Chevron became just the latest employer to announce its exit from California last week, and while it is tempting to blame the state’s war against fossil fuels as the cause for the departure, energy firms are far from the only companies fleeing the state as fast as they can.

In just the last four years, rocket manufacturer SpaceX, financial servicer Charles Schwab, and software creator Oracle have all left California and moved to Texas. And major corporations aren’t the only ones leaving. California has led the United States in outstate migration for a generation now, with most residents following employers to Texas.

On the energy front, California has done plenty to target fossil fuel companies like Chevron. The state charges cap-and-trade taxes on energy producers, imposes costly environmental mandates on refiners, and, on top of all that, charges oil companies an “excessive profits” tax to add insult to injury.

“We believe California has a number of policies that raise costs, that hurt consumers, that discourage investment, and ultimately, we think that’s not good for the economy in California or for consumers,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said as his company announced its move to Houston. 

But as much as California’s energy policies have raised costs, hurt consumers, and discouraged investment, so have its policies in every other sector. The nation’s strictest environmental laws make it prohibitively expensive to build housing, factories, and infrastructure. As a result, California now has the nation’s highest gas prices, the nation’s highest energy costs, and the nation’s most unaffordable housing.

One might hope that while the Democratic Party is inflicting all of these high costs on consumers across all sectors of the economy, it would at least be able to deliver good public services as a result. Unfortunately not. Despite a 14.4% top income tax rate and an 8.8% corporate tax rate, the state is still $46.8 billion in debt, the homeless population is the nation’s highest, the schools are among the nation’s worst, and so are the state’s roads and highways. The Democratic Party is so enamored with the myth of a green new economy that it has poured more than $10 billion into a high-speed train to nowhere that has constructed barely a mile of track while still needing over $100 billion to complete the project.

No wonder California has the nation’s highest unemployment rate to boot.

As bad as is the Democratic Party’s malfeasance in running California into the ground, the lone bright spot is that middle-class families still have the freedom to escape Democratic Party tyranny and flee to Republican-controlled states such as Utah, Texas, and Florida.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

But that is what makes Vice President Kamala Harris’s candidacy such a danger. Harris wants to take the far-left extreme policies that have destroyed California and inflict them on the rest of the nation. Despite her flip-flopping on mandatory gun buybacks, fracking bans, and a ban on private health insurance, positions on which she will surely flip right back if elected, she still supports decriminalizing illegal border crossings, free healthcare for illegal immigrants, as California already provides, and the elimination of cash bail.

If Harris wins and the Democratic Party continues to do to the U.S. what it did to California, making it an unaffordable debt and homeless-ridden dump, to where will the rest of us flee?

2024-08-06 04:01:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3110822%2Fexodus-kamala-harris-california-continues%2F?w=600&h=450, Chevron became just the latest employer to announce its exit from California last week, and while it is tempting to blame the state’s war against fossil fuels as the cause for the departure, energy firms are far from the only companies fleeing the state as fast as they can. In just the last four years,

Chevron became just the latest employer to announce its exit from California last week, and while it is tempting to blame the state’s war against fossil fuels as the cause for the departure, energy firms are far from the only companies fleeing the state as fast as they can.

In just the last four years, rocket manufacturer SpaceX, financial servicer Charles Schwab, and software creator Oracle have all left California and moved to Texas. And major corporations aren’t the only ones leaving. California has led the United States in outstate migration for a generation now, with most residents following employers to Texas.

On the energy front, California has done plenty to target fossil fuel companies like Chevron. The state charges cap-and-trade taxes on energy producers, imposes costly environmental mandates on refiners, and, on top of all that, charges oil companies an “excessive profits” tax to add insult to injury.

“We believe California has a number of policies that raise costs, that hurt consumers, that discourage investment, and ultimately, we think that’s not good for the economy in California or for consumers,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said as his company announced its move to Houston. 

But as much as California’s energy policies have raised costs, hurt consumers, and discouraged investment, so have its policies in every other sector. The nation’s strictest environmental laws make it prohibitively expensive to build housing, factories, and infrastructure. As a result, California now has the nation’s highest gas prices, the nation’s highest energy costs, and the nation’s most unaffordable housing.

One might hope that while the Democratic Party is inflicting all of these high costs on consumers across all sectors of the economy, it would at least be able to deliver good public services as a result. Unfortunately not. Despite a 14.4% top income tax rate and an 8.8% corporate tax rate, the state is still $46.8 billion in debt, the homeless population is the nation’s highest, the schools are among the nation’s worst, and so are the state’s roads and highways. The Democratic Party is so enamored with the myth of a green new economy that it has poured more than $10 billion into a high-speed train to nowhere that has constructed barely a mile of track while still needing over $100 billion to complete the project.

No wonder California has the nation’s highest unemployment rate to boot.

As bad as is the Democratic Party’s malfeasance in running California into the ground, the lone bright spot is that middle-class families still have the freedom to escape Democratic Party tyranny and flee to Republican-controlled states such as Utah, Texas, and Florida.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

But that is what makes Vice President Kamala Harris’s candidacy such a danger. Harris wants to take the far-left extreme policies that have destroyed California and inflict them on the rest of the nation. Despite her flip-flopping on mandatory gun buybacks, fracking bans, and a ban on private health insurance, positions on which she will surely flip right back if elected, she still supports decriminalizing illegal border crossings, free healthcare for illegal immigrants, as California already provides, and the elimination of cash bail.

If Harris wins and the Democratic Party continues to do to the U.S. what it did to California, making it an unaffordable debt and homeless-ridden dump, to where will the rest of us flee?

, Chevron became just the latest employer to announce its exit from California last week, and while it is tempting to blame the state’s war against fossil fuels as the cause for the departure, energy firms are far from the only companies fleeing the state as fast as they can. In just the last four years, rocket manufacturer SpaceX, financial servicer Charles Schwab, and software creator Oracle have all left California and moved to Texas. And major corporations aren’t the only ones leaving. California has led the United States in outstate migration for a generation now, with most residents following employers to Texas. On the energy front, California has done plenty to target fossil fuel companies like Chevron. The state charges cap-and-trade taxes on energy producers, imposes costly environmental mandates on refiners, and, on top of all that, charges oil companies an “excessive profits” tax to add insult to injury. “We believe California has a number of policies that raise costs, that hurt consumers, that discourage investment, and ultimately, we think that’s not good for the economy in California or for consumers,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said as his company announced its move to Houston.  But as much as California’s energy policies have raised costs, hurt consumers, and discouraged investment, so have its policies in every other sector. The nation’s strictest environmental laws make it prohibitively expensive to build housing, factories, and infrastructure. As a result, California now has the nation’s highest gas prices, the nation’s highest energy costs, and the nation’s most unaffordable housing. One might hope that while the Democratic Party is inflicting all of these high costs on consumers across all sectors of the economy, it would at least be able to deliver good public services as a result. Unfortunately not. Despite a 14.4% top income tax rate and an 8.8% corporate tax rate, the state is still $46.8 billion in debt, the homeless population is the nation’s highest, the schools are among the nation’s worst, and so are the state’s roads and highways. The Democratic Party is so enamored with the myth of a green new economy that it has poured more than $10 billion into a high-speed train to nowhere that has constructed barely a mile of track while still needing over $100 billion to complete the project. No wonder California has the nation’s highest unemployment rate to boot. As bad as is the Democratic Party’s malfeasance in running California into the ground, the lone bright spot is that middle-class families still have the freedom to escape Democratic Party tyranny and flee to Republican-controlled states such as Utah, Texas, and Florida. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER But that is what makes Vice President Kamala Harris’s candidacy such a danger. Harris wants to take the far-left extreme policies that have destroyed California and inflict them on the rest of the nation. Despite her flip-flopping on mandatory gun buybacks, fracking bans, and a ban on private health insurance, positions on which she will surely flip right back if elected, she still supports decriminalizing illegal border crossings, free healthcare for illegal immigrants, as California already provides, and the elimination of cash bail. If Harris wins and the Democratic Party continues to do to the U.S. what it did to California, making it an unaffordable debt and homeless-ridden dump, to where will the rest of us flee?, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/AP20002718879776-scaled-1024×710.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

Vice President Kamala Harris has never met an issue she hasn’t flip-flopped on, but that should not stop the Republican Party from finding out where she stands on permitting reform. The Democratic Party can subsidize factory creation, energy production, and home construction all they want, but until real permitting reform is passed, taxpayers will be wasting billions of dollars and hundreds of years on waste and delays.

This past week, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 on a 15-4 bipartisan basis. The legislation, co-sponsored by Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV) and ranking member John Barrasso (R-WY), would ease resource extraction, renewable energy creation, and power transmission. 

The legislation enables a true “all of the above” approach to energy policy with provisions designed to help oil and gas extraction, hydropower construction, mineral mining, and power line construction. Most importantly, the bill creates a 150-day statute of limitations for all legal challenges to any energy project and sets a 180-day deadline for federal agency action when projects are attacked in court. The bill also repeals President Joe Biden’s ban on liquefied natural gas exports and encourages the development of geothermal energy.

Radical environmental groups opposed the legislation, however, with Public Citizen calling the bill “nothing short of the first steps to implement the radical corporate giveaway agenda espoused in Project 2025, a sweeping far-right initiative led by the Heritage Foundation.”

On the one hand, Public Citizen couldn’t be more wrong: Nothing in the bill is a “giveaway” to anyone — unless you think letting people build power lines without interference from radical environmentalists is a “giveaway.” But on the other hand, Public Citizen is correct: The Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is very much in line with Project 2025’s goal of making America a country that builds things again.

If anything, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 doesn’t go far enough. Instead of picking around the edges of the National Environmental Policy Act, the legislation that enables environmental radicals to stall any infrastructure project in federal court, NEPA should be repealed entirely. Not just for energy-related projects, both fossil and renewable, but for all infrastructure projects: factories, highways, railways, residential, everything. We have the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to ensure our air is breathable and our water is drinkable. We do not need to give radical environmentalists veto power over every construction project with a nexus to the federal government.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

But as essential as a full repeal of NEPA is, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is at least a good start, and Republicans should make every effort possible to force Harris to take a stand on the legislation. Does Harris stand with the American Clean Power Association and the National Mining Association and the millions of jobs and kilowatt hours they produce? Or does she stand with the radical environmentalists who create nothing but billable hours for lawyers?

Republican senators should press Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to bring this legislation to the Senate floor, and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) should pledge House action on the bill as soon as possible.

