westernjournal--2020-02-03--Mother Rings Cancer-Free Bell in Video To Celebrate Infant Daughter Beating Brain Cancer

A baby who was born with a life-threatening brain tumor marked the end of her cancer treatment by ringing the bell at UCSF Benioff Children ’ s Hospital in Oakland , California , last week .
Parents Leann and Patrick Borden learned their daughter , Lillian Grace Borden , had brain cancer just days after her birth in September .
“ As a parent , there is no way to prepare for those words , ” Leann Borden explained in a GoFundMe campaign started on Lily ’ s behalf .
“ One minute you ’ re living your dream , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling you your beautiful angel you ’ ve waited your whole life for will likely die , ” she wrote .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted The Borden family thought their baby girl was born perfectly healthy until a nurse noticed that Lily “ wasn ’ t moving her limbs quite right.
” Lily ’ s first MRI revealed “ an ominous spot on her brain stem , ” which thrust the family into a whirlwind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ daughter ’ s life .
The baby was diagnosed with an aggressive stage 3-4 malignant glioma that was inoperable because of its location in her brain stem .
The tumor developed rapidly , moving from Lily ’ s brain stem down her spinal cord and below her shoulders in a matter of days , according to the GoFundMe campaign .
Doctors used a newly approved , targeted chemotherapy on Lily ’ s tumor in a desperate attempt to save the baby ’ s life .
Lily ’ s family and medical team were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three weeks after the specialized chemotherapy began , revealed that Lily ’ s tumor had disappeared .
“ On January 25 , 2020 , the day we had been praying for finally came after nearly five months — Lily rang the bell signifying the successful end of treatment , ” the GoFundMe campaign read .
Standing beside the bronze bell in the hospital wing , Patrick Borden held his baby girl in his arms while Leann thanked Lily ’ s medical team for all they had done to save their baby ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Down in Tears During Ceremony When Army Son Shows Up To Pin Her Badge Borden explained that without the financial help they received from the GoFundMe campaign and organizations such as the Northern Nevada Children ’ s Cancer Foundation , her family “ would have been lost.
” “ You guys are all incredible .
I ’ ve never met such amazing people in my whole life , ” she said .
Wiping tears from her eyes , Leann took her baby ’ s hand into her own and helped Lily ring the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the child was officially cancer-free .
Throughout Lily ’ s cancer journey , Leann Borden said she struggled to make sense of it all .
She questioned God and why he would allow her baby to be born with a brain tumor .
In the end , Borden began to understand that the struggle strengthened her faith and shaped her in ways she otherwise would not have experienced .
“ Everyone in the hospital is in shock , ” Borden wrote after learning Lily ’ s tumor had disappeared .
We are committed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A baby who was born with a life-threatening brain tumor marked the end of her cancer treatment by ringing the bell at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital in Oakland, California, last week.
Parents Leann and Patrick Borden learned their daughter, Lillian Grace Borden, had brain cancer just days after her birth in September.
“As a parent, there is no way to prepare for those words,” Leann Borden explained in a GoFundMe campaign started on Lily’s behalf.
“One minute you’re living your dream, the next minute, a doctor is telling you your beautiful angel you’ve waited your whole life for will likely die,” she wrote.
The Borden family thought their baby girl was born perfectly healthy until a nurse noticed that Lily “wasn’t moving her limbs quite right.”
Lily’s first MRI revealed “an ominous spot on her brain stem,” which thrust the family into a whirlwind of events to try and save their daughter’s life.
The baby was diagnosed with an aggressive stage 3-4 malignant glioma that was inoperable because of its location in her brain stem.
The tumor developed rapidly, moving from Lily’s brain stem down her spinal cord and below her shoulders in a matter of days, according to the GoFundMe campaign.
Doctors used a newly approved, targeted chemotherapy on Lily’s tumor in a desperate attempt to save the baby’s life.
Lily’s family and medical team were amazed when an MRI, taken just three weeks after the specialized chemotherapy began, revealed that Lily’s tumor had disappeared.
“On January 25, 2020, the day we had been praying for finally came after nearly five months — Lily rang the bell signifying the successful end of treatment,” the GoFundMe campaign read.
Standing beside the bronze bell in the hospital wing, Patrick Borden held his baby girl in his arms while Leann thanked Lily’s medical team for all they had done to save their baby’s life.
Borden explained that without the financial help they received from the GoFundMe campaign and organizations such as the Northern Nevada Children’s Cancer Foundation, her family “would have been lost.”
“You guys are all incredible. I’ve never met such amazing people in my whole life,” she said.
Wiping tears from her eyes, Leann took her baby’s hand into her own and helped Lily ring the bell on the wall, signifying that the child was officially cancer-free.
Throughout Lily’s cancer journey, Leann Borden said she struggled to make sense of it all. She questioned God and why he would allow her baby to be born with a brain tumor.
In the end, Borden began to understand that the struggle strengthened her faith and shaped her in ways she otherwise would not have experienced.
“Everyone in the hospital is in shock,” Borden wrote after learning Lily’s tumor had disappeared.
“They say it’s magic. I say it’s faith.”
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--2020-02-03--Chef & TV Personality Andrew Zimmern Went from Being Homeless to Celebrating 28 Years of Sobriety

Andrew Zimmern is a well-known chef famous for his adventurous spirit and willingness to try eating foods that few others would dare to even look at .
“ A four-time James Beard Award-winning TV personality , chef , writer and teacher , Andrew Zimmern ( andrewzimmern.com ) is regarded as one of the most versatile and knowledgeable personalities in the food world , ” his Facebook page reads .
“ As the creator , executive producer and host of the Bizarre Foods franchise on Travel Channel , Andrew Zimmern ’ s Driven by Food and The Zimmern List , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 170 countries.
” He ’ s thriving now , but many wouldn ’ t recognize the man he was three decades ago .
He wasn ’ t always an approachable person , and he ’ d made some decisions in his life that drew him into a downward spiral .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ I was the guy you crossed the street to avoid if you walked by me in New York , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ You ’ re living the life where you are constantly beat up , abused , abusing other people , doing something horrifically shameful , and tawdry things that crater your soul , ” he added .
“ You give away pieces of yourself that you swear you would never do.
” The drugs and drinks took their toll on him , even prompting him to steal a friend ’ s wallet and making him homeless , according to “ Today.
” Finally , in 1982 , friends convinced him to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minnesota , and that was the start of a turning point for him .
Since then , sober and living a life full of travel and adventure , Zimmern has made it a priority to reflect on his experiences and share his past — even the darker parts — with fans and followers .
“ Throwaway your life throwback Thursday pic # tbt … 1982 or so , deranged drunk and drugged , ” he shared on Instagram on Nov. 30 , 2017 , featuring a photo of a younger Zimmern holding up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I was a dangerous mess and still took almost a decade to sober up .
# keepitgreen # odat # grateful ” “ I don ’ t think I ever posted a pic like this before , ” he added .
“ The smile on the outside is a mask .
The pain inside was unimaginable and indescribable .
Thankfully I don ’ t feel that way or live that way anymore.
” RELATED : After Nearly 50 Years , Regis and Joy Philbin 's Marriage Is ' A True Love Story' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 28 , because it marked a very important milestone for the now-famous chef .
“ Today I ’ m 28 years sober on the 28th , ” he wrote , again alongside the notorious photo .
“ A golden date .
I ’ m grateful and very overwhelmed .
Every anniversary I wonder ‘ why me ’ ?
Why me when so many others end up in jails , institutions or die from this illness.
” “ Well , I did jails/institutions and I wanted to die at the end , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can ’ t ever begin to repay the debt I owe to others .
You all know you are , but especially @ amackmn @ jimlynden who have held me for the whole ride .
Thanks to @ kevinboehmboka and @ donniemadia for giving me a rare copy of my favorite book , to @ chefkalt for keeping a light in the window 30 years ago , to BB my first sponsor who told me showing up high and drunk to meetings wasn ’ t going to help , to Bert , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roommates to all my sponsees new and old , and the fellow travelers on the road to happy destiny.
” “ To those struggling with this disease , I wasted years not asking for help from people who cared about me .
Once I did , that simple act changed my life.
” “ Baudelaire said drunkenness was ‘ the great imperative , in order not to feel , times horrid fardel , bruise your shoulders , grinding you into the earth.
’ I hear ya ’ Chuck … but there IS a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with addiction haunt him , he actively uses it to keep himself on the straight and narrow and make better decisions .
“ Any decision that I make , anything that I do , every single consideration of my day goes through the prism of what my former experience has been , ” he told ABC .
“ I have a life based on completely different principles now , and I try to stick with those .
I think it has been the secret to my success.
” We are committed to truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Read our editorial standards .

