westernjournal--2020-09-22--First Four Facts You Should Know About Barbara Lagoa

With the recent death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , it is now up to President Donald Trump to find a replacement to fill her seat .
In the past few days , Trump has narrowed down the list of potential nominees to a select few names .
Near the top of that list is Judge Barbara Lagoa .
Here are the first four facts you need to know about her : Much like the late Justice Antonin Scalia , Lagoa is a champion of reading the Constitution as the Founders intended it .
TRENDING : Schiff Accused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Still Accepts 'Whistleblower ' Complaint from Him After a recent vote , Lagoa explained her commitment to upholding the Constitution and what role she felt the judicial system should play in the American government .
“ Our role in the constitutional system is simply to review that step for compliance with the Constitution , not to lengthen its stride .
To proceed otherwise would violate the principles of federalism and separation of powers — the two structural guarantors of individual rights and liberty in our Constitution , ” Lagoa wrote , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizens of the State of Florida and their elected state legislators , not to federal judges , to make any additional changes to it.
” One of the main reasons Lagoa has rocketed up Trump ’ s list of potential nominees is her popularity in Florida .
Veteran Democratic pollster and consultant Fernand Amandi noted in an interview with Politico that a Lagoa nomination may go a long way in helping Trump come November .
“ It ’ s a play for women , Hispanics and most importantly , Florida ’ s 29 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Barbara Lagoa is the conservative Cuban version of Sonia Sotomayor.
” The proud Cuban heritage of Lagoa is one of the many reasons she has become so popular in Florida .
RELATED : The Topics for the First Presidential Debate Have Been Revealed Lagoa often references this heritage and has noted on multiple occasions how it has influenced her view of the judicial system .
“ If we are not bound by what the Constitution means and it is ever-changing , then we are no different than the country that my parents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Because Cuba has a constitution and a bill of rights and it means nothing , ” Lagoa said during testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee , according to CNN .
Lagoa was confirmed to her appeals court post in an 80-15 vote in November 2019 .
This was due to a significant amount of bipartisan support , including from Democratic Sens .
Dianne Feinstein of California , Chris Coons of Delaware and Joe Manchin of West Virginia , according to Fox News .
Some Republicans view the bipartisan support for Lagoa as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ principled , originalist approach to reading the Constitution , it is likely nothing to worry about .
The support from Democrats will likely dissipate if Lagoa is nominated by Trump .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

With the recent death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it is now up to President Donald Trump to find a replacement to fill her seat.
In the past few days, Trump has narrowed down the list of potential nominees to a select few names.
Near the top of that list is Judge Barbara Lagoa.
Here are the first four facts you need to know about her:
Originalist
Much like the late Justice Antonin Scalia, Lagoa is a champion of reading the Constitution as the Founders intended it.
After a recent vote, Lagoa explained her commitment to upholding the Constitution and what role she felt the judicial system should play in the American government.
“Our role in the constitutional system is simply to review that step for compliance with the Constitution, not to lengthen its stride. To proceed otherwise would violate the principles of federalism and separation of powers — the two structural guarantors of individual rights and liberty in our Constitution,” Lagoa wrote, according to CNN.
“It falls to the citizens of the State of Florida and their elected state legislators, not to federal judges, to make any additional changes to it.”
Popular Florida Judge
One of the main reasons Lagoa has rocketed up Trump’s list of potential nominees is her popularity in Florida.
Veteran Democratic pollster and consultant Fernand Amandi noted in an interview with Politico that a Lagoa nomination may go a long way in helping Trump come November.
“It’s a play for women, Hispanics and most importantly, Florida’s 29 Electoral votes,” Amandi said.
“Barbara Lagoa is the conservative Cuban version of Sonia Sotomayor.”
Cuban-American
The proud Cuban heritage of Lagoa is one of the many reasons she has become so popular in Florida.
Lagoa often references this heritage and has noted on multiple occasions how it has influenced her view of the judicial system.
“If we are not bound by what the Constitution means and it is ever-changing, then we are no different than the country that my parents fled from, which is Cuba.
“Because Cuba has a constitution and a bill of rights and it means nothing,” Lagoa said during testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to CNN.
Garnered Bipartisan Support
Lagoa was confirmed to her appeals court post in an 80-15 vote in November 2019.
This was due to a significant amount of bipartisan support, including from Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Chris Coons of Delaware and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, according to Fox News.
Some Republicans view the bipartisan support for Lagoa as a red flag, but given her principled, originalist approach to reading the Constitution, it is likely nothing to worry about.
The support from Democrats will likely dissipate if Lagoa is nominated by 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--2020-09-22--Video: Trump Sanctions on Chinese Slave Labor Could Cost China $250M

Clinton , Biden , and Schumer All Push To Wait for Election Before SCOTUS Nom , But What Did They @ @ @ @

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


westernjournal--2020-09-22--Video: Op-Ed – I Took a Road Trip Through Blue-State America; What I Found May Surprise You


westernjournal--2020-09-22--Video: Listen – Professor Busted for Urging Students Not To Vote for Trump


westernjournal--2020-09-22--Video: AOC Calls for Left To ‘Radicalize’ After RBG’s Death – ‘We Can, and Must, Fight’


westernjournal--2020-09-22--Video: Measure Targeting Rising Anti-Semitism Opposed by Majority of House Democrats


westernjournal--2020-09-23--Op-Ed: Biden’s Plan for Peace in the Middle East Is To Copy Trump’s Plan

