westernjournal--2020-01-18--National Archives Admits It Doctored Photo of Anti-Trump Protest

The anti-Trump nature of the 2017 Women ’ s March will be blurred for anyone who relies on a photograph currently displayed at the National Archives and Records Administration as a promotion for its exhibit on women ’ s suffrage .
The National Archives used a photograph from the 2017 demonstration as part of a promotional display for an exhibit keyed to the 100th anniversary of American women being granted the right to vote in 1920 .
The 2017 photo was paired with an image of a 1913 suffrage march in Washington to show two protests in the same place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2017 photo has been altered , according to The Washington Post .
The National Archives , which on its website calls itself “ the nation ’ s record keeper , ” blurred the name of President Donald Trump where it was used on protest signs , and also blurred references to female genitals , which were present on some protest signs .
The Post used as an example a sign that originally read “ God Hates Trump ” but now has the president ’ s name blurred .
A sign reading “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” also has Trump ’ s name blurred .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond The Archives said the alterations were made intentionally , and that David S. Ferriero , the archivist , an appointee of former President Barack Obama , endorsed the decision to alter the image .
“ As a non-partisan , non-political federal agency , we blurred references to the President ’ s name on some posters , so as not to engage in current political controversy , ” Archives spokeswoman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Our mission is to safeguard and provide access to the nation ’ s most important federal records , and our exhibits are one way in which we connect the American people to those records .
Modifying the image was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records.
” Kleiman said that references to female genitals were scrubbed because they could be perceived by groups including students and children as inappropriate .
The Archives “ only alters images in exhibits when they are used as graphic design components , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We do not alter images or documents that are displayed as artifacts in exhibitions , ” she said .
“ In this case , the image is part of a promotional display , not an artifact.
” Many leftists said the full wrath of protesters should have been on display .
RELATED : Tucker Carlson Clashes with Conservative Think Tank Heritage Foundation over Big Tech Some historians criticized the National Archives .
“ There ’ s no reason for the National Archives to ever digitally alter a historic photograph , ” Rice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If they don ’ t want to use a specific image , then don ’ t use it .
But to confuse the public is reprehensible .
The head of the Archives has to very quickly fix this damage .
A lot of history is messy , and there ’ s zero reason why the Archives can ’ t be upfront about a photo from a women ’ s march.
” One professor was particularly outraged over the decision to blue references to women ’ s genitals .
“ Doctoring a commemorative photograph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s OK to silence women ’ s voice and actions , ” said Wendy Kline , a history professor at Purdue University .
“ It is literally erasing something that was accurately captured on camera .
That ’ s an attempt to erase a powerful message.
” Archives spokesman John Valceanu said the changes were approved by Getty Images , which licensed the images for use by the Archives , but Getty told The Post in an email Friday that it was “ still determining ” whether it had actually done so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The anti-Trump nature of the 2017 Women’s March will be blurred for anyone who relies on a photograph currently displayed at the National Archives and Records Administration as a promotion for its exhibit on women’s suffrage.
The National Archives used a photograph from the 2017 demonstration as part of a promotional display for an exhibit keyed to the 100th anniversary of American women being granted the right to vote in 1920. The 2017 photo was paired with an image of a 1913 suffrage march in Washington to show two protests in the same place but a century apart.
However, the 2017 photo has been altered, according to The Washington Post.
The National Archives, which on its website calls itself “the nation’s record keeper,” blurred the name of President Donald Trump where it was used on protest signs, and also blurred references to female genitals, which were present on some protest signs.
The Post used as an example a sign that originally read “God Hates Trump” but now has the president’s name blurred. A sign reading “Trump & GOP — Hands Off Women” also has Trump’s name blurred.
The Archives said the alterations were made intentionally, and that David S. Ferriero, the archivist, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, endorsed the decision to alter the image.
“As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in a statement.
“Our mission is to safeguard and provide access to the nation’s most important federal records, and our exhibits are one way in which we connect the American people to those records. Modifying the image was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records.”
Should the picture have been used unaltered? 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: 70% (1267 Votes) No: 30% (549 Votes)
Kleiman said that references to female genitals were scrubbed because they could be perceived by groups including students and children as inappropriate.
The Archives “only alters images in exhibits when they are used as graphic design components,” Kleiman said in the statement.
“We do not alter images or documents that are displayed as artifacts in exhibitions,” she said. “In this case, the image is part of a promotional display, not an artifact.”
Many leftists said the full wrath of protesters should have been on display.
The new normal for the United States. You don’t just wake up here. We crept into this time and place. The National Archive digitally altered and edited and blurred out all signs from the 2017 Women’s March that were critical of @realDonaldTrump. https://t.co/2nZY0UQuNV — Shaun King (@shaunking) January 18, 2020
As I’ve argued in my work, it’s not the #freespeech of racists and misogynists that is most at risk of censorship. It’s speech that threatens power, especially speech by women that seeks to hold men accountable for their abuses. #freespeechforwomen https://t.co/JS6d2JFeeg — Mary Anne Franks (@ma_franks) January 18, 2020
Some historians criticized the National Archives.
“There’s no reason for the National Archives to ever digitally alter a historic photograph,” Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley said. “If they don’t want to use a specific image, then don’t use it. But to confuse the public is reprehensible. The head of the Archives has to very quickly fix this damage. A lot of history is messy, and there’s zero reason why the Archives can’t be upfront about a photo from a women’s march.”
One professor was particularly outraged over the decision to blue references to women’s genitals.
“Doctoring a commemorative photograph buys right into the notion that it’s OK to silence women’s voice and actions,” said Wendy Kline, a history professor at Purdue University. “It is literally erasing something that was accurately captured on camera. That’s an attempt to erase a powerful message.”
Archives spokesman John Valceanu said the changes were approved by Getty Images, which licensed the images for use by the Archives, but Getty told The Post in an email Friday that it was “still determining” whether it had actually done so.
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--2020-01-18--With One Year To Spare, Trump Breaks Record for Judges Appointed in First Term

