westernjournal--2020-10-25--Trump Issues Executive Order Targeting Federal Bureaucracy

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to infuse the “ work or walk ” spirit of the private sector into the federal bureaucracy .
The order is designed to reform the federal bureaucracy by creating a new class of positions called “ Schedule F. ” This will cover “ employees serving in confidential , policy-determining , policy-making , or policy-advocating positions that are not normally subject to change as the result of a presidential transition , ” according to a White House fact sheet .
The order itself , which was dated Oct. 21 , notes that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , policy-determining , policy-making , or policy-advocating positions is of the utmost importance.
” However , the federal bureaucracy is not always meeting that standard , the order states .
“ Unfortunately , the Government ’ s current performance management is inadequate , as recognized by Federal workers themselves .
For instance , the 2016 Merit Principles Survey reveals that less than a quarter of Federal employees believe their agency addresses poor performers effectively , ” the order stated .
“ Separating employees who can not or will not meet required performance standards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important with regard to employees in confidential , policy-determining , policy-making , or policy-advocating positions , ” Trump said in his order .
The order said that the president is responding to a need identified by those trying to get work done amid the constraint of having employees in their workforce upon whom they can not rely .
“ Senior agency officials report that poor performance by career employees in policy-relevant positions has resulted in long delays and substandard-quality work for important agency projects , such as drafting and issuing regulations , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that accompanied the order said that “ Removing poor performers , even from these critical positions , is time-consuming and difficult .
The Government Accountability Office reports that it takes 6 months to 1 year to remove Federal employees for poor performance.
” The order said that serving the taxpayers requires good people in government .
“ Given the importance of the functions they discharge , employees in such positions must display appropriate temperament , acumen , impartiality , and sound judgment .
Due to these requirements , agencies should have a greater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these employees than is afforded by the existing competitive service process , ” the order said .
The fact sheet notes that reclassified employees will be protected from retribution against their political affiliation .
Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Viginia , Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Operations , put a partisan spin on the order , according to The ( U.K ) Independent .
He called it “ yet another attack on federal employees that addresses absolutely none of the issues that can hinder effective federal recruitment and hiring.
” RELATED @ @ @ @ @ @ @ People Standing in Line To Vote Connolly said that making it easier to rid the government of individuals was “ a cheap ploy to let the Trump administration replace talent and acumen with fealty and self-dealing.
” However , even liberal media outlets like The Washingon Post have documented the existence of anti-Trump blocs in among federal employees , determined to hinder the president ’ s conservative , small-government philosophy .
An executive order that makes it easier for those employees to be weeded out in a second Trump administration means an easier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative policies .
Months ago , according to the Independent , then-deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley telegraphed the order by saying that Trump wanted to remove “ people in the bowels of the federal government working against this president ” and pursuing “ their own selfish political agenda.
” “ It ’ s not a secret that we want people in positions that work with this president , not against him , and too often we have people in this government — I mean the federal government is massive , with millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people out there taking action against this president and when we find them we will take appropriate action , ” Gidley said in January , according to the Independent .
Gidley is now press secretary to Trump ’ s re-election campaign .
In one section , Trump ’ s executive order indicates it could be a way to address leaks to the media aimed at harming the administration : “ The Federal Government benefits from career professionals in positions that are not normally subject to change as a result of a Presidential transition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significant discretion in formulating and implementing executive branch policy and programs under the laws of the United States , ” it states .
“ The heads of executive departments and agencies and the American people also entrust these career professionals with non‑public information that must be kept confidential.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to infuse the “work or walk” spirit of the private sector into the federal bureaucracy.
The order is designed to reform the federal bureaucracy by creating a new class of positions called “Schedule F.” This will cover “employees serving in confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating positions that are not normally subject to change as the result of a presidential transition,” according to a White House fact sheet.
The order itself, which was dated Oct. 21, notes that “effective performance management of employees in confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating positions is of the utmost importance.”
However, the federal bureaucracy is not always meeting that standard, the order states.
“Unfortunately, the Government’s current performance management is inadequate, as recognized by Federal workers themselves. For instance, the 2016 Merit Principles Survey reveals that less than a quarter of Federal employees believe their agency addresses poor performers effectively,” the order stated.
“Separating employees who cannot or will not meet required performance standards is important, and it is particularly important with regard to employees in confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating positions,” Trump said in his order.
The order said that the president is responding to a need identified by those trying to get work done amid the constraint of having employees in their workforce upon whom they cannot rely.
“Senior agency officials report that poor performance by career employees in policy-relevant positions has resulted in long delays and substandard-quality work for important agency projects, such as drafting and issuing regulations,” the order said.
The fact sheet that accompanied the order said that “Removing poor performers, even from these critical positions, is time-consuming and difficult. The Government Accountability Office reports that it takes 6 months to 1 year to remove Federal employees for poor performance.”
Do you think Trump's order about federal employees was justified? 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% (1256 Votes) No: 0% (6 Votes)
The order said that serving the taxpayers requires good people in government.
“Given the importance of the functions they discharge, employees in such positions must display appropriate temperament, acumen, impartiality, and sound judgment. Due to these requirements, agencies should have a greater degree of appointment flexibility with respect to these employees than is afforded by the existing competitive service process,” the order said.
The fact sheet notes that reclassified employees will be protected from retribution against their political affiliation.
Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Viginia, Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Operations, put a partisan spin on the order, according to The (U.K) Independent.
He called it “yet another attack on federal employees that addresses absolutely none of the issues that can hinder effective federal recruitment and hiring.”
Connolly said that making it easier to rid the government of individuals was “a cheap ploy to let the Trump administration replace talent and acumen with fealty and self-dealing.”
However, even liberal media outlets like The Washingon Post have documented the existence of anti-Trump blocs in among federal employees, determined to hinder the president’s conservative, small-government philosophy. An executive order that makes it easier for those employees to be weeded out in a second Trump administration means an easier path to implementing even more of those conservative policies.
Months ago, according to the Independent, then-deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley telegraphed the order by saying that Trump wanted to remove “people in the bowels of the federal government working against this president” and pursuing “their own selfish political agenda.”
“It’s not a secret that we want people in positions that work with this president, not against him, and too often we have people in this government — I mean the federal government is massive, with millions of people — and there are a lot people out there taking action against this president and when we find them we will take appropriate action,” Gidley said in January, according to the Independent.
Gidley is now press secretary to Trump’s re-election campaign.
In one section, Trump’s executive order indicates it could be a way to address leaks to the media aimed at harming the administration:
“The Federal Government benefits from career professionals in positions that are not normally subject to change as a result of a Presidential transition but who discharge significant duties and exercise significant discretion in formulating and implementing executive branch policy and programs under the laws of the United States,” it states.
“The heads of executive departments and agencies and the American people also entrust these career professionals with non‑public information that must be kept confidential.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-25--Kushner, Ivanka Trump Threaten To Sue Lincoln Project Over ‘Defamatory’ NYC Billboards

The anti-Trump Lincoln Project could face a lawsuit over its double-barreled trashing of Ivanka Trump and her husband , Jared Kushner .
On Thursday , the Lincoln Project unveiled billboards in New York City ’ s Times Square designed to send a message that the president ’ s daughter and son-in-law — who are senior White House advisers — are gleeful amid America ’ s suffering due to the coronavirus .
The billboard of Ivanka Trump shows her smiling as she gestures to the death toll from the virus .
Fox News reported that image appeared to come from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which she was gesturing toward a can of Goya black beans after Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue made a statement supporting President Donald Trump .
The one of Kushner has a quote an anonymous source for a Vanity Fair article claims he said , which reads , “ [ New Yorkers ] are going to suffer and that ’ s their problem.
” The Lincoln Project shared on Twitter a letter it was sent by Trump family lawyer Marc Kasowitz .
Kasowitz called the ads “ false , malicious and defamatory ” in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday .
“ Of course , Mr. Kushner never made any such statement , Ms. Trump never made any such gesture , and the Lincoln Project ’ s representations that they did are an outrageous and shameful libel , ” the letter stated .
“ If these billboard ads are not immediately removed , we will sue you for what will doubtless be enormous compensatory and punitive damages.
” RELATED : Trump Admin Teams with Respected Group To Make Big Move in Fight Against Child Exploitation The quote attributed to Kushner was culled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told by an unnamed source were words Kushner used during a March meeting on the coronavirus .
The article said Kushner was angered at a comment about New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo and his demands .
