, but “reverential” isn’t a word I would use in that situation and I would definitely call it “awful” in a different, more modern context.
Meanwhile, “literally” … well, let’s just not discuss the specifics of that one, because this one literally makes me want to get that aforementioned buffet food poisoning rather than contemplate that usage shift.
(Do I mean that literally or do mean “figuratively, but with emphasis?” I guess you’ll never know, which is why this example of definitional change makes me want to literally want to spend taxpayer money to teach millennials the definition of the word “figuratively” and promote the use of it as a substitute for “literally” as a slang word denoting emphasis. I know, I’m a conservative, but this would literally be worth it.)
However, as words that will be tough to effect some kind of legitimate definitional shift for, “partisan” seems a lot more difficult than “literally.” The meaning is actually very explicit. “Partisan,” as an adjective, means “feeling, showing, or deriving from strong and sometimes blind adherence to a particular party, faction, cause, or person.”
To former Vice President Joe Biden, however, a non-partisan vote means getting the left wing of the Democratic Party together with the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. Call it a linguistic hunch, but I don’t think this one’s gonna catch on.
Biden’s attempt at introducing a language shift came during an appearance on “Good Morning America” on Friday. Most of it was stuff that was written for him, one feels, because it sounded exactly like what everyone else is saying about impeachment.
One also feels he deviated from the script slightly, which is so seldom a good idea for Joe Biden because it means he’ll talk about how you need to leave the record player on for Republicans at night so they learn new meanings for words.
Do you think Joe Biden will win the Democrat nomination? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 13% (363 Votes) No: 87% (2460 Votes)
Like, you know, “partisan.” Biden — incidentally one of the country’s most notorious abusers of the word “literally” — was asked by “Good Morning America” host George Stephanopoulos why he thought a partisan impeachment would have been wrong in 1974 with Nixon and 1998 with Clinton but right in the case of President Donald Trump.
“I find this defense astounding. ‘Yeah, he did it, but it doesn’t matter,'” Biden said. (Which isn’t quite any Republican’s defense, but if that qualified as a Biden gaffe on this occasion we wouldn’t be here frittering away our time talking about it, now, would we?)
“I mean, George Washington is rolling over in his grave in his farewell address saying, ‘The greatest threat to the Republic is being interfered with by foreign countries.”
And then boom went the etymological dynamite.
“It’s not a partisan impeachment. He violated the Constitution, period,” Biden said.
“Even if it’s a party-line vote, it just … reflects on those who know, in fact, in their heart and their head that, in fact, it’s a violation of the Constitution to do what he did.” [Emphasis mine]
Even if it’s a party-line vote, it’s not partisan, even though that’s what partisan literally means — as in literally literally, not just hipster guy talking about how he thought the latest Wes Anderson movie was the literally the worst movie ever — because the vote “reflects on those who know, in fact, in their heart” what Donald Trump did was wrong.
This is the weakest way I’ve heard of explaining away how partisan impeachment was by saying it wasn’t really partisan because, um, shrug emoji?
In short, this is preposterous junk weasel language that somehow manages to sink beneath the dignity of a career politician. It’s like saying a circle isn’t a circle because it doesn’t fit the definition of a square. It’s technically true and deliberately inaccurate at the same time.
I mean, the rest of that clip is wrong in so many ways, and not just because he’s lying about Trump supposedly violating the Constitution or everyone else on the Republican side knowing what they did was wrong.
It’s because Biden appears to be claiming that a party-line vote isn’t a partisan impeachment because — apparently — his party is the one involved, and he wants to pretend the Democratic Party doesn’t do anything for simply “partisan” reasons. America knows better than to believe that. Even Democrats know better than to believe that.
Unfortunately for Biden, acknowledging the truth would basically invalidate everything he’s said about an impeachment being a divisive political decision if it were a party-line vote.
What’s funny is that Biden is not the only major Democrat who’s said something like this in the past. In fact, I can think of one who said something arguably far more problematic for the Democrats’ case. Rep. Jerrold Nadler is one of the House impeachment managers behind the effort to oust Trump, but he had a different view in 1998:
I know “that didn’t age well” isn’t aging too well as sarcastic online commentary, but if you can think of any better summation of that speech that Nadler would literally spend taxpayer dollars to develop a nuclear-powered DeLorean so he could go back in time and erase it, I’d like to hear it.
That DeLorean, alas, isn’t going to come anytime soon. (Besides, I get the feeling our friend, former Sen. Biden of Delaware, would use it to go back and properly cite Neil Kinnock during a certain speech in the 1988 election cycle, which could theoretically change our presidential timeline considerably.)
So now, Biden is trying to turn “partisan” into “bipartisan.” To quote “Mean Girls”: That is so fetch!
In short: Biden, stop trying to make “partisan” bipartisan.
It’s very literally not going to happen.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--FBI Arrests Alleged Al-Qaeda Leader Hiding in Arizona

A man linked to the al-Qaeda terrorist group has been arrested in Arizona .
Ali Yousif Ahmed Al-Nouri , 42 , was arrested Thursday in Phoenix in connection with murder charges that date back to 2006 , according to a Justice Department statement .
The statement said that Al-Nouri was the leader of a terrorist group in Fallujah , Iraq , and now faces extradition to answer to charges in Iraq .
The statement said that Iraq ’ s government had asked for Al-Nouri to be extradited .
It did not explain how Al-Nouri entered the U.S. or how long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to the statement , Al-Nouri ’ s terrorist group in Fallujah targeted Iraqi police .