President Donald Trump has so remade the face of the judiciary that , with a year to spare , he ’ s already broken the record for judges appointed in his first term .
Surprisingly , the president is taking a victory lap in celebration of the event .
( OK … maybe it ’ s not so surprising . )
Earlier this week , Trump took to Twitter to celebrate the event , which actually happened last month .
Retweeting a video from Mitch McConnell celebrating the 50 judges Trump and Senate Republicans have managed to put on circuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s first term since 1980 and almost as many as President Barack Obama managed to put on in eight years — Trump reminded everyone they ’ d also managed to confirm 187 federal judges total .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond “ Now up to 187 Federal Judges , and two great new Supreme Court Justices , ” Trump said in the Wednesday tweet .
“ We are in major record territory .
Hope EVERYONE is happy !
” There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For instance , take those 50 circuit court judges .
In the video , the Senate majority leader brags that “ Mitch McConnell is giving the nation ’ s courts a face-lift.
” Both he and Trump definitely have — and it ’ s made a lot of people very , very nervous .
Take The Boston Globe ’ s headline on Dec. 29 : “ Trump reshapes judiciary in his image.
” Subheadline : “ The astounding scale of President Trump ’ s remaking of the federal courts is cause for alarm.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ image is Justice Brett Kavanaugh snarling , presumably from the Senate hearing during which he ’ d been accused of sexual assault and the subject of a heated , politicized barrage of questions .
His anger at a terminally poxed story from Christine Blasey Ford — a story that was nevertheless taken at face value by the media — is apparently “ cause for alarm.
” Another “ cause for alarm ” is the fact that certain decisions don ’ t go the way the editorial board of the Globe thinks they should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American society — for good or for ill — quite like federal judges , ” the article began .
“ Regressive moves by the courts in recent years have illustrated their awesome power to gut the Voting Rights Act , open the floodgates to political campaign funders , and give companies the right to refuse coverage of their employees ’ birth control .
Yet we ’ ve also seen federal judges serve as a critical bulwark against the President Trump ’ s attempts to circumvent environmental rules , declare a national emergency in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ban travelers from predominantly Muslim countries.
” RELATED : Trump Trade War Works as US Economy Sizzles & China Sees Weakest Growth in 29 Years Those “ regressive moves ” should probably be put into context .
The “ gutting ” of the Voting Rights Act was a 2013 Supreme Court decision that invalidated a provision of the 1965 legislation requiring certain states , mostly in the South , to submit their election laws to the federal government for advance approval .
The provision was written when those states were still fighting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floodgates ” for “ political campaign funders ” almost certainly refers to Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission that challenged a provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act that blatantly violated the First Amendment ’ s protection of political speech by limiting independent campaign expenditures .
( Full disclosure : One of the founders of Citizens United , Floyd Brown , is the publisher of The Western Journal . )
And , as for the part about “ giv [ ing ] companies the right to refuse coverage of their employees ’ birth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with several cases in which religious or faith-based employers were being forced by Obamacare to provide medical coverage that contravened their beliefs .
This covered a very minute number of employees — and yet , it ’ s still being treated as if it were an outrage .
In short , this is why 187 new federal judges is great news for conservatives , if just because we know how those cases would be decided if it weren ’ t Trump in the White House .
“ I ’ ve always heard , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the most — single most important thing you can do is federal judges , ” Trump said in November , according to The Washington Post .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump has so remade the face of the judiciary that, with a year to spare, he’s already broken the record for judges appointed in his first term.
Surprisingly, the president is taking a victory lap in celebration of the event. (OK … maybe it’s not so surprising.)
Earlier this week, Trump took to Twitter to celebrate the event, which actually happened last month.
Retweeting a video from Mitch McConnell celebrating the 50 judges Trump and Senate Republicans have managed to put on circuit courts — the most in a president’s first term since 1980 and almost as many as President Barack Obama managed to put on in eight years — Trump reminded everyone they’d also managed to confirm 187 federal judges total.
Now up to 187 Federal Judges, and two great new Supreme Court Justices. We are in major record territory. Hope EVERYONE is happy! https://t.co/ymEQljJyib — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 15, 2020
“Now up to 187 Federal Judges, and two great new Supreme Court Justices,” Trump said in the Wednesday tweet. “We are in major record territory. Hope EVERYONE is happy!”
There’s reason for Trump to be happy. For instance, take those 50 circuit court judges.
In the video, the Senate majority leader brags that “Mitch McConnell is giving the nation’s courts a face-lift.” Both he and Trump definitely have — and it’s made a lot of people very, very nervous.
Do you agree with Donald Trump's judicial picks? 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% (1997 Votes) No: 1% (11 Votes)
Take The Boston Globe’s headline on Dec. 29: “Trump reshapes judiciary in his image.” Subheadline: “The astounding scale of President Trump’s remaking of the federal courts is cause for alarm.”
On that story, the featured image is Justice Brett Kavanaugh snarling, presumably from the Senate hearing during which he’d been accused of sexual assault and the subject of a heated, politicized barrage of questions. His anger at a terminally poxed story from Christine Blasey Ford — a story that was nevertheless taken at face value by the media — is apparently “cause for alarm.”
Another “cause for alarm” is the fact that certain decisions don’t go the way the editorial board of the Globe thinks they should go.
“No one can shape American society — for good or for ill — quite like federal judges,” the article began.
“Regressive moves by the courts in recent years have illustrated their awesome power to gut the Voting Rights Act, open the floodgates to political campaign funders, and give companies the right to refuse coverage of their employees’ birth control. Yet we’ve also seen federal judges serve as a critical bulwark against the President Trump’s attempts to circumvent environmental rules, declare a national emergency in order to fund a border wall, and ban travelers from predominantly Muslim countries.”
Those “regressive moves” should probably be put into context.
The “gutting” of the Voting Rights Act was a 2013 Supreme Court decision that invalidated a provision of the 1965 legislation requiring certain states, mostly in the South, to submit their election laws to the federal government for advance approval. The provision was written when those states were still fighting for de jure segregation.
The “floodgates” for “political campaign funders” almost certainly refers to Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission that challenged a provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act that blatantly violated the First Amendment’s protection of political speech by limiting independent campaign expenditures. (Full disclosure: One of the founders of Citizens United, Floyd Brown, is the publisher of The Western Journal.)
And, as for the part about “giv[ing] companies the right to refuse coverage of their employees’ birth control,” this has to do with several cases in which religious or faith-based employers were being forced by Obamacare to provide medical coverage that contravened their beliefs. This covered a very minute number of employees — and yet, it’s still being treated as if it were an outrage.
In short, this is why 187 new federal judges is great news for conservatives, if just because we know how those cases would be decided if it weren’t Trump in the White House.
“I’ve always heard, actually, that when you become president, the most — single most important thing you can do is federal judges,” Trump said in November, according to The Washington Post.
We’d be loath to disagree.
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--2020-01-18--Video Shows Yellow Wiggle Greg Page Go into Cardiac Arrest on Stage During Benefit Concert

A founding member of the beloved children ’ s musical group The Wiggles went into cardiac arrest and collapsed on stage while performing in Sydney on Friday .
Greg Page , who was the original Yellow Wiggle , retired in 2006 due to health issues , according to the BBC .
But Page and the other members from the original 1991 crew came together this week for a pair of concerts benefiting those affected by the Australian bushfires .
The musical group was scheduled for two , adult-only performances , with all of the proceeds going to Australian Red Cross @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Education Service .
Page performed on stage for an hour and a half before he stumbled off stage , as seen below : TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond Following the show , the official Wiggles Twitter account updated fans on Page ’ s health .
“ At the end of the show this evening there was a medical incident off stage involving Greg Page , ” the statement said .
“ Medics were called immediately and he was taken to hospital where he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more information as it comes to hand.
” A few hours later , The Wiggles confirmed that Page had gone into cardiac arrest , but they assured fans he received proper medical treatment and was recovering .
On Saturday , the group affirmed its update and included a photo of Page in high spirits .
“ We ’ ve visited Greg this morning & he wanted to thank everyone for their well wishes , ” The Wiggles wrote on Twitter .
“ He ’ s so grateful for the messages of love & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greg ’ s main concern was that the show tonight should go on. Let ’ s do it for Greg whilst raising much needed funds.
” Page ’ s wishes came true ; the show will go on .
The Wiggles shared updated times for the show Saturday and wrote , “ Emma Wiggle , Simon Wiggle and a few Wiggly friends and musicians will all be jumping in while Greg recovers , to make sure this is a great show.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @

A founding member of the beloved children’s musical group The Wiggles went into cardiac arrest and collapsed on stage while performing in Sydney on Friday.
Greg Page, who was the original Yellow Wiggle, retired in 2006 due to health issues, according to the BBC.
But Page and the other members from the original 1991 crew came together this week for a pair of concerts benefiting those affected by the Australian bushfires.
The musical group was scheduled for two, adult-only performances, with all of the proceeds going to Australian Red Cross and the NSW Wildlife Information Rescue and Education Service.
Page performed on stage for an hour and a half before he stumbled off stage, as seen below:
Following the show, the official Wiggles Twitter account updated fans on Page’s health.
“At the end of the show this evening there was a medical incident off stage involving Greg Page,” the statement said.
“Medics were called immediately and he was taken to hospital where he is receiving treatment. We will provide more information as it comes to hand.”
Update: At the end of the show this evening there was a medical incident off stage involving Greg Page. Medics were called immediately and he was taken to hospital where he is receiving treatment. We will provide more information as it comes to hand. — The Wiggles (@TheWiggles) January 17, 2020
A few hours later, The Wiggles confirmed that Page had gone into cardiac arrest, but they assured fans he received proper medical treatment and was recovering.
On Saturday, the group affirmed its update and included a photo of Page in high spirits.
“We’ve visited Greg this morning & he wanted to thank everyone for their well wishes,” The Wiggles wrote on Twitter. “He’s so grateful for the messages of love & support from around the world.
“Greg’s main concern was that the show tonight should go on. Let’s do it for Greg whilst raising much needed funds.”
We’ve visited Greg this morning & he wanted to thank everyone for their well wishes. He’s so grateful for the messages of love & support from around the world. Greg’s main concern was that the show tonight should go on. Let’s do it for Greg whilst raising much needed funds pic.twitter.com/8CBT7P8roA — The Wiggles (@TheWiggles) January 18, 2020
Page’s wishes came true; the show will go on.
The Wiggles shared updated times for the show Saturday and wrote, “Emma Wiggle, Simon Wiggle and a few Wiggly friends and musicians will all be jumping in while Greg recovers, to make sure this is a great show.”
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--2020-01-18--CDC Begins Airport Screenings as Mystery Virus Takes Lives in China

Travelers entering the U.S. from the Chinese city of Wuhan will now be screened for a virus that has left two people dead .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said travelers from Wuhan will now be screened at the three largest ports of entry in the U.S. Those are San Francisco , Los Angeles and New York City ’ s John F. Kennedy airport , according to The New York Times .
The CDC said that it appeared that the initial virus was spread in Wuhan by people who visited an animal and seafood market , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person to person in some limited cases .
However , health care workers who treated infected individuals in China did not become infected themselves , the CDC noted .
Although China is the main source of reports about the virus , it has also been reported in Thailand and Japan — but only in people who have been to Wuhan , China .
About 40 people have been sickened as a result of the virus , known officially as 2019-nCoV , the CDC reported .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To conduct the screenings in the U.S. , the CDC will beef up its staffing at the three target airports by about 100 people .
“ This is a serious situation , ” said Dr. Nancy Messonnier , director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases .
“ We know it is crucial to be proactive and prepared.
” “ Based on current information , however , the immediate health risk from 2019-nCoV to the general American public is deemed to be low at this time .
Nevertheless , CDC is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC said on its website .
Dr. Martin Cetron , director of the CDC ’ s division of global migration and quarantine , said between 60,000 and 65,000 people a year travel from Wuhan to the U.S .
The virus , which was first reported only in December , is in the same family of viruses that cause SARS and MERS , which concerns health officials .
“ It doesn ’ t take much for a virus in general to go from being worrisome to being extremely worrisome , because they tend to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Messonnier said .
Cetron noted that this was a rare step for the CDC , which has deployed resources on this scale only once before — during the Ebola outbreak of 2014 , according to CNN .
“ I ’ ve been here since 1996 , and that ’ s the only other time we ’ ve ever done this — for Ebola , ” Cetron said .
However , Cetron said the risk should not be overstated .
RELATED : Video Shows Yellow Wiggle Greg Page Go into Cardiac Arrest on Stage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a time for people to freak out and be overly concerned , ” Cetron said .
“ This is a time for vigilance and awareness.
” Cetron said that the flu , for example , is a greater threat to the health of most Americans than this new virus .
“ I ’ m fully aware that the unknown is more of a source of anxiety than that which is already defined , ” he said .
“ But we should not freak out.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ editorial standards .

