Daily Archives: July 30, 2024

NewsGuard, the self-appointed arbiter of media reliability, appears poised to peddle some more of its own misinformationthis time about George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley.

Turley exposed NewsGuards apparent plans in a Saturday column for The Hill. In The Most Chilling Words Today: Im from NewsGuard and I Am Here to Rate You, the chaired professor of law detailed a recent communication he received from the ratings giant. Roughly a week after he had penned an earlier column for The Hill in which he criticized NewsGuard as infected with a pro-Democrat and left-wing bias, the for-profit organization came knocking, Turley explained.

NewGuard had decided to now review Res Ipsa, the blog the law professor hosts at jonathanturley.org, Turley explained. That alone is curious, because many of the articles posted at Res Ipsa have been published by other NewsGuard-rated outlets, such as The Hill and the Wall Street Journal. Beyond that fact and the suspicious timing of NewsGuards decision to evaluate the law professors writings, the questions posed were bizarre, as Turley explained.

For instance, why would he call his blog Res Ipsa Liquitur [sic] the thing itself speaks. Could you explain the reason to this non-lawyer? Res ipsa loquitur is defined in the header as The thing itself speaks, which I think speaks for itself, Turley quipped.

While one might laugh off that ridiculous, typo-infused question, NewsGuards outreach to Turley included a much more concerning and, as the law professor stressed, illuminating inquiry.

I cannot find any information on the site that would signal to readers that the sites content reflects a conservative or libertarian perspective, as is evident in your articles.Why is this perspective not disclosed to give readers a sense of the sites point of view? The NewsGuard reviewer queried Professor Turley.

As he noted in his The Hill op-ed on Saturday, Turley has historically been criticized as a liberal, conservative or a libertarian depending on the particular op-eds. I certainly admit to libertarian viewpoints, Turley continued, though I hold many traditional liberal views. For example, I have been outspoken for decades in favor same-sex marriage, environmental protection, free speech and other individual rights. I am a registered Democrat who has defended reporters, activists and academics on the left for years in both courts and columns.

Turley further stressed that his blog has thousands of postings that cut across the ideological spectrum. He has criticized Trump in the past, the George Washington University law professor added, while also refusing to suspend [his] legal judgment when cases touch on the interests of conservatives or Donald Trump. Its another indication NewsGuard deigns itself not only the arbiter of truth, but also of a law professors political or policy-oriented views.

NewsGuards efforts to categorize Turleys diverse ideological views as conservative or libertarianand then to expect him to inaccurately label himself for his readersperfectly illustrates a structural deficiency in NewsGuards business model: NewsGuard relies on employees and a Board of Advisors hailing from the so-called mainstream media. NewsGuards Board of Advisors, which serves as subject-matter experts for the for-profit enterprise, is also heavily stacked with former government officials.

Together, then, those conducting or assisting in NewsGuards reviews of new media outlets bring an establishment perspective and a siloed knowledge base to their work, leaving them particularly ill-suited to judging the reliability of the alternative press. That fundamental flaw supplants any claimed effort by NewsGuard to operate apolitically and without bias.

There is an even more fundamental problem with NewsGuards self-proclaimed unbiased ratings. It flows from the secretive methodology it uses to select articles for review. Here, another recent outreach by NewsGuard illustrates the deficiencyand this one appears purposeful.

Last week, NewsGuard contacted The Federalists CEO Sean Davis to inquire about Daviss post on X that followed President Joe Bidens sight-unseen announcement on the social media platform that he would not run for re-election. Do we have any evidence Biden is even alive right now? Davis queried.

I just wanted to ask on what basis he made the aforementioned comment, a News Verification Reporter for NewsGuard noted, seeking clarity/context for the post.

Now why would NewsGuard select Daviss post among the millions made every day on X? Did NewsGuard make similar inquiries to other outlets that, rather than posing questions about the then-still unseen president, pushed Democrat talking points about former President Donald Trump?

For instance, did NewsGuard ask Reuters about its Sunday post on X of an out-of-context comment Trump made during a rally that in four years, you dont have to vote again? While saying it wasnt clear what Donald Trump meant by his remarks, Reuters nonetheless framed the quote as support for Democrats accusation that Trump was a threat to democracy.

Did NewsGuard ask Reuters what it meant by its post? Is NewsGuard analyzing all the outlets that misrepresented Trumps comments as evidence of dictatorial tendencies, as opposed to an entreaty for low-propensity voters to drag themselves to the polls this one time? What about outlets like Newsweek, which reported Donald Trump might not have been shot after all? Were they on the receiving end of NewsGuards inquisitorial emails? If not, why not?

For all its claims of transparency, NewsGuard has refused to explain how it decides how many articles to assess per outlet, or its process for deciding which content to review. The lack of a random and proportionate survey of the media allows NewsGuard to manipulate its ratings.