At the time of the killings he is charged with , Iraqi police were working with the U.S. to bring order to the war-torn country .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Al-Nouri , in conjunction with others , is accused of killing a first lieutenant and an officer in the Fallujah police on two separate dates in 2006 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Al-Nouri to Iraq will be made by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo .
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department ’ s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Michael Bailey for the District of Arizona .
The FBI Phoenix Field Office , Homeland Security Investigations Phoenix Field Office and the U.S .
Marshals Service arrested al-Nouri .
The extradition case will be handled by the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Arizona and the Criminal Division ’ s Office of International Affairs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the war against the Iraqi police in 2006 was captured in a Global Policy Forum article that noted that despite American efforts to capture Fallujah , the city was receding into control by al-Qaeda .
‘ We can win the war , but for now al-Qaeda has won in Fallujah , ” the article quoted what it said was a police officer whose name was not used .
“ They made the police force stop patrolling streets , and that ’ s a victory , ” he said .
The article noted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quit their jobs with the police .
“ What was I going to wait for that would keep me on the force ?
” Mohammed Humadi , a former captain , said .
“ Nothing was going to get any better .
I have children , and if I were to sacrifice myself , it wouldn ’ t change anything , ” he said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A man linked to the al-Qaeda terrorist group has been arrested in Arizona.
Ali Yousif Ahmed Al-Nouri, 42, was arrested Thursday in Phoenix in connection with murder charges that date back to 2006, according to a Justice Department statement.
The statement said that Al-Nouri was the leader of a terrorist group in Fallujah, Iraq, and now faces extradition to answer to charges in Iraq.
The statement said that Iraq’s government had asked for Al-Nouri to be extradited. It did not explain how Al-Nouri entered the U.S. or how long he’d been in the country.
According to the statement, Al-Nouri’s terrorist group in Fallujah targeted Iraqi police. At the time of the killings he is charged with, Iraqi police were working with the U.S. to bring order to the war-torn country.
Al-Nouri, in conjunction with others, is accused of killing a first lieutenant and an officer in the Fallujah police on two separate dates in 2006.
The ultimate decision over whether to send Al-Nouri to Iraq will be made by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Are you worried about terrorists infiltrating the U.S.? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (1909 Votes) No: 2% (33 Votes)
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Michael Bailey for the District of Arizona. The FBI Phoenix Field Office, Homeland Security Investigations Phoenix Field Office and the U.S. Marshals Service arrested al-Nouri.
The extradition case will be handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona and the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs, the statement reported.
Man in Arizona accused of being Al Qaeda leader by Iraq: fedshttps://t.co/ymEq0Ttj6V Not sure how he got here, but I’m sure we can thank Obama! “Authorities accused Ali Yousif Ahmed Al-Nouri, 42, of killing two police officers in Fallujah in 2006.” — Mr. D (@MrD81344553) February 1, 2020
The extent of the war against the Iraqi police in 2006 was captured in a Global Policy Forum article that noted that despite American efforts to capture Fallujah, the city was receding into control by al-Qaeda.
‘We can win the war, but for now al-Qaeda has won in Fallujah,” the article quoted what it said was a police officer whose name was not used.
“They made the police force stop patrolling streets, and that’s a victory,” he said.
Aug 14 2006 After threat by insurgents only around 100 of Fallujah’s 1700 police showed up to duty https://t.co/xfNJztZY33 — Joel Wing (@JoelWing2) August 14, 2019
The article noted that killings and death threats led many to quit their jobs with the police.
“What was I going to wait for that would keep me on the force?” Mohammed Humadi, a former captain, said.
“Nothing was going to get any better. I have children, and if I were to sacrifice myself, it wouldn’t change anything,” he said.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Cruz: Warren’s Impeachment Question Backfired and Saved Trump

Remember all of that chatter on cable news these past few days about what would happen if the Republicans lost three senators in the vote that would decide whether to call witnesses ?
Remember how Chief Justice John Roberts might have had to cast the deciding vote ?
So , yes , about that chatter — it was the biggest rhetorical waste since CNN spent hours speculating what kind of Muscovite collusion the Mueller report would reveal .
There will be no additional witnesses called .
And , according to Sen. Ted Cruz , you can thank America ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you were paying attention to the question portion of the impeachment hearings ( I know that ’ s not all of you , given that most people don ’ t need a C-SPAN sedative during the daytime hours ) , Sen. Elizabeth Warren — Massachusetts Democrat , 1/11th of the remaining Democrat presidential field , 1/100th of the jury that ’ s deciding the fate of President Donald Trump and 1/1024th of a Cherokee — made a bit of splash with her written query .
The question was directed technically to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chief Justice Roberts — something that caused a curious bit of entertainment , given the fact that the chief justice had to read it .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government , does the fact that the chief justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court and the Constitution ?
” Warren ’ s question read , according to The Hill .
I ’ m not even sure what that was supposed to mean , especially given the fact that the only people who have questioned Roberts ’ impartiality are liberals who believe the only impartiality that can be shown is extreme partiality to their side .
Anyhow , CNN described the scene thusly : “ Roberts , as part of his prescribed duties , read Warren ’ s query from the dais .
Word for word @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressionless , but Cruz wasn ’ t the only one who thought this was the turning point in the witness vote saga .
The Texas Republican ’ s description of how much of an epic fail Warren ’ s question ended up being was among the best , though .
“ Elizabeth Warren helped defeat the impeachment of the president of the United States , ” Cruz said during his impeachment podcast , “ The Verdict , ” according to The Washington Times .
