Oct. 12, 2020
Permission to republish original opeds and cartoons granted.
Amy Coney Barrett: A new brand of Feminism
Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a new role model for young women, and even women of her own generation. While her success is built upon the trailblazing work of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she takes feminism in a new direction.
Video: Biden's crazy plan to shut down the economy
Dr. Anthony Fauci seems proud of the lives saved by social distancing and other techniques. But still Biden and Harris blame Trump for too many lives lost. According to the early estimates, we could have lost a lot more!
Trump warns Biden will kill ‘spygate’ investigation. He’s right.
President Donald Trump: “If we don’t win this election, [the Durham investigation] that whole thing is going to end. Okay? And you just remember that… [T]hat whole thing is going to be dismissed… I was under investigation illegally… We caught them in the act. They were spying on my campaign and they went for a coup… That’s another thing I’m fighting for, because these people have to be brought to justice.” – Oct. 9, 2020, Rush Limbaugh Show.
Kamala Harris, California’s Bad Cop, Victimized the Vulnerable
In the vice presidential debate, Kamala Harris was lucky that Mike Pence chose not to attack her prosecutorial record except to note that, when Harris was the San Francisco district attorney, blacks were 19 times more likely to be charged with minor drug offenses than whites or Hispanics.
BONUS Video: Trump has the support of suburban women!
Meet Tyler, a Northern Virginia mother of two who trusts Trump to keep her family safe from the violent Left.
Video: ALG Minute, Biden’s Ominous Threat to Pack the Courts
Biden has been involved in what looks like court packing in the past. If he is allowed back into the White House, and his party gains control of the Senate, he could very likely push through a Roosevelt-type scheme to politicize the Supreme Court.
Statement: A robust Trump mobilizes conservative base on Limbaugh
Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning: “President Donald Trump has taken the brilliant step of co-hosting the Rush Limbaugh Show as well appearing on the Mark Levin Show and Tucker Carlson all on the same day.
Amy Coney Barrett: A new brand of Feminism
By Catherine Mortensen
Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a new role model for young women, and even women of her own generation. While her success is built upon the trailblazing work of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she takes feminism in a new direction. She has reached the pinnacle of her career while still raising young children and sustaining what looks to be a happy, functional marriage, something men have done for years.
Feminism has turned a corner. With past women justice nominees, it felt like their gender defined them. It seems different with Barrett. President Trump selected her because of her extraordinary intellectual gifts and her commitment to an originalist view of the Constitution and the role of the courts, not her gender. She clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, and shares his textualist philosophy to interpret the law as written.
While Barrett’s confirmation vetting should be solely about her past court decisions and her views on the Constitution, and not her gender, it is worth noting her gender because Barrett represents a new image of a successful career woman. It is clear that womentoday can succeed in careers at the same pace as their male colleagues. This was rarely the case in the past when women often left the workforce when they got married or had children and returned later, always behind their male counterparts. It is refreshing to see a woman reach the top of her field while still in her prime.
This was largely the theme shared by a group of Republic women senators spoke in support of Barrett at a Sept. 30 news conference.
Sen. Debra Fischer (R-NE): “I think it is so remarkable that we have such a woman before us now. When we look at Judge Barrett, we see an accomplished woman. We see a brilliant jurist. We see a nice person. We see someone who has been able to balance their family life with a husband and seven children and keep everybody on track. We see someone who's had to make choices in her life in order to move forward in her chosen career. We see someone who's a success.”
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA):“Folks, this is whata mom can do. I tell my daughter all the time that a mom can be a farmer or arancher. A mom can be acombat veteran. A mom can be a financialplannera mom can serve in the United States Senate, and most certainly a mom can bea Supreme Court Justice. Anybody that says differentis absolutely wrong.”
Sen. Martha McSally (R-AZ): “If confirmed on the court, she willbe the firstwith school-age children serving on the Supreme Court. That is something that should becelebrated. Judge Barrett is by all accounts a woman of faith and of grace and ofbrillianceand of compassion. She is someonewithseven kids, including two adopted ones andone with special needs. She is able to balance it all and doit in an amazing way. That really setsthe examplefor so many women and girls. We should encourage everyone in America to really celebrate the fact that we have this brilliantwoman who rose into the top who has been able to balance it allwithgrace and dignity.”
Sen. Shelley Caputo (R-WV): “We should be rejoicing in the fact that we have an accomplished woman to consider that we have a role model for our girls, our daughters and our granddaughters. She has traveled a journey that not many of us get to do and we should use that as an opportunity to inspire that next generation.”
For many young women today, feminism has a slightly negative connotation. Old school feminists are often seen as harsh, combative, and judgmental. Many women would prefer to be seen as smart, strong, and compassionate. While today’s youth certainly owe a debt of gratitude to women such as Gloria Steinem and Justice Ginsburg, to name a few, many in the rising generation have moved on to a new type of feminist ideal. An ideal that allows them to be a parent, a spouse, a community volunteer, and still succeed in careers, just as men have always been able to do.