It ’ s not easy to give credit where credit is due .
Especially if the one giving the credit is a Democrat , and the one deserving of the commendation is President Trump .
Immediately after Trump brokered peace deals between Israel and two Arab states — Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates — it was almost predictable , comical even , to watch the establishment media launch into spin-mode while the president ’ s arch-enemies put on their Scrooge hats and downplayed the achievement .
When the pacts between the three countries were signed on Sept. 15 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feat , acknowledging the accomplishment but quickly adding that the agreements didn ’ t address the rift between Israel and Palestine .
So , the deals were pretty good , but not that good .
TRENDING : Watch : GOP Candidate Klacik Gets Kicked Off of 'The View ' for Calling Out Behar 's Blackface Scandal As for the Scrooges , there were plenty .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shrugged off Trump ’ s achievement as a mere “ distraction ” during the coronavirus pandemic .
Pelosi also reminded everyone that Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israel and the Palestinians – seems like that ’ s becoming a talking point among Democrats .
Human rights attorney Noura Erakat called the deals with Bahrain and the UAE a “ charade ” that will “ suppress struggles for freedom.
” How so ?
By normalizing relations between the countries and improving the chance for widespread peace in the region ?
That doesn ’ t sound too oppressive to me .
As the first piece of the deal fell into place on Aug. 13 when the UAE came on board , Ben @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barack Obama , dismissed the achievement as something that was trending to happen anyway .
At the same time , Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan did what she does best – agitate – and pronounced that “ we won ’ t be fooled ” by the deal as it will only contribute to Palestinian suffering .
During her report on NBC News , chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell said the agreements open the door for trade , travel and tourism , but… “ It is not Middle East peace.
” That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and tourism between countries sound like pretty peaceful concepts to me .
RELATED : David Harsanyi : Trump 's Middle East Peace Deals May Signal the Arab World 's Break from Palestine Still , the significance of the pact , dubbed the Abraham Accords , was so monumental that even those who despise Trump at every turn had no choice but to pat the president on the back .
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the deal “ welcome news ” and added that such an agreement between Israel and the Arab nations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must ’ ve made Schumer squirm to have no other choice but to praise Trump .
But I don ’ t think he was as uncomfortable as presidential nominee Joe Biden , who said it was “ good to see ” Israel be recognized by other countries in the Middle East .
Biden stayed in his comfort zone by issuing his remarks through a prepared statement , presumably from the comfort of his own basement .
Still , the statement contained the same awkwardness that routinely permeates Biden ’ s infrequent public appearances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ build on these steps , challenge other nations to keep pace , and work to leverage these growing ties into progress toward a two-state solution and a more stable , peaceful region.
” Essentially , in a wordy way , Biden admitted he would follow Trump ’ s lead toward achieving peace in the Middle East .
Rather than offer details about a plan of his own , Biden admitted he would follow Trump ’ s path for Middle East peace .
But what ’ s truly important in all of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critics , or even Republicans , think about the peace deal .
The bigger question is what does it mean for the average American ?
For those parents who have a son or daughter signing up for a career in the military , how much better would they feel about the decision knowing the Middle East was at peace ?
No longer do we need to send troops and fight endless wars in the desert as stability replaces bloodshed in the Middle East .
While the Abraham Accords don ’ t include a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as so many Democrats have eagerly pointed out – the pact does lay the groundwork for more Arab nations to get on board .
And as they do , the pressure on Palestine to follow will increase as more countries come together with Israel .
While some continue to balk at giving Trump credit for the peace deals – which were the first since Jordan recognized Israel in 1994 , following Egypt in 1979 – consider this key development that occurred well before the Abraham Accords .
In 2018 , the U.S. became @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world , making us energy independent .
We don ’ t need Middle East oil anymore , and as a result those nations have lost quite a bit of leverage in dealing with the U.S .
If Middle Eastern countries want to stay in our good graces , they need to do things that please us .
Lowering oil prices won ’ t cut it anymore , but signing peace deals with Israel would surely suffice .
Energy independence means the leverage has swung to America ’ s side , and that allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Accords for the true benefits of peace , and not the oil .
There ’ s no ulterior motive , and that ’ s what makes the latest Middle East peace deals so genuine .
And for that , all the credit goes to Trump .
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal , you can learn about our submission guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s not easy to give credit where credit is due.
Especially if the one giving the credit is a Democrat, and the one deserving of the commendation is President Trump.
Immediately after Trump brokered peace deals between Israel and two Arab states — Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates — it was almost predictable, comical even, to watch the establishment media launch into spin-mode while the president’s arch-enemies put on their Scrooge hats and downplayed the achievement.
When the pacts between the three countries were signed on Sept. 15, The Associated Press reluctantly reported the historic feat, acknowledging the accomplishment but quickly adding that the agreements didn’t address the rift between Israel and Palestine.
So, the deals were pretty good, but not that good.
That’s the spin.
As for the Scrooges, there were plenty.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shrugged off Trump’s achievement as a mere “distraction” during the coronavirus pandemic. Pelosi also reminded everyone that Trump has yet to broker a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians – seems like that’s becoming a talking point among Democrats.
Do you think Joe Biden will try to take credit for Trump's peace deals if he is elected president? 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% (213 Votes) No: 1% (2 Votes)
Human rights attorney Noura Erakat called the deals with Bahrain and the UAE a “charade” that will “suppress struggles for freedom.”
How so? By normalizing relations between the countries and improving the chance for widespread peace in the region? That doesn’t sound too oppressive to me.
As the first piece of the deal fell into place on Aug. 13 when the UAE came on board, Ben Rhodes, a former adviser to President Barack Obama, dismissed the achievement as something that was trending to happen anyway.
At the same time, Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan did what she does best – agitate – and pronounced that “we won’t be fooled” by the deal as it will only contribute to Palestinian suffering.
During her report on NBC News, chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell said the agreements open the door for trade, travel and tourism, but… “It is not Middle East peace.”
That’s funny. Trade, travel and tourism between countries sound like pretty peaceful concepts to me.
Still, the significance of the pact, dubbed the Abraham Accords, was so monumental that even those who despise Trump at every turn had no choice but to pat the president on the back.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the deal “welcome news” and added that such an agreement between Israel and the Arab nations was “long past due.”
It must’ve made Schumer squirm to have no other choice but to praise Trump.
But I don’t think he was as uncomfortable as presidential nominee Joe Biden, who said it was “good to see” Israel be recognized by other countries in the Middle East.
Biden stayed in his comfort zone by issuing his remarks through a prepared statement, presumably from the comfort of his own basement. Still, the statement contained the same awkwardness that routinely permeates Biden’s infrequent public appearances.
Biden further said his administration would “build on these steps, challenge other nations to keep pace, and work to leverage these growing ties into progress toward a two-state solution and a more stable, peaceful region.”
Essentially, in a wordy way, Biden admitted he would follow Trump’s lead toward achieving peace in the Middle East. Rather than offer details about a plan of his own, Biden admitted he would follow Trump’s path for Middle East peace.
Strange.
But what’s truly important in all of this isn’t what Trump’s critics, or even Republicans, think about the peace deal.
The bigger question is what does it mean for the average American?
The answer speaks volumes.
For those parents who have a son or daughter signing up for a career in the military, how much better would they feel about the decision knowing the Middle East was at peace?
No longer do we need to send troops and fight endless wars in the desert as stability replaces bloodshed in the Middle East.
While the Abraham Accords don’t include a peace deal between Palestine and Israel – as so many Democrats have eagerly pointed out – the pact does lay the groundwork for more Arab nations to get on board.
And as they do, the pressure on Palestine to follow will increase as more countries come together with Israel.
While some continue to balk at giving Trump credit for the peace deals – which were the first since Jordan recognized Israel in 1994, following Egypt in 1979 – consider this key development that occurred well before the Abraham Accords.
In 2018, the U.S. became the largest producer of oil in the world, making us energy independent. We don’t need Middle East oil anymore, and as a result those nations have lost quite a bit of leverage in dealing with the U.S.
If Middle Eastern countries want to stay in our good graces, they need to do things that please us. Lowering oil prices won’t cut it anymore, but signing peace deals with Israel would surely suffice.
Energy independence means the leverage has swung to America’s side, and that allows Trump to broker deals like the Abraham Accords for the true benefits of peace, and not the oil.
There’s no ulterior motive, and that’s what makes the latest Middle East peace deals so genuine.
And for that, all the credit goes to Trump.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
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--2020-09-24--Op-Ed: Christians Can’t ‘Mind Their Own Business’ Anymore – They Have To Take a Stand