Cruz went on to say that Warren ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lisa and Lamar , ” newspaper reported .
The explanation , according to The Times is simple : RELATED : Watch Kamala 's Face as Schumer Scolds Her for Laughing During Live Impeachment Conference “ [ ‘ T ] he question seemed desired to boost Ms. Warren ’ s struggling presidential campaign , but its immediate effect was to irk key GOP senators who realized Democrat ’ s ‘ strategy to prolong the trial was centered on trying to drag the chief justice ever deeper into the action , ” the article stated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following the whole to-do over Democrats trying to line up votes to get their witnesses , Cruz was talking about Sens .
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee .
Murkowski is one of the most reliably liberal senators in the GOP caucus and has the electoral infrastructure to beat back challenges in her reliably Republican home state ; in 2010 , after losing the Republican primary to tea party candidate Joe Miller , Murkowski was able to mount a write-in campaign which led to a comfortable , if not considerable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , isn ’ t running for re-election in 2020 and , like fellow Volunteer State retiree Bob Corker , is following a zero-cares-given philosophy .
He ’ s not as antagonistic to Trump as Corker was , but he was a potential vote for Democrats .
Only one of those senators would have been needed to force a 50-50 tie — reliable GOP Trump antagonists Sens .
Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah had already decided they wanted to see John Bolton take the stand and give a dramatic pitch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new book — which could have led to the prospect of Roberts being in a position to cast a deciding vote .
This was unlikely .
Although Democratic Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York had argued that the chief justice had cast the deciding vote in the 1868 impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson , Roberts had made it clear he wouldn ’ t insert himself into a charged political process — but the mere prospect was enough to deter Murkowski from wanting to hear from witnesses .
And beyond that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s remarks had played into her decision .
“ We have already degraded this institution for partisan political benefit , and I will not enable those who wish to pull down another , ” Murkowski said , according to The Washington Times .
“ I will not stand for nor support that effort .
We are , sadly , at a low point of division in this country.
” Alexander also decided to vote against hearing witnesses , although he was always a less likely yes vote .
The final vote ended up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short : Have fun explaining that one to rabid Democrats in Iowa , Sen. Warren !
Knowing the true intentions of politicians is a difficult process of divination , but I ’ m pretty sure all the Democrats had to do was play it cool and they could persuade at least one more GOP senator not named Collins or Romney to hear their witnesses .
Colorado ’ s Cory Gardner is a moderate who ’ s facing a Rocky Mountain-esque uphill battle for re-election ( sorry , couldn ’ t resist ) and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show an increasingly blue home-state electorate how bipartisan he is .
And then there ’ s Alexander ( who didn ’ t have to care ) and Murkowski ( who ’ s faced no repercussions for not caring about similar issues in the past ) .
All you had to do is get one of them .
You had one job , as the kids like to say .
Perhaps Warren ’ s question gave Murkowski an easy way out of a predicament that she always planned to get out of anyway .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to her ?
Or , perhaps the question really did raise the specter of a major constitutional crisis precipitated by a sitting senator running for president dragging the chief justice into the politics of impeachment .
In that case , Sen. Warren basically scuttled her party ’ s chance of getting to call witnesses .
Excellent work , there .
Whatever the case , impugning the motives of the chief justice of the Supreme Court wasn ’ t just beyond the boundaries of good taste , although talking about that in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in and of itself .
It was also a decision Warren will live to regret .
All her more moderate opponents have to do is point to how they were this close to hearing John Bolton trash the president in sworn Senate testimony and one ill-mannered , ill-conceived question from Warren blew it for them .
Is that true ?
Who knows .
Does it matter ?
Possibly quite a bit .
Warren ’ s chances feel like they ’ re diminishing by the hour , but there are always opponents willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get votes .
In this case , former Vice President Joe Biden , former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar are circling above like turkey buzzards , waiting for an opportunity to strike that Warren might have just given them .
Ted Cruz is absolutely right : To the extent the deal needed to be sealed for Alexander and Murkowski , Warren helped seal it .
She helped save Donald Trump .
To the extent the death warrant for Warren ’ s campaign needed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , too .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Remember all of that chatter on cable news these past few days about what would happen if the Republicans lost three senators in the vote that would decide whether to call witnesses?
Remember how Chief Justice John Roberts might have had to cast the deciding vote?
So, yes, about that chatter — it was the biggest rhetorical waste since CNN spent hours speculating what kind of Muscovite collusion the Mueller report would reveal. There will be no additional witnesses called. And, according to Sen. Ted Cruz, you can thank America’s favorite crypto-socialist pseudo-Native American for that.
If you were paying attention to the question portion of the impeachment hearings (I know that’s not all of you, given that most people don’t need a C-SPAN sedative during the daytime hours), Sen. Elizabeth Warren — Massachusetts Democrat, 1/11th of the remaining Democrat presidential field, 1/100th of the jury that’s deciding the fate of President Donald Trump and 1/1024th of a Cherokee — made a bit of splash with her written query.
The question was directed technically to the House impeachment managers, but unsubtly concerned Chief Justice Roberts — something that caused a curious bit of entertainment, given the fact that the chief justice had to read it.
“At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the chief justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the Supreme Court and the Constitution?” Warren’s question read, according to The Hill.
Warren asks a question about the “loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the supreme court and the constitution.” And Roberts has to read it.#impeachment pic.twitter.com/4PK6cLlO5L — Zach Wolf (@zbyronwolf) January 30, 2020
I’m not even sure what that was supposed to mean, especially given the fact that the only people who have questioned Roberts’ impartiality are liberals who believe the only impartiality that can be shown is extreme partiality to their side.