Thanks, Judge Barrett, for your 21st century brand of feminism.
Catherine Mortensen is Vice President of Communication for Americans for Limited Government.
Video: Biden's crazy plan to shut down the economy
Trump warns Biden will kill ‘spygate’ investigation. He’s right.
By Robert Romano
“If we don’t win this election, that whole thing is going to end. Okay? And you just remember that… [T]hat whole thing is going to be dismissed.”
That was President Donald Trump co-hosting the Rush Limbaugh Show on Oct. 9 with host Rush Limbaugh, stating the obvious in responding to news reported by Axios that Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham will not be releasing any comprehensive report or conclude their investigation before the election into abuses by the Justice Department and intelligence agencies spying on the Trump campaign in 2016 and then falsely accusing the President and his team of being Russian agents.
This column has called the scandal Spygate. It started during the Obama administration, and then the top secret investigation was carried over into the Trump administration — undermining the peaceful transfer of power in 2016 and perhaps doing irreparable damage to the Constitution and civil society.
According to the Axios report by Alayna Treene, “Attorney General Bill Barr has begun telling top Republicans that the Justice Department’s sweeping review into the origins of the Russia investigation will not be released before the election, a senior White House official and a congressional aide briefed on the conversations tell Axios… Barr has made clear that they should not expect any further indictments or a comprehensive report before Nov. 3.”
Now, with the election just weeks away, this is not surprising. What would have been surprising would be a lengthy report being dropped on the eve of the election or major prosecutions announced. If any major bombshells were going to happen, they would’ve happened months ago.
Trump agreed, stating to Limbaugh and his audience of millions, “I’ll probably be disappointed because this stuff should’ve come out at year ago.”
On the progress of the investigation, the report added that the ongoing criminal investigation is seeking prosecutions, “Barr is communicating that Durham is taking his investigation extremely seriously and is focused on winning prosecutions. According to one of the sources briefed on the conversations Barr said Durham is working in a deliberate and calculated fashion, and they need to be patient. The general sense of the talks, the source says, is that Durham is not preoccupied with completing his probe by a certain deadline for political purposes.”
In other words, the investigation will be done when it’s done. In Durham’s eyes there is no rush.
But he’s wrong. President Trump is right. If former Vice President Joe Biden wins this election, he will never allow this investigation to continue. It simply hits too close to home for Biden.
Consider, after all, Biden attended the fateful Jan. 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting with former President Barack Obama, former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates that a now fully declassified letter former National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote to herself on Jan. 20, 2017, memorializing the meeting, where the investigation was ordered by Obama to be carried over into the Trump administration.
Per Rice’s summary “On January 5, following a briefing by IC leadership on Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election, President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Jim Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden and I were also present.”
This was the Russian interference into the 2016 election briefing given a day before then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued the joint intelligence assessment on the same.
However, the version that was given to former President Barack Obama and then-President-Elect Trump on Jan. 5, 2017 included some of the phony allegations leveled by former British spy Christopher Steele’s dossier, paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, that Trump was a Russian agent.
This was the same dossier that led to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants aimed at former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page beginning in Oct. 2016, his contacts in the campaign, and his contact’s contacts in the campaign and into Trump’s inner circle.
The allegations were eventually debunked by none other than Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who in his March 2019 report stated, “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” and “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.”
After the core intel briefing on Jan. 5, 2017, former President Obama did nothing to stop the investigation into the incoming administration: “President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book’. The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book. From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
Obama could have stopped it right then and there. Instead, Obama directed Comey to continue with the witch hunt into the Trump administration, “by the book.” And if it was necessary, to conceal classified information from the incoming Trump administration.
The memo continued, with promising to carry on the probe: “Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding ‘by the book’ as it relates to law enforcement. From a national security perspective, Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing sensitive information. President obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pas sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn. Comey replied, ‘potentially.’ He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that ‘the level of communication is unusual.’”
In the interview with Limbaugh, Trump blasted the entire investigation, calling it a “coup”: “I was under investigation illegally… We caught them in the act. They were spying on my campaign and they went for a coup.”
Fortunately, they failed.
But would Biden want that to come out to the public if he wins the election? The answer is it will never come out. President Trump is right. If Biden wins, the Justice Department will immediately squash this investigation. Which is why President Trump is urging his supporters to get out and vote, declaring, “That’s another thing I’m fighting for, because these people have to be brought to justice.”
Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.
Kamala Harris, California’s Bad Cop, Victimized the Vulnerable
By Richard McCarty
In the vice presidential debate, Kamala Harris was lucky that Mike Pence chose not to attack her prosecutorial record except to note that, when Harris was the San Francisco district attorney, blacks were 19 times more likely to be charged with minor drug offenses than whites or Hispanics. Harris’s years spent as a prosecutor and state attorney general demonstrate that she lacks integrity and good judgment; consequently, she is unfit to serve as vice president, just one heartbeat from the presidency. As a law enforcement official, Harris focused on winning at any cost, even if that meant that innocent people would be incarcerated or denied compensation for wrongful convictions.
