Category Archives: Federalist

With news that Congress is on its way to passing new gun control laws that will make it easier for bureaucrats to disarm law-abiding Americans, the United States is once again repeating the egregious mistake of responding to a perceived emergency by crippling constitutional protections for Americans unalienable rights.

First we had the post-9/11 passage of the Patriot Act and its creation of a national security surveillance state that tracks and records Americans digital communications despite the absence of probable cause, legal warrants, or explicit consent. Then we had the Department of Homeland Securitys recent flirtation with a disinformation board meant to regulate speech and censor points of view at odds with the governments officially sanctioned narratives.

Now we have a renewed push for red flag laws intended to deprive Americans of their weapons without proper due process or criminal conviction. Over the last 20 years, Americas First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments have been under sustained attack, and, amazingly, it has been elected officials sworn by oath to support and defend those same amendments who have led much of the charge.

Theres nothing so dangerous as a politician who undermines the Bill of Rights during a moment of tragedy or crisis. Those rights, set forth as the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution as a redundancy to make explicitly clear what is beyond the scope of the federal governments enumerated powers, are not wishy-washy suggestions meant to be ignored during times of emergency. On the contrary, it is during such times when their safeguards become most critical.

After suffering a terrorist attack, or enduring the ravages of lockdowns, or reeling from the staggering loss of young murder victims, trading freedom for the alluring promises of peace and security is at once reckless and irresistible. That is why our first ten amendments are a necessary line in the sand, so to speak, a caution from one generation of Americans to the next about the dangerous predilection of ever-encroaching government power to descend toward outright tyranny.

In this way, the Bill of Rights represents both a prohibition against illegitimate government action and a kind of easily digestible warning label counseling ordinary citizens: should your government attempt to infringe these most basic rights, then you will know that your continuing freedom is in jeopardy.

Too many elected officials today speak of the protections within the Bill of Rights as if they were created out of thin air and can be erased as indiscriminately as they are perceived to have been written down. It should be noted that many of the original ratifiers of the U.S. Constitution and its subsequent first ten amendments feared later generations would come to this erroneous conclusion.

Some opposed to the explicit adoption of a Bill of Rights thought it unnecessary, since the federal governments powers were already strictly limited to those enumerated. They also worried that guaranteeing certain specific rights might have the perverse effect of endangering American freedoms not affirmatively recorded.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments dual assurances that The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people and that The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people were meant to redress this risk. The Bill of Rights, in other words, provides expansive protection for individual liberty, constrained only by those powers constitutionally delegated to the federal government.

This moral idea that personal freedom should be maximized and government power minimized has always been revolutionary. It recognized that all legitimate power first originates with the people before they voluntarily cede some of their power to a functioning government. Conversely, when Congress decides that it may disregard the express prohibitions set forth in the Bill of Rights in order to pursue its own policy preferences, then it resurrects that same system where those with power rule and those without power obey.

To have any value, individual rights must belong wholly to the people. If personal freedoms were understood as nothing more than gifts from the government to the people, then they would be reduced to mere privileges either granted or denied according to the states prerogative. For unalienable natural rights to have substantive meaning, they must be inherently possessed by individual Americans, immune from the vagaries of government whim.

For free speech, the right to self-defense, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and due process to protect Americans ably from the potential threats of government tyranny, they must exist irrespective of any government action seeking their dilution or outright abrogation. Whereas man-made laws may sway from side to side when a nation faces heavy winds, it is imperative that unalienable natural rights never bend.

Congress always has a good reason for disregarding the Bill of Rights. Its just a red flag law targeting crazies with guns. Its just a little warrantless surveillance meant to stop domestic extremists. Its just a little regulation of speech necessary to counter disinformation and lies. Every new restriction on Americans freedom is always touted as instrumental to saving lives.

Theres never any time, it seems, to stop and ask: who will be empowered to judge which Americans are crazy or extremist or spreading lies? Who will be given the authority to decide which Americans have unalienable rights and which Americans do not? When rights are reduced to nothing more than government privileges, after all, it matters a great deal who will be handing out those gifts.