(In fact, more conservatives seemed to get themselves worked up over Roberts’ performance after he disallowed a question from Sen. Rand Paul about the suspected whistleblower — neither here nor there when it came to Warren’s question, but it’s still worth pointing out.)
Will Trump's impeachment hurt Democrats in November? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (1954 Votes) No: 2% (42 Votes)
Anyhow, CNN described the scene thusly: “Roberts, as part of his prescribed duties, read Warren’s query from the dais. Word for word without expression.”
Roberts may have been expressionless, but Cruz wasn’t the only one who thought this was the turning point in the witness vote saga. The Texas Republican’s description of how much of an epic fail Warren’s question ended up being was among the best, though.
“Elizabeth Warren helped defeat the impeachment of the president of the United States,” Cruz said during his impeachment podcast, “The Verdict,” according to The Washington Times.
Cruz went on to say that Warren’s “stunt helped deliver the votes of Lisa and Lamar,” newspaper reported.
The explanation, according to The Times is simple:
“[‘T]he question seemed desired to boost Ms. Warren’s struggling presidential campaign, but its immediate effect was to irk key GOP senators who realized Democrat’s‘ strategy to prolong the trial was centered on trying to drag the chief justice ever deeper into the action,” the article stated.
If you haven’t been following the whole to-do over Democrats trying to line up votes to get their witnesses, Cruz was talking about Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee.
Murkowski is one of the most reliably liberal senators in the GOP caucus and has the electoral infrastructure to beat back challenges in her reliably Republican home state; in 2010, after losing the Republican primary to tea party candidate Joe Miller, Murkowski was able to mount a write-in campaign which led to a comfortable, if not considerable, 4-point victory.
Alexander, meanwhile, isn’t running for re-election in 2020 and, like fellow Volunteer State retiree Bob Corker, is following a zero-cares-given philosophy. He’s not as antagonistic to Trump as Corker was, but he was a potential vote for Democrats.
Only one of those senators would have been needed to force a 50-50 tie — reliable GOP Trump antagonists Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah had already decided they wanted to see John Bolton take the stand and give a dramatic pitch as to why you should buy his new book — which could have led to the prospect of Roberts being in a position to cast a deciding vote.
This was unlikely. Although Democratic Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York had argued that the chief justice had cast the deciding vote in the 1868 impeachment trial of Andrew Johnson, Roberts had made it clear he wouldn’t insert himself into a charged political process — but the mere prospect was enough to deter Murkowski from wanting to hear from witnesses.
And beyond that, she made it clear that Warren’s remarks had played into her decision.
“We have already degraded this institution for partisan political benefit, and I will not enable those who wish to pull down another,” Murkowski said, according to The Washington Times.
“I will not stand for nor support that effort. We are, sadly, at a low point of division in this country.”
Alexander also decided to vote against hearing witnesses, although he was always a less likely yes vote. The final vote ended up being 51-49 against.
So, in short: Have fun explaining that one to rabid Democrats in Iowa, Sen. Warren!
Knowing the true intentions of politicians is a difficult process of divination, but I’m pretty sure all the Democrats had to do was play it cool and they could persuade at least one more GOP senator not named Collins or Romney to hear their witnesses.
Colorado’s Cory Gardner is a moderate who’s facing a Rocky Mountain-esque uphill battle for re-election (sorry, couldn’t resist) and wouldn’t mind a chance to show an increasingly blue home-state electorate how bipartisan he is.
And then there’s Alexander (who didn’t have to care) and Murkowski (who’s faced no repercussions for not caring about similar issues in the past). All you had to do is get one of them. You had one job, as the kids like to say.
Perhaps Warren’s question gave Murkowski an easy way out of a predicament that she always planned to get out of anyway. In that case, why even give it to her? Or, perhaps the question really did raise the specter of a major constitutional crisis precipitated by a sitting senator running for president dragging the chief justice into the politics of impeachment.
In that case, Sen. Warren basically scuttled her party’s chance of getting to call witnesses. Excellent work, there.
Whatever the case, impugning the motives of the chief justice of the Supreme Court wasn’t just beyond the boundaries of good taste, although talking about that in the context of the impeachment hearing is laughable in and of itself.
It was also a decision Warren will live to regret. All her more moderate opponents have to do is point to how they were this close to hearing John Bolton trash the president in sworn Senate testimony and one ill-mannered, ill-conceived question from Warren blew it for them.
Is that true? Who knows. Does it matter? Possibly quite a bit.
Warren’s chances feel like they’re diminishing by the hour, but there are always opponents willing to pick at the carrion of her campaign to get votes. In this case, former Vice President Joe Biden, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar are circling above like turkey buzzards, waiting for an opportunity to strike that Warren might have just given them.
Ted Cruz is absolutely right: To the extent the deal needed to be sealed for Alexander and Murkowski, Warren helped seal it. She helped save Donald Trump.
To the extent the death warrant for Warren’s campaign needed to be sealed, one guesses she did that, too.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Attacks on Miami Super Bowl from Sea Will Meet This Black Hawk-Interceptor Combo

It would seem those in attendance at Hard Rock Stadium on Sunday , or milling about the adjacent Miami area for Super Bowl LIV , will have little to worry about in terms of comprehensive event security .
According to The Associated Press , despite an apparent absence of credible threats , joint efforts are being made by Florida and federal law enforcement agencies to guard one of the nation ’ s largest spectacles against threats ranging from “ a detonated bomb ” to “ massive food poisoning.