The United States has reached a pivotal point in its history as the assault on the ideals of faith , freedom , liberty and American exceptionalism has grown into a blitzkrieg .
Rioters are burning down cities while demanding that the very foundations of this country be stripped away in favor of Marxist intersectionality .
While social media dialogues are dramatic , a lack of action displays an apathy on part of American citizens and , sadly , many in the church .
Despite what many might think , it is not the historical position of Christians to disengage from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christians have understood that while this temporal world is not our home , it is our mission field and we must seek the welfare of our nation .
In America ’ s infancy , Christians such as John Clarke , Roger Williams and Isaac Backus were champions of religious liberty and were integral in the formation of the First Amendment .
These men knew not only the tyranny of European state-run churches but also the limited religious freedoms that had been allowed in colonial America .
They recognized the importance of religious liberty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GOP Candidate Klacik Gets Kicked Off of 'The View ' for Calling Out Behar 's Blackface Scandal Whether it be the establishment of this nation or the abolition of slavery , Christians , and those subscribing to a Judeo-Christian worldview , have been at the forefront of American political movements ; to purport otherwise is not supported by history .
In the 1950s , conservatism had been all but erased from the political and intellectual arenas .
Facing the march of the progressive movement were those such as William F. Buckley , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incongruous with a Judeo-Christian worldview and the utopian pipe dreams of socialism were incompatible with reality .
Buckley never shied away from the fray but charged onto the political scene with boldness .
He actively engaged with the left and was able to articulate the principles of conservatism with remarkable intellect and eloquence .
The left may preach tolerance , but as Buckley said , “ liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views , but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.
” Buckley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal media monopoly and was one of the most significant conservatives of his time .
His influence helped to sway Ronald Reagan , once a liberal , to conservatism and was a great influence on radio host Rush Limbaugh , who is heard by tens of millions of people every day .
In the 1970s , theologian Francis Schaeffer was deeply troubled by the state of Western culture and American politics .
In his books “ A Christian Manifesto ” and “ How Should We Then Live , ” Schaeffer argued that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond their private spiritual practice but extended to all facets of life , including politics .
He called for Christians to awaken to the decline of Western society evidenced by events such as Roe v. Wade , which Schaeffer argued was indicative of the church ’ s detachment from societal issues .
It was unthinkable to Schaeffer that Christians could allow the murderous practice of abortion to go unchallenged and exhorted them to take an active interest in the political process .
Jerry Falwell Sr. also stepped into the political sphere in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the church and politics must be separate .
In addition to founding Liberty University in 1971 , Falwell founded the Moral Majority in 1979 .
The Moral Majority was made up of millions who were concerned about the state of American society and politics , and lobbied for Christian values in government .
Falwell and the Moral Majority ’ s influence helped to elect Ronald Reagan to two consecutive terms in the 1980s .
RELATED : Dennis Prager : I Used To Think the Left 's Moral Compass Was Broken - Now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the First Place It is time for more Christians to stand up and enter the political arena .
The temptation to disengage and try to simply “ mind your own business ” is understandable , but it must be resisted .
Many Christians fear the intolerance of the left as they have seen countless conservatives “ canceled , ” “ doxxed ” and attacked .
They ’ ve come to believe that if they don ’ t get involved , they will be left alone .
Unfortunately , hiding only encourages and emboldens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They may preach tolerance , but they desire no such thing .
People are limitedly sovereign agents who must have the ability to make their own choices regarding their faith and worldview .
We can not force Christianity on anyone else , nor should anyone else ’ s views be forced upon us .
It is critical that Christians take an active interest in politics and in the civic education of our children and youth .
We must speak up for the truth , we must vote , and we must pray @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You can not choose to “ stay out of it ” thinking you can live a quiet life while the authoritarianism of the left is on the move .
We are amid a spiritual war for the future of our country .
It is time for Christians to march out to meet the challenge .
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western @ @ @ @ @ @ @ submission guidelines and process here .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The United States has reached a pivotal point in its history as the assault on the ideals of faith, freedom, liberty and American exceptionalism has grown into a blitzkrieg.
Rioters are burning down cities while demanding that the very foundations of this country be stripped away in favor of Marxist intersectionality. While social media dialogues are dramatic, a lack of action displays an apathy on part of American citizens and, sadly, many in the church.
Despite what many might think, it is not the historical position of Christians to disengage from the political process.
For centuries, Christians have understood that while this temporal world is not our home, it is our mission field and we must seek the welfare of our nation. In America’s infancy, Christians such as John Clarke, Roger Williams and Isaac Backus were champions of religious liberty and were integral in the formation of the First Amendment.
These men knew not only the tyranny of European state-run churches but also the limited religious freedoms that had been allowed in colonial America. They recognized the importance of religious liberty for all.
Whether it be the establishment of this nation or the abolition of slavery, Christians, and those subscribing to a Judeo-Christian worldview, have been at the forefront of American political movements; to purport otherwise is not supported by history.
In the 1950s, conservatism had been all but erased from the political and intellectual arenas. Facing the march of the progressive movement were those such as William F. Buckley, a devout Catholic who knew that leftism was incongruous with a Judeo-Christian worldview and the utopian pipe dreams of socialism were incompatible with reality.
Buckley never shied away from the fray but charged onto the political scene with boldness. He actively engaged with the left and was able to articulate the principles of conservatism with remarkable intellect and eloquence.
The left may preach tolerance, but as Buckley said, “liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Buckley founded National Review to further combat the liberal media monopoly and was one of the most significant conservatives of his time.
Do you think it's time for Christians to take a stand for truth? 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% (435 Votes) No: 0% (2 Votes)
His influence helped to sway Ronald Reagan, once a liberal, to conservatism and was a great influence on radio host Rush Limbaugh, who is heard by tens of millions of people every day.
In the 1970s, theologian Francis Schaeffer was deeply troubled by the state of Western culture and American politics. In his books “A Christian Manifesto” and “How Should We Then Live,” Schaeffer argued that a Christian’s devotion to Christ went beyond their private spiritual practice but extended to all facets of life, including politics.
He called for Christians to awaken to the decline of Western society evidenced by events such as Roe v. Wade, which Schaeffer argued was indicative of the church’s detachment from societal issues. It was unthinkable to Schaeffer that Christians could allow the murderous practice of abortion to go unchallenged and exhorted them to take an active interest in the political process.
Jerry Falwell Sr. also stepped into the political sphere in the 1970s, despite many contemporaries who said that the church and politics must be separate.
In addition to founding Liberty University in 1971, Falwell founded the Moral Majority in 1979. The Moral Majority was made up of millions who were concerned about the state of American society and politics, and lobbied for Christian values in government. Falwell and the Moral Majority’s influence helped to elect Ronald Reagan to two consecutive terms in the 1980s.
It is time for more Christians to stand up and enter the political arena.
The temptation to disengage and try to simply “mind your own business” is understandable, but it must be resisted.
Many Christians fear the intolerance of the left as they have seen countless conservatives “canceled,” “doxxed” and attacked. They’ve come to believe that if they don’t get involved, they will be left alone.
Unfortunately, hiding only encourages and emboldens the left to use tactics of intimidation. They may preach tolerance, but they desire no such thing. People are limitedly sovereign agents who must have the ability to make their own choices regarding their faith and worldview.
We cannot force Christianity on anyone else, nor should anyone else’s views be forced upon us. It is critical that Christians take an active interest in politics and in the civic education of our children and youth.
We must speak up for the truth, we must vote, and we must pray for our nation and our leaders. You cannot choose to “stay out of it” thinking you can live a quiet life while the authoritarianism of the left is on the move.
We are amid a spiritual war for the future of our country. It is time for Christians to march out to meet the challenge.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
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--2020-09-24--WWE Hall of Famer Joe Laurinaitis Dead at Age 60

Joe Laurinaitis , known as Road Warrior Animal , passed away on Tuesday .
He was 60 years old .
According to TMZ , he died of natural causes while visiting Tan-Tar-A Resort located in Osage Beach , Missouri .
His wife called for help , but he was declared dead by the time first responders arrived .
Laurinaitis was born and raised in Chicago .
After moving to Minneapolis , he started training with Michael “ Hawk ” Hegstrand , eventually joining the WWE in 1990 .
TRENDING : Watch : GOP Candidate Klacik Gets Kicked Off of 'The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blackface Scandal Laurinaitis and Hegstrand made up the “ Road Warriors , ” one of the most successful tag teams in wrestling history , winning multiple World Tag Team Titles .
While they made an impact as The Road Warriors/Legion of Doom , their friendship and tag-team domination ended in 2003 with Hegstrand ’ s death after he experienced a heart attack .
Laurinaitis ’ passing was confirmed on his Twitter account on Wednesday .
“ At this time , we would like to confirm the passing of Joseph Laurinaitis aka Road Warrior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the tweet read .
“ The family is planning to release a statement later today .
At this time we ask for you to keep everyone in your thoughts and prayers.
” The WWE soon followed up with a tweet responding to the news , and other wrestlers have also taken to social media to honor his legacy .
“ WWE is saddened to learn that Joe Laurinaitis , known to WWE fans as Road Warrior Animal , has passed away , ” the WWE posted .
“ WWE extends its condolences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fans.
” The Iron Sheik also tweeted his goodbye .
“ MY ROAD WARRIOR ANIMAL BROTHER , ” he wrote .
“ YOU WERE MOST OVER TAG TEAM EVER .
WE HAVE THE BEST TIME IN THE MINNESOTA FOREVER I LOVE YOU .
RIP BUBBA.
” “ RIP Animal , ” Hulk Hogan shared , “ love you my brother , I know you and Hawk have a lot of unfinished business to take care of !
” “ God speed and blessings to your beautiful family , one love4Life.
” We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Joe Laurinaitis, known as Road Warrior Animal, passed away on Tuesday. He was 60 years old.
According to TMZ, he died of natural causes while visiting Tan-Tar-A Resort located in Osage Beach, Missouri. His wife called for help, but he was declared dead by the time first responders arrived.
Laurinaitis was born and raised in Chicago. After moving to Minneapolis, he started training with Michael “Hawk” Hegstrand, eventually joining the WWE in 1990.
Laurinaitis and Hegstrand made up the “Road Warriors,” one of the most successful tag teams in wrestling history, winning multiple World Tag Team Titles.
While they made an impact as The Road Warriors/Legion of Doom, their friendship and tag-team domination ended in 2003 with Hegstrand’s death after he experienced a heart attack.
Laurinaitis’ passing was confirmed on his Twitter account on Wednesday.
“At this time, we would like to confirm the passing of Joseph Laurinaitis aka Road Warrior Animal at the age of 60,” the tweet read.
“The family is planning to release a statement later today. At this time we ask for you to keep everyone in your thoughts and prayers.”
At this time, we would like to confirm the passing of Joseph Laurinaitis aka Road Warrior Animal at the age of 60. The family is planning to release a statement later today. At this time we ask for you to keep everyone in your thoughts and prayers. #OhWhatARush — RoadWarriorAnimal (@RWAnimal) September 23, 2020
The WWE soon followed up with a tweet responding to the news, and other wrestlers have also taken to social media to honor his legacy.
“WWE is saddened to learn that Joe Laurinaitis, known to WWE fans as Road Warrior Animal, has passed away,” the WWE posted.
“WWE extends its condolences to Laurinaitis’ family, friends and fans.”
WWE is saddened to learn that Joe Laurinaitis, known to WWE fans as Road Warrior Animal, has passed away. WWE extends its condolences to Laurinaitis’ family, friends and fans. https://t.co/hurorEDVff — WWE (@WWE) September 23, 2020
The Iron Sheik also tweeted his goodbye.
“MY ROAD WARRIOR ANIMAL BROTHER,” he wrote. “YOU WERE MOST OVER TAG TEAM EVER. WE HAVE THE BEST TIME IN THE MINNESOTA FOREVER I LOVE YOU. RIP BUBBA.”
“RIP Animal,” Hulk Hogan shared, “love you my brother, I know you and Hawk have a lot of unfinished business to take care of!”
RIP Animal,love you my brother, I know you and Hawk have a lot of unfinished business to take care of! God speed and blessings to your beautiful family,one love4Life. HH — Hulk Hogan (@HulkHogan) September 23, 2020
“God speed and blessings to your beautiful family, one love4Life.”
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--2020-09-24--Video Shows BLM Protesters Segregating by Race and Gender