As Congress and President Biden look to undermine the Second Amendment with new gun control laws this year, dont forget the hidden costs. When rights remain as strong as oak, they endure regardless of any perceived emergency. When rights become as malleable as plastic, though, they melt quickly under even the gentlest sun.

J.B. Shurk is a freedom-minded, anti-establishment, sometimes unorthodox, committed generalist and a proud American from Daniel Boone country.

Read the original here:

Congress Finds Even More Reasons To Disregard The Bill of Rights - The Federalist

This past week, a group of ten Republican senators, led by Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, met with the ten Democrat senators, led by Sen. Chris Murphy, in a bipartisan committee to write new federal gun control legislation. According to The Independent, the legislation will include an expansion of background checks for people under age 21 to include a search of juvenile justice registries, as well as a federal grant program that will encourage states to pass red flag laws, which allow family members or law enforcement to petition courts to temporarily restrict certain persons from owning firearms.

While Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is hailing this as a great example of compromise and placating the do something! crowd, this is rather a shameless concession that will make Americans less safe, less free, and less represented while emboldening todays toxic Democrats to wreck the country even further.

Obviously, the proposed bill is meant to be a response to the mass shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo. Democrats want to disarm potential psychos by placing more barriers to owning and using a gun, and Republicans want more intervention with individuals who suffer from mental health problems. On the surface, their bill seems to be a win-win: fewer guns and fewer crazy people.

Except that these two incidents have almost nothing to do with guns or psychopaths, and everything to do with the profound dysfunction of American law enforcement. There were plenty of red flags with both shooters that warranted earlier intervention and immediate action, but nothing happened.

In Buffalo, there were already red flag laws, and no one bothered to enforce them. And in the Uvalde shooting, police officers actively impeded any kind of intervention while the shooter was shooting people, mostly children, for at least an hour.

So this new legislation would only empower and enrich incompetent police officers and punish and disable law-abiding Americans. Instead of deterring these monsters with armed civilians, the government will deter those civilians from becoming armed in the first place. Added to this is the costly and politicized bureaucracy to enforce these regulations on people who have done nothing wrong.

On a deeper level, it must be reiterated that these types of regulations are an unconstitutional violation of civil liberties. The Second Amendment guarantees Americans the right to use firearms to defend themselves according to Justin Trudeau, Canadians have no such right.

Like the right to free speech, the right to due process, or the right to be treated equally, the Second Amendment empowers individuals against all forms of tyranny, whether that be from the state, the corporate elite, the mob, criminal organizations, or any other oppressor. Take it away, and Americans have one less tool to protect their freedom, their property, and their lives.

For people who dont own firearms, this may be too abstract. Therefore, as a good analogy they can consider restrictions on their right to own and drive a car (which, by the way, kills thousands more Americans each year than firearms). At that moment, all people would be forced to depend on the governments approval to drive a car of the governments own choosing or rely on government-run mass transit.

Perhaps some may be fine with this, living in an urban area where they have a semi-functional bus and subway system and few places to go, unless they are rich, leftist, and own a fleet of Teslas. However, the great majority of people would resent being restricted in this way, and object that their right to automobility (which isnt an amendment, but probably should be) was being infringed.

In response, those who oppose such freedoms could always claim that there are fewer traffic accidents, and the United States is finally starting to resemble the rest of the developed world. The matter would finally rest there, and the government would put another freedom on the chopping block.

As it is with driving a car of ones choice, so it is with protecting oneself with a gun of ones choice. So many social reforms may fall under the heading of safety, but they inevitably translate to more government control. This is Democrats whole agenda. Whether its gun restrictions, diversity quotas, ending economic security in the name of climate change, or eliminating poverty, all of it amounts to the government having more control and making Americans less independent and self-sufficient.

All of this is why Republicans need to stop meeting their political opponents halfway. G. K. Chestertons criticism made more than a century ago is still quite apt: Compromise used to mean that half a loaf was better than no bread. Among modern statesmen it really seems to mean that half a loaf is better than a whole loaf. With this new bill, McConnell and the rest of the ilk are celebrating yet another half-loaf while their constituents already suffer from malnutrition.