Andrew Zimmern is a well-known chef famous for his adventurous spirit and willingness to try eating foods that few others would dare to even look at.
“A four-time James Beard Award-winning TV personality, chef, writer and teacher, Andrew Zimmern (andrewzimmern.com) is regarded as one of the most versatile and knowledgeable personalities in the food world,” his Facebook page reads.
“As the creator, executive producer and host of the Bizarre Foods franchise on Travel Channel, Andrew Zimmern’s Driven by Food and The Zimmern List, he has explored culture through food in more than 170 countries.”
He’s thriving now, but many wouldn’t recognize the man he was three decades ago. He wasn’t always an approachable person, and he’d made some decisions in his life that drew him into a downward spiral.
“I was the guy you crossed the street to avoid if you walked by me in New York,” he said according to ABC News.
Do you watch Andrew Zimmern's shows? 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: 63% (25 Votes) No: 37% (15 Votes)
“You’re living the life where you are constantly beat up, abused, abusing other people, doing something horrifically shameful, and tawdry things that crater your soul,” he added. “You give away pieces of yourself that you swear you would never do.”
The drugs and drinks took their toll on him, even prompting him to steal a friend’s wallet and making him homeless, according to “Today.”
Finally, in 1982, friends convinced him to go to the Hazelden Addiction Treatment Center in Minnesota, and that was the start of a turning point for him.
Since then, sober and living a life full of travel and adventure, Zimmern has made it a priority to reflect on his experiences and share his past — even the darker parts — with fans and followers.
“Throwaway your life throwback Thursday pic #tbt … 1982 or so, deranged drunk and drugged,” he shared on Instagram on Nov. 30, 2017, featuring a photo of a younger Zimmern holding up a glass of wine and smiling. “I was a dangerous mess and still took almost a decade to sober up. #keepitgreen #odat #grateful”
“I don’t think I ever posted a pic like this before,” he added. “The smile on the outside is a mask. The pain inside was unimaginable and indescribable. Thankfully I don’t feel that way or live that way anymore.”
The photo cropped up again on Jan. 28, because it marked a very important milestone for the now-famous chef.
“Today I’m 28 years sober on the 28th,” he wrote, again alongside the notorious photo. “A golden date. I’m grateful and very overwhelmed. Every anniversary I wonder ‘why me’? Why me when so many others end up in jails, institutions or die from this illness.”
“Well, I did jails/institutions and I wanted to die at the end, but the universe had different plans for me. I can’t ever begin to repay the debt I owe to others. You all know you are, but especially @amackmn @jimlynden who have held me for the whole ride. Thanks to @kevinboehmboka and @donniemadia for giving me a rare copy of my favorite book, to @chefkalt for keeping a light in the window 30 years ago, to BB my first sponsor who told me showing up high and drunk to meetings wasn’t going to help, to Bert, Jim, and Carty, my first roommates to all my sponsees new and old, and the fellow travelers on the road to happy destiny.”
“To those struggling with this disease, I wasted years not asking for help from people who cared about me. Once I did, that simple act changed my life.”
“Baudelaire said drunkenness was ‘the great imperative, in order not to feel, times horrid fardel, bruise your shoulders, grinding you into the earth.’ I hear ya’ Chuck … but there IS a solution.”
Instead of letting his time with addiction haunt him, he actively uses it to keep himself on the straight and narrow and make better decisions.
“Any decision that I make, anything that I do, every single consideration of my day goes through the prism of what my former experience has been,” he told ABC.
“I have a life based on completely different principles now, and I try to stick with those. I think it has been the secret to my success.”
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--2020-02-03--John Kerry Heard Lamenting ‘Possibility of Bernie Sanders Taking Down the Democratic Party’: Report

Former Secretary of State John Kerry was reportedly overheard on a phone call discussing what he would need to do to enter the Democratic presidential primary race as he expressed concern about “ the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.
” NBC News political analyst Jonathan Allen tweeted on Sunday that he heard Kerry ’ s comments in the lobby restaurant of the Renaissance Des Moines Savery Hotel in Des Moines , Iowa .
“ Maybe I ’ m f—ing deluding myself here , ” the former Obama administration official said .
He went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to run , he ’ d have to give up making paid speeches and step down from the board of directors for Bank of America .
Kerry also said that donors like venture capitalist Doug Hickey would have to “ raise a couple of million , ” for him to jump in the race , adding that they “ now have the reality of Bernie.
” TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted After a surge in recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden by nearly 4 percentage points in Iowa in the RealClearPolitics average of polls .
Biden still holds the lead nationally by 3.7 percent in the RCP average .
NBC reached out to Kerry about the call later on Sunday , asking if he was contemplating jumping into the presidential race .
As the story grew , Kerry tweeted ( and then deleted ) , “ As I told the reporter , I am absolutely not running for President .
Any report otherwise is f—ing ( or categorically ) false.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with my good friend Joe Biden , who is going to win the nomination , beat Trump and make an outstanding president.
” The 76-year-old posted a second tweet with the expletive removed .
Kerry was the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004 , when he narrowly lost to former President George W. Bush .
The final tally was 286 to 251 in the Electoral College vote .
Former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer told Fox News on Monday , “ What ’ s really getting lost because [ Kerry ] used an explicative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He said Bernie is he going to destroy the Democratic Party , take the party down in whole , ” Fleischer continued .
“ That ’ s what people should keep their eye on , this growing fissure in the Democratic Party and if Bernie wins here in Iowa or Bernie wins in New Hampshire , that fissure grows deep.
” Fleischer further argued that if Sanders , who hails from Vermont , “ opens up 2 and 0 , you have mass panic inside the Democratic Party and it ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Democratic Party is.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Former Secretary of State John Kerry was reportedly overheard on a phone call discussing what he would need to do to enter the Democratic presidential primary race as he expressed concern about “the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole.”
NBC News political analyst Jonathan Allen tweeted on Sunday that he heard Kerry’s comments in the lobby restaurant of the Renaissance Des Moines Savery Hotel in Des Moines, Iowa.
“Maybe I’m f—ing deluding myself here,” the former Obama administration official said. He went on to explain that if he were to run, he’d have to give up making paid speeches and step down from the board of directors for Bank of America.
Kerry also said that donors like venture capitalist Doug Hickey would have to “raise a couple of million,” for him to jump in the race, adding that they “now have the reality of Bernie.”
Overheard (by me) in Iowa, John Kerry discussed possible 2020 run and concern over Sanders https://t.co/Tc0XxIXEuc — Jonathan Allen (@jonallendc) February 2, 2020
After a surge in recent weeks, Sanders leads former Vice President Joe Biden by nearly 4 percentage points in Iowa in the RealClearPolitics average of polls.
Biden still holds the lead nationally by 3.7 percent in the RCP average.
NBC reached out to Kerry about the call later on Sunday, asking if he was contemplating jumping into the presidential race.
Do you think Bernie Sanders will be the Democratic nominee? 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: 28% (24 Votes) No: 72% (61 Votes)
“Absolutely not,” was his response.
As the story grew, Kerry tweeted (and then deleted), “As I told the reporter, I am absolutely not running for President. Any report otherwise is f—ing (or categorically) false.”
“I’ve been proud to campaign with my good friend Joe Biden, who is going to win the nomination, beat Trump and make an outstanding president.”
The 76-year-old posted a second tweet with the expletive removed.
As I told the reporter, I am absolutely not running for President. Any report otherwise is categorically false. I’ve been proud to campaign with my good friend Joe Biden, who is going to win the nomination, beat Trump, and make an outstanding president. — John Kerry (@JohnKerry) February 2, 2020
Kerry was the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, when he narrowly lost to former President George W. Bush. The final tally was 286 to 251 in the Electoral College vote.
Former Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer told Fox News on Monday, “What’s really getting lost because [Kerry] used an explicative is the part about Bernie.”
“He said Bernie is he going to destroy the Democratic Party, take the party down in whole,” Fleischer continued. “That’s what people should keep their eye on, this growing fissure in the Democratic Party and if Bernie wins here in Iowa or Bernie wins in New Hampshire, that fissure grows deep.”
Watch @AriFleischer on John Kerry saying Bernie Sanders will destroy the Dems: “There’s a growing fissure in the Democratic party and if Bernie wins in Iowa or New Hampshire that fissure grows deeper.” pic.twitter.com/FiV0dtcwaS — TV News HQ (@TVNewsHQ) February 3, 2020
Fleischer further argued that if Sanders, who hails from Vermont, “opens up 2 and 0, you have mass panic inside the Democratic Party and it’s a real grassroots sign of what the future of the Democratic Party is.”
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--2020-02-03--Bloomberg’s Super Bowl Ad Draws Forceful Response from NRA: ‘Mike, Come and Take It’