Want to ensure The Washington Post or The New York Times receive favorable ratings? Avoid reviewing their articles about the Russia collusion hoax or Covid-19. NewsGuard can continue to guarantee favored outlets retain top reliability ratings by also ignoring the false and misleading coverage of the assassination attempt of Trump, which was framed at first as a fall by many outlets NewsGuard rates as reliable.

Without transparency concerning how and why NewsGuard selects posts or articles for review, as well as information about the relative quantity of materials assessed by outlet, NewsGuards ratings lack all credibility and are best branded GIGOgarbage in, garbage out.

Margot Cleveland is an investigative journalist and legal analyst and serves as The Federalists senior legal correspondent. Margots work has been published at The Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, the New Criterion, National Review Online, Townhall.com, the Daily Signal, USA Today, and the Detroit Free Press. She is also a regular guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and on Fox News, Fox Business, and Newsmax. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prizethe law schools highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. Cleveland is also of counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland where you can read more about her greatest accomplishmentsher dear husband and dear son. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Original post:

Targeting Law Professor Turley Again Proves NewsGuard Is A Powerful Scam - The Federalist

Kamala Harris office has had a staggering 91.5 percent turnover rate since she became vice president, an investigation from government watchdog organization Open The Books (OTB) revealed on Monday. Of the 47 staff members hired when Harris took office in 2021, only four reportedly remained in her employment as of March 2024.

The report comes as Bidens X account announced he will stand down from his reelection campaign and fully support Harris as the new nominee. OTB utilized U.S. Senate disclosures to obtain records from the vice presidents office, including 2021 and 2024 payrolls.

Chaos reigns on the vice presidents staff, wrote OTB founder Adam Andrzejewski.Our auditors at OpenTheBooks quantified an extraordinarily high 91.5-percent staff turnover rate.

Payrolls provide further insight into the staff exodus in Harris office. As The Atlantic reported in October 2023, Harris communications director, national security adviser, chief of staff, and numerous aides left within a year and a half of her taking office in January 2021.

Furthermore, the turnover chaos isnt getting better. In the trailing 12-month period, 24 staffers left thats almost half the employees, Andrzejewski wrote.

OTBs investigation also revealed budget discrepancies and a lack of transparency from Harris office.As Andrzejewski said, Kamala Harris, Office of Vice President, is committed to the opacity of its payrolls and all other office information.

When OTB filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for Harris staff payroll in September 2021, a spokesman reportedly declined the request and claimed the vice presidents office was not subject to FOIA. When OTB replied with a request for any transparency Harris office could provide, the spokesman said Harris did not have any information to share at this time.

The VPs rejection makes her the least transparent elected office holder in the country, Andrzejewski wrote in a 2021 Forbes article detailing the interaction. Citizens ought to be concerned that the person next in line for the presidency is so unwilling to disclose how she spends their money.

OTBs investigation also revealed an over $2 million discrepancy in Harris allocation of taxpayer dollars.

We calculated that for VP Harriss 28 staff listed in the Senate report, the 2021 salaries added up to $2,334,223, Andrzejewski wrote. But the vice presidents office got $5 million for 23 full time staff in 2021 and requested over $6 million for 27 full time staff in 2022.

Harris office reportedly refused to answer any questions from OTB regarding this inconsistency. OTB says its analysis reflects the dysfunction widely reported in the corporate media, which he says have called Harris office a revolving door where theres been a staff exodus of key aides heading for the exits.

Staffers in Harris office have reported a toxic work environment since 2021, when The Washington Post spoke with 18 individuals in Harris orbit. Descriptions ranged from uncomfortable to soul-destroying.

One of the things weve said in our little text groups among each other is what is the common denominator through all this and its her, former Harris aide and Democrat strategist Gil Duran told the Post. Back in 2013, after just five months of working for Harris, he quit. Who are the next talented people youre going to bring in and burn through and then have [them] pretend theyre retiring for positive reasons.

Others said Harris blamed staff for her lack of preparation.

Its clear that youre not working with somebody who is willing to do the prep and the work, a former anonymous staffer told the Post. With Kamala you have to put up with a constant amount of soul-destroying criticism and also her own lack of confidence. So youre constantly sort of propping up a bully and its not really clear why.

Monroe Harless is a summer intern at The Federalist. She is a recent graduate of the University of Georgia with degrees in journalism and political science.

The rest is here:

92 Percent Of Kamala Harris Staff Left In Her First Three Years As VP - The Federalist

Grassroots activists are warning Republicans that while former President Donald Trump has surged in momentum lately, the belief that Democrats are in such disarray following President Joe Bidens ouster from the race could lead to dangerous complacency.

Trump currently leads Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee, by 3 points nationwide, according to a recent CNN poll. RealClearPolitics has Trump up 2.1 percentage points in its polling average.

But if President Joe Biden could win an election from his basement, and if Sen. John Fetterman could win his election despite being severely impaired from a stroke, then Harris can easily win this November if Republicans become complacent, grassroots activists tell The Federalist.

