westernjournal--2020-02-18--Trump Commutes ‘Ridiculous’ Sentence of Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich

President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has commuted the 14-year prison sentence of former Illinois Gov .
Rod Blagojevich .
The former governor was convicted of political corruption just months after he appeared on Trump ’ s reality TV show , “ Celebrity Apprentice.
” Blagojevich , who hails from a state with a long history of pay-to-play schemes , was expected to walk out of prison later Tuesday , according to a person close to him , who spoke on condition of anonymity .
He had been found guilty of crimes that included seeking to sell an appointment to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate seat and trying to shake down a children ’ s hospital .
The 63-year-old Democrat exhausted his last appellate option in 2018 and had seemed destined to remain behind bars until his projected 2024 release date .
His wife , Patti , went on a media blitz in 2018 to encourage Trump to step in , praising the president and likening the investigation of her husband to special prosecutor Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election — a probe Trump long characterized as a “ witch hunt.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Governor of Illinois , was sentenced to 14 years in prison .
He has served 7 years , ” Trump had tweeted in August 2019 .
“ Many people have asked that I study the possibility of commuting his sentence in that it was a very severe one .
White House staff is continuing the review of this matter.
” Blagojevich ’ s conviction was notable , even in a state where four of the last 10 governors have gone to prison for corruption .
Judge James Zagel — who in 2011 sentenced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an Illinois politician — said when a governor “ goes bad , the fabric of Illinois is torn and disfigured.
” Blagojevich became the brunt of jokes for foul-mouthed rants on wiretaps released after his Dec. 9 , 2008 , arrest while still governor .
On the most notorious recording , he gushed about profiting by naming someone to the seat Obama vacated to become president : “ I ’ ve got this thing and it ’ s f—ing golden .
And I ’ m just not giving it up for f—ing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea in May 2018 of intervening to free Blagojevich , he said Blagojevich was convicted for “ being stupid , saying things that every other politician , you know , that many other politicians say.
” He said Blagojevich ’ s sentence was too harsh .
Prosecutors have balked at the notion long fostered by Blagojevich that he engaged in common political horse-trading and was a victim of an overzealous U.S. attorney , Patrick Fitzgerald .
Fitzgerald said after Blagojevich ’ s arrest that the governor had gone on “ a political corruption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lincoln turn over in his grave .
Mueller was FBI director during the investigation into Blagojevich .
Fitzgerald is now a private attorney for another former FBI director , James Comey , whom the president dismissed from the agency in May 2017 .
Trump also expressed some sympathy for Blagojevich when he appeared on “ Celebrity Apprentice ” in 2010 before his first corruption trial started .
As Trump “ fired ” Blagojevich as a contestant , he praised him for how he was fighting his criminal case , telling him : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of guts.
” RELATED : George Soros Pushes Wild Conspiracy Theory About a Deal Between Trump and Zuckerberg The president later poll-tested the matter , asking for a show of hands of those who supported clemency at an October 2019 fundraiser at his Chicago hotel .
Most of the 200 to 300 attendees raised their hands , The Wall Street Journal reported , citing several people at the event .
On the same day , Trump told Chicago ’ s WLS-TV that — despite bringing up the possibility of freeing Blagojevich in August @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the idea — Blagojevich shouldn ’ t abandon hope of an early release .
“ No , he should not at all give up hope , at all , ” Trump said .
“ We are looking at it.
” Blagojevich testified at his 2011 retrial , describing himself as a flawed dreamer grounded in his parents ’ working-class values .
He sought to humanize himself to counteract the blunt , profane , seemingly greedy Blagojevich heard on wiretap recordings played in court by prosecutors over several weeks .
He said the hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a politician who liked to think out loud .
But jurors accepted evidence that Blagojevich demanded a $ 50,000 donation from the head of a children ’ s hospital in return for increased state support and extorted $ 100,000 in donations from two horse racing tracks and a racing executive in exchange for quick approval of legislation the tracks wanted .
He originally was convicted on 18 counts , including lying to the FBI , wire fraud for trying to trade an appointment to the Obama seat for contributions , and attempted extortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Appeals in Chicago in 2015 tossed five of 18 convictions , including ones in which he offered to appoint someone to a high-paying job in the Senate .
The appeals court ordered the trial judge to resentence Blagojevich but suggested it would be appropriate to hand him the same sentence , given the gravity of the crimes .
Blagojevich appeared via live video from prison during the 2016 resentencing and asked for leniency .
The judge gave him the same 14-year term , saying it was below federal guidelines when he imposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once aspired to run for president himself but entered the Federal Correctional Institution Englewood in suburban Denver in 2012 , disgraced and broke .
Court documents filed by his lawyers in 2016 portrayed Blagojevich as humble and self-effacing as well as an insightful life coach and lecturer on everything from the Civil War to Richard Nixon .
The Associated Press contributed to this report .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has commuted the 14-year prison sentence of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
The president told reporters Blagojevich’s sentence was “ridiculous.”
The former governor was convicted of political corruption just months after he appeared on Trump’s reality TV show, “Celebrity Apprentice.”
Blagojevich, who hails from a state with a long history of pay-to-play schemes, was expected to walk out of prison later Tuesday, according to a person close to him, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
He had been found guilty of crimes that included seeking to sell an appointment to former President Barack Obama’s old Senate seat and trying to shake down a children’s hospital.
The 63-year-old Democrat exhausted his last appellate option in 2018 and had seemed destined to remain behind bars until his projected 2024 release date.
His wife, Patti, went on a media blitz in 2018 to encourage Trump to step in, praising the president and likening the investigation of her husband to special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election — a probe Trump long characterized as a “witch hunt.”
“Rod Blagojevich, the former Governor of Illinois, was sentenced to 14 years in prison. He has served 7 years,” Trump had tweeted in August 2019. “Many people have asked that I study the possibility of commuting his sentence in that it was a very severe one. White House staff is continuing the review of this matter.”
Blagojevich’s conviction was notable, even in a state where four of the last 10 governors have gone to prison for corruption. Judge James Zagel — who in 2011 sentenced Blagojevich to the longest prison term yet for an Illinois politician — said when a governor “goes bad, the fabric of Illinois is torn and disfigured.”
Do you agree with President Trump's decision to commute Blagojevich's sentence? 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: 84% (42 Votes) No: 16% (8 Votes)
Blagojevich became the brunt of jokes for foul-mouthed rants on wiretaps released after his Dec. 9, 2008, arrest while still governor. On the most notorious recording, he gushed about profiting by naming someone to the seat Obama vacated to become president: “I’ve got this thing and it’s f—ing golden. And I’m just not giving it up for f—ing nothing.”
When Trump publicly broached the idea in May 2018 of intervening to free Blagojevich, he said Blagojevich was convicted for “being stupid, saying things that every other politician, you know, that many other politicians say.” He said Blagojevich’s sentence was too harsh.
Prosecutors have balked at the notion long fostered by Blagojevich that he engaged in common political horse-trading and was a victim of an overzealous U.S. attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald said after Blagojevich’s arrest that the governor had gone on “a political corruption crime spree” that would make Abraham Lincoln turn over in his grave.
Mueller was FBI director during the investigation into Blagojevich. Fitzgerald is now a private attorney for another former FBI director, James Comey, whom the president dismissed from the agency in May 2017.
Trump also expressed some sympathy for Blagojevich when he appeared on “Celebrity Apprentice” in 2010 before his first corruption trial started. As Trump “fired” Blagojevich as a contestant, he praised him for how he was fighting his criminal case, telling him: “You have a hell of a lot of guts.”
The president later poll-tested the matter, asking for a show of hands of those who supported clemency at an October 2019 fundraiser at his Chicago hotel. Most of the 200 to 300 attendees raised their hands, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing several people at the event.
On the same day, Trump told Chicago’s WLS-TV that — despite bringing up the possibility of freeing Blagojevich in August and then appearing to back away from the idea — Blagojevich shouldn’t abandon hope of an early release.
“No, he should not at all give up hope, at all,” Trump said. “We are looking at it.”
Blagojevich testified at his 2011 retrial, describing himself as a flawed dreamer grounded in his parents’ working-class values. He sought to humanize himself to counteract the blunt, profane, seemingly greedy Blagojevich heard on wiretap recordings played in court by prosecutors over several weeks. He said the hours of FBI recordings were the ramblings of a politician who liked to think out loud.
But jurors accepted evidence that Blagojevich demanded a $50,000 donation from the head of a children’s hospital in return for increased state support and extorted $100,000 in donations from two horse racing tracks and a racing executive in exchange for quick approval of legislation the tracks wanted.
He originally was convicted on 18 counts, including lying to the FBI, wire fraud for trying to trade an appointment to the Obama seat for contributions, and attempted extortion. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago in 2015 tossed five of 18 convictions, including ones in which he offered to appoint someone to a high-paying job in the Senate.
The appeals court ordered the trial judge to resentence Blagojevich but suggested it would be appropriate to hand him the same sentence, given the gravity of the crimes. Blagojevich appeared via live video from prison during the 2016 resentencing and asked for leniency. The judge gave him the same 14-year term, saying it was below federal guidelines when he imposed it the first time.
Blagojevich had once aspired to run for president himself but entered the Federal Correctional Institution Englewood in suburban Denver in 2012, disgraced and broke.
Court documents filed by his lawyers in 2016 portrayed Blagojevich as humble and self-effacing as well as an insightful life coach and lecturer on everything from the Civil War to Richard Nixon.
Blagojevich, an Elvis Presley fan, also formed a prison band called “The Jailhouse Rockers.”
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--2020-02-18--Media Whines About How Trump Used His Limo, Ignores How Obama Used Entire WH