Even a multi-billionaire can ’ t buy honesty – especially if he ’ s running as a Democrat .
Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg , busy trying to buy up the Democratic presidential nomination , splurged a reported $ 10 million on a one-minute Super Bowl ad that was likely barely seen – or quickly forgotten – by the vast majority of viewers of Sunday night ’ s extravaganza .
But it was seen in advance by enough Second Amendment supporters for its lies of omission and commission to be brought to light .
And as for its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was firing back on social media long before the big game ’ s politically tinged sex extravaganza started at halftime .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted The NRA ad feature numerous faces speaking out for the constitutionally guaranteed right of Americans to bear arms .
According to Breitbart , the interviews were conducted with NRA members at the Great American Outdoors Show taking place in Harrisburg , Pennsylvania , this week .
Men and women , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their right to self-defense .
“ Mike Bloomberg is a white billionaire who has no place in telling me how I can defend myself or my loved ones , ” one black man stated .
“ As a mother of 3-year-old little boy , my family means everything to me , ” a woman told the camera .
“ As a woman , I believe the best way to protect myself is with a firearm.
” Another woman put billionaire Bloomberg ’ s skewed perspectives on the table .
“ Think about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she said .
“ Are you OK with the fact that your policies could leave them defenseless ?
” Of course , it ’ s unlikely that any member of Bloomberg ’ s family will ever be “ defenseless ” – unlike an unguarded , non-billionaire woman living a standard American , middle-class life .
The ad ends with a series of participants vowing that they will not allow their Second Amendment rights to be infringed , Bloomberg or no Bloomberg .
One woman ’ s challenge said it all : “ Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Twitter Roasts CNN 's Stelter After He Doubles Down on Fact-Checking Trump Joke And there were plenty of Second Amendment supporters who agreed with those in the video .
What might be even worse than the rank hypocrisy of one of the world ’ s wealthiest men calling for the hoi polloi to be disarmed is the rank dishonesty of his Super Bowl advertisement itself .
While it features the mother of a young man who died in a 2013 shooting , what it does not say is that the young man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chronicle , was very much a participant in the activity that led to his death .
If you haven ’ t seen it yet , check out the ad here : The young man ’ s name was George Harold Kemp , 20 , who ’ d driven to a neighborhood with some companions to challenge a teenager to a fight .
When the teen showed up with friends , one of the friends shot Kemp to death .
That isn ’ t to discount anyone ’ s death , but engaging in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Deciding to use a case like that to disarm millions of law-abiding Americans is almost criminally dishonest .
Also , as Tobias Hoonhout noted at National Review , the numbers Bloomberg used in his commercial are hopelessly distorted .
The ad claims that 2,900 children are killed in “ gun violence ” every year .
Hoonhout pointed out that the number comes from Bloomberg ’ s own organization , Everytown for Gun Safety , and a report it produced in 2013 .
The problem is , the Everytown report specifically stated that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 0-19 ) are shot and killed ” every year .
Obviously , not everyone “ 0-19 years old ” is a child .
If those considered adults by the law are counted separately from toddlers , tweens and young teenagers , it turns out the number of children is about half what Bloomberg ’ s ad states , according to Hoonhout .
“ The same data , when reviewed for the same time-frame while omitting legal adults — 18 and 19 year olds — shows an average of 1,499 annual gun deaths for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number claimed in Bloomberg ’ s ad , ” Hoonhout wrote .
Again , this isn ’ t to devalue any human life ( something a pro-abortion Bloomberg should know something about ) , it is just making the point that the only thing Bloomberg ’ s Super Bowl ad proves is that the former mayor is as big a liar as his fellow contenders in the Democratic field .
Bloomberg ’ s billions might just buy him the Democratic nomination – they ’ ve already purchased his spot on the national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perfidy of the Democratic National Committee .
But all the money in the world can ’ t buy an honest character .
Of course , since Bloomberg ’ s running as a Democrat , he ’ s not even in the market for one .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Even a multi-billionaire can’t buy honesty – especially if he’s running as a Democrat.
Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, busy trying to buy up the Democratic presidential nomination, splurged a reported $10 million on a one-minute Super Bowl ad that was likely barely seen – or quickly forgotten – by the vast majority of viewers of Sunday night’s extravaganza.
But it was seen in advance by enough Second Amendment supporters for its lies of omission and commission to be brought to light. And as for its basic premise, the National Rifle Association was firing back on social media long before the big game’s politically tinged sex extravaganza started at halftime.
NRA members don’t like hypocritical NYC billionaires. You want to know how real Americans feel, Bloomberg? Watch this! Your $10M #SuperBowl ad won’t beat the American spirit. You want to take our guns, go ahead and try. We will fight for our freedom. #SuperBowlLIV #GAOS2020 pic.twitter.com/Bq8bNUqpCn — NRA (@NRA) February 3, 2020
The NRA ad feature numerous faces speaking out for the constitutionally guaranteed right of Americans to bear arms. According to Breitbart, the interviews were conducted with NRA members at the Great American Outdoors Show taking place in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, this week.
Men and women, black and white — they spoke out for their right to self-defense.
“Mike Bloomberg is a white billionaire who has no place in telling me how I can defend myself or my loved ones,” one black man stated.
“As a mother of 3-year-old little boy, my family means everything to me,” a woman told the camera. “As a woman, I believe the best way to protect myself is with a firearm.”
Do you think Bloomberg's Super Bowl ad is backfiring on him? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (864 Votes) No: 0% (2 Votes)
Another woman put billionaire Bloomberg’s skewed perspectives on the table.
“Think about the women in your life,” she said. “Are you OK with the fact that your policies could leave them defenseless?”
Of course, it’s unlikely that any member of Bloomberg’s family will ever be “defenseless” – unlike an unguarded, non-billionaire woman living a standard American, middle-class life.
The ad ends with a series of participants vowing that they will not allow their Second Amendment rights to be infringed, Bloomberg or no Bloomberg.
One woman’s challenge said it all: “Mike, come and take it.”
And there were plenty of Second Amendment supporters who agreed with those in the video.
They refuse to take the guns out of the criminals hands but instead they want to take the guns away from law abiding citizens
So all lawful ppl will hand in their but criminals will not turn them in.
We still will have shootings because they will not allow stop & frisk. — RKEOUGH (@RTKDEA) February 3, 2020
Mike Bloomberg does not represent the millions of law abiding gun owners in this country who want to protect themselves, and if the need arises, protect the lives of others. His policies and rhetoric will be destructive and irreversible. — Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) February 3, 2020
Tell ta what. If you want to lose your rights to free speech, freedom of religion, bearing arms, due process, states independence, representation, and to fave your accuser vote #Democrat. It’s what they do. — Buck Turgidson (@BuckTurgidson8) February 3, 2020
What might be even worse than the rank hypocrisy of one of the world’s wealthiest men calling for the hoi polloi to be disarmed is the rank dishonesty of his Super Bowl advertisement itself.
While it features the mother of a young man who died in a 2013 shooting, what it does not say is that the young man in question, according to the Houston Chronicle, was very much a participant in the activity that led to his death.
If you haven’t seen it yet, check out the ad here:
The young man’s name was George Harold Kemp, 20, who’d driven to a neighborhood with some companions to challenge a teenager to a fight. When the teen showed up with friends, one of the friends shot Kemp to death.
That isn’t to discount anyone’s death, but engaging in fights is by definition a dangerous activity. Deciding to use a case like that to disarm millions of law-abiding Americans is almost criminally dishonest.
Also, as Tobias Hoonhout noted at National Review, the numbers Bloomberg used in his commercial are hopelessly distorted.
The ad claims that 2,900 children are killed in “gun violence” every year.
Hoonhout pointed out that the number comes from Bloomberg’s own organization, Everytown for Gun Safety, and a report it produced in 2013. The problem is, the Everytown report specifically stated that “2,900 children and teens (aged 0-19) are shot and killed” every year.
Obviously, not everyone “0-19 years old” is a child. If those considered adults by the law are counted separately from toddlers, tweens and young teenagers, it turns out the number of children is about half what Bloomberg’s ad states, according to Hoonhout.
“The same data, when reviewed for the same time-frame while omitting legal adults — 18 and 19 year olds — shows an average of 1,499 annual gun deaths for children, or about 51 percent of the number claimed in Bloomberg’s ad,” Hoonhout wrote.
Everytown used a five year average of gun deaths between 0-19 years of age in the CDC’s Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) to come up with 2,887 gun deaths per year among that age group. pic.twitter.com/dr3uuQTCaw — Stephen Gutowski (@StephenGutowski) February 1, 2020
Again, this isn’t to devalue any human life (something a pro-abortion Bloomberg should know something about), it is just making the point that the only thing Bloomberg’s Super Bowl ad proves is that the former mayor is as big a liar as his fellow contenders in the Democratic field.
Bloomberg’s billions might just buy him the Democratic nomination – they’ve already purchased his spot on the national debate stage, thanks to the well-known perfidy of the Democratic National Committee.
But all the money in the world can’t buy an honest character.
Of course, since Bloomberg’s running as a Democrat, he’s not even in the market for one.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-02-03--When NBC Reporter Refuses To Be Quiet, GOP Impeachment Hero Elise Stefanik Steps In & Crushes Her

