westernjournal--2020-10-07--Remember What Biden Said in 2018 About Christians Who Oppose Gay Marriage?

In an echo of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton ’ s infamous “ deplorables ” comment , former Vice President Joe Biden labeled some of those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman or oppose LGBTQ rights in any way as being among the “ dregs of society.
” Speaking at the Human Rights Campaign National Dinner in Washington in 2018 , Biden attacked “ narrow-minded ” people who try to “ define family , ” saying , “ Any person of conscience , regardless of their religious or partisan beliefs , should be able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is simply intolerable , illegal , wrong.
” “ Using religion or culture as a license to discriminate , demonizing the community , individuals to score political points , is no more justifiable around the world than it is here at home , and our policies should reflect that , ” said Biden , now the Democratic presidential nominee .
Christians and other conservatives were at the forefront of arguing for the traditional view of marriage to be upheld in the United States .
However , the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obergefell v. Hodges .
“ Despite losing in the courts and in the court of public opinion , these forces of intolerance remain determined to undermine and roll back the progress you all have made .
This time they , not you , have an ally in the White House , ” Biden said in his 2018 address , referencing President Donald Trump .
TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' “ They ’ re a small percentage of the American people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dregs of society , ” he said .
“ And instead of using the full might of the executive branch to secure justice , dignity , safety for all , the president uses the White House as a literal bully pulpit , callously exerting his power over those who have little or none.
” It ’ s not clear what Biden was speaking about there .
Trump , a New Yorker , has been fairly friendly toward the LGBT community , voicing his support for equal rights and appointing the first openly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell .
In June 2019 , the administration announced a global campaign to end the criminalization of homosexuality .
Regarding same-sex marriage , Trump has no authority to roll back the Supreme Court ’ s ruling regarding the matter , nor has he indicated any desire to do so .
Was Biden ’ s former boss , Barack Obama , part of the “ dregs of society ” when he opposed gay marriage a little over a decade ago as a presidential candidate ?
Saddleback Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forum on religion to define marriage in August 2008 .
“ I believe that marriage is the union between a man and woman , ” he said , adding , “ I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage , but I do believe in civil unions.
” During the Democratic primary in July 2007 , Obama also affirmed his view that individual Christian denominations should be able to decide if they want to recognize same-sex marriages .
RELATED : Biden Surrogate Calls Pandemic That Killed 1000s 'God 's Gift to the Left' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president , he flipped on the issue , refusing to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act when it was challenged in federal court , saying it was unconstitutional .
The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman for federal legal purposes and allowed states to decline to recognize same-sex unions from other states .
The law enjoyed strong bipartisan support in Congress and was signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton .
Biden himself , along with 84 of his Senate colleagues , voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the “ dregs of society ” back then ?
What Trump has done is uphold the religious freedom of Americans .
Left-wing groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union are upset that the president has rolled back Obama-era federal policies that discriminated against faith-based groups if they did not conform to LGBT dogma .
The Trump administration has also come out in opposition to male athletes who identify as female being able to compete against girls or women .
People of goodwill — both on the left and the right — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ female athletes to open their sports up to boys or men .
Shortly after taking office , Trump rescinded the Obama administration ’ s transgender bathroom rules that forced states and localities to recognize the right of students to choose the bathroom they prefer based on their gender identity .
Despite what Biden might say , it ’ s not “ dregs of society ” -type thinking to have concerns about men who identify as women freely going into women ’ s bathrooms .
The Democratic nominee has placed a marker out there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be treated fairly if he should become president and they dare to hold views that differ from the current LGBT orthodoxy .
That should raise red flags for any who care about the First Amendment and the future of religious liberty in America .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

In an echo of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s infamous “deplorables” comment, former Vice President Joe Biden labeled some of those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman or oppose LGBTQ rights in any way as being among the “dregs of society.”
Speaking at the Human Rights Campaign National Dinner in Washington in 2018, Biden attacked “narrow-minded” people who try to “define family,” saying, “Any person of conscience, regardless of their religious or partisan beliefs, should be able to agree that discrimination … in any form is simply intolerable, illegal, wrong.”
“Using religion or culture as a license to discriminate, demonizing the community, individuals to score political points, is no more justifiable around the world than it is here at home, and our policies should reflect that,” said Biden, now the Democratic presidential nominee.
Christians and other conservatives were at the forefront of arguing for the traditional view of marriage to be upheld in the United States. However, the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage with its 2015 ruling in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges.
“Despite losing in the courts and in the court of public opinion, these forces of intolerance remain determined to undermine and roll back the progress you all have made. This time they, not you, have an ally in the White House,” Biden said in his 2018 address, referencing President Donald Trump.
“They’re a small percentage of the American people, virulent people, some of them the dregs of society,” he said. “And instead of using the full might of the executive branch to secure justice, dignity, safety for all, the president uses the White House as a literal bully pulpit, callously exerting his power over those who have little or none.”
It’s not clear what Biden was speaking about there. Trump, a New Yorker, has been fairly friendly toward the LGBT community, voicing his support for equal rights and appointing the first openly gay man to a Cabinet post: former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell.
In June 2019, the administration announced a global campaign to end the criminalization of homosexuality.
Do you think Biden holds an intolerant view toward Christians who believe in traditional marriage? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 97% (554 Votes) No: 3% (17 Votes)
Regarding same-sex marriage, Trump has no authority to roll back the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding the matter, nor has he indicated any desire to do so.
Was Biden’s former boss, Barack Obama, part of the “dregs of society” when he opposed gay marriage a little over a decade ago as a presidential candidate?
Saddleback Church Pastor Rick Warren asked Obama during a forum on religion to define marriage in August 2008.
“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and woman,” he said, adding, “I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions.”
During the Democratic primary in July 2007, Obama also affirmed his view that individual Christian denominations should be able to decide if they want to recognize same-sex marriages.
Of course, after being elected as president, he flipped on the issue, refusing to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act when it was challenged in federal court, saying it was unconstitutional.
The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman for federal legal purposes and allowed states to decline to recognize same-sex unions from other states.
The law enjoyed strong bipartisan support in Congress and was signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton.
Biden himself, along with 84 of his Senate colleagues, voted for the legislation. Was he part of the “dregs of society” back then?
What Trump has done is uphold the religious freedom of Americans.
Left-wing groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union are upset that the president has rolled back Obama-era federal policies that discriminated against faith-based groups if they did not conform to LGBT dogma.
The Trump administration has also come out in opposition to male athletes who identify as female being able to compete against girls or women.
People of goodwill — both on the left and the right — have argued it is not fair to female athletes to open their sports up to boys or men.
Shortly after taking office, Trump rescinded the Obama administration’s transgender bathroom rules that forced states and localities to recognize the right of students to choose the bathroom they prefer based on their gender identity.
Despite what Biden might say, it’s not “dregs of society”-type thinking to have concerns about men who identify as women freely going into women’s bathrooms.
The Democratic nominee has placed a marker out there that indicates Christian churches and organizations will not be treated fairly if he should become president and they dare to hold views that differ from the current LGBT orthodoxy.
That should raise red flags for any who care about the First Amendment and the future of religious liberty in America.
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--2020-10-07--Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama’s Trump Attack: She ‘Lied in That Video’