Its a mistake to view todays Democrats as fellow Americans who share the same values and goals but have different ideas of how to get there. Rather, they have completely different goals and will employ any means to achieve them, even if that means putting on show trials, exploiting mass shootings, and intimidating and threatening opponents to say nothing of rigging elections, bankrupting the country, and ushering in millions of illegal immigrants.

The time for negotiation and crossing the aisle is over, and has been for a long time. Democrats have figured this out and continue to push their failed policies with impunity. Republican leadership continues to play political patty cake while their country goes up in flames. The American people are on their own right now. And its times like these where an individuals freedoms matter most, particularly the freedom to defend oneself.

Read this article:

This Is The Wrong Time To Compromise With Democrats On Gun Rights Or Anything Else - The Federalist

The House Select Committee on Jan. 6 continued its show trials Thursday in the panels third hearing on the Capitol riot probing everything but the riot.

Retired federal judge Michael Luttig and former White House counsel for Vice President Mike Pence, Greg Jacob, testified before the committee on the vice presidents role certifying the election results over President Donald Trumps objections.

Luttig told the committee Pences compliance with Trumps orders to halt certification of the 2020 contest would have been the first constitutional crisis since the founding of the republic.

If I had been advising the vice president of the United States on Jan. 6, Luttig said, I would have laid my body across the road before I would have let the vice president overturn the 2020 election.

The panel spent hours reviewing Trumps efforts through theories espoused by attorney and law professor John Eastman to convince the vice president to thwart the electoral process on Jan. 6. Pence ultimately rebuked the president and continued with certification until the mob breached Capitol security interrupting the joint session of Congress. The vice president was taken to a secure location under the complex while rioters chanted hang Mike Pence above.

The Jan. 6 Committee characteristically dedicated little time to the Capitol security failures that put Pences safety in jeopardy, and instead blamed Trump for doing so through a pressure campaign to stop the count.

After about two hours, the House panel finally detailed Pences whereabouts at the Capitol as rioters overwhelmed police and entered the chambers.

California Democrat Rep. Pete Aguilar, who led Thursdays questioning, asked Pence counsel Jacobs, who was with the vice president throughout the riot about the days events.

Forty feet between the vice president and the mob, Aguilar said after playing footage from the Capitol. Mr. Jacob, you were there, seeing that for the first time, does it surprise you to see how close the mob was to the evacuation route that you took?

I could hear the din of the rioters in the building while we moved but I dont think I was aware that they were as close as that, Jacobs said, and was later asked to recount how his faith comforted him amid the riot.

The questioning was obviously designed to solicit emotion for a committee operating with the sole purpose of smearing political dissidents without any legitimate legislative value. If Aguilar and the rest of the panel were seriously concerned about Pences safety and the circumstances that led to the vice president being forced to shelter in a secure location, a more appropriate subject for questioning would have been former House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving. If not Irving, then any other top official involved in maintaining Capitol security or Pences secret service detail, which must have coordinated with officials at the complex.

As House Speaker Nancy Pelosis chief security officer in the lower chamber, Irving is at the center of the controversy surrounding the failures that led the mob into the Capitol. According to former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, Irving and Pelosi refused to deploy the National Guard to reinforce the Capitol security team six times. Irving said the National Guard presence would be bad optics.

Capitol Police, meanwhile, were ill-equipped and ill-trained to handle the horde of demonstrators who flooded the Capitol, according to a 128-page bipartisan Senate report, and were only half-staffed on Jan. 6. Irving, however, refused cooperation with lawmakers in the upper chamber.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

See original here:

J6 Committee Ignores Capitol Security Failures In Third Show Trial Hearing - The Federalist

Tim Sale died Thursday. He was one of the best and most iconic comic book artists of the last 30 years. He was known primarily for a handful of major collaborations with writer Jeph Loeb on Batman and Superman in particular. Their two most important works were probably Batman: The Long Halloween and Superman for All Seasons. But my personal favorite was Spider-Man: Blue.

Superman for All Seasons was probably their greatest work. Several years ago I picked it as the greatest Superman story ever, and I stand by that. And Batman: The Long Halloween is an amazing piece of art. But it was the six issues they did on Spider-Man that have always had my heart. They were maybe the most normal thing the two ever did, which highlights what made Sale so special: Nothing about his art was normal.