Every major public congressional hearing produces its breakout figures .
For the GOP , Rep. Elise Stefanik — the New York congresswoman who vigorously questioned many of the members on the Democrats ’ curated witness list during the impeachment inquiry — became enough of a star that George Conway called her “ lying trash.
” That ’ s pretty much how you know you ’ ve made it inside the Beltway these days if you have an R appended to your name .
Much to the displeasure of the strangely married Mr. Conway , Stefanik ’ s profile has continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , something that NBC News correspondent Heidi Przybyla discovered last week .
Stefanik was part of a media “ gaggle ” about impeachment issues with Republican Reps. Lee Zeldin of New York and Mike Johnson of Louisiana .
Gaggles , for the unfamiliar , are supposed to work thusly : A reporter asks a question of a group of public officials in an informal situation .
One or several of the individuals give their answers .
The reporter then asks a follow-up question or moves on to a different line of thinking .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ prove why Republicans often avoid the press .
The question she asked was ostensibly about the Ukraine scandal — in particular , whether corruption was the real motivating factor behind the investigations that President Donald Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to explore .
It was less of a question , however , and more of a lecture .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Przybyla , for instance , began by stating that Ukraine had “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aid was withheld and asked “ what specific corruption ” prompted the withholding of aid .
Zeldin began by explaining the history of the issues behind the problems with Ukrainian corruption , which Przybyla didn ’ t want to hear , saying the history of corruption was already considered in the funding .
“ Let me finish the answer , please , and I ’ ll get right back to you , ” the congressman responded .
Zeldin then cited Zelensky as a reason to question the aid ; Przybyla interrupted and said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( And Barack Obama ran on a platform of lowering your health care premiums ; what ’ s your point ? )
At one point , Zeldin landed a solid riposte to the display : “ If I give a good answer , that doesn ’ t mean that you have to cut me off , OK ?
I know that if I give a bad answer , you ’ d probably let me go all day.
” Przybyla asked Zeldin what the specific corruption was besides Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was paid handsomely to serve on the board of the Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings while he was the Obama administration ’ s point man for U.S. policy regarding Ukraine — and Crowdstrike .
“ I know it ’ s a hard question , ” she said , since Trump “ is not on the record mentioning anything other than Biden and Crowdstrike , and you haven ’ t mentioned anything else.
” “ I ’ m happy to answer your question , but all I was asking was , because you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Zeldin replied .
Przybyla said , “ You guys want the answer , right ?
” RELATED : Stefanik Becomes Anti-Impeachment Star , Outraises Dem Opponent by More Than 50 % “ OK , I ’ m happy to , but just , you have a unique style , OK , and it ’ s one that might not be as , I mean , you ’ re not looking around to see if anyone else has any other questions , ” Zeldin said .
Eventually , Stefanik took the mic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made it clear she cited testimony by ambassadors about corruption and noted that “ as we ’ ve said , there was no official investigation into the Bidens , so you should get your facts straight.
” “ Do you ignore the testimony of ambassadors ?
… This is ridiculous , ” Stefanik asked Przybyla later in the exchange .
“ You need to go back and listen to the testimony .
Every single witness has testified — well , what did the witnesses say about corruption in Ukraine ?
” Here ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at about 2:10 : As for Stefanik ’ s performance — until she stepped up , this was another example of journalists owning the cons , at least for the liberals , who don ’ t mind when reporters just talk over politicians they don ’ t like .
Stefanik made it an aggressive give-and-take — and one where she was right , by the way .
Witnesses agreed there were issues with how , at least , Hunter Biden conducted himself in Ukraine , where he got massive amounts of money with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One actually wishes the confrontation went on a bit longer , given the fact that Przybyla was getting pushback and not just giving her version of events in Ukraine to two Republicans who seemed almost flat-footed at the barrage .
As it is , one suspects this will be quite the donor clip for Stefanik and her campaign .
It ’ s been earned .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Every major public congressional hearing produces its breakout figures. For the GOP, Rep. Elise Stefanik — the New York congresswoman who vigorously questioned many of the members on the Democrats’ curated witness list during the impeachment inquiry — became enough of a star that George Conway called her “lying trash.” That’s pretty much how you know you’ve made it inside the Beltway these days if you have an R appended to your name.
Much to the displeasure of the strangely married Mr. Conway, Stefanik’s profile has continued to rise. She also remains combative, something that NBC News correspondent Heidi Przybyla discovered last week.
Stefanik was part of a media “gaggle” about impeachment issues with Republican Reps. Lee Zeldin of New York and Mike Johnson of Louisiana. Gaggles, for the unfamiliar, are supposed to work thusly: A reporter asks a question of a group of public officials in an informal situation. One or several of the individuals give their answers. The reporter then asks a follow-up question or moves on to a different line of thinking.
Przybyla, instead, was determined to prove why Republicans often avoid the press. The question she asked was ostensibly about the Ukraine scandal — in particular, whether corruption was the real motivating factor behind the investigations that President Donald Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to explore.
It was less of a question, however, and more of a lecture.
Przybyla, for instance, began by stating that Ukraine had “met all anti-corruption standards” before military aid was withheld and asked “what specific corruption” prompted the withholding of aid.
Zeldin began by explaining the history of the issues behind the problems with Ukrainian corruption, which Przybyla didn’t want to hear, saying the history of corruption was already considered in the funding.
“Let me finish the answer, please, and I’ll get right back to you,” the congressman responded.
Zeldin then cited Zelensky as a reason to question the aid; Przybyla interrupted and said Zelensky ran on an anti-corruption platform. (And Barack Obama ran on a platform of lowering your health care premiums; what’s your point?)
Do you think Elise Stefanik is a rising star in the GOP? 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% (4908 Votes) No: 1% (58 Votes)
At one point, Zeldin landed a solid riposte to the display: “If I give a good answer, that doesn’t mean that you have to cut me off, OK? I know that if I give a bad answer, you’d probably let me go all day.”
Przybyla asked Zeldin what the specific corruption was besides Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden — whose son Hunter was paid handsomely to serve on the board of the Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings while he was the Obama administration’s point man for U.S. policy regarding Ukraine — and Crowdstrike.
“I know it’s a hard question,” she said, since Trump “is not on the record mentioning anything other than Biden and Crowdstrike, and you haven’t mentioned anything else.”
“I’m happy to answer your question, but all I was asking was, because you have a lot of colleagues here,” Zeldin replied.
Przybyla said, “You guys want the answer, right?”
“OK, I’m happy to, but just, you have a unique style, OK, and it’s one that might not be as, I mean, you’re not looking around to see if anyone else has any other questions,” Zeldin said.
Eventually, Stefanik took the mic and things took a turn.
The congresswoman made it clear she cited testimony by ambassadors about corruption and noted that “as we’ve said, there was no official investigation into the Bidens, so you should get your facts straight.”
“Do you ignore the testimony of ambassadors? … This is ridiculous,” Stefanik asked Przybyla later in the exchange. “You need to go back and listen to the testimony. Every single witness has testified — well, what did the witnesses say about corruption in Ukraine?”
“Corruption is a problem,” Przybyla answered.
“Exactly,” Stefanik said.
Here’s the exchange, which gets Stefanik-heavy at about 2:10:
As for Stefanik’s performance — until she stepped up, this was another example of journalists owning the cons, at least for the liberals, who don’t mind when reporters just talk over politicians they don’t like. Stefanik made it an aggressive give-and-take — and one where she was right, by the way. Witnesses agreed there were issues with how, at least, Hunter Biden conducted himself in Ukraine, where he got massive amounts of money with no qualifications save for a surname.
One actually wishes the confrontation went on a bit longer, given the fact that Przybyla was getting pushback and not just giving her version of events in Ukraine to two Republicans who seemed almost flat-footed at the barrage.
As it is, one suspects this will be quite the donor clip for Stefanik and her campaign. It’s been earned.
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--2020-02-03--Zuckerberg Admits Facebook’s New Approach to Free Speech Will Make Many People Angry

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Friday said the social media giant will embrace free speech and not censorship , despite whatever its critics say .
“ This is the new approach , and I think it ’ s going to piss off a lot of people .
But frankly , the old approach was pissing off a lot of people too , so let ’ s try something different , ” Zuckerberg said Friday at the Silicon Slopes Tech Summit in Utah , according to CNN Business .
Facebook announced in 2019 that it would not fact-check political ads , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The last thing I want is for our products to be used to divide people or rip society apart in any kind of way , ” Zuckerberg said , according to the Salt Lake Tribune .
“ But at some point , we ’ ve got to stand up and say , ‘ No , we ’ re going to stand for free expression.
’ Yeah , we ’ re going to take down the content that ’ s really harmful , but the line needs to be held at some point , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Zuckerberg said the increase in calls for limiting unfettered speech has come to bother him .
“ Increasingly , we ’ re getting called in to censor a lot of different kinds of content that makes me really uncomfortable , ” Zuckerberg said .
“ It kind of feels like the list of things that you ’ re not allowed to say socially keeps on growing.
” “ And I ’ m not really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Zuckerberg said democracy faces new challenges in an online world .
“ There are real questions the internet raises around the democratic process , its integrity , around free expression vs. safety , around privacy and competition and well-being , ” he said .
“ And I mean , we need to get these right.
” “ The formula throughout history has been that empowering individuals , more voice , more connection between people , is the way you build strong communities , ” he said .
Zuckerberg said many people and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The people who are criticizing and saying that more stuff needs to be censored are never the people who are actually at risk of being censored themselves , ” Zuckerberg said .
“ They have their ways of getting stuff out.
” “ I feel like someone needs to stand up for giving everyone a voice , ” he said .
His bottom line ?
Facebook “ isn ’ t to be liked , but to be understood.
” “ If you ’ re not out there standing for things that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not possible for people to feel that strongly about what you ’ re doing , ” he said .
Zuckerberg also offered a dose of contrition that Facebook had not anticipated how its rules might have been broken .
“ This is the lesson from Cambridge Analytica , right ?
There was a developer who gave people access to the data , and then the developer turned around and sold the data , which was against our policies .
But , rather than waiting for someone to report that , we should have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and identify that suspicious behavior , ” he said , according to KSL .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Friday said the social media giant will embrace free speech and not censorship, despite whatever its critics say.
“This is the new approach, and I think it’s going to piss off a lot of people. But frankly, the old approach was pissing off a lot of people too, so let’s try something different,” Zuckerberg said Friday at the Silicon Slopes Tech Summit in Utah, according to CNN Business.
Facebook announced in 2019 that it would not fact-check political ads, prompting a firestorm of criticism.
“The last thing I want is for our products to be used to divide people or rip society apart in any kind of way,” Zuckerberg said, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.
“But at some point, we’ve got to stand up and say, ‘No, we’re going to stand for free expression.’ Yeah, we’re going to take down the content that’s really harmful, but the line needs to be held at some point,” he said.
Zuckerberg said the increase in calls for limiting unfettered speech has come to bother him.
“Increasingly, we’re getting called in to censor a lot of different kinds of content that makes me really uncomfortable,” Zuckerberg said. “It kind of feels like the list of things that you’re not allowed to say socially keeps on growing.”
“And I’m not really OK with that,” he said.
Zuckerberg said democracy faces new challenges in an online world.
Do you think Facebook is really open to all opinions? 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: 5% (26 Votes) No: 95% (460 Votes)
“There are real questions the internet raises around the democratic process, its integrity, around free expression vs. safety, around privacy and competition and well-being,” he said. “And I mean, we need to get these right.”
“The formula throughout history has been that empowering individuals, more voice, more connection between people, is the way you build strong communities,” he said.
Zuckerberg said many people and groups pushing censorship want to muzzle others.
“The people who are criticizing and saying that more stuff needs to be censored are never the people who are actually at risk of being censored themselves,” Zuckerberg said. “They have their ways of getting stuff out.”
“I feel like someone needs to stand up for giving everyone a voice,” he said.
His bottom line? Facebook “isn’t to be liked, but to be understood.”
“If you’re not out there standing for things that people care about then it’s not possible for people to feel that strongly about what you’re doing,” he said.
Zuckerberg also offered a dose of contrition that Facebook had not anticipated how its rules might have been broken.
“This is the lesson from Cambridge Analytica, right? There was a developer who gave people access to the data, and then the developer turned around and sold the data, which was against our policies. But, rather than waiting for someone to report that, we should have had systems that could proactively go in and identify that suspicious behavior,” he said, according to KSL.
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--2020-02-03--Airline Cuts Ties with Chocolate Provider Over Owner’s Pro-Life Views