Leo Terrell knows a liar when he sees her .
So when the noted civil rights attorney — and prominent Donald Trump supporter — saw the video Michelle Obama released on Tuesday claiming the protests that have swept the country since May have been “ overwhelmingly peaceful , ” he didn ’ t hesitate to speak out .
“ Respectfully , the first lady lied in that video , ” Terrell said on Tuesday night ’ s “ Hannity.
” “ Everyone in this country can see the chaos and the burning in the Democratic cities .
And she wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And that very eloquent approach , as if she really cares… TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' For anyone who missed the target of Terrell ’ s tirade , below is a segment of the 24-plus minute video posted to YouTube Tuesday titled “ Closing Argument.
” In it , Obama makes the ludicrous claim that the protests that have destroyed parts of Seattle , Washington , Portland , Oregon , Chicago , New York City , Philadelphia , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the orgies of destruction they looked like — just apparently forceful demonstrations of the desire for “ racial solidarity.
” What made Obama ’ s claim so risible wasn ’ t simply the fact that she was asking viewers , as Terrell put it , “ to disbelieve what we see.
” It was the spurious use of a statistical argument — an apparent reference to a Princeton University study that claimed to find 93 percent of demonstrations did not involve violence .
( Do Black Lives Matter activists talk about the overwhelming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t end up with someone getting shot ? )
Making matters worse , the study was basically an argument against holding the protesters themselves responsible for property destruction , looting and arson .
“ In some cases where demonstrations did turn violent , there are reports of agents provocateurs — or infiltrators — instigating the violence , ” the report states .
RELATED : Michelle Obama Does Extreme Mental Gymnastics on Protest Violence in Attack on Trump Other causes included an allegedly violent response by local governments as well as , of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Part of Obama ’ s argument was calling Trump a “ racist.
” No liberal public appearance is complete without that canard , no matter how false it is . )
It would take a supreme act of self-delusion to buy the argument in the study , or the former first lady ’ s video .
And Terrell has not built a law career or national reputation on self-delusion .
A successful black man , he can see for himself the difference between Trump and his predecessor .
“ The reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this country rejected the Obama-Biden administration .
And that is why we ’ re here today , ” Terrell told Hannity .
He then ticked off numerous ways Trump ’ s presidency has benefited black Americans , including aid to higher education , prison reform , and a record-setting economy in the years before the coronavirus struck .
“ As far as calling Donald Trump a racist ?
Shame on you , Michelle Obama .
Tell us what Obama did .
Donald Trump has given positive reform for black Americans .
Historically black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Step Act .
“ She will call him a racist and not tout what Obama did because he did nothing for black people .
And just because she is black , that doesn ’ t ’ give her credibility , ” Terrell said .
Larry Elder , the popular conservative talk show host who appeared on the “ Hannity ” program in the same segment , called Obama out for propaganda that is not only false in its premise , but actually endangers lives .
“ If anything , the police are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force against black people than against white people .
“ The government has been looking at this since the ’ 90s … They can not find any pattern that suggests anything like ‘ systemic racism.
’ “ It ’ s not only wrong , it ’ s also getting people killed .
Cops pull back , bad guys know it .
And some nut cases are going to feel that the narrative is true and ambush cops … all because of this phony narrative pushed by people like Michelle Obama , Barack Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a secret that the Democratic Party and its media echo chamber has been counting on the lie of “ systemic racism ” to drag Joe Biden , the doddering Democratic nominee , over the finish line in November ’ s presidential race .
But what Terrell and Elder were pointing out was how dangerously delusional the propaganda actually is .
It ’ s not just that Obama ’ s so-called “ argument ” is wrong , it ’ s that it ’ s dangerously wrong , raising the spectacle of Americans dying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Party campaign advertisement about an illusory problem of institutional police bias against black people .
From a less educated person , or from a casual observer , Obama ’ s statements might simply be wrong .
From a woman with a degree in law , whose very claim to influence is based on Democratic Party propaganda , it ’ s not simply an error , it ’ s an outright lie .
Fortunately , there are prominent voices like Leo Terrell and Larry Elder who are there to call it out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Leo Terrell knows a liar when he sees her.
So when the noted civil rights attorney — and prominent Donald Trump supporter — saw the video Michelle Obama released on Tuesday claiming the protests that have swept the country since May have been “overwhelmingly peaceful,” he didn’t hesitate to speak out.
“Respectfully, the first lady lied in that video,” Terrell said on Tuesday night’s “Hannity.”
“Everyone in this country can see the chaos and the burning in the Democratic cities. And she wants us to disbelieve what we can see. And that very eloquent approach, as if she really cares…
“She lives in a very wealthy area.”
Check out Terrell’s appearance here.
For anyone who missed the target of Terrell’s tirade, below is a segment of the 24-plus minute video posted to YouTube Tuesday titled “Closing Argument.”
In it, Obama makes the ludicrous claim that the protests that have destroyed parts of Seattle, Washington, Portland, Oregon, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, and Kenosha, Wisconsin, weren’t the orgies of destruction they looked like — just apparently forceful demonstrations of the desire for “racial solidarity.”
.@MichelleObama on BLM riots: Trump is “pinning [violence] on what’s been an overwhelmingly peaceful movement for racial solidarity; it’s true, research backs it up; only a tiny fraction of demonstrations have had any violence at all … What the president is doing is … racist.” pic.twitter.com/7wBsmACiCQ — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) October 6, 2020
What made Obama’s claim so risible wasn’t simply the fact that she was asking viewers, as Terrell put it, “to disbelieve what we see.” It was the spurious use of a statistical argument — an apparent reference to a Princeton University study that claimed to find 93 percent of demonstrations did not involve violence. (Do Black Lives Matter activists talk about the overwhelming number of police-civilian encounters that don’t end up with someone getting shot?)
Making matters worse, the study was basically an argument against holding the protesters themselves responsible for property destruction, looting and arson.
“In some cases where demonstrations did turn violent, there are reports of agents provocateurs — or infiltrators — instigating the violence,” the report states.
Do you think most Americans agree that Michelle Obama is lying about protest violence? 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: 95% (3807 Votes) No: 5% (190 Votes)
Other causes included an allegedly violent response by local governments as well as, of course, President Donald Trump’s administration. (Part of Obama’s argument was calling Trump a “racist.” No liberal public appearance is complete without that canard, no matter how false it is.)
It would take a supreme act of self-delusion to buy the argument in the study, or the former first lady’s video. And Terrell has not built a law career or national reputation on self-delusion. A successful black man, he can see for himself the difference between Trump and his predecessor.
“The reason why Donald Trump got elected is because this country rejected the Obama-Biden administration. And that is why we’re here today,” Terrell told Hannity.
He then ticked off numerous ways Trump’s presidency has benefited black Americans, including aid to higher education, prison reform, and a record-setting economy in the years before the coronavirus struck.
“As far as calling Donald Trump a racist? Shame on you, Michelle Obama. Tell us what Obama did. Donald Trump has given positive reform for black Americans. Historically black colleges, low unemployment rate, First Step Act.
“She will call him a racist and not tout what Obama did because he did nothing for black people. And just because she is black, that doesn’t’ give her credibility,” Terrell said.
Larry Elder, the popular conservative talk show host who appeared on the “Hannity” program in the same segment, called Obama out for propaganda that is not only false in its premise, but actually endangers lives.
“If anything, the police are more hesitant, more reluctant to use deadly force against black people than against white people.
“The government has been looking at this since the ’90s … They cannot find any pattern that suggests anything like ‘systemic racism.’
“It’s not only wrong, it’s also getting people killed. Cops pull back, bad guys know it. And some nut cases are going to feel that the narrative is true and ambush cops … all because of this phony narrative pushed by people like Michelle Obama, Barack Obama and the Democrats.”
It’s not a secret that the Democratic Party and its media echo chamber has been counting on the lie of “systemic racism” to drag Joe Biden, the doddering Democratic nominee, over the finish line in November’s presidential race.
But what Terrell and Elder were pointing out was how dangerously delusional the propaganda actually is.
It’s not just that Obama’s so-called “argument” is wrong, it’s that it’s dangerously wrong, raising the spectacle of Americans dying in service of what amounts to a Democratic Party campaign advertisement about an illusory problem of institutional police bias against black people.
From a less educated person, or from a casual observer, Obama’s statements might simply be wrong.
From a woman with a degree in law, whose very claim to influence is based on Democratic Party propaganda, it’s not simply an error, it’s an outright lie.
Fortunately, there are prominent voices like Leo Terrell and Larry Elder who are there to call it out.
Did you know that The Western Journal now publishes some content in Spanish as well as English, for international audiences? Click here to read this article on The Western Journal en Español!
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--2020-10-07--Communist China Mouthpiece: Taiwan’s Freedom a Blip in History, Will Soon ‘Come to an End’