The following are some notable examples of how Harris victimized the vulnerable.
Harris’s office prosecuted Jamal Trulove for the murder of his friend. Trulove was convicted without any physical evidence and only one witness whose testimony shifted over time. Several years later, Trulove’s conviction was overturned; he was retried and acquitted. For his wrongful conviction and the more than six years he spent behind bars, Trulove received a $13.1 million settlement.
In case after case, Harris’s office looked for technicalities to exploit to keep people in prison and bar them from receiving compensation for being unjustly locked up.
· Harris prolonged Caramad Conley ’s time in prison after his wrongful conviction for two murders. Conley’s conviction was vacated after a judge found that the star witness in his case had lied in court and that the prosecution had not shared key evidence with the defense. Harris then decided to retry the case, which kept Conley behind bars. Fortunately for Conley, Harris was moving on, and the new prosecutor quickly dismissed the case against him. Conley subsequently received a $3.5 million payout for his wrongful conviction and 18 years in incarceration.
· On procedural grounds, Harris’s office opposed vacating the conviction of Jose Diaz, who was wrongfully convicted of rape. Even after Harris’s office dropped its opposition to vacating the conviction, it continued to oppose compensating Diaz. Nonetheless, Diaz was awarded more than $300,000 for his wrongful conviction and nearly nine years of unjust incarceration.
· Harris opposed compensating Rafael Madrigal even though he was wrongfully convicted of murder and spent nine years behind bars.
· Harris’s lawyers argued that nonviolent prisoners should be kept in prison because the state might need them to fight wildfires, for which they would have been paid about $2 a day.
When a police laboratory technician was suspected of intentionally sabotaging her work, Harris’s office withheld the information from defense attorneys. After the public found out about the technician’s misconduct, Harris fought the dismissal of cases that the technician had handled and even had the gall to accuse a judge presiding over some of the cases of a conflict of interest. In the end, about 1,000 cases were dismissed.
In a 2010 speech, Harris proudly told of her plan to prosecute the parents of truant students. Her staff was not pleased with the idea initially, but she proceeded anyway. First, she sent all of the local public school parents a letter threatening them with jail if their children were truant. Then she sent her prosecutors to meet with principals and parents of truant students and told her prosecutors to “look really mean” in hopes of intimidating the parents. Incredibly, Harris went on in her speech to tell the story of a homeless mother who was ensnared by Harris’s anti-truancy program. The mother had three kids and was working two jobs. According to Harris, the woman “just needed some help” – and Harris helped by filing charges.
Not content to just harass parents in San Francisco, she successfully pushed for statewide legislation making the parents of truant students subject to fines up to $2,000 and up to a year in jail. Two years after Harris’s law passed, Cheree Peoples was publicly arrested and humiliated in front of the media because her daughter was allegedly truant. The problem is that Cheree’s daughter was not truant: she was sick. The girl suffered from sickle cell anemia and was frequently hospitalized and in pain. The girl’s school was even aware of her condition. One would think that such a situation would quickly be resolved and an apology issued to Cheree, but, in fact, her legal ordeal lasted for more than two years. Ridiculously, after sponsoring and championing the truancy bill, Harris claimed that jailing parents was an “unintended consequence.”
Due to Joe Biden’s advanced age, additional scrutiny of his vice-presidential candidate is warranted. Judging by Harris’s record as a law enforcement official, she seems to have been driven by a desire to rack up convictions at any cost, to keep people behind bars on technicalities, and to deprive people of compensation for wrongful convictions. Because Harris’s decisions, policies, and personnel harmed blacks and Hispanics, it would be a shame if she were elected with the support of minorities.
Richard McCarty is Director of Research for the Americans for Limited Government Foundation.
BONUS Video: Trump has the support of suburban women!
Video: ALG Minute, Biden’s Ominous Threat to Pack the Courts
A robust Trump mobilizes conservative base on Limbaugh
Oct. 9, 2020, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement responding to President Donald Trump's appearance today on the Rush Limbaugh Show where he said "If we don’t win this election, [the Durham investigation] that whole thing is going to end. Okay? And you just remember that… [T]hat whole thing is going to be dismissed… I was under investigation illegally… We caught them in the act. They were spying on my campaign and they went for a coup… That’s another thing I’m fighting for, because these people have to be brought to justice":
"President Donald Trump has taken the brilliant step of co-hosting the Rush Limbaugh Show as well appearing on the Mark Levin Show and Tucker Carlson all on the same day. For three reasons: It eliminates all doubt that the President is as robust as ever. It eliminates the filter that the media uses to separate the President from the American people. And third, it mobilizes the President's conservative base to go all in for 2020 in the weeks ahead.
"President Trump succinctly addressed one of the most important yet underdiscussed issues in front of millions in the Limbaugh audience, warning the Durham investigation will be squashed under Biden if Trump doesn't win the election. This matters, because if the perpetrators of a three-and-a-half year coup get off Scot free, they will know forever that they can do it again and the American people's faith in our intelligence services will be destroyed forever."