The one car that caused the most commotion at the Daytona 500 this long weekend was Ryan Newman ’ s .
In a rain-delayed race on Monday , Newman was involved in a horrific crash from the lead that sent the 42-year-old veteran driver to the hospital .
Newman was in serious condition , but the injuries weren ’ t life-threatening .
Given the kind of fright that accident caused , though , the fact that “ The Beast ” was a close second in terms of commotion-causing cars was impressive — especially when it doesn ’ t have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Beast ” is the informal name for the presidential limousine , a massive tank of a car that ensures the commander in chief stays safe .
President Donald Trump took it down to the Daytona International Speedway for NASCAR ’ s premier race , something which struck the predictable people the wrong way .
In the case of The New York Times ’ Maggie Haberman , she was clearly unhappy the president was using official government property for a political purpose .
At least he did it with a limousine .
Former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House — and yet , no one seemed to have a problem with it .
Trump was the grand marshal for the event , where he told drivers they were competing “ for pure American glory.
” He then did roughly a quarter lap around the famed 2.5 mile oval in Daytona Beach , Florida in “ The Beast ” — nominally a Cadillac , but with enough modifications that very little of the original car is left — during the warm-up laps .
Trump had also done a flyover of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president ’ s appearance seemed to have a meliorative effect on declining ratings for NASCAR ’ s Super Bowl , with the green-flag viewership reaching a five-year high , according to Fox Business .
NBC News ’ Kelly O ’ Donnell tweeted a ( rather off-kilter ) photo of “ The Beast ” doing its quarter lap of Daytona .
In a retweet , Haberman made it clear that she was Not Happy™ about this .
“ Using the official apparatus of government for what appears to be a political event , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never to happen .
Except for in this iconic photo , of course : That was roughly five years ago when the Supreme Court ruling which held that same-sex marriage was an inviolable constitutional right — Obergefell v. Hodges — came down .
“ As of 7:08 PM , the sunlight made it difficult [ to ] make out the colors , but red , orange , yellow , green and violet were faintly visible , ” a White House pool report from June 26 , 2015 read , according to Politico .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ north side of the White House in the colors of the rainbow flag “ to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to progress and equality , here in America and around the world , ” a White House official said .
“ The pride colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community , and tonight , these colors celebrate a new chapter in the history of American civil rights.
” Other things the Obama administration did ( releasing an email blast from plaintiff Jim Obergefell , tweeting out praise for the Supreme Court ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However , using the White House to make what ’ s effectively a political statement — given that Obergefell was and remains a contentious ruling , if not because of the act of same-sex marriage itself but because of its implications for religious freedom in the long term — was unusual .
Remember , the White House is a bit more than a presidential limousine .
“ The Beast ” isn ’ t on any U.S. currency , after all .
It ’ s not a symbol of the American republic .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Obama White House did was acceptable — if not because I agree with the cause but because I agree with the right of the president to make such a decision .
Donald Trump is trying to energize NASCAR fans , typically a Republican-leaning lot .
Obama was using the Supreme Court ruling to further energize the LGBT community , a key Democratic voting bloc .
If you can do that with James Hoban ’ s architectural masterpiece , you can darn well do it with a limousine .
Maggie Haberman is well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem isn ’ t with “ The Beast ” being in front of the Daytona 500 field .
It ’ s who was being transported inside the limousine that irked her .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The one car that caused the most commotion at the Daytona 500 this long weekend was Ryan Newman’s.
In a rain-delayed race on Monday, Newman was involved in a horrific crash from the lead that sent the 42-year-old veteran driver to the hospital. Newman was in serious condition, but the injuries weren’t life-threatening.
Given the kind of fright that accident caused, though, the fact that “The Beast” was a close second in terms of commotion-causing cars was impressive — especially when it doesn’t have a number or a famous driver.
“The Beast” is the informal name for the presidential limousine, a massive tank of a car that ensures the commander in chief stays safe.
President Donald Trump took it down to the Daytona International Speedway for NASCAR’s premier race, something which struck the predictable people the wrong way.
In the case of The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman, she was clearly unhappy the president was using official government property for a political purpose.
At least he did it with a limousine.
Former President Barack Obama did it with the White House — and yet, no one seemed to have a problem with it.
Trump was the grand marshal for the event, where he told drivers they were competing “for pure American glory.”
Did you watch President Trump's appearance at the Daytona 500? 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: 79% (759 Votes) No: 21% (196 Votes)
He then did roughly a quarter lap around the famed 2.5 mile oval in Daytona Beach, Florida in “The Beast” — nominally a Cadillac, but with enough modifications that very little of the original car is left — during the warm-up laps.
Trump had also done a flyover of the speedway with Air Force One.
The president’s appearance seemed to have a meliorative effect on declining ratings for NASCAR’s Super Bowl, with the green-flag viewership reaching a five-year high, according to Fox Business.
Tune-in at green flag of yesterday’s Daytona 500 hit a five-year high with 11.2 million viewers. https://t.co/pGHDKAt4nq — Michael Mulvihill (@mulvihill79) February 17, 2020
NBC News’ Kelly O’Donnell tweeted a (rather off-kilter) photo of “The Beast” doing its quarter lap of Daytona.
In a retweet, Haberman made it clear that she was Not Happy™ about this.
Using the official apparatus of government for what appears to be a political event https://t.co/GWNm8io8O1 — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) February 16, 2020
“Using the official apparatus of government for what appears to be a political event,” Haberman tweeted.
Yes, that ought never to happen. Except for in this iconic photo, of course:
Remember that?
That was roughly five years ago when the Supreme Court ruling which held that same-sex marriage was an inviolable constitutional right — Obergefell v. Hodges — came down.
“As of 7:08 PM, the sunlight made it difficult [to] make out the colors, but red, orange, yellow, green and violet were faintly visible,” a White House pool report from June 26, 2015 read, according to Politico.
The Obama administration had lit up the north side of the White House in the colors of the rainbow flag “to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to progress and equality, here in America and around the world,” a White House official said.
“The pride colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community, and tonight, these colors celebrate a new chapter in the history of American civil rights.”
Other things the Obama administration did (releasing an email blast from plaintiff Jim Obergefell, tweeting out praise for the Supreme Court’s decision) were all pretty unsurprising.
However, using the White House to make what’s effectively a political statement — given that Obergefell was and remains a contentious ruling, if not because of the act of same-sex marriage itself but because of its implications for religious freedom in the long term — was unusual.
Remember, the White House is a bit more than a presidential limousine.
“The Beast” isn’t on any U.S. currency, after all. It’s not a symbol of the American republic.
And yet, I’d argue what the Obama White House did was acceptable — if not because I agree with the cause but because I agree with the right of the president to make such a decision.
Both were political events.
Donald Trump is trying to energize NASCAR fans, typically a Republican-leaning lot.
Obama was using the Supreme Court ruling to further energize the LGBT community, a key Democratic voting bloc.
If you can do that with James Hoban’s architectural masterpiece, you can darn well do it with a limousine.
Maggie Haberman is well aware of this, too.
Her problem isn’t with “The Beast” being in front of the Daytona 500 field.
It’s who was being transported inside the limousine that irked her.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Dean Cain Threatens Lawsuit After Media Smears Him with Outright Lie About Warren Comment