2024-08-05 04:01:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3108762%2Fwhere-does-kamala-harris-stand-on-permitting%2F?w=600&h=450, Vice President Kamala Harris has never met an issue she hasn’t flip-flopped on, but that should not stop the Republican Party from finding out where she stands on permitting reform. The Democratic Party can subsidize factory creation, energy production, and home construction all they want, but until real permitting reform is passed, taxpayers will be,

Vice President Kamala Harris has never met an issue she hasn’t flip-flopped on, but that should not stop the Republican Party from finding out where she stands on permitting reform. The Democratic Party can subsidize factory creation, energy production, and home construction all they want, but until real permitting reform is passed, taxpayers will be wasting billions of dollars and hundreds of years on waste and delays.

This past week, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 on a 15-4 bipartisan basis. The legislation, co-sponsored by Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV) and ranking member John Barrasso (R-WY), would ease resource extraction, renewable energy creation, and power transmission. 

The legislation enables a true “all of the above” approach to energy policy with provisions designed to help oil and gas extraction, hydropower construction, mineral mining, and power line construction. Most importantly, the bill creates a 150-day statute of limitations for all legal challenges to any energy project and sets a 180-day deadline for federal agency action when projects are attacked in court. The bill also repeals President Joe Biden’s ban on liquefied natural gas exports and encourages the development of geothermal energy.

Radical environmental groups opposed the legislation, however, with Public Citizen calling the bill “nothing short of the first steps to implement the radical corporate giveaway agenda espoused in Project 2025, a sweeping far-right initiative led by the Heritage Foundation.”

On the one hand, Public Citizen couldn’t be more wrong: Nothing in the bill is a “giveaway” to anyone — unless you think letting people build power lines without interference from radical environmentalists is a “giveaway.” But on the other hand, Public Citizen is correct: The Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is very much in line with Project 2025’s goal of making America a country that builds things again.

If anything, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 doesn’t go far enough. Instead of picking around the edges of the National Environmental Policy Act, the legislation that enables environmental radicals to stall any infrastructure project in federal court, NEPA should be repealed entirely. Not just for energy-related projects, both fossil and renewable, but for all infrastructure projects: factories, highways, railways, residential, everything. We have the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to ensure our air is breathable and our water is drinkable. We do not need to give radical environmentalists veto power over every construction project with a nexus to the federal government.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

But as essential as a full repeal of NEPA is, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is at least a good start, and Republicans should make every effort possible to force Harris to take a stand on the legislation. Does Harris stand with the American Clean Power Association and the National Mining Association and the millions of jobs and kilowatt hours they produce? Or does she stand with the radical environmentalists who create nothing but billable hours for lawyers?

Republican senators should press Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to bring this legislation to the Senate floor, and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) should pledge House action on the bill as soon as possible.

, Vice President Kamala Harris has never met an issue she hasn’t flip-flopped on, but that should not stop the Republican Party from finding out where she stands on permitting reform. The Democratic Party can subsidize factory creation, energy production, and home construction all they want, but until real permitting reform is passed, taxpayers will be wasting billions of dollars and hundreds of years on waste and delays. This past week, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 on a 15-4 bipartisan basis. The legislation, co-sponsored by Chairman Joe Manchin (I-WV) and ranking member John Barrasso (R-WY), would ease resource extraction, renewable energy creation, and power transmission.  The legislation enables a true “all of the above” approach to energy policy with provisions designed to help oil and gas extraction, hydropower construction, mineral mining, and power line construction. Most importantly, the bill creates a 150-day statute of limitations for all legal challenges to any energy project and sets a 180-day deadline for federal agency action when projects are attacked in court. The bill also repeals President Joe Biden’s ban on liquefied natural gas exports and encourages the development of geothermal energy. Radical environmental groups opposed the legislation, however, with Public Citizen calling the bill “nothing short of the first steps to implement the radical corporate giveaway agenda espoused in Project 2025, a sweeping far-right initiative led by the Heritage Foundation.” On the one hand, Public Citizen couldn’t be more wrong: Nothing in the bill is a “giveaway” to anyone — unless you think letting people build power lines without interference from radical environmentalists is a “giveaway.” But on the other hand, Public Citizen is correct: The Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is very much in line with Project 2025’s goal of making America a country that builds things again. If anything, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 doesn’t go far enough. Instead of picking around the edges of the National Environmental Policy Act, the legislation that enables environmental radicals to stall any infrastructure project in federal court, NEPA should be repealed entirely. Not just for energy-related projects, both fossil and renewable, but for all infrastructure projects: factories, highways, railways, residential, everything. We have the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to ensure our air is breathable and our water is drinkable. We do not need to give radical environmentalists veto power over every construction project with a nexus to the federal government. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER But as essential as a full repeal of NEPA is, the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is at least a good start, and Republicans should make every effort possible to force Harris to take a stand on the legislation. Does Harris stand with the American Clean Power Association and the National Mining Association and the millions of jobs and kilowatt hours they produce? Or does she stand with the radical environmentalists who create nothing but billable hours for lawyers? Republican senators should press Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to bring this legislation to the Senate floor, and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) should pledge House action on the bill as soon as possible., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/AP23339785278268-1024×683.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

“I’m a former prosecutor,” Vice President Kamala Harris likes to remind the country as she seeks the presidency.

As Harris campaigns for the White House, it’s crucial to consider what this former prosecutor would do with the entire federal law enforcement apparatus at her command.

She would undoubtedly use the Justice Department and other federal agencies to wage the Left’s culture war, compel speech, harass religious organizations, suppress conservative ideas, and advance the cause of abortion.

In a Harris administration, every Christian organization would have a target on its back.

How do we know this? Harris’s record and rhetoric teach us as much, as does the record of the Biden-Harris Justice Department.

As California attorney general, Harris put the screws to pro-life activist David Daleiden because he blew the whistle on Planned Parenthood, an organization that has, more than any other, promoted abortion to an industrial scale, and whose endorsement Harris was seeking in her run for U.S. Senate. In retaliation, and instead of investigating Planned Parenthood’s body-part business, Harris brought frivolous charges against the whistleblower who exposed the gruesome business. The charges were ultimately tossed out.

The Biden-Harris administration has turned law enforcement against pro-lifers. The Justice Department created a special task force to prosecute pro-life activists, and its first big catch was father Mark Houck, who shoved an abortion activist to the ground in a scuffle on the streets of Philadelphia. The charges were dismissed because they were absurd. But inflicting pain on culture-war enemies was the point, not securing a conviction.

Harris has made clear that she will go after all sorts of conservative-leaning Christian groups. Famously, she branded the Knights of Columbus, who cook pancakes for parishioners and run charities for children, as an extremist group.

All such groups should brace for DOJ harassment at least or indictment at worst.

Indictment for what, you might ask.

Being pro-life is a crime in Harris’s eyes, and so crisis pregnancy centers will feel the weight of the law. Religious schools that don’t conform to brand-new ideas about gender will be accused of civil rights violations.

Democratic administrations cried “discrimination” when a Catholic school created codes of conduct for teachers that follow Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality. Expect more of that in a Harris administration.

Recall the Stalin-era saying, “Show me the man, and I will find the crime.” If the Justice Department wants to find something with which to indict a Catholic school, a Christian home-school co-op, a crisis pregnancy center, or even an order of nuns, it can. Given tactical venue shopping jury rigging, it might even win some convictions.

Harris and her underlings will claim they are going only after extremists, not religious organizations, per se. But that is untrue.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Biden administration labeled angry school parents as terrorists, and the Democrats’ friends in the media brand as “Christian nationalists” those who believe their rights come from God.

It will be incumbent on fair-minded people of the Left and Right and the center to reject this lawfare. It would be best to start by rejecting Harris.

2024-08-04 04:01:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3108275%2Fkamalas-war-on-christians%2F?w=600&h=450, “I’m a former prosecutor,” Vice President Kamala Harris likes to remind the country as she seeks the presidency. As Harris campaigns for the White House, it’s crucial to consider what this former prosecutor would do with the entire federal law enforcement apparatus at her command. She would undoubtedly use the Justice Department and other federal,

“I’m a former prosecutor,” Vice President Kamala Harris likes to remind the country as she seeks the presidency.

As Harris campaigns for the White House, it’s crucial to consider what this former prosecutor would do with the entire federal law enforcement apparatus at her command.

She would undoubtedly use the Justice Department and other federal agencies to wage the Left’s culture war, compel speech, harass religious organizations, suppress conservative ideas, and advance the cause of abortion.

In a Harris administration, every Christian organization would have a target on its back.

How do we know this? Harris’s record and rhetoric teach us as much, as does the record of the Biden-Harris Justice Department.

As California attorney general, Harris put the screws to pro-life activist David Daleiden because he blew the whistle on Planned Parenthood, an organization that has, more than any other, promoted abortion to an industrial scale, and whose endorsement Harris was seeking in her run for U.S. Senate. In retaliation, and instead of investigating Planned Parenthood’s body-part business, Harris brought frivolous charges against the whistleblower who exposed the gruesome business. The charges were ultimately tossed out.

The Biden-Harris administration has turned law enforcement against pro-lifers. The Justice Department created a special task force to prosecute pro-life activists, and its first big catch was father Mark Houck, who shoved an abortion activist to the ground in a scuffle on the streets of Philadelphia. The charges were dismissed because they were absurd. But inflicting pain on culture-war enemies was the point, not securing a conviction.

Harris has made clear that she will go after all sorts of conservative-leaning Christian groups. Famously, she branded the Knights of Columbus, who cook pancakes for parishioners and run charities for children, as an extremist group.

All such groups should brace for DOJ harassment at least or indictment at worst.

Indictment for what, you might ask.

Being pro-life is a crime in Harris’s eyes, and so crisis pregnancy centers will feel the weight of the law. Religious schools that don’t conform to brand-new ideas about gender will be accused of civil rights violations.

Democratic administrations cried “discrimination” when a Catholic school created codes of conduct for teachers that follow Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality. Expect more of that in a Harris administration.

Recall the Stalin-era saying, “Show me the man, and I will find the crime.” If the Justice Department wants to find something with which to indict a Catholic school, a Christian home-school co-op, a crisis pregnancy center, or even an order of nuns, it can. Given tactical venue shopping jury rigging, it might even win some convictions.

Harris and her underlings will claim they are going only after extremists, not religious organizations, per se. But that is untrue.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Biden administration labeled angry school parents as terrorists, and the Democrats’ friends in the media brand as “Christian nationalists” those who believe their rights come from God.

It will be incumbent on fair-minded people of the Left and Right and the center to reject this lawfare. It would be best to start by rejecting Harris.