Travelers entering the U.S. from the Chinese city of Wuhan will now be screened for a virus that has left two people dead.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said travelers from Wuhan will now be screened at the three largest ports of entry in the U.S. Those are San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York City’s John F. Kennedy airport, according to The New York Times.
The CDC said that it appeared that the initial virus was spread in Wuhan by people who visited an animal and seafood market, but that the virus has apparently been passed from person to person in some limited cases. However, health care workers who treated infected individuals in China did not become infected themselves, the CDC noted.
Although China is the main source of reports about the virus, it has also been reported in Thailand and Japan — but only in people who have been to Wuhan, China.
About 40 people have been sickened as a result of the virus, known officially as 2019-nCoV, the CDC reported.
To conduct the screenings in the U.S., the CDC will beef up its staffing at the three target airports by about 100 people.
“This is a serious situation,” said Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “We know it is crucial to be proactive and prepared.”
“Based on current information, however, the immediate health risk from 2019-nCoV to the general American public is deemed to be low at this time. Nevertheless, CDC is taking proactive preparedness precautions,” the CDC said on its website.
Dr. Martin Cetron, director of the CDC’s division of global migration and quarantine, said between 60,000 and 65,000 people a year travel from Wuhan to the U.S.
Do you think the government is doing enough to protect Americans from this virus? 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: 34% (40 Votes) No: 66% (77 Votes)
The virus, which was first reported only in December, is in the same family of viruses that cause SARS and MERS, which concerns health officials.
“It doesn’t take much for a virus in general to go from being worrisome to being extremely worrisome, because they tend to morph and mutate a lot,” Messonnier said.
Cetron noted that this was a rare step for the CDC, which has deployed resources on this scale only once before — during the Ebola outbreak of 2014, according to CNN.
“I’ve been here since 1996, and that’s the only other time we’ve ever done this — for Ebola,” Cetron said.
However, Cetron said the risk should not be overstated.
“This is not a time for people to freak out and be overly concerned,” Cetron said. “This is a time for vigilance and awareness.”
Cetron said that the flu, for example, is a greater threat to the health of most Americans than this new virus.
“I’m fully aware that the unknown is more of a source of anxiety than that which is already defined,” he said. “But we should not freak out.”
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--2020-01-18--Couple Chases Down Alleged Kidnapper After Seeing His Car In an Amber Alert

Thanks to vigilance and quick actions of a Massachusetts couple , a kidnapped girl was returned home safely .
Massachusetts State Police issued an AMBER alert for 11-year-old Charlotte Moccia around 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday , only a couple hours after she was reported missing .
According to WBTS-CD , Charlotte was abducted on her way home from her bus stop around 1:30 p.m .
Neighbors who heard the screams reported the incident to local law enforcement and surveillance video captured images of the suspected vehicle .
“ My wife saw most of it , ” neighbor Julius Kenney said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hollering , that ’ s when I got involved .
I was in the front room and she was screaming .
I thought somebody was breaking in.
” TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond The police department shared the AMBER alert on Twitter with pictures of the suspected vehicle , describing it as “ an older dark blue Honda , possibly a Civic w/tinted windows , no front plate & distinctive rims.
” They also said the suspect who forced Charlotte into the car @ @ @ @ @ @ @ male.
” Thanks to a couple who had seen the AMBER alert , police were able to rescue the young girl only six hours after she was reported missing , according to Fox News .
Spring Police Department Commissioner Cheryl Clapprood told WBTS that the public ’ s response the AMBER alert “ immensely ” helped the search .
“ The biggest factor , I think , in this was the assistance of the public .
The tips coming in were amazing , ” she said .
“ People were out looking for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amanda Disley and her husband Benny Correa were among the civilians keeping a vigilant eye out for the vehicle of interest .
When they spotted a dark Honda with “ distinctive rims , ” they immediately began chasing it in their own vehicle .
A video of the chase captured some of Disley ’ s conversation with the police .
RELATED : Doorbell Cam Captures Terrified 10-Year-Old Boy Who Says 3 Men Tried To Lure Him Into Car with Candy “ It ’ s him , it ’ s him !
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re doing 100 miles per hour right now !
” she said .
“ He ’ s blowing through red lights !
” Disley later shared the video to Facebook and said a “ gut feeling ” told them that it was the same car described in the AMBER alert .
“ Some of the video sorry for dramaticness but when I saw the person in the back seat being pushed down all we could think about is her and the danger she was in , ” she wrote in a Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t even sure if it was the right car just the gut feeling my husband and I had by the rims and the funny movements in the car.
” Warning : the following video contains strong language that some readers may find offensive .
Even though Disley and Correa weren ’ t able to keep up with the car , their tips helped officials locate the car and rescue the young girl inside .
Officers finally approached the vehicle around 7:15 p.m. and were able to arrest the 24-year-old driver , Miguel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backseat and was rushed to the hospital to be evaluated before being reunited with her family .
The girl ’ s family thanked everyone involved in bringing home their little girl , but offered a special message to Disley and Correa .
“ In particular , we ’ d like to thank Amanda Disley and her husband for their vigilance and courage for putting themselves in harm ’ s way to make sure she wasn ’ t out of their sight , ” the family said in a statement .
Even though police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connection with Charlotte ’ s kidnapping , but they said Rodriguez is the sole suspect in the case , according to WBTS .
Based on reports from Rodriguez ’ s family that he suffers from schizophrenia , the judge has ordered a 15-day competency hearing .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Thanks to vigilance and quick actions of a Massachusetts couple, a kidnapped girl was returned home safely.
Massachusetts State Police issued an AMBER alert for 11-year-old Charlotte Moccia around 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, only a couple hours after she was reported missing.
According to WBTS-CD, Charlotte was abducted on her way home from her bus stop around 1:30 p.m.
Neighbors who heard the screams reported the incident to local law enforcement and surveillance video captured images of the suspected vehicle.
“My wife saw most of it,” neighbor Julius Kenney said. “When she started screaming and hollering, that’s when I got involved. I was in the front room and she was screaming. I thought somebody was breaking in.”
The police department shared the AMBER alert on Twitter with pictures of the suspected vehicle, describing it as “an older dark blue Honda, possibly a Civic w/tinted windows, no front plate & distinctive rims.”
They also said the suspect who forced Charlotte into the car was likely a “white or Hispanic male.”
UPDATE – Further investigation indicates the suspect who forced CHARLOTTE MOCCIA into the car was a white or Hispanic male, not a black male. Further investigation also reveals that the car has distinctive aftermarket rims and a moonroof. Please call 911 if seen. https://t.co/XPyEgSe2qJ pic.twitter.com/riRNr0ZAlj — Mass State Police (@MassStatePolice) January 15, 2020
Thanks to a couple who had seen the AMBER alert, police were able to rescue the young girl only six hours after she was reported missing, according to Fox News.
Spring Police Department Commissioner Cheryl Clapprood told WBTS that the public’s response the AMBER alert “immensely” helped the search.
“The biggest factor, I think, in this was the assistance of the public. The tips coming in were amazing,” she said. “People were out looking for this car. It was amazing.”
Amanda Disley and her husband Benny Correa were among the civilians keeping a vigilant eye out for the vehicle of interest.
When they spotted a dark Honda with “distinctive rims,” they immediately began chasing it in their own vehicle.
A video of the chase captured some of Disley’s conversation with the police.
“It’s him, it’s him! It’s a blue Honda Civic and they’re doing 100 miles per hour right now!” she said. “He’s blowing through red lights!”
Disley later shared the video to Facebook and said a “gut feeling” told them that it was the same car described in the AMBER alert.
“Some of the video sorry for dramaticness but when I saw the person in the back seat being pushed down all we could think about is her and the danger she was in,” she wrote in a Facebook post. “[I] wasn’t even sure if it was the right car just the gut feeling my husband and I had by the rims and the funny movements in the car.”
Warning: the following video contains strong language that some readers may find offensive.
Even though Disley and Correa weren’t able to keep up with the car, their tips helped officials locate the car and rescue the young girl inside.
Do you pay attention to AMBER alerts issued in your local area? 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: 91% (180 Votes) No: 9% (17 Votes)
Officers finally approached the vehicle around 7:15 p.m. and were able to arrest the 24-year-old driver, Miguel Rodriguez. Charlotte was found in the backseat and was rushed to the hospital to be evaluated before being reunited with her family.
The girl’s family thanked everyone involved in bringing home their little girl, but offered a special message to Disley and Correa.
“In particular, we’d like to thank Amanda Disley and her husband for their vigilance and courage for putting themselves in harm’s way to make sure she wasn’t out of their sight,” the family said in a statement.
Even though police were initially looking for two suspects in connection with Charlotte’s kidnapping, but they said Rodriguez is the sole suspect in the case, according to WBTS.
Based on reports from Rodriguez’s family that he suffers from schizophrenia, the judge has ordered a 15-day competency hearing.
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--2020-01-18--GOP Senator Doubles Down After CNN Anchor Demands Apology for Calling Reporter a ‘Liberal Hack’