It ’ s a strange , predictable and inexorable process of the left .
Let ’ s say , hypothetically , someone on the right says something about , oh , anything .
This happens frequently , as human beings are prone to opening their mouths and saying stuff .
There are several ways you this something could be taken : charitably , uncharitably or I-didn ’ t-even-know-that-was-on-the-table badly .
Almost immediately , opinion on Twitter coalesces around the last option .
There ’ s not even any kind of discussion .
Pitchforks are lifted .
Apologies are demanded .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outrage to bubble up from social media to traditional media .
No one questions the validity of outrage — to do so is to question the marginalized .
The someone who said something tries to explain what they meant .
It doesn ’ t really matter at this point .
Perhaps a question mark is inserted into some of the stories : “ Could he/she have meant something else ?
” The subtext is : “ Nah , probably not.
” If there is an apology or retraction required , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bang the initial story generated .
As an example of this phenomenon , I present to you the case of Dean Cain , Ashley Judd and Sen. Elizabeth Warren .
It began with a video and Cain , a noted Hollywood conservative , remarking on it .
It could end in a lawsuit where Cain takes a tabloid TV show to court .
In case you ’ ve missed the whole sturm und drang , here ’ s a catch-up : Last week , the Massachusetts Democrat announced that Judd , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endorsers , would be making phone calls on her behalf in a video .
“ Hi y ’ all , I ’ m Ashley Judd , and I am so proud to support Elizabeth Warren for president of the United States , ” Judd said in the video .
“ And right now , ” she said , “ our plan is to make calls to grassroots donors to thank them for chipping in three bucks , five bucks.
” In a tweet sharing the video , Warren uproariously announced : “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grassroots — built by people , not Super PACs or billionaires.
” Inasmuch as this is true , the time to say it isn ’ t when you ’ re tweeting a video where an entitled millionaire is making phone calls on your behalf .
Yes , she technically qualifies as “ people.
” So , indeed , do billionaires .
RELATED : Dean Cain Puts Alyssa Milano and Co. on Blast for Opposition to 'Heartbeat Bill ' : 'Huge Mistake' Anyhow , what online trolls noticed wasn ’ t the curious nature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the 51-year-old Judd ’ s face appeared puffy .
I saw this tweet and didn ’ t think anything of it .
Sure , it wasn ’ t exactly the Judd I remember — but then , I always assume Hollywood types look considerably different when they ’ re , say , making fundraising calls for quasi-socialist New Englanders than they are when they ’ re on the red carpet .
( Anyone who ’ s ever seen the frightening apparition of Johnny Depp when caught by the paparazzi can attest to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were cruel and insinuated that Judd had put on more than a little weight .
I may be spoiling future plot developments , but see if you can espy any cruelty in this tweet by Cain , who ’ s been unambiguous about his disdain for the type of politician that resembles Warren or the type of insulated Hollywood liberal who ’ d pull a stunt like making fundraising phone calls for her : “ I ’ m not exactly sure what to say here… I certainly have nothing positive to say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Cain tweeted Wednesday , the day after the video was posted .
So , in case you ’ ve forgotten my observation of how this generally works , here ’ s how I would chart the three ways this could be viewed : Charitable : Cain was holding his vitriol while still signaling his disapproval of Warren ’ s candidacy and Hollywood limousine liberal types .
Uncharitable : Cain was pointing his finger and laughing at Warren ’ s candidacy — especially its recent flops — and the mistaken belief that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the left these days .
( See : Swift , Taylor ; Blackburn , Marsha . )
Remember : The Warren/Judd video went out Tuesday .
Cain ’ s tweet was fired off early Wednesday .
To show you how quickly this process works , here ’ s a Marketwatch ( a serious publication dedicated to , as its name indicates , watching financial markets and the news that affects them ) headline from Thursday , after only 24 hours of digital liberal invective : “ Super mean : Dean Cain slammed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judd ’ s puffy face.
” Subheadline : “ The actress has blamed swelling on prescribed steroids like prednisone , which millions of Americans take.
” Despite this , Marketwatch acknowledged in the piece that while “ Cain did not immediately respond to a MarketWatch request for comment … he later tweeted that he wasn ’ t insulting Judd ’ s looks , but rather ‘ her candidate and her support for said candidate ’ s policies . '
” This sounds like a perfectly sensible reading of the situation , but some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that room-clearingly deadly “ Super mean ” /Superman pun playing off Cain ’ s best-known role , and he or she wasn ’ t going to let wordsmithery like that go to waste , I guess .
Anyhow , things got even worse — hence the lawsuit threat .
Say what you will about Marketwatch , it has standards .
“ Inside Edition ” never has .
I ’ m kind of amazed the show is still on the air , but there are plenty of people out there who also have no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Inside Edition ” tackled the topic in the rubbish manner you might expect , using the pretense of tut-tutting at fat-shaming trolls to engage in fat-shaming itself .
But there ’ s the kicker : Included among the trolls was Dean Cain for a tweet that was ambiguous at worst .
The actor wasn ’ t about to allow that to stand .
“ You presented a story that is nothing short of libelous , ” Cain tweeted Saturday .
“ Never made a reference to anyone ’ s looks .
Was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign .
You knew this .
Issue an apology and an on-air correction , or prepare your lawyers.
” Will Cain make the media pay ?
I hate to break it to him and his supporters , but the kind of no-standards garbage that ’ s been on the air since Bill O ’ Reilly ’ s “ We ’ ll do it live !
” days of hosting it is still on the air because it has awfully good lawyers that know what libel entails and how close to the line you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a settlement .
Then again , maybe the mere prospect of ending up in court and having its journalistic standards examined might be enough for “ Inside Edition ” to issue an apology or clarification .
Short of that , Cain might be better off sticking with the comments he made to Billy Bush of “ Extra.
” “ I made zero comment about Ashley at all , ” he said , according to Yahoo Entertainment .
“ I ’ m commenting on the inauthentic campaign by Elizabeth Warren , calling this grassroots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having a millionaire actress make your donor phone calls .
It ’ s ridiculous .
It ’ s actually a perfect irony.
” Cain added : “ It says more about them [ than ] it does about me because I didn ’ t mention her looks at all.
” It does .
Unfortunately , that ’ s not what the headlines are going to say — all thanks to that strange , inexorable process designed to keep conservatives from opening their mouths as little as possible .
We are committed to truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s a strange, predictable and inexorable process of the left.
Let’s say, hypothetically, someone on the right says something about, oh, anything. This happens frequently, as human beings are prone to opening their mouths and saying stuff.
There are several ways this something could be taken: charitably, uncharitably or I-didn’t-even-know-that-was-on-the-table badly.
Almost immediately, opinion on Twitter coalesces around the last option. There’s not even any kind of discussion. Pitchforks are lifted. Apologies are demanded.
It doesn’t take long for the outrage to bubble up from social media to traditional media. No one questions the validity of outrage — to do so is to question the marginalized.
The someone who said something tries to explain what they meant. It doesn’t really matter at this point. Perhaps a question mark is inserted into some of the stories: “Could he/she have meant something else?” The subtext is: “Nah, probably not.” If there is an apology or retraction required, it’s done with a whimper, not the bang the initial story generated.
As an example of this phenomenon, I present to you the case of Dean Cain, Ashley Judd and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
It began with a video and Cain, a noted Hollywood conservative, remarking on it. It could end in a lawsuit where Cain takes a tabloid TV show to court.
In case you’ve missed the whole sturm und drang, here’s a catch-up: Last week, the Massachusetts Democrat announced that Judd, one of her presidential campaign’s celebrity endorsers, would be making phone calls on her behalf in a video.
Do you think Dean Cain should sue 'Inside Edition' if it doesn't issue a correction? 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% (2248 Votes) No: 1% (34 Votes)
“Hi y’all, I’m Ashley Judd, and I am so proud to support Elizabeth Warren for president of the United States,” Judd said in the video.
“And right now,” she said, “our plan is to make calls to grassroots donors to thank them for chipping in three bucks, five bucks.”
In a tweet sharing the video, Warren uproariously announced: “I’m proud that our campaign is grassroots — built by people, not Super PACs or billionaires.”
Inasmuch as this is true, the time to say it isn’t when you’re tweeting a video where an entitled millionaire is making phone calls on your behalf. Yes, she technically qualifies as “people.” So, indeed, do billionaires.
My friend @AshleyJudd made a few calls to people who chipped in a few dollars to our campaign. I’m proud that our campaign is grassroots—built by people, not Super PACs or billionaires. Chip in $3 tonight, and Ashley could call you to say thanks! https://t.co/qOzNnVvmg4 pic.twitter.com/2SJOEAGKCp — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) February 11, 2020
Anyhow, what online trolls noticed wasn’t the curious nature of this argument but instead the fact that the 51-year-old Judd’s face appeared puffy.
I saw this tweet and didn’t think anything of it. Sure, it wasn’t exactly the Judd I remember — but then, I always assume Hollywood types look considerably different when they’re, say, making fundraising calls for quasi-socialist New Englanders than they are when they’re on the red carpet. (Anyone who’s ever seen the frightening apparition of Johnny Depp when caught by the paparazzi can attest to this.)
Trolls being trolls, they were cruel and insinuated that Judd had put on more than a little weight. I may be spoiling future plot developments, but see if you can espy any cruelty in this tweet by Cain, who’s been unambiguous about his disdain for the type of politician that resembles Warren or the type of insulated Hollywood liberal who’d pull a stunt like making fundraising phone calls for her:
I’m not exactly sure what to say here… I certainly have nothing positive to say, so I’ll be quiet. https://t.co/Ee02CQNThz — Dean Cain (@RealDeanCain) February 12, 2020
“I’m not exactly sure what to say here… I certainly have nothing positive to say, so I’ll be quiet,” Cain tweeted Wednesday, the day after the video was posted.
So, in case you’ve forgotten my observation of how this generally works, here’s how I would chart the three ways this could be viewed:
Charitable: Cain was holding his vitriol while still signaling his disapproval of Warren’s candidacy and Hollywood limousine liberal types.
Uncharitable: Cain was pointing his finger and laughing at Warren’s candidacy — especially its recent flops — and the mistaken belief that celebrity endorsements actually mean anything to candidates on the left these days. (See: Swift, Taylor; Blackburn, Marsha.)
I-didn’t-even-know-that-was-on-the-table bad: Cain was fat-shaming Judd.
Remember: The Warren/Judd video went out Tuesday. Cain’s tweet was fired off early Wednesday.
To show you how quickly this process works, here’s a Marketwatch (a serious publication dedicated to, as its name indicates, watching financial markets and the news that affects them) headline from Thursday, after only 24 hours of digital liberal invective:
“Super mean: Dean Cain slammed on Twitter for seeming to insult Ashley Judd’s puffy face.”
Subheadline: “The actress has blamed swelling on prescribed steroids like prednisone, which millions of Americans take.”
Despite this, Marketwatch acknowledged in the piece that while “Cain did not immediately respond to a MarketWatch request for comment … he later tweeted that he wasn’t insulting Judd’s looks, but rather ‘her candidate and her support for said candidate’s policies.'”
This sounds like a perfectly sensible reading of the situation, but some whiz in the newsroom came up with that room-clearingly deadly “Super mean”/Superman pun playing off Cain’s best-known role, and he or she wasn’t going to let wordsmithery like that go to waste, I guess.
Anyhow, things got even worse — hence the lawsuit threat.
Say what you will about Marketwatch, it has standards. “Inside Edition” never has. I’m kind of amazed the show is still on the air, but there are plenty of people out there who also have no standards, so there you are.
“Inside Edition” tackled the topic in the rubbish manner you might expect, using the pretense of tut-tutting at fat-shaming trolls to engage in fat-shaming itself. But there’s the kicker: Included among the trolls was Dean Cain for a tweet that was ambiguous at worst.
The actor wasn’t about to allow that to stand.
“You presented a story that is nothing short of libelous,” Cain tweeted Saturday. “Never made a reference to anyone’s looks. Was referring to Elizabeth Warren’s inauthentic campaign. You knew this. Issue an apology and an on-air correction, or prepare your lawyers.”
. @InsideEdition You presented a story that is nothing short of libelous. Never made a reference to anyone’s looks. Was referring to Elizabeth Warren’s inauthentic campaign. You knew this. Issue an apology and an on-air correction, or prepare your lawyers. pic.twitter.com/TNjG12uGuY — Dean Cain (@RealDeanCain) February 15, 2020
Will Cain make the media pay?
I hate to break it to him and his supporters, but the kind of no-standards garbage that’s been on the air since Bill O’Reilly’s “We’ll do it live!” days of hosting it is still on the air because it has awfully good lawyers that know what libel entails and how close to the line you can get without having to pay out a settlement.
Then again, maybe the mere prospect of ending up in court and having its journalistic standards examined might be enough for “Inside Edition” to issue an apology or clarification.
Short of that, Cain might be better off sticking with the comments he made to Billy Bush of “Extra.”
“I made zero comment about Ashley at all,” he said, according to Yahoo Entertainment. “I’m commenting on the inauthentic campaign by Elizabeth Warren, calling this grassroots. Nothing screams authenticity and grassroots like having a millionaire actress make your donor phone calls. It’s ridiculous. It’s actually a perfect irony.”
Cain added: “It says more about them [than] it does about me because I didn’t mention her looks at all.”
It does. Unfortunately, that’s not what the headlines are going to say — all thanks to that strange, inexorable process designed to keep conservatives from opening their mouths as little as possible.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Ex-MLB Player Says He’s Been Snubbed from Team’s World Series Reunion for Supporting Trump