Protests broke out in Louisville , Kentucky , Wednesday after no murder charges were announced following a grand jury investigation into the police shooting death of Breonna Taylor .
But based on video footage from reporter Brendan Gutenschwager , who appears to be on the ground in Louisville , some demonstrators seem to be segregating themselves along racial and gender lines .
A video tweeted by Gutenschwager shows Black Lives Matter protestors ordered by a man with a megaphone to allow preference for black women to protest out in front of white and male demonstrators .
The video showed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Listen , no one is to cross in front of the black women .
No one.
” “ Everybody keep a steady pace , no one crosses in front of the black women , ” the man added .
Gutenschwager reported that the protesters were segregated by race and gender , with black women in the front , followed by black men .
Others protesting were reportedly required to stay in the back .
Taylor , 26 , was a black woman who was killed in Louisville by a police officer during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residence was suspected of being used for drug activity on March 13 .
Shots were fired , injuring an officer , and Sgt .
Jonathan Mattingly and Det .
Myles Cosgrove returned fire .
FBI ballistics analysis showed Cosgrove fired the shot that killed Taylor .
Officer Brett Hankison discharged his weapon 10 times , The Washington Post reported , and was indicted on three charges of wanton endangerment Wednesday .
The officer was fired from the department in June .
The charges Wednesday fell short of what demonstrators sought for the officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To Strip Funding from Police After 'Ferocious ' Pressure from BLM The situation in downtown Louisville began heating up immediately after the grand jury decided not to recommend murder charges .
The National Guard has been activated in the city .
The city began bracing for violence this week as the grand jury decision was awaited .
The LMPD issued an emergency declaration on Monday and began putting up vehicle barricades around downtown Louisville , according to The Hill .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
@ @ @ @ @

Protests broke out in Louisville, Kentucky, Wednesday after no murder charges were announced following a grand jury investigation into the police shooting death of Breonna Taylor.
But based on video footage from reporter Brendan Gutenschwager, who appears to be on the ground in Louisville, some demonstrators seem to be segregating themselves along racial and gender lines.
A video tweeted by Gutenschwager shows Black Lives Matter protestors ordered by a man with a megaphone to allow preference for black women to protest out in front of white and male demonstrators.
“No one is to cross in front of the Black women” Protesters have grouped the front lines by race and gender, with a line of Black women, followed by a line of Black men, followed by everyone else #Louisville #BLM #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/rdWsxBFWFm — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) September 23, 2020
The video showed the man ordering into a megaphone, “Listen, no one is to cross in front of the black women. No one.”
“Everybody keep a steady pace, no one crosses in front of the black women,” the man added.
Gutenschwager reported that the protesters were segregated by race and gender, with black women in the front, followed by black men.
Others protesting were reportedly required to stay in the back.
Do you agree with the grand jury's decision to indict Hankison? 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: 50% (132 Votes) No: 50% (133 Votes)
Taylor, 26, was a black woman who was killed in Louisville by a police officer during the service of a no-knock warrant after her residence was suspected of being used for drug activity on March 13.
Shots were fired, injuring an officer, and Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and Det. Myles Cosgrove returned fire. FBI ballistics analysis showed Cosgrove fired the shot that killed Taylor.
Officer Brett Hankison discharged his weapon 10 times, The Washington Post reported, and was indicted on three charges of wanton endangerment Wednesday.
The officer was fired from the department in June.
The charges Wednesday fell short of what demonstrators sought for the officers.
The situation in downtown Louisville began heating up immediately after the grand jury decided not to recommend murder charges.
Protesters have organized a full front line now as they move through the streets #Louisville #BreonnaTaylor pic.twitter.com/WHmiwVM2DU — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) September 23, 2020
The National Guard has been activated in the city.
The city began bracing for violence this week as the grand jury decision was awaited.
This is Louisville today. They shut the city down as we await the decision on holding the officers who murdered Breonna Taylor accountable.
Closed government buildings and boarded them up.
Shut down gas stations.
Barricaded the roads.
This can only mean one thing. pic.twitter.com/SHNzGJLCOJ — Laura Christie ✊? (@Laura_Christie3) September 22, 2020
The LMPD issued an emergency declaration on Monday and began putting up vehicle barricades around downtown Louisville, according to The Hill.
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--2020-09-23--Victor Davis Hanson: American ‘Experts’ Have Abandoned Common Sense – And We’re All Suffering for It