The Republic of China , the “ other ” China headquartered on the island country of Taiwan , stands as a glowing reminder for the Chinese people that there is an alternative to the mainland ’ s brutal communist rule .
Unfortunately for the republic , leadership of the communist People ’ s Republic of China has not been shy about their want and desire for Taiwan , threatening military force to bring back what they see as a rogue province of a greater unified state .
Foreign friendships and firepower ( mostly American ) have so far kept the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re outnumbered more than 50-to-1 in terms of population , there ’ s not much more the Taiwanese can do but defend their small holding .
Even worse for the island nation , communist China is no longer the fledgling dictatorship it faced more than 70 years ago , but a superpower armed with an increasingly powerful arsenal .
Now , with the world largely disconnected by the coronavirus pandemic and leaders ’ heavy-handed responses to it , one of the mouthpieces of communist China is calling for his country to prepare for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' Hu Xijin , editor-in-chief of the Chinese Communist Party-owned Global Times , is behind the aggressive Tuesday article .
“ We must no longer hold any more illusions , ” Hu wrote .
“ The only way forward is for the mainland to fully prepare itself for war and to give Taiwan secessionist forces a decisive punishment at any time .
As the secessionist forces ’ arrogance continues to swell , the historical turning point is getting closer .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ status of the island of Taiwan is only a short period in history that will definitely come to an end.
” Hu admitted his argument for military action is largely the result of two resolutions proposed by Taiwan ’ s Chinese Nationalist Party , or KMT .
Passed in rare unanimous votes Tuesday , the motions would bring the United States even closer to a becoming a major player in any cross-strait conflict .
According to Taiwan News , the resolutions are official calls for a resumption of diplomatic ties and military aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help comes as communist China deals with a growing reckoning from some of its powerful neighbors .
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been actively working with several of these nations , shoring up an alliance against the Asian powerhouse .
India , Japan and Australia are the primary allies in this cooperation against communist China .
Unfortunately for the People ’ s Republic , it looks like Taiwan ’ s request couldn ’ t have been made at a better time .
President Donald Trump signaled major support for the island @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and deceit from its mainland adversary sparked a global pandemic .
RELATED : Christian Bookseller Sentenced to 7 Years by Chinese Government , Over 12,000 Texts Destroyed Despite past support , it ’ s still unclear whether Trump or other American officials will answer Taiwan ’ s call .
The impending swamp of election chaos is sure to cause even more problems when it comes to a U.S. response For Taiwan , the clock is already ticking .
Communist China has massed amphibious assault vehicles on the strait , and it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up .
The only question now is whether the United States will draw a line in the sand when it comes to freedom for the people of Taiwan .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The Republic of China, the “other” China headquartered on the island country of Taiwan, stands as a glowing reminder for the Chinese people that there is an alternative to the mainland’s brutal communist rule.
Unfortunately for the republic, leadership of the communist People’s Republic of China has not been shy about their want and desire for Taiwan, threatening military force to bring back what they see as a rogue province of a greater unified state.
Foreign friendships and firepower (mostly American) have so far kept the island free. But considering they’re outnumbered more than 50-to-1 in terms of population, there’s not much more the Taiwanese can do but defend their small holding.
Even worse for the island nation, communist China is no longer the fledgling dictatorship it faced more than 70 years ago, but a superpower armed with an increasingly powerful arsenal.
Now, with the world largely disconnected by the coronavirus pandemic and leaders’ heavy-handed responses to it, one of the mouthpieces of communist China is calling for his country to prepare for conquest.
Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of the Chinese Communist Party-owned Global Times, is behind the aggressive Tuesday article.
“We must no longer hold any more illusions,” Hu wrote. “The only way forward is for the mainland to fully prepare itself for war and to give Taiwan secessionist forces a decisive punishment at any time. As the secessionist forces’ arrogance continues to swell, the historical turning point is getting closer.
“It’s certain that the current status of the island of Taiwan is only a short period in history that will definitely come to an end.”
Hu admitted his argument for military action is largely the result of two resolutions proposed by Taiwan’s Chinese Nationalist Party, or KMT. Passed in rare unanimous votes Tuesday, the motions would bring the United States even closer to a becoming a major player in any cross-strait conflict.
Do you think that the United States should become involved in a cross-strait war? 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: 75% (65 Votes) No: 25% (22 Votes)
According to Taiwan News, the resolutions are official calls for a resumption of diplomatic ties and military aid from America.
The call for foreign help comes as communist China deals with a growing reckoning from some of its powerful neighbors.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been actively working with several of these nations, shoring up an alliance against the Asian powerhouse. India, Japan and Australia are the primary allies in this cooperation against communist China.
Unfortunately for the People’s Republic, it looks like Taiwan’s request couldn’t have been made at a better time.
President Donald Trump signaled major support for the island nation in late March, after lies and deceit from its mainland adversary sparked a global pandemic.
Despite past support, it’s still unclear whether Trump or other American officials will answer Taiwan’s call. The impending swamp of election chaos is sure to cause even more problems when it comes to a U.S. response
For Taiwan, the clock is already ticking. Communist China has massed amphibious assault vehicles on the strait, and it’s clear that this flashpoint is quickly heating up.
The only question now is whether the United States will draw a line in the sand when it comes to freedom for the people of Taiwan.
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--2020-10-07--Video: NYPD Commissioner – 24 ‘Spoiled Brats’ Arrested in Latest Protest

‘ Breaking windows , property damage , graffiti , lighting fires .
I mean , that is the last thing @ @ @ @ @ need right now.
’ STORY : http : //w-j.co/s/40c6d

Bradley Cooper's latest role has not gone down well with everyone, particularly with regard to his use of a prosthetic nose.


westernjournal--2020-10-07--Video: Over 2,000 Mail-In Ballots in LA County Have 1 Fatal Flaw – There’s No Way To Vote for Presid

Video: Over 2,000 Mail-In Ballots in LA County Have 1 Fatal Flaw – There’s No Way To Vote for President

Joe Biden : We Were Able To Stay Home During COVID Because of Some Black Woman Stocking Grocery Shelves


westernjournal--2020-10-07--Video: Joe Biden Appears To Copy Foreign Leader’s ‘Build Back Better’ Slogan


westernjournal--2020-10-07--Biden Supporters Featured on MSNBC Were Portrayed as ‘Undecided’ Voters on NBC News

It ’ s not so much that the establishment media is committed to churning out fake news to prop up their candidate of choice in the 2020 presidential election , it ’ s that they ’ re painfully lazy about covering it up .
In a town hall event Monday where former Vice President Joe Biden took questions from what the network claimed was an “ audience of undecided Florida voters , ” NBC News featured two participants who turned out be already committed to the Democratic candidate .
What ’ s worse , those men — and another who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” be voting for Biden — had made their previous declarations on sister network MSNBC , suggesting this was no innocent oversight or error .
Broadcast from Miami , the event — which aired on NBC , CNBC and MSNBC — featured moderator Lester Holt , who mostly stuck to “ orange man bad ” set-ups about President Donald Trump and veered away from anything remotely damaging to Biden , Fox News reported .
It ’ s no surprise that the evening featured the usual coddling the mainstream media bestow on leftist politicians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without even bothering to rustle up new puppets to stump for Biden .
TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' The Washington Free Beacon spliced footage of each man speaking to show their remarks on both Monday ’ s town hall as independents and their previous appearances on MSNBC as Biden supporters .
The first part showed attorney Peter Gonzalez asking Biden a question at the town hall for supposedly “ undecided ” voters .
In the next cut , this one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with MSNBC , the chyron identified him as a “ Republican Voting for Biden.
” “ [ If ] we get four more years of Trump , good luck , and good luck with the future attracting younger voters , ” Gonzalez had told NBC News/MSNBC correspondent Ellison Barber in a discussion featuring Cuban-American voters following Biden ’ s acceptance speech during the Democratic National Convention .
The remarks were apparently so compelling , the network pull-quoted him in a tweet .
RELATED : WaPo Lied About Biden 's Support of Green New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Own Headline The next clip from the town hall showed marketing executive Ismael Llano , who Holt said “ voted for Hillary Clinton four years ago but has voted Republican in the past.
” As if that statement wasn ’ t enough to reveal the sham , the flashback of Llano appearing Aug. 21 on MSNBC during the same discussion as the one with Gonzalez revealed that the chyron identified him as an “ Independent Voting for Biden.
” “ [ Something ] that Joe Biden said during his speech that resonated with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibility , ” Llano told Barber .
The third disingenuous “ undecided voter ” from the town hall footage tweet was Mateo Gomez , who said he would “ probably ” be voting for Biden in a Sept. 30 MSNBC appearance — clearly indicating he was anything but undecided .
The Free Beacon ’ s accompanying story about the town hall noted that other participants had also pledged support for Biden and denigrated Trump on their social media accounts .
For instance , guest Michelle Cruz Marrero ’ s public Facebook profile includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden and his running mate , California Sen. Kamala Harris , as well as one that boasts the slogan , “ Pro-America … Anti-Trump.
” The Free Beacon also revealed that town hall participant Cassidy Brown ’ s Twitter account , which appears to have since been switched to “ private , ” retweeted a pro-Biden/Harris account last month .
“ Brown also shared an Instagram post from her sister after the town hall , where she boasted Brown asked the ‘ future president ’ an ‘ incredible question ’ about reproductive rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These silly political events the establishment media host are supposed to inform the viewer , but instead employ the usual ruse of conversing with so-called “ undecided voters ” as an opportunity to verbally bludgeon Trump ( or whichever Republican happens to be running ) .
The mainstream media especially hate Trump and have hammered him with fake news and skewed coverage since the day he descended the escalator to announce his run for president , so it ’ s no shock that they ’ re all in for Biden .
The one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sloppy guest booking is that these networks are showing themselves to be the partisan hacks those on the right always knew they were .
It ’ s possible they ’ re blinded by “ Trump Derangement Syndrome , ” or it could be they ’ re suffering from the same hubris they had prior to the first time Trump was elected president , when they thought former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was a shoo-in for the White House .
The problem for them is that the internet is forever , with just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a couple of keyboard strokes .
No longer can they get away with pretending thatthe useful idiots they ’ re parading out to lob softballs at Biden are anything but Trump-hating Biden supporters like they are .
It ’ s looking like an uphill battle electorally for Trump the moment , but given the kind of skewed and downright viscous coverage he has received compared to his Democratic opponent , it ’ s a miracle he ’ s even competing in the polls at all .
The one encouraging fact , however , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2016 with Clinton , and Trump did then what he does best : get the silent majority to rise up and vote against this establishment media and their awful candidate .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s not so much that the establishment media is committed to churning out fake news to prop up their candidate of choice in the 2020 presidential election, it’s that they’re painfully lazy about covering it up.
In a town hall event Monday where former Vice President Joe Biden took questions from what the network claimed was an “audience of undecided Florida voters,” NBC News featured two participants who turned out be already committed to the Democratic candidate.
What’s worse, those men — and another who previously said he’d “probably” be voting for Biden — had made their previous declarations on sister network MSNBC, suggesting this was no innocent oversight or error.
Broadcast from Miami, the event — which aired on NBC, CNBC and MSNBC — featured moderator Lester Holt, who mostly stuck to “orange man bad” set-ups about President Donald Trump and veered away from anything remotely damaging to Biden, Fox News reported.
It’s no surprise that the evening featured the usual coddling the mainstream media bestow on leftist politicians, but that night they did it without even bothering to rustle up new puppets to stump for Biden.
The Washington Free Beacon spliced footage of each man speaking to show their remarks on both Monday’s town hall as independents and their previous appearances on MSNBC as Biden supporters.
.@NBCNews featured a pair of “undecided” voters during a network town hall earlier this week who had previously declared their support for Democratic nominee @JoeBiden on the network’s sister channel, @MSNBC. via @CAndersonMO and @DavidRutz pic.twitter.com/gKW1Sh3bb5 — Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) October 6, 2020
The first part showed attorney Peter Gonzalez asking Biden a question at the town hall for supposedly “undecided” voters.
Is the establishment media getting sloppy because they think Biden is a shoo-in to win in November? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (507 Votes) No: 2% (11 Votes)
In the next cut, this one featuring an Aug. 21 interview Gonzalez did with MSNBC, the chyron identified him as a “Republican Voting for Biden.”
“[If] we get four more years of Trump, good luck, and good luck with the future attracting younger voters,” Gonzalez had told NBC News/MSNBC correspondent Ellison Barber in a discussion featuring Cuban-American voters following Biden’s acceptance speech during the Democratic National Convention.
The remarks were apparently so compelling, the network pull-quoted him in a tweet.
“If we get four more years of Trump, good luck. And good luck with the future attracting younger voters,” a Cuban-American voter tells @ellisonbarber.https://t.co/nrrf4iNPMr — MSNBC (@MSNBC) August 23, 2020
The next clip from the town hall showed marketing executive Ismael Llano, who Holt said “voted for Hillary Clinton four years ago but has voted Republican in the past.”
As if that statement wasn’t enough to reveal the sham, the flashback of Llano appearing Aug. 21 on MSNBC during the same discussion as the one with Gonzalez revealed that the chyron identified him as an “Independent Voting for Biden.”
“[Something] that Joe Biden said during his speech that resonated with me was what defines America is a possibility,” Llano told Barber.
The third disingenuous “undecided voter” from the town hall footage tweet was Mateo Gomez, who said he would “probably” be voting for Biden in a Sept. 30 MSNBC appearance — clearly indicating he was anything but undecided.
The Free Beacon’s accompanying story about the town hall noted that other participants had also pledged support for Biden and denigrated Trump on their social media accounts.
(That’s outrageous, but not as brazen as recycling the same men who appeared weeks before on NBC’s sister network and just slapping a different label on them for the town hall.)
For instance, guest Michelle Cruz Marrero’s public Facebook profile includes several photos that specifically express support for Biden and his running mate, California Sen. Kamala Harris, as well as one that boasts the slogan, “Pro-America … Anti-Trump.”
The Free Beacon also revealed that town hall participant Cassidy Brown’s Twitter account, which appears to have since been switched to “private,” retweeted a pro-Biden/Harris account last month.
“Brown also shared an Instagram post from her sister after the town hall, where she boasted Brown asked the ‘future president’ an ‘incredible question’ about reproductive rights,” according to the outlet.
These silly political events the establishment media host are supposed to inform the viewer, but instead employ the usual ruse of conversing with so-called “undecided voters” as an opportunity to verbally bludgeon Trump (or whichever Republican happens to be running).
The mainstream media especially hate Trump and have hammered him with fake news and skewed coverage since the day he descended the escalator to announce his run for president, so it’s no shock that they’re all in for Biden.
The one upside to this sort of coverage and sloppy guest booking is that these networks are showing themselves to be the partisan hacks those on the right always knew they were.
It’s possible they’re blinded by “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” or it could be they’re suffering from the same hubris they had prior to the first time Trump was elected president, when they thought former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was a shoo-in for the White House.
The problem for them is that the internet is forever, with just about anything easily verified and uncovered with a couple of keyboard strokes.
No longer can they get away with pretending thatthe useful idiots they’re parading out to lob softballs at Biden are anything but Trump-hating Biden supporters like they are.
It’s looking like an uphill battle electorally for Trump the moment, but given the kind of skewed and downright viscous coverage he has received compared to his Democratic opponent, it’s a miracle he’s even competing in the polls at all.
The one encouraging fact, however, is that he has been here before in 2016 with Clinton, and Trump did then what he does best: get the silent majority to rise up and vote against this establishment media and their awful candidate.
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--2020-10-07--Newly Released Body Cam Video Shows Brutal Attack on Los Angeles Officer