Swiss Air Lines will no longer distribute chocolates from the Swiss chocolate maker Läderach because the company ’ s leaders support a pro-life , pro-family Christian group .
The 10-year partnership between the airline and company will end in April , according to LifeSite News .
The company has been under attack by LGBTQ groups , according to Swissinfo , and has been subject to vandalism and calls for boycotts .
“ It was about us , as customers , wanting to draw attention to our displeasure at the patent homophobia , ” protest leader Rupan Sivaganesan said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stance of the company ’ s management.
” TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Jürg Läderach , who owns the company , is the president of the Swiss branch of Christianity for Today .
Johannes Läderach , his son , is on the board of the group , which sponsors an annual March for Life in Switzerland .
The group supports Biblical marriage and opposes abortion .
“ I understand it if people value a woman ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unborn child ’ s right to life .
But I ask for understanding for my opinion , ” Johannes Läderach , 33 , said .
“ I ’ m allowed to have a different opinion.
” He said his critics do not understand him .
“ Because I fight for the unborn life , I ’ m accused of misogyny .
But I ’ m not a misogynist – 60 percent of our managers are women , ” he said .
He said that protests will not change his positions .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for my Christian values just because we ’ re having success as a company , ” he said .
“ Ultimately what counts is not how much profit we make but whether we stand by our convictions.
” He went on to say the company does not discriminate .
“ No one at Läderach is homophobic – neither the management nor the staff , ” he said .
“ We have homosexuals working for us , too .
We don ’ t ask them .
I attended a gay network event because I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has against Läderach .
There , I explained that I may have a different opinion on same-sex marriage or on the question of when life begins .
But this does not mean that I have anything against homosexuals .
Läderach has a zero tolerance for discrimination , ” he said .
Läderach said that his staff has been loyal , but also noted that they are now bearing a difficult burden .
“ Not a single employee has left the company since the wave of criticism against me , ” he said “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it ’ s not acceptable that employees have to live in fear.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Swiss Air Lines will no longer distribute chocolates from the Swiss chocolate maker Läderach because the company’s leaders support a pro-life, pro-family Christian group.
The 10-year partnership between the airline and company will end in April, according to LifeSite News.
The company has been under attack by LGBTQ groups, according to Swissinfo, and has been subject to vandalism and calls for boycotts.
“It was about us, as customers, wanting to draw attention to our displeasure at the patent homophobia,” protest leader Rupan Sivaganesan said.
“Not many people are aware of the stance of the company’s management.”
Jürg Läderach, who owns the company, is the president of the Swiss branch of Christianity for Today. Johannes Läderach, his son, is on the board of the group, which sponsors an annual March for Life in Switzerland. The group supports Biblical marriage and opposes abortion.
“I understand it if people value a woman’s right to choose more than an unborn child’s right to life. But I ask for understanding for my opinion,” Johannes Läderach, 33, said. “I’m allowed to have a different opinion.”
He said his critics do not understand him.
“Because I fight for the unborn life, I’m accused of misogyny. But I’m not a misogynist – 60 percent of our managers are women,” he said.
Do you think this is just another example of the left being intolerant? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (1950 Votes) No: 0% (9 Votes)
He said that protests will not change his positions.
“I don’t want to stop fighting for my Christian values just because we’re having success as a company,” he said. “Ultimately what counts is not how much profit we make but whether we stand by our convictions.”
He went on to say the company does not discriminate.
“No one at Läderach is homophobic – neither the management nor the staff,” he said.
“We have homosexuals working for us, too. We don’t ask them. I attended a gay network event because I wanted to hear what the LGBTQ movement has against Läderach. There, I explained that I may have a different opinion on same-sex marriage or on the question of when life begins. But this does not mean that I have anything against homosexuals. Läderach has a zero tolerance for discrimination,” he said.
Läderach said that his staff has been loyal, but also noted that they are now bearing a difficult burden.
“Not a single employee has left the company since the wave of criticism against me,” he said
“I accept that my opinions provoke resistance. But it’s not acceptable that employees have to live in fear.”
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--2020-02-03--New Coronavirus Cases Confirmed in California as US Total Grows

The number of confirmed cases of the new coronavirus in the U.S. jumped to 11 Sunday with three confirmed cases announced by California health officials .
One case was in Santa Clara County .
The others , a husband and wife , were located in San Benito County , Reuters reported .
The Santa Clara County case involved a woman who had traveled to Wuhan , China .
In the San Benito County cases , the husband had recently traveled to Wuhan and transmitted the disease to his wife .
In addition to these and other cases that have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases in Illinois and one case each in Massachusetts , Arizona and Washington state .
New York City officials said Saturday they are awaiting tests on a suspected case there .
On Sunday , China reported that 361 people had died from the virus , according to The New York Times .
The SARS outbreak during 2002 and 2003 killed 349 people in China .
China announced that there were 17,238 confirmed cases of people infected with the virus .
To date , only one case outside China — an individual in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ World Health Organization said there have been 151 confirmed cases in 23 countries other than China .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted Experts are now using the word pandemic to describe the virus .
“ It ’ s very , very transmissible , and it almost certainly is going to be a pandemic , ” Dr. Anthony S. Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease , said , according to The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it be catastrophic ?
I don ’ t know , ” he said .
It is “ increasingly unlikely that the virus can be contained , ” Dr. Thomas R. Frieden , former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , said .
“ It is therefore likely that it will spread , as flu and other organisms do , but we still don ’ t know how far , wide or deadly it will be , ” he said .
“ This looks far more like H1N1 ’ s spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alarmed , ” Dr. Peter Piot , director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said .
“ Even 1 percent mortality would mean 10,000 deaths in each million people.
” The head of the World Health Organization , however , cautioned against panic .
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus said “ panic and fear ” were the real challenges facing society .
“ So the 146 [ cases ] means that it is very small ; there is nothing to be scared of , ” he said , according to The Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take this in the right perspective , it should be used as a signal to prepare.
” RELATED : Pentagon Makes Quarantine Housing Announcement as More US Virus Cases Appear China on Monday accused the U.S. of overreacting to the virus .
“ The U.S. government hasn ’ t provided any substantial assistance to us , ” Hua Chunying , a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman , said in a briefing carried out through China ’ s WeChat app instead of in person due to the virus .
“ But it was the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wuhan , the first to suggest partial withdrawal of its embassy staff , and the first to impose a travel ban on Chinese travelers .
All it has done could only create and spread fear , which is a bad example , ” she said .
“ The U.S. is turning from overconfidence to fear and overreaction , ” she said .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The number of confirmed cases of the new coronavirus in the U.S. jumped to 11 Sunday with three confirmed cases announced by California health officials.
One case was in Santa Clara County. The others, a husband and wife, were located in San Benito County, Reuters reported. The Santa Clara County case involved a woman who had traveled to Wuhan, China. In the San Benito County cases, the husband had recently traveled to Wuhan and transmitted the disease to his wife.
In addition to these and other cases that have been reported in California, there are two cases in Illinois and one case each in Massachusetts, Arizona and Washington state. New York City officials said Saturday they are awaiting tests on a suspected case there.
On Sunday, China reported that 361 people had died from the virus, according to The New York Times. The SARS outbreak during 2002 and 2003 killed 349 people in China.
China announced that there were 17,238 confirmed cases of people infected with the virus. To date, only one case outside China — an individual in the Philippines — has been fatal. The World Health Organization said there have been 151 confirmed cases in 23 countries other than China.
Experts are now using the word pandemic to describe the virus.
“It’s very, very transmissible, and it almost certainly is going to be a pandemic,” Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, said, according to The New York Times.
“But will it be catastrophic? I don’t know,” he said.
It is “increasingly unlikely that the virus can be contained,” Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said.
Should China be sealed off until this outbreak ends? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (239 Votes) No: 2% (5 Votes)
“It is therefore likely that it will spread, as flu and other organisms do, but we still don’t know how far, wide or deadly it will be,” he said.
“This looks far more like H1N1’s spread than SARS, and I am increasingly alarmed,” Dr. Peter Piot, director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said. “Even 1 percent mortality would mean 10,000 deaths in each million people.”
The head of the World Health Organization, however, cautioned against panic.
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus said “panic and fear” were the real challenges facing society.
“So the 146 [cases] means that it is very small; there is nothing to be scared of,” he said, according to The Washington Post. “If we are going to take this in the right perspective, it should be used as a signal to prepare.”
China on Monday accused the U.S. of overreacting to the virus.
“The U.S. government hasn’t provided any substantial assistance to us,” Hua Chunying, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, said in a briefing carried out through China’s WeChat app instead of in person due to the virus.
“But it was the first to evacuate personnel from its consulate in Wuhan, the first to suggest partial withdrawal of its embassy staff, and the first to impose a travel ban on Chinese travelers. All it has done could only create and spread fear, which is a bad example,” she said.
“The U.S. is turning from overconfidence to fear and overreaction,” she said.
Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said the U.S. first reached out to China on Jan. 6 with an offer of assistance that was never acted upon until China asked for WHO intervention last week.
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--2020-02-03--AOC Endorses Conspiracy Theory, References GOP’s ‘Larger Project’ After Witness Vote