Former San Francisco Giants first baseman Aubrey Huff says he has been excluded from the 2010 World Series-winning team reunion this summer because of his social media posts supporting President Donald Trump .
The 43-year-old played first base and outfield for the Giants when the team won the 2010 World Series .
He played in 157 games and hit .290 with 26 home runs and 86 runs batted in that year , ESPN reported .
He played his final three seasons of his 13-year baseball career with the Giants before he retired following the 2012 season .
He also played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Orioles , Houston Astros and Detroit Tigers .
The Giants confirmed to ESPN that Huff would not be invited to the reunion , which is planned for Aug. 16 .
“ Earlier this month , we reached out to Aubrey Huff to let him know that he will not be included in the upcoming 2010 World Series Championship reunion , ” the Giants said in a statement .
“ Aubrey has made multiple comments on social media that are unacceptable and run counter to the values of our organization .
“ While we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the 2010 championship season , we stand by our decision , ” the statement concluded .
In his own statement , Huff pointed to his political support of Trump as the reason the board did not approve of his social media activity .
“ Three weeks ago I had a call with Larry Baer CEO of the San Francisco Giants .
He took me by surprise when he told me I was unanimously voted against attending the 2010 Giants World Series Championship reunion , ” he wrote .
“ When I asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told [ me ] that the board didn ’ t approve of my Twitter posts , and my political support of Donald Trump.
” RELATED : Former MLB All-Star and World Series Champ Tony Fernandez Dead at Age 57 “ I ’ m proud of what I accomplished in my 3 years with the Giants .
I made lifelong memories with teammates that can never be taken away from me , ” he continued .
“ And while I ’ m disappointed the Giants are so opposed to President Trump , and our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me to my teams reunion , it shows me that now more than ever we have to stand up for our first 1st amendment rights .
Otherwise , the America we know and love is already dead.
” While Huff maintains that his “ locker room humor on Twitter is meant to be satirical , and sarcastic , ” the former baseball player has been involved in controversial discussions on the social media platform , Fox News reported .
In January , he posted a since-deleted tweet about kidnapping Iranian women to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amongst other things.
” Huff later said the tweet was a joke .
He also tweeted in November that he was teaching his children how to use a gun in the “ unlikely ” possibility Sen. Bernie Sanders beats Trump in the 2020 election .
In response to his exclusion from the reunion , Huff told The Athletic he was “ quite frankly , shocked .
Disappointed.
” “ If it wasn ’ t for me , they wouldn ’ t be having a reunion , ” he said .
“ But if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correct , progressive bulls— , that ’ s fine.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Former San Francisco Giants first baseman Aubrey Huff says he has been excluded from the 2010 World Series-winning team reunion this summer because of his social media posts supporting President Donald Trump.
The 43-year-old played first base and outfield for the Giants when the team won the 2010 World Series.
He played in 157 games and hit .290 with 26 home runs and 86 runs batted in that year, ESPN reported.
He played his final three seasons of his 13-year baseball career with the Giants before he retired following the 2012 season.
He also played for the Tampa Bay Rays, Baltimore Orioles, Houston Astros and Detroit Tigers.
The Giants confirmed to ESPN that Huff would not be invited to the reunion, which is planned for Aug. 16.
“Earlier this month, we reached out to Aubrey Huff to let him know that he will not be included in the upcoming 2010 World Series Championship reunion,” the Giants said in a statement.
“Aubrey has made multiple comments on social media that are unacceptable and run counter to the values of our organization.
“While we appreciate the many contributions that Aubrey made to the 2010 championship season, we stand by our decision,” the statement concluded.
Do you think the Giants were right to disinvite Huff? 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: 0% (0 Votes) No: 100% (97 Votes)
In his own statement, Huff pointed to his political support of Trump as the reason the board did not approve of his social media activity.
“Three weeks ago I had a call with Larry Baer CEO of the San Francisco Giants. He took me by surprise when he told me I was unanimously voted against attending the 2010 Giants World Series Championship reunion,” he wrote.
“When I asked why I wasn’t invited he told [me] that the board didn’t approve of my Twitter posts, and my political support of Donald Trump.”
“I’m proud of what I accomplished in my 3 years with the Giants. I made lifelong memories with teammates that can never be taken away from me,” he continued.
“And while I’m disappointed the Giants are so opposed to President Trump, and our constitutional rights that they’d uninvite me to my teams reunion, it shows me that now more than ever we have to stand up for our first 1st amendment rights. Otherwise, the America we know and love is already dead.”
While Huff maintains that his “locker room humor on Twitter is meant to be satirical, and sarcastic,” the former baseball player has been involved in controversial discussions on the social media platform, Fox News reported.
In January, he posted a since-deleted tweet about kidnapping Iranian women to “fan us and feed us grapes, amongst other things.”
Huff later said the tweet was a joke.
He also tweeted in November that he was teaching his children how to use a gun in the “unlikely” possibility Sen. Bernie Sanders beats Trump in the 2020 election.
In response to his exclusion from the reunion, Huff told The Athletic he was “quite frankly, shocked. Disappointed.”
“If it wasn’t for me, they wouldn’t be having a reunion,” he said. “But if they want to stick with their politically correct, progressive bulls—, that’s fine.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Trump Teases Lawsuits Over ‘Illegally Set Up’ Mueller Investigation

President Donald Trump has threatened to sue the officials involved in the investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 election led by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller .
Echoing his previous themes of calling the investigation a “ witch hunt , ” Trump discussed the lawsuit possibility in a series of tweets Tuesday morning .
“ These were Mueller prosecutors , and the whole Mueller investigation was illegally set up based on a phony and now fully discredited Fake Dossier , lying and forging documents to the FISA Court , and many other things , ” he wrote .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigation is badly tainted and , in my opinion , should be thrown out .
Even Mueller ’ s statement to Congress that he did not see me to become the FBI Director ( again ) , has been proven false.
” “ If I wasn ’ t President , I ’ d be suing everyone all over the place… BUT MAYBE I STILL WILL .
WITCH HUNT !
” Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz said in December he didn ’ t trust the explanations given by FBI lawyers and agents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Surveillance Act investigation into former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page , the Washington Examiner reported .
Sen. Lindsey Graham , the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee , has pledged to investigate the failures in obtaining the surveillance warrants .
“ I ’ m going to get to the bottom of the FISA work process because it was an abuse of power of the Department of Justice , the FBI , ” Graham told Margaret Brennan on CBS News ’ “ Face the Nation.
” “ I can promise the president and your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call witnesses , ” he said .
These witnesses could include former FBI Director James Comey , Deputy Director Andrew McCabe , former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — all of whom signed the four surveillance warrant applications in question .
RELATED : George Soros Pushes Wild Conspiracy Theory About a Deal Between Trump and Zuckerberg The Department of Justice has already found two of the surveillance warrants defective and the other two are under review , CBS News reported .
In a Friday letter to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 17 FBI and Justice Department employees he wanted to interview in regard to the surveillance abuses .
The agents are not identified by name but by the titles given to them in the Justice Department ’ s inspector general ’ s December report , according to The Daily Caller .
In Trump ’ s Tuesday morning Twitter discussion , he also quoted Judge Andrew Napolitano , who told “ Fox & Friends ” that former Trump adviser Roger Stone deserves a new trial after social media posts indicating anti-Trump bias from one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he should [ get a new trial ] , ” Napolitano said .
“ I think almost any judge in the country would order a new trial ; I ’ m not so sure about Judge Jackson.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump has threatened to sue the officials involved in the investigation into Russian influence in the 2016 election led by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Echoing his previous themes of calling the investigation a “witch hunt,” Trump discussed the lawsuit possibility in a series of tweets Tuesday morning.
“These were Mueller prosecutors, and the whole Mueller investigation was illegally set up based on a phony and now fully discredited Fake Dossier, lying and forging documents to the FISA Court, and many other things,” he wrote.
“Everything having to do with this fraudulent investigation is badly tainted and, in my opinion, should be thrown out. Even Mueller’s statement to Congress that he did not see me to become the FBI Director (again), has been proven false.”
….badly tainted and, in my opinion, should be thrown out. Even Mueller’s statement to Congress that he did not see me to become the FBI Director (again), has been proven false. The whole deal was a total SCAM. If I wasn’t President, I’d be suing everyone all over the place… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2020
“If I wasn’t President, I’d be suing everyone all over the place… BUT MAYBE I STILL WILL. WITCH HUNT!”
….BUT MAYBE I STILL WILL. WITCH HUNT! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 18, 2020
Do you think Roger Stone should get a new trial? 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% (2766 Votes) No: 3% (88 Votes)
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz said in December he didn’t trust the explanations given by FBI lawyers and agents for their conduct during the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation into former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, the Washington Examiner reported.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has pledged to investigate the failures in obtaining the surveillance warrants.
“I’m going to get to the bottom of the FISA work process because it was an abuse of power of the Department of Justice, the FBI,” Graham told Margaret Brennan on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”
“I can promise the president and your viewers that I’m going to call witnesses,” he said.
These witnesses could include former FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — all of whom signed the four surveillance warrant applications in question.
The Department of Justice has already found two of the surveillance warrants defective and the other two are under review, CBS News reported.
In a Friday letter to Attorney General William Barr, Graham listed 17 FBI and Justice Department employees he wanted to interview in regard to the surveillance abuses.
The agents are not identified by name but by the titles given to them in the Justice Department’s inspector general’s December report, according to The Daily Caller.
In Trump’s Tuesday morning Twitter discussion, he also quoted Judge Andrew Napolitano, who told “Fox & Friends” that former Trump adviser Roger Stone deserves a new trial after social media posts indicating anti-Trump bias from one of the jurors resurfaced.
“Pretty obvious he should [get a new trial],” Napolitano said. “I think almost any judge in the country would order a new trial; I’m not so sure about Judge Jackson.”
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.