Los Angeles police released shocking video on Wednesday that captured a brutal attack on an officer inside a station last month , including footage from the officer ’ s own body-worn camera that shows a violent struggle for his gun .
The 21-minute video compilation of the Sept. 26 assault includes footage from a surveillance camera at the station and the body camera of officer Anthony Freeman , as well as from the body cameras of officers who arrested suspect Jose Cerpa Guzman .
Freeman , a veteran of the department of more than 30 years , survived the attack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ footage shows his blood dripping onto the lobby floor of the Harbor Station in the Sen Pedro area of Los Angeles as he shouts for an ambulance , breathing heavily and saying , “ I ’ m starting to black out !
” TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' Guzman , 29 , was arrested after a brief vehicle pursuit — parts of the chase and the takedown were captured on camera — and authorities say they found Freeman ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being held on $ 2.2 million bail , records show .
He is scheduled to be arraigned Oct. 16 on charges of attempted murder and assault with a semiautomatic firearm , as well as robbery and evading and resisting an officer .
It was not immediately clear if he had an attorney who could speak on his behalf .
“ This was a brutal , unprovoked attack on one of our officers where the suspect clearly tried to kill a cop , ” Craig Lally , president of the Los Angeles Police Protective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Thanks to the efficient and professional work of our officers , this menace is off of our streets and we hope he stays there .
There should be no leniency for an attempted cop killer.
” The incident came two weeks after two Los Angeles County Sheriff ’ s Department deputies were ambushed as they sat in their police vehicle in Compton , about 15 miles north of San Pedro .
The officers suffered serious gunshot wounds but have both been released from a hospital .
A 36-year-old man is charged in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ punching Freeman and knocking him to the ground in an apparently unprovoked attack .
RELATED : National Guard at the Ready as Wisconsin Braces for Police Shooting Decision As Guzman grabs Freeman ’ s gun , the footage shows the officer ’ s hands around the suspect ’ s neck and then trying to pull the gun away .
Guzman pistol-whipped him with the weapon before pointing it at Freeman ’ s chest .
Guzman ran out of the station as the watch commander , Sgt .
Robin Aguirre , came into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he got my gun !
” and she followed Guzman outside , where they exchanged gunfire .
Guzman sped away , prompting a pursuit from other officers nearby .
They wrestled him into handcuffs as he wailed .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Los Angeles police released shocking video on Wednesday that captured a brutal attack on an officer inside a station last month, including footage from the officer’s own body-worn camera that shows a violent struggle for his gun.
The 21-minute video compilation of the Sept. 26 assault includes footage from a surveillance camera at the station and the body camera of officer Anthony Freeman, as well as from the body cameras of officers who arrested suspect Jose Cerpa Guzman.
Freeman, a veteran of the department of more than 30 years, survived the attack.
At one point, the graphic footage shows his blood dripping onto the lobby floor of the Harbor Station in the Sen Pedro area of Los Angeles as he shouts for an ambulance, breathing heavily and saying, “I’m starting to black out!”
New Video.
Bodycam Video From Attack on LAPD Officers at Harbor Stationhttps://t.co/z9j3Um24YF pic.twitter.com/ZqkvWFB44l — PoliceActivity (@Police_Activity) October 7, 2020
Guzman, 29, was arrested after a brief vehicle pursuit — parts of the chase and the takedown were captured on camera — and authorities say they found Freeman’s gun in his truck.
Guzman is being held on $2.2 million bail, records show.
He is scheduled to be arraigned Oct. 16 on charges of attempted murder and assault with a semiautomatic firearm, as well as robbery and evading and resisting an officer. It was not immediately clear if he had an attorney who could speak on his behalf.
Do you think this man should be convicted of attempted murder? 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% (68 Votes) No: 1% (1 Votes)
“This was a brutal, unprovoked attack on one of our officers where the suspect clearly tried to kill a cop,” Craig Lally, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said in a statement.
“Thanks to the efficient and professional work of our officers, this menace is off of our streets and we hope he stays there. There should be no leniency for an attempted cop killer.”
The incident came two weeks after two Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department deputies were ambushed as they sat in their police vehicle in Compton, about 15 miles north of San Pedro.
The officers suffered serious gunshot wounds but have both been released from a hospital. A 36-year-old man is charged in that attack.
The video depicts Guzman punching Freeman and knocking him to the ground in an apparently unprovoked attack.
As Guzman grabs Freeman’s gun, the footage shows the officer’s hands around the suspect’s neck and then trying to pull the gun away. Guzman pistol-whipped him with the weapon before pointing it at Freeman’s chest.
Guzman ran out of the station as the watch commander, Sgt. Robin Aguirre, came into the lobby.
Freeman shouted to her “he got my gun!” and she followed Guzman outside, where they exchanged gunfire.
Guzman sped away, prompting a pursuit from other officers nearby. They wrestled him into handcuffs as he wailed.
[jwplayer 0QsN0S17]
The Western Journal has reviewed this Associated Press story and may have altered it prior to publication to ensure that it meets our editorial standards.
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--2020-10-07--Massachusetts Will Allow Votes of Dead People To Count in 2020 Election