, “I’m a former prosecutor,” Vice President Kamala Harris likes to remind the country as she seeks the presidency. As Harris campaigns for the White House, it’s crucial to consider what this former prosecutor would do with the entire federal law enforcement apparatus at her command. She would undoubtedly use the Justice Department and other federal agencies to wage the Left’s culture war, compel speech, harass religious organizations, suppress conservative ideas, and advance the cause of abortion. In a Harris administration, every Christian organization would have a target on its back. How do we know this? Harris’s record and rhetoric teach us as much, as does the record of the Biden-Harris Justice Department. As California attorney general, Harris put the screws to pro-life activist David Daleiden because he blew the whistle on Planned Parenthood, an organization that has, more than any other, promoted abortion to an industrial scale, and whose endorsement Harris was seeking in her run for U.S. Senate. In retaliation, and instead of investigating Planned Parenthood’s body-part business, Harris brought frivolous charges against the whistleblower who exposed the gruesome business. The charges were ultimately tossed out. The Biden-Harris administration has turned law enforcement against pro-lifers. The Justice Department created a special task force to prosecute pro-life activists, and its first big catch was father Mark Houck, who shoved an abortion activist to the ground in a scuffle on the streets of Philadelphia. The charges were dismissed because they were absurd. But inflicting pain on culture-war enemies was the point, not securing a conviction. Harris has made clear that she will go after all sorts of conservative-leaning Christian groups. Famously, she branded the Knights of Columbus, who cook pancakes for parishioners and run charities for children, as an extremist group. All such groups should brace for DOJ harassment at least or indictment at worst. Indictment for what, you might ask. Being pro-life is a crime in Harris’s eyes, and so crisis pregnancy centers will feel the weight of the law. Religious schools that don’t conform to brand-new ideas about gender will be accused of civil rights violations. Democratic administrations cried “discrimination” when a Catholic school created codes of conduct for teachers that follow Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality. Expect more of that in a Harris administration. Recall the Stalin-era saying, “Show me the man, and I will find the crime.” If the Justice Department wants to find something with which to indict a Catholic school, a Christian home-school co-op, a crisis pregnancy center, or even an order of nuns, it can. Given tactical venue shopping jury rigging, it might even win some convictions. Harris and her underlings will claim they are going only after extremists, not religious organizations, per se. But that is untrue. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The Biden administration labeled angry school parents as terrorists, and the Democrats’ friends in the media brand as “Christian nationalists” those who believe their rights come from God. It will be incumbent on fair-minded people of the Left and Right and the center to reject this lawfare. It would be best to start by rejecting Harris., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/iStock-1482228312-1024×540.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

On marijuana policy, even when the Biden administration faces facts, it uses them for the wrong purposes.

As a result, Second Amendment gun rights are at risk.

The thrust of Biden’s marijuana policy until now has favored legalization and leniency even as all the new empirical data show marijuana to be far more dangerous than public mythology recognizes. A Monday Justice Department court filing in a Mississippi gun case, though, finally acknowledges the science. In any other context, this would be a good thing, even if woefully belated. If the administration were honest and wise, which it isn’t, it would base the rest of its marijuana enforcement on the facts related in the court filing.

Before addressing the gun rights milieu, let’s focus on those facts against marijuana. As the Justice Department writes, “Marijuana intoxication can lead to an altered perception of time, short-term memory loss, impaired perception and motors skills, paranoid thoughts, and even hallucinations.” Moreover, “people who use marijuana are more likely to develop psychosis and long-lasting mental disorders, including schizophrenia.” And: “Marijuana use is also associated with depression, thoughts of suicide, suicide attempts, and suicide.” Keep in mind that this comes from an administration pushing for the liberalization of marijuana use.

As we have editorialized numerous times, these conclusions come from a plethora of recent and amply peer-reviewed studies showing that marijuana is a highly dangerous substance and that legalization has led to higher traffic accident rates and increased health problems, including greater cancer risks and worse incidence of mortality. It even has been shown to do damage to human genes.

Yet again and again, Biden and his fellow Democrats, and some less-than-exemplary Republicans, have, until now, peddled the fiction that marijuana isn’t very harmful. In April, the Drug Enforcement Administration under Biden’s prodding announced that it is reclassifying the narcotic from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule III one, making it less a priority to police and probably watering down penalties for its use.

On the other hand, smart Republican governors such as Virginia’s Glenn Youngkin have vetoed bills based on, and otherwise fought, the harmful, pro-marijuana lies. They are saving lives in doing so.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

All of which ordinarily would mean the public should welcome a course reversal on marijuana by this administration. Alas, in this instance it is admitting the drug’s dangers only to push a gun grab that federal courts of appeals have ruled unconstitutional. At issue is a law that makes it illegal for a controlled substance user to own a gun, even if there has been no court order or conviction invalidating the gun ownership and even if the gun was not used in conjunction with the marijuana use. The overall subject, both in general and as applied to particular circumstances, is being fought in several lengthy court battles.

These cases deserve more discussion on another day. For now, though, the Biden administration should be consistent in its message and actions on marijuana. What the administration, in its anti-gun fervor, finally admits about the dangers of marijuana should guide its policies across the board. Instead of succumbing to calls for more leniency and more legalization, Biden and his fellow Democrats should just say no.

2024-08-03 04:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3108129%2Fbiden-admits-marijuana-is-bad%2F?w=600&h=450, On marijuana policy, even when the Biden administration faces facts, it uses them for the wrong purposes. As a result, Second Amendment gun rights are at risk. The thrust of Biden’s marijuana policy until now has favored legalization and leniency even as all the new empirical data show marijuana to be far more dangerous than public mythology recognizes. A Monday Justice Department court filing in a,

On marijuana policy, even when the Biden administration faces facts, it uses them for the wrong purposes.

As a result, Second Amendment gun rights are at risk.

The thrust of Biden’s marijuana policy until now has favored legalization and leniency even as all the new empirical data show marijuana to be far more dangerous than public mythology recognizes. A Monday Justice Department court filing in a Mississippi gun case, though, finally acknowledges the science. In any other context, this would be a good thing, even if woefully belated. If the administration were honest and wise, which it isn’t, it would base the rest of its marijuana enforcement on the facts related in the court filing.

Before addressing the gun rights milieu, let’s focus on those facts against marijuana. As the Justice Department writes, “Marijuana intoxication can lead to an altered perception of time, short-term memory loss, impaired perception and motors skills, paranoid thoughts, and even hallucinations.” Moreover, “people who use marijuana are more likely to develop psychosis and long-lasting mental disorders, including schizophrenia.” And: “Marijuana use is also associated with depression, thoughts of suicide, suicide attempts, and suicide.” Keep in mind that this comes from an administration pushing for the liberalization of marijuana use.

As we have editorialized numerous times, these conclusions come from a plethora of recent and amply peer-reviewed studies showing that marijuana is a highly dangerous substance and that legalization has led to higher traffic accident rates and increased health problems, including greater cancer risks and worse incidence of mortality. It even has been shown to do damage to human genes.

Yet again and again, Biden and his fellow Democrats, and some less-than-exemplary Republicans, have, until now, peddled the fiction that marijuana isn’t very harmful. In April, the Drug Enforcement Administration under Biden’s prodding announced that it is reclassifying the narcotic from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule III one, making it less a priority to police and probably watering down penalties for its use.

On the other hand, smart Republican governors such as Virginia’s Glenn Youngkin have vetoed bills based on, and otherwise fought, the harmful, pro-marijuana lies. They are saving lives in doing so.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

All of which ordinarily would mean the public should welcome a course reversal on marijuana by this administration. Alas, in this instance it is admitting the drug’s dangers only to push a gun grab that federal courts of appeals have ruled unconstitutional. At issue is a law that makes it illegal for a controlled substance user to own a gun, even if there has been no court order or conviction invalidating the gun ownership and even if the gun was not used in conjunction with the marijuana use. The overall subject, both in general and as applied to particular circumstances, is being fought in several lengthy court battles.

These cases deserve more discussion on another day. For now, though, the Biden administration should be consistent in its message and actions on marijuana. What the administration, in its anti-gun fervor, finally admits about the dangers of marijuana should guide its policies across the board. Instead of succumbing to calls for more leniency and more legalization, Biden and his fellow Democrats should just say no.

, On marijuana policy, even when the Biden administration faces facts, it uses them for the wrong purposes. As a result, Second Amendment gun rights are at risk. The thrust of Biden’s marijuana policy until now has favored legalization and leniency even as all the new empirical data show marijuana to be far more dangerous than public mythology recognizes. A Monday Justice Department court filing in a Mississippi gun case, though, finally acknowledges the science. In any other context, this would be a good thing, even if woefully belated. If the administration were honest and wise, which it isn’t, it would base the rest of its marijuana enforcement on the facts related in the court filing. Before addressing the gun rights milieu, let’s focus on those facts against marijuana. As the Justice Department writes, “Marijuana intoxication can lead to an altered perception of time, short-term memory loss, impaired perception and motors skills, paranoid thoughts, and even hallucinations.” Moreover, “people who use marijuana are more likely to develop psychosis and long-lasting mental disorders, including schizophrenia.” And: “Marijuana use is also associated with depression, thoughts of suicide, suicide attempts, and suicide.” Keep in mind that this comes from an administration pushing for the liberalization of marijuana use. As we have editorialized numerous times, these conclusions come from a plethora of recent and amply peer-reviewed studies showing that marijuana is a highly dangerous substance and that legalization has led to higher traffic accident rates and increased health problems, including greater cancer risks and worse incidence of mortality. It even has been shown to do damage to human genes. Yet again and again, Biden and his fellow Democrats, and some less-than-exemplary Republicans, have, until now, peddled the fiction that marijuana isn’t very harmful. In April, the Drug Enforcement Administration under Biden’s prodding announced that it is reclassifying the narcotic from a Schedule I controlled substance to a Schedule III one, making it less a priority to police and probably watering down penalties for its use. On the other hand, smart Republican governors such as Virginia’s Glenn Youngkin have vetoed bills based on, and otherwise fought, the harmful, pro-marijuana lies. They are saving lives in doing so. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER All of which ordinarily would mean the public should welcome a course reversal on marijuana by this administration. Alas, in this instance it is admitting the drug’s dangers only to push a gun grab that federal courts of appeals have ruled unconstitutional. At issue is a law that makes it illegal for a controlled substance user to own a gun, even if there has been no court order or conviction invalidating the gun ownership and even if the gun was not used in conjunction with the marijuana use. The overall subject, both in general and as applied to particular circumstances, is being fought in several lengthy court battles. These cases deserve more discussion on another day. For now, though, the Biden administration should be consistent in its message and actions on marijuana. What the administration, in its anti-gun fervor, finally admits about the dangers of marijuana should guide its policies across the board. Instead of succumbing to calls for more leniency and more legalization, Biden and his fellow Democrats should just say no., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/iStock-1399322768-1024×576.jpg, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

There is only one presidential campaign that is segregating supporters into campaign events by race, and it is not the Republican presidential candidate’s.