Sales work was incomparable. It was both sloppy and precise, passionate and calculating, obtuse yet highly relatable. There are probably many better artists working in comics, but no one has ever drawn like Sale. His work was always instantly recognizable. No one could draw a cover that looked like a Tim Sale other than Tim Sale.

Every great comic book artist is unique and different, and they all have things that make their work distinctive. Jack Kirby, for instance, was known for his power and action. His panels were overflowing with comic book wonder and consistent disregard for human anatomy. Then you have Alex Ross, who does oil painting based on actual human models. Frank Miller is abstract and animalistic. Jim Lee is a perfectionist, Neal Adams is a classicist, John Romita Jr. is chaos incarnate, Steve Ditko was the industry standard, etc. The list of amazing comic artists is endless. But they all seem to be having a kind of conversation with each other over the decades. Theyre all playing a similar game, in essentially the same medium.

But Sale always felt like something else entirely.

Sure, he had influences. Superman for all seasons is at least 50 percent Norman Rockwell. But he also basically drew Superman like a huge thumb, and somehow we loved the Kryptonian even more that way. Sale had this ability to exaggerate and somehow make things feel more relatable at the same time.

Whats maybe most amazing about Sale is how little impact hes had on the industry in terms of overt influence. That sounds like a bad thing, imitation being the most sincere form of flattery. But Sales style was so precise, so specific to him, that it couldnt be imitated or even borrowed from. His artwork feels like a dream come to life; his pencil marks imbue characters with breath. Peter Parker and the Green Goblin seem like they are about to waltz right off the page, but not into our reality where bodies obey physics rather, into some other plane of real existence.

Thats one of the reasons Spider-Man: Blue is my favorite by him. Its so full of life, in a story about death. Each stroke of his pencil was laden with epic whimsy and romantic sadness. And his take on Spider-Man was pretty straightforward the character looked like a normal Spider-Man, instantly recognizable, the way Ditko and Lee had designed him all those years ago, yet somehow completely original. Sale always made every character his own, and converted them into his own visual language.

Spider-Man: Blue is the tale of an older Peter Parker, now married to Mary Jane, remembering his first love and how they finally got together. For the uninitiated, Peters first and arguably truest love was Gwen Stacy who was killed by the Green Goblin. Peter is recording the story of their romance on tapes in the attic, but because its a true Spider-Man story their romance involves just about every one of the major villains from his rogues gallery. And Sale nailed the look for all of them. But what is even more impressive is how he got the more mundane characters so perfectly. Using the most subtle implications of shape and form he makes the reader see Gwen Stacys soul and understand why losing her was so tragic.

Theres never going to be another Tim Sale. Comic purists and more sophisticated art snobs than I may not see the great sadness that conveys, but his utter uniqueness is still breathtaking to me. When he drew the bat cape it would magically change sizes, becoming ridiculously huge, and yet it never seemed silly. Whatever he did made emotional sense of what was happening in the writing at that moment. His Joker has teeth that appeared to be 5 or 8 inches long, and yet you never questioned it. Whatever Sale gave the reader, we simply devoured in an act of sheer gratefulness.

Thank you, Tim, for all the beauty you put into this world while you were here. I pray that you rest in peace.

A.C. Gleason is a proud alumnus of Biola University and Talbot Seminary. He teaches Philosophy full time. His writing has appeared in numerous outlets including Hollywood in Toto, The Daily Wire, and The Imaginative Conservative. He co-hosts and co-produces The AK47 Podcast with fellow Talbot Alum Kyle Hendricks.

Read the original:

Tim Sale Was Not A Normal Comic Book Artist, And There'll Never Be Another One Like Him - The Federalist

Nebraska joined the ranks of states cutting ties with the National School Boards Association on Saturday, making it the 25th state to boycott the organization after the NSBA sent a letter to President Biden in September 2021 urging the federal government to use domestic terrorism laws to go after parents at school board meetings. The Nebraska Association of School Boards voted to withdraw less than a month after its executive committee voted to cancel its membership, the Omaha World Herald reported.

The NSBAs letter to President Biden has enraged half of the states in the union now by suggesting that parental involvement in school board meetings amounts todomestic terrorism and by calling on the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Secret Service to quash parent interference. The letters first draft apparently included a petition for use of the Army National Guard but a different copy was sent.