Without common sense in government , civilization can not continue .
After the summer protests and rioting in many large cities , activists demanded a defunding , or at least radical pullbacks , of the police .
So-called crime experts often concurred .
So some city governments ignored public warnings and diminished their police presence despite a sharp rise in crime in many cities .
Looting and arson were often ignored .
If you call 911 in a large American city , there is no guarantee that anyone will answer promptly and send out police to aid the endangered .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who never before owned weapons , or even opposed the use of firearms , are now terrified to remain unarmed .
Self-protection often outweighs abstract ideology .
According to a recent Gallup poll , most black Americans favor maintaining or increasing police presence .
Often , city officials who support cutting back on law enforcement still expect their own homes and property to be constantly policed .
The same is often true of activist elites who live far from the inner city .
Large swaths of the American West are now charred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many federal bureaucrats blame the conflagrations on climate change .
But those who actually live within forests , or on mountains and foothills , that are historically vulnerable to wildfires know that the epic droughts of 2013-2015 killed or dried out millions of acres of trees and vegetation .
Yet most of these decaying trees were never removed by authorities .
They now predictably provide the fuel for the current wildfire Armageddon .
A few veteran forest managers have been proverbial voices in the wilderness in recent years .
They warned that ignoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ domestic animal grazing that reduces dead brush and dry foliage , forbidding timber companies from harvesting decaying timber , and preventing periodic controlled burns were collectively a prescription for the very disasters that now cloud Western skies with fires , smoke and air pollution .
In other words , pragmatic people once understood that tens of millions of dead trees were not to be left alone as mulch for premodern ecosystems .
In the present , the dried-up vegetation has served as veritable napalm , causing traditional fall wildfires to blow up into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and people .
The public trust in science depends on its consistency , its transparency and its divorce from politics and ideology .
There can be no left or right , liberal or conservative , blue-state or red-state slant if scientific expertise is to be taken seriously .
Unfortunately , during the COVID-19 pandemic , the very opposite has sometimes occurred .
The World Health Organization initially swore that the virus was not transmissible by humans , did not warrant travel bans or mask-wearing , and was not a significant global threat .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the WHO an unscientific party line .
And its director then branded the propaganda with superficial scientific authority .
American experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other federal health agencies were often inconsistent on travel bans , testing , masks , quarantines and medical therapies , and intolerant of dissident medical research .
Authorities rarely could consistently explain to the public how the virus was spread ; why children , who were rarely stricken , were kept from attending school ; and whether quarantines were aimed at flattening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ altogether or just waiting out the virus .
RELATED : John Stossel : Stupid Government Policies , Not Climate Change , Are To Blame for Wildfires The elderly were rightly deemed the most vulnerable .
But then , inexplicably , they were often exposed to newly arriving infected patients in their long-term care facilities .
When millions of people hit the streets to protest the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police , many health care professionals ignored the supposedly dangerous mass meetings that they had earlier insisted were major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health professionals , sympathetic to protests , even signed an open letter declaring that social activism was , for the moment , more important than social distancing .
When supporters of President Donald Trump then went to open-air rallies , many medical experts suddenly called these assemblies dangerous to public health .
In truth , either both or neither types of public outings are dangerous .
For six months , experts have given the American public contradictory and weaponized election-year directives on masks , social distancing , lockdowns , school closures and workplace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health reveal the disasters that follow when common sense is ignored and ideology reigns .
Most Americans know that only the police can protect the vulnerable in times of social chaos .
Most people instinctively sense that when vast swaths of dead trees are not removed from dense forests , they will eventually serve as kindling for raging firestorms .
And when scientific expertise offers ever-changing , inconsistent and occasionally absurd public health advice , then people turn to their own instincts and innate common sense to protect themselves and their livelihoods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been failing America .
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal , you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Without common sense in government, civilization cannot continue.
After the summer protests and rioting in many large cities, activists demanded a defunding, or at least radical pullbacks, of the police. So-called crime experts often concurred. So some city governments ignored public warnings and diminished their police presence despite a sharp rise in crime in many cities. Looting and arson were often ignored.
If you call 911 in a large American city, there is no guarantee that anyone will answer promptly and send out police to aid the endangered. So gun sales have soared. Some people who never before owned weapons, or even opposed the use of firearms, are now terrified to remain unarmed. Self-protection often outweighs abstract ideology.
According to a recent Gallup poll, most black Americans favor maintaining or increasing police presence. Often, city officials who support cutting back on law enforcement still expect their own homes and property to be constantly policed. The same is often true of activist elites who live far from the inner city.
Large swaths of the American West are now charred by out-of-control wildfires. Some governors and many federal bureaucrats blame the conflagrations on climate change. But those who actually live within forests, or on mountains and foothills, that are historically vulnerable to wildfires know that the epic droughts of 2013-2015 killed or dried out millions of acres of trees and vegetation.
Yet most of these decaying trees were never removed by authorities. They now predictably provide the fuel for the current wildfire Armageddon.
A few veteran forest managers have been proverbial voices in the wilderness in recent years.
They warned that ignoring dead trees, limiting the sort of domestic animal grazing that reduces dead brush and dry foliage, forbidding timber companies from harvesting decaying timber, and preventing periodic controlled burns were collectively a prescription for the very disasters that now cloud Western skies with fires, smoke and air pollution.
In other words, pragmatic people once understood that tens of millions of dead trees were not to be left alone as mulch for premodern ecosystems. In the present, the dried-up vegetation has served as veritable napalm, causing traditional fall wildfires to blow up into biblical conflagrations that consume homes, property and people.
Do you think America's experts have led us astray? 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% (235 Votes) No: 1% (3 Votes)
The public trust in science depends on its consistency, its transparency and its divorce from politics and ideology. There can be no left or right, liberal or conservative, blue-state or red-state slant if scientific expertise is to be taken seriously.
Unfortunately, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the very opposite has sometimes occurred.
The World Health Organization initially swore that the virus was not transmissible by humans, did not warrant travel bans or mask-wearing, and was not a significant global threat. The organization’s Chinese patrons had given the WHO an unscientific party line. And its director then branded the propaganda with superficial scientific authority.
American experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other federal health agencies were often inconsistent on travel bans, testing, masks, quarantines and medical therapies, and intolerant of dissident medical research.
Authorities rarely could consistently explain to the public how the virus was spread; why children, who were rarely stricken, were kept from attending school; and whether quarantines were aimed at flattening the curve of infection, eliminating it altogether or just waiting out the virus.
The elderly were rightly deemed the most vulnerable. But then, inexplicably, they were often exposed to newly arriving infected patients in their long-term care facilities.
When millions of people hit the streets to protest the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, many health care professionals ignored the supposedly dangerous mass meetings that they had earlier insisted were major public health threats.
More than 1,000 health professionals, sympathetic to protests, even signed an open letter declaring that social activism was, for the moment, more important than social distancing.
When supporters of President Donald Trump then went to open-air rallies, many medical experts suddenly called these assemblies dangerous to public health. In truth, either both or neither types of public outings are dangerous.
For six months, experts have given the American public contradictory and weaponized election-year directives on masks, social distancing, lockdowns, school closures and workplace policies.
All of these matters of public health reveal the disasters that follow when common sense is ignored and ideology reigns.
Most Americans know that only the police can protect the vulnerable in times of social chaos.
Most people instinctively sense that when vast swaths of dead trees are not removed from dense forests, they will eventually serve as kindling for raging firestorms.
And when scientific expertise offers ever-changing, inconsistent and occasionally absurd public health advice, then people turn to their own instincts and innate common sense to protect themselves and their livelihoods.
Experts, not common-sense citizens, have been failing America.
© 2020 TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
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--2020-09-23--Cal Thomas: Alaska Has Handled the COVID Pandemic Remarkably Well – So I Sat Down with the Governor

Cal Thomas: Alaska Has Handled the COVID Pandemic Remarkably Well – So I Sat Down with the Governor To Find Out How

From the moment Alaska Gov .
Mike Dunleavy , a Republican , was made aware of the threat of COVID-19 , he acted faster than most other states and the federal government .
In an interview , I asked him why he moved so quickly when others did not .
“ We got a call from the [ U.S. ] State Department in January asking for assistance with a charter [ plane ] that was coming out of Wuhan with State Department officials .
We are the entry point for North America from Asia , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State Department officials and their families from China because of the virus , there is something to it .
We immediately set up our disaster team … and we started to prepare at that point for some type of epidemic or pandemic.
” The government also instituted a testing requirement that travelers to Alaska must have tested negative for the virus at least 72 hours before their arrival into the state .
Health care professionals are at the airport to either confirm one has had a test or sell you a kit for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are confirmed .
As a result , Alaska is one of eight states with the lowest number of COVID cases and deaths in the country .
I ask why other states — and the Trump administration , as Democrats charge — did not respond as he has .
“ I really don ’ t know the answer to that .
Part of what benefited us is that we are isolated .
We have Canada as our only land neighbor .
We don ’ t have a lot of through traffic , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a special effort to get here .
We have the highest percent of Native Americans — 15 percent of our population .
And many died [ in the 1918 Spanish flu ] pandemic .
We didn ’ t want to repeat that.
” His thoughts on the presidential campaign ?
“ I obviously support the president because of what he does … bringing back jobs to the United States .
I think the president was very astute in that he recognized early on that we were ceding our sovereignty to foreign actors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ An example is when this virus broke out , we had to look to China for some of our personal protective equipment , potential testing and so forth .
That puts you at a disadvantage .
He saw this early on.
” What about the looting and rioting in some cities ?
“ I don ’ t think you ’ re going to see that tolerated the next four years if Trump is in office .
People want security .
They want economic security and they want security with regard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t entered into a war with this president , ” he said .
RELATED : Victor Davis Hanson : American 'Experts ' Have Abandoned Common Sense - And We 're All Suffering for It “ He ’ s finished wars .
He ’ s [ been nominated by two people for the ] Nobel Peace Prize .
The press doesn ’ t want to talk about that , generally speaking .
If the question is do I think the president ’ s policies are good for America , I do .
I really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidency and the Green New Deal do to the Alaska economy ?
“ I think it would be radically altered for the worse .
… We were purchased from Russia for two reasons : One was our resources ; one was our geo-political location .
Oil , coal would take a hit .
Gas would most likely take a hit .
We depend on oil more than any other state .
It would be devastating.
” Does he see Biden as a “ Trojan horse ” for socialist policies , as some Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some truth in that .
That certainly is the emerging wing and probably in my estimation will become the Democratic Party pretty quick , the Democratic socialism wing , ” Dunleavy said .
“ I think what you would see with candidate Biden , if he were to win … that would be the last vestige of the Democratic Party , which has changed radically .
My parents were FDR Democrats and would not recognize [ today ’ s Democratic Party ] .
” Prediction on the race ?
“ I am hopeful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win.
” The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal , you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