Vice President Kamala Harris‘s campaign hosted two fundraising events this week created for white people only. First, there was a “White Women for Kamala” fundraising Zoom call on Sunday, followed by a “White Dudes for Harris” call on Monday.

Both were as cringeworthy as any sane person would expect.

On the White Women for Kamala call, a TikTok influencer named Mrs. Frazzled told listeners, “We are here because BIPOC [black, Indigenous, and people of color] women have tapped us in as white women to step up. … As white women, we need to use our privilege to make positive changes. … As white people, we have a lot to learn and unlearn.”

The Harris campaign’s message, as delivered by Mrs. Frazzled, was clear: White women are to think of themselves as white and women first, not as Americans.

Mrs. Frazzled then went on to instruct the white women where exactly they stood within Harris’s resegregated America. “If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC individuals or, God forbid, correcting them,” Mrs. Frazzled instructed, “just take a beat, and instead, we can put our listening ears on.”

In other words, as white women, your job is to listen to your more diverse betters, never question them, and then use your “privilege” to lecture white men on what their place in Harris’s resegregated America should be.

The White Dudes for Harris call was no better, with Hollywood actor Tim Daly telling those on the call, “It’s time we had a woman because that sensibility is something we’ve never experienced, and the experience of the white dudes has not always gone so well for us in that office.”

The message, again, is clear: Shut up, white people, because questioning a more diverse woman is inherently racist and sexist.

This is what the Democratic Party does: It places identity at the center of politics as part of an effort to fracture America along identitarian lines instead of trying to unite as a nation.

We can see what Harris’s vision for a resegregated America looks like on college campuses today, where the Left already has the power the vice president is seeking. At colleges across the campus, housing, classes, and even graduation ceremonies have been resegregated along racial and religious lines.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Harvard, for example, held separate “Asian American, Pacific Islander, Desi-American,” “Latinx,” “Jewish,” “Lavender” (for LGBT), and, of course, “Black” graduation celebrations. And Harvard is not alone. According to the National Association of Scholars, 46% of colleges have segregated student orientation programs, 43% offer segregated residential arrangements, 72% have segregated graduation ceremonies, and 68% offer “Diversity Fly-Ins” in which minority students can visit a college campus with segregated alumni groups.

These are the stakes this November. Do we as a country want to continue down the segregated road that college campuses have taken? Or do we want to recommit to a united nation where we are all equal?

2024-08-02 04:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3105734%2Fkamala-resegregated-america%2F?w=600&h=450, There is only one presidential campaign that is segregating supporters into campaign events by race, and it is not the Republican presidential candidate’s. Vice President Kamala Harris‘s campaign hosted two fundraising events this week created for white people only. First, there was a “White Women for Kamala” fundraising Zoom call on Sunday, followed by a,

There is only one presidential campaign that is segregating supporters into campaign events by race, and it is not the Republican presidential candidate’s.

Vice President Kamala Harris‘s campaign hosted two fundraising events this week created for white people only. First, there was a “White Women for Kamala” fundraising Zoom call on Sunday, followed by a “White Dudes for Harris” call on Monday.

Both were as cringeworthy as any sane person would expect.

On the White Women for Kamala call, a TikTok influencer named Mrs. Frazzled told listeners, “We are here because BIPOC [black, Indigenous, and people of color] women have tapped us in as white women to step up. … As white women, we need to use our privilege to make positive changes. … As white people, we have a lot to learn and unlearn.”

The Harris campaign’s message, as delivered by Mrs. Frazzled, was clear: White women are to think of themselves as white and women first, not as Americans.

Mrs. Frazzled then went on to instruct the white women where exactly they stood within Harris’s resegregated America. “If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC individuals or, God forbid, correcting them,” Mrs. Frazzled instructed, “just take a beat, and instead, we can put our listening ears on.”

In other words, as white women, your job is to listen to your more diverse betters, never question them, and then use your “privilege” to lecture white men on what their place in Harris’s resegregated America should be.

The White Dudes for Harris call was no better, with Hollywood actor Tim Daly telling those on the call, “It’s time we had a woman because that sensibility is something we’ve never experienced, and the experience of the white dudes has not always gone so well for us in that office.”

The message, again, is clear: Shut up, white people, because questioning a more diverse woman is inherently racist and sexist.

This is what the Democratic Party does: It places identity at the center of politics as part of an effort to fracture America along identitarian lines instead of trying to unite as a nation.

We can see what Harris’s vision for a resegregated America looks like on college campuses today, where the Left already has the power the vice president is seeking. At colleges across the campus, housing, classes, and even graduation ceremonies have been resegregated along racial and religious lines.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Harvard, for example, held separate “Asian American, Pacific Islander, Desi-American,” “Latinx,” “Jewish,” “Lavender” (for LGBT), and, of course, “Black” graduation celebrations. And Harvard is not alone. According to the National Association of Scholars, 46% of colleges have segregated student orientation programs, 43% offer segregated residential arrangements, 72% have segregated graduation ceremonies, and 68% offer “Diversity Fly-Ins” in which minority students can visit a college campus with segregated alumni groups.

These are the stakes this November. Do we as a country want to continue down the segregated road that college campuses have taken? Or do we want to recommit to a united nation where we are all equal?

, There is only one presidential campaign that is segregating supporters into campaign events by race, and it is not the Republican presidential candidate’s. Vice President Kamala Harris‘s campaign hosted two fundraising events this week created for white people only. First, there was a “White Women for Kamala” fundraising Zoom call on Sunday, followed by a “White Dudes for Harris” call on Monday. Both were as cringeworthy as any sane person would expect. On the White Women for Kamala call, a TikTok influencer named Mrs. Frazzled told listeners, “We are here because BIPOC [black, Indigenous, and people of color] women have tapped us in as white women to step up. … As white women, we need to use our privilege to make positive changes. … As white people, we have a lot to learn and unlearn.” The Harris campaign’s message, as delivered by Mrs. Frazzled, was clear: White women are to think of themselves as white and women first, not as Americans. Mrs. Frazzled then went on to instruct the white women where exactly they stood within Harris’s resegregated America. “If you find yourself talking over or speaking for BIPOC individuals or, God forbid, correcting them,” Mrs. Frazzled instructed, “just take a beat, and instead, we can put our listening ears on.” In other words, as white women, your job is to listen to your more diverse betters, never question them, and then use your “privilege” to lecture white men on what their place in Harris’s resegregated America should be. The White Dudes for Harris call was no better, with Hollywood actor Tim Daly telling those on the call, “It’s time we had a woman because that sensibility is something we’ve never experienced, and the experience of the white dudes has not always gone so well for us in that office.” The message, again, is clear: Shut up, white people, because questioning a more diverse woman is inherently racist and sexist. This is what the Democratic Party does: It places identity at the center of politics as part of an effort to fracture America along identitarian lines instead of trying to unite as a nation. We can see what Harris’s vision for a resegregated America looks like on college campuses today, where the Left already has the power the vice president is seeking. At colleges across the campus, housing, classes, and even graduation ceremonies have been resegregated along racial and religious lines. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Harvard, for example, held separate “Asian American, Pacific Islander, Desi-American,” “Latinx,” “Jewish,” “Lavender” (for LGBT), and, of course, “Black” graduation celebrations. And Harvard is not alone. According to the National Association of Scholars, 46% of colleges have segregated student orientation programs, 43% offer segregated residential arrangements, 72% have segregated graduation ceremonies, and 68% offer “Diversity Fly-Ins” in which minority students can visit a college campus with segregated alumni groups. These are the stakes this November. Do we as a country want to continue down the segregated road that college campuses have taken? Or do we want to recommit to a united nation where we are all equal?, , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/kamala-harris-segregation.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

Vice President Kamala Harris, whom her campaign says should never be referred to as President Joe Biden’s Border Czar, now says she “will proudly” put her record up against President Donald Trump’s on any issue, “including, for example, on the issue of immigration.”

Let’s do that.

Before we turn to the numbers, it should first be noted that as lax and extreme on border security as President Joe Biden and his administration have been, Harris was even more radical as a presidential candidate and as a senator.

As a senator, she fought against Trump’s efforts to increase funding for new Border Patrol agents and migrant detention beds. She also tried to defund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and funnel that money to non-profit organizations that encourage illegal immigration. 

As a presidential candidate, Harris said she wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings, which even Biden was not prepared to do. Harris also said she would extend free healthcare to illegal immigrants, a policy her radical home state of California has since implemented.

While Biden is not as radical as Kamala, he still let millions of illegal immigrants into the country. Immediately upon entering office with Harris, he ended Trump’s Remain in Mexico program, which required asylum-seekers to wait until their cases were adjudicated before crossing into our nation. Instead, he and Harris let illegal migrants in to go wherever they wanted. Biden and Harris ended all deportations from the interior of the country for 100 days, and curtailed the number of interior deportations since. In the final year before COVID-19, Trump deported 267,258 illegal immigrants from the country’s interior. In Biden’s first full year in office, he deported just 72,177.

The results of the Biden-Harris immigration policies were swift. Southwest border apprehensions soared from fewer than 75,000 in the month before Harris took office to over 100,000 the month after she took office. It further soared to more than 300,000 in December 2023. All told, there have been more than 8 million Southwest border apprehensions since Harris became vice president and was given special responsibility for tackling the issue, compared to less than 2.5 million during Trump’s full four-year term.

The total number of illegal immigrants in the country fell during Trump’s term, but the number under Harris has surged by almost 4 million. These have been a strain on communities, including Democrat-controlled communities, across the country. Cities, including Denver, Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C., have pleaded for federal bailouts to pay to feed, house, and educate migrants and provide them with healthcare.