Dead people can officially vote in the November election in Massachusetts , officials in the state have announced .
No , this isn ’ t a Babylon Bee article , and this isn ’ t the twilight zone .
This is the most consequential election in modern American history , and this is indeed real news .
WBZ-TV reported that Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin , a Democrat , announced on Monday a change to a previous election rule that would reject the ballot of any person who was discovered to have passed away before an election day after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change that is “ necessary because of the coronavirus pandemic , ” per WBZ-TV , such votes will be counted this year .
TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' This means that if someone votes early now ahead of the November election , but dies before Election Day , their vote will be counted .
Gee , what could go wrong ?
This is problematic for so many reasons beyond the obvious , which is whether or not the deceased should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an election that will affect a future they , sadly , will miss out on .
But what if a voter dies today and their ballot is left on the dinner table or in the mailbox for someone else to fill out and send in ?
Even with a certificate of death proving the person died four weeks before the election , the vote could be accepted .
Massachusetts previously required voters who voted by mail to apply for an absentee ballot and to offer a reasonable reason as to why they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this year , any Massachusetts resident registered to vote by July of this year was automatically sent an application for a mail-in ballot , Fox News reported .
Now there are ballots floating around in Massachusetts that could , in all likelihood , be in the wrong hands right now , and could be harvested and sent in without the knowledge of a person who has since died or is on their death bed .
The decision is absurd , but it is also more evidence that the party that has pounded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security suddenly doesn ’ t care about secure elections .
Even without later proof of malfeasance , the notion that something could be awry with the state ’ s ballots only casts more doubt on the election ’ s legitimacy .
RELATED : Fact Check : Harris Says Biden Wo n't Ban Fracking , Video Shows Her and Biden Saying They Would A growing notion that the coming election will be anything but fair didn ’ t need any assistance , as we ’ ve already seen hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ examples of mail-in ballot issues , Massachusetts officials went ahead and decided that they would add to the vote-by-mail fiasco .
Galvin was on Twitter earlier this week reminding voters their ballots were on the way : Galvin left the mildly important detail about dead voters out of his tweet .
“ To be clear , these are people who are alive and competent when they voted , but they may have died unexpectedly after they voted , ” Galvin said of the decision to allow dead people ’ s votes to count @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times , if the local officials knew they were dead – had died – even though they had legally voted when they cast the ballot , they would have discarded the ballot , not counted it.
” Added the Massachusetts Secretary of State , “ If somebody voted at 8 o ’ clock in the morning in person and then two hours later died , their ballot being in the box , it would have been counted .
If somebody voted on an absentee ballot the day , or two days , before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and there ’ s no chance the material determined that they had died , they would always be counted .
So that ’ s not new .
What this did is ( the legislation ) took it out further.
” “ It ’ s not a significant number of ballots , ” he concluded .
The optics on this are horrendous .
On top of that , mail-in ballots in the state , even from those who have died , will be counted for 20 additional days past the Nov. 3 election .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump or the GOP , so it ’ s surprising the state ’ s elected officials would take this kind of measure to further debase the integrity of the election .
Still , this is ridiculous .
Thank the Lord above for blessing the country ’ s founders with the foresight , intelligence and intuition to institute the Electoral College .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Dead people can officially vote in the November election in Massachusetts, officials in the state have announced.
No, this isn’t a Babylon Bee article, and this isn’t the twilight zone.
This is the most consequential election in modern American history, and this is indeed real news.
WBZ-TV reported that Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin, a Democrat, announced on Monday a change to a previous election rule that would reject the ballot of any person who was discovered to have passed away before an election day after voting early.
Now, in a change that is “necessary because of the coronavirus pandemic,” per WBZ-TV, such votes will be counted this year.
This means that if someone votes early now ahead of the November election, but dies before Election Day, their vote will be counted.
Gee, what could go wrong?
This is problematic for so many reasons beyond the obvious, which is whether or not the deceased should have their ballots counted with regard to an election that will affect a future they, sadly, will miss out on.
But what if a voter dies today and their ballot is left on the dinner table or in the mailbox for someone else to fill out and send in?
Even with a certificate of death proving the person died four weeks before the election, the vote could be accepted.
Massachusetts previously required voters who voted by mail to apply for an absentee ballot and to offer a reasonable reason as to why they would be prevented from in-person voting.
As of this year, any Massachusetts resident registered to vote by July of this year was automatically sent an application for a mail-in ballot, Fox News reported.
Now there are ballots floating around in Massachusetts that could, in all likelihood, be in the wrong hands right now, and could be harvested and sent in without the knowledge of a person who has since died or is on their death bed.
The decision is absurd, but it is also more evidence that the party that has pounded its chest for four years about election security suddenly doesn’t care about secure elections.
Even without later proof of malfeasance, the notion that something could be awry with the state’s ballots only casts more doubt on the election’s legitimacy.
Do you think the addition of millions of insecure mail-in ballots will harm the integrity of the election? 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% (211 Votes) No: 0% (1 Votes)
A growing notion that the coming election will be anything but fair didn’t need any assistance, as we’ve already seen hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballot irregularities across the country.
With countless examples of mail-in ballot issues, Massachusetts officials went ahead and decided that they would add to the vote-by-mail fiasco.
Galvin was on Twitter earlier this week reminding voters their ballots were on the way:
If you’ve already applied for a Vote by Mail ballot, you’ll soon see the date your ballot was mailed to you at https://t.co/jBrByhxViJ. Nearly all ballots are expected to be in the mail this week. Now is a good time to apply, if you haven’t already.https://t.co/B4iSkjiTeu https://t.co/vk8p06d9zq — Mass. Elections (@VotingInMass) October 5, 2020
Galvin left the mildly important detail about dead voters out of his tweet.
“To be clear, these are people who are alive and competent when they voted, but they may have died unexpectedly after they voted,” Galvin said of the decision to allow dead people’s votes to count, per WBZ-TV.
“In past times, if the local officials knew they were dead – had died – even though they had legally voted when they cast the ballot, they would have discarded the ballot, not counted it.”
Added the Massachusetts Secretary of State, “If somebody voted at 8 o’clock in the morning in person and then two hours later died, their ballot being in the box, it would have been counted. If somebody voted on an absentee ballot the day, or two days, before the election and died on Election Day and there’s no chance the material determined that they had died, they would always be counted. So that’s not new. What this did is (the legislation) took it out further.”
“It’s not a significant number of ballots,” he concluded.
The optics on this are horrendous.
On top of that, mail-in ballots in the state, even from those who have died, will be counted for 20 additional days past the Nov. 3 election.
Massachusetts isn’t in play for President Donald Trump or the GOP, so it’s surprising the state’s elected officials would take this kind of measure to further debase the integrity of the election.
Still, this is ridiculous.
Thank the Lord above for blessing the country’s founders with the foresight, intelligence and intuition to institute the Electoral College.
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--2020-10-07--Video: Fans Call for Tyra Banks Firing After Disastrous ‘Dancing with the Stars’ Mistake

Some fans are calling for the host to be fired and to bring back former host Tom Bergeron .
STORY @ @ @ @