Just because Democrats have appeared to be a dumpster fire for the last month doesnt mean the election is in the bag, President of Arizona Free Enterprise Scot Mussi tells The Federalist. We have to work hard as ever, if not harder.

Mussi stressed that Republicans must maintain enthusiasm up through Election Day.

I think the one thing that could hurt us is complacency and a belief that Democrats are in such disarray that they had to drop their nominee four months before the election, Mussi continued. You know, a month ago when Biden was still the nominee, that same plan needs to be the plan today. We cant go into this thinking we can do less. We cant stop. This is critically important.

Mussi credited the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Trump campaign for ramping up their efforts in the state but urged them not to take Arizona for granted or take their foot off the pedal.

I think from a top level, the RNC, Trump campaign, they cant take Arizona for granted. Its our perspective that a little bit of that happened in 2020, they engaged but it was at a later date than what we thought was critically important for 2020, Mussi said. The good news is that everything weve been seeing [is that] they have increased their engagement, they have hired more staff throughout Arizona, thats all great, but they need to keep it up. I dont want them to think Arizona is secured and they can go somewhere else.

Tom Eddy has seen the same type of enthusiasm on the East Coast. Eddy, the GOP chair in Pennsylvanias Erie County, told The Federalist theres a huge amount of enthusiasm all of a sudden since the convention.

Every day its one [person walking in] after another after another, Eddy said. Weve got more and more people walking into my office wanting to get involved.

[READ NEXT: We Have The Army: Pennsylvania Grassroots Eager For Direction As RNC Trains Poll Watchers]

Capitalizing on the enthusiasm is a high priority for these grassroots activists. Eddy reiterated his previous comments to The Federalist regarding the importance of mail-in voting, noting Democrats have created an advantage for themselves by focusing efforts on building their on-the-ground operations targeting mail-ins.

Democrats have got people who tend to not vote all the time getting to sit home, receive a ballot and then send it back, Eddy said. So the emphasis for the Pennsylvania GOP and I think the Trump campaign is behind this as well, is to let those low propensity Republican voters know that mail-in ballots are OK and to try and get those ballots into their hands. We dont have to match the Democrats vote for vote in the mail-ins, all we have to do is get maybe 40-50 percent and we will be OK.

Eddy said he will continue to visit local community events such as fairs, where he has a booth set up to register voters and provide mail-in ballot literature. His team also has door knockers who emphasize the importance of using a mail-in ballot to voters who may not guarantee they can show up to the polls on Election Day.

To me the most important way to get someone to agree to mail-in ballots is to talk to them because theres a lot of people who dont understand how the process works, Eddy said. Ive come across, I dont know how many people, and they think if you apply for a mail-in ballot you cant vote in person if you decide to change your mind. So people will hesitate if they dont know the full procedure, so talking to voters face-to-face helps encourage applications.

Mussi is also focused on engaging voters via a massive door-knocking campaign, telling The Federalist his organization plans on visiting 1 million doors by Election Day and working to remind voters to return their mail-in ballots or show up on Nov. 5 to vote in person.

North Carolina Election Integrity Team President Jim Womack told The Federalist that the work to secure a Republican victory is going to be equally difficult following Democrats candidate swap and signaled that the GOP cannot afford to take its foot off the pedal.

Harris hasnt changed our battle space for free and fair elections because she comes from the same group that Biden was in that is sponsored and promoted by the left, Womack said. And because the left will stop at nothing to win an election, there wont be any less serious attempt to try to manipulate the election than there was under Joe Biden.

The strategy that the RNC has taken on is that were going to do the same thing we did in 2020 and 2022 and that is, were going to have lots of field staff and were going to hire thousands of lawyers around the country to be on lookout and ready to go to to litigate. And were going to do poll observing training, Womack said, adding he has no issue with either of those things but that the only other thing theyre doing differently this time thats discernible is the focus on trying to get people to vote by mail.

The one thing Womack believes the RNC desperately needs to do is further unify the grassroots organizations that are working for election integrity.

The RNC, which launched its first election integrity division in 2021 and has since added additional programs, has increased its poll watcher training through its Protect the Vote program. Attendees at a recent Bucks County, Pennsylvania event told me they found the session to be insightful, very informative, and very efficient. A source from the RNC told The Federalist theyre also working to engage poll workers.

Each day countless individuals around the country sign up to volunteer, that includes those who wish to work the polls, the RNC source told The Federalist. We give them the direction they need to apply to become poll worker to help administer the election. Around the country weve seen states working hard but struggling to hire poll workers, so we bring the workers directly to them to ensure municipalities have the coverage they need to effectively administer elections.

The RNC has also encouraged voting by mail over the past few months.

Absentee voting, early voting, and Election Day voting are all good options, Trump said in an April post on Truth Social. Republicans must make a plan, register, and vote!