[W]ith such acute threats and actions that are disruptive to our students well-being, to the safety of public school officials and personnel, and to interstate commerce, we urge the federal governments intervention against individuals or hate groups who are targeting our schools and educators, the letter read.

The only supposed hate group referenced in the letter was one that posted watchlists about school boards.

As states like Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania began to drop out of the association almost immediately, the NSBA issued an apology for the letter in October 2021, but the public backtracking hasnt stopped the mass exodus.

Nebraska politicians joined the state school board association in criticism of the NSBA letter, with Sen. Ben Sasse labeling the NSBAs collusion with the Biden Justice Department a political hack job and Gov. Pete Ricketts insisting that following the letters requests would be an absolute outrageous abuse of federal power meant to browbeat parents into not going to school board meetings.

Beth Whitehead is an intern at The Federalist and a journalism major at Patrick Henry College where she fondly excuses the excess amount of coffee she drinks as an occupational hazard.

See the article here:

Half Of The 50 States Have Now Ditched The NSBA For Targeting Parents - The Federalist

While Democrats continue exploiting the Uvalde shooting victims to prattle on about assault weapons and so-called common-sense gun control, another school was attacked on Thursday, but it wont make the headlines.

Thats because this school Walnut Park Elementary School in Gadsden, Alabama didnt have any victims except the would-be invader, who was shot dead by police after he tried and failed to bust into the building. Heres how it all reportedly went down.

A passerby saw a man aggressively trying to get into the school building. When the man was unsuccessful, he tried several other doors, all of which were locked. The responsible observer called to report the man, the school principal put the building on lockdown and called in a police officer who doubles as the school resource officer, and that officer called for backup. If the reports are correct, the chain of command worked smoothly thanks to decisive action and quickly followed protocols.

The resource officer reportedly engaged the would-be invader, who then also allegedly attempted to forcefully enter a marked police vehicle and to take the officers gun. More police officers rushed to the scene to help, and the assailant was shot and killed. According to the citys school superintendent, the schoolchildren who were there seemed to be unaware the incident occurred.

In other words, a man who aggressively tried to break into a school and take the firearm of a police officer was stopped because doors were properly locked and police officers acted bravely and urgently.

Hmm. Thats interesting. Because according to President Joe Biden, failed presidential candidate Beto ORourke, rom-com celebrity Matthew McConaughey, and late-night political scold Jimmy Kimmel, the only way to end the carnage of schoolchildren being murdered is to pass anti-gun laws or issue executive orders that radically infringe on the Second Amendment but are slapped with an innocuous common-sense qualifier so they dont sound so bad.

Nothing else would do the trick, such people say despite the fact that the Uvalde killer had no problem passing a background check, entered through an unlocked door, and faced little resistance from law enforcement for a disgustingly long time.

When Texas Sen. Ted Cruz responded to the Uvalde murder with calls for better school security in the form of locked doors and single-point entry, which could have prevented that killing, leftists and the corporate press ridiculed him for focusing on doors. [S]enator Ted Cruz comes out bravely against doors, scoffed The Atlantics Molly Jong-Fast on Twitter. Are they really gonna make it about too many doors on the school? They are, arent they? chimed in woke comedian Patton Oswalt.

Meanwhile, nobody on the left wants to talk about the criminal failures of the Uvalde police and the Department of Public Safety. Thats in part because if they had done their jobs rather than standing outside like cowards for the better part of an hour, lives undoubtedly would have been spared. Its also because the implication of Democrats disarming responsible citizens is that the only remaining defense will be armed government employees, who may or may not have the courage to actually help anyone.

Thankfully, in Alabama on Thursday, police did have that courage, and lives were saved because of it. But Democrats and their media lapdogs wont speak a word of Walnut Park Elementary because it obliterates their gun do somethingism.

It turns out we dont need celebrity lectures and sweeping gun control to keep schoolchildren safe. We just need locked doors and adults who do their dang jobs.