Kushner is quoted in the article as saying , “ Cuomo didn ’ t pound the phones hard enough to get PPE for his state… .
His people are going to suffer and that ’ s their problem.
” The Lincoln Project said the billboards will remain .
“ The level of indignant outrage Jared Kushner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lincoln Project for exposing their indifference for the more than 223,000 people who have lost their lives due to their reckless mismanagement of COVID-19 is comical , ” it said in a statement .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The anti-Trump Lincoln Project could face a lawsuit over its double-barreled trashing of Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner.
On Thursday, the Lincoln Project unveiled billboards in New York City’s Times Square designed to send a message that the president’s daughter and son-in-law — who are senior White House advisers — are gleeful amid America’s suffering due to the coronavirus.
The billboard of Ivanka Trump shows her smiling as she gestures to the death toll from the virus.
Fox News reported that image appeared to come from a photo Ivanka Trump posted on Twitter in which she was gesturing toward a can of Goya black beans after Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue made a statement supporting President Donald Trump.
If it’s Goya, it has to be good.
Si es Goya, tiene que ser bueno. pic.twitter.com/9tjVrfmo9z — Ivanka Trump (@IvankaTrump) July 15, 2020
The one of Kushner has a quote an anonymous source for a Vanity Fair article claims he said, which reads, “[New Yorkers] are going to suffer and that’s their problem.”
Kushner’s billboard also features a row of body bags.
The Lincoln Project shared on Twitter a letter it was sent by Trump family lawyer Marc Kasowitz.
Kasowitz called the ads “false, malicious and defamatory” in the cease-and-desist letter the Lincoln Project posted Friday.
“Of course, Mr. Kushner never made any such statement, Ms. Trump never made any such gesture, and the Lincoln Project’s representations that they did are an outrageous and shameful libel,” the letter stated.
“If these billboard ads are not immediately removed, we will sue you for what will doubtless be enormous compensatory and punitive damages.”
Do you think the Lincoln Project deserves to be sued over these billboards? 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% (1025 Votes) No: 1% (10 Votes)
The quote attributed to Kushner was culled from what Vanity Fair said it was told by an unnamed source were words Kushner used during a March meeting on the coronavirus.
The article said Kushner was angered at a comment about New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his demands.
Kushner is quoted in the article as saying, “Cuomo didn’t pound the phones hard enough to get PPE for his state…. His people are going to suffer and that’s their problem.”
The Lincoln Project said the billboards will remain.
Jared and Ivanka have always been entitled, out-of-touch bullies who have never given the slightest indication they have any regard for the American people. We plan on showing them the same level of respect. Our full statement: pic.twitter.com/M3K5nOE5qd — The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) October 24, 2020
“The level of indignant outrage Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump have shown towards The Lincoln Project for exposing their indifference for the more than 223,000 people who have lost their lives due to their reckless mismanagement of COVID-19 is comical,” it said in a statement.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-25--11 Days Before the Election, Trump Gets Massive Peace News From Middle East

It ’ s a policy colloquially known as the “ Three Nos ” that ’ s supposed to dictate how Arab governments deal with Israel .
The policy takes its name from an agreement passed by the Arab League in 1967 in the wake of the Six-Day War ; the Khartoum Resolution , reached in the capital of Sudan , laid out in no uncertain language , in its third paragraph , how the Jewish state was to be dealt with : “ The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5 , ” the agreement stated .
“ This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide , namely , no peace with Israel , no recognition of Israel , no negotiations with it , and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.
” That meeting was chaired by Ismai ’ il al-Azhari , then the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and Gen. Abdel-Fattah al-Burhan , the military leader of Sudan ’ s transitional military government , were both on a conference call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Donald Trump to make peace with Israel — and the irony wasn ’ t lost on Netanyahu , who noted the “ Three Nos.
” “ Whereas today , Khartoum says yes to peace with Israel , yes to recognition of Israel and to normalization with Israel , ” he said , according to The Washington Post .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential election in the United States , was another coup in Middle East peace for President Trump .
Sudan became the third Arab state in recent weeks to normalize relations with Israel in recent weeks after the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain .
All of those deals had the president as a middleman .
It was big enough that even on the viciously anti-Trump CNN , international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson described it in positive terms .
“ It ’ s certainly what Trump is looking for and has been looking for , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and he ’ ll certainly chalk this up as that , ” Robertson said .
“ And I think that some people , you know , they ’ ll see that Trump “ has succeeded in the Middle East where other presidents have failed.
” The announcement came as Sudan was taken off of the United States ’ list of state sponsors of terrorism and the country agreed to pay millions to Americans who fell victim to terrorism .
“ After decades of living under a brutal dictatorship , the people of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a statement issued by the three countries read .
“ The Sudanese transitional government has demonstrated its courage and commitment to combating terrorism , building its democratic institutions , and improving its relations with its neighbors.
” RELATED : Mainstream Media Gets Distracted by Fly , Blows Off Pence 's Most Powerful Debate Moment Trump said during the conference call that “ at least five ” other countries were looking to normalize relations with Israel separate from any conditions involving Palestine .
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas ’ reaction to the agreement , unsurprisingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidency affirms its condemnation and rejection of normalized relations with the Israeli occupation state that usurps the land of Palestine , ” Abbas ’ office said in a statement , according to Palestinian media .
“ This contradicts the decisions of the Arab summits , as well as the Arab peace initiatives approved by the Arab and Islamic summits and the U.N. Security Council.
” What was most striking about the deal , however , is how different the normalization of relations between Sudan and Israel is from the previous normalizations by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Bahrain are relatively developed economies with stable governments .
While neither could be called a flourishing democracy where open debate is roundly encouraged — or won ’ t end with one of the debaters in jail — neither has a history of genocide .
The decision may not have been met with unmixed delight among the populace in either country , but neither nation was a hotbed of anti-Israel sentiment .
However , as Jerusalem Post senior editor Lahav Harkov pointed out in a column on Saturday , Sudan “ is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear for decades .
It was a way station for Iranian arms going to Hamas and Hezbollah until fairly recently ; Israel repeatedly bombed Sudan to stop the weapons from reaching their destinations.
” Its government also isn ’ t particularly stable .
In 2019 , dictator Omar al-Bashir was deposed amid widespread demonstrations in the country .
He ’ s already been convicted on corruption charges and in July , a case against him for the 1989 coup that brought him to power began .
He ’ s also under indictment by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violations committed in Darfur , including charges of genocide .
According to the BBC , the current government plans to hand him over to the tribunal .
All of that means the transitional government was taking a risk by normalizing relations , particularly given the anti-Israel sentiment in Sudan is far more visceral and that the government is less secure .
As Harkov noted , “ it ’ s likely that in a situation where a transitional government is making an unpopular move , that this normalization process will be much slower than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – where the move is not popular with the Shi ’ ite majority , either , but the Sunni government is relatively stable.
” Aside from the security aspect and the symbolism of the matter , Israel also benefits from Sudan agreeing to let its commercial airliners fly over Sudanese airspace .
The African country is on the southern border of Egypt .
“ The skies of Sudan are open to Israel today .
This allows for direct and shorter flights between Israel and Africa and South America , ” Netanyahu said during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that there “ would be many more peace deals to come in the Middle East , ” according to National Review .
“ We have many lined up .
They want to come in , get the deal done , ” Trump said .
“ Three months ago no one thought this was possible .
Even Bibi didn ’ t know if this was possible.
” And then there was the one line that , as always , the media jumped on : Trump questioning Netanyahu whether “ Sleepy Joe ” Biden could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to The Post , Netanyahu paused and then said , “ Mr .
President , one thing I can tell you is , we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America.
” Of course , what ’ s supposed to rile us up is that Trump would even ask such a thing .
An Israeli prime minister knows his country needs to be on good terms with any American president .
With a pending presidential election , Netanyahu can ’ t afford to alienate any candidate who could be in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ riled The Post up is that , if Netanyahu were in a position to give an honest answer , it probably wouldn ’ t be a yes .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s a policy colloquially known as the “Three Nos” that’s supposed to dictate how Arab governments deal with Israel.
The policy takes its name from an agreement passed by the Arab League in 1967 in the wake of the Six-Day War; the Khartoum Resolution, reached in the capital of Sudan, laid out in no uncertain language, in its third paragraph, how the Jewish state was to be dealt with:
“The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5,” the agreement stated.
“This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.”