” Reportedly leading that security charge this weekend is a team of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agents , who bring with them no shortage of heavy machinery .
“ We ’ re part of a huge law enforcement team down here in South Florida to ensure the integrity and security of both the game itself and the events leading up to it , ” CBP Director of Field Operations Diane Sabatino said in a Wednesday new release .
“ We have a number of missions in support of the national special security event.
” TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tasked in previous years with guarding official Super Bowl Sunday festivities against a wide variety of threats to the general public , CBP is faced this year in Miami with the unique challenge of leveraging strategic resources against the potential for an attack that comes by sea .
And that is exactly where much of the aforementioned heavy machinery comes into play .
Provided by CBP Air and Marine Operations , a special response team made up of a combination of high-speed aquatic interceptor vehicles and overseen by a slew of UH-60 Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Atlantic waters and skies surrounding the city .
The team ’ s role is simple : To prevent aquatic approach by craft suspected to be carrying drugs , human cargo or other dangerous contraband .
Audiences worldwide were treated to exactly what the team ’ s rapid response process looks like on Monday , when Defense Visual Information Distribution Service released video of CBP AMO ’ s Super Bowl training exercises .
“ Our air assets are going to go in to identify a target , ” said AMO Marine Interdiction Agent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox News ’ Tomi Lahren during one such exercise last week .
RELATED : Beyoncé and Jay-Z Caught on Camera Remaining Seated for Super Bowl National Anthem “ We utilize our Black Hawk to be the eyes in the sky for the overall interdiction effort , ” Rodriquez said .
“ They have the means of stopping that vessel as well.
” “ There ’ s going to be a lot of overwhelming force .
You ’ ll see that it ’ s going to compel them to stop , ” he added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we have means to actually mitigate that as well.
” These are far from the only measures being taken to secure Super Bowl LIV , however .
According to the AP , federal officials are taking a number of precautions , from an increasing CDC-led screening of fliers originating from China at Miami International Airport in light of the coronavirus outbreak to getting all event staff and volunteers participating in a single , real-time crime reporting app known as SaferWatch .
More than 20 police snipers have also conducted on-site target practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and local sources confirm fighter jets will be enforcing a “ No Fly Zone ” for the entirety of Sunday night ’ s game , never leaving the airspace to refuel .
“ It ’ s all hands on deck , ” Miami Homeland Security Investigations chief Anthony Salisbury told the AP .
“ This is a high-profile event .
It ’ s the same with every Super Bowl.
” “ Nothing is being taken for granted.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our @ @ @

It would seem those in attendance at Hard Rock Stadium on Sunday, or milling about the adjacent Miami area for Super Bowl LIV, will have little to worry about in terms of comprehensive event security.
According to The Associated Press, despite an apparent absence of credible threats, joint efforts are being made by Florida and federal law enforcement agencies to guard one of the nation’s largest spectacles against threats ranging from “a detonated bomb” to “massive food poisoning.”
Reportedly leading that security charge this weekend is a team of roughly 150 U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents, who bring with them no shortage of heavy machinery.
“We’re part of a huge law enforcement team down here in South Florida to ensure the integrity and security of both the game itself and the events leading up to it,” CBP Director of Field Operations Diane Sabatino said in a Wednesday new release. “We have a number of missions in support of the national special security event.”
It takes a team to tackle security efforts for a major event like the @SuperBowl. Learn CBP’s role in the game plan for #SBLIV security: https://t.co/EMqojbt1lr pic.twitter.com/hr9REm8x04 — CBP (@CBP) January 31, 2020
Tasked in previous years with guarding official Super Bowl Sunday festivities against a wide variety of threats to the general public, CBP is faced this year in Miami with the unique challenge of leveraging strategic resources against the potential for an attack that comes by sea.
And that is exactly where much of the aforementioned heavy machinery comes into play.
Provided by CBP Air and Marine Operations, a special response team made up of a combination of high-speed aquatic interceptor vehicles and overseen by a slew of UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters has already begun patrols in the Atlantic waters and skies surrounding the city.
The team’s role is simple: To prevent aquatic approach by craft suspected to be carrying drugs, human cargo or other dangerous contraband.
Watch the latest video at foxnews.com
Audiences worldwide were treated to exactly what the team’s rapid response process looks like on Monday, when Defense Visual Information Distribution Service released video of CBP AMO’s Super Bowl training exercises.
“Our air assets are going to go in to identify a target,” said AMO Marine Interdiction Agent Alex Rodriguez, describing the process to Fox News’ Tomi Lahren during one such exercise last week.
“We utilize our Black Hawk to be the eyes in the sky for the overall interdiction effort,” Rodriquez said. “They have the means of stopping that vessel as well.”
“There’s going to be a lot of overwhelming force. You’ll see that it’s going to compel them to stop,” he added. “If he doesn’t, we have means to actually mitigate that as well.”
SUPER BOWL SECURITY: Fighter jets practice mid-air refueling ahead of Sunday’s Super Bowl, so they can remain in the air the whole game and not have to leave the area and come back to get more gas. https://t.co/6rk1ccjDo3 pic.twitter.com/Zyaui4za2v — KDKA (@KDKA) January 30, 2020
Weeks before Super Bowl LIV, we joined 20 police snipers as they trained at Hard Rock Stadium in preparation for the world’s biggest sporting event. WATCH HERE: https://t.co/ubsirzbLHu pic.twitter.com/jxU2OEzkSr — Tactical-Life.com (@TacticalLife1) January 30, 2020
These are far from the only measures being taken to secure Super Bowl LIV, however.