Here is the original post:

A Would-Be School Invader Failed Thanks To Locked Doors, Brave Police - The Federalist

The recently released Medicare trustees report estimates the programs Part A trust fund faces insolvency in 2028, two years later than last years estimate. Some might think that represents a major improvement in the programs fiscal position. But a fact-checkerat least a politically honest onemight say the 2028 projection lacks important context.

In reality, Medicare faces a series of financial challenges, many of them created by fiscal gimmicks, that make the programs shortfalls much greater than the official estimates suggest. Politicians have been hiding the hard facts about Medicare for decades, and when they finally have to face the fiscal musicwhich will happen sooner rather than laterthe American people will not like what they hear.

In truth, Medicares trust fund is already insolvent, and has been for several years. In 2009, the last year before Obamacares passage, the programs actuaries estimated trust fund insolvency in 2017five years ago. But suddenly, the year that Obamacare passed, the insolvency date got extended until 2029. What happened?

As some might recall, Obamacare lowered Medicare spending by $718 billion and raised several Medicare-related taxes. What happened with that money is such a Washington politicians gimmick that the politicians deserve to explain it themselves:

The Medicare reductions didnt really make the programs financial position any better in practice, because they went to fund Obamacare. They only improved Medicares solvency on paperpractically the only thing Washington politicians care about.

In other words, the double-counting of the Medicare cuts included in Obamacare has been the only thing keeping Medicare from acknowledging its trust fund insolvency. Its therefore entirely reasonable to call the program functionally insolvent. It in fact has been for several years.

As to the immediate reason the official insolvency date got pushed back to 2028, the trustees report explained that the new report estimates income, largely from payroll taxes, as 5 percent ($176 billion) higher from 2021-2028, with expenses only marginally increased.

But that estimated increase in payroll tax revenue could prove as fleeting as the phony double-counted Obamacare savings. The Medicare actuarys office, which compiles the trustees report, admitted that it locked in its economic assumptions behind this years report in February.

As with the Congressional Budget Offices recent estimate of the fiscal outlook for the next ten years, the Medicare actuarys estimates seem already outdated, due to the continued spike in inflation. Rising pricesand rising interest rates to counteract the inflationmean that most analysts believe the risk of recession has risen since the actuary completed its assumptions in February. And if a recession hits, most or all of that $176 billion in projected additional payroll tax revenuethe prime factor driving the extension of the official insolvency datewill likely evaporate.

The rising risk of a recession, and the looming insolvency of Medicare, represents but one of the many challenges the next president will have to faceand none too soon. Because of the Obamacare double-counting referenced above, politicians have spent the last decade with their heads in the sand about the need to right-size Medicare. If not for the Obamacare fiscal gimmick, Donald Trump and others would not have had the luxury of claiming they wouldnt cut anyones Medicarethe looming insolvency would have forced them to act.

Medicare faces challenges in the long term, too. The trustees report also discusses how current payment levels for doctors and hospitalssome of them created by Obamacare, some notwill fall to unsustainably low levels in coming decades, another way the official estimates significantly understate the depths of the problems the program faces.

To put it bluntly: Washington has spent the past several decades lying to the American people, by hiding the tough choices our nation will have to face about fiscal priorities as the Baby Boomers retire. Those long-delayed choices will finally start coming due over the next few years. When they do, the politicians who have dodged the truth for lo these many decades better have some good answers for why they did.

Read the original:

Fact Check: Medicare Is Already Functionally Insolvent - The Federalist

The Daily Wires Matt Walsh called for everyone at Fox News who aided in creating and promoting a controversial segment promoting chemical castration for children to be fired for celebrating that a 14-year-old girl named Ryland has been subjected to radical transgender ideology and practices since she was a baby.

I know for a fact that many people at Fox do not approve of this and never would have agreed to air radical far left trans propaganda, the What is a Woman? documentary creator tweeted on Friday afternoon. But Fox reporter Bryan L[l]enas chose to do this story and someone at Fox chose to put it on the air. Everyone involved should be fired immediately.

In the segment aired on Americas Newsroom on Friday, Fox News Correspondent Bryan Llenas explained in a voiceover that Rylands parents began sex experimentation on the child after determining that Before Ryland could even speak, he managed to tell his parents that he is a boy.