Pandemic

For more A.F .
Branco cartoons , go to WesternJournal.com/opinion/cartoons .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all @ @ @ @ @ our editorial standards .

Aldi opened its first store in the U.S. in 1976 after it was founded a decade earlier in Germany by two brothers.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Famous Atheist Richard Dawkins Comes Under Fire for Touting Benefits of Eugenics

British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins , who has never hidden his embrace of atheism , touched off a firestorm this week by saying eugenics should not be dismissed as unworkable just because some people don ’ t like the concept .
Eugenics can be summarized as a method of controlling human population growth so that only certain characteristics or populations continue .
The concept was embraced by Nazi Germany , and has been considered abhorrent by most of society since that time , although it was supported by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger .
As noted recently by The Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eugenics is making a comeback as part of proposals designed to slow population growth and address climate change .
In this context , Dawkins fired off a three-tweet salvo on Sunday .
“ It ’ s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological , political , moral grounds .
It ’ s quite another to conclude that it wouldn ’ t work in practice .
Of course it would .
It works for cows , horses , pigs , dogs & roses .
Why on earth wouldn ’ t it work for humans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted .
Dawkins wanted to be sure no one confused his support for the concept with the reality of actually making it work .
“ For those determined to miss the point , I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy .
I simply said deploring it doesn ’ t mean it wouldn ’ t work .
Just as we breed cows to yield more milk , we could breed humans to run faster or jump higher .
But heaven forbid that we should do it , ” he said .
He then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong does not mean eugenics could not work .
“ A eugenic policy would be bad .
I ’ m combating the illogical step from ‘ X would be bad ’ to ‘ So X is impossible ’ .
It would work in the same sense as it works for cows .
Let ’ s fight it on moral grounds .
Deny obvious scientific facts & we lose — or at best derail — the argument , ” he wrote .
RELATED : Marine Corps Bans Popular Faith-Based Dog Tags That Have Been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a reaction !
Sunday ’ s series of tweet was not the first time Dawkins has raised the issue of eugenics .
Writing in The Guardian after one of Dawkins ’ previous comments about eugenics , writer Giles Fraser took Dawkins to task .
“ Being so obsessed with attacking religion , people such as Dawkins have lost sight of what they are supposed to be defending , ” Dawkins wrote .
“ And this may be because too many humanists also place the category ‘ human ’ quite a long way down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as rationality or choice or the avoidance of pain being deemed of greater significance .
Human life can thus be easily traded away in some utilitarian calculation.
” “ It so happens that , when it comes to eugenics , religion has a much better track record at defending the human than science or leftwing progressives , ” he added .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, who has never hidden his embrace of atheism, touched off a firestorm this week by saying eugenics should not be dismissed as unworkable just because some people don’t like the concept.
Eugenics can be summarized as a method of controlling human population growth so that only certain characteristics or populations continue.
The concept was embraced by Nazi Germany, and has been considered abhorrent by most of society since that time, although it was supported by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger.
As noted recently by The Washington Post, however, the concept of eugenics is making a comeback as part of proposals designed to slow population growth and address climate change.
In this context, Dawkins fired off a three-tweet salvo on Sunday.
“It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology,” he tweeted.
It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology. — Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020
Dawkins wanted to be sure no one confused his support for the concept with the reality of actually making it work.
Are you scared that eugenics is now embraced by many on the left? 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: 86% (25 Votes) No: 14% (4 Votes)
“For those determined to miss the point, I deplore the idea of a eugenic policy. I simply said deploring it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work. Just as we breed cows to yield more milk, we could breed humans to run faster or jump higher. But heaven forbid that we should do it,” he said.
He then noted that just because it would be wrong does not mean eugenics could not work.
“A eugenic policy would be bad. I’m combating the illogical step from ‘X would be bad’ to ‘So X is impossible’. It would work in the same sense as it works for cows. Let’s fight it on moral grounds. Deny obvious scientific facts & we lose — or at best derail — the argument,” he wrote.
A eugenic policy would be bad. I’m combating the illogical step from “X would be bad” to “So X is impossible”. It would work in the same sense as it works for cows. Let’s fight it on moral grounds. Deny obvious scientific facts & we lose – or at best derail – the argument. — Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) February 16, 2020
Oh was there a reaction!
The analogy that Richard Dawkins draws here between the ideology of eugenics and the domestication of cows or horses is false, dangerous, and historically illiterate. https://t.co/pAI4rjlIg7 — Dan Hicks (@profdanhicks) February 16, 2020
This is inane (and other things) beyond words. The very notion of “work/s” is ideological. Facts are deaf to ideology in only the most superficial of understandings; ideology decides how and why and which facts are used and interpreted and acted upon. — Hicham Yezza (@HichamYezza) February 16, 2020
This tweet was not up to our usual standards. While Galton played an inportant role in developing the science of genetics, he also advocated eugenics, a completely discredited set of ideas with no scientific basis. — The Royal Society (@royalsociety) February 17, 2020
Eugenics “works” in a single but incredibly effective manner, in that it’s an ideology designed to spread prejudice and fear. Thank you @royalsociety for this clear statement—which frankly should be forthcoming from certain other quarters, both politicians and “scientists”. — Dan Hicks (@profdanhicks) February 17, 2020
Eugenics does not create superior species. We turned mighty buffalo herds roaming the plains into factory farmed cows, the independent stallion into the pony, and the wild boar into the pig. We weaken the gene pool selecting for traits desirable for us but not for the subject. — Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) February 16, 2020
The gross statement that eugenics could “work” also ignores the fact that as soon as you talk about identifying “superior” or “desirable” traits, you ARE applying an ideology of some sort. But men like Dawkins think they’ve transcended ideology and only operate in facts ? https://t.co/kUOPbqTDby — Sophie Ellman-Golan (@EgSophie) February 16, 2020
Sunday’s series of tweet was not the first time Dawkins has raised the issue of eugenics.
And you thought Francis was the “good Pope”?https://t.co/cmGIDyA8XT Abortion to avoid birth defects is not about eugenics. It’s about the avoidance of individual human suffering. — Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) June 18, 2018
Writing in The Guardian after one of Dawkins’ previous comments about eugenics, writer Giles Fraser took Dawkins to task.
“Being so obsessed with attacking religion, people such as Dawkins have lost sight of what they are supposed to be defending,” Dawkins wrote.
“And this may be because too many humanists also place the category ‘human’ quite a long way down their order of importance, with things such as rationality or choice or the avoidance of pain being deemed of greater significance. Human life can thus be easily traded away in some utilitarian calculation.”
“It so happens that, when it comes to eugenics, religion has a much better track record at defending the human than science or leftwing progressives,” he added.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Americans Horrified as Bloomberg’s Comments on 95-Year-Old Cancer Patient Come to Light