A Republican senator who understands what real combat is all about derided the ruffled feathers over at CNN caused by a pair of words for which she refuses to apologize .
The Beltway brouhaha began when CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju lobbed a question at fast-walking Republican Sen. Martha McSally of Arizona , who as an Air Force fighter pilot was the first woman to lead a squadron into combat .
The retort led to CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer demanding an apology “ It was disgusting , it was awful , she should know better , ” Blitzer told Raju @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right thing , she would personally call you and say ‘ I ’ m sorry . '
” But during an appearance later that same day on the Fox News program “ The Ingraham Angle , ” McSally stood by her words .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond “ Senator , do you regret what you said ?
” host Laura Ingraham asked .
“ No Laura , I do not , ” McSally replied after laughing at a clip Ingraham played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bit of byplay .
“ And I said it again actually as I went in , I said , ‘ You ’ re a liberal hack , buddy.
’ ” McSally said the bias she cited is real .
“ These CNN reporters , but many of them around the Capitol , they are so biased , ” she said .
“ They are so in cahoots with the Democrats .
They so can ’ t stand the president , and they run around , trying to chase … Republicans and ask trapping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to McSally , she only speaks the truth .
“ I ’ m a fighter pilot .
I called it like it is , and that ’ s what we see out of the mainstream media , and especially CNN , every single day .
So obviously I ’ m gon na tell the truth , and I did it today , and it ’ s laughable how they ’ ve responded , ” she said .
Ingraham noted that critics claimed McSally has gone “ full Trump.
” “ Well , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ unbecoming a senator ’ and I ‘ lashed out , ' ” McSally said .
“ The Democratic senators walk by and they say , ‘ Hi how are you today ?
’ and then they chase after the Republicans .
It ’ s honestly ridiculous as you know.
” The media is anti-Republican , McSally said .
“ They ’ re cheerleading Democrats .
They hate the president , ” she said .
The Arizona Republican said she has nothing for which to apologize .
“ I speak the truth , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it .
I ’ ve done it my whole life , ” she said .
“ They have a lot of apologizing to do and they should probably be filing FEC reports with the DNC — in-kind contributions , ” she said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A Republican senator who understands what real combat is all about derided the ruffled feathers over at CNN caused by a pair of words for which she refuses to apologize.
The Beltway brouhaha began when CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju lobbed a question at fast-walking Republican Sen. Martha McSally of Arizona, who as an Air Force fighter pilot was the first woman to lead a squadron into combat.
“You’re a liberal hack, I’m not talking to you,” McSally fired back “You’re a liberal hack.”
The retort led to CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer demanding an apology
“It was disgusting, it was awful, she should know better,” Blitzer told Raju on Thursday. “If they did the right thing, she would personally call you and say ‘I’m sorry.'”
But during an appearance later that same day on the Fox News program “The Ingraham Angle,” McSally stood by her words.
“Senator, do you regret what you said?” host Laura Ingraham asked.
“No Laura, I do not,” McSally replied after laughing at a clip Ingraham played of the outrage CNN shared over the bit of byplay. “And I said it again actually as I went in, I said, ‘You’re a liberal hack, buddy.’”
McSally said the bias she cited is real.
“These CNN reporters, but many of them around the Capitol, they are so biased,” she said.
“They are so in cahoots with the Democrats. They so can’t stand the president, and they run around, trying to chase … Republicans and ask trapping questions,” she said.
According to McSally, she only speaks the truth.
“I’m a fighter pilot. I called it like it is, and that’s what we see out of the mainstream media, and especially CNN, every single day. So obviously I’m gonna tell the truth, and I did it today, and it’s laughable how they’ve responded,” she said.
Do you agree with Sen. Martha McSally's comments? 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% (913 Votes) No: 1% (5 Votes)
Ingraham noted that critics claimed McSally has gone “full Trump.”
“Well, they’ve also said that it was ‘unbecoming a senator’ and I ‘lashed out,'” McSally said. “The Democratic senators walk by and they say, ‘Hi how are you today?’ and then they chase after the Republicans. It’s honestly ridiculous as you know.”
The media is anti-Republican, McSally said.
“They’re cheerleading Democrats. They hate the president,” she said.
The Arizona Republican said she has nothing for which to apologize.
“I speak the truth, I’m gonna continue to do it. I’ve done it my whole life,” she said.
“They have a lot of apologizing to do and they should probably be filing FEC reports with the DNC — in-kind contributions,” 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--2020-01-18--Trump Accuses Pelosi of ‘Rigging’ Primary in Favor of Biden with Impeachment Timing

Republicans this week revived the Democratic Party ’ s primary-rigging scandal of 2016 and accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of timing her transfer of the articles of impeachment to impact the Democratic presidential race .
During the 2016 primary , leaked documents revealed that the Democratic National Committee did the bidding of candidate Hillary Clinton to increase her chances of beating Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont .
President Donald Trump tweeted that Pelosi was now playing a similar game , citing the weeks-long gap between when the House passed the articles of impeachment and when Pelosi formally transferred them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because the impeachment trial , currently set to begin in earnest Tuesday , will likely overlap with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary .
Candidates such as Sanders and fellow Sens .
Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts , Michael Bennet of Colorado and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will be forced to stay in Washington to fulfill their roles in the impeachment trial .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond Meanwhile , other candidates will be campaigning in person in those early voting states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again against Bernie Sanders , just like last time , only even more obviously , ” Trump tweeted Friday .
“ They are bringing him out of so important Iowa in order that , as a Senator , he sit through the Impeachment Hoax Trial .
Crazy Nancy thereby gives the strong edge to Sleepy Joe Biden , and Bernie is shut out again.
” “ Very unfair , but that ’ s the way the Democrats play the game .
Anyway , it ’ s a lot of fun to watch !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi ’ s ] own leadership , there were questions about why she held [ the articles ] , ” he said during a news conference Tuesday .
“ But if there ’ s anyone who gained from this , it ’ d be anybody who ’ s running for president that ’ s not in the U.S. Senate .
With Iowa quickly upon us in early February , those four senators who are running for president will now no longer have a voice.
” “ [ I ] f you look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ it was ] to harm one campaign and give a benefit to another , ” he said .
McCarthy noted that the 2016 scandal showed Democrats have not been averse to rigging the system .
“ I know what happened 4 years ago .
Something no one thought would , ” he said .
“ That the head of a complete party of the Democrat National Committee resigning the day before , actually the night before , the nominating convention .
Why ?
Because emails came out to show that one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was cheated.
” Out of fairness , Democratic front-runner former Vice President Joe Biden should suspend his campaign during the trial , McCarthy said .
“ The only rightful thing of Joe Biden is to make a pledge not to campaign while Bernie Sanders can not — after what the Democratic National Committee had done to his campaign a few short years ago , ” he said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Republicans this week revived the Democratic Party’s primary-rigging scandal of 2016 and accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of timing her transfer of the articles of impeachment to impact the Democratic presidential race.
During the 2016 primary, leaked documents revealed that the Democratic National Committee did the bidding of candidate Hillary Clinton to increase her chances of beating Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
President Donald Trump tweeted that Pelosi was now playing a similar game, citing the weeks-long gap between when the House passed the articles of impeachment and when Pelosi formally transferred them to the Senate.
The timing matters, because the impeachment trial, currently set to begin in earnest Tuesday, will likely overlap with the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.
Candidates such as Sanders and fellow Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Michael Bennet of Colorado and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will be forced to stay in Washington to fulfill their roles in the impeachment trial.
Meanwhile, other candidates will be campaigning in person in those early voting states.
“They are rigging the election again against Bernie Sanders, just like last time, only even more obviously,” Trump tweeted Friday. “They are bringing him out of so important Iowa in order that, as a Senator, he sit through the Impeachment Hoax Trial. Crazy Nancy thereby gives the strong edge to Sleepy Joe Biden, and Bernie is shut out again.”
….Joe Biden, and Bernie is shut out again. Very unfair, but that’s the way the Democrats play the game. Anyway, it’s a lot of fun to watch! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 17, 2020
Do you think Nancy Pelosi is trying to impact the Democratic presidential race? 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% (3160 Votes) No: 1% (24 Votes)
“Very unfair, but that’s the way the Democrats play the game. Anyway, it’s a lot of fun to watch!” Trump added.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, made similar observations, Fox News reported.
“Within [Pelosi’s] own leadership, there were questions about why she held [the articles],” he said during a news conference Tuesday.
“But if there’s anyone who gained from this, it’d be anybody who’s running for president that’s not in the U.S. Senate. With Iowa quickly upon us in early February, those four senators who are running for president will now no longer have a voice.”
“[I]f you look at the true political nature of why — [it was] to harm one campaign and give a benefit to another,” he said.
On TYT a few weeks ago they were discussing Pelosi’s delay and they speculated that one of the reasons she might be waiting was so that Bernie would be hindered in campaigning on the early primaries. Now that it’s happened, I believe that is exactly what she was doing. — Bernie Babe ? (@caltron01) January 17, 2020
So much fo a speedy trial desired by the WH, the Senate Impeachment trial May run through Iowa caucuses, SOTU, and even the NH primaries. Dem Sen running for office should thank Pelosi for delay that hurts their campaign. https://t.co/0XfR5wfieh via @BreitbartNews — Edwin Mora (@EdwinMora83) January 17, 2020
Pelosi meddling in Dem primary? Senate trial delay a setback for Sanders https://t.co/6hepKJT2EV pic.twitter.com/ZgEjNxyzea — Chuck Woolery (@chuckwoolery) January 14, 2020
McCarthy noted that the 2016 scandal showed Democrats have not been averse to rigging the system.
“I know what happened 4 years ago. Something no one thought would,” he said.
“That the head of a complete party of the Democrat National Committee resigning the day before, actually the night before, the nominating convention. Why? Because emails came out to show that one of the main campaigners, Sen. Bernie Sanders, was cheated.”
Out of fairness, Democratic front-runner former Vice President Joe Biden should suspend his campaign during the trial, McCarthy said.
“The only rightful thing of Joe Biden is to make a pledge not to campaign while Bernie Sanders cannot — after what the Democratic National Committee had done to his campaign a few short years ago,” 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--2020-01-18--Judge Smacks Down Transgender Pronouns, Says They’re a Courtesy, Not a Right for People Before the C