So runs the line of logic being promulgated by Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York in a Friday tweet that followed the Senate vote not to call additional witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump .
Ocasio-Cortez , who favored impeachment long before the president ’ s July 25 phone call with Ukraine ’ s Volodymyr Zelensky that led to the House investigations against Trump , said the Republicans are now out to abolish democracy .
“ The Senate ’ s abdication of responsibility to the rule of law represents a much deeper threat to our democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she wrote .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ The GOP knows that its agenda is incompatible with democracy , so their larger project is to dismantle it.
” Her tweet referenced one from Rolling Stone ’ s Jamil Smith , who said the GOP ’ s actions reflect its desire to freely manipulate elections and institute autocracy in America .
“ They did this for a reason , ” Smith tweeted .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though Republicans are okay with that .
It ’ s about the fact that he was caught manipulating an election , something that they too would like to continue doing without interruption.
” He continued that theme in his Rolling Stone article .
“ We may be witnessing the end of the United States presidency as we know it , ” Smith said .
“ It doesn ’ t come in large , destructive gestures , like the demolition of the White House .
Instead , we most often see it arrive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” He took issue with famed attorney Alan Dershowitz , who told the Senate last week , in defending Trump in his dealings with Ukraine , “ If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest , that can not be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.
” In Smith ’ s prose , that means that “ the impeachment process is being perverted into a process to make Trump into a dictator.
” He went on to proclaim that Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away from minorities .
“ Would presidents , convinced that it is in the public interest for their discriminatory policies to continue , promote voter suppression to keep black and Hispanic people away from the polls if they believe it would help them get elected ?
” Smith wrote .
“ Would they seek to cancel an election altogether ?
RELATED : A-O-Me : Ocasio-Cortez Fills In for Bernie at Rally but Does n't Even Mention His Name Once “ We consider these things hyperbolic , perhaps , but then look at what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday .
That actually happened .
This is actually happening.
” “ This is how reckless Republicans are with America , willing to give untold amounts of power to a man whom they still don ’ t fully understand in a frantic attempt to maintain their own grip on advantage in a country that has already elected a black president once and whose demographics are quickly turning against them , ” he wrote .
Smith said the only goal of the GOP is supporting Trump so that white men can stay in power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that Republicans , who have never made a real policy argument for black and Hispanic votes ( and instead stigmatized and hindered them ) , are now stuck offering ridiculous reasoning to keep their charlatan , criminal president in office , ” he wrote .
“ It pays to have a case to make , but when the agenda is furthering white patriarchy and oligarchy at the expense of our natural resources , voter suppression becomes a useful tool.
” Some called out Ocasio-Cortez for her views and retweet of Smith .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the coming election .
“ Everyone keeps telling us to vote in November , ” one Twitter user said .
“ What if there is no vote in November ?
If the president determines it isn ’ t in the national interest to vote in November , who holds him accountable ?
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Democracy is falling! Democracy is falling!
So runs the line of logic being promulgated by Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York in a Friday tweet that followed the Senate vote not to call additional witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
Ocasio-Cortez, who favored impeachment long before the president’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky that led to the House investigations against Trump, said the Republicans are now out to abolish democracy.
“The Senate’s abdication of responsibility to the rule of law represents a much deeper threat to our democracy, our institutions, and our republic,” she wrote.
“The GOP knows that its agenda is incompatible with democracy, so their larger project is to dismantle it.”
The Senate’s abdication of responsibility to the rule of law represents a much deeper threat to our democracy, our institutions, and our republic. The GOP knows that its agenda is incompatible with democracy, so their larger project is to dismantle it. https://t.co/RxH4aiJsbx — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 1, 2020
Her tweet referenced one from Rolling Stone’s Jamil Smith, who said the GOP’s actions reflect its desire to freely manipulate elections and institute autocracy in America.
“They did this for a reason,” Smith tweeted. “Not necessarily to give Trump ultimate power, though Republicans are okay with that. It’s about the fact that he was caught manipulating an election, something that they too would like to continue doing without interruption.”
He continued that theme in his Rolling Stone article.
Do you think there's any truth to Ocasio-Cortez's claims? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 1% (3 Votes) No: 99% (234 Votes)
“We may be witnessing the end of the United States presidency as we know it,” Smith said. “It doesn’t come in large, destructive gestures, like the demolition of the White House. Instead, we most often see it arrive in the mild utterances of old men.”
He took issue with famed attorney Alan Dershowitz, who told the Senate last week, in defending Trump in his dealings with Ukraine, “If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”
In Smith’s prose, that means that “the impeachment process is being perverted into a process to make Trump into a dictator.”
He went on to proclaim that Republicans are trying to wrest control of America away from minorities.
“Would presidents, convinced that it is in the public interest for their discriminatory policies to continue, promote voter suppression to keep black and Hispanic people away from the polls if they believe it would help them get elected?” Smith wrote. “Would they seek to cancel an election altogether?
“We consider these things hyperbolic, perhaps, but then look at what Dershowitz said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. That actually happened. This is actually happening.”
Smith equated support for Trump with racism.
“This is how reckless Republicans are with America, willing to give untold amounts of power to a man whom they still don’t fully understand in a frantic attempt to maintain their own grip on advantage in a country that has already elected a black president once and whose demographics are quickly turning against them,” he wrote.
Smith said the only goal of the GOP is supporting Trump so that white men can stay in power.
“The irony of it all is that Republicans, who have never made a real policy argument for black and Hispanic votes (and instead stigmatized and hindered them), are now stuck offering ridiculous reasoning to keep their charlatan, criminal president in office,” he wrote. “It pays to have a case to make, but when the agenda is furthering white patriarchy and oligarchy at the expense of our natural resources, voter suppression becomes a useful tool.”
Some called out Ocasio-Cortez for her views and retweet of Smith.
.@AOC thinks the @GOP is garbage and so are the police but #ANTIFA is all that’s good and holy in our country. She has fostered this behavior and people need to start calling her out for it.pic.twitter.com/79exUZ4AKS — Kash Jackson (@KashJackson2018) February 1, 2020
You’re a socialist aren’t you, so what do you know about democracy? — Leah E (@ldebert) February 1, 2020
Oh look, AOC is talking about power again.https://t.co/fdPI4WnQd9 — @JoMichigan (@JoMichigan1) February 1, 2020
Others, however, shared similar concerns about the coming election.
“Everyone keeps telling us to vote in November,” one Twitter user said. “What if there is no vote in November? If the president determines it isn’t in the national interest to vote in November, who holds him accountable?”
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--2020-02-03--Twitter Roasts CNN’s Stelter After He Doubles Down on Fact-Checking Trump Joke

It ’ s difficult for me to understand how Brian Stelter ’ s CNN show is called “ Reliable Sources.
” It ’ s less of a title and more an act of effrontery .
I ’ m going to talk to my editors and see if I can start calling my columns “ Brief , Tepid Liberal Musings about Current Events.
” No , it doesn ’ t have the catchy two-word title based on a phrase that ’ s already in public circulation going for it — in fact , it ’ s pretty unwieldy .
In terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s just as accurate .
I ’ m not going to go through a list of Stelterian perfidies to prove how embarrassing the show is to its parent network .
Just watch for five minutes and see how the very reliable source hosting it starts every episode off with a doom-laden screed about the wretched , authoritarian political climate under President Donald Trump .
Or perhaps you could look at this very important fact-check from Stelter ’ s most recent show .
The president conducted a Super Bowl interview with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previewed with a clip during the week — a clip that was very obviously a joke about Democratic presidential candidate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his , ahem , modest stature .
Asked what he thought of Bloomberg , Trump said , “ Very little .
I just think of little .
“ You know , now he wants a box for the debates , to stand on .
OK , it ’ s OK , there ’ s nothing wrong , you can be short , why should he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ OK ?
He wants a box for the debates , why should he be entitled to that ?
Really .
Does that mean that everybody else gets a box ?
” TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted If you were one of the people who thought the former New York mayor truly wanted a box during the debates ( it ’ d be kind of hard to hide a box behind those podiums , don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t worry — your favorite reliable source is to the rescue .
“ Despite Trump ’ s claim , there is no evidence that Bloomberg is trying to get a box to stand on for Dem debates , ” declared a CNN chyron , with attribution to Stelter ’ s Twitter handle .
James Earl Jones hasn ’ t done one of those “ This … is CNN ” station idents in a while , right ?
Because I can just picture him laughing all the way through it , and that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to project .
Anyhow , the chyron got picked up by conservative Twitter , which predictably had some fun with it : RELATED : Watch Kamala 's Face as Schumer Scolds Her for Laughing During Live Impeachment Conference I ’ m not an opinion-slinger of Stelter ’ s profile , but I know what it ’ s like to put something this stupid out there .
It happens .
( It happens a lot to Stelter and he doesn ’ t consider it stupid , but we won ’ t go there .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in my experience : You lay low for a few days .
If it ’ s not contrafactual and just imbecilic , pretend it never happened .
If you can ’ t , issue a correction and own up to it , then move on as quickly as possible .
Avoid your editors for a little while if at all possible .
Go home and binge watch “ Parks and Rec ” for a night and then order a pizza .
When everyone ’ s forgotten in a day or two , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boy pants and go back to doing your job right .
That ’ s what you do .
Here ’ s what you don ’ t do : Well now .
Maybe he just doesn ’ t like “ Parks and Rec ?
” Ron Swanson a bit too libertarian for his tastes ?
In all seriousness , I ’ ve been thinking for about , oh , an hour now about plausibly worse ways Stelter could have handled this .
I ’ m not talking , like , Alex Jones ripping his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s clearly not going to happen .
Within the range of normal Stelterian behavior , how could this have gone worse ?
If you have a legitimate answer , please contact me via the author feedback form .
I honestly can ’ t come up with a more disastrous way to deal with the minor embarrassment of “ fact-checking ” an obvious Trump joke than to angrily respond to a Twitterer with “ so , you ’ re AGAINST reporting what the president says and does ?
just checking.
” By the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impression , Stelter wasn ’ t the only journalist thinking this way .
There was , for instance , The New York Times ’ Jonathan Martin , who made his thoughts on a “ Fox & Friends ” piece about the clip sound a bit more respectable but no less tone-deaf : A joke is “ bombast ” that the Republicans don ’ t want to deal with , which is why impeachment has been a boon for them because they don ’ t have to answer to the sobering , consequential issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ box .
So whatever .
We all now know Bloomberg doesn ’ t want a box to stand on thanks to the brave , heroic reporting of at least two members of the news media .
They might not be in the employ of The Washington Post , but they ’ ve helped assure democracy won ’ t die in darkness .
And don ’ t suggest otherwise , or Brian Stelter might snap at you on Twitter .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read @ @ @ @