In a clip circulating on social media , Democratic presidential candidate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg says elderly Americans should be denied cancer treatments because of their age .
In the newly unearthed video from 2011 , the billionaire is seen speaking with a family in New York mourning the loss of a brother , according to The Yeshiva World .
During the conversation , Bloomberg complained that the Affordable Care Act — Obamacare — had driven up health care costs , and predicted that those costs would eventually bankrupt the country .
He then indicated he believes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans become a burden to taxpayers and should be denied medical treatment and left to die .
“ If you show up with prostate cancer and you ’ re 95 years old , we should say , ‘ Go and enjoy , have a nice [ inaudible ] , live a long life.
’ There ’ s no cure , and we can ’ t do anything.
’ He added , “ If you ’ re a young person , we should do something about it .
Society ’ s not ready to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is worth $ 62 billion , according to Forbes , could , of course , afford any and every measure to extend his own life were he to be stricken with cancer or some other life-threatening illness .
The 78-year-old has proposed a health care plan that includes a “ Medicare-like public option ” that his website says “ would be administered by the federal government but paid for by customer premiums.
” Bloomberg ’ s big-government health care takeover plan does not specify whether the candidate would institute death panels of unelected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s most vulnerable should be left to die without treatment .
However , he has proposed appropriating federal funds to pay for gender reassignment surgery for transgender people .
The media mogul ’ s government-run health care plan also proposes expanding enrollments under former President Barack Obama ’ s ACA health care exchange , which he says President Donald Trump has tried to “ sabotage.
” His comments about the hypothetical 95-year-old cancer patient were widely criticized on social media .
Bloomberg ’ s dismissive comments toward elderly Americans are just the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nightmares for his campaign , which has blasted voters nationwide with more than $ 400 million in TV ads in recent months .
Comments he made denigrating the intelligence of farmers and factory workers went viral this week .
During a December 2016 appearance at the University of Oxford ’ s Saïd Business School , Bloomberg suggested they lack the “ grey matter ” to work in information technology .
A week ago , the candidate was heard in newly released audio from 2015 defending New York ’ s controversial “ stop-and-frisk ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minority citizens .
“ Ninety-five percent of your murders and murderers and murder victims fit one MO .
You can just take the description and Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops .
They are male minorities 15 to 25 , ” he said in the audio clip .
Bloomberg added : “ People say , ‘ Oh my God , you are arresting kids for marijuana who are all minorities !
’ Yes , that ’ s true .
Why ?
Because we put all the cops in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s true .
Why ’ d we do it ?
Because that ’ s where all the crime is .
And the way you should get the guns out of the kids ’ hands is throw them against the wall and frisk them.
” Bloomberg , who apologized for his support of stop-and-frisk just a week before he announced his candidacy in November , was forced to issue another apology .
“ I regret that and I have apologized , ” he said .
“ I have taken responsibility for taking too long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black and Latino communities.
” In a recent report , The Washington Post also outlined allegations that Bloomberg cultivated an environment that was discriminatory toward women at his company in the 1980s and 1990s .
One former female employee alleges in 1995 Bloomberg found out she was pregnant and told her to “ kill it ” in regards to her unborn child .
On Saturday , journalist Matt Drudge reported that Bloomberg is considering choosing 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as his running mate should he win the party ’ s nomination for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

In a clip circulating on social media, Democratic presidential candidate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg says elderly Americans should be denied cancer treatments because of their age.
In the newly unearthed video from 2011, the billionaire is seen speaking with a family in New York mourning the loss of a brother, according to The Yeshiva World.
During the conversation, Bloomberg complained that the Affordable Care Act — Obamacare — had driven up health care costs, and predicted that those costs would eventually bankrupt the country.
He then indicated he believes that at a certain age, elderly Americans become a burden to taxpayers and should be denied medical treatment and left to die.
“If you show up with prostate cancer and you’re 95 years old, we should say, ‘Go and enjoy, have a nice [inaudible], live a long life.’ There’s no cure, and we can’t do anything.’
He added, “If you’re a young person, we should do something about it. Society’s not ready to do that yet.”
Bloomberg explaining how healthcare will “bankrupt us,” unless we deny care to the elderly. “If you show up with cancer & you’re 95 years old, we should say…there’s no cure, we can’t do anything. A young person, we should do something. Society’s not willing to do that, yet.” pic.twitter.com/7E5UFHXLue — Samuel D. Finkelstein II (@CANCEL_SAM) February 16, 2020
Bloomberg, who is worth $62 billion, according to Forbes, could, of course, afford any and every measure to extend his own life were he to be stricken with cancer or some other life-threatening illness.
Do you agree with Bloomberg? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 2% (19 Votes) No: 98% (1002 Votes)
The 78-year-old has proposed a health care plan that includes a “Medicare-like public option” that his website says “would be administered by the federal government but paid for by customer premiums.”
Bloomberg’s big-government health care takeover plan does not specify whether the candidate would institute death panels of unelected bureaucrats to decide which of America’s most vulnerable should be left to die without treatment. However, he has proposed appropriating federal funds to pay for gender reassignment surgery for transgender people.
The media mogul’s government-run health care plan also proposes expanding enrollments under former President Barack Obama’s ACA health care exchange, which he says President Donald Trump has tried to “sabotage.”
His comments about the hypothetical 95-year-old cancer patient were widely criticized on social media.
Death panels here we come so my 72 year old mother should just have to die?Someone who has paid into the tax system since 1964?Suck it mini Mike — LisaAnne (@LisaAnneGA) February 17, 2020
This idiot is saying that a 95 year old life in not worth saving, which tells you all you need to know about his belief of and caring for his fellow man. What if he wants to choose a lower age, maybe 75, or even 70? A lot of people are still productive and healthy at those ages — RunLikeGirl530 (@RunLikeGirl530) February 17, 2020
So my dad who is 89 and needs a valve replacement in his heart should #justgoandenjoy? At what age does #MiniMikeBloomberg think is too old? — sandy (@sgalicastro) February 17, 2020
Disgusting. No person with a shred of human decency, morals, ethics, and compassion could ever say something like this. — Julie Klee (@JulieKlee) February 17, 2020
Bloomberg’s dismissive comments toward elderly Americans are just the latest in a series of recent public relations nightmares for his campaign, which has blasted voters nationwide with more than $400 million in TV ads in recent months.
Comments he made denigrating the intelligence of farmers and factory workers went viral this week. During a December 2016 appearance at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, Bloomberg suggested they lack the “grey matter” to work in information technology.
A week ago, the candidate was heard in newly released audio from 2015 defending New York’s controversial “stop-and-frisk” policy, which critics have argued targeted minority citizens.
“Ninety-five percent of your murders and murderers and murder victims fit one MO. You can just take the description and Xerox it and pass it out to all the cops. They are male minorities 15 to 25,” he said in the audio clip.
Bloomberg added: “People say, ‘Oh my God, you are arresting kids for marijuana who are all minorities!’ Yes, that’s true. Why? Because we put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. Yes, that’s true. Why’d we do it? Because that’s where all the crime is. And the way you should get the guns out of the kids’ hands is throw them against the wall and frisk them.”
Bloomberg, who apologized for his support of stop-and-frisk just a week before he announced his candidacy in November, was forced to issue another apology.
“I regret that and I have apologized,” he said. “I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on black and Latino communities.”
In a recent report, The Washington Post also outlined allegations that Bloomberg cultivated an environment that was discriminatory toward women at his company in the 1980s and 1990s.
One former female employee alleges in 1995 Bloomberg found out she was pregnant and told her to “kill it” in regards to her unborn child.
On Saturday, journalist Matt Drudge reported that Bloomberg is considering choosing 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as his running mate should he win the party’s nomination for president.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Sponsor of Failed VA ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Ominously Vows ‘We Will Be Back’

When Democrats took control of Virginia ’ s legislature after last November ’ s elections , the first item on the agenda was gun control .
It was , after all , how they ’ d managed to recapture the General Assembly — promising liberals , particularly in the D.C. suburbs , that they ’ d crack down on guns .
The biggest and most ambitious item on the agenda : a ban on so-called “ assault weapons.
” This was non-negotiable to Democratic leadership , and when waves of counties and municipalities began declaring themselves “ Second Amendment sanctuaries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws that authorities deemed to be unconstitutional , there was talk of calling out the National Guard .
It turns out that won ’ t be necessary , at least for the moment : There will be no ban on the sale of “ assault weapons.
” According to The Washington Post , the legislation , which also would have banned the sale and possession of magazines which could hold more than 12 rounds , was shut down in a Senate committee .
The bill was part of a suite of eight gun-control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Northam has been advancing since last summer ; Republicans ’ refusal to consider them became a campaign talking point for Democrats in their campaign to retake the state legislature .
It ’ s hardly the end of the matter , however .
Del .
Mark Levine , the House of Delegates member who sponsored the bill , had an ominous warning on Twitter : “ We will be back.
” The House of Delegates has generally been more liberal than the state Senate , which has been more cautious than the lower house @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Three of the Democrats ’ gun bills have been quietly been put out to pasture by Democrats there , who believe that a swift move to pass as much liberal legislation as possible could lead to a voter backlash in 2021 .
This hasn ’ t just been the case on limiting gun rights , either ; collective bargaining , minimum wage and budgetary legislation from Northam have all faced much tougher fights in the Senate than in the House .
On Monday , the Senate ’ s Committee on the Judiciary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapons ” ban to the state ’ s Crime Commission for a study , essentially ending the chances it ’ ll be passed this year .
Four Democrats joined with Republicans in the vote , which elicited applause from the room .
House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn condemned the Senate Democrats who refused to vote for the bill .
“ The Democratic platform last fall was very clear , ” Filler-Corn said in a statement .
“ Limiting access to weapons of war used in mass murder was a key part of that platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our promise to take action to keep those weapons off our streets .
To call today ’ s vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee a disappointment would be an understatement.
” Levine retweeted this , along with his portentous warning : For whatever it ’ s worth , it might be difficult to take seriously the threats of a man who made this face when the bill failed in committee : However sad-trombone that look may be , it would be difficult to count Virginia Democrats out .
For reasons unbeknownst to God @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considerable power in the state even after he was thoroughly disgraced last year in a blackface photo scandal .
The suite of gun control legislation is a huge part of his legacy ; without it , Virginians and other Americans who remember him at all will remember a very ugly photo of a minstrel and a klansman in a medical school yearbook .
Meanwhile , it ’ s worth noting Virginia ’ s Senate isn ’ t exactly wrong here .
Yes , the Democrats won the elections in November and Virginia holds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a considerable advantage if you can get out single-issue voters .
Yes , Virginia is also a state that seems to be turning from purple to blue .
However , the anaphylactic reaction of the body politic in Virginia to these gun control bills show how dangerous the issue is for Democrats .
There were the “ Second Amendment sanctuaries , ” a movement which started before the new legislature was inaugurated and should have quickly demonstrated just how toxic this issue was .
There was the gun-rights protest at the Capitol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mood wasn ’ t helped by the prior insinuation that violent white supremacists and fringe groups had taken control of the peaceful demonstration and definitely wasn ’ t helped by Northam ’ s wild claim that “ armed militia groups planned to storm the Capitol.
” Northam spokeswoman Alena Yarmosky told The Post the governor was “ disappointed ” by the defeat but “ fully expects the Crime Commission to give this measure the detailed review that Senators called for .
We will be back next year.
” They may be .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who reacted with vigor to a new government that , the moment it got into power , looked to took away their rights .
The latter camp showed it could win even without control of the legislature — but only with vigilance .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