From the moment Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, a Republican, was made aware of the threat of COVID-19, he acted faster than most other states and the federal government.
In an interview, I asked him why he moved so quickly when others did not.
“We got a call from the [U.S.] State Department in January asking for assistance with a charter [plane] that was coming out of Wuhan with State Department officials. We are the entry point for North America from Asia,” he said.
“If you are going to evacuate U.S. State Department officials and their families from China because of the virus, there is something to it. We immediately set up our disaster team … and we started to prepare at that point for some type of epidemic or pandemic.”
The government also instituted a testing requirement that travelers to Alaska must have tested negative for the virus at least 72 hours before their arrival into the state. Health care professionals are at the airport to either confirm one has had a test or sell you a kit for $250 and require self-quarantine until results are confirmed.
As a result, Alaska is one of eight states with the lowest number of COVID cases and deaths in the country.
I ask why other states — and the Trump administration, as Democrats charge — did not respond as he has.
“I really don’t know the answer to that. Part of what benefited us is that we are isolated. We have Canada as our only land neighbor. We don’t have a lot of through traffic,” he said.
Do you think Alaska has done a good job dealing with the coronavirus pandemic? 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% (45 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
“You have to make a special effort to get here. We have the highest percent of Native Americans — 15 percent of our population. And many died [in the 1918 Spanish flu] pandemic. We didn’t want to repeat that.”
His thoughts on the presidential campaign?
“I obviously support the president because of what he does … bringing back jobs to the United States. I think the president was very astute in that he recognized early on that we were ceding our sovereignty to foreign actors, such as China,” Dunleavy said.
“An example is when this virus broke out, we had to look to China for some of our personal protective equipment, potential testing and so forth. That puts you at a disadvantage. He saw this early on.”
What about the looting and rioting in some cities?
“I don’t think you’re going to see that tolerated the next four years if Trump is in office. People want security. They want economic security and they want security with regard to our foreign policy. We haven’t entered into a war with this president,” he said.
“He’s finished wars. He’s [been nominated by two people for the] Nobel Peace Prize. The press doesn’t want to talk about that, generally speaking. If the question is do I think the president’s policies are good for America, I do. I really do.”
What would a Joe Biden presidency and the Green New Deal do to the Alaska economy?
“I think it would be radically altered for the worse. … We were purchased from Russia for two reasons: One was our resources; one was our geo-political location. Oil, coal would take a hit. Gas would most likely take a hit. We depend on oil more than any other state. It would be devastating.”
Does he see Biden as a “Trojan horse” for socialist policies, as some Republicans have charged?
“There may be some truth in that. That certainly is the emerging wing and probably in my estimation will become the Democratic Party pretty quick, the Democratic socialism wing,” Dunleavy said.
“I think what you would see with candidate Biden, if he were to win … that would be the last vestige of the Democratic Party, which has changed radically. My parents were FDR Democrats and would not recognize [today’s Democratic Party].”
Prediction on the race? “I am hopeful, and I have confidence Trump will win.”
© 2020 TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
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--2020-09-23--Murkowski Appears To Backtrack on Decision Not To Vote for SCOTUS Nominee

Republican plans to fill late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s vacated seat on the court got a shot in the arm Tuesday , thanks to a reversal in tone from GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska .
Murkowski appeared to backtrack on earlier statements in which she signaled she would be opposed to voting to confirm a nominee prior to the November election .
“ For weeks , I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election , ” she said Sunday .
“ Sadly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our reality , but my position has not changed.
” On Tuesday , however , Alaska Public Media reported the senator said she has now not ruled out voting to confirm Trump ’ s high court nominee .
“ I know everybody wants to ask the question , ‘ Will you confirm the nominee ? '
” Murkowski said outside the Capitol prior to a weekly Republican luncheon .
“ We don ’ t have a nominee yet .
You and I don ’ t know who that is .
And so I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can confirm a nominee when I don ’ t know who the nominee is , ” the senior senator from Alaska said .
She reiterated she did not support moving forward with a confirmation vote , but added , “ Now , having said that , this process is moving forward with or without me.
” Republicans already received good news Tuesday when Sen. Mitt Romney signaled he would be open to voting on a replacement for Ginsburg , who died Friday at age 87 .
“ I intend to follow the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s nominee , ” the Utah Republican said in a statement .
“ If the nominee reaches the Senate floor , I intend to vote based upon their qualifications , ” he added .
News that Murkowski might now be onboard offers the GOP a bit of buffer should a Republican waver on committing to give Trump ’ s Supreme Court nominee a vote .
Romney , for example , has been unreliable for Senate Republicans since being elected in 2018 , and Democrats are sure to appeal to other Republican senators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmation of a replacement for Ginsburg .
RELATED : Romney Spox Shuts Down Rumor Senator Has Decided Not To Confirm SCOTUS Pick The reversal from Murkowski could prove an important one .
She said Friday , prior to Ginsburg ’ s death , that she would oppose voting to confirm a high court nominee during an election year .
Murkowski said in the interview published before news of Ginsburg ’ s death that she would be opposed to participating in such a vote so close to the election .
The senator said she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court nominee ” when speaking with Alaska Public Media as it was “ too close to an election ” and “ the people needed to decide.
” “ We are 50-some days away from an election , and the good news for us is that all of our Supreme Court justices are in good health and doing their job .
And we pray that they are able to continue that , ” Murkowski said at the time , when the scenario was still hypothetical .
As of Wednesday , her vote would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 50-vote threshold to confirm whomever the president nominates to replace Ginsburg .
Trump has said he will announce his pick on Saturday at 5 p.m .
ET at the White House .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Republican plans to fill late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s vacated seat on the court got a shot in the arm Tuesday, thanks to a reversal in tone from GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
Murkowski appeared to backtrack on earlier statements in which she signaled she would be opposed to voting to confirm a nominee prior to the November election.
“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election,” she said Sunday. “Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed.”
On Tuesday, however, Alaska Public Media reported the senator said she has now not ruled out voting to confirm Trump’s high court nominee.
“I know everybody wants to ask the question, ‘Will you confirm the nominee?'” Murkowski said outside the Capitol prior to a weekly Republican luncheon.
“We don’t have a nominee yet. You and I don’t know who that is. And so I can’t confirm whether or not I can confirm a nominee when I don’t know who the nominee is,” the senior senator from Alaska said.
She reiterated she did not support moving forward with a confirmation vote, but added, “Now, having said that, this process is moving forward with or without me.”
Republicans already received good news Tuesday when Sen. Mitt Romney signaled he would be open to voting on a replacement for Ginsburg, who died Friday at age 87.
“I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee,” the Utah Republican said in a statement.
“If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications,” he added.
My statement regarding the current Supreme Court vacancy: pic.twitter.com/6YO0dPWWXc — Senator Mitt Romney (@SenatorRomney) September 22, 2020
News that Murkowski might now be onboard offers the GOP a bit of buffer should a Republican waver on committing to give Trump’s Supreme Court nominee a vote.
Romney, for example, has been unreliable for Senate Republicans since being elected in 2018, and Democrats are sure to appeal to other Republican senators in their fight to prevent an election-year confirmation of a replacement for Ginsburg.
Do you think a replacement for Ginsburg will confirmed before the election? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 97% (2989 Votes) No: 3% (86 Votes)
The reversal from Murkowski could prove an important one.
She said Friday, prior to Ginsburg’s death, that she would oppose voting to confirm a high court nominee during an election year.
Murkowski said in the interview published before news of Ginsburg’s death that she would be opposed to participating in such a vote so close to the election.
The senator said she would “not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee” when speaking with Alaska Public Media as it was “too close to an election” and “the people needed to decide.”
“We are 50-some days away from an election, and the good news for us is that all of our Supreme Court justices are in good health and doing their job. And we pray that they are able to continue that,” Murkowski said at the time, when the scenario was still hypothetical.
As of Wednesday, her vote would not be needed for Republicans to meet the 50-vote threshold to confirm whomever the president nominates to replace Ginsburg.
Trump has said he will announce his pick on Saturday at 5 p.m. ET at the White House.
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--2020-09-23--Video: Iran Will Have Nuclear Warhead Material Ready by End of 2020, US Official Reportedly Warns


westernjournal--2020-09-23--The Liberal Meltdown After Romney Announced His SCOTUS Decision Was Absolutely Glorious