Judge Smacks Down Transgender Pronouns, Says They’re a Courtesy, Not a Right for People Before the Court

You can get yourself into an awful lot of trouble these days for the mere act of living in reality .
Such is the case of Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan , a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit .
Duncan is a Trump appointee , one who was savaged by the left during his confirmation hearings because they said he couldn ’ t rule fairly in cases involving LGBT individuals , in large part due to the fact he once represented a school board fighting against a transgender student who wanted to use the bathroom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again at the center of a controversy regarding whether transgender identity and pronouns are a right in the legal system as opposed to a courtesy .
In an advisory opinion Wednesday , as The Hill reported , Duncan said that it was “ convention , ” not “ binding precedent , ” for the courts to refer to a transgender-identifying litigant by their chosen gender pronouns .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond Jett , back in 2012 , pleaded guilty to child pornography @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Norman Varner .
Jett wanted the court records updated to reflect the fact he had a different name .
He also wanted all gender pronouns in the paperwork to be changed to “ she/her.
” A lower court ruled that Jett had no claim given that there was no “ defect ” in the original paperwork , considering that he was legally referred to as Norman Varner at the time of the crimes .
In his majority opinion , Duncan called Jett ’ s efforts to have his gender pronouns changed in court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No authority supports the proposition that we may require litigants , judges , court personnel , or anyone else to refer to gender-dysphoric litigants with pronouns matching their subjective gender identity , ” Duncan ’ s opinion read .
“ But the courts that have followed this ‘ convention , ' ” he added , “ have done so purely as a courtesy to parties.
” “ None has adopted the practice as a matter of binding precedent , and none has purported to obligate litigants or others to follow the practice.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said , didn ’ t apply inasmuch as Congress “ has said nothing to prohibit courts from referring to litigants according to their biological sex , rather than according to their subjective gender identity.
” The outrage circus immediately came to town , as evidenced by this purportedly straight news piece from NBC News .
“ In his majority opinion , Duncan vacated the lower court ruling that denied Jett ’ s appeal , saying the court lacked jurisdiction , but then he proceeded to mock Jett ’ s court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ female pronouns and her new name , ” the Friday article by Tim Fitzsimons read .
Fitzsimons argued that the 5th Circuit had mostly gone with using an individual ’ s preferred pronouns , although Duncan ’ s ruling cited three cases in which they didn ’ t .
There ’ s also no explanation about how this constitutes mocking other than the fact that Duncan said something which went against liberal transgender dogma .
The remainder of the piece seemed to be handed over to Duncan ’ s adversaries from his confirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Mr. Duncan will cast aside his bigoted beliefs overnight , and miraculously transform into an impartial judge , is ludicrous and reckless , ” Lambda Legal Executive Director Rachel Tiven is quoted as saying back in 2018 .
American Civil Liberties Union attorney and transgender rights advocate Chase Strangio said Duncan ’ s ruling was “ far outside the standard practice within the entire legal profession ” and that he went “ on this long advisory opinion about the legal implications of pronouns and the nature of sex discrimination and things that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the question before it.
” Almost as much column space , meanwhile , was given over to the dissenting opinion from Clinton appointee Judge James L. Dennis .
A short excerpt : “ As the majority notes , though no law compels granting or denying such a request , many courts and judges adhere to such requests out of respect for the litigant ’ s dignity , ” he wrote .
It ’ s a matter of courtesy , and it ’ s nothing that the court has an obligation to rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as this .
While much of what Duncan had to say may be a novelty for a media outlet like NBC , his ruling is both legally sound and should be a welcome guide on an emerging set of rules involving how courts and law enforcement should deal with transgender-adjacent issues .
No one , especially not our court system , ought to be forced to change their language based on one person ’ s demands .
Going into 2020 , it ’ s well worth reminding voters that control over judicial appointments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key factors in the battle for the White House .
It ’ s difficult to imagine what the landscape would look like were Hillary Clinton president .
Of course , say what you will about Clinton , but 2016 Hillary sounds an awful lot more reasonable than 2020 Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren .
Consider what this decision would be like without a Trump appointee — and then think about what might happen if the Democrats are allowed to nominate federal judges for the next 4 years .
We are committed to truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Read our editorial standards .

You can get yourself into an awful lot of trouble these days for the mere act of living in reality. Such is the case of Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Duncan is a Trump appointee, one who was savaged by the left during his confirmation hearings because they said he couldn’t rule fairly in cases involving LGBT individuals, in large part due to the fact he once represented a school board fighting against a transgender student who wanted to use the bathroom of their choice.
He finds himself again at the center of a controversy regarding whether transgender identity and pronouns are a right in the legal system as opposed to a courtesy.
In an advisory opinion Wednesday, as The Hill reported, Duncan said that it was “convention,” not “binding precedent,” for the courts to refer to a transgender-identifying litigant by their chosen gender pronouns.
The case involves Kathrine Nicole Jett, a transgender biological male.
Jett, back in 2012, pleaded guilty to child pornography charges when he was legally known as Norman Varner.
Jett wanted the court records updated to reflect the fact he had a different name. He also wanted all gender pronouns in the paperwork to be changed to “she/her.”
A lower court ruled that Jett had no claim given that there was no “defect” in the original paperwork, considering that he was legally referred to as Norman Varner at the time of the crimes.
In his majority opinion, Duncan called Jett’s efforts to have his gender pronouns changed in court records a “quixotic undertaking.”
Do you agree with this judge's ruling? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (3852 Votes) No: 0% (16 Votes)
“No authority supports the proposition that we may require litigants, judges, court personnel, or anyone else to refer to gender-dysphoric litigants with pronouns matching their subjective gender identity,” Duncan’s opinion read.
“But the courts that have followed this ‘convention,'” he added, “have done so purely as a courtesy to parties.”
“None has adopted the practice as a matter of binding precedent, and none has purported to obligate litigants or others to follow the practice.”
Congressional legislation regarding “gender identity discrimination,” he said, didn’t apply inasmuch as Congress “has said nothing to prohibit courts from referring to litigants according to their biological sex, rather than according to their subjective gender identity.”
The outrage circus immediately came to town, as evidenced by this purportedly straight news piece from NBC News.
“In his majority opinion, Duncan vacated the lower court ruling that denied Jett’s appeal, saying the court lacked jurisdiction, but then he proceeded to mock Jett’s court motion that she be referred to using female pronouns and her new name,” the Friday article by Tim Fitzsimons read.
Fitzsimons argued that the 5th Circuit had mostly gone with using an individual’s preferred pronouns, although Duncan’s ruling cited three cases in which they didn’t. There’s also no explanation about how this constitutes mocking other than the fact that Duncan said something which went against liberal transgender dogma.
The remainder of the piece seemed to be handed over to Duncan’s adversaries from his confirmation to the court.
“The idea that Mr. Duncan will cast aside his bigoted beliefs overnight, and miraculously transform into an impartial judge, is ludicrous and reckless,” Lambda Legal Executive Director Rachel Tiven is quoted as saying back in 2018.
American Civil Liberties Union attorney and transgender rights advocate Chase Strangio said Duncan’s ruling was “far outside the standard practice within the entire legal profession” and that he went “on this long advisory opinion about the legal implications of pronouns and the nature of sex discrimination and things that have nothing to do with the case or the question before it.”
Almost as much column space, meanwhile, was given over to the dissenting opinion from Clinton appointee Judge James L. Dennis.
A short excerpt: “As the majority notes, though no law compels granting or denying such a request, many courts and judges adhere to such requests out of respect for the litigant’s dignity,” he wrote.
“[O]ut of respect,” however, isn’t a binding thing.
It’s a matter of courtesy, and it’s nothing that the court has an obligation to rule on, particularly in a case such as this.
While much of what Duncan had to say may be a novelty for a media outlet like NBC, his ruling is both legally sound and should be a welcome guide on an emerging set of rules involving how courts and law enforcement should deal with transgender-adjacent issues.
No one, especially not our court system, ought to be forced to change their language based on one person’s demands.
Going into 2020, it’s well worth reminding voters that control over judicial appointments is going to be one of the key factors in the battle for the White House.
It’s difficult to imagine what the landscape would look like were Hillary Clinton president.
Of course, say what you will about Clinton, but 2016 Hillary sounds an awful lot more reasonable than 2020 Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren.
Consider what this decision would be like without a Trump appointee — and then think about what might happen if the Democrats are allowed to nominate federal judges for the next 4 years.
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--2020-01-18--Trump Trade War Works as US Economy Sizzles & China Sees Weakest Growth in 29 Years