Not only has Harris failed even to speak to the last two Border Patrol Chiefs, she actually mocked the suggestion she should visit the southern border. “I don’t understand the point you are making,” she laughed when NBC News’ Lester Holt corrected her and pointed out that she had never been to the border.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Harris’s campaign claims she is better on border security because she supported legislation authored by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), but it would have made the crisis worse. It codifies catch-and-release policies by creating a new “Alternatives to Detention” pathway for illegal migrants to be released into the country and set on a path to work permits and amnesty. The bill would have done nothing to prevent the murder of Laken Riley or the other violent crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants the Biden-Harris administration welcomed into the country. 

Harris can flip-flop and abandon her past border positions, but she can’t run away from the Biden-Harris record of border failure.

2024-08-01 04:01:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3106230%2Fkamalas-harris-failed-weak-and-dangerously-liberal-immigration-record%2F?w=600&h=450, Vice President Kamala Harris, whom her campaign says should never be referred to as President Joe Biden’s Border Czar, now says she “will proudly” put her record up against President Donald Trump’s on any issue, “including, for example, on the issue of immigration.” Let’s do that. Before we turn to the numbers, it should first,

Vice President Kamala Harris, whom her campaign says should never be referred to as President Joe Biden’s Border Czar, now says she “will proudly” put her record up against President Donald Trump’s on any issue, “including, for example, on the issue of immigration.”

Let’s do that.

Before we turn to the numbers, it should first be noted that as lax and extreme on border security as President Joe Biden and his administration have been, Harris was even more radical as a presidential candidate and as a senator.

As a senator, she fought against Trump’s efforts to increase funding for new Border Patrol agents and migrant detention beds. She also tried to defund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and funnel that money to non-profit organizations that encourage illegal immigration. 

As a presidential candidate, Harris said she wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings, which even Biden was not prepared to do. Harris also said she would extend free healthcare to illegal immigrants, a policy her radical home state of California has since implemented.

While Biden is not as radical as Kamala, he still let millions of illegal immigrants into the country. Immediately upon entering office with Harris, he ended Trump’s Remain in Mexico program, which required asylum-seekers to wait until their cases were adjudicated before crossing into our nation. Instead, he and Harris let illegal migrants in to go wherever they wanted. Biden and Harris ended all deportations from the interior of the country for 100 days, and curtailed the number of interior deportations since. In the final year before COVID-19, Trump deported 267,258 illegal immigrants from the country’s interior. In Biden’s first full year in office, he deported just 72,177.

The results of the Biden-Harris immigration policies were swift. Southwest border apprehensions soared from fewer than 75,000 in the month before Harris took office to over 100,000 the month after she took office. It further soared to more than 300,000 in December 2023. All told, there have been more than 8 million Southwest border apprehensions since Harris became vice president and was given special responsibility for tackling the issue, compared to less than 2.5 million during Trump’s full four-year term.

The total number of illegal immigrants in the country fell during Trump’s term, but the number under Harris has surged by almost 4 million. These have been a strain on communities, including Democrat-controlled communities, across the country. Cities, including Denver, Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C., have pleaded for federal bailouts to pay to feed, house, and educate migrants and provide them with healthcare.

Not only has Harris failed even to speak to the last two Border Patrol Chiefs, she actually mocked the suggestion she should visit the southern border. “I don’t understand the point you are making,” she laughed when NBC News’ Lester Holt corrected her and pointed out that she had never been to the border.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Harris’s campaign claims she is better on border security because she supported legislation authored by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), but it would have made the crisis worse. It codifies catch-and-release policies by creating a new “Alternatives to Detention” pathway for illegal migrants to be released into the country and set on a path to work permits and amnesty. The bill would have done nothing to prevent the murder of Laken Riley or the other violent crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants the Biden-Harris administration welcomed into the country. 

Harris can flip-flop and abandon her past border positions, but she can’t run away from the Biden-Harris record of border failure.

, Vice President Kamala Harris, whom her campaign says should never be referred to as President Joe Biden’s Border Czar, now says she “will proudly” put her record up against President Donald Trump’s on any issue, “including, for example, on the issue of immigration.” Let’s do that. Before we turn to the numbers, it should first be noted that as lax and extreme on border security as President Joe Biden and his administration have been, Harris was even more radical as a presidential candidate and as a senator. As a senator, she fought against Trump’s efforts to increase funding for new Border Patrol agents and migrant detention beds. She also tried to defund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and funnel that money to non-profit organizations that encourage illegal immigration.  As a presidential candidate, Harris said she wanted to decriminalize illegal border crossings, which even Biden was not prepared to do. Harris also said she would extend free healthcare to illegal immigrants, a policy her radical home state of California has since implemented. While Biden is not as radical as Kamala, he still let millions of illegal immigrants into the country. Immediately upon entering office with Harris, he ended Trump’s Remain in Mexico program, which required asylum-seekers to wait until their cases were adjudicated before crossing into our nation. Instead, he and Harris let illegal migrants in to go wherever they wanted. Biden and Harris ended all deportations from the interior of the country for 100 days, and curtailed the number of interior deportations since. In the final year before COVID-19, Trump deported 267,258 illegal immigrants from the country’s interior. In Biden’s first full year in office, he deported just 72,177. The results of the Biden-Harris immigration policies were swift. Southwest border apprehensions soared from fewer than 75,000 in the month before Harris took office to over 100,000 the month after she took office. It further soared to more than 300,000 in December 2023. All told, there have been more than 8 million Southwest border apprehensions since Harris became vice president and was given special responsibility for tackling the issue, compared to less than 2.5 million during Trump’s full four-year term. The total number of illegal immigrants in the country fell during Trump’s term, but the number under Harris has surged by almost 4 million. These have been a strain on communities, including Democrat-controlled communities, across the country. Cities, including Denver, Chicago, New York, and Washington, D.C., have pleaded for federal bailouts to pay to feed, house, and educate migrants and provide them with healthcare. Not only has Harris failed even to speak to the last two Border Patrol Chiefs, she actually mocked the suggestion she should visit the southern border. “I don’t understand the point you are making,” she laughed when NBC News’ Lester Holt corrected her and pointed out that she had never been to the border. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER Harris’s campaign claims she is better on border security because she supported legislation authored by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), but it would have made the crisis worse. It codifies catch-and-release policies by creating a new “Alternatives to Detention” pathway for illegal migrants to be released into the country and set on a path to work permits and amnesty. The bill would have done nothing to prevent the murder of Laken Riley or the other violent crimes perpetrated by illegal immigrants the Biden-Harris administration welcomed into the country.  Harris can flip-flop and abandon her past border positions, but she can’t run away from the Biden-Harris record of border failure., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Feat.Border.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

Were President Joe Biden not a lame duck, his attack on the Supreme Court would be more worrying. It’ll go nowhere but it is nevertheless another stain on his thoroughly soiled career, undertaken in a last desperate partisan gasp as the Democratic Party shoves him ruthlessly aside.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the president’s plan “dead on arrival,” to which Biden responded with now-characteristic clumsiness, “I think that’s what he is.” This was especially awkward given that former President Donald Trump had been shot by a would-be assassin two weeks earlier.

The substance of Biden’s proposals is just as bad as his rhetoric. He falsely claimed that a recent Supreme Court decision “means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.” Anyone who can read knows the court did no such thing. The majority decision backed Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, in which the Supreme Court blocked President Harry Truman’s seizure of the nation’s steel mills during the Korean War. That decision held that presidents may not act outside their legal authority and that they could be blocked by courts if they tried. That case is still good law, no matter what Biden says.

Second, Biden called for 18-year term limits for all Supreme Court justices. It is unclear if he wants a constitutional amendment for this item, but he’ll need one. The Constitution is clear that Supreme Court justices are to have life tenure, and legislation that tries to skirt this by labeling some justices “Senior Justice” won’t pass constitutional muster. Federalist No. 78 is clear about the “essential” nature of the “permanent tenure of judicial offices” in maintaining a functional balance in the separation of powers. No “senior status” gimmick is compatible with the Constitution’s original design.

Finally, Biden proposes a “binding code of conduct” for the Supreme Court, calling the current code weak since it is “self-enforced.” But here again, the president’s wishes smash up against the Constitution. The judicial branch is free to design and enforce its own ethics guidelines and indeed has done so. Parties can and do file ethics complaints against federal judges which are then heard by other federal judges and could, in theory, make it all the way to the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court is already the highest court. Congress does not have the constitutional authority to give lower courts power to render judgments on the ethics or recusal decisions of Supreme Court justices.

It would be bad policy if they did. More than 1,000 complaints have been filed against U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for her handling of Trump’s classified documents case. These are mostly, perhaps entirely, scurrilous political attacks. Opening Supreme Court justices to similar campaigns would expand to an industrial scale the Left’s campaign of harassment against justices who decide cases on their constitutional merits rather than in line with a “progressive” agenda. Biden’s proposal would do nothing to improve the transparency of justice’s ethical and recusal decisions.

As he noted in making the case for his Supreme Court makeover, before becoming vice president, he had been a senator for 36 years, including a stint as chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Where was the urgency for remaking the Supreme Court then? There was none because in those days, the court made more ideologically activist decisions that Biden and his fellow left-wingers liked.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Democratic Party and wider Left are now attacking the Supreme Court only because they want to regain control of it. When it was inventing rights to abortion, for example, Democrats loved the Supreme Court’s unmoored ability and willingness to make new law. But now that conservatives are returning the court to its proper limits, Democrats want to weaken it and undermine the Constitution.

Biden is scratching around for relevance now that he is being pushed out in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. He has chosen to latch on to a completely partisan issue that has no hope of passing with just three months before Election Day. He could have chosen to leave office with dignity, but dignity is not something one has ever been able to expect from Joe Biden.

2024-07-31 04:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2F3104676%2Fbiden-pathetic-supreme-court-putsch%2F?w=600&h=450, Were President Joe Biden not a lame duck, his attack on the Supreme Court would be more worrying. It’ll go nowhere but it is nevertheless another stain on his thoroughly soiled career, undertaken in a last desperate partisan gasp as the Democratic Party shoves him ruthlessly aside. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the president’s,

Were President Joe Biden not a lame duck, his attack on the Supreme Court would be more worrying. It’ll go nowhere but it is nevertheless another stain on his thoroughly soiled career, undertaken in a last desperate partisan gasp as the Democratic Party shoves him ruthlessly aside.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the president’s plan “dead on arrival,” to which Biden responded with now-characteristic clumsiness, “I think that’s what he is.” This was especially awkward given that former President Donald Trump had been shot by a would-be assassin two weeks earlier.