westernjournal--2020-10-07--SCOTUS Justices Thomas and Alito Urge the Court To Reconsider 2015 Gay Marriage Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court has officially decided that it will not hear the case of a former Kentucky county clerk who refused , on religious grounds , to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples .
As is often the case where Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are concerned , however , the court ’ s final ruling was far from the last word on the subject .
In a four-page Monday opinion on Davis v. Ermold , the conservative jurists fell hard on precedent recently established in the 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges , which saw same-sex marriage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that states must recognize and permit the practice .
“ If the States had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation , they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs , ” Thomas wrote , with Alito signing on .
“ By choosing to privilege a novel constitutional right over the religious liberty interests explicitly protected in the First Amendment , and by doing so undemocratically , the court has created a problem that only it can fix .
Until then , Obergefell will continue to have ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' According to The New York Times , the remarks came in a concurrence , with both justices supporting the court ’ s decision to pass on the case over unclear presentation of its constitutional merits .
Still , Thomas and Alito managed to leverage the moment for conservative ends , arguing the court had , with its judicial activism in Obergefell , failed to address the legitimate First Amendment concerns presented time and again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their moral opposition to same-sex marriage .
In fact , the justices argued the precedent had outright delegitimized such concerns , allowing any societal opposition to be legally represented as discriminatory and thus stamped out over time .
Thomas on Davis v Ermold by The Western Journal “ Due to Obergefell , those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society , ” Thomas wrote .
“ Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.
” “ In other words , Obergefell was read to suggest that being a public official with traditional Christian values was legally tantamount to invidious discrimination toward homosexuals , ” the justice added .
“ Since Obergefell , parties have continually attempted to label people of good will as bigots merely for refusing to alter their religious beliefs in the wake of prevailing orthodoxy.
” Such was the case in 2018 , when the court remanded Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the topic of religious exemptions for figures such as Colorado baker Jack Phillips , who became the target of a high-profile discrimination lawsuit over his unwillingness to create custom wedding cakes for same-sex couples because of his faith .
RELATED : Dem Support for Amy Coney Barrett 's Confirmation to the Supreme Court Grows by Double Digits : Poll Rather than establish clear precedent on the matter , the court ruled 7-2 in favor of seeing the case relitigated before a neutral arbiter at the lower level , as clear “ animosity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practices ” had colored the initial decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission .
The decision was , of course , a small bandage draped across the gaping First Amendment wound left by Obergefell — a stopgap that could not reasonably suppress the steady bleeding that will undoubtedly continue until the ruling is reconsidered .
As Reason editor Scott Shackford pointed out in a column published Monday afternoon , however , the notable absence of Justices John Roberts , Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh on the concurrence indicates a great deal of convincing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the conservative bloc is to move against Obergefell .
Only serving to further muddy those waters was Gorsuch ’ s majority opinion this summer in Bostock v. Clayton County , which saw a 6-3 court majority deny American employers the ability to use religious liberty as justification for hiring and firing decisions made with regard to LGBT employees .
According to The Times , the court will hear arguments next month on a religious liberty case involving the exclusion of homosexual couples from the foster care system .
With three of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Obergefell now either dead or retired , and another Republican-appointee now an arm ’ s reach away from the Supreme Court in U.S. 7th Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett , many believe Thomas and Alito ’ s concurrence Monday might foreshadow major changes with regard to precedent on the topic of same-sex marriage .
But Barrett could , like Gorsuch , disappoint conservatives on the topic , her ardent originalist judicial philosophy leaving an abundance of precedent and ancillary accounts on the table for consideration in cases spanning both issues of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case seems as good a time as any for Thomas and Alito to push their fellow jurists toward reconstruction — or outright demolition — of the legal foundations set in Obergefell .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The U.S. Supreme Court has officially decided that it will not hear the case of a former Kentucky county clerk who refused, on religious grounds, to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
As is often the case where Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito are concerned, however, the court’s final ruling was far from the last word on the subject.
In a four-page Monday opinion on Davis v. Ermold, the conservative jurists fell hard on precedent recently established in the 2015 case of Obergefell v. Hodges, which saw same-sex marriage legalized absent statute with a 5-4 ruling that states must recognize and permit the practice.
“If the States had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation, they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs,” Thomas wrote, with Alito signing on.
“By choosing to privilege a novel constitutional right over the religious liberty interests explicitly protected in the First Amendment, and by doing so undemocratically, the court has created a problem that only it can fix. Until then, Obergefell will continue to have ‘ruinous consequences for religious liberty.'”
According to The New York Times, the remarks came in a concurrence, with both justices supporting the court’s decision to pass on the case over unclear presentation of its constitutional merits.
Still, Thomas and Alito managed to leverage the moment for conservative ends, arguing the court had, with its judicial activism in Obergefell, failed to address the legitimate First Amendment concerns presented time and again by religious actors unwilling to budge in their moral opposition to same-sex marriage.
In fact, the justices argued the precedent had outright delegitimized such concerns, allowing any societal opposition to be legally represented as discriminatory and thus stamped out over time.
Thomas on Davis v Ermold by The Western Journal
“Due to Obergefell, those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society,” Thomas wrote. “Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.”
“In other words, Obergefell was read to suggest that being a public official with traditional Christian values was legally tantamount to invidious discrimination toward homosexuals,” the justice added.
“Since Obergefell, parties have continually attempted to label people of good will as bigots merely for refusing to alter their religious beliefs in the wake of prevailing orthodoxy.”
Such was the case in 2018, when the court remanded Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, kicking the can down the road on the topic of religious exemptions for figures such as Colorado baker Jack Phillips, who became the target of a high-profile discrimination lawsuit over his unwillingness to create custom wedding cakes for same-sex couples because of his faith.
Do you agree with Justices Thomas and Alito? 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: 94% (255 Votes) No: 6% (15 Votes)
Rather than establish clear precedent on the matter, the court ruled 7-2 in favor of seeing the case relitigated before a neutral arbiter at the lower level, as clear “animosity to religion” and “distrust of its practices” had colored the initial decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
The decision was, of course, a small bandage draped across the gaping First Amendment wound left by Obergefell — a stopgap that could not reasonably suppress the steady bleeding that will undoubtedly continue until the ruling is reconsidered.
As Reason editor Scott Shackford pointed out in a column published Monday afternoon, however, the notable absence of Justices John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh on the concurrence indicates a great deal of convincing may, in fact, be necessary if the conservative bloc is to move against Obergefell.
Only serving to further muddy those waters was Gorsuch’s majority opinion this summer in Bostock v. Clayton County, which saw a 6-3 court majority deny American employers the ability to use religious liberty as justification for hiring and firing decisions made with regard to LGBT employees.
According to The Times, the court will hear arguments next month on a religious liberty case involving the exclusion of homosexual couples from the foster care system.
With three of the justices on the court at the time of Obergefell now either dead or retired, and another Republican-appointee now an arm’s reach away from the Supreme Court in U.S. 7th Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett, many believe Thomas and Alito’s concurrence Monday might foreshadow major changes with regard to precedent on the topic of same-sex marriage.
But Barrett could, like Gorsuch, disappoint conservatives on the topic, her ardent originalist judicial philosophy leaving an abundance of precedent and ancillary accounts on the table for consideration in cases spanning both issues of religious liberty and discrimination.
Regardless, the case seems as good a time as any for Thomas and Alito to push their fellow jurists toward reconstruction — or outright demolition — of the legal foundations set in Obergefell.
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--2020-10-07--Video: NBA Finals Crash and Burn – Games Plagued by Terrible Ratings


westernjournal--2020-10-07--Dem Support for Amy Coney Barrett’s Confirmation to the Supreme Court Grows by Double Digits: Poll