It’s difficult for me to understand how Brian Stelter’s CNN show is called “Reliable Sources.” It’s less of a title and more an act of effrontery.
I’m going to talk to my editors and see if I can start calling my columns “Brief, Tepid Liberal Musings about Current Events.” No, it doesn’t have the catchy two-word title based on a phrase that’s already in public circulation going for it — in fact, it’s pretty unwieldy. In terms of describing the content therein, however, it’s just as accurate.
I’m not going to go through a list of Stelterian perfidies to prove how embarrassing the show is to its parent network. Just watch for five minutes and see how the very reliable source hosting it starts every episode off with a doom-laden screed about the wretched, authoritarian political climate under President Donald Trump. Or perhaps you could look at this very important fact-check from Stelter’s most recent show.
The president conducted a Super Bowl interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity that was previewed with a clip during the week — a clip that was very obviously a joke about Democratic presidential candidate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his, ahem, modest stature.
Asked what he thought of Bloomberg, Trump said, “Very little. I just think of little.
“You know, now he wants a box for the debates, to stand on. OK, it’s OK, there’s nothing wrong, you can be short, why should he get a box to stand on? OK? He wants a box for the debates, why should he be entitled to that? Really. Does that mean that everybody else gets a box?”
If you were one of the people who thought the former New York mayor truly wanted a box during the debates (it’d be kind of hard to hide a box behind those podiums, don’t you think?), don’t worry — your favorite reliable source is to the rescue.
Was it clear to you that President Trump was joking about the box? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 95% (874 Votes) No: 5% (42 Votes)
“Despite Trump’s claim, there is no evidence that Bloomberg is trying to get a box to stand on for Dem debates,” declared a CNN chyron, with attribution to Stelter’s Twitter handle.
James Earl Jones hasn’t done one of those “This … is CNN” station idents in a while, right? Because I can just picture him laughing all the way through it, and that’s not really the image you want to project.
Anyhow, the chyron got picked up by conservative Twitter, which predictably had some fun with it:
Trump wins again pic.twitter.com/tE1skbiTb3 — Comfortably Smug (@ComfortablySmug) February 2, 2020
Brian Stelter coming to the aid of Mike Bloomberg: pic.twitter.com/ND1sAtlFLp — Sam Valley (@SamValley) February 2, 2020
I mean, they’re doing the work for him. Four years, and they still haven’t caught on. https://t.co/qALiFUYxo4 — It’s still 2016 apparently (@jtLOL) February 2, 2020
I’m not an opinion-slinger of Stelter’s profile, but I know what it’s like to put something this stupid out there. It happens. (It happens a lot to Stelter and he doesn’t consider it stupid, but we won’t go there.)
Here’s what you do, in my experience: You lay low for a few days. If it’s not contrafactual and just imbecilic, pretend it never happened. If you can’t, issue a correction and own up to it, then move on as quickly as possible. Avoid your editors for a little while if at all possible. Go home and binge watch “Parks and Rec” for a night and then order a pizza. When everyone’s forgotten in a day or two, stop sulking, put on your big boy pants and go back to doing your job right. That’s what you do.
Here’s what you don’t do:
so, you’re AGAINST reporting what the president says and does? just checking. — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) February 2, 2020
Well now. Maybe he just doesn’t like “Parks and Rec?” Ron Swanson a bit too libertarian for his tastes?
In all seriousness, I’ve been thinking for about, oh, an hour now about plausibly worse ways Stelter could have handled this. I’m not talking, like, Alex Jones ripping his shirt off stuff, because that’s clearly not going to happen. Within the range of normal Stelterian behavior, how could this have gone worse?
If you have a legitimate answer, please contact me via the author feedback form. I honestly can’t come up with a more disastrous way to deal with the minor embarrassment of “fact-checking” an obvious Trump joke than to angrily respond to a Twitterer with “so, you’re AGAINST reporting what the president says and does? just checking.”
By the way, lest I give you the wrong impression, Stelter wasn’t the only journalist thinking this way. There was, for instance, The New York Times’ Jonathan Martin, who made his thoughts on a “Fox & Friends” piece about the clip sound a bit more respectable but no less tone-deaf:
The commentary after really makes it… This clip also captures why impeachment has been a hiatus for hill Rs in one important way: they made everything in recent months about impeachment threshold, faced few Qs about Trump’s more-routine bombast https://t.co/qbcujBrbOH — Jonathan Martin (@jmartNYT) February 2, 2020
A joke is “bombast” that the Republicans don’t want to deal with, which is why impeachment has been a boon for them because they don’t have to answer to the sobering, consequential issue of Trump’s japery involving a box.
So whatever. We all now know Bloomberg doesn’t want a box to stand on thanks to the brave, heroic reporting of at least two members of the news media. They might not be in the employ of The Washington Post, but they’ve helped assure democracy won’t die in darkness. And don’t suggest otherwise, or Brian Stelter might snap at you on Twitter.
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--2020-02-03--Super Bowl Halftime Show Contained a Subtle Anti-Trump Immigration Message