The substance of Biden’s proposals is just as bad as his rhetoric. He falsely claimed that a recent Supreme Court decision “means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.” Anyone who can read knows the court did no such thing. The majority decision backed Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, in which the Supreme Court blocked President Harry Truman’s seizure of the nation’s steel mills during the Korean War. That decision held that presidents may not act outside their legal authority and that they could be blocked by courts if they tried. That case is still good law, no matter what Biden says.

Second, Biden called for 18-year term limits for all Supreme Court justices. It is unclear if he wants a constitutional amendment for this item, but he’ll need one. The Constitution is clear that Supreme Court justices are to have life tenure, and legislation that tries to skirt this by labeling some justices “Senior Justice” won’t pass constitutional muster. Federalist No. 78 is clear about the “essential” nature of the “permanent tenure of judicial offices” in maintaining a functional balance in the separation of powers. No “senior status” gimmick is compatible with the Constitution’s original design.

Finally, Biden proposes a “binding code of conduct” for the Supreme Court, calling the current code weak since it is “self-enforced.” But here again, the president’s wishes smash up against the Constitution. The judicial branch is free to design and enforce its own ethics guidelines and indeed has done so. Parties can and do file ethics complaints against federal judges which are then heard by other federal judges and could, in theory, make it all the way to the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court is already the highest court. Congress does not have the constitutional authority to give lower courts power to render judgments on the ethics or recusal decisions of Supreme Court justices.

It would be bad policy if they did. More than 1,000 complaints have been filed against U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for her handling of Trump’s classified documents case. These are mostly, perhaps entirely, scurrilous political attacks. Opening Supreme Court justices to similar campaigns would expand to an industrial scale the Left’s campaign of harassment against justices who decide cases on their constitutional merits rather than in line with a “progressive” agenda. Biden’s proposal would do nothing to improve the transparency of justice’s ethical and recusal decisions.

As he noted in making the case for his Supreme Court makeover, before becoming vice president, he had been a senator for 36 years, including a stint as chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Where was the urgency for remaking the Supreme Court then? There was none because in those days, the court made more ideologically activist decisions that Biden and his fellow left-wingers liked.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Democratic Party and wider Left are now attacking the Supreme Court only because they want to regain control of it. When it was inventing rights to abortion, for example, Democrats loved the Supreme Court’s unmoored ability and willingness to make new law. But now that conservatives are returning the court to its proper limits, Democrats want to weaken it and undermine the Constitution.

Biden is scratching around for relevance now that he is being pushed out in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. He has chosen to latch on to a completely partisan issue that has no hope of passing with just three months before Election Day. He could have chosen to leave office with dignity, but dignity is not something one has ever been able to expect from Joe Biden.

, Were President Joe Biden not a lame duck, his attack on the Supreme Court would be more worrying. It’ll go nowhere but it is nevertheless another stain on his thoroughly soiled career, undertaken in a last desperate partisan gasp as the Democratic Party shoves him ruthlessly aside. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the president’s plan “dead on arrival,” to which Biden responded with now-characteristic clumsiness, “I think that’s what he is.” This was especially awkward given that former President Donald Trump had been shot by a would-be assassin two weeks earlier. The substance of Biden’s proposals is just as bad as his rhetoric. He falsely claimed that a recent Supreme Court decision “means there are virtually no limits on what a president can do.” Anyone who can read knows the court did no such thing. The majority decision backed Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, in which the Supreme Court blocked President Harry Truman’s seizure of the nation’s steel mills during the Korean War. That decision held that presidents may not act outside their legal authority and that they could be blocked by courts if they tried. That case is still good law, no matter what Biden says. Second, Biden called for 18-year term limits for all Supreme Court justices. It is unclear if he wants a constitutional amendment for this item, but he’ll need one. The Constitution is clear that Supreme Court justices are to have life tenure, and legislation that tries to skirt this by labeling some justices “Senior Justice” won’t pass constitutional muster. Federalist No. 78 is clear about the “essential” nature of the “permanent tenure of judicial offices” in maintaining a functional balance in the separation of powers. No “senior status” gimmick is compatible with the Constitution’s original design. Finally, Biden proposes a “binding code of conduct” for the Supreme Court, calling the current code weak since it is “self-enforced.” But here again, the president’s wishes smash up against the Constitution. The judicial branch is free to design and enforce its own ethics guidelines and indeed has done so. Parties can and do file ethics complaints against federal judges which are then heard by other federal judges and could, in theory, make it all the way to the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court is already the highest court. Congress does not have the constitutional authority to give lower courts power to render judgments on the ethics or recusal decisions of Supreme Court justices. It would be bad policy if they did. More than 1,000 complaints have been filed against U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for her handling of Trump’s classified documents case. These are mostly, perhaps entirely, scurrilous political attacks. Opening Supreme Court justices to similar campaigns would expand to an industrial scale the Left’s campaign of harassment against justices who decide cases on their constitutional merits rather than in line with a “progressive” agenda. Biden’s proposal would do nothing to improve the transparency of justice’s ethical and recusal decisions. As he noted in making the case for his Supreme Court makeover, before becoming vice president, he had been a senator for 36 years, including a stint as chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Where was the urgency for remaking the Supreme Court then? There was none because in those days, the court made more ideologically activist decisions that Biden and his fellow left-wingers liked. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The Democratic Party and wider Left are now attacking the Supreme Court only because they want to regain control of it. When it was inventing rights to abortion, for example, Democrats loved the Supreme Court’s unmoored ability and willingness to make new law. But now that conservatives are returning the court to its proper limits, Democrats want to weaken it and undermine the Constitution. Biden is scratching around for relevance now that he is being pushed out in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. He has chosen to latch on to a completely partisan issue that has no hope of passing with just three months before Election Day. He could have chosen to leave office with dignity, but dignity is not something one has ever been able to expect from Joe Biden., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/biden-scotus-putsch.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

The dictator of Venezuela has claimed victory in Sunday’s presidential election. Although credible pre-election opinion polls showed Nicolas Maduro losing by a significant margin, although all exit polls on Sunday showed the same thing, and although millions of anti-Maduro Venezuelans flooded the streets outside polling stations, Maduro somehow beat Edmundo Gonzalez 51%-44%, according to the National Electoral Council, which is controlled by Maduro.

China and Russia have rushed to endorse Maduro’s victory, lending their voices rather than democratic credentials to election theft. Brazil’s socialist president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, also endorsed this electoral fiction as well, pledging that he would “not endorse any narrative that there was fraud.”

Most of Latin America and the rest of the world disagree and have responded with deep skepticism to the results.

But the Biden administration doesn’t appear interested in combating Maduro’s larceny. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says he has “serious concerns” over the results and “the international community is watching this very closely and will respond accordingly.” But these words are already a failure to respond accordingly. Were the Administration serious about holding Maduro to account, it would rally the Organization of American States for wide-ranging sanctions, call a U.N. Security Council meeting that forced China and Russia to explain why they back the dictator, and recognize Gonzalez as Venezuela’s legitimate president.

President Joe Biden’s weak response is characteristic. Since entering office, he has incentivized Maduro’s double-dealing just as he has given succor to evil regimes everywhere else.

He foolishly waived sanctions on Venezuela’s oil and mineral export industries in 2023. This was part of an agreement designed to ensure fair elections — in other words, to ensure that what happened on Sunday would never happen. After months of blatant Maduro breaches of his obligations, the administration finally reintroduced sanctions in April, but the damage was already done. Maduro played Biden for a fool — who wouldn’t? — and learned that the United States would not confront him. Soon after the sanctions were waived, Maduro began threatening to invade Guyana. If the White House now treats Maduro’s election theft as business as usual, he may decide he has little to lose by going for the Guyanan jugular.

Biden’s foolishness on Venezuela speaks to a pattern of foreign policy defectiveness.

His Iran policy, for example, blends timidity in the face of terrorism with myopia on not holding Iran to account over its nuclear escalations. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified last week that the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has a U.S. presence plotting terrorist attacks. Iran continues to plot the murder of former Trump administration officials, including former President Donald Trump himself, in revenge for the January 2020 assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani.

The list of foreign policy failings runs far longer.

Biden’s policy toward Israel mixes hectoring Jerusalem and petulant virtue signaling to the Democratic Left. As Hezbollah lobs rockets into Israeli children playing soccer, and as Hamas keeps dozens of hostages in underground dungeons, Biden calls for one-sided ceasefires and no Israeli defensive actions.

Russia policy oscillates between supporting Ukraine and bowing to theatrical Russian pressure over what weapons Ukraine may use against Russian targets.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

China policy obsesses over talk while China attacks ships from Taiwan and the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally, even in Manila’s exclusive economic zone.

This record shows the adults are not back in charge as Biden claimed they would be. But weak as Biden is, Kamala Harris seems likely to be no better. The vice president issued a bland statement asserting that “the will of the Venezuelan people must be respected” without acknowledging Gonzalez’s victory or criticizing Maduro’s conduct. America needs a stronger leader than this in the White House.

2024-07-30 04:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3101882%2Fmaduro-mocks-biden-naivete%2F?w=600&h=450, The dictator of Venezuela has claimed victory in Sunday’s presidential election. Although credible pre-election opinion polls showed Nicolas Maduro losing by a significant margin, although all exit polls on Sunday showed the same thing, and although millions of anti-Maduro Venezuelans flooded the streets outside polling stations, Maduro somehow beat Edmundo Gonzalez 51%-44%, according to the,

The dictator of Venezuela has claimed victory in Sunday’s presidential election. Although credible pre-election opinion polls showed Nicolas Maduro losing by a significant margin, although all exit polls on Sunday showed the same thing, and although millions of anti-Maduro Venezuelans flooded the streets outside polling stations, Maduro somehow beat Edmundo Gonzalez 51%-44%, according to the National Electoral Council, which is controlled by Maduro.

China and Russia have rushed to endorse Maduro’s victory, lending their voices rather than democratic credentials to election theft. Brazil’s socialist president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, also endorsed this electoral fiction as well, pledging that he would “not endorse any narrative that there was fraud.”

Most of Latin America and the rest of the world disagree and have responded with deep skepticism to the results.

But the Biden administration doesn’t appear interested in combating Maduro’s larceny. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says he has “serious concerns” over the results and “the international community is watching this very closely and will respond accordingly.” But these words are already a failure to respond accordingly. Were the Administration serious about holding Maduro to account, it would rally the Organization of American States for wide-ranging sanctions, call a U.N. Security Council meeting that forced China and Russia to explain why they back the dictator, and recognize Gonzalez as Venezuela’s legitimate president.

President Joe Biden’s weak response is characteristic. Since entering office, he has incentivized Maduro’s double-dealing just as he has given succor to evil regimes everywhere else.