A new poll has found that support for the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has risen by double digits among registered Democratic voters .
As Democrats in Washington wage a campaign of character assassination against the devout Catholic and mother of seven , the messaging is not landing with many in their own party .
A Morning Consult/Politico poll released on Wednesday found that among Democrats , support for Barrett ’ s nomination is at 24 percent .
While that might not seem like a lot of enthusiasm , it ’ s important to note the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single biggest issues the Democratic Party is using in its campaign against President Donald Trump .
The fact that nearly a quarter of Democrats surveyed support Barrett replacing late associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the high court is very telling .
TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' The 24 percent support for Barrett ’ s nomination is an increase of 10 points among Democrats from Sept. 26 , when only 14 percent of Democratic respondents supported the nominee .
Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett , and threats to violate norms with the judiciary are growing louder with chatter about packing the Supreme Court with more justices .
Democrats have challenged Barrett ’ s faith , her family , her adoptions of children from earthquake-ravaged Haiti and much more .
High-profile Senate Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have gone as far as to launch verbal attacks against Barrett while refusing to meet with her ahead of nomination proceedings .
“ I believe first the whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said last week , according to Fox News .
“ And second , because she ’ s already stated that she is for overturning the ACA .
I will not meet with her , ” the Democrat added .
Blumenthal referred to Barrett ’ s nomination and coming confirmation as an “ illegitimate sham process ” in a Sept. 26 tweet .
RELATED : SCOTUS Justices Thomas and Alito Urge the Court To Reconsider 2015 Gay Marriage Ruling Democrats are also using every possible tool in their arsenal to delay proceedings for Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has said in no uncertain terms that the confirmation process will proceed unabated .
Over the past week , the strategy has backfired for Democrats and the establishment media , which is essentially the party ’ s propaganda wing .
“ Democrats are losing the Supreme Court messaging war , new polling indicates , with support for Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s confirmation trending in the GOP ’ s direction , ” Morning Consult noted .
The poll surveyed roughly 2,000 registered voters from Oct. 2-4 and found that support for Barrett @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans and independents .
Of those surveyed on Sept. 26 , 71 percent of Republicans supported confirming Barrett .
That number has increased to 77 percent .
With independents , support has gone up by 8 points , from 28 percent to 36 percent .
With all registered voters polled , 46 percent said Barrett should be confirmed as soon as possible by the Senate “ regardless of who wins next month ’ s election , ” according to the poll .
That number is up 9 points from Sept. 26 , when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination .
Independents polled were more likely to have no opinion one way or the other on Barrett ’ s confirmation .
On the latest poll , 33 percent of independents had no opinion on the matter , while 31 percent opposed the confirmation .
A plurality of voters not affiliated with either major political party support confirming Barrett , at 36 percent .
Shockingly , only 52 percent of Democrats oppose the confirmation of Barrett .
While Barrett ’ s confirmation only enjoys the support of 46 percent of all voters polled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apathy .
Among all voters , 23 percent of those surveyed simply don ’ t care one way or the other , meaning the confirmation is only outright opposed by 31 percent of registered voters , according to Morning Consult .
Democrats have gone negative by attacking a working mother on an issue that voters don ’ t share their passion for .
With polls about the presidential race all over the place , finding out that 48 percent of registered Democratic voters either support the confirmation or don ’ t care is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is struggling to find a solid footing when attempting to connect with other voters , or to fire up its base on a major issue .
The Morning Consult/Politico poll had a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A new poll has found that support for the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has risen by double digits among registered Democratic voters.
As Democrats in Washington wage a campaign of character assassination against the devout Catholic and mother of seven, the messaging is not landing with many in their own party.
A Morning Consult/Politico poll released on Wednesday found that among Democrats, support for Barrett’s nomination is at 24 percent.
While that might not seem like a lot of enthusiasm, it’s important to note the Supreme Court has now become one of the single biggest issues the Democratic Party is using in its campaign against President Donald Trump.
The fact that nearly a quarter of Democrats surveyed support Barrett replacing late associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the high court is very telling.
The 24 percent support for Barrett’s nomination is an increase of 10 points among Democrats from Sept. 26, when only 14 percent of Democratic respondents supported the nominee.
Bad news for Senate Democrats: Support for Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination shot up over the past couple of weeks, with nearly half of voters now backing her confirmation, per @MorningConsult/@politico polling. More from @eyokley here: https://t.co/UBJPhWE2G0 pic.twitter.com/RaYRJq7Dza — Cameron Easley (@cameron_easley) October 7, 2020
Of course, Democrats have gone negative on Barrett, and threats to violate norms with the judiciary are growing louder with chatter about packing the Supreme Court with more justices.
Do you think Barrett will be confirmed by the Senate before the election? 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% (2574 Votes) No: 1% (36 Votes)
Democrats have challenged Barrett’s faith, her family, her adoptions of children from earthquake-ravaged Haiti and much more.
High-profile Senate Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have gone as far as to launch verbal attacks against Barrett while refusing to meet with her ahead of nomination proceedings.
“I believe first the whole process has been illegitimate,” Schumer said last week, according to Fox News.
“And second, because she’s already stated that she is for overturning the ACA. I will not meet with her,” the Democrat added.
Blumenthal referred to Barrett’s nomination and coming confirmation as an “illegitimate sham process” in a Sept. 26 tweet.
I will oppose the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, as I would any nominee proposed as part of this illegitimate sham process, barely one month before an election as Americans are already casting their votes. Americans deserve a voice in this hugely consequential decision. — Richard Blumenthal (@SenBlumenthal) September 26, 2020
Democrats are also using every possible tool in their arsenal to delay proceedings for Barrett, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said in no uncertain terms that the confirmation process will proceed unabated.
Judge Barrett’s hearings will begin one week from today. Chairman Graham has all the tools to conduct a hybrid hearing, just like the 150 others the Senate has held this year. We will not stop working for the American people because Democrats are afraid they may lose a vote. — Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) October 6, 2020
Over the past week, the strategy has backfired for Democrats and the establishment media, which is essentially the party’s propaganda wing.
“Democrats are losing the Supreme Court messaging war, new polling indicates, with support for Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation trending in the GOP’s direction,” Morning Consult noted.
The poll surveyed roughly 2,000 registered voters from Oct. 2-4 and found that support for Barrett’s conformation is also up with Republicans and independents.
Of those surveyed on Sept. 26, 71 percent of Republicans supported confirming Barrett.
That number has increased to 77 percent.
With independents, support has gone up by 8 points, from 28 percent to 36 percent.
With all registered voters polled, 46 percent said Barrett should be confirmed as soon as possible by the Senate “regardless of who wins next month’s election,” according to the poll.
That number is up 9 points from Sept. 26, when 37 percent of all voters supported her nomination.
Independents polled were more likely to have no opinion one way or the other on Barrett’s confirmation.
On the latest poll, 33 percent of independents had no opinion on the matter, while 31 percent opposed the confirmation.
A plurality of voters not affiliated with either major political party support confirming Barrett, at 36 percent.
Shockingly, only 52 percent of Democrats oppose the confirmation of Barrett.
While Barrett’s confirmation only enjoys the support of 46 percent of all voters polled, the buried lede here is the apathy.
Among all voters, 23 percent of those surveyed simply don’t care one way or the other, meaning the confirmation is only outright opposed by 31 percent of registered voters, according to Morning Consult.
Democrats have gone negative by attacking a working mother on an issue that voters don’t share their passion for.
With polls about the presidential race all over the place, finding out that 48 percent of registered Democratic voters either support the confirmation or don’t care is a pretty good indication that the party is struggling to find a solid footing when attempting to connect with other voters, or to fire up its base on a major issue.
The Morning Consult/Politico poll had a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points.
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--2020-10-07--Video Shows CNN Reporter Attacked by Raccoon Outside White House

A CNN reporter was trying to deliver news from the White House lawn when a raccoon decided to make a special appearance .
Behind-the-scenes video footage of CNN senior Washington correspondent Joe Johns fending off the raccoon moments before he appeared on CNN ’ s “ New Day ” went viral on social media Wednesday .
“ Get !
” he yelled before throwing what looked like a work bag at the animal to try and scare it off .
“ Frickin ’ raccoons , man .
God , again !
This is the second time !
” He added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around when I ’ m going to go on TV.
” TRENDING : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' “ New Day ” host Alisyn Camerota praised Johns for being a “ consummate professional ” in the “ nutty news cycle.
” Johns replied to Camerota ’ s tweet , saying that one of the raccoons “ slipped into a WH guard shack last night ” and that the creatures are “ unafraid of people at this stage.
” Gulf Coast broadcast personality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are obviously Republicans.
” This is not the first time that news crews have had to fend off raccoons on the White House lawn .
RELATED : Dan Bongino Announces It Looks Like He Has Lymphoma After Having Tumor Removed The White House has reportedly reached out to the U.S. General Services Administration to deal with the aggressive creatures .
Images from both instances went viral on social media , with jokes being made at the expense of the reporters and the president .
White House communications director Alyssa Farah suggested that perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of White House pool reporters .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A CNN reporter was trying to deliver news from the White House lawn when a raccoon decided to make a special appearance.
Behind-the-scenes video footage of CNN senior Washington correspondent Joe Johns fending off the raccoon moments before he appeared on CNN’s “New Day” went viral on social media Wednesday.
“Get!” he yelled before throwing what looked like a work bag at the animal to try and scare it off.
“Frickin’ raccoons, man. God, again! This is the second time!”
He added, “It always comes around right around when I’m going to go on TV.”
“New Day” host Alisyn Camerota praised Johns for being a “consummate professional” in the “nutty news cycle.”
This is what a consummate professional @joejohnscnn is. Seconds before his @NewDay live shot, he fends off a raccoon attack! Just another day in the nutty news cycle. #behindthescenes #whitehouseraccoon #wildlife pic.twitter.com/p13w3QICiD — Alisyn Camerota (@AlisynCamerota) October 7, 2020
Johns replied to Camerota’s tweet, saying that one of the raccoons “slipped into a WH guard shack last night” and that the creatures are “unafraid of people at this stage.”
Gulf Coast broadcast personality Kenny Webster said, “These raccoons are obviously Republicans.”
CNN reporter @joejohnscnn attacked by raccoons at the White House. These raccoons are obviously Republicans. pic.twitter.com/So3blEkjoC — Kenny Webster (@KenWebsterII) October 7, 2020
This is not the first time that news crews have had to fend off raccoons on the White House lawn.
CBS News’ Paula Reid tweeted that a raccoon “attacked multiple news crews” on Sept. 28, allegedly grabbing a photographer’s pant leg.
Strong Pawnee vibes at White House this morning as a raccoon attacked multiple news crews on North Lawn. ? allegedly grabbed pant leg of a photographer & then a corespondent before being fended off. (WH ?? ? pictured here in more peaceful times.) pic.twitter.com/o5VbTUHxBR — Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) September 28, 2020
The White House has reportedly reached out to the U.S. General Services Administration to deal with the aggressive creatures.
Images from both instances went viral on social media, with jokes being made at the expense of the reporters and the president.
The Trash Pandas mistook @CNN for garbage. Completely understandable. — Director Haspell ? (@GinaHaspell1) October 7, 2020
We need a distraction! We’ve used up all of our distractions. [low, ominous] Release the raccoons. https://t.co/Mwdf3tJVeq — Schooley (@Rschooley) September 28, 2020
White House communications director Alyssa Farah suggested that perhaps raccoons should be added to the rotation of White House pool reporters.
Did you know that The Western Journal now publishes some content in Spanish as well as English, for international audiences? Click here to read this article on The Western Journal en Español!
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--2020-10-08--Trump Hasn’t Appointed Any Black Appellate Judges, But That’s Not the Whole Story