Do you think there will be any security problems at the Super Bowl? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 4% (12 Votes) No: 96% (312 Votes)
According to the AP, federal officials are taking a number of precautions, from an increasing CDC-led screening of fliers originating from China at Miami International Airport in light of the coronavirus outbreak to getting all event staff and volunteers participating in a single, real-time crime reporting app known as SaferWatch.
More than 20 police snipers have also conducted on-site target practice in recent weeks, TacticalLife.com reported, and local sources confirm fighter jets will be enforcing a “No Fly Zone” for the entirety of Sunday night’s game, never leaving the airspace to refuel.
“It’s all hands on deck,” Miami Homeland Security Investigations chief Anthony Salisbury told the AP. “This is a high-profile event. It’s the same with every Super Bowl.”
“Nothing is being taken for granted.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Biden Dismisses Fed-Up Man as GOP Mole After Walkout at Iowa Event

Apparently , if you ’ re not happy with Joe Biden and you show up at one of his rallies , you must be a GOP mole .
That ’ s the ( likely incorrect ) takeaway Biden had from a comic protester at an event in North Liberty , Iowa , on Saturday , all because the man pointed out what everyone kind of knows — Biden ’ s nobody ’ s first choice , but he ’ s the choice you come up with when you ’ re convinced he ’ s the guy who can beat Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City Press-Citizen ’ s coverage of the event , it was all perfectly normal .
There ’ s a lot of pictures of the smiling Democrat front-runner shaking a lot of hands and looking very presidential .
All in all , it looked like a successful event .
However , QuickTake by Bloomberg posted a few more , ahem , interesting videos of the event in which it was clear that things didn ’ t go quite as smoothly as Biden backers had hoped .
Here ’ s one featuring a gentleman wondering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ I ’ m beginning to see why your wife left you , ” Biden finally declared at one point during the exchange , which he otherwise handled well .
Then , a guy with a mock “ Settle for Biden ” T-shirt got up and walked out of the event .
“ I just want to say that you ’ re a fine candidate , and I ’ m planning on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the man said .
“ I think we should all settle for Biden .
I think you could be the Hillary of 2020.
” The man got a cascade of boos and even Biden joined in on it .
“ I ’ ll tell you what , man , ” Biden said .
“ I thought they were exaggerating when the Republicans said they were sending out 80 people to participate in the Democratic caucus here .
“ Well , I ’ m not sure who he ’ s with , but , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us back your ‘ Joe ’ shirt , OK ?
” RELATED : Biden Falls Apart Explaining Why Impeachment Was n't Partisan Even Though Vote Was Down Party Lines Check it out on a Bloomberg YouTube video here .
( The same men pranked Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren , too . )
“ Joe Biden : He ’ ll literally take your shirt off your back.
” That ’ s a campaign slogan the wealth-tax crowd could actually get behind .
As Uncle Joe is wont to do , he didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the guy was obviously a troll .
No , he wasn ’ t from the GOP , or even apparently from a conservative outfit .
According to the Washington Examiner , the individuals involved were almost certainly from a comedy duo called The Good Liars — which , with a name like that , are unsurprisingly Democrat partisans .
Here ’ s the header image on the duo ’ s Twitter account , which has a blue checkmark despite having fewer followers than the kind of crowd you would think would show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ game : Yes , they ’ re hawking Donald Trump Jr. ’ s tome , “ Daddy , Please Love Me.
” Just in case you didn ’ t get the gist of this , here ’ s their take on Rudy Giuliani : So I ’ d say that , if anything , these guys are more the Bernie Bro type .
This isn ’ t the first time that Biden has managed to get into a situation with Iowans who weren ’ t there to fawn over him , either .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ man of a certain girth challenged the former vice president over Hunter Biden at an event in New Hampton , Iowa in December .
CNBC reported that the man was an 83-year-old retired farmer ; Biden called him “ a damn liar ” and challenged him to a pushup contest before saying “ look , fat , look , here ’ s the deal.
” Biden would later claim he said “ facts , ” which sounds every bit as true as the claim that Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a full-blooded member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is there a moral to this , other than that it ’ s funny ?
Well , yes .
First , due to the nature of Iowa ’ s caucus system , going out there and being chummy with the locals — even when they ’ re giving you a hard time — is exceptionally important .
Run-ins with groups like the Good Liars are the sorts of things you shrug off .
Biden won ’ t .
Iowa isn ’ t usually critically important — Trump lost it in 2016 , after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something to do with the fact that his campaign style simply didn ’ t mesh with how the caucuses roll .
Biden has actually jumped into second in the RealClearPolitics polling average in the state , partially because former South Bend , Indiana , Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Warren , now third and fourth , have seen minor implosions in their likability in the state .
That said , polls in the caucuses are notoriously difficult to gauge , and if Biden ends up placing third or fourth , he goes on to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very tenuous second , according to RealClearPolitics averages .
In both cases , he ’ d likely lose to Bernie Sanders , which raises Larry David ’ s electability quotient and makes Super Tuesday — and inevitably , what ’ ll happen at the Democratic convention — a lot less predictable .
In short , it ’ d probably be good for Biden not to screw up Iowa at this late hour .
Second , this says a lot about Biden that he automatically thinks it ’ s only the Republicans who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most of the Democrats aren ’ t exactly enamored of him , either .
His huge lead in the polls nationally is mostly gone and the only saving grace is that Sanders , whom the party would unite against en masse if he got anywhere close to the nomination , is second in the national polling average by less than 4 points .