That meeting was chaired by Ismai’il al-Azhari, then the president of Sudan.
On Friday, Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and Gen. Abdel-Fattah al-Burhan, the military leader of Sudan’s transitional military government, were both on a conference call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Donald Trump to make peace with Israel — and the irony wasn’t lost on Netanyahu, who noted the “Three Nos.”
“Whereas today, Khartoum says yes to peace with Israel, yes to recognition of Israel and to normalization with Israel,” he said, according to The Washington Post.
The agreement, 11 days before the presidential election in the United States, was another coup in Middle East peace for President Trump. Sudan became the third Arab state in recent weeks to normalize relations with Israel in recent weeks after the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. All of those deals had the president as a middleman.
It was big enough that even on the viciously anti-Trump CNN, international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson described it in positive terms.
“It’s certainly what Trump is looking for and has been looking for, [an] international foreign policy win, and he’ll certainly chalk this up as that,” Robertson said. “And I think that some people, you know, they’ll see that Trump “has succeeded in the Middle East where other presidents have failed.”
CNN’s Nic Robertson: “President @realDonaldTrump has succeeded in the Middle East where other presidents have failed” pic.twitter.com/0zATZwhasB — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) October 23, 2020
The announcement came as Sudan was taken off of the United States’ list of state sponsors of terrorism and the country agreed to pay millions to Americans who fell victim to terrorism.
“After decades of living under a brutal dictatorship, the people of Sudan are finally taking charge,” a statement issued by the three countries read.
“The Sudanese transitional government has demonstrated its courage and commitment to combating terrorism, building its democratic institutions, and improving its relations with its neighbors.”
Trump said during the conference call that “at least five” other countries were looking to normalize relations with Israel separate from any conditions involving Palestine.
Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’ reaction to the agreement, unsurprisingly, was negative.
“The Palestinian presidency affirms its condemnation and rejection of normalized relations with the Israeli occupation state that usurps the land of Palestine,” Abbas’ office said in a statement, according to Palestinian media.
Will the Sudanese-Israeli agreement help Donald Trump at the polls? 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: 96% (1935 Votes) No: 4% (83 Votes)
“This contradicts the decisions of the Arab summits, as well as the Arab peace initiatives approved by the Arab and Islamic summits and the U.N. Security Council.”
What was most striking about the deal, however, is how different the normalization of relations between Sudan and Israel is from the previous normalizations by the UAE or Bahrain.
Both the UAE and Bahrain are relatively developed economies with stable governments. While neither could be called a flourishing democracy where open debate is roundly encouraged — or won’t end with one of the debaters in jail — neither has a history of genocide. The decision may not have been met with unmixed delight among the populace in either country, but neither nation was a hotbed of anti-Israel sentiment.
However, as Jerusalem Post senior editor Lahav Harkov pointed out in a column on Saturday, Sudan “is a country where the hatred of Israel was clear for decades. It was a way station for Iranian arms going to Hamas and Hezbollah until fairly recently; Israel repeatedly bombed Sudan to stop the weapons from reaching their destinations.”
Its government also isn’t particularly stable. In 2019, dictator Omar al-Bashir was deposed amid widespread demonstrations in the country. He’s already been convicted on corruption charges and in July, a case against him for the 1989 coup that brought him to power began. He’s also under indictment by the International Criminal Court for human rights violations committed in Darfur, including charges of genocide. According to the BBC, the current government plans to hand him over to the tribunal.
All of that means the transitional government was taking a risk by normalizing relations, particularly given the anti-Israel sentiment in Sudan is far more visceral and that the government is less secure. As Harkov noted, “it’s likely that in a situation where a transitional government is making an unpopular move, that this normalization process will be much slower than the ones with the UAE and Bahrain – where the move is not popular with the Shi’ite majority, either, but the Sunni government is relatively stable.”
Aside from the security aspect and the symbolism of the matter, Israel also benefits from Sudan agreeing to let its commercial airliners fly over Sudanese airspace.
The African country is on the southern border of Egypt.
“The skies of Sudan are open to Israel today. This allows for direct and shorter flights between Israel and Africa and South America,” Netanyahu said during the phone call.
Trump said Friday that there “would be many more peace deals to come in the Middle East,” according to National Review.
“We have many lined up. They want to come in, get the deal done,” Trump said. “Three months ago no one thought this was possible. Even Bibi didn’t know if this was possible.”
And then there was the one line that, as always, the media jumped on: Trump questioning Netanyahu whether “Sleepy Joe” Biden could have gotten the deal done.
According to The Post, Netanyahu paused and then said, “Mr. President, one thing I can tell you is, we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America.”
Of course, what’s supposed to rile us up is that Trump would even ask such a thing. An Israeli prime minister knows his country needs to be on good terms with any American president. With a pending presidential election, Netanyahu can’t afford to alienate any candidate who could be in the Oval Office in 2021.
What likely riled The Post up is that, if Netanyahu were in a position to give an honest answer, it probably wouldn’t be a yes.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-25--Sen. Murkowski Announces She Will Vote To Confirm Barrett to Supreme Court

Making sure to castigate the process that will result in the expected Monday confirmation vote of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett , Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska on Saturday said she will vote to confirm Barrett .
Republicans hold a 53-vote majority in the Senate .
Republican Susan Collins of Maine has said she opposes filling the seat left open by the September death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seat until after the presidential election .
In 2016 , after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia , the Republican-controlled Senate did not act upon then-President Barack Obama ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court .
Collins and Murkowski have indicated they believe that precedent should have precluded the Senate from considering a nomination this time around .
“ I voted no on the motion to proceed yesterday because I have stated on multiple occasions since 2016 I do not believe the Senate should take up a Supreme Court nomination this close to a presidential election .
I have been clear in that position throughout this process , ” Murkowski said in a statement on her website .
“ With that vote , my view did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate is whether Judge Amy Coney Barrett is qualified to serve on the highest court in the land .
“ My constitutional responsibility is to now look beyond process and to vote based on a solid evaluation of her qualifications and fitness of judicial temperament.
” “ I have reviewed Judge Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing and her writings .
I also had a lengthy discussion with her this week to delve further into her record and views of jurisprudence .
It is clear that she is qualified by any objective standard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the American Bar Association , ” Murkowski ’ s statement said .
“ She has demonstrated a strong command of the law , intellect , discipline , and , ultimately , the capability to hold the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
” However , Murkowski wanted to be sure her disapproval of the process of filling Ginsburg ’ s seat is duly noted .
“ There will be at least one more procedural vote on Sunday , and I will once again object to advancing the nomination past cloture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we reach a final vote , I will vote to confirm Judge Barrett to serve on the Supreme Court , ” she said .
During a speech from the Senate floor on Saturday , Murkowski said that “ I just regret that we are in this place , ” according to The Hill .
“ I have looked inward , considering in these difficult days what I believe is best for the institutions of our government , and I recognize that confirming this nominee is not going to heal .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these institutions have endured , ” Murkowski said .
“ But neither will threats that should the balance of power in this chamber change everything is on the table , ” Murkowski said , referring to talk among Democrats they might seek to “ pack ” the court by adding justices and abolish the filibuster if Democratic nominee Joe Biden wins the presidency and Democrats regain control of the Senate in November ’ s elections .
In her floor speech , Murkowski was clear that despite reservations on the process , she was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no doubt about her intellect .
I have no doubt about Judge Barrett ’ s judicial temperament .
I have no doubt about her capability to do the job , ” she said , according to The Hill .
“ I have concluded that she is the sort of person we want on the Supreme Court.
” But she also made her unhappiness with the situation clear .
“ I do not believe that moving forward on a nominee just over a week removed from a pitched presidential election when partisan tensions are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … will help our country become a better version of itself , ” Murkowski said , according to The Hill .
“ Frankly , I ’ ve lost that procedural fight .
“ I believe that the only way to put us back on the path of appropriate consideration of judicial nominees is to evaluate Judge Barrett as we would want to be judged , on the merits of her qualifications .
And so when we do that , when that final question comes before us … I will be a yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oppose the process that has led us to this point , I do not hold it against her as an individual who has navigated the gauntlet with grace , skill and humility .
I will vote ‘ no ’ on the procedural votes ahead of us .
but ‘ yes ’ to confirm Judge Barrett when the question before us is her qualification to be an associate justice , ” Murkowski added .
After the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Murkowski said she opposed any attempt to fill the seat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election .