RNC spokeswoman Anna Kelly told The Federalist that the RNCs Swamp the Vote and Protect the Vote programs are meant to ensure that Americans feel confident casting their ballot, whether its by mail, early in-person, or on Election Day. One way this is done, according to the RNC, is through a statewide hotline in each state where the RNC provides rapid response when voting issues are reported. The RNC said the operation would be scaled up for the general election and specifically in battleground states.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2

Read more:

Grassroots To GOP: Dont Be Complacent Just Because Dems Are A Dumpster Fire - The Federalist

Who is J.D. Vance? Millions of Americans have been asking this question since former President Donald Trump announced that Vance, a bestselling author and junior senator from Ohio, would be his running mate in the 2024 presidential election. Unfortunately, the majority of prominent media sources available to our nations electorate have already proven themselves unable (or unwilling) to answer it.

Given we are talking about the potential next vice president of the country and, if history is our tutor, a likely future president such malfeasance represents the embarrassing degree to which our establishment media have abandoned their mission.

The Washington Post, given its location in our nations capital and history (or notoriety) of reporting on the latest political scoops and scandals purports to be the most important print source of election-related news in the country. Yet in the days following the announcement of Vance being selected as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, the Post directed its news coverage to negative (if not also bizarre) stories regarding the sitting senator.

One such piece discussed how many of Vances neighbors in his overwhelmingly liberal Northern Virginia community dont like him (not exactly a surprise given the Washington metropolitan area has twice as many Democrats as Republicans). Another noted that many people who admired Vance after reading his 2016 bestselling book, Hillbilly Elegy, now detest him because of his politics. Yet another reported that a few far-right loonies have criticized Vance for marrying a woman of South-Asian descent or, alternatively, highlighted Vances earlier criticisms of Trump. One even alleged that hes an election-denier (part and parcel of the Posts publicly acknowledged willingness to forgo neutrality in its news reporting).

In vain will Post readers find much, if any, reporting on Vances tenure in the Senate, during which time he co-sponsored bills with Democrat Sens. Raphael Warnock and Elizabeth Warren, nor even his current senatorial committee assignments, which would give an indication of his congressional expertise. What you will learn instead is that he held up dozens of ambassador nominations because of concerns over diplomats positions on transgender ideology and diversity hiring as if the quality and pace of Department of State postings are of serious concern to anyone besides foreign policy wonks or a few federal employees. Though I subscribe to the Post, I had to run a search within its website to find a single article detailing Vances positions on such topics as the economy, abortion, immigration, and Ukraine.

Not that The Washington Post is all that unique. CNNs Fast Facts offers no information on Vances political positions though, once again, youll learn he was once critical of Trump (arent people allowed to change their political opinions?). Another CNN piece analyzes Vances positions according to his autobiography, as if a 2016 book published years before he was even in politics is the best source available on that topic. Youll also learn from CNN that Russia is reportedly eager to have Vance on the ticket, while other European nations are not. (Does CNN think Russians or Europeans should be voting in our presidential election?)

Or try this: Run a search in Google for J.D. Vance, click news, and see what you get. When I did on July 22, the top stories included further reporting on far-right personalities attacking Vances wife and multiple op-eds claiming that Vance is a hillbilly poser who doesnt represent the white working-class or Appalachia. According to The Atlantic, Hillbilly Women Will Get No Help From J. D. Vance, and he is full of hillbilly excuses. (I suppose we should have always expected elitist mockery of a man willing to self-identify using derogatory slang).

So what? you may retort to the medias not-exactly-surprising leftist bent. Legacy media are offering nothing but critical coverage of a Republican politician gunning for the second-highest office in the land would we expect anything different in 2024? The answer, for those who have been paying attention to a media sphere that has quite willingly shed its attempts to be unbiased Republicans comprising less than 5 percent of journalists is no, we should obviously not expect impartiality from the likes of MSNBC or The New York Times.

Nevertheless, leftist corporate medias coverage of J.D. Vance indicates something even more damning than its obvious, long-documented political bias. American voters know that media in the last generation have undergone a siloing: Left-leaning voters watch CNN or The Big Three (ABC, NBC, CBS), and right-leaning voters watch Fox News. Democrats read The Washington Post and The New York Times, while conservatives read The Wall Street Journal.

Though voters are now accustomed to expecting bias even in news coverage, one might at least hope that in an election year, voters of all political persuasions would be able to learn from any news source a few basic facts about the people on both presidential tickets, including, most importantly, what political positions those candidates hold and why.

That finding such information now requires wading through pages (or hours) of biased, politically motivated content cynically presented as straight factual reporting is an indictment on a fourth estate that has become embarrassingly compromised by ideology.

Who is J.D. Vance? Dont bother asking legacy media even if they knew, they wouldnt tell you. Much better, in their view, to force-feed audiences on buzzwords (e.g., election-denier, anti-immigrant, white nationalist) aimed at ruining the Ohio senators reputation by November. Thankfully, fewer and fewer Americans are fooled by such journalistic chicanery.