The poor kid is 14 now with a permanently altered body, condemned to live forever with an identity imposed as a small child. It is horrifying, evil, and sick. And it is what Fox chose to promote, Walsh added.

The reporter says that the child announced a new gender as a toddler. Does Fox want us to believe that BABIES can choose their gender? This is the most extreme, radical, dangerous form of gender ideology. And its being promoted on Fox News, Walsh continued.

Walsh said while he is grateful to have been given a platform by Fox News many times, he will risk his relationship with the network to call out the evil lunacy encapsulated in the 8-minute clip highlighting the YouTube family.

Walsh also called on Fox News viewers to demand that Fox publicly retract and apologize for the horrendous, dangerous propaganda it aired today and fire the people responsible for it.

Accept nothing less than full accountability, he wrote.

Walshs outrage was not only shared by his colleagues at The Daily Wire, but other conservatives and Fox News viewers who agreed the network had overstepped its bounds.

Conservative commentator and podcast host Allie Beth Stuckey condemned the segment asheartbreaking, maddening,andas extreme and depraved as it gets.

David Reaboi, a senior fellow at the prominent, conservative think tank Claremont Institutecalledthe decision to run the segment sick.

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

Read more:

Walsh: Fox Segment Praising Child Sex Experimentation Is 'Horrifying, Evil, And Sick' - The Federalist

Democrats on the House Select Committee to InvestigateJanuary 6claim their public hearings, starting this week, are meant to tell the story about what happened that day.

But millions of Americans watched the violence unfold on television, and theres been breathless news coverage in the months since. The events ofJan. 6, 2021have been investigated by Senate committees, federal inspectors general, and a phalanx of Washington reporters. Prosecutions are still ongoing in open court.

With so much information already public aboutJan. 6, what is the real purpose of these prime-time hearings? And why has the committee so aggressively stretched its investigative powers beyond the limits, including by subpoenaing me and four other Republican colleagues?

Behind the committees storytelling, theres a more sinister aim: convincing Americans that conservatives are to blame for the events of that day. In fact, Democrats have already done just thatasserting last year that President Trump was unmistakably responsible for the violence and even calling Republicans traitors for their Electoral College objections. Never mind the fact that Democrats made the very same objections to every Republican president in this century, or that Democrats spent most of 2020 condoning left-wing violent riots across the country.

The committees real goal, and what it hopes to achieve with its unprecedented subpoenas and its bright-light hearings, is a repudiation of conservatism and all those who hold conservative values. Democrats want to use the violence ofJan. 6to stigmatize conservative voices and delegitimize conservative ideals. Theyve even talkedcondescendingly, of courseabout treating conservatives as cult members who need to be deprogrammed.

Theres long been an arrogance among those on the left that has compelled them to try to delegitimize conservatives. President Obama famously predicted the grassroots Tea Party fever would break following his 2012 re-election. Four years later, Hillary Clinton infamously dismissed millions of Americans as deplorables who were hopelessly misguided and irredeemable.

But in the wake ofJan. 6, Democrats are amplifying their attacks against conservatives.

You hold a sincere belief that state election integrity measures help to make elections more accurate and more secure? Democrats call you a racist. And President Biden says youre part of Jim Crow 2.0 and as bad as 1960s segregationist Bull Connor.

You exercise your right to speak up at a school board meeting to say that boys shouldnt be allowed to use the girls restroom in elementary school? Democrats say youre transphobic, and you may even get a visit from President Bidens FBI.

These attacks are intentional. Their design is to make you feel embarrassed and ostracized. And it goes hand in hand with the lefts Orwellian effort to tell you what to think.

The Biden White House has called on Big Tech companies to fight disinformation, and the Department of Homeland Security stood up a so-called Disinformation Board for the same purpose. Of course, the disinformation only runs one way, and always against conservatives. Prominent Democrat politicians have posted demonstrably false information online and there is no broad outcry to take it down. But when a conservative voices an opinion that conflicts with the lefts woke ideology, her account is shut down unless and until she bends a knee to the left.

Each of these heavy-handed tactics, including the Select Committee subpoenas and hearings, has at its core the same goal: delegitimize conservative views so that they dont need to be debated or even addressed in polite society.