Sadly , what was then a hypothetical is now our reality , but my position has not changed , she said in a statement .
“ I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia .
We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Trump nominated Barrett , she began to give herself wiggle room .
“ For weeks I have stated that I do not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to an election , ” she said in a statement then .
“ But today the President exercised his constitutional authority to nominate an individual to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
I welcome the opportunity to meet with the Supreme Court nominee , just as I did in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Making sure to castigate the process that will result in the expected Monday confirmation vote of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska on Saturday said she will vote to confirm Barrett.
Republicans hold a 53-vote majority in the Senate. Republican Susan Collins of Maine has said she opposes filling the seat left open by the September death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seat until after the presidential election.
In 2016, after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the Republican-controlled Senate did not act upon then-President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the court. Collins and Murkowski have indicated they believe that precedent should have precluded the Senate from considering a nomination this time around.
“I voted no on the motion to proceed yesterday because I have stated on multiple occasions since 2016 I do not believe the Senate should take up a Supreme Court nomination this close to a presidential election. I have been clear in that position throughout this process,” Murkowski said in a statement on her website. “With that vote, my view did not prevail, so the question now facing the Senate is whether Judge Amy Coney Barrett is qualified to serve on the highest court in the land.
“My constitutional responsibility is to now look beyond process and to vote based on a solid evaluation of her qualifications and fitness of judicial temperament.”
“I have reviewed Judge Barrett’s confirmation hearing and her writings. I also had a lengthy discussion with her this week to delve further into her record and views of jurisprudence. It is clear that she is qualified by any objective standard and has received the highest possible rating from the American Bar Association,” Murkowski’s statement said.
“She has demonstrated a strong command of the law, intellect, discipline, and, ultimately, the capability to hold the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.”
However, Murkowski wanted to be sure her disapproval of the process of filling Ginsburg’s seat is duly noted.
“There will be at least one more procedural vote on Sunday, and I will once again object to advancing the nomination past cloture. Assuming that motion prevails, when we reach a final vote, I will vote to confirm Judge Barrett to serve on the Supreme Court,” she said.
Do you support Sen. Lisa Murkowski's decision? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 88% (236 Votes) No: 12% (33 Votes)
During a speech from the Senate floor on Saturday, Murkowski said that “I just regret that we are in this place,” according to The Hill.
“I have looked inward, considering in these difficult days what I believe is best for the institutions of our government, and I recognize that confirming this nominee is not going to heal. It’s not going to salve the wounds that these institutions have endured,” Murkowski said.
“But neither will threats that should the balance of power in this chamber change everything is on the table,” Murkowski said, referring to talk among Democrats they might seek to “pack” the court by adding justices and abolish the filibuster if Democratic nominee Joe Biden wins the presidency and Democrats regain control of the
Senate in November’s elections.
In her floor speech, Murkowski was clear that despite reservations on the process, she was impressed with Barrett.
“I have no doubt about her intellect. I have no doubt about Judge Barrett’s judicial temperament. I have no doubt about her capability to do the job,” she said, according to The Hill. “I have concluded that she is the sort of person we want on the Supreme Court.”
But she also made her unhappiness with the situation clear.
“I do not believe that moving forward on a nominee just over a week removed from a pitched presidential election when partisan tensions are running about as high as they could … will help our country become a better version of itself,” Murkowski said, according to The Hill. “Frankly, I’ve lost that procedural fight.
“I believe that the only way to put us back on the path of appropriate consideration of judicial nominees is to evaluate Judge Barrett as we would want to be judged, on the merits of her qualifications. And so when we do that, when that final question comes before us … I will be a yes,” Murkowski said.
“While I oppose the process that has led us to this point, I do not hold it against her as an individual who has navigated the gauntlet with grace, skill and humility. I will vote ‘no’ on the procedural votes ahead of us. but ‘yes’ to confirm Judge Barrett when the question before us is her qualification to be an associate justice,” Murkowski added.
After the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Murkowski said she opposed any attempt to fill the seat.
“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed, she said in a statement.
“I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia. We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must apply.”
A few days later, after Trump nominated Barrett, she began to give herself wiggle room.
“For weeks I have stated that I do not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to an election,” she said in a statement then.
“But today the President exercised his constitutional authority to nominate an individual to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. I welcome the opportunity to meet with the Supreme Court nominee, just as I did in 2016.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-25--Afghanistan Claims To Have Killed Al-Qaida Leader on FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist List

Afghanistan claimed Sunday it killed a top al-Qaida propagandist on an FBI most-wanted list during an operation in the country ’ s east , showing the militant group ’ s continued presence there as U.S. forces work to withdraw from America ’ s longest-running war amid continued bloodshed .
The reported death of Husam Abd al-Rauf , also known by the nom de guerre Abu Muhsin al-Masri , follows weeks of violence , including a suicide bombing by the Islamic State group Saturday at an education center near Kabul that killed 24 people .
Meanwhile , the Afghan government continues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talks in Qatar between the two sides take place for the first time .
The violence and al-Rauf ’ s reported killing threaten the face-to-face peace talks and risk plunging this nation beset by decades of war into further instability .
They also complicate American efforts to withdraw , 19 years after it led an invasion targeting the Taliban for hosting al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden after the Sept. 11 attacks .
Details over the raid that led to al-Rauf ’ s alleged death remained murky hours after Afghanistan ’ s intelligence service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claimed on Twitter to have killed him in Ghazni province .
It said one of its members was also killed in the operation .
The agency released a photograph late Sunday afternoon it described as al-Rauf ’ s corpse , which resembled FBI images of the militant leader .
Al-Qaida did not immediately acknowledge al-Rauf ’ s reported death .
The FBI declined to comment .
The U.S. military ’ s Central Command and NATO did not respond to requests for comment .
The Afghan raid happened last week in Kunsaf , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ district some 90 miles southwest of Kabul , two government officials said .
Amanullah Kamrani , the deputy head of Ghazni ’ s provincial council , told The Associated Press that Afghan special forces led by the intelligence agency raided Kunsaf , which he described as being under Taliban control .
On the village ’ s outskirts , they stormed an isolated home and killed seven suspected militants in a firefight , including al-Rauf , Kamrani said .
Neither Kamrani nor the intelligence agency offered details on how authorities identified al-Rauf , nor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the village .
Wahidullah Jumazada , a spokesman for the provincial governor in Ghazni , said Afghan forces killed six suspected militants in the raid , without acknowledging al-Rauf had been killed .
Kamrani alleged , without providing evidence , that the Taliban had been offering shelter and protection to al-Rauf .
The Taliban told the AP on Sunday they are investigating the incident .
If the Taliban had provided protection for al-Rauf that would violate the terms of its Feb. 29 deal with the U.S. that jump-started the Afghan peace talks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ not to cooperate with groups or individuals threatening the security of the United States and its allies , ” which includes al-Qaida .
RELATED : Suicide Bomber Kills 18 at Education Center on Day of Deadly Islamist Attacks Across Afghanistan The Afghan presidential palace issued a statement Sunday saying al-Rauf had been killed and warning it “ proved that the threat of terrorism and the Taliban ’ s links to terrorist networks are still in place.
” “ The Taliban should prove to the people , the government of Afghanistan and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ links with terrorist groups , including al-Qaida , ” the statement said .
They “ should stop the war and violence and facilitate a dignified and sustainable peace in the country.
” Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York filed a warrant for al-Rauf ’ s arrest in December 2018 , accusing him of providing support to a foreign terrorist organization and being part of a conspiracy to kill U.S. citizens .
The FBI put him on the bureau ’ s “ Most Wanted Terrorists ” list , which now includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believed to be born in 1958 , is an Egyptian national .
An al-Qaida-issued biography said he joined the mujaheddin fighters who battled the Soviet Union in 1986 .
He has served for years as al-Qaida ’ s media chief , offering audio statements and written articles backing the militant group .
After years of remaining silent following the acknowledgment of Taliban founder Mullah Mohammad Omar ’ s death , al-Rauf reemerged in 2018 in an audio statement in which he mocked President Donald Trump and those who preceded him the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ T-Rambo ’ who tries to copy the famous American fictional character ‘ Rambo , ’ who , with only a Kalashnikov , was able to liberate the entire Afghanistan from the Soviet Union , ” al-Rauf said , according to the SITE Intelligence Group .
The Afghan presidential palace described al-Rauf as “ al-Qaida ’ s leader for the Indian subcontinent.