When Democrats took control of Virginia’s legislature after last November’s elections, the first item on the agenda was gun control.
It was, after all, how they’d managed to recapture the General Assembly — promising liberals, particularly in the D.C. suburbs, that they’d crack down on guns.
The biggest and most ambitious item on the agenda: a ban on so-called “assault weapons.”
This was non-negotiable to Democratic leadership, and when waves of counties and municipalities began declaring themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries” which wouldn’t enforce gun laws that authorities deemed to be unconstitutional, there was talk of calling out the National Guard.
It turns out that won’t be necessary, at least for the moment: There will be no ban on the sale of “assault weapons.”
According to The Washington Post, the legislation, which also would have banned the sale and possession of magazines which could hold more than 12 rounds, was shut down in a Senate committee.
The bill was part of a suite of eight gun-control measures that Democrat Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam has been advancing since last summer; Republicans’ refusal to consider them became a campaign talking point for Democrats in their campaign to retake the state legislature.
It’s hardly the end of the matter, however.
Del. Mark Levine, the House of Delegates member who sponsored the bill, had an ominous warning on Twitter: “We will be back.”
Do you think Democrats want to confiscate the guns of law-abiding citizens? 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% (836 Votes) No: 1% (5 Votes)
The House of Delegates has generally been more liberal than the state Senate, which has been more cautious than the lower house on bills being put forth by Northam.
Three of the Democrats’ gun bills have been quietly been put out to pasture by Democrats there, who believe that a swift move to pass as much liberal legislation as possible could lead to a voter backlash in 2021.
This hasn’t just been the case on limiting gun rights, either; collective bargaining, minimum wage and budgetary legislation from Northam have all faced much tougher fights in the Senate than in the House.
On Monday, the Senate’s Committee on the Judiciary voted 10-5 to consign the “assault weapons” ban to the state’s Crime Commission for a study, essentially ending the chances it’ll be passed this year. Four Democrats joined with Republicans in the vote, which elicited applause from the room.
House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn condemned the Senate Democrats who refused to vote for the bill.
“The Democratic platform last fall was very clear,” Filler-Corn said in a statement.
“Limiting access to weapons of war used in mass murder was a key part of that platform. The House of Delegates delivered on our promise to take action to keep those weapons off our streets. To call today’s vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee a disappointment would be an understatement.”
Levine retweeted this, along with his portentous warning:
We will be back. https://t.co/6ZMAn3wDM9 — Mark Levine (@DelegateMark) February 17, 2020
For whatever it’s worth, it might be difficult to take seriously the threats of a man who made this face when the bill failed in committee:
Cheers erupted when the Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee voted to not move forward on HB961, the the “assault weapons” ban and magazine confiscation bill, for the year.@DelegateMark, who had been pushing for the bill, has a priceless reaction. pic.twitter.com/rvvF8JiWcO — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) February 17, 2020
However sad-trombone that look may be, it would be difficult to count Virginia Democrats out.
For reasons unbeknownst to God and man, Gov. Northam retains considerable power in the state even after he was thoroughly disgraced last year in a blackface photo scandal.
The suite of gun control legislation is a huge part of his legacy; without it, Virginians and other Americans who remember him at all will remember a very ugly photo of a minstrel and a klansman in a medical school yearbook.
He’d clearly prefer the gun control legislation.
Meanwhile, it’s worth noting Virginia’s Senate isn’t exactly wrong here.
Yes, the Democrats won the elections in November and Virginia holds off-year elections, meaning you’ll have a considerable advantage if you can get out single-issue voters.
Yes, Virginia is also a state that seems to be turning from purple to blue.
However, the anaphylactic reaction of the body politic in Virginia to these gun control bills show how dangerous the issue is for Democrats.
There were the “Second Amendment sanctuaries,” a movement which started before the new legislature was inaugurated and should have quickly demonstrated just how toxic this issue was.
There was the gun-rights protest at the Capitol in Richmond several weeks ago; the mood wasn’t helped by the prior insinuation that violent white supremacists and fringe groups had taken control of the peaceful demonstration and definitely wasn’t helped by Northam’s wild claim that “armed militia groups planned to storm the Capitol.”
Northam spokeswoman Alena Yarmosky told The Post the governor was “disappointed” by the defeat but “fully expects the Crime Commission to give this measure the detailed review that Senators called for. We will be back next year.”
They may be. So will Levine. And so will the people who reacted with vigor to a new government that, the moment it got into power, looked to took away their rights.
The latter camp showed it could win even without control of the legislature — but only with vigilance.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Trump Fires Back at Obama’s ‘Con Job’ Presidents Day Claim, Gets Help from James Woods

For Barack Obama and his deluded fans , these truths have to hurt .
Obama ’ s Presidents Day Twitter post claiming credit for the humming U.S. economy three years after he left office infuriated millions of Americans who wasted no time firing back on social media .
But it was President Donald Trump — the American in the Oval Office who replaced Obama and has overseen an economic turnaround — who had the best perspective .
“ Did you hear the latest con job ?
” Trump wrote in a Monday evening Twitter post .
“ President Obama is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economic Boom taking place under the Trump Administration .
He had the WEAKEST recovery since the Great Depression , despite Zero Fed Rate & MASSIVE quantitative easing .
“ NOW , best jobs numbers ever .
Had to rebuild our military , which was totally depleted .
Fed Rate UP , taxes and regulations WAY DOWN .
If Dems won in 2016 , the USA would be in big economic ( Depression ? )
& military trouble right now .
THE BEST IS YET TO COME .
KEEP AMERICA GREAT !
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has become a motto of the Trump presidency and the 2020 election .
It ’ s a far cry from the doom-and-gloom messaging of the Obama years , where a fatalistic acceptance of American decline as an economic and global power was the accepted norm .
The reality of the economy today , with low unemployment and rising wages , demonstrates the lie Obama and his acolytes in the mainstream media are trying to peddle .
As conservative commentator Liz Peek noted in a piece in The Hill as far back as January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wall Street Journal were giving Trump — not Obama — credit for the improving economy .
In The Journal article , the economists said Trump ’ s emphasis on deregulation and the tax cuts of 2017 would ignite continued growth after the malaise of the Obama years .
That was dated Jan. 11 , 2018 , less than a year after Trump ’ s inauguration in 2017 .
It ’ s now 2020 and that growth has continued — and Obama wants to take credit for it ?
No sensible person would buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is more sensible than most .
RELATED : Leftist Blown Away After Visiting Trump Rally : 'Democrats Are Not Ready for 2020' The outspoken Woods — whose sanity and politics make him part of a rare breed in Hollywood — took to Twitter on Monday to blast Obama ’ s spurious claims .
And he did it with Obama ’ s own words .
As was widely reported back in June 2016 , before Trump was even the official GOP nominee , Obama mocked Trump ’ s plan ’ s for a rejuvenated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Woods ’ tweet didn ’ t let anyone forget that .
“ The notion that you did anything but destroy the nation ’ s economy is beyond hilarious , ” Woods wrote , addressing Obama .
“ ‘ Those jobs are never coming back .
What ’ s he going to do , wave a magic wand ?
’ Yes , @ realDonaldTrump did exactly that .
Your only sad legacy was your blatant lies about ObamaCare.
” Among the more than 90,000 Twitter users who liked Woods ’ post was Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was Trump ’ s last challenger for the 2016 Republican nomination and has become one of the president ’ s biggest supporters on Capitol Hill .
His response was simple and to the point : That sums it up pretty clearly .
Barack Obama can cling to whatever fantasies he chooses to about his dismal presidency — one that rivals Jimmy Carter ’ s 1970s fiasco for worst administrations in history .
In fact , Trump ’ s description of the country if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 — “ the USA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ? )
& military trouble right now ” — will sound awfully familiar to Americans who remember how awful the Carter years were .
Democrats and the media can pretend that what looked like crass ineptitude and steps toward socialism was really Obama laying the foundation for the vibrant economy the United States sees today .
But it ’ s hogwash .
And every American who ’ s watched the economy growing , who ’ s seen family and neighbors return to the work force , and who ’ ve been able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Obama and the mainstream media can milk “ the latest con job ” for all it ’ s worth , but the truth is staring Americans straight in the face .
And for Obama and his deluded fans , those truths have to hurt .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