He foolishly waived sanctions on Venezuela’s oil and mineral export industries in 2023. This was part of an agreement designed to ensure fair elections — in other words, to ensure that what happened on Sunday would never happen. After months of blatant Maduro breaches of his obligations, the administration finally reintroduced sanctions in April, but the damage was already done. Maduro played Biden for a fool — who wouldn’t? — and learned that the United States would not confront him. Soon after the sanctions were waived, Maduro began threatening to invade Guyana. If the White House now treats Maduro’s election theft as business as usual, he may decide he has little to lose by going for the Guyanan jugular.

Biden’s foolishness on Venezuela speaks to a pattern of foreign policy defectiveness.

His Iran policy, for example, blends timidity in the face of terrorism with myopia on not holding Iran to account over its nuclear escalations. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified last week that the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has a U.S. presence plotting terrorist attacks. Iran continues to plot the murder of former Trump administration officials, including former President Donald Trump himself, in revenge for the January 2020 assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani.

The list of foreign policy failings runs far longer.

Biden’s policy toward Israel mixes hectoring Jerusalem and petulant virtue signaling to the Democratic Left. As Hezbollah lobs rockets into Israeli children playing soccer, and as Hamas keeps dozens of hostages in underground dungeons, Biden calls for one-sided ceasefires and no Israeli defensive actions.

Russia policy oscillates between supporting Ukraine and bowing to theatrical Russian pressure over what weapons Ukraine may use against Russian targets.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

China policy obsesses over talk while China attacks ships from Taiwan and the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally, even in Manila’s exclusive economic zone.

This record shows the adults are not back in charge as Biden claimed they would be. But weak as Biden is, Kamala Harris seems likely to be no better. The vice president issued a bland statement asserting that “the will of the Venezuelan people must be respected” without acknowledging Gonzalez’s victory or criticizing Maduro’s conduct. America needs a stronger leader than this in the White House.

, The dictator of Venezuela has claimed victory in Sunday’s presidential election. Although credible pre-election opinion polls showed Nicolas Maduro losing by a significant margin, although all exit polls on Sunday showed the same thing, and although millions of anti-Maduro Venezuelans flooded the streets outside polling stations, Maduro somehow beat Edmundo Gonzalez 51%-44%, according to the National Electoral Council, which is controlled by Maduro. China and Russia have rushed to endorse Maduro’s victory, lending their voices rather than democratic credentials to election theft. Brazil’s socialist president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, also endorsed this electoral fiction as well, pledging that he would “not endorse any narrative that there was fraud.” Most of Latin America and the rest of the world disagree and have responded with deep skepticism to the results. But the Biden administration doesn’t appear interested in combating Maduro’s larceny. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says he has “serious concerns” over the results and “the international community is watching this very closely and will respond accordingly.” But these words are already a failure to respond accordingly. Were the Administration serious about holding Maduro to account, it would rally the Organization of American States for wide-ranging sanctions, call a U.N. Security Council meeting that forced China and Russia to explain why they back the dictator, and recognize Gonzalez as Venezuela’s legitimate president. President Joe Biden’s weak response is characteristic. Since entering office, he has incentivized Maduro’s double-dealing just as he has given succor to evil regimes everywhere else. He foolishly waived sanctions on Venezuela’s oil and mineral export industries in 2023. This was part of an agreement designed to ensure fair elections — in other words, to ensure that what happened on Sunday would never happen. After months of blatant Maduro breaches of his obligations, the administration finally reintroduced sanctions in April, but the damage was already done. Maduro played Biden for a fool — who wouldn’t? — and learned that the United States would not confront him. Soon after the sanctions were waived, Maduro began threatening to invade Guyana. If the White House now treats Maduro’s election theft as business as usual, he may decide he has little to lose by going for the Guyanan jugular. Biden’s foolishness on Venezuela speaks to a pattern of foreign policy defectiveness. His Iran policy, for example, blends timidity in the face of terrorism with myopia on not holding Iran to account over its nuclear escalations. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified last week that the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has a U.S. presence plotting terrorist attacks. Iran continues to plot the murder of former Trump administration officials, including former President Donald Trump himself, in revenge for the January 2020 assassination of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani. The list of foreign policy failings runs far longer. Biden’s policy toward Israel mixes hectoring Jerusalem and petulant virtue signaling to the Democratic Left. As Hezbollah lobs rockets into Israeli children playing soccer, and as Hamas keeps dozens of hostages in underground dungeons, Biden calls for one-sided ceasefires and no Israeli defensive actions. Russia policy oscillates between supporting Ukraine and bowing to theatrical Russian pressure over what weapons Ukraine may use against Russian targets. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER China policy obsesses over talk while China attacks ships from Taiwan and the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally, even in Manila’s exclusive economic zone. This record shows the adults are not back in charge as Biden claimed they would be. But weak as Biden is, Kamala Harris seems likely to be no better. The vice president issued a bland statement asserting that “the will of the Venezuelan people must be respected” without acknowledging Gonzalez’s victory or criticizing Maduro’s conduct. America needs a stronger leader than this in the White House., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/maduro-mocks-biden.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) should bring the Senate Armed Services Committee’s blueprint for the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor without delay. Senate Republicans have pushed hard for such a move, but Schumer has refused to act since the committee endorsed the bill on June 13.

The need for the NDAA is clear. The world is growing manifestly more dangerous and the military needs certainty as to what it will or won’t have to work with, especially for contingencies including war with China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea. Military commanders need certainty about their capabilities so they can prepare effectively. So, also, do weapons manufacturers to prepare workforces and facilities to deliver on new military demands effectively. Uncertainty benefits only America’s adversaries.

Fortunately, Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee have produced a plan that would bring certainty. Their blueprint boosts U.S. military capabilities and readiness in numerous ways. It would also strengthen the defense industrial base.

A primary focus is on the Indo-Pacific. The bipartisan Armed Services Committee’s bill would pay for an additional destroyer and bolster the defective submarine industrial base. The shipbuilding behemoth that supports the Chinese military vastly outpaces the United States. in new warship construction. The U.S. Navy needs more destroyers and submarines now. It is increasingly vulnerable to Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile forces, improving anti-submarine warfare proficiency, and excellent warships such as the Type-055 air defense cruiser.

The committee requires “an annual briefing on the missile defense of Guam.” This is welcome because Guam would be the central, forward-operating base for the U.S. in any war defending Taiwan, Japan, or the Philippines. For that reason, Guam would also almost certainly come under saturated Chinese missile attack during any war. Absurdly, the Biden administration’s defense budget failed to appropriate the air defense requests made by Indo-Pacific Command.

While the committee takes insufficient steps to punish defense manufacturers for cost overruns and delays — Lockheed Martin’s mismanagement of the F-35 fighter jet program is a particular disgrace — it does take tentative steps in response to contract delays. It reduces funding for VIP transport planes including the new Air Force One. It also prohibits funding for in-development projects yet to be positively tested.

The committee would also provide new funding and authorities to address backlogs in the defense industrial supply chain. It builds more redundancy and production scale into that supply chain, laying the groundwork for the kind of mass production that would be needed in a war with China. But it’s not just about production. Taking advantage of America’s technological supremacy, the committee puts new investment and allied cooperation authorizations into the development of unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, and big data networking.

It funds both the Pacific and the European deterrence initiatives, necessary to reassure allies in Asia, all of which spend too little on defense, and in Eastern Europe, all of which exceed NATO’s 2%-of-GDP defense spending target.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The NDAA is imperfect. It fails to cut bases the military doesn’t need and cannot use except as local economic development projects. It also ignores an easy solution to the Navy’s shipbuilding crisis: allowing purchases from foreign manufacturers. “Build-in-America” sounds good but improves China’s chances of victory in a future war. Far greater investments in long-range land and naval attack missiles are also needed.

Nonetheless, this NDAA meets current needs pretty well. Schumer should bring it to a floor vote this week, before the August recess, so the ball gets rolling on this most important legislation. Continued delay benefits only our enemies.

2024-07-29 05:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3101324%2Fbring-national-defense-bill-to-senate-floor%2F?w=600&h=450, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) should bring the Senate Armed Services Committee’s blueprint for the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor without delay. Senate Republicans have pushed hard for such a move, but Schumer has refused to act since the committee endorsed the bill on June 13. The need for the NDAA is clear. The world is growing,

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) should bring the Senate Armed Services Committee’s blueprint for the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor without delay. Senate Republicans have pushed hard for such a move, but Schumer has refused to act since the committee endorsed the bill on June 13.

The need for the NDAA is clear. The world is growing manifestly more dangerous and the military needs certainty as to what it will or won’t have to work with, especially for contingencies including war with China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea. Military commanders need certainty about their capabilities so they can prepare effectively. So, also, do weapons manufacturers to prepare workforces and facilities to deliver on new military demands effectively. Uncertainty benefits only America’s adversaries.

Fortunately, Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee have produced a plan that would bring certainty. Their blueprint boosts U.S. military capabilities and readiness in numerous ways. It would also strengthen the defense industrial base.

A primary focus is on the Indo-Pacific. The bipartisan Armed Services Committee’s bill would pay for an additional destroyer and bolster the defective submarine industrial base. The shipbuilding behemoth that supports the Chinese military vastly outpaces the United States. in new warship construction. The U.S. Navy needs more destroyers and submarines now. It is increasingly vulnerable to Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile forces, improving anti-submarine warfare proficiency, and excellent warships such as the Type-055 air defense cruiser.

The committee requires “an annual briefing on the missile defense of Guam.” This is welcome because Guam would be the central, forward-operating base for the U.S. in any war defending Taiwan, Japan, or the Philippines. For that reason, Guam would also almost certainly come under saturated Chinese missile attack during any war. Absurdly, the Biden administration’s defense budget failed to appropriate the air defense requests made by Indo-Pacific Command.

While the committee takes insufficient steps to punish defense manufacturers for cost overruns and delays — Lockheed Martin’s mismanagement of the F-35 fighter jet program is a particular disgrace — it does take tentative steps in response to contract delays. It reduces funding for VIP transport planes including the new Air Force One. It also prohibits funding for in-development projects yet to be positively tested.

The committee would also provide new funding and authorities to address backlogs in the defense industrial supply chain. It builds more redundancy and production scale into that supply chain, laying the groundwork for the kind of mass production that would be needed in a war with China. But it’s not just about production. Taking advantage of America’s technological supremacy, the committee puts new investment and allied cooperation authorizations into the development of unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, and big data networking.