” The National Directorate of Security referred to al-Rauf as having a close relationship with both bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri , an Egyptian now leading al-Qaida .
It said he lived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and neighboring Pakistan .
Meanwhile Sunday , authorities raised the death toll in Saturday ’ s suicide attack on an education center near Kabul .
The suicide bomber , who was stopped by guards from entering the center , killed 24 and wounded 57 — many of them young students .
The Islamic State group ’ s local affiliate claimed credit for the attack in a heavily Shiite neighborhood of western Kabul ’ s Dasht-e-Barchi neighborhood , saying one of its fighters used a suicide bomb vest in the assault .
The Sunni @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shiites as heretics and have repeatedly targeted them in attacks in Afghanistan , even after losing the territory of their so-called caliphate once spanning parts of Iraq and Syria .
Mourners later gathered on a dusty hillside to bury the youths killed by the bombing .
An Afghan flag whipped in the wind above their heads as they prayed for , buried and quietly remembered those lost .
“ They had no guns on hand , ” said one mourner named Azizullah , who like many Afghans uses one name .
“ They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future for themselves and the country.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Afghanistan claimed Sunday it killed a top al-Qaida propagandist on an FBI most-wanted list during an operation in the country’s east, showing the militant group’s continued presence there as U.S. forces work to withdraw from America’s longest-running war amid continued bloodshed.
The reported death of Husam Abd al-Rauf, also known by the nom de guerre Abu Muhsin al-Masri, follows weeks of violence, including a suicide bombing by the Islamic State group Saturday at an education center near Kabul that killed 24 people.
Meanwhile, the Afghan government continues to fight Taliban militants even as peace talks in Qatar between the two sides take place for the first time.
The violence and al-Rauf’s reported killing threaten the face-to-face peace talks and risk plunging this nation beset by decades of war into further instability.
They also complicate American efforts to withdraw, 19 years after it led an invasion targeting the Taliban for hosting al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Details over the raid that led to al-Rauf’s alleged death remained murky hours after Afghanistan’s intelligence service, the National Directorate of Security, claimed on Twitter to have killed him in Ghazni province. It said one of its members was also killed in the operation.
The agency released a photograph late Sunday afternoon it described as al-Rauf’s corpse, which resembled FBI images of the militant leader.
Al-Qaida did not immediately acknowledge al-Rauf’s reported death. The FBI declined to comment. The U.S. military’s Central Command and NATO did not respond to requests for comment.
The Afghan raid happened last week in Kunsaf, a village in Ghazni province’s Andar district some 90 miles southwest of Kabul, two government officials said.
Amanullah Kamrani, the deputy head of Ghazni’s provincial council, told The Associated Press that Afghan special forces led by the intelligence agency raided Kunsaf, which he described as being under Taliban control. On the village’s outskirts, they stormed an isolated home and killed seven suspected militants in a firefight, including al-Rauf, Kamrani said.
Neither Kamrani nor the intelligence agency offered details on how authorities identified al-Rauf, nor how they came to suspect he was in the village.
Wahidullah Jumazada, a spokesman for the provincial governor in Ghazni, said Afghan forces killed six suspected militants in the raid, without acknowledging al-Rauf had been killed.
Kamrani alleged, without providing evidence, that the Taliban had been offering shelter and protection to al-Rauf. The Taliban told the AP on Sunday they are investigating the incident.
If the Taliban had provided protection for al-Rauf that would violate the terms of its Feb. 29 deal with the U.S. that jump-started the Afghan peace talks. That deal saw the Taliban agree “not to cooperate with groups or individuals threatening the security of the United States and its allies,” which includes al-Qaida.
The Afghan presidential palace issued a statement Sunday saying al-Rauf had been killed and warning it “proved that the threat of terrorism and the Taliban’s links to terrorist networks are still in place.”
“The Taliban should prove to the people, the government of Afghanistan and the international community that they are ending their links with terrorist groups, including al-Qaida,” the statement said. They “should stop the war and violence and facilitate a dignified and sustainable peace in the country.”
Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York filed a warrant for al-Rauf’s arrest in December 2018, accusing him of providing support to a foreign terrorist organization and being part of a conspiracy to kill U.S. citizens. The FBI put him on the bureau’s “Most Wanted Terrorists” list, which now includes 27 others.
The red-headed al-Rauf, believed to be born in 1958, is an Egyptian national. An al-Qaida-issued biography said he joined the mujaheddin fighters who battled the Soviet Union in 1986.
He has served for years as al-Qaida’s media chief, offering audio statements and written articles backing the militant group. After years of remaining silent following the acknowledgment of Taliban founder Mullah Mohammad Omar’s death, al-Rauf reemerged in 2018 in an audio statement in which he mocked President Donald Trump and those who preceded him the White House.
“I name him ‘Donald T-Rambo’ who tries to copy the famous American fictional character ‘Rambo,’ who, with only a Kalashnikov, was able to liberate the entire Afghanistan from the Soviet Union,” al-Rauf said, according to the SITE Intelligence Group.
The Afghan presidential palace described al-Rauf as “al-Qaida’s leader for the Indian subcontinent.” The National Directorate of Security referred to al-Rauf as having a close relationship with both bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian now leading al-Qaida. It said he lived for years in hideouts in both Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan.
Meanwhile Sunday, authorities raised the death toll in Saturday’s suicide attack on an education center near Kabul. The suicide bomber, who was stopped by guards from entering the center, killed 24 and wounded 57 — many of them young students.
The Islamic State group’s local affiliate claimed credit for the attack in a heavily Shiite neighborhood of western Kabul’s Dasht-e-Barchi neighborhood, saying one of its fighters used a suicide bomb vest in the assault. The Sunni extremists of the Islamic State group view Shiites as heretics and have repeatedly targeted them in attacks in Afghanistan, even after losing the territory of their so-called caliphate once spanning parts of Iraq and Syria.
Mourners later gathered on a dusty hillside to bury the youths killed by the bombing. An Afghan flag whipped in the wind above their heads as they prayed for, buried and quietly remembered those lost.
“They had no guns on hand,” said one mourner named Azizullah, who like many Afghans uses one name. “They wanted to study and have a bright future for themselves and the country.”
The Western Journal has reviewed this Associated Press story and may have altered it prior to publication to ensure that it meets our editorial standards.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-27--Amy Coney Barrett Takes Her Oath, Officially Sworn In To Fill 9th SCOTUS Seat

President Donald Trump hosted an event for Amy Coney Barrett on Monday night at the White House , where she was sworn as an associate justice to the Supreme Court .
Justice Barrett , 48 , became the fifth woman appointed to the high court and the first to be a mother of school-aged children .
The Senate confirmed Barrett earlier in the evening in a 52-48 vote .
Justice Clarence Thomas administered the constitutional oath , officially swearing Barrett in as the 103rd associate justice in Supreme Court history .
Thomas is currently the longest-serving justice on the court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H.W .
Bush in 1991 .
TRENDING : Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy' Barrett , who clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia in the 1990s , shares both his and Thomas ’ originalist/textualist judicial philosophy in interpreting the Constitution and statutes .
Barrett thanked the president for the honor of the appointment and promised fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law .
“ My fellow Americans , even though we judges don ’ t face elections , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett said .
“ It is your Constitution that establishes the rule of law , and the judicial independence that is so central to it .
“ The oath that I have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that I will do my job without any fear or favor , and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences .
“ I love the Constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes , and I will devote myself to preserving it.
” Asked by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Barrett event would be large , Trump replied it would not .
“ Just a very nice event , ” he said .
RELATED : Barrett Elevated to SCOTUS After Passing Final Senate Vote , Will Become 3rd Trump Justice on Court The subtext of the question was clearly in reference to the White House event last month when Trump announced his nomination of Barrett , which Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden characterized on Monday as a super-spreader event for COVID , according to Politico .
The Washington Post reported of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rose Garden nomination announcement on Sept. 26 , at least 11 later tested positive for COVID-19 .
The occasion included both the outdoor Rose Garden event and an indoor reception for some of the attendees .
Vice President Mike Pence , Karen Pence and Attorney General William Barr were among some of the prominent attendees who did not contract the virus .
Barrett ’ s addition to the court replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shifts its composition to six justices appointed by Republican presidents and three by Democrats .
Biden continues to duck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ additional justices to the Supreme Court if he were elected president .
However , he did tell reporters on Monday he would establish a commission of constitutional scholars to provide him recommendations about how to potentially restructure the court .