Todays Democrat Party is a party of coastal elites who believe they are smarter and more enlightened than their fellow Americans. They set up fact-checkers and disinformation boards because they think Americans are too stupid or too busy to make up their own minds. And when their radical, top-down policies still prove to be unpopular, they move to delegitimize dissenting ideas.

That is why the Select Committee will spend dozens of hours of prime-time television coverage to lecture Americans about an event they saw for themselves less than 18 months ago. That is why the Select Committee is targeting their Republican colleagues with ridiculous charges of insurrection and treason. Make no mistake, the violence ofJan. 6was as wrong as wrong can be. But Americans watching the hearings should have no illusions about the Democrats true objectives.

Mr. Jordan is the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee.

Original post:

J6 Probe's True Goal Is Slandering The Right Out Of The Public Sphere - The Federalist

At the same time Congressional Democrats host televised Jan. 6 witch hunt show trials, leftists are turning a blind eye to political violence and destruction that far-left representatives and senators have repeatedly begged for.

A 26-year-old California man armed with a pistol and other tactical weapons was arrested on Wednesday for attempting to murder U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh at his home. The man, Nicholas Roske, confessed to detectives that he was inspired to violence after learning from the infamous Dobbs v. Jackson opinion leak that the high court might overturn Roe v. Wade.

A plan to assassinate Kavanaugh and the dozens of assaults on pro-life centers around the country should have sparked countless coverage from the corporate media, who have pegged domestic terrorism as the greatest threat to our democracy, as well as endless condemnations from politicians on both sides of the aisle. Yet, the left was largely silent.

Instead, the same party that blamed Sarah Palin and a map released from her PAC for a deadly shooting in Arizona absolved itself of any blame it could shoulder for an attack on a justice.

When Justice Samuel Alitos draft Dobbs opinion was prematurely leaked, Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand,Elizabeth Warren,Ron Wyden,Tammy Duckworth, andReps. Eric Swalwell,Cori Bush,Ayanna Pressley,Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, andTim Ryan all used incendiary language to encourage Americans to reject any SCOTUS decision that hurt their abortion agenda.

That was after politicians such as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had already threatened Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch.

You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You wont know what hit you, Schumer said in 2020.

The White House finally issued a vanilla statement about the Kavanaugh assassination attempt on behalf of the president on Wednesday.

President Biden condemns the actionsof this individual in the strongest terms, and is grateful to law enforcement for quickly taking him into custody, White House Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates told The Daily Wire.

That statement, however, doesnt square with Bidens comments later Wednesday night. Instead of condemning the attempted murder of Kavanaugh, Biden joked about sending his political enemies to jail and threatened that the Supreme Courts potential decision to overturn Roe v. Wade will cause a mini-revolution.

On Thursday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who is stalling legislation designed to protect SCOTUS justices while she and her cronies focus on political prosecution regarding Jan. 6, 2021, added to Bidens nonchalance by claiming that the justices are protected.

Nobody is in danger over the weekend because of our not having a bill, she told reporters.

This isnt the first time Democrats and their corrupt corporate media cronies have blown off inconvenient political violence and this likely wont be their last.

When rioters and arsonists laid siege to the nations major cities during the summer of 2020, Democrats and the press cheered them on and bailed them out. The riots that caused billions of dollars in damages were labeled by the propaganda press as fiery but mostly peaceful.

When leftists stormed the Supreme Court to protest Kavanaughs confirmation, they were heralded by the same outlet that pushed lies fueling the justices confirmation battle and Democrats who were upset that Trump had another SCOTUS nominee. The same reaction occurred when climate protesters occupied a federal building.

If you disagree with Democrats, youre an insurrectionist. But if youre a Democrat actually inciting violence like Maxine Waters did, of course, you get away with it. If you make an attempt on a Supreme Court justices life because a bunch of leftists told you to fight back, it is somehow still Republicans fault.

Democrats only condemn and exploit political violence when it is convenient for them. Unless their political enemies can somehow be blamed, leftists like Biden, Schumer, and Pelosi will keep ignoring political violence and destruction that can clearly be traced back to them.

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

View post:

Dems Don't Just Fail To Apologize For Left-Wing Violence, They Incite It - The Federalist