Yet, as citizens of a free republic, we should expect more from our educated, professional class, who, whatever their personal political opinions, are supposed to be motivated by a patriotic, humble sense of service to all American citizens. As the framers understood, the establishment, because of its position of relative power, is supposed to strenuously labor to serve and faithfully communicate with the electorate in all its diversity, lest it be perceived by that electorate as a tyrannical oligarchy. And if you know much of anything about vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, youd know such motivations are central to his own meteoric entrance into public service.

Casey Chalk is a senior contributor at The Federalist and an editor and columnist at The New Oxford Review. He has a bachelors in history and masters in teaching from the University of Virginia and a masters in theology from Christendom College. He is the author of The Persecuted: True Stories of Courageous Christians Living Their Faith in Muslim Lands.

Follow this link:

Who Is J.D. Vance? Dont Expect The Corrupt Media To Tell You - The Federalist

The powers that be decided this week that despite her disastrous approval numbers and long history of unpopularity among Democrat voters, Vice President Kamala Harris will take President Joe Bidens place as the blue partys presumptive 2024 candidate.

Here are 30 reasons why Harris, whether through Bidens resignation or the upcoming election, would make a terrible president.

Harris had a front-row seat to President Joe Bidens mental and physical deterioration but never said a word. In fact, she routinely issued statements indicating Biden was fit enough to stay president.

Harrisbelievesthe pro-terrorist activists taking over college campuses, occupying highways, and defacing military cemeteries are merely showing exactly what the human emotion should be.

Harris famously refusedto say which abortion limits she supports in a September 2023 sitdown with CBSs Margaret Brennan.

Biden named Harris as border czar in 2021, but it took her months to visit ground zero of the record-breaking invasion her administration incentivized. The Border Patrol chiefs responsible for securing the border also confirmed that Harris never spoke with them.

Harris traveled thousands of miles away from the U.S. border invasion she was tasked with handling to deliver peace and security to the borders of Ukraine, which is a country.

Harris claimed she saw horrible footage of Border Patrol agents whipping illegal border crossers, but a U.S. Customs and Border Protection investigationfound no evidence that the horseback unit used their reins to strike migrants.

One of Harris most notable accomplishments is receiving the worst vice presidential rating in the history of modern polling. Her abysmal job approval ratings have only continued, often ranking worse than Bidens, and do not suggest that shes up to the task of taking over the presidency.

A whopping 92 percent of Harris staff left in her first three years as vice president.

While arguing against voter ID laws, Harris claimed that its almost impossible for rural Americans to make a photocopy.

Harris has tried to come off asinspirational, but her speeches and public addresses are often riddled with jumbled, off-script chattering or unintelligible babble that rivals Bidens incoherence.

Harris used the presidential podium to cheer on Democrats for taking on rightly the crisis pregnancy centers.

Accused rapists, repeat offenders, and rioters alike benefitted in June 2020 when Harris encouraged her social media followers to donate to a bail fund dedicated to those arrested for their months-long, $2 billion siege of cities like Minneapolis. The vice president later lied about her involvement in the money-raising scheme.

During the peak of Black Lives Matter calls to defund the police in 2020, Harris refused to say whether she supported defunding law enforcement. Instead, she championed meeting thedire need for mental health resources.

Harris loves to tell a story about asking for fweedom from her stroller at a civil rights march. That supposed childhood memory, however, suspiciously resembles one Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. told Playboy in 1965.

During her short-lived presidential campaign in 2020, Harris debuted plans for a $100 billion home-ownership subsidy for black families she claims should be repaid for generations of discrimination.

Harris threatened during the 2020 Democrat primary debate to take executive action on guns if Congress did not meet her demands by passing the most comprehensive background check policy weve had. After taking office, Harris claimed no one is trying to come after your guns as the Biden administration and Democrats prepared to do just that.

During the 2020 vice presidential debate, Harris proudly promised the Biden-Harris White House would repeal a bill that prevented a$4 trillion increase in taxes.

Theres no question Im in favor of banning fracking, Harris said during a 2019 CNN town hall.

Harris failed infants in 2019 when she voted alongside other Democrats against legislation that would compel doctors to give babies born alive after botched abortions the same level of care other humans receive.

During a CNN town hall forum in 2019, Harris said she wanted to eliminate all private insurance, which would strip millions of Americans of their health coverage.

I am opposed to any policy that would deny in our country any human being from access to public safety, public education or public health, period, Harris told CNNs Jake Tapper in 2019.

Harris called the staged hate crime an attempted modern-day lynching. She did not apologize even after Smollett was found guilty of felony disorderly conduct and making false police reports.

Harris claimed Rev. Al Sharpton, who has a history of inciting race riots and anti-Jewish pogroms, has spent his life fighting for whats right and working to improve our nation. She also spoke at a summit with ties to the former Womens March Chair Tamika Mallory, who stepped down after praising Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

In 2019, Harris called on then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to suspend Donald Trumps account because she deemed his tweets incendiary.

As a senator, Harris was a proud co-sponsor ofthe original version of the Womens Health Protection Act, which sought tocodify abortionthrough all nine months of pregnancy.

As a senator, Harris asked the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement if he saw any parallels between the KKK and his agency.