Biden said he would give the scholars a deadline of 180 days after he takes office to get the proposals to him .
According to the Heritage Foundation ’ s Judicial Tracker , Trump has appointed 218 judges to date , which is the most of any president going back to Ronald Reagan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in office .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump hosted an event for Amy Coney Barrett on Monday night at the White House, where she was sworn as an associate justice to the Supreme Court.
Justice Barrett, 48, became the fifth woman appointed to the high court and the first to be a mother of school-aged children.
The Senate confirmed Barrett earlier in the evening in a 52-48 vote.
Justice Clarence Thomas administered the constitutional oath, officially swearing Barrett in as the 103rd associate justice in Supreme Court history.
Thomas is currently the longest-serving justice on the court, having been appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.
Barrett, who clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia in the 1990s, shares both his and Thomas’ originalist/textualist judicial philosophy in interpreting the Constitution and statutes.
Barrett thanked the president for the honor of the appointment and promised fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law.
“My fellow Americans, even though we judges don’t face elections, we still work for you,” Barrett said. “It is your Constitution that establishes the rule of law, and the judicial independence that is so central to it.
Do you think Barrett was a good choice for Trump? 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% (1944 Votes) No: 1% (10 Votes)
“The oath that I have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that I will do my job without any fear or favor, and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences.
“I love the Constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes, and I will devote myself to preserving it.”
LIVE: President Trump participates in the swearing-in ceremony of the Honorable Amy Coney Barrett https://t.co/nGav1ldptD — The White House (@WhiteHouse) October 27, 2020
Asked by a reporter earlier in the day whether the Barrett event would be large, Trump replied it would not.
“Just a very nice event,” he said.
The subtext of the question was clearly in reference to the White House event last month when Trump announced his nomination of Barrett, which Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden characterized on Monday as a super-spreader event for COVID, according to Politico.
The Washington Post reported of the approximately 200 who attended Barrett’s Rose Garden nomination announcement on Sept. 26, at least 11 later tested positive for COVID-19.
The occasion included both the outdoor Rose Garden event and an indoor reception for some of the attendees.
Vice President Mike Pence, Karen Pence and Attorney General William Barr were among some of the prominent attendees who did not contract the virus.
Barrett’s addition to the court replacing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shifts its composition to six justices appointed by Republican presidents and three by Democrats.
Biden continues to duck the question of whether he would add additional justices to the Supreme Court if he were elected president.
WATCH: “It’s a lifetime appointment. I’m not going to attempt to change that at all.” — Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden when asked by @DanielBush if he’s open to term limits for Supreme Court justices pic.twitter.com/m4qKltQHkf — PBS NewsHour (@NewsHour) October 26, 2020
However, he did tell reporters on Monday he would establish a commission of constitutional scholars to provide him recommendations about how to potentially restructure the court.
Biden said he would give the scholars a deadline of 180 days after he takes office to get the proposals to him.
According to the Heritage Foundation’s Judicial Tracker, Trump has appointed 218 judges to date, which is the most of any president going back to Ronald Reagan at the same point of their time in office.
Did you know that The Western Journal now publishes some content in Spanish as well as English, for international audiences? Click here to read this article on The Western Journal en Español!
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-27--Barrett Elevated to SCOTUS After Passing Final Senate Vote, Will Become 3rd Trump Justice on Court

The Senate has officially voted to elevate 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court .
One of the closest high court confirmations in American history , the decision came by way of a 52-48 floor vote Monday , with only one senator breaking rank to vote across party lines .
After hours of debate , Sen. Susan Collins of Maine was the only Republican Senate majority member to stand alongside an undivided Democratic caucus in opposition to the confirmation .
On Twitter , GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina commended President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a job well done , calling the confirmation a “ great day for conservative women and the American people !
” TRENDING : Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy' Barrett is the third Trump-appointed jurist elevated to the Supreme Court during the president ’ s four-year Oval Office tenure .
Nominated a mere eight days after the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sept. 18 , Barrett is expected to re-balance the high court in favor of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that escalated tensions surrounding the matter , with Democratic senators and left-wing pundits alike crying foul and threatening radical action in response to an election-year confirmation .
The contentious nature of the discussion did little to influence Republican Sen .
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , who announced on the night of Ginsburg ’ s passing that Republicans , who hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber , would move forward with efforts to fill the vacancy .
“ President Trump ’ s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the time after laying out his rationale : “ In the last midterm election before Justice [ Antonin ] Scalia ’ s death in 2016 , Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president ’ s second term .
“ We kept our promise .
Since the 1880s , no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president ’ s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year .
By contrast , Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump and support his agenda , particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary , ” the Senate majority leader said .
“ Once again , we will keep our promise.
” RELATED : Amy Coney Barrett Takes Her Oath , Officially Sworn In To Fill 9th SCOTUS Seat In the days that followed , the Senate GOP took on a moderately more tempered pace , not introducing Barrett before the Judiciary Committee until Oct. 12 — roughly two weeks after her official nomination .
With Election Day looming , Judiciary Committee Chairman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down concerns the body would not be able to confirm Barrett on time , telling Fox News , “ More than half of the Supreme Court justices who have had hearings were done within 16 days or less.
” According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service , the senator was correct , as the nominees reported to the Judiciary Committee since 1975 saw an average of 12 days elapse between their committee report and the final floor vote .
Barrett , however , was ushered through the process in even less time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12-0 vote and confirmed just four days later .
None of the Judiciary Committee ’ s Democratic members were present Thursday , boycotting the motion in light of unsuccessful efforts to publicly impugn the judge ’ s judicial fitness during a series of hearings held two weeks ago .
It was expected that horse trading would be all but unnecessary when it came to the final floor vote , with McConnell telling reporters last week he had already locked down the votes .
With Trump rival and GOP swing Sen. Mitt Romney of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Oct. 15 , very few votes were believed to be in play going to the floor .
An at-risk Sen. Collins had , of course , telegraphed her opposition weeks in advance — one of the first figures to do so .
Other perceived swing votes later made obstruction of the nominee all but impossible .
Sen. Cory Gardner , who ’ s waging a tough re-election bid in Colorado , conversely voiced his likely support just a few days later , and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska weighed in with her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distaste for the idea of an election year confirmation .
Forecasting the final vote last week , Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis told The Western Journal the contentious process and final decision would likely serve as a rallying cry for Senate GOP candidates seeking to drive voter turnout in the eleventh hour of the 2020 presidential campaign .
“ Judge Barrett has shown her immense and impeccable qualifications to serve on the high Court as a judge — not an activist , ” Ellis said in an exclusive written statement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ legacy will be his filling of judicial vacancies with actual judges , who will faithfully hold the two political branches accountable.
” “ The American people need him in office for another four years to continue to preserve and protect this critical separation of powers .
The Democrats and Joe Biden have clearly shown they don ’ t want to be held accountable and want a partisan , activist Court to rubber-stamp their unconstitutional policy agenda , ” she added .
“ I think the Court will be an important and crucial consideration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The Senate has officially voted to elevate 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
One of the closest high court confirmations in American history, the decision came by way of a 52-48 floor vote Monday, with only one senator breaking rank to vote across party lines.
After hours of debate, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine was the only Republican Senate majority member to stand alongside an undivided Democratic caucus in opposition to the confirmation.
On Twitter, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina commended President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for a job well done, calling the confirmation a “great day for conservative women and the American people!”
A constitutional conservative on the Supreme Court who understands the difference between being a judge and a politician. Well done President @realdonaldtrump and @senatemajldr! — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) October 27, 2020
Barrett is the third Trump-appointed jurist elevated to the Supreme Court during the president’s four-year Oval Office tenure.
Nominated a mere eight days after the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sept. 18, Barrett is expected to re-balance the high court in favor of a firm 6-3 conservative majority — a reality that escalated tensions surrounding the matter, with Democratic senators and left-wing pundits alike crying foul and threatening radical action in response to an election-year confirmation.
The contentious nature of the discussion did little to influence Republican Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who announced on the night of Ginsburg’s passing that Republicans, who hold a 53-47 majority in the chamber, would move forward with efforts to fill the vacancy.
Do you support the Senate GOP's efforts to expedite the Barrett confirmation? 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% (225 Votes) No: 0% (1 Votes)
“President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate,” McConnell said at the time after laying out his rationale: “In the last midterm election before Justice [Antonin] Scalia’s death in 2016, Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s second term.