Either way , most Democratic voters outside of Biden ’ s hardcore bases in the black community and white working class look at him as the kind of guy you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wanted got away .
And that ’ s assuming these voters want to settle down with Biden .
None of the other candidates ’ fan bases think too highly of the guy — which is problematic when you realize that ’ s one of the reasons Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump .
For now , those serious issues can wait and we can all have a good laugh at this whole mess .
The only way this could be better is if this guy started his spiel with , “ look , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the deal… ” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Apparently, if you’re not happy with Joe Biden and you show up at one of his rallies, you must be a GOP mole.
That’s the (likely incorrect) takeaway Biden had from a comic protester at an event in North Liberty, Iowa, on Saturday, all because the man pointed out what everyone kind of knows — Biden’s nobody’s first choice, but he’s the choice you come up with when you’re convinced he’s the guy who can beat Donald Trump.
If you believe the Iowa City Press-Citizen’s coverage of the event, it was all perfectly normal. There’s a lot of pictures of the smiling Democrat front-runner shaking a lot of hands and looking very presidential. All in all, it looked like a successful event.
However, QuickTake by Bloomberg posted a few more, ahem, interesting videos of the event in which it was clear that things didn’t go quite as smoothly as Biden backers had hoped.
Here’s one featuring a gentleman wondering why his wife left him:
Iowa voter: “My wife recently left me. She’s divorcing me. What can I do to get her back?” Joe Biden: “I’m beginning to see why your wife left you…” #IowaCaucus #IACaucus pic.twitter.com/e5YjLv2ix3 — QuickTake by Bloomberg (@QuickTake) February 1, 2020
“I’m beginning to see why your wife left you,” Biden finally declared at one point during the exchange, which he otherwise handled well.
Then, a guy with a mock “Settle for Biden” T-shirt got up and walked out of the event.
Do you think Joe Biden will win the Democratic nomination? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 16% (173 Votes) No: 84% (894 Votes)
“I just want to say that you’re a fine candidate, and I’m planning on settling for Biden in 2020,” the man said.
“I think we should all settle for Biden. I think you could be the Hillary of 2020.”
The man got a cascade of boos and even Biden joined in on it.
“I’ll tell you what, man,” Biden said. “I thought they were exaggerating when the Republicans said they were sending out 80 people to participate in the Democratic caucus here.
“Well, I’m not sure who he’s with, but, hey, by the way, give us back your ‘Joe’ shirt, OK?”
Check it out on a Bloomberg YouTube video here. (The same men pranked Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, too.)
“Joe Biden: He’ll literally take your shirt off your back.” That’s a campaign slogan the wealth-tax crowd could actually get behind.
As Uncle Joe is wont to do, he didn’t exactly get it totally right. Yes, the guy was obviously a troll. No, he wasn’t from the GOP, or even apparently from a conservative outfit.
According to the Washington Examiner, the individuals involved were almost certainly from a comedy duo called The Good Liars — which, with a name like that, are unsurprisingly Democrat partisans.
Here’s the header image on the duo’s Twitter account, which has a blue checkmark despite having fewer followers than the kind of crowd you would think would show up at a Canadian Football League preseason game:
Yes, they’re hawking Donald Trump Jr.’s tome, “Daddy, Please Love Me.” Just in case you didn’t get the gist of this, here’s their take on Rudy Giuliani:
After watching @RudyGiuliani’s recent television appearances we decided to put this sign up at Fox News. #CrazyRudy pic.twitter.com/btAfKEARbV — The Good Liars (@TheGoodLiars) January 28, 2020
So I’d say that, if anything, these guys are more the Bernie Bro type.
This isn’t the first time that Biden has managed to get into a situation with Iowans who weren’t there to fawn over him, either.
Perhaps the most infamous was when a man of a certain girth challenged the former vice president over Hunter Biden at an event in New Hampton, Iowa in December. CNBC reported that the man was an 83-year-old retired farmer; Biden called him “a damn liar” and challenged him to a pushup contest before saying “look, fat, look, here’s the deal.”
Handled like a pro.
Biden would later claim he said “facts,” which sounds every bit as true as the claim that Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is a full-blooded member of the Cherokee Nation.
So, is there a moral to this, other than that it’s funny?
Well, yes. First, due to the nature of Iowa’s caucus system, going out there and being chummy with the locals — even when they’re giving you a hard time — is exceptionally important. Run-ins with groups like the Good Liars are the sorts of things you shrug off. Biden won’t.
Iowa isn’t usually critically important — Trump lost it in 2016, after all, a loss that probably had something to do with the fact that his campaign style simply didn’t mesh with how the caucuses roll.
Biden has actually jumped into second in the RealClearPolitics polling average in the state, partially because former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Warren, now third and fourth, have seen minor implosions in their likability in the state.
That said, polls in the caucuses are notoriously difficult to gauge, and if Biden ends up placing third or fourth, he goes on to New Hampshire where he’s again a very tenuous second, according to RealClearPolitics averages.
In both cases, he’d likely lose to Bernie Sanders, which raises Larry David’s electability quotient and makes Super Tuesday — and inevitably, what’ll happen at the Democratic convention — a lot less predictable.
In short, it’d probably be good for Biden not to screw up Iowa at this late hour.
Second, this says a lot about Biden that he automatically thinks it’s only the Republicans who are after him.
After all, most of the Democrats aren’t exactly enamored of him, either. His huge lead in the polls nationally is mostly gone and the only saving grace is that Sanders, whom the party would unite against en masse if he got anywhere close to the nomination, is second in the national polling average by less than 4 points.