When pressed about Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs proposed 70 percent tax hike in 2019, Harris called the freshman legislator fantastic and praised her for challenging the status quo.

As a senator in 2018, Harris smeared Brian Buescher, a nominee for the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, for his affiliation with the famous Catholic fraternal organization Knights of Columbus and its historically pro-life views.

Harris not only publicly declared her belief in Christine Blasey Fords evidenceless allegations against Justice Brett Kavanaugh but used her position as senator to interrupt and smear the Trump nominee numerous times during his 2018 confirmation hearings. Even after Kavanaugh officially joined the high court, Harris claimed his confirmation was a denial of justice for the women of this country.

As California attorney general, Harris prosecuted journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt for exposing Planned Parenthood fortrafficking the body parts of aborted babies.Part of her prosecution involved a raid on Daleidens house, where investigators allegedly seized footage further implicating the abortion giant and handed it over to Harris abortion campaign donors.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on X @jordanboydtx.

Read the original:

Top 30 Reasons Kamala Harris Would Be A Terrible President - The Federalist

Google has severely throttled users ability to search for the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump less than three weeks after he avoided certain death by less than an inch. In doing so, Google joins what appears to be a trend to suppress information about the attack.

Trump narrowly survived the July 13 assassination attempt during a Butler, Pennsylvania, rally when he cocked his head to the right to look at a graph showing illegal immigration under his administration. A bullet struck his ear. Fifty-year-old Corey Comperatore was fatally shot after shielding his wife and daughter from gunfire, and two additional rallygoers were severely injured.

But Google users might not know that because Google has suppressed autocomplete search attempts.

[READ NEXT: Biden Praises Secret Service Director Who Allowed Trump To Get Shot In The Head]

A cursory search of assassination attempt on t produces two top autocomplete hits: assassination attempt on Truman and assassination attempt on the pope. A broader search of assassination attempt on produces 10 autocomplete hits none of which relates to Trumps assassination attempt.

A Google spokesperson told Fox Business that the autocomplete feature is just a tool to help people save time

Following this terrible act, people turned to Google to find high quality information we connected them with helpful results, and will continue to do so, the spokesperson said, according to Fox Business. Google is reportedly working on improving the system.

But as Federalist CEO and co-founder Sean Davis said in a post on X, the left, which has questioned whether Trump was really shot, is trying to make sure no one can see the evidence, at which point theyll go back to claiming it never happened.

The online outlet Mother Jones questioned whether Trump was actually hit by a bullet and said it was unclear. Mother Jones Mark Follman tacitly admitted the only reason that question was worth posing is because the left is upset that Trumps survival and strength in the immediate aftermath of the assassination attempt were politically advantageous.

MSNBCs Michael Steele questioned whether Trump was struck by a bullet or actually shards of glass from the teleprompter itself.

Of course none of these questions is surprising given that FBI Director Christopher Wray who has, according to my colleague Joy Pullman, refused to provide Congress information about the bureaus activities during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot said during a congressional hearing that theres some question about whether or not its a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear.

The FBI later determined Trump was struck by a bullet though the FBIs confirmation was not necessary given the ample video and photographic evidence showing just the same.

But such photographic evidence was also the target of the lefts ire, with a photo editor and photographer from a major news outlet, as described by Axios, saying the amount that publications have been using Evans photo is kind of free P.R. for Trump in a way, and its [sic] dangerous for media organizations to keep sharing that photo despite how good it is.

The unidentified source said that no one was talking about how these photos could impact public perception in the rush to get it out.

With less than 100 days until Election Day, many on the left are trying to memory-hole Trumps assassination attempt because they fear it could be politically advantageous to the former president.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2

Continued here:

The Left Is Trying To Memory-Hole Trumps Assassination Attempt - The Federalist

House Democrats are pushing to have the former Jan. 6 Committee chairman who sought to strip former President Donald Trump of his security detail earlier this year serve on a bipartisan commission investigating the recent assassination attempt.

On Tuesday, Punchbowl News reported that former Jan. 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., is one top candidate Democrats are considering for an appointment to the 11-person panel established by House leadership.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries can choose five Democrats to serve along with six Republicans, Punchbowl reported. Democrats are still sorting through potential candidates. But one name weve heard is Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). Thompson is the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security panel and chaired the Jan. 6 Committee.

In the spring, however, Thompson introduced legislation to leave Trump vulnerable to assassination with the Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable (DISGRACED) Former Protectees Act (HR 8081). The bill, proposed in April, would have terminated Secret Service protection for otherwise qualified candidates who are convicted of a felony. Trump was convicted by a New York jury in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records when the Manhattan real estate mogul labeled payments to a lawyer as legal expenses.

The Mississippi lawmaker wrote in a post on X he was glad the former President is safe following a would-be assassins bullet tearing through Trumps ear at a Pennsylvania rally. Trump miraculously survived the assassination attempt with a last-second tilt of the head to read a chart on immigration.