“We kept our promise. Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year. By contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary,” the Senate majority leader said.
“Once again, we will keep our promise.”
The Senate and the nation mourn the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life. My full statement: pic.twitter.com/NOwYLhDxIk — Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) September 19, 2020
In the days that followed, the Senate GOP took on a moderately more tempered pace, not introducing Barrett before the Judiciary Committee until Oct. 12 — roughly two weeks after her official nomination.
With Election Day looming, Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham was quick to shoot down concerns the body would not be able to confirm Barrett on time, telling Fox News, “More than half of the Supreme Court justices who have had hearings were done within 16 days or less.”
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the senator was correct, as the nominees reported to the Judiciary Committee since 1975 saw an average of 12 days elapse between their committee report and the final floor vote.
Barrett, however, was ushered through the process in even less time, reported out of committee Thursday in a 12-0 vote and confirmed just four days later.
None of the Judiciary Committee’s Democratic members were present Thursday, boycotting the motion in light of unsuccessful efforts to publicly impugn the judge’s judicial fitness during a series of hearings held two weeks ago.
“We did it. We did it. Judge Barrett’s going to the floor.” Sen. Lindsey Graham speaks after the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to advance the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Democrats boycotted the vote. https://t.co/7Oge8WpTSS pic.twitter.com/czYzTUhz7R — ABC News (@ABC) October 22, 2020
It was expected that horse trading would be all but unnecessary when it came to the final floor vote, with McConnell telling reporters last week he had already locked down the votes.
With Trump rival and GOP swing Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah having confirmed his support for Barrett on Oct. 15, very few votes were believed to be in play going to the floor.
An at-risk Sen. Collins had, of course, telegraphed her opposition weeks in advance — one of the first figures to do so.
Other perceived swing votes later made obstruction of the nominee all but impossible. Sen. Cory Gardner, who’s waging a tough re-election bid in Colorado, conversely voiced his likely support just a few days later, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska weighed in with her stamp of approval Saturday after previously signaling distaste for the idea of an election year confirmation.
Forecasting the final vote last week, Trump campaign senior legal adviser Jenna Ellis told The Western Journal the contentious process and final decision would likely serve as a rallying cry for Senate GOP candidates seeking to drive voter turnout in the eleventh hour of the 2020 presidential campaign.
“Judge Barrett has shown her immense and impeccable qualifications to serve on the high Court as a judge — not an activist,” Ellis said in an exclusive written statement. “President Trump’s most lasting legacy will be his filling of judicial vacancies with actual judges, who will faithfully hold the two political branches accountable.”
“The American people need him in office for another four years to continue to preserve and protect this critical separation of powers. The Democrats and Joe Biden have clearly shown they don’t want to be held accountable and want a partisan, activist Court to rubber-stamp their unconstitutional policy agenda,” she added.
“I think the Court will be an important and crucial consideration for voters re-electing President Trump.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-26--Battleground State Poll: Trump and Biden Virtually Tied Among Likely Voters

A new poll reveals the presidential race is tightening in the battleground state of Nevada .
According to Tableau-Survey Monkey 2020 election polling , Democratic nominee Joe Biden is leading Nevada with a polling average of 51 percent , with President Donald Trump close behind at 48 percent .
The survey was also conducted in partnership with Axios .
The averages are from a series of polls from Sept. 28 to Oct. 25 , with 3,015 likely voters surveyed .
“ Data have been weighted for age , race , sex , education , and geography using the Census Bureau @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demographic composition of the United States age 18 and over , ” Survey Monkey and Tableau explained their methodology .
This reflects similar numbers to the actual results of the 2016 election when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won the state ’ s 6 electoral votes with 47.9 percent of the vote , according to the New York Times .
TRENDING : Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy' Trump won 45.5 percent of the vote , and Libertarian nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state has gone blue in the past , this polling hints that Nevada may still be a very competitive state .
Republicans are continuing their voter registration effort heavily in the state .
“ In Nevada , where Democrats routinely out-register Republicans in the run-up to elections , the GOP has bested Democrats for at least five months since the pandemic hit , ” the Associated Press reported .
Polling from other battleground states are also reflecting a tight race .
Political consultant and pollster Frank Luntz noticed a similar pattern to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key swing states .
Many Trump supporters and advocates have an understandable doubt in polling , given that Trump won the presidency in an upset victory in 2016 .
While national polling did accurately predict Clinton winning the popular vote , state polling was a much different story .
A large part of the inaccuracies had to do with the people being scared to say that they would vote for Trump to a survey taker over the phone .
Pollsters also did not account for the fact that Clinton was not campaigning heavily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump held constant rallies .
RELATED : Democrats ' Narrative Busted : Vladimir Putin Comes to the Bidens ' Defense Those same shy voters could potentially be casting their ballots for Trump again in 2020 and could put Trump over the edge in certain battleground states .
While most data indicates a Biden victory this election , the race is still clearly competitive and anything is possible .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A new poll reveals the presidential race is tightening in the battleground state of Nevada.
According to Tableau-Survey Monkey 2020 election polling, Democratic nominee Joe Biden is leading Nevada with a polling average of 51 percent, with President Donald Trump close behind at 48 percent. The survey was also conducted in partnership with Axios.
The averages are from a series of polls from Sept. 28 to Oct. 25, with 3,015 likely voters surveyed.
“Data have been weighted for age, race, sex, education, and geography using the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey to reflect the demographic composition of the United States age 18 and over,” Survey Monkey and Tableau explained their methodology.
This reflects similar numbers to the actual results of the 2016 election when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won the state’s 6 electoral votes with 47.9 percent of the vote, according to the New York Times.
Trump won 45.5 percent of the vote, and Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson garnered 3.3 percent.
Although the state has gone blue in the past, this polling hints that Nevada may still be a very competitive state.
Republicans are continuing their voter registration effort heavily in the state.
“In Nevada, where Democrats routinely out-register Republicans in the run-up to elections, the GOP has bested Democrats for at least five months since the pandemic hit,” the Associated Press reported.
Polling from other battleground states are also reflecting a tight race.
Political consultant and pollster Frank Luntz noticed a similar pattern to 2016 with Real Clear Polling averages in key swing states.
Many Trump supporters and advocates have an understandable doubt in polling, given that Trump won the presidency in an upset victory in 2016.
While national polling did accurately predict Clinton winning the popular vote, state polling was a much different story.
Do you think Trump will win Nevada? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 97% (1691 Votes) No: 3% (46 Votes)
A large part of the inaccuracies had to do with the people being scared to say that they would vote for Trump to a survey taker over the phone.
Pollsters also did not account for the fact that Clinton was not campaigning heavily in certain Rust Belt states, where Trump held constant rallies.
Those same shy voters could potentially be casting their ballots for Trump again in 2020 and could put Trump over the edge in certain battleground states.
While most data indicates a Biden victory this election, the race is still clearly competitive and anything is possible.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-26--Family Suffers Terrifying Attack While Participating in ‘Jews for Trump’ Event

A pro-Trump rally in New York City held by members of the Jewish community was attacked throughout Sunday by protestors , leaving children suffering after being assaulted with pepper spray .
A “ Jews for Trump ” vehicle rally was organized by an adviser to the Trump campaign , Boris Epshteyn .
He is also the co-chair of Jewish Voices for Trump .
But rather than being allowed to take part in a peaceful showing of support for the president , the already embattled Orthodox Jewish community was assaulted in areas from Manhattan to Brooklyn .
WARNING : The following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offensive : TRENDING : Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy' Fox News reported a family of seven was pepper-sprayed while participating in the peaceful rally .
Of the family that was targeted by anti-Trump protestors , four children were left feeling the lingering effects of the pepper spray .
A man told Fox anonymously that his family was driving along Fifth Avenue in a car draped with Trump flags with its windows down .
That ’ s when the man said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sprayed everyone , including the four children , with the pepper spray .
“ Immediately the kids started crying and screaming and I jumped out of the car after I was peppered [ sic ] sprayed as well , ” he told Fox News .
The reported attacker was arrested when the man who was interviewed by Fox said he got out of the car , only to be further pursued on foot by a person who allegedly released the chemical irritant on the family and children .
An officer reportedly detained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man said the children “ are now left traumatized ” and “ coughing ” from the pepper spray they were exposed to in the unprovoked attack .
The family hit with the chemical irritant were not the only members of the city ’ s pro-Trump Jewish community targeted by violence Sunday .