Turns out , it wasn ’ t all about sex .
For millions of Americans , the halftime show of Super Bowl LIV in Miami on Sunday might have looked like just another throbbing mélange of shapely , half-naked women writhing sensually to pounding , relentless music , their faces flushed with passion as erotic imagery engulfed the senses .
Quite the show all around , really .
But one aspect of the soft-core porn that lit up America ’ s most-watched television event of the year was political , too .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted And , naturally , it was a shot at President Donald Trump .
As many liberals noticed , the halftime show included more than Jennifer Lopez and Shakira putting on a sex-suffused performance that might have been illegal in public a couple of generations ago .
It also included a nod to the illegal immigration crisis liberals have forced on the country , with a scene that many interpreted as a protest against detainment facilities for those crossing the border without the benefit of papers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Emme Maribel Muniz , according to Billboard — emerged from symbolic “ cages ” to sing the Lopez hit “ Let ’ s Get Loud.
” “ How is no one talking about this powerful yet subtle statement ?
” one user asked .
Oh , maybe because it was so subtle it was easy to miss among all the jiggling flesh that would have been called “ exploitation of women ” if anyone remotely conservative had been behind it .
RELATED : Dem Rep 'Disturbed ' by Arrest of Criminal Alien Who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ago Or maybe because it was a retread of the liberal lie that separating families who cross the border illegally was somehow an innovation of the Trump administration .
This is a theme that ’ s come up over and over again , but it bears repeating : The policy that liberals call “ kids in cages ” was a product of President Barack Obama ’ s time in office .
But it ’ s like many of the lies circulated about the Trump White House by liberals still unable to accept the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s spouting about “ Russia collusion , ” or esoteric alleged violations of the emoluments clause , or a sham impeachment for “ obstruction of Congress , ” the # Resistance has never shown a high regard for truth in its attacks on the man duly elected to be president of the United States .
Fortunately , many on social media were aware enough to scorn the half-baked halftime show .
First , there was the political argument : And then there was the presentation part .
If a Super Bowl @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for politics , maybe its sizeable audience of children and minors should put it out of consideration as a spot for a national strip show .
Seriously .
Mixing politics with sports has been a bad recipe for the NFL since the ludicrous anthem-kneeling controversies kicked off with quarterback Colin Kaepernick in 2016 ( it was Kaepernick ’ s former San Francisco 49ers who ended up losing Sunday night , more ’ s the pity ) .
Mixing politics with the Super Bowl show ’ s orgiastic exploitation of female sexuality was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics in deceptively , blaming the Trump administration for a policy that started under his predecessor — and that was taken in response to an illegal immigration crisis Democrats themselves precipitated and are continuing to encourage — is even worse .
They should have stuck with the sex .
At least that was almost honest .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Turns out, it wasn’t all about sex.
For millions of Americans, the halftime show of Super Bowl LIV in Miami on Sunday might have looked like just another throbbing mélange of shapely, half-naked women writhing sensually to pounding, relentless music, their faces flushed with passion as erotic imagery engulfed the senses.
Quite the show all around, really.
But one aspect of the soft-core porn that lit up America’s most-watched television event of the year was political, too.
And, naturally, it was a shot at President Donald Trump.
As many liberals noticed, the halftime show included more than Jennifer Lopez and Shakira putting on a sex-suffused performance that might have been illegal in public a couple of generations ago.
It also included a nod to the illegal immigration crisis liberals have forced on the country, with a scene that many interpreted as a protest against detainment facilities for those crossing the border without the benefit of papers.
Children — including Lopez’s daughter Emme Maribel Muniz, according to Billboard — emerged from symbolic “cages” to sing the Lopez hit “Let’s Get Loud.”
Libs lapped it up.
“How is no one talking about this powerful yet subtle statement?” one user asked.
HOW IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS POWERFUL YET SUBTLE STATEMENT #PepsiHalftime pic.twitter.com/NJiD2lxmXn — lyam (@luthorswift) February 3, 2020
Oh, maybe because it was so subtle it was easy to miss among all the jiggling flesh that would have been called “exploitation of women” if anyone remotely conservative had been behind it.
Do you think most people noticed this part of the halftime show? 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: 15% (657 Votes) No: 85% (3621 Votes)
Or maybe because it was a retread of the liberal lie that separating families who cross the border illegally was somehow an innovation of the Trump administration.
This is a theme that’s come up over and over again, but it bears repeating: The policy that liberals call “kids in cages” was a product of President Barack Obama’s time in office.
Telling liberals Obama had kids in cages is like beating your head against a brick wall and when we show them proof they come up with all types of excuses. https://t.co/L6FmDrbXRY — Melanie Deal (@MelanieLDeal76) July 6, 2019
But it’s like many of the lies circulated about the Trump White House by liberals still unable to accept the results of the 2016 election. Whether it’s spouting about “Russia collusion,” or esoteric alleged violations of the emoluments clause, or a sham impeachment for “obstruction of Congress,” the #Resistance has never shown a high regard for truth in its attacks on the man duly elected to be president of the United States.
Fortunately, many on social media were aware enough to scorn the half-baked halftime show.
First, there was the political argument:
President Obama put kids in cages and said on national tv, “do not send your kids here they will be sent back” #SuperBowl #HalftimeShow pic.twitter.com/BpJPLyaCwy — ✌???Conservative Stoner ??✌? (@MAGASTONER420) February 3, 2020
WATCH: J-Lo and Shakira Super Bowl Halftime Show Features Kids in Cages Are those the cages OBAMA had built to CAGE KIDS? yeah, Yeah they ARE. Odd they didn’t mention that part,,,huh — Herman Vogel (@Nitamylove) February 3, 2020
Hey @BarackObama did you see they had the cages you built on the halftime super bowl show? That’s crazy. @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/5rJZwViRl0 — Doug DeRose (@DougDeRose) February 3, 2020
#HalftimeShow – kids in ‘cages’ as ‘Born In The USA’ played…dressed in white immig protest colors, lights made a “fence” bkground, blah blah. The suddenly “woke” over-the-hill pole stripper seems to have forgotten those were Obama cages. JLo Hypocrisy https://t.co/QFfQmKL0oe — Myrna ?? ⭐⭐⭐ ?? (@inthecopa) February 3, 2020
And then there was the presentation part. If a Super Bowl halftime show isn’t the place for politics, maybe its sizeable audience of children and minors should put it out of consideration as a spot for a national strip show.
So woke. If JLO writhing on a stripper pole wasn’t bad enough, let’s ad political points. Thanks @BarackObama. WATCH: NFL Put Hispanic Kids in Cages During “Born in USA” Halftime Show https://t.co/IxtE8BevS4 via @toddstarnes — Emily (@HoosierEm) February 3, 2020
Wow, perceptive. I thought it was “mom’s should entertain the neighborhood by stripper dancing”. — ??Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?? (@heyjustmaga) February 3, 2020
The DemoKKKRats #1 RULE: DO AS WE SAY “NOT” AS WE DO. Maybe you did not notice the TOP 1% not Standing up to the national anthem? Or the kids singing in cages?
Not a fan of Halftime Shows, but this was by far the worst one of all. Unless you like strip shows, then it was Good — Andre (@andre05_02) February 3, 2020
Seriously. Mixing politics with sports has been a bad recipe for the NFL since the ludicrous anthem-kneeling controversies kicked off with quarterback Colin Kaepernick in 2016 (it was Kaepernick’s former San Francisco 49ers who ended up losing Sunday night, more’s the pity).
Mixing politics with the Super Bowl show’s orgiastic exploitation of female sexuality was not a whole lot better.
Mixing the politics in deceptively, blaming the Trump administration for a policy that started under his predecessor — and that was taken in response to an illegal immigration crisis Democrats themselves precipitated and are continuing to encourage — is even worse.
They should have stuck with the sex. At least that was almost honest.
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--2020-02-03--Poll: Senate Trial Isn’t Changing Anyone’s Minds on Impeachment

As the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump enters what appears to be its final days , a new poll shows that after proceedings in the House and Senate , a larger share of voters opposes Trump ’ s removal than in late October .
The day before the House voted on Oct. 31 to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry against Trump , an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 46 percent of those polled opposed impeachment and 49 percent opposed it , according to CNBC .
After hearings by the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those numbers are now reversed , according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll .
In the poll , published Sunday , 49 percent said Trump should not be removed from office , while 46 percent said he should go .
A December poll found that 48 percent of those polled felt Trump should remain , with the same number wanting him removed .
TRENDING : Pelosi Defies Senate 's Authority , Says Even if Senate Votes To Acquit , Trump Wo n't Actually Be Acquitted “ We ’ ve been through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a trial in the Senate , and America ’ s attitudes about Donald Trump have hardly budged , ” said Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt of Hart Research Associates .
“ Same as it always was , ” added Democratic pollster Peter Hart .
Among Democrats , 84 percent support removing Trump , while 91 percent of Republicans oppose removing him from office .
The telephone poll of 1,000 registered voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points .
The Senate trial was set to resume at 11 a.m. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by time set aside for senators to debate the issue and discuss their positions .
The vote on removing Trump from office is scheduled for 4 p.m. Wednesday .
Acquittal on the articles of impeachment filed by the House is widely expected after Democrats lost votes Friday to call additional witnesses , a move opposed by Republicans .
On Sunday , Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the vote will end the battle but not the war .
“ It will only end when the American people re-elect Donald Trump in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for being in charge of the House , ” Graham said on the Fox News show “ Sunday Morning Futures , ” referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan , who had called for impeaching Trump the moment she took her oath of office in January 2019 .
“ If you want to exonerate the president , American people , and you want to deter future impeachments like this , make sure President Trump gets re-elected .
And let ’ s fire Nancy Pelosi , ” Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of extremists taking over the Democratic Party .
“ And what happened to the Nancy Pelosi that was thoughtful , prayerful , said impeachment could only be done bipartisan ?
Tlaib and these people took over the Democratic Party .
And Chuck Schumer is having AOC breathing down his neck in terms of a Democratic primary , ” Graham said of the Senate minority leader and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , both of New York .
“ Chuck Schumer is scared to death to lose his job to AOC .
And that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

As the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump enters what appears to be its final days, a new poll shows that after proceedings in the House and Senate, a larger share of voters opposes Trump’s removal than in late October.
The day before the House voted on Oct. 31 to formally authorize an impeachment inquiry against Trump, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 46 percent of those polled opposed impeachment and 49 percent opposed it, according to CNBC.
After hearings by the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees and the early phases of the Senate trial, those numbers are now reversed, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.
In the poll, published Sunday, 49 percent said Trump should not be removed from office, while 46 percent said he should go.
A December poll found that 48 percent of those polled felt Trump should remain, with the same number wanting him removed.
“We’ve been through an impeachment inquiry in the House, a trial in the Senate, and America’s attitudes about Donald Trump have hardly budged,” said Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt of Hart Research Associates.
“Same as it always was,” added Democratic pollster Peter Hart.
Unsurprisingly, the poll found a wide variance by party enrollment.
Among Democrats, 84 percent support removing Trump, while 91 percent of Republicans oppose removing him from office.
Has your view of impeachment changed during the 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: 4% (31 Votes) No: 96% (782 Votes)
The telephone poll of 1,000 registered voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
The Senate trial was set to resume at 11 a.m. Eastern time Monday with closing arguments followed by time set aside for senators to debate the issue and discuss their positions. The vote on removing Trump from office is scheduled for 4 p.m. Wednesday.
Acquittal on the articles of impeachment filed by the House is widely expected after Democrats lost votes Friday to call additional witnesses, a move opposed by Republicans.
On Sunday, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the vote will end the battle but not the war.
“It will only end when the American people re-elect Donald Trump in November and fire Nancy Pelosi and Tlaib for being in charge of the House,” Graham said on the Fox News show “Sunday Morning Futures,” referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, who had called for impeaching Trump the moment she took her oath of office in January 2019.
“If you want to exonerate the president, American people, and you want to deter future impeachments like this, make sure President Trump gets re-elected. And let’s fire Nancy Pelosi,” Graham said.
He said impeachment came as a result of extremists taking over the Democratic Party.
“And what happened to the Nancy Pelosi that was thoughtful, prayerful, said impeachment could only be done bipartisan? Tlaib and these people took over the Democratic Party. And Chuck Schumer is having AOC breathing down his neck in terms of a Democratic primary,” Graham said of the Senate minority leader and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, both of New York. “Chuck Schumer is scared to death to lose his job to AOC. And that’s why this debacle continued in the Senate.”
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.