It was a cold day on Tuesday morning if you were a liberal .
Granted , it was probably seasonable in most parts of the U.S. — warm , even .
However , that ’ s when Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney , seen by many Democrats as a potential holdout to stop a solid conservative majority on the Supreme Court , announced he supported President Donald Trump ’ s decision to nominate a new justice in an election year .
“ My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘ fairness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the eye of the beholder , ” Romney wrote in a statement .
“ It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law , which in this case is the Constitution and precedent .
The historical precedent of election-year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party ’ s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own .
“ The Constitution gives the president the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees .
Accordingly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ precedent in considering the president ’ s nominee .
If the nominee reaches the Senate floor , I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.
” As NPR reported , the move meant Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would almost certainly have the 51 votes he needs to consider the nomination in the Senate .
Romney wasn ’ t actually in the Senate in 2016 , so he didn ’ t personally have to follow any sort of “ consistent ” application of the rules the Democrats have worked themselves into a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And — wouldn ’ t you know it ?
— it turns out this was never about consistency in the first place .
There was one school of Democrats who seemed genuinely let down that Romney wasn ’ t a “ moderate , ” by which they meant a Republican who said and did liberal things but kind of hemmed and hawed a bit before he did them .
At which they ’ d still throw the individual into the lake of fire in the secular left-wing afterlife for being a Republican , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trevor Noah of “ The Daily Show ” seemed to sum this school of thought up best : “ Yes , my friends , even Mitt Romney , the dad you ask when your other Republican dads say ‘ no , ’ is going along with Mitch McConnell ’ s plan , ” he said Tuesday , according to The New York Times .
“ And I know , some people were holding out hope that he would refuse to help the Republicans push through before the election , but for some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Romney is still a conservative senator from one of the most conservative states .
People act like Mitt Romney came into the Senate with a pussy hat on , but , no — he ’ s only moderate compared to Cinnamon Hitler.
” Tell that to your conservative friends and they ’ ll laugh , and not just because of that “ Cinnamon Hitler ” quip .
RELATED : Trump Gains 4-Point Lead Over Biden with FL Likely Voters in Latest ABC/WaPo Poll There was plenty of this on social media , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sight to behold , a Chernobyl-level event that was somehow , as a conservative looking in from the outside , like watching the first robin of spring cavorting on a dewy lawn : Charlotte Clymer , queen of performativity , lamenting the fact Mitt Romney is performative .
Also , sorry this ruined Libby Watson ‘ s morning .
Then there were those who thought that since Romney voted to convict in President Trump ’ s impeachment trial , he needed to vote against him appointing a Supreme Court justice , even though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were those who said Romney would simply do anything at all to get another pro-life justice .
Of course , none of this would have happened if the Democrats hadn ’ t viewed the Supreme Court as a de facto legislative body and then viewed the Senate ’ s refusal to consider Obama nominee Merrick Garland for the court in 2016 as the ultimate affront , even though presidents ’ nominees rarely get confirmed in election years where their party doesn ’ t control the Senate .
Then , after floating “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ derail President Trump ’ s nominee to his second seat by uncritically publicizing any sexual assault allegation leveled against him , they expected Trump not to nominate someone when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died .
When Trump said he would , they expected Mitt Romney would come to their rescue .
“ You ’ re our friend now , right Mitt ?
We ’ re pals .
You voted for impeachment .
We ’ re going to let you hang out at the cool kids ’ table .
We ’ re not going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you were one of the good ones .
Except when we said you put your dog on the roof of your car and did everything but say you would yank my nana ’ s feeding tube out with your bare hands if it ’ d save Bain Capital a few pennies .
Just please vote against this one , OK ?
” He didn ’ t , so expect some blue-checkmarked Daily Beast writer to come out and reveal to America Mitt Romney really did yank nana ’ s feeding tube out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it for Bain Capital , though .
He did it for Trump .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It was a cold day on Tuesday morning if you were a liberal.
Granted, it was probably seasonable in most parts of the U.S. — warm, even. However, that’s when Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney, seen by many Democrats as a potential holdout to stop a solid conservative majority on the Supreme Court, announced he supported President Donald Trump’s decision to nominate a new justice in an election year.
“My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness’ which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder,” Romney wrote in a statement.
“It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent. The historical precedent of election-year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party’s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own.
“The Constitution gives the president the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees. Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the president’s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”
My statement regarding the current Supreme Court vacancy: pic.twitter.com/6YO0dPWWXc — Senator Mitt Romney (@SenatorRomney) September 22, 2020
As NPR reported, the move meant Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would almost certainly have the 51 votes he needs to consider the nomination in the Senate.
Romney wasn’t actually in the Senate in 2016, so he didn’t personally have to follow any sort of “consistent” application of the rules the Democrats have worked themselves into a state of apoplexy at Senate Republicans over. And — wouldn’t you know it? — it turns out this was never about consistency in the first place.
Were you surprised at Romney's announcement? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 86% (678 Votes) No: 14% (107 Votes)
There was one school of Democrats who seemed genuinely let down that Romney wasn’t a “moderate,” by which they meant a Republican who said and did liberal things but kind of hemmed and hawed a bit before he did them. At which they’d still throw the individual into the lake of fire in the secular left-wing afterlife for being a Republican, but they’d do it nicely.
Trevor Noah of “The Daily Show” seemed to sum this school of thought up best:
“Yes, my friends, even Mitt Romney, the dad you ask when your other Republican dads say ‘no,’ is going along with Mitch McConnell’s plan,” he said Tuesday, according to The New York Times.
“And I know, some people were holding out hope that he would refuse to help the Republicans push through before the election, but for some reason, people always forget that Mitt Romney is still a conservative senator from one of the most conservative states. People act like Mitt Romney came into the Senate with a pussy hat on, but, no — he’s only moderate compared to Cinnamon Hitler.”
Tell that to your conservative friends and they’ll laugh, and not just because of that “Cinnamon Hitler” quip.
There was plenty of this on social media, as well — and the meltdown was a sight to behold, a Chernobyl-level event that was somehow, as a conservative looking in from the outside, like watching the first robin of spring cavorting on a dewy lawn:
lol at all the people who thought Mitt Romney to be one of the good guys. — Karen Attiah (@KarenAttiah) September 22, 2020
Mitt Romney just threw away any integrity he gained from his impeachment vote. — Trish Zornio (@trish_zornio) September 22, 2020
When you voted to impeach I thought you saw and disapproved of the corruption. I was wrong. You are now abetting it. — CuriousCheeze (@CuriousCheeze) September 22, 2020
Just when I thought Romney had found his morals, THIS. — Lois Bez (@vacashun) September 22, 2020
im the guy who thought mitt romney would do the Right Thing and my morning is RUINED!!! — libby watson (@libbycwatson) September 22, 2020
Mitt Romney has always been who we thought he was and always will be and no amount of performative tweets and op-eds on his part decrying Trump’s corruption is ever going to change that. — Charlotte Clymer ?? (@cmclymer) September 22, 2020
Charlotte Clymer, queen of performativity, lamenting the fact Mitt Romney is performative. Also, sorry this ruined Libby Watson‘s morning.
Then there were those who thought that since Romney voted to convict in President Trump’s impeachment trial, he needed to vote against him appointing a Supreme Court justice, even though the president was acquitted.
“Donald Trump is dangerous and fake and unfit to serve and I’m now going to give him vastly more power because I stand for nothing.”
– Mitt Romney — Mikel Jollett (@Mikel_Jollett) September 22, 2020
So, Mit Romney thinks the president committed high crimes and should be removed from office, but should get to replace RBG on SCOTUS. Got it. Dems, we need to fight back. Impeach Bill Barr or Trump again if we have to. — George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) September 22, 2020
Romney logic: I think Trump should be impeached and removed from office, but also get a Supreme Court pick. — Neera -Vote Early- Tanden (@neeratanden) September 22, 2020
Mitt Romney says the impeached president that he voted to convict and remove from office for high crimes and misdemeanors in February should now be allowed to appoint a Supreme Court Justice for lifetime tenure in September. Every single Republican should be voted out of office. https://t.co/BGmBK8YyKB — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) September 22, 2020
And then there were those who said Romney would simply do anything at all to get another pro-life justice.
The big pro-life victory comes on top of a mountain of American deaths. But still worth it for Romney et al. Still worth it. — Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) September 22, 2020
Mitt Romney pondering standing up to Trump destroying the country, or getting another anti-abortion Justice pic.twitter.com/4e6WNObRV3 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 22, 2020
Of course, none of this would have happened if the Democrats hadn’t viewed the Supreme Court as a de facto legislative body and then viewed the Senate’s refusal to consider Obama nominee Merrick Garland for the court in 2016 as the ultimate affront, even though presidents’ nominees rarely get confirmed in election years where their party doesn’t control the Senate.
Then, after floating “court-packing” multiple times and trying to derail President Trump’s nominee to his second seat by uncritically publicizing any sexual assault allegation leveled against him, they expected Trump not to nominate someone when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died.
When Trump said he would, they expected Mitt Romney would come to their rescue.
“You’re our friend now, right Mitt? We’re pals. You voted for impeachment. We’re going to let you hang out at the cool kids’ table. We’re not going to turn on you. We always thought you were one of the good ones. Except when we said you put your dog on the roof of your car and did everything but say you would yank my nana’s feeding tube out with your bare hands if it’d save Bain Capital a few pennies. Just please vote against this one, OK?”
He didn’t, so expect some blue-checkmarked Daily Beast writer to come out and reveal to America Mitt Romney really did yank nana’s feeding tube out. This time, he didn’t do it for Bain Capital, though. He did it for 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--2020-09-23--Video: DOJ Issues Major Blow to Portland, Seattle, New York City


westernjournal--2020-09-23--Breaking Ranks? Dem Senator Blasts Party’s Treatment of Barrett’s Religion