Punchbowl News not only omitted Thompsons efforts to remove Trumps security detail, but the outlet also said nothing of the former Jan. 6 Committee chairmans misconduct on the partisan panel that was weaponized to throw political opponents in jail without proper oversight.

In March, House lawmakers investigating the Jan. 6 Committees conduct reported that Thompsons probe deleted troves of records from the two-year inquisition to cover up additional abuses by the committee. The Federalist had just revealed the committee led by Thompson and disgraced Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney concealed testimony from former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato, who told investigators Trump pled for D.C. leadership to accept 10,000 National Guard reinforcements for local police ahead of Jan. 6, 2021.

The Jan. 6 Committee ultimately imprisoned two former Trump officials who refused to comply with subpoenas issued by lawmakers on the panel, which was improperly established in the lower chamber. Former Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro completed a four-month prison sentence and flew straight to Milwaukee, where he gave a defiant speech at the Republican National Convention.

Steve Bannon, who previously served as an adviser in the Trump White House and runs the War Room podcast, was similarly sentenced to four months behind bars earlier this month.

The Secret Service director in charge of the agency when Trump was shot resigned Tuesday after a bipartisan grilling before the House Oversight Committee.

Read more:

Democrats Eyeing J6 Chairman To Probe Assassination Attempt - The Federalist

Democrats are offended that Republicans are pointing out Vice President Kamala Harris was a diversity hire. What do they have against diversity, equity, and inclusion? Shouldnt they be celebrating those concepts? It was the left, after all, that conceived and implemented DEI programs around the country.

Kamala Harris faces racial DEI attacks amid campaign for the 2024 presidency,explainsABC News. Incredibly insulting,saysSusan Rice. Right-wing media figures call Kamala Harris a DEI candidate as race-based attacks ramp up, writes the perpetually confused Oliver Darcy. Is it 1951?askedMorning Joe.

Sort of, yes. In 1951, many white Americans still judged their fellow citizens by immutable characteristics like the color of their skin. Today, a new group of Americans are doing the same thing, including journalists who stopped using black as a descriptor of a color and then started capitalizing the word to strongly suggest that skin color defines a person. Scarborough should ask his good buddy Al Sharpton, a big-time defender of DEI, how all of it works.

Lets face it, the only reason mentioning DEI is considered a racial attack by the left is because DEI is a racist policy. The anger over the Kamala accusation is a tacit admission that race- and sex-based hiring practices degrade a persons accomplishments and career. If that is true of the vice president, it is surely true of the millions of minority women and men toiling to make it out in the real world.

Democrats are going to spin this by arguing that it is factually incorrect to contend that Harris was picked because of her gender and color. The argument coming from Republicans is Harris who had served 13 years as DA + AG before 3.5 years in the Senate was a DEI hire for Biden, while JD Vance who wrote a bestseller, worked in venture capital briefly & has been in the Senate 18 months was picked because of his rsum,arguedCNN Senior Reporter Edward-Isaac Dovere.

No, thats not the argument. The argument is that Biden decided to, or was pressured into, picking a black woman by Democrats in 2020. He promised to do it. He bragged about doing it. All Dovere had to do was search his own website to find the evidence.

Joe Biden Says He Is Considering Four Black Women To Be His Running Mate, a 2020 CNN headlineexplained not four of the most qualified people. Joe Biden Pressed Again To Name A Black Woman As His Running Mate,reada headline in The Washington Post. Pressure Grows On Joe Biden To Pick A Black Woman As His Running Mate,saidan NPR headline, right under the words America Reckons With Racial Injustice written a little more than three years after Barack Obama finished his eight-year tenure as the most powerful man in the world.

It was clear that Kamala Harris wasnt the meritocratic choice, not even among the other 2020 Democrat Party presidential contenders. Her campaign didnt even make it to Iowa. Her senate career was undistinguished. Her polling was atrocious. She was unable to run a campaign or keep her staff.

Of course, Im not nave. Harris isnt the first candidate whos been picked, fully or in part, because of her background, personal appeal, and physical characteristics. Vance is Trumps veep pick because he allegedly strongly appeals to the forgotten Rust Belt working man, not because hes the most accomplished person in America. One suspects he would admit as much.

Now, none of this means that many African Americans and Hispanic kids dont often have to overcome failing schools, poverty, and other obstacles just as other groups have in the past. (Harris is not one of these people, by the way.) This puts them at a serious disadvantage. So, lets fix (or better yet, dismantle) the public school system and welfare state that break apart families and undermine opportunity and stop punishing other Americans who have earned their opportunities.

Should GOP attack Harris over her hiring a good campaign attack. No. But, in the end, if you dont want your preferred candidate being called a DEI hire, stop bean-counting people by their color and sex.

Go here to see the original:

Why Is It Offensive To Call Kamala A DEI Hire? - The Federalist

Following the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, one of the most prominent news bytes among the propaganda media was the shooters alleged political affiliation.