Either way, most Democratic voters outside of Biden’s hardcore bases in the black community and white working class look at him as the kind of guy you settle for after the one you really wanted got away. And that’s assuming these voters want to settle down with Biden. None of the other candidates’ fan bases think too highly of the guy — which is problematic when you realize that’s one of the reasons Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump.
For now, those serious issues can wait and we can all have a good laugh at this whole mess. The only way this could be better is if this guy started his spiel with, “look, hair-plugs, look, here’s the deal…”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-02--Woman Who Crashed Mar-a-Lago Checkpoints Is Anti-Trump Bernie Supporter

A Connecticut opera singer involved in a high-speed chase near President Donald Trump ’ s Mar-a-Lago estate on Friday has been a public supporter of Democratic presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont .
On her Facebook page , Hannah Roemhild posted a photo of the 2017 Women ’ s March , featuring an anti-Trump protest sign that read , “ Not My President.
” On March 10 , 2016 , 2016 , she posted a link to Sanders explaining his position in support of abortion , and added the hashtag “ feeltheBern.
” Her page also posted a June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Donald Duck .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Friday ’ s incident unfolded at about 11:30 a.m. , Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said , according to the Palm Beach Post .
A Florida Highway Patrol trooper responded to a call of a woman acting “ irrationally ” and “ doing some kind of dance ” on top of a car , The Associated Press reported .
Roemhild would not speak to the trooper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ window of her vehicle , Bradshaw said at news conference , according to the AP .
She threw the vehicle in reverse , instead .
The trooper then smashed the window in a futile effort to stop her from escaping , Bradshaw said .
A chase ensued in which the vehicle police were chasing dodged two checkpoints that were in place because Trump was arriving later in the day .
Members of the Secret Service and Palm Beach Sheriff ’ s Office , who were nearly hit when the vehicle went through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was able to escape , according to the AP .
The vehicle was later spotted by a license plate reader , the AP reported .
Roemhild was later found at a local hotel , where she was taken into custody by a trooper who tackled her , Bradshaw said , according to the AP .
Bradshaw said Roemhild was “ obviously impaired ” during the incident , according to the New York Post .
“ There was clearly no intention , ” Bradshaw said .
“ I ’ m not sure she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been scheduled to appear before Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Ted S. Booras Saturday , but she refused and now has a hearing scheduled for Monday , the Palm Beach Post reported .
Roemhild is facing charges of assault on a federal officer , deadly assault on a sheriff ’ s deputy and various traffic charges for driving her car through the checkpoints , Bradshaw said .
“ She is a lovely singer and was a lovely person , ” Michelle Murray-Fiertek , executive director of the Hartford Opera Theater , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ She was a responsible supporter of the arts , ” Murray-Fiertek said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A Connecticut opera singer involved in a high-speed chase near President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate on Friday has been a public supporter of Democratic presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
On her Facebook page, Hannah Roemhild posted a photo of the 2017 Women’s March, featuring an anti-Trump protest sign that read, “Not My President.”
On March 10, 2016, 2016, she posted a link to Sanders explaining his position in support of abortion, and added the hashtag “feeltheBern.”
Her page also posted a June 3, 2017, image likening Trump to Donald Duck.
This is the Hannah Roemhild who was shot at by law enforcement and then arrested after she rammed through checkpoints at Mar-a-Lago today. I bet you’re all shocked to find out that she’s a Democrat who hates Trump. ? https://t.co/y3iqPlq6Hu — Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) January 31, 2020
;
Friday’s incident unfolded at about 11:30 a.m., Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said, according to the Palm Beach Post. A Florida Highway Patrol trooper responded to a call of a woman acting “irrationally” and “doing some kind of dance” on top of a car, The Associated Press reported.
Roemhild would not speak to the trooper, even when he pounded on the window of her vehicle, Bradshaw said at news conference, according to the AP. She threw the vehicle in reverse, instead. The trooper then smashed the window in a futile effort to stop her from escaping, Bradshaw said.
Should this woman get serious jail time? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (5995 Votes) No: 1% (59 Votes)
A chase ensued in which the vehicle police were chasing dodged two checkpoints that were in place because Trump was arriving later in the day.
Members of the Secret Service and Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office, who were nearly hit when the vehicle went through the checkpoints, shot at the vehicle but it was able to escape, according to the AP.
The vehicle was later spotted by a license plate reader, the AP reported. Roemhild was later found at a local hotel, where she was taken into custody by a trooper who tackled her, Bradshaw said, according to the AP.
more exclusive video of Hannah Roemhild being taken into custody this afternoon in WPB @WPTV @MerrisBadcock pic.twitter.com/kIHNsRhSrQ — Erik J. Altmann (@ejaltmann) January 31, 2020
Bradshaw said Roemhild was “obviously impaired” during the incident, according to the New York Post.
“There was clearly no intention,” Bradshaw said. “I’m not sure she knew where she was going.”
Reomhild had been scheduled to appear before Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Ted S. Booras Saturday, but she refused and now has a hearing scheduled for Monday, the Palm Beach Post reported.
Roemhild is facing charges of assault on a federal officer, deadly assault on a sheriff’s deputy and various traffic charges for driving her car through the checkpoints, Bradshaw said.
“She is a lovely singer and was a lovely person,” Michelle Murray-Fiertek, executive director of the Hartford Opera Theater, said, according to the Palm Beach Post.
“She was a responsible supporter of the arts,” Murray-Fiertek said.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.