“ Phase One ” of the resolution of the United States-China trade war was signed earlier this week , and it had some pretty big wins for the Trump administration .
Writ large in media headlines were two things the United States did well to get Beijing to sign onto — agreements from China to crack down on intellectual property theft and to increase imports from the United States by $ 200 billion over 2 years .
Whether or not Chinese President Xi Jinping ’ s government actually enforces any of this is another question entirely , but that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Phase One.
” President Donald Trump insisted , according to CNBC , that the agreement had “ total and full enforceability.
” During the signing , he said the two countries were “ righting the wrongs of the past and delivering a future of economic justice and security for American workers , farmers and families.
” TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond Most of the tariffs from the trade war will remain in place , according to Reason , and the deal is still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that China was even willing to agree to any of this in the first place was , at the very least , a major win for the United States — particularly since we were told how the trade war with China was going to end in tears .
As it turns out , if there are any tears being shed , they ’ re likely coming from Beijing .
On the same week that the “ Phase One ” agreement was signed , China revealed its economic growth in 2019 was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years — 6.1 percent , according to Reuters .
While that growth was by no means slow by global standards , it was a major cooling-off from the 6.6 percent growth China experienced in 2018 .
Furthermore , experts predicted the world ’ s second-largest economy would further cool to 5.9 percent growth in 2020 .
The sluggish growth was , according to Reuters , recorded “ amid a bruising trade war with the United States , and more stimulus is expected this year as Beijing tries to boost sluggish investment and demand.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ growth rate will come further down to below 6 % percent in 2020 , ” Masaaki Kanno , chief economist at Sony Financial Holdings in Japan , told Reuters .
“ The Chinese economy is unlikely to fall abruptly because of … government policies , but at the same time the trend of a further slowdown of the economy will remain unchanged.
” RELATED : Fox Host Bolton Says Trump Should Plaster This Chart 'Absolutely Everywhere' Reuters reported that “ [ e ] asing trade tensions have made manufacturers more optimistic about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many of the tit-for-tat tariffs both sides imposed during the trade war remain in place.
” While U.S. GDP growth isn ’ t exactly as robust as China ’ s — we ’ re a far more mature economy , which means we don ’ t put up rocket-ship numbers the same way that Beijing does — our third-quarter gross domestic product growth was actually higher than expected .
“ The Commerce Department said Wednesday that economic activity grew at an annualized rate of 1.9 % in the third quarter , down slightly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second quarter .
Economists polled by Dow Jones had expected the first look at third-quarter economic growth to come in at 1.6 % , ” CNBC reported in October .
As the White House pointed out , too , the third-quarter results made this the longest run of economic expansion in recorded U.S. history .
“ As today ’ s advance Gross Domestic Product ( GDP ) release confirms , economic growth continued in the third quarter of 2019 , beating market expectations and adding to the expansion ’ s record length .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Administration ’ s policies support sustained economic growth and lead to higher incomes for American families , ” the White House said in a statement upon the release of the numbers .
“ In its final projection before the 2016 election , the Congressional Budget Office ( CBO ) estimated that real GDP would grow at a 2.1 percent annual rate in the first 11 quarters of a new Administration .
Instead , under President Trump , real GDP as of the third quarter has grown at a strong 2.6 percent annual rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third quarter , real GDP is $ 230 billion — or 1.2 percent — higher than CBO ’ s projection .
“ Furthermore , under President Obama ’ s expansion period , real GDP grew at only a 2.2 percent annual rate compared to the Trump Administration ’ s 2.6 percent rate.
” Now , protectionism for protectionism ’ s sake and modern-day mercantilism are things any sensible conservative should be against , which is why an all-out economic war over mere trade deficits is something the United States would do well to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tariffs as a means to an end — particularly when it comes to China , which has been a bad actor on the economic stage for decades and has made little effort to change — is a very necessary evil .
Beijing has long promised that it will open up its economy and protect intellectual property .
It hasn ’ t .
Whether or not “ Phase One ” makes any difference remains to be seen , but it ’ s a promising first step , What we do know is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , from the looks of things , it ’ s hurt them more than it ’ s hurt us .
Furthermore , it ’ s changed the “ calculus ” of the matter , according to George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen .
“ The U.S. has established its seriousness as a counterweight to China , something lacking since it largely overlooked China ’ s various territorial encroachments in the 2010s , ” he wrote in an Op-Ed for Bloomberg on Wednesday .
“ Whether in economics or foreign policy , China now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — a very different calculus .
At a time when there is tension in North Korea , Hong Kong , Taiwan and the South China Sea , that is potentially a significant gain .
“ President Donald Trump ’ s tariffs did hurt U.S. consumers , and while that is indeed an economic cost of the deal , it is also a credibility benefit , ” he continued .
“ It shows that the U.S. is in fact willing to incur some pain to oppose China , contrary to the common Chinese view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credibility has also been improved among its allies and some neutral nations.
” Trump ’ s tariffs , in the end , haven ’ t been deadly for us and they ’ ve forced Beijing to the table .
That ’ s a major change from where we were a few short years ago — and it ’ s one for the better We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

“Phase One” of the resolution of the United States-China trade war was signed earlier this week, and it had some pretty big wins for the Trump administration.
Writ large in media headlines were two things the United States did well to get Beijing to sign onto — agreements from China to crack down on intellectual property theft and to increase imports from the United States by $200 billion over 2 years.
Whether or not Chinese President Xi Jinping’s government actually enforces any of this is another question entirely, but that’s why it’s called “Phase One.”
President Donald Trump insisted, according to CNBC, that the agreement had “total and full enforceability.”
During the signing, he said the two countries were “righting the wrongs of the past and delivering a future of economic justice and security for American workers, farmers and families.”
Most of the tariffs from the trade war will remain in place, according to Reason, and the deal is still a rough sketch.
Still, the fact that China was even willing to agree to any of this in the first place was, at the very least, a major win for the United States — particularly since we were told how the trade war with China was going to end in tears.
As it turns out, if there are any tears being shed, they’re likely coming from Beijing.
On the same week that the “Phase One” agreement was signed, China revealed its economic growth in 2019 was the lowest it’s been in 29 years — 6.1 percent, according to Reuters.
Do you think China's economic growth will continue to falter? 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: 88% (588 Votes) No: 12% (84 Votes)
While that growth was by no means slow by global standards, it was a major cooling-off from the 6.6 percent growth China experienced in 2018.
Furthermore, experts predicted the world’s second-largest economy would further cool to 5.9 percent growth in 2020.
The sluggish growth was, according to Reuters, recorded “amid a bruising trade war with the United States, and more stimulus is expected this year as Beijing tries to boost sluggish investment and demand.”
“We expect China’s growth rate will come further down to below 6% percent in 2020,” Masaaki Kanno, chief economist at Sony Financial Holdings in Japan, told Reuters.
“The Chinese economy is unlikely to fall abruptly because of … government policies, but at the same time the trend of a further slowdown of the economy will remain unchanged.”
Reuters reported that “[e]asing trade tensions have made manufacturers more optimistic about the business outlook, analysts said, though many of the tit-for-tat tariffs both sides imposed during the trade war remain in place.”
While U.S. GDP growth isn’t exactly as robust as China’s — we’re a far more mature economy, which means we don’t put up rocket-ship numbers the same way that Beijing does — our third-quarter gross domestic product growth was actually higher than expected.
“The Commerce Department said Wednesday that economic activity grew at an annualized rate of 1.9% in the third quarter, down slightly from the 2% pace in the second quarter. Economists polled by Dow Jones had expected the first look at third-quarter economic growth to come in at 1.6%,” CNBC reported in October.
As the White House pointed out, too, the third-quarter results made this the longest run of economic expansion in recorded U.S. history.
“As today’s advance Gross Domestic Product (GDP) release confirms, economic growth continued in the third quarter of 2019, beating market expectations and adding to the expansion’s record length. The release also confirms that the Trump Administration’s policies support sustained economic growth and lead to higher incomes for American families,” the White House said in a statement upon the release of the numbers.
“In its final projection before the 2016 election, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that real GDP would grow at a 2.1 percent annual rate in the first 11 quarters of a new Administration. Instead, under President Trump, real GDP as of the third quarter has grown at a strong 2.6 percent annual rate since the election. As of the third quarter, real GDP is $230 billion — or 1.2 percent — higher than CBO’s projection.
“Furthermore, under President Obama’s expansion period, real GDP grew at only a 2.2 percent annual rate compared to the Trump Administration’s 2.6 percent rate.”
Now, protectionism for protectionism’s sake and modern-day mercantilism are things any sensible conservative should be against, which is why an all-out economic war over mere trade deficits is something the United States would do well to avoid.
This being said, using tariffs as a means to an end — particularly when it comes to China, which has been a bad actor on the economic stage for decades and has made little effort to change — is a very necessary evil.
Beijing has long promised that it will open up its economy and protect intellectual property. It hasn’t.
Whether or not “Phase One” makes any difference remains to be seen, but it’s a promising first step,
What we do know is that the trade war has hurt China. And, from the looks of things, it’s hurt them more than it’s hurt us.
Furthermore, it’s changed the “calculus” of the matter, according to George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen.
“The U.S. has established its seriousness as a counterweight to China, something lacking since it largely overlooked China’s various territorial encroachments in the 2010s,” he wrote in an Op-Ed for Bloomberg on Wednesday.
“Whether in economics or foreign policy, China now can expect the U.S. to push back — a very different calculus. At a time when there is tension in North Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and the South China Sea, that is potentially a significant gain.
“President Donald Trump’s tariffs did hurt U.S. consumers, and while that is indeed an economic cost of the deal, it is also a credibility benefit,” he continued.
“It shows that the U.S. is in fact willing to incur some pain to oppose China, contrary to the common Chinese view that Americans are ‘soft.’ U.S. credibility has also been improved among its allies and some neutral nations.”
Trump’s tariffs, in the end, haven’t been deadly for us and they’ve forced Beijing to the table.
That’s a major change from where we were a few short years ago — and it’s one for the better
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--2020-01-18--Fox Host Bolton Says Trump Should Plaster This Chart ‘Absolutely Everywhere’