No one should be surprised that Kamala Harris asked a race-baiting question during the vice presidential debate .
During Wednesday ’ s night ’ s debate with Vice President Mike Pence , the Democratic vice presidential nominee made a misleading , race-baiting claim about President Donald Trump ’ s record appointing judges to federal courts .
The claim was made as Harris was dodging a question from Pence about whether she and Joe Biden ’ s administration would pack the Supreme Court .
TRENDING : Fact Check : Harris Says Biden Wo n't Ban Fracking , Video Shows Her and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that of the 50 people who President Trump appointed to the court of appeals for lifetime appointments , not one is black ?
” Harris asked .
“ This is what they ’ ve been doing .
You want to talk about packing a court , let ’ s have that discussion.
” Despite saying “ let ’ s have that discussion , ” Harris never answered whether she and Biden would , in fact , pack the court .
With regard to her comments about judicial appointments , it is true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black judge to an appellate court .
Trump has , however , appointed black judges to district courts .
A fact check from WUSA-TV debunked the claim that the “ Trump administration has not confirmed any Black judges.
” “ The American Constitution Society shows nearly 4 % of President Trump ’ s judge confirmations have been Black , ” the WUSA report read .
Even more importantly than that , a person ’ s skin color should not determine whether or not a judge should be appointed to the court .
Although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives and libertarians on the right believe that all people , of every skin color , should be judged based on merit .
RELATED : Civil Rights Attorney Calls Out Michelle Obama 's Trump Attack : She 'Lied in That Video' The black community is suffering and the Biden-Harris ticket is offering , as their solution , to appoint more African-Americans to positions of power .
That isn ’ t going to help the large portion of the black community who are currently in poverty .
The Trump administration , however , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black community .
On Sept. 25 , Trump announced a $ 500 billion “ Platinum Plan ” to help black communities achieve greater equality of opportunity .
Opportunity , security , prosperity and fairness are the four pillars of the plan .
None of those qualities will be available under the Biden campaign , despite what Harris wants you to think .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

No one should be surprised that Kamala Harris asked a race-baiting question during the vice presidential debate.
During Wednesday’s night’s debate with Vice President Mike Pence, the Democratic vice presidential nominee made a misleading, race-baiting claim about President Donald Trump’s record appointing judges to federal courts.
The claim was made as Harris was dodging a question from Pence about whether she and Joe Biden’s administration would pack the Supreme Court.
Kamala Harris repeatedly dodges the court packing question. Instead goes on a tangent about how “of the 50 people who President Trump appointed to the court of appeals for lifetime appointments, not one is black.” pic.twitter.com/F3ZZvWUU34 — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) October 8, 2020
“Do you know that of the 50 people who President Trump appointed to the court of appeals for lifetime appointments, not one is black?” Harris asked.
“This is what they’ve been doing. You want to talk about packing a court, let’s have that discussion.”
Despite saying “let’s have that discussion,” Harris never answered whether she and Biden would, in fact, pack the court.
With regard to her comments about judicial appointments, it is true that Trump hasn’t nominated a black judge to an appellate court.
Is Harris an honest candidate? 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: 1% (35 Votes) No: 99% (3129 Votes)
Trump has, however, appointed black judges to district courts.
A fact check from WUSA-TV debunked the claim that the “Trump administration has not confirmed any Black judges.”
“The American Constitution Society shows nearly 4% of President Trump’s judge confirmations have been Black,” the WUSA report read.
Even more importantly than that, a person’s skin color should not determine whether or not a judge should be appointed to the court.
Although the left is obsessed with race, conservatives and libertarians on the right believe that all people, of every skin color, should be judged based on merit.
The black community is suffering and the Biden-Harris ticket is offering, as their solution, to appoint more African-Americans to positions of power.
That isn’t going to help the large portion of the black community who are currently in poverty.
The Trump administration, however, is already doing so much to help the black community.
On Sept. 25, Trump announced a $500 billion “Platinum Plan” to help black communities achieve greater equality of opportunity.
Opportunity, security, prosperity and fairness are the four pillars of the plan.
None of those qualities will be available under the Biden campaign, despite what Harris wants you to think.
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--2020-10-09--After Ratings Tank, NBA Is Finally Giving Up on BLM Propaganda

It ’ s impossible to overstate the cultural significance of sports .
Spectating at competitive sports can bring together total strangers , and games of little consequence to their respective leagues , divisions and conferences can mean the world to individual fans and fanbases .
We need sports , and athletes , coaches and league administrators , in return , need us .
It ’ s a mutually beneficial relationship that is better left undisturbed .
Fans fund sports leagues by buying merchandise and tickets and by tuning in on TV , thus funding the leagues by convincing advertisers that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the league ’ s product .
TRENDING : Joe Biden Caught Red-Handed Misleading Americans About the Number of People Given Clemency While He Was VP That being said , running a sports league is a business , and alienating at least half of your potential customers in any business is a recipe for a disaster .
The NBA has found this out the hard way since late July , when the league resumed in the Orlando , Florida , bubble following a coronavirus hiatus .
When play resumed , many fans felt estranged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leftist politics into basketball .
Embracing the divisive , neo-Marxist Black Lives Matter movement was bad for business , as were other not-so-subtle actions taken by players and coaches .
Fans have tuned out of the NBA in droves , at a time when the country was dealing with the health , psychological and economic ramifications of a global pandemic .
The league ’ s ratings should have been healthy .
Instead , the NBA Finals are currently experiencing record lows in viewership .
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver , often touted as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the overt displays of politics might be hurting his league ’ s brand this week during an interview with ESPN before the ratings disaster that was Sunday matchup between the Miami Heat and the Los Angeles Lakers .
Silver said prior to the game that the league ’ s very loud displays of support for leftist causes not related to basketball likely would not return next year — pending a conversation with players .
ESPN ’ s Rachel Nichols asked , “ How committed are you to [ championing political causes ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re completely committed to standing for social justice and racial equality , ” Silver said , adding : “ It ’ s part of the DNA of this league.
” But the commissioner also commented on the appearance of the words “ Black Lives Matter ” on NBA courts , as well as the social justice phrases which have appeared on the backs of some player jerseys since the summer .
” I would say in terms of the messages you see on our court on the jerseys , this was an extraordinary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the discussions with the players and what we all lived through this summer , ” he said .
But the businessman in the 58-year-old apparently prevailed .
“ My sense is there will be somewhat a return to normalcy , ” he said .
“ That those messages will largely be left to be delivered off the floor .
And I understand those people who are saying ‘ I ’ m on your side , but I want to watch a basketball game , ' ” Silver said .
Silver also said he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ begin in January , although he wouldn ’ t commit to that time frame .
But at some point , the players will again apparently play the game of basketball in an apolitical way , if Silver is to be believed on the issue .
The only question : Is the damage done to the league ’ s reputation so severe that fans will be interested in games , as they were prior to the politicization of the game they love ?
Will enough fans be forgiving of the league ’ s betrayal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resume watching games , and even attending them , en masse , when a lid is finally put on the coronavirus pandemic ?
Only time will tell .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s impossible to overstate the cultural significance of sports.
Spectating at competitive sports can bring together total strangers, and games of little consequence to their respective leagues, divisions and conferences can mean the world to individual fans and fanbases.
We need sports, and athletes, coaches and league administrators, in return, need us.
It’s a mutually beneficial relationship that is better left undisturbed.
Fans fund sports leagues by buying merchandise and tickets and by tuning in on TV, thus funding the leagues by convincing advertisers that their commercials are a good investment in the league’s product.
That being said, running a sports league is a business, and alienating at least half of your potential customers in any business is a recipe for a disaster.
The NBA has found this out the hard way since late July, when the league resumed in the Orlando, Florida, bubble following a coronavirus hiatus.
When play resumed, many fans felt estranged from the game by the insertion of leftist politics into basketball.
Embracing the divisive, neo-Marxist Black Lives Matter movement was bad for business, as were other not-so-subtle actions taken by players and coaches.
Do you think this move will help the NBA win back viewers? 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: 20% (482 Votes) No: 80% (1876 Votes)
Fans have tuned out of the NBA in droves, at a time when the country was dealing with the health, psychological and economic ramifications of a global pandemic.
The league’s ratings should have been healthy.
Instead, the NBA Finals are currently experiencing record lows in viewership.
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver, often touted as the smartest official in professional sports, hinted that the overt displays of politics might be hurting his league’s brand this week during an interview with ESPN before the ratings disaster that was Sunday matchup between the Miami Heat and the Los Angeles Lakers.
Deadline reported that Game 3 only attracted 4.08 million viewers.
Silver said prior to the game that the league’s very loud displays of support for leftist causes not related to basketball likely would not return next year — pending a conversation with players.
ESPN’s Rachel Nichols asked, “How committed are you to [championing political causes] going forward?”
“We’re completely committed to standing for social justice and racial equality,” Silver said, adding: “It’s part of the DNA of this league.”
But the commissioner also commented on the appearance of the words “Black Lives Matter” on NBA courts, as well as the social justice phrases which have appeared on the backs of some player jerseys since the summer.
”I would say in terms of the messages you see on our court on the jerseys, this was an extraordinary moment in time, when we began the discussions with the players and what we all lived through this summer,” he said.
But the businessman in the 58-year-old apparently prevailed.
“My sense is there will be somewhat a return to normalcy,” he said.
“That those messages will largely be left to be delivered off the floor. And I understand those people who are saying ‘I’m on your side, but I want to watch a basketball game,'” Silver said.
Silver also said he believes the 2021 NBA season will likely begin in January, although he wouldn’t commit to that time frame.
But at some point, the players will again apparently play the game of basketball in an apolitical way, if Silver is to be believed on the issue.
The only question: Is the damage done to the league’s reputation so severe that fans will be interested in games, as they were prior to the politicization of the game they love?
Will enough fans be forgiving of the league’s betrayal of their loyalty and values to actually resume watching games, and even attending them, en masse, when a lid is finally put on the coronavirus pandemic?
Only time will tell.
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.