Corporate media outlets didnt hesitate to note that Thomas Crooks, the 20-year-old Pennsylvania native who shot Trump in the face, killed a rally attendee, and injured two others, was a registeredRepublican.

Crooks was a registered Republican, according to Pennsylvania voter records,wroteNBC News in an article the day after the assassination attempt. A CNN article with the headline What We Know About The Trump Rally Gunman So Far used the line A 20-year-old living in a crucial swing state to begin to describe the man who wreaked irreversible havoc on July 13. USA Today reported that Crooks donated to ActBlue but registered as a Republican after he turned 18 later the same year.

In the wake of Trumps near assassination, some in the media find the most pressing detail Crooks political affiliation, as if Crooks allegedly being a registered Republican removes the layer of political violence from the attack: he is supposedly one of Trumps own. Of course, corporate media would love to have another excuse to portray political violence as a right-wing problem, as they have with their coverage of Jan. 6.

In reality, there is no shortage of left-wing radical assassins. Here are five assassinations and assassination attempts on presidents committed by left-wing perpetrators.

Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. It has recently been alleged that Oswald was an agent of the Soviet KGB and was initially ordered to assassinate JFK, though the KGB changed course and Oswald later acted on his own.

In any case, Oswald had declared himself communist and defected to the Soviet Union. Originally a United States Marine, the KGB allegedly recruited Oswald when he was serving with the U.S. military in Japan.

The political climate in the Soviet Union at the time of Kennedys assassination was extremely hostile toward the American republic. In the middle of the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union came close to nuclear war, specifically during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Communism was the rule of the land in the Soviet Union, promoting anti-capitalist philosophies. The Soviet government was a monolithic, monopolistic ruling party that dominated the political, economic, social, and cultural life of the U.S.S.R. and was at odds with American culture, politics, and values throughout the duration of the Cold War.

Leon Czolgosz shot and killed President William McKinley in September of 1901. After Czolgoszswageswere lowered at the mill he worked at, he became increasingly interested in workers rights and felt that there was inequality between the rich and the working class. It isreportedthat he began to read radical books and writings, and was particularly interested in anarchist Gaetano Bresci, who assassinated the king of Italy. Czolgosz himself could be described as an anarchist.

Anarchy is an anti-capitalist, libertarian, and socialist philosophy.

Left-wing anarchistsoppose natural hierarchies, private property, and government. By their logic, a ruler is someone who owns private property, holds a managerial position, or is a government official, according to the Mises Institute.

Reportedly [Czolgoszs] last words were: I killed the president because he was the enemy of the good people the working people.'

Czolgoszs words are consistent with the philosophy of left-wing anarchy. His anger at the presidents supposed attack on the working class underscores Czolgoszs motivations to assassinate McKinley.

Another anarchist, Giuseppe Zangara, targeted President-Elect Franklin D. Roosevelt, shouting, Too many people are starving! as he aimed at FDR and attempted to shoot him. Zangara fired six shots, hitting five people, including fatally wounding the mayor of Chicago, who was at the event FDR was speaking at.

It isreportedthat Zangara said, I dont hate Mr. Roosevelt personally, I hate all officials and anyone who is rich. Additionally, he told the FBI, Since my stomach hurt I want to make even with the capitalists by kill [sic] the president. My stomach hurt long time [sic].

Like Czolgosz, Zangara was an anarchist with a deep distaste for the wealthy in America. Although FDR was a leftist himself, Czolgoszs radical left-wing ideology brewed a deep-seated hatred of anyone with privilege, a common pillar of anti-capitalist and socialist theories.

Sara Jane Moore tried to kill President Gerald R. Ford in 1975 at a hotel in San Francisco. She shot at the president from 40 feet away and missed because someone in the crowd grabbed the gun at the last moment.

Moore was not a textbook assassin, she was a mother and accountant in her mid-40s. She was also extremely vague when she described her motives to the police.

However, her life before the assassination attempt provides clues about her radical ideology and paranoia. Moore associated with left-wing groups, and when she became an FBI informant in the 1970s, the bureau tasked her with infiltrating left-leaning radical organizations. Just prior to the shooting, she stopped working for the FBI and was convinced they wanted her dead.

I was going to go down anyway, Mooresaid. If the government was going to kill me, I was going to make some kind of statement.

John Hinckley Jr., who shot President Ronald Reagan, was ultimately found not guilty due to alleged insanity.

Recently, Hinckley has decided to start his own political party, called the National Redemption Party.

The 67-year-old said in a tweet that the NRP is for peace, love, racial equality, LGBTQ Rights, Abortion Rights, the Green New Deal,'wrotethe HuffPost, quoting from a since-deleted post on X. NRP also opposes the Mob that controls the music industry.

Hinckleys party platform uncannily resembles that of the modern-day Democrat Party.

Kamden Mulder is a summer intern at The Federalist. She is a senior at Hillsdale College pursuing a degree in American Studies and Journalism.

Read this article:

There Is No Shortage Of Radical Left-Wing Assassins. Here Are Five Examples - The Federalist