At the Democratic presidential debate earlier this week in Iowa , several of the candidates made it clear they were ready to take on President Donald Trump regarding America ’ s economy .
Pete Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , declared , “ I am ready to take on this president on the economy , because I am from the exact kind of industrial Midwestern community that he pretends to speak to and has proven to turn his back on — and guided that community through a historic transformation.
” Billionaire activist Tom Steyer , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phony when it came to economic issues .
“ Whoever is going to beat Mr. Trump is going to have to beat him on the economy , and I have the experience and the expertise to show he ’ s a fake there and a fraud , ” Steyer said .
“ Look , Mayor Pete has three years as an analyst at McKinsey .
I have 30 years of international business experience .
I can beat Trump on the economy.
” And , in a moment which should have evoked laughter in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden also said he could take Trump down based on the economy .
TRENDING : Northam Declares 'State of Emergency ' as Militias Prepare To March on Richmond “ With regard to the economy , I can hardly wait to have that debate with him .
Where I come from , the neighborhoods I come from , they ’ re in real trouble — working-class people , middle-class people , ” Biden said .
“ I ’ d love that debate because the American public is getting clobbered .
The wealthy are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The reason that should have evoked laughter , for those of you who ’ ve already forgotten the history of the late aughts and early tens , is how the economy was doing under the Obama administration .
If you ’ ve forgotten that , you ’ ve also likely forgotten the what the economy ’ s looked like for the last 40 years .
That ’ s why Fox Business host Deirdre Bolton said Thursday on Fox Nation ’ s “ Deep Dive ” that there ’ s one chart the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everywhere.
” It ’ s the one thing that Democrats are loath to admit : Things are actually pretty copacetic , economy-wise , under the current administration .
The chart in question shows the average unemployment rate for the first 35 months of a president ’ s term .
The highest average rate during the first 35 months of a term was 9.3 percent under Barack Obama .
While this is somewhat to be expected — Obama took office in the midst of the Great Recession , after all — it doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t do much about it for the first few years .
RELATED : Trump Trade War Works as US Economy Sizzles & China Sees Weakest Growth in 29 Years The next-highest average unemployment rate during the first 35 months of a term was under Ronald Reagan , who took over while the malaise hangover from the Jimmy Carter years was still in effect .
A worldwide economic slowdown in the early 1980s didn ’ t help , and while the United States managed to get out of the doldrums pretty early , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average unemployment rate .
Overall , the lowest rate among non-Trump presidents was under George W. Bush , who managed a 5.5 average unemployment rate despite 9/11 and the economic downturn in its wake .
During the first 35 months of Donald Trump term ?
A historically low 3.9 percent average unemployment rate , according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics .
“ If I were the Trump campaign , I would just be plastering that absolutely everywhere , ” Bolton said .
And it ’ s not just the 1 percent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Payne pointed out , workers ’ wages are going up faster than the wages of those above them .
“ The first time it happened was September of 2018 , ” Payne said .
“ And it ’ s happened every single month , except one , where blue-collar workers ’ , not supervisory workers ’ , wages have grown faster than their supervisors ’ .
It ’ s amazing.
” James Freeman , an editor with The Wall Street Journal , said this meant the Democrats would need a new line if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 .
“ There needs to be , I think , a new Democratic economic message , ” he said .
“ They ’ re basically giving the same talking points from 2015 and 2016 , when we talk about the average person ’ s wages are stagnating and the middle class doesn ’ t have the same opportunity.
” This all coincided with a Thursday report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia which showed rebounding numbers for slumping industrial production in the mid-Atlantic region .
“ Fourty-four percent of firms questioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said they were seeing increased demand for their products , while 30.5 percent reported falling demand , ” Fox News reported .
“ Of the businesses reporting higher demand , 25 percent said they were going to hire more workers and 33 percent said that they were going to increase hours.
” “ For the first time in 26 years , according to census , and [ BLS ] data , we have seen income gains in all Metropolitan areas , ” Fox Business host Elizabeth MacDonald said .
“ Now , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their state tax revenue back before pre-recession levels , according to Pew Charitable Trusts.
” “ So are people buying the 2020 Democrats ’ doom and gloom ?
” Well , Biden , Buttigieg and Steyer are — and they want you to believe they can do a better job of handling the economy for the average American , even though the average American is doing much better under the Trump administration than they ever were under Obama , or , really , any president in recent memory .
If the Trump campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , this chart would be what they ’ d plaster everywhere — simply because no one in the field has an answer to it .
And remember , Trump was supposed to destroy the economy .
First it was that he was unhinged and inexperienced .
Then it was that trade wars would decimate us .
Then it was that a recession was just around the corner , talk that curiously seemed to disappear about the same time impeachment kicked into high gear .
Now it ’ s that Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
None of that is true .
Unemployment is low , the stock market and GDP are high , and economic indicators are good .
That ’ s going to be difficult for the Democrats to counter with the tired old lines about impending economic doom .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