For Barack Obama and his deluded fans, these truths have to hurt.
Obama’s Presidents Day Twitter post claiming credit for the humming U.S. economy three years after he left office infuriated millions of Americans who wasted no time firing back on social media.
But it was President Donald Trump — the American in the Oval Office who replaced Obama and has overseen an economic turnaround — who had the best perspective.
And Obama’s “con job” wasn’t fooling anyone.
….ever. Had to rebuild our military, which was totally depleted. Fed Rate UP, taxes and regulations WAY DOWN. If Dems won in 2016, the USA would be in big economic (Depression?) & military trouble right now. THE BEST IS YET TO COME. KEEP AMERICA GREAT! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2020
“Did you hear the latest con job?” Trump wrote in a Monday evening Twitter post. “President Obama is now trying to take credit for the Economic Boom taking place under the Trump Administration. He had the WEAKEST recovery since the Great Depression, despite Zero Fed Rate & MASSIVE quantitative easing.
“NOW, best jobs numbers ever. Had to rebuild our military, which was totally depleted. Fed Rate UP, taxes and regulations WAY DOWN. If Dems won in 2016, the USA would be in big economic (Depression?) & military trouble right now. THE BEST IS YET TO COME. KEEP AMERICA GREAT!”
“The best is yet to come” has become a motto of the Trump presidency and the 2020 election. It’s a far cry from the doom-and-gloom messaging of the Obama years, where a fatalistic acceptance of American decline as an economic and global power was the accepted norm.
Do you think Americans are buying the Obama "con job"? 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: 3% (126 Votes) No: 97% (3771 Votes)
The reality of the economy today, with low unemployment and rising wages, demonstrates the lie Obama and his acolytes in the mainstream media are trying to peddle.
As conservative commentator Liz Peek noted in a piece in The Hill as far back as January 2018, professional economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal were giving Trump — not Obama — credit for the improving economy.
In The Journal article, the economists said Trump’s emphasis on deregulation and the tax cuts of 2017 would ignite continued growth after the malaise of the Obama years.
That was dated Jan. 11, 2018, less than a year after Trump’s inauguration in 2017. It’s now 2020 and that growth has continued — and Obama wants to take credit for it?
No sensible person would buy that — and conservative actor James Woods is more sensible than most.
The outspoken Woods — whose sanity and politics make him part of a rare breed in Hollywood — took to Twitter on Monday to blast Obama’s spurious claims.
And he did it with Obama’s own words. As was widely reported back in June 2016, before Trump was even the official GOP nominee, Obama mocked Trump’s plan’s for a rejuvenated economy as needing a “magic wand.”
Woods’ tweet didn’t let anyone forget that.
The notion that you did anything but destroy this nation’s economy is beyond hilarious. “Those jobs are never coming back. What’s he going to do, wave a magic wand?” Yes, @realDonaldTrump did exactly that. Your only sad legacy was your blatant lies about ObamaCare. https://t.co/1vCePXZ3tv — James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) February 17, 2020
“The notion that you did anything but destroy the nation’s economy is beyond hilarious,” Woods wrote, addressing Obama. “‘Those jobs are never coming back. What’s he going to do, wave a magic wand?’ Yes, @realDonaldTrump did exactly that. Your only sad legacy was your blatant lies about ObamaCare.”
Among the more than 90,000 Twitter users who liked Woods’ post was Sen. Ted Cruz, the Texas Republican who was Trump’s last challenger for the 2016 Republican nomination and has become one of the president’s biggest supporters on Capitol Hill.
His response was simple and to the point:
“Damn straight.”
That sums it up pretty clearly.
Barack Obama can cling to whatever fantasies he chooses to about his dismal presidency — one that rivals Jimmy Carter’s 1970s fiasco for worst administrations in history.
In fact, Trump’s description of the country if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 — “the USA would be in big economic (Depression?) & military trouble right now” — will sound awfully familiar to Americans who remember how awful the Carter years were.
Democrats and the media can pretend that what looked like crass ineptitude and steps toward socialism was really Obama laying the foundation for the vibrant economy the United States sees today.
But it’s hogwash. And every American who’s watched the economy growing, who’s seen family and neighbors return to the work force, and who’ve been able to get back to work themselves, knows it.
Obama and the mainstream media can milk “the latest con job” for all it’s worth, but the truth is staring Americans straight in the face.
And for Obama and his deluded fans, those truths have to hurt.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-18--Dershowitz Bombshell: I Have Proof Obama Personally Asked FBI To Help Soros Investigate Someone

In an interview on satellite radio over the weekend , Harvard Law School professor emeritus and Trump impeachment counsel Alan Dershowitz said he had proof of an allegation that President Barack Obama asked the FBI to investigate someone at the behest of liberal benefactor George Soros .
Dershowitz , talking with Breitbart News Sunday ’ s Joel Pollak , brought the allegation up during a conversation about the constitutionality of presidential influence on the Department of Justice .
“ There was a lot of White House control of the Justice Department during the Kennedy administration and I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arguing against that , ” Dershowitz said .
“ I have some information as well about the Obama administration — which will be disclosed in a lawsuit at some point , but I ’ m not prepared to disclose it now — about how President Obama personally asked the FBI to investigate somebody on behalf of George Soros , who was a close ally of his.
” “ We ’ ve seen this kind of White House influence on the Justice Department virtually in every Justice Department , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overt about it , he tweets about it .
President Obama whispered to the Justice Department about it.
” Pollak ’ s attention was obviously diverted from the constitutionality of presidential influence on the Justice Department for a moment .
“ But let me just ask you , ” he said .
“ You said that George Soros asked Barack Obama to have his Justice Department investigate somebody ?
” “ We ’ re — that ’ s going to come out in a lawsuit in the near future , yeah , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we look forward to hearing more about that , ” Pollak said .
“ That ’ s not unusual .
That is not unusual , ” Dershowitz said .
“ People whisper to presidents all the time .
Presidents whisper to [ the ] Justice Department all the time .
It ’ s very common .
“ It ’ s wrong , whoever does it , but it ’ s common , and we shouldn ’ t think that it ’ s unique to any particular president .
I have in my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documents this issue , and it will , at the right time , come out .
But I ’ m not free to disclose it now because it ’ s a case that ’ s not yet been filed.
” A 302 is an FBI form that documents an interview .
Dershowitz didn ’ t specify whom the target of the investigation was .
RELATED : Media Whines About How Trump Used His Limo , Ignores How Obama Used Entire WH This obviously fits under the aegis of what the kids might call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it could be one huge nothingburger in the delivery department .
However , the background of this — the Roger Stone case — makes for an interesting revelation .
The interview came shortly after Attorney General William Barr , insisting there had been no White House interference in the case , had said that President Donald Trump ’ s tweeting was making it “ impossible ” for him to carry out his duties .
Stone is obviously the Next Big Thing for the Democrats , who want to focus attention in that direction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is accurate , however , the attention may be focused on a different president entirely .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

In a Feb. 16 interview on satellite radio, Harvard Law School professor emeritus and Trump impeachment counsel Alan Dershowitz said he had proof of an allegation that President Barack Obama asked the FBI to investigate someone at the behest of liberal benefactor George Soros.
Dershowitz, talking with Breitbart News Sunday’s Joel Pollak, brought the allegation up during a conversation about the constitutionality of presidential influence on the Department of Justice.
“There was a lot of White House control of the Justice Department during the Kennedy administration and I don’t think we saw very many liberal professors arguing against that,” Dershowitz said.
“I have some information as well about the Obama administration — which will be disclosed in a lawsuit at some point, but I’m not prepared to disclose it now — about how President Obama personally asked the FBI to investigate somebody on behalf of George Soros, who was a close ally of his.”
“We’ve seen this kind of White House influence on the Justice Department virtually in every Justice Department,” he said.
“The difference this president is much more overt about it, he tweets about it. President Obama whispered to the Justice Department about it.”
Pollak’s attention was obviously diverted from the constitutionality of presidential influence on the Justice Department for a moment. “But let me just ask you,” he said. “You said that George Soros asked Barack Obama to have his Justice Department investigate somebody?”
“We’re — that’s going to come out in a lawsuit in the near future, yeah,” Dershowitz said.
“Wow, well, we look forward to hearing more about that,” Pollak said.
Do you think Dershowitz has information on Obama? 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% (5073 Votes) No: 1% (48 Votes)
“That’s not unusual. That is not unusual,” Dershowitz said. “People whisper to presidents all the time. Presidents whisper to [the] Justice Department all the time. It’s very common.
“It’s wrong, whoever does it, but it’s common, and we shouldn’t think that it’s unique to any particular president. I have in my possession the actual 302 form, which documents this issue, and it will, at the right time, come out. But I’m not free to disclose it now because it’s a case that’s not yet been filed.”
A 302 is an FBI form that documents an interview.
Dershowitz didn’t specify whom the target of the investigation was.
This obviously fits under the aegis of what the kids might call “big if true.”
Granted, it could be one huge nothingburger in the delivery department. However, the background of this — the Roger Stone case — makes for an interesting revelation.
The interview came shortly after Attorney General William Barr, insisting there had been no White House interference in the case, had said that President Donald Trump’s tweeting was making it “impossible” for him to carry out his duties.
Stone is obviously the Next Big Thing for the Democrats, who want to focus attention in that direction post-impeachment. If what Dershowitz is saying is accurate, however, the attention may be focused on a different president entirely.
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.