Several hundred cars adorning “ Trump 2020 ” flags took part in the mobile rally , which began in the Coney Island neighborhood , and stopped at Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue .
One such caravan was led by former New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ car was targeted by a mob of demonstrators .
The rally eventually headed to a park in Brooklyn .
Multiple videos posted to social media show that those who partook in the Trump rally were attacked with rocks and other projectiles throughout the event , while some were targeted on the Brooklyn Bridge by a man who was punching car windows .
In all , the NYPD told Fox that “ 11 people were taken into custody ” following the attacks on the Jews for Trump rally-goers .
Of those arrested , six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of government administration and harassment .
Another individual faces a charge of assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest .
Thirteen Orthodox Jewish rabbis endorsed Trump ’ s re-election bid in a letter on Sunday .
The community has been targeted in recent weeks by city and state officials over religious gatherings , leading to accusations that Democratic officials such as Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov .
Andrew Cuomo are engaging in anti-Semitism .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A pro-Trump rally in New York City held by members of the Jewish community was attacked throughout Sunday by protestors, leaving children suffering after being assaulted with pepper spray.
A “Jews for Trump” vehicle rally was organized by an adviser to the Trump campaign, Boris Epshteyn.
He is also the co-chair of Jewish Voices for Trump.
But rather than being allowed to take part in a peaceful showing of support for the president, the already embattled Orthodox Jewish community was assaulted in areas from Manhattan to Brooklyn.
WARNING: The following contains videos that some viewers may find offensive:
More from brawl in Manhattan when anti-Trump protesters attack #JewsForTrump vehicle convoy pic.twitter.com/KUPratW4Mf — NYC Scanner (@NYScanner) October 25, 2020
Fox News reported a family of seven was pepper-sprayed while participating in the peaceful rally.
Of the family that was targeted by anti-Trump protestors, four children were left feeling the lingering effects of the pepper spray.
Do you think New York City Democrats have an anti-Semitism problem? 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% (428 Votes) No: 1% (3 Votes)
A man told Fox anonymously that his family was driving along Fifth Avenue in a car draped with Trump flags with its windows down.
That’s when the man said another car pulled up alongside his family and sprayed everyone, including the four children, with the pepper spray.
“Immediately the kids started crying and screaming and I jumped out of the car after I was peppered [sic] sprayed as well,” he told Fox News.
The reported attacker was arrested when the man who was interviewed by Fox said he got out of the car, only to be further pursued on foot by a person who allegedly released the chemical irritant on the family and children.
An officer reportedly detained and arrested the alleged attacker.
Woman arrested for spraying pepper spray at the #JewsForTrump vehicle convoy on 5 Avenue in Manhattan. pic.twitter.com/kfrwaLTJgT — NYC Scanner (@NYScanner) October 25, 2020
The man said the children “are now left traumatized” and “coughing” from the pepper spray they were exposed to in the unprovoked attack.
The family hit with the chemical irritant were not the only members of the city’s pro-Trump Jewish community targeted by violence Sunday.
Several hundred cars adorning “Trump 2020” flags took part in the mobile rally, which began in the Coney Island neighborhood, and stopped at Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue.
One such caravan was led by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, whose car was targeted by a mob of demonstrators.
Ruddy Giuliani just rode through NYC with Trump Caravan. Trump cars got egged and flags ripped up by BLM. ? By Scootercaster (FNTV) desk@scootercaster.com for licensing pic.twitter.com/9Knx0hAtSM — @SCOOTERCASTER (FNTV) (@ScooterCasterNY) October 25, 2020
The rally eventually headed to a park in Brooklyn.
Multiple videos posted to social media show that those who partook in the Trump rally were attacked with rocks and other projectiles throughout the event, while some were targeted on the Brooklyn Bridge by a man who was punching car windows.
This man is so upset that a #JewsForTrump vehicle convoy practically shut down the Brooklyn Bridge while heading to Manhattan, that he began punching vehicles. @NYPDnews @realDonaldTrump @TrumpWarRoom pic.twitter.com/6kSZKUoa0F — NYC Scanner (@NYScanner) October 25, 2020
Eggs thrown on #JewsForTrump vehicle convoy in Brooklyn pic.twitter.com/IvMC4uGXKN — NYC Scanner (@NYScanner) October 25, 2020
In all, the NYPD told Fox that “11 people were taken into custody” following the attacks on the Jews for Trump rally-goers.
Of those arrested, six were charged with disorderly conduct, obstruction of government administration and harassment.
Another individual faces a charge of assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest.
Thirteen Orthodox Jewish rabbis endorsed Trump’s re-election bid in a letter on Sunday.
The community has been targeted in recent weeks by city and state officials over religious gatherings, leading to accusations that Democratic officials such as Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov. Andrew Cuomo are engaging in anti-Semitism.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-10-26--Man Accidentally Wins $2 Million Lottery Prize After Purchasing Extra Ticket

Most minor mix-ups happen in daily life with few consequences .
We buy the wrong item at the store , accidentally buy a duplicate or the wrong size and lose a few bucks at most .
But one man from Dearborn Heights , Michigan , made a small mistake that paid off big in a way no one could have predicted .
Samir Mazahem picked the five winning numbers for the drawing that took place on June 9 .
The 56-year-old chose 01-05-09-10-23 online when buying his Mega Millions ticket .
As often happens with online ordering , Mazahem accidentally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series when he went back to check on his numbers .
TRENDING : Big Tech CEO Emails All 10 Million Customers Warning a Vote for Trump Is a 'Vote Against Democracy' Mazahem told the Michigan Lottery what caused the mix-up .
“ I went online and bought a ticket using numbers that are family birthdays , ” he said .
“ I forgot to save the numbers as favorites in the app , so I went back in and set them up as favorites so I could easily play them in the future.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ realize , is that meant I would be buying a second ticket with the same numbers .
Once I figured out I had bought two tickets with identical numbers , I was a little bummed but didn ’ t think much about it.
” In most cases , buying two tickets with the same numbers would decrease the likelihood of a win — but it worked out quite well for Mazahem .
“ I recently logged into the app to check on some tickets I had bought , and that is when I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prizes pending , ” he explained .
“ Saying that I was stunned is an understatement.
” “ I couldn ’ t believe it was real .
It took several days for the reality to set in that my mistake had paid off to the tune of $ 2 million !
” RELATED : He Splits $ 22 Million with Best Friend After Winning Lottery , Keeping Promise Made 20+ Years Ago His initial win would have netted him a nice sum , but because each ticket was worth $ 1 million , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Winning is exciting and gives me some comfort knowing that when I retire , I will have money in the bank , ” he said .
According to Michigan Lottery , Mazahem went in-person to the headquarters to claim his money .
They said he plans to purchase a house and put the rest in savings .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Most minor mix-ups happen in daily life with few consequences. We buy the wrong item at the store, accidentally buy a duplicate or the wrong size and lose a few bucks at most.
But one man from Dearborn Heights, Michigan, made a small mistake that paid off big in a way no one could have predicted.
Samir Mazahem picked the five winning numbers for the drawing that took place on June 9. The 56-year-old chose 01-05-09-10-23 online when buying his Mega Millions ticket.
As often happens with online ordering, Mazahem accidentally purchased another ticket with the same number series when he went back to check on his numbers.
Mazahem told the Michigan Lottery what caused the mix-up.
“I went online and bought a ticket using numbers that are family birthdays,” he said.
“I forgot to save the numbers as favorites in the app, so I went back in and set them up as favorites so I could easily play them in the future.”
“What I didn’t realize, is that meant I would be buying a second ticket with the same numbers. Once I figured out I had bought two tickets with identical numbers, I was a little bummed but didn’t think much about it.”
In most cases, buying two tickets with the same numbers would decrease the likelihood of a win — but it worked out quite well for Mazahem.
“I recently logged into the app to check on some tickets I had bought, and that is when I saw I had two $1 million prizes pending,” he explained.
“Saying that I was stunned is an understatement.”
“I couldn’t believe it was real. It took several days for the reality to set in that my mistake had paid off to the tune of $2 million!”
His initial win would have netted him a nice sum, but because each ticket was worth $1 million, he made off with double the win.
“Winning is exciting and gives me some comfort knowing that when I retire, I will have money in the bank,” he said.
According to Michigan Lottery, Mazahem went in-person to the headquarters to claim his money. They said he plans to purchase a house and put the rest in savings.
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.