At the Democratic presidential debate earlier this week in Iowa, several of the candidates made it clear they were ready to take on President Donald Trump regarding America’s economy.
Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, declared, “I am ready to take on this president on the economy, because I am from the exact kind of industrial Midwestern community that he pretends to speak to and has proven to turn his back on — and guided that community through a historic transformation.”
Billionaire activist Tom Steyer, meanwhile, said the president was a phony when it came to economic issues.
“Whoever is going to beat Mr. Trump is going to have to beat him on the economy, and I have the experience and the expertise to show he’s a fake there and a fraud,” Steyer said. “Look, Mayor Pete has three years as an analyst at McKinsey. I have 30 years of international business experience. I can beat Trump on the economy.”
And, in a moment which should have evoked laughter in any other forum, former Vice President Joe Biden also said he could take Trump down based on the economy.
“With regard to the economy, I can hardly wait to have that debate with him. Where I come from, the neighborhoods I come from, they’re in real trouble — working-class people, middle-class people,” Biden said.
“I’d love that debate because the American public is getting clobbered. The wealthy are the only ones doing well — period.”
The reason that should have evoked laughter, for those of you who’ve already forgotten the history of the late aughts and early tens, is how the economy was doing under the Obama administration.
If you’ve forgotten that, you’ve also likely forgotten the what the economy’s looked like for the last 40 years.
Do you think Donald Trump has done a good job of managing the economy? 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% (1732 Votes) No: 1% (16 Votes)
That’s why Fox Business host Deirdre Bolton said Thursday on Fox Nation’s “Deep Dive” that there’s one chart the Trump administration should be plastering “absolutely everywhere.”
It’s the one thing that Democrats are loath to admit: Things are actually pretty copacetic, economy-wise, under the current administration.
The chart in question shows the average unemployment rate for the first 35 months of a president’s term.
The highest average rate during the first 35 months of a term was 9.3 percent under Barack Obama.
While this is somewhat to be expected — Obama took office in the midst of the Great Recession, after all — it doesn’t erase the fact his administration didn’t do much about it for the first few years.
The next-highest average unemployment rate during the first 35 months of a term was under Ronald Reagan, who took over while the malaise hangover from the Jimmy Carter years was still in effect.
A worldwide economic slowdown in the early 1980s didn’t help, and while the United States managed to get out of the doldrums pretty early, that still led to a 9 percent average unemployment rate.
Overall, the lowest rate among non-Trump presidents was under George W. Bush, who managed a 5.5 average unemployment rate despite 9/11 and the economic downturn in its wake.
During the first 35 months of Donald Trump term?
A historically low 3.9 percent average unemployment rate, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“If I were the Trump campaign, I would just be plastering that absolutely everywhere,” Bolton said.
And it’s not just the 1 percent, either.
As Fox Business host Charles Payne pointed out, workers’ wages are going up faster than the wages of those above them.
“The first time it happened was September of 2018,” Payne said.
“And it’s happened every single month, except one, where blue-collar workers’, not supervisory workers’, wages have grown faster than their supervisors’. It’s amazing.”
James Freeman, an editor with The Wall Street Journal, said this meant the Democrats would need a new line if they’re going to win in 2020.
“There needs to be, I think, a new Democratic economic message,” he said.
“They’re basically giving the same talking points from 2015 and 2016, when we talk about the average person’s wages are stagnating and the middle class doesn’t have the same opportunity.”
This all coincided with a Thursday report from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia which showed rebounding numbers for slumping industrial production in the mid-Atlantic region.
“Fourty-four percent of firms questioned in the Philadelphia Fed’s survey said they were seeing increased demand for their products, while 30.5 percent reported falling demand,” Fox News reported.
“Of the businesses reporting higher demand, 25 percent said they were going to hire more workers and 33 percent said that they were going to increase hours.”
“For the first time in 26 years, according to census, and [BLS] data, we have seen income gains in all Metropolitan areas,” Fox Business host Elizabeth MacDonald said.
“Now, we’ve also seen 45 states seeing their state tax revenue back before pre-recession levels, according to Pew Charitable Trusts.”
“So are people buying the 2020 Democrats’ doom and gloom?”
Well, Biden, Buttigieg and Steyer are — and they want you to believe they can do a better job of handling the economy for the average American, even though the average American is doing much better under the Trump administration than they ever were under Obama, or, really, any president in recent memory.
If the Trump campaign wanted to decimate whoever the Democratic candidate is, this chart would be what they’d plaster everywhere — simply because no one in the field has an answer to it.
And remember, Trump was supposed to destroy the economy.
First it was that he was unhinged and inexperienced.
Then it was that trade wars would decimate us.
Then it was that a recession was just around the corner, talk that curiously seemed to disappear about the same time impeachment kicked into high gear.
Now it’s that Trump’s economic proposals have solely benefited the rich.
None of that is true.
Unemployment is low, the stock market and GDP are high, and economic indicators are good.
That’s going to be difficult for the Democrats to counter with the tired old lines about impending economic doom.
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--2020-01-19--In Custody Battle, Man Demands ‘Trial by Combat’ with Samurai Swords: ‘I Will Rend Their Souls’

A Kansas man challenged his ex-wife and her attorney to a “ trial by combat ” with Japanese samurai swords in order to settle their child custody dispute in Iowa earlier this month .
David Ostrom , 40 , claimed in court documents that his ex-wife , Bridgette , 38 , and her attorney have “ destroyed [ him ] legally.
” According to The New York Post , Ostrom got the idea from a 2015 case involving New York attorney Richard Luthmann , who challenged a lawyer and his clients to settle a legal dispute via swordfight — “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To this day , trial by combat has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States , ” Ostrom stated in court filings , according to the Carroll Times Herald .
He said that such a method has been used “ as recently as 1818 in British Court.
” Ostrom asked the Iowa District Court in Shelby County to give him three months to either acquire or forge katana and wakizashi swords .
TRENDING : UK Outlet Runs Pictures of Grinning Bill Clinton with Sex Slave and Epstein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now wish to give them the chance to meet me on the field of battle , where I will REND THEIR SOULS from their … bodies , ” Ostrom wrote in the court filing .
Ostrom said that he would allow his ex-wife to choose her attorney , Matthew Hudson , as her “ champion , ” or stand-in fighter .
If they do not accept the challenge , Ostrom says he should automatically win the dispute .
“ Respondent and counsel have proven themselves to be cravens by refusing to answer the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose this motion by default , ” Ostrom wrote in the court filings .
But if they chose to accept , he will engage them with a “ blunted practice style ” of sword-fighting .
Ostrom told the The Des Moines Register on Monday that the challenge stemmed from his annoyance with Hudson .
“ I think I ’ ve met Mr. Hudson ’ s absurdity with my own absurdity , ” Ostrom said .
Hudson filed his opposition to Ostrom ’ s proposed mediation tactic on Jan. 10 , arguing that since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ severe injury or death , the potential consequences would be too severe for a dispute over child custody .
“ Although the respondent and potential combatant do have souls to be rended , they respectfully request that the court not order this done , ” Hudson wrote .
“ It should be noted that just because the U.S. and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling another person with a deadly katana sword , it does prohibit a court sitting in equity from ordering same.
” Hudson asked the court order a psychological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights in light of the absurd request .
Ostrom argued that he had no history of mental issues .
RELATED : With One Year To Spare , Trump Breaks Record for Judges Appointed in First Term However , Ostrom said that he made the outlandish request to make a point .
He told KCTV in an interview that he hopes all the attention his case has received will open up the conversation on co-parenting .
“ I ’ m not interested in physically causing harm to anyone , ” Ostrom said .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s court system is biased against men in child custody cases .
“ They ’ ve tried to ignore me , not address equal custody , and I think this puts a spotlight on them , ” he said .
“ I ’ ve kind of run out of options and no one pays attention to what I think is hardship on myself and my children.
” The court has not yet made a decision on any of the proposed motions .
Ostrom told The Des Moines Register that he does not expect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but he still would like a reply .
Though he doesn ’ t have any sword fighting experience , he is serious about his challenge .
“ If Mr. Hudson is willing to do it , I will meet him .
I don ’ t think he has the guts to do it.
” The Western Journal has reached out to Matthew Hudson for further comment but did not receive a response by publication time .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial @ @

A Kansas man challenged his ex-wife and her attorney to a “trial by combat” with Japanese samurai swords in order to settle their child custody dispute in Iowa earlier this month.
David Ostrom, 40, claimed in court documents that his ex-wife, Bridgette, 38, and her attorney have “destroyed [him] legally.”
According to The New York Post, Ostrom got the idea from a 2015 case involving New York attorney Richard Luthmann, who challenged a lawyer and his clients to settle a legal dispute via swordfight — “Game of Thrones” style.
“To this day, trial by combat has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States,” Ostrom stated in court filings, according to the Carroll Times Herald. He said that such a method has been used “as recently as 1818 in British Court.”
Ostrom asked the Iowa District Court in Shelby County to give him three months to either acquire or forge katana and wakizashi swords.
“I now wish to give them the chance to meet me on the field of battle, where I will REND THEIR SOULS from their … bodies,” Ostrom wrote in the court filing.
Ostrom said that he would allow his ex-wife to choose her attorney, Matthew Hudson, as her “champion,” or stand-in fighter. If they do not accept the challenge, Ostrom says he should automatically win the dispute.
“Respondent and counsel have proven themselves to be cravens by refusing to answer the call to battle, thus they should lose this motion by default,” Ostrom wrote in the court filings. But if they chose to accept, he will engage them with a “blunted practice style” of sword-fighting.
Ostrom told the The Des Moines Register on Monday that the challenge stemmed from his annoyance with Hudson.
Do you think this man is completely out of his mind? 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: 55% (424 Votes) No: 45% (342 Votes)
“I think I’ve met Mr. Hudson’s absurdity with my own absurdity,” Ostrom said.
Hudson filed his opposition to Ostrom’s proposed mediation tactic on Jan. 10, arguing that since a trial by combat could end in severe injury or death, the potential consequences would be too severe for a dispute over child custody.
“Although the respondent and potential combatant do have souls to be rended, they respectfully request that the court not order this done,” Hudson wrote.
“It should be noted that just because the U.S. and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling another person with a deadly katana sword, it does prohibit a court sitting in equity from ordering same.”
Hudson asked the court order a psychological evaluation for Ostrom and suspend his visitation rights in light of the absurd request. Ostrom argued that he had no history of mental issues.
However, Ostrom said that he made the outlandish request to make a point. He told KCTV in an interview that he hopes all the attention his case has received will open up the conversation on co-parenting.
“I’m not interested in physically causing harm to anyone,” Ostrom said. He said he believes that his county’s court system is biased against men in child custody cases.
“They’ve tried to ignore me, not address equal custody, and I think this puts a spotlight on them,” he said. “I’ve kind of run out of options and no one pays attention to what I think is hardship on myself and my children.”
The court has not yet made a decision on any of the proposed motions. Ostrom told The Des Moines Register that he does not expect that the court will approve his motion, but he still would like a reply.
Though he doesn’t have any sword fighting experience, he is serious about his challenge.
“If Mr. Hudson is willing to do it, I will meet him. I don’t think he has the guts to do it.”
The Western Journal has reached out to Matthew Hudson for further comment but did not receive a response by publication time.
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.