Since approximately one minute after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death was announced on Friday , politicians on both sides of the aisle have been voicing their opinions about filling her seat just weeks before the next presidential election .
President Donald Trump has said he will nominate a potential replacement at the end of the week .
The left has already started a smear campaign against one of the candidates thought to be at the top of Trump ’ s shortlist , Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the 7th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Catholic faith .
At least one Democratic senator disagrees with the attacks on Barrett ’ s religion , according to Fox News .
Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia said on Wednesday that Barrett ’ s faith should not be part of a discussion of her qualifications for the Supreme Court .
“ I ’ m Catholic , OK. And religion should not enter into it .
It sure doesn ’ t with me , ” Manchin told “ Fox & Friends.
” Manchin cited the First Amendment to back up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religion is one of the basic rights we all have as an American citizen.
” “ Whether you ’ re Catholic , whether you ’ re Protestant , whether you ’ re Jewish , evangelical , whatever it may be , God bless you .
You worship who you want and you worship how you want .
You worship the same God .
All of us do , ” he said .
Manchin is right : All Americans , including Supreme Court justices , have a constitutional right to practice the religion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment — including hiring and firing — based on a candidate ’ s religion .
Perhaps even more importantly , the Senate ’ s constitutional duty with regard to federal judges is to “ advise and consent ” — not to tear apart the life and reputation of potential justices in order to keep them off the court because of ideological differences .
The Democrats already showed their willingness to attack Barrett ’ s Catholicism during the 2017 hearings on her nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point , Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California raised eyebrows when she told Barrett “ the dogma lives loudly within you.
” In truth , neither a potential justice ’ s religion , nor his or her political leanings or gender or race , should be relevant to a judge ’ s confirmation .
The only relevant consideration should be the nominee ’ s judicial qualifications .
RELATED : The Liberal Meltdown After Romney Announced His SCOTUS Decision Was Absolutely Glorious Barrett has been a circuit judge for almost three years .
Has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bench ?
Are her rulings reasonably based on the Constitution and legal precedent ?
Those are the considerations that actually matter .
Nevertheless , the left would have us believe Barrett is unfit for the country ’ s highest court because she is a devout Catholic — and in particular because she is pro-life .
That ’ s ridiculous , of course .
Joe Biden is Catholic , too ( though he ’ s been denied communion because of his support for abortion ) .
So is Nancy Pelosi .
If it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the executive and legislative branches to be Catholic , it should be OK for members of the judiciary .
It ’ s refreshing to see a Democrat who is willing to stand up to the hatred that is festering in his own party , not to mention taking a pre-emptive stance against the unconstitutional religious tests his party is going to apply to Barrett if she is nominated .
That ’ s not to say Manchin will vote for Barrett , or whoever Trump ’ s nominee ends up being , when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he doesn ’ t support filling the vacant Supreme Court seat until after the election .
But it ’ s still nice to see a Democrat who isn ’ t afraid to break from the party line .
Regardless of who Trump nominates , Republicans need to be ready for unconstitutional and personal attacks against the nominee .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Since approximately one minute after Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death was announced on Friday, politicians on both sides of the aisle have been voicing their opinions about filling her seat just weeks before the next presidential election.
President Donald Trump has said he will nominate a potential replacement at the end of the week. The left has already started a smear campaign against one of the candidates thought to be at the top of Trump’s shortlist, Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Their biggest gripe so far? Barrett’s Catholic faith.
At least one Democratic senator disagrees with the attacks on Barrett’s religion, according to Fox News. Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia said on Wednesday that Barrett’s faith should not be part of a discussion of her qualifications for the Supreme Court.
“I’m Catholic, OK. And religion should not enter into it. It sure doesn’t with me,” Manchin told “Fox & Friends.”
Manchin cited the First Amendment to back up his position: “The freedom of religion is one of the basic rights we all have as an American citizen.”
“Whether you’re Catholic, whether you’re Protestant, whether you’re Jewish, evangelical, whatever it may be, God bless you. You worship who you want and you worship how you want. You worship the same God. All of us do,” he said.
Manchin is right: All Americans, including Supreme Court justices, have a constitutional right to practice the religion of their choice. In fact, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in employment — including hiring and firing — based on a candidate’s religion.
Do you agree that a judicial nominee's religion is irrelevant to their 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: 97% (2509 Votes) No: 3% (81 Votes)
Perhaps even more importantly, the Senate’s constitutional duty with regard to federal judges is to “advise and consent” — not to tear apart the life and reputation of potential justices in order to keep them off the court because of ideological differences.
The Democrats already showed their willingness to attack Barrett’s Catholicism during the 2017 hearings on her nomination to the 7th Circuit. At one point, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California raised eyebrows when she told Barrett “the dogma lives loudly within you.”
Flashback — Dianne Feinstein to Amy Coney Barrett about ACB’s Catholic faith: “When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you — and that’s of concern.”pic.twitter.com/aMGjVQRmcS — JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) September 19, 2020
In truth, neither a potential justice’s religion, nor his or her political leanings or gender or race, should be relevant to a judge’s confirmation.
The only relevant consideration should be the nominee’s judicial qualifications.
Barrett has been a circuit judge for almost three years. Has she ruled fairly during her time on the bench? Are her rulings reasonably based on the Constitution and legal precedent?
Those are the considerations that actually matter.
Nevertheless, the left would have us believe Barrett is unfit for the country’s highest court because she is a devout Catholic — and in particular because she is pro-life.
That’s ridiculous, of course. Joe Biden is Catholic, too (though he’s been denied communion because of his support for abortion). So is Nancy Pelosi.
If it’s OK for leading members of the executive and legislative branches to be Catholic, it should be OK for members of the judiciary.
It’s refreshing to see a Democrat who is willing to stand up to the hatred that is festering in his own party, not to mention taking a pre-emptive stance against the unconstitutional religious tests his party is going to apply to Barrett if she is nominated.
That’s not to say Manchin will vote for Barrett, or whoever Trump’s nominee ends up being, when the time comes. He’s already said he doesn’t support filling the vacant Supreme Court seat until after the election. But it’s still nice to see a Democrat who isn’t afraid to break from the party line.
Regardless of who Trump nominates, Republicans need to be ready for unconstitutional and personal attacks against the nominee.
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--2020-09-23--Portland Cries COVID, Prohibits Right-Wing Rally Amid 100 Straight Days of Rioting

Portland , Oregon , has denied a permit for a Saturday rally planned by the right-wing group Proud Boys .
In a statement released Wednesday , the Portland Parks & Recreation Bureau said the group ’ s estimated crowd size of 10,000 people was too big to comply with coronavirus restrictions .
The bureau said it had consulted with Democratic Mayor Ted Wheeler , who is also the police commissioner , and decided that those attending the rally would not be able to comply with social distancing rules .
“ We must all do our part to fight the spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ourselves and each other safe .
Events like this are not welcome and are not allowed , ” Portland City Commissioner Amanda Fritz , who oversees the city ’ s parks department , said in the statement .
There have been over 100 consecutive days of nightly protests and riots in Portland .
Mayor Wheeler himself joined one of them in July , telling demonstrators “ what we ’ re doing tonight is actually the best thing we can do right now.
” TRENDING : Watch : GOP Candidate Klacik Gets Kicked Off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Behar 's Blackface Scandal The rally planned for Saturday was moved from downtown Portland to north Portland to accommodate what the Proud Boys called a “ battalion of patriots ” exercising their right to assemble freely .
Left-wing groups plan at least two events to oppose the Proud Boys .
The Western Journal has not reviewed this Associated Press story prior to publication .
Therefore , it may contain editorial bias or may in some other way not meet our normal editorial standards .
It is provided to our readers as a service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Portland, Oregon, has denied a permit for a Saturday rally planned by the right-wing group Proud Boys.
In a statement released Wednesday, the Portland Parks & Recreation Bureau said the group’s estimated crowd size of 10,000 people was too big to comply with coronavirus restrictions.
The bureau said it had consulted with Democratic Mayor Ted Wheeler, who is also the police commissioner, and decided that those attending the rally would not be able to comply with social distancing rules.
“We must all do our part to fight the spread of COVID-19 in our community and keep ourselves and each other safe. Events like this are not welcome and are not allowed,” Portland City Commissioner Amanda Fritz, who oversees the city’s parks department, said in the statement.
There have been over 100 consecutive days of nightly protests and riots in Portland. Wheeler himself joined one of them in July, telling demonstrators “what we’re doing tonight is actually the best thing we can do right now.”
The rally planned for Saturday was moved from downtown Portland to north Portland to accommodate what the Proud Boys called a “battalion of patriots” exercising their right to assemble freely.
Left-wing groups plan at least two events to oppose the Proud Boys.
[jwplayer tlHGmnUb]
The Western Journal has not reviewed this Associated Press story prior to publication. Therefore, it may contain editorial bias or may in some other way not meet our normal editorial standards. It is provided to our readers as a service from The Western Journal.
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.