It funds both the Pacific and the European deterrence initiatives, necessary to reassure allies in Asia, all of which spend too little on defense, and in Eastern Europe, all of which exceed NATO’s 2%-of-GDP defense spending target.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The NDAA is imperfect. It fails to cut bases the military doesn’t need and cannot use except as local economic development projects. It also ignores an easy solution to the Navy’s shipbuilding crisis: allowing purchases from foreign manufacturers. “Build-in-America” sounds good but improves China’s chances of victory in a future war. Far greater investments in long-range land and naval attack missiles are also needed.

Nonetheless, this NDAA meets current needs pretty well. Schumer should bring it to a floor vote this week, before the August recess, so the ball gets rolling on this most important legislation. Continued delay benefits only our enemies.

, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) should bring the Senate Armed Services Committee’s blueprint for the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor without delay. Senate Republicans have pushed hard for such a move, but Schumer has refused to act since the committee endorsed the bill on June 13. The need for the NDAA is clear. The world is growing manifestly more dangerous and the military needs certainty as to what it will or won’t have to work with, especially for contingencies including war with China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea. Military commanders need certainty about their capabilities so they can prepare effectively. So, also, do weapons manufacturers to prepare workforces and facilities to deliver on new military demands effectively. Uncertainty benefits only America’s adversaries. Fortunately, Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee have produced a plan that would bring certainty. Their blueprint boosts U.S. military capabilities and readiness in numerous ways. It would also strengthen the defense industrial base. A primary focus is on the Indo-Pacific. The bipartisan Armed Services Committee’s bill would pay for an additional destroyer and bolster the defective submarine industrial base. The shipbuilding behemoth that supports the Chinese military vastly outpaces the United States. in new warship construction. The U.S. Navy needs more destroyers and submarines now. It is increasingly vulnerable to Chinese anti-ship ballistic missile forces, improving anti-submarine warfare proficiency, and excellent warships such as the Type-055 air defense cruiser. The committee requires “an annual briefing on the missile defense of Guam.” This is welcome because Guam would be the central, forward-operating base for the U.S. in any war defending Taiwan, Japan, or the Philippines. For that reason, Guam would also almost certainly come under saturated Chinese missile attack during any war. Absurdly, the Biden administration’s defense budget failed to appropriate the air defense requests made by Indo-Pacific Command. While the committee takes insufficient steps to punish defense manufacturers for cost overruns and delays — Lockheed Martin’s mismanagement of the F-35 fighter jet program is a particular disgrace — it does take tentative steps in response to contract delays. It reduces funding for VIP transport planes including the new Air Force One. It also prohibits funding for in-development projects yet to be positively tested. The committee would also provide new funding and authorities to address backlogs in the defense industrial supply chain. It builds more redundancy and production scale into that supply chain, laying the groundwork for the kind of mass production that would be needed in a war with China. But it’s not just about production. Taking advantage of America’s technological supremacy, the committee puts new investment and allied cooperation authorizations into the development of unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, and big data networking. It funds both the Pacific and the European deterrence initiatives, necessary to reassure allies in Asia, all of which spend too little on defense, and in Eastern Europe, all of which exceed NATO’s 2%-of-GDP defense spending target. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER The NDAA is imperfect. It fails to cut bases the military doesn’t need and cannot use except as local economic development projects. It also ignores an easy solution to the Navy’s shipbuilding crisis: allowing purchases from foreign manufacturers. “Build-in-America” sounds good but improves China’s chances of victory in a future war. Far greater investments in long-range land and naval attack missiles are also needed. Nonetheless, this NDAA meets current needs pretty well. Schumer should bring it to a floor vote this week, before the August recess, so the ball gets rolling on this most important legislation. Continued delay benefits only our enemies., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/USS-dwight-d-eisenhower.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,

Cynics assume all politicians are liars, but today’s Democratic Party leadership is particularly prone to dishonesty about policies great and small. In the final part of our series on Democratic lies, inspired by the fantastic fraud perpetrated by the party on the subject of President Joe Biden’s mental acuity, we see that almost the entire Democratic narrative is built on demonstrable falsehoods.

The series has covered climate, immigration, the economy, and crime. On the latter, for example, new FBI protocols deter accurate reporting, so the Biden administration can claim crime is decreasing when everyone knows it is doing nothing of the sort.

Let’s look at a few more ways Democrats twist the truth.

On abortion, they repeatedly accuse former President Donald Trump of supporting a “national ban.” But even the stories to which they link for proof, on which the headlines don’t match the contents, report Trump saying, “It shouldn’t be a federal issue; it’s a state issue.” The real abortion extremists are the 210 out of 212 House Democrats who voted against requiring medical personnel to try to save the lives of babies born alive, breathing the air of day, after botched abortions.

On Afghanistan, U.S. generals say Biden has been lying ever since the U.S. military withdrawal was botched. He says they recommended complete withdrawal when they didn’t and insists his administration followed their advice on how to proceed, which, again, it didn’t. Biden also claimed in last month’s debate that no American troops died on his watch despite the 13 deaths in Afghanistan, but that may have been senility rather than a deliberate lie.

On voting rights, Democrats repeat almost weekly the canard that Republicans have engaged in “voter suppression,” even though almost every time a Republican election integrity law is passed, voter participation goes not down but up. The caterwauling about Georgia’s voting reforms in 2021, which resulted in higher turnout and shorter wait times, is a good example.

On Israel, presidential heir apparent Kamala Harris on July 25 echoed the full-time Democratic narrative that Israel is responsible for an unacceptable “scale of human suffering in Gaza, including the death of far too many innocent civilians … with over 2 million people facing high levels of food insecurity,” even though the ratio of civilian-to-combatant deaths is lower than in any war the vice president might name and the people stealing food aid are the terrorists.

On Republican corporate tax policy, almost every Democratic official in Washington blames then-House Speaker Paul Ryan’s corporate income tax cuts for starving the government of revenue and harming the poor. The fact is that in 2017, the last year before the cuts, receipts from those taxes amounted to $230 billion but now have risen to $410 billion. The Democratic narrative is pure bunk. On the other hand, Democrats’ targeted sweetheart tax breaks for left-leaning industries or politically strong banks, included in Biden’s various budget boondoggles, are costing the federal government $650 billion in a 10-year span, according to data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

In years past, Democrats, including Harris, pushed flagrantly dishonest narratives on supposedly racially oriented violent policing, which now they have gone mum on because it makes them look weak on crime.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

This litany of Democratic lies could continue indefinitely. The late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid once shrugged off his utter falsehood that presidential candidate Mitt Romney hadn’t paid taxes for 10 years. There wasn’t a grain of truth in it. But Reid insouciantly noted, “They can call it whatever they want — Romney didn’t win, did he?”

It was a cardinal statement of amorality. The lie worked so what’s not to like? Democrats increasingly care only if they win, and they don’t care how many lies they tell to do it.

2024-07-28 04:00:00, http://s.wordpress.com/mshots/v1/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonexaminer.com%2Fopinion%2Feditorials%2F3101464%2Fwhat-else-democrats-are-lying-about-part-4-most-things%2F?w=600&h=450, Cynics assume all politicians are liars, but today’s Democratic Party leadership is particularly prone to dishonesty about policies great and small. In the final part of our series on Democratic lies, inspired by the fantastic fraud perpetrated by the party on the subject of President Joe Biden’s mental acuity, we see that almost the entire Democratic,

Cynics assume all politicians are liars, but today’s Democratic Party leadership is particularly prone to dishonesty about policies great and small. In the final part of our series on Democratic lies, inspired by the fantastic fraud perpetrated by the party on the subject of President Joe Biden’s mental acuity, we see that almost the entire Democratic narrative is built on demonstrable falsehoods.

The series has covered climate, immigration, the economy, and crime. On the latter, for example, new FBI protocols deter accurate reporting, so the Biden administration can claim crime is decreasing when everyone knows it is doing nothing of the sort.

Let’s look at a few more ways Democrats twist the truth.

On abortion, they repeatedly accuse former President Donald Trump of supporting a “national ban.” But even the stories to which they link for proof, on which the headlines don’t match the contents, report Trump saying, “It shouldn’t be a federal issue; it’s a state issue.” The real abortion extremists are the 210 out of 212 House Democrats who voted against requiring medical personnel to try to save the lives of babies born alive, breathing the air of day, after botched abortions.

On Afghanistan, U.S. generals say Biden has been lying ever since the U.S. military withdrawal was botched. He says they recommended complete withdrawal when they didn’t and insists his administration followed their advice on how to proceed, which, again, it didn’t. Biden also claimed in last month’s debate that no American troops died on his watch despite the 13 deaths in Afghanistan, but that may have been senility rather than a deliberate lie.

On voting rights, Democrats repeat almost weekly the canard that Republicans have engaged in “voter suppression,” even though almost every time a Republican election integrity law is passed, voter participation goes not down but up. The caterwauling about Georgia’s voting reforms in 2021, which resulted in higher turnout and shorter wait times, is a good example.

On Israel, presidential heir apparent Kamala Harris on July 25 echoed the full-time Democratic narrative that Israel is responsible for an unacceptable “scale of human suffering in Gaza, including the death of far too many innocent civilians … with over 2 million people facing high levels of food insecurity,” even though the ratio of civilian-to-combatant deaths is lower than in any war the vice president might name and the people stealing food aid are the terrorists.

On Republican corporate tax policy, almost every Democratic official in Washington blames then-House Speaker Paul Ryan’s corporate income tax cuts for starving the government of revenue and harming the poor. The fact is that in 2017, the last year before the cuts, receipts from those taxes amounted to $230 billion but now have risen to $410 billion. The Democratic narrative is pure bunk. On the other hand, Democrats’ targeted sweetheart tax breaks for left-leaning industries or politically strong banks, included in Biden’s various budget boondoggles, are costing the federal government $650 billion in a 10-year span, according to data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

In years past, Democrats, including Harris, pushed flagrantly dishonest narratives on supposedly racially oriented violent policing, which now they have gone mum on because it makes them look weak on crime.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

This litany of Democratic lies could continue indefinitely. The late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid once shrugged off his utter falsehood that presidential candidate Mitt Romney hadn’t paid taxes for 10 years. There wasn’t a grain of truth in it. But Reid insouciantly noted, “They can call it whatever they want — Romney didn’t win, did he?”

It was a cardinal statement of amorality. The lie worked so what’s not to like? Democrats increasingly care only if they win, and they don’t care how many lies they tell to do it.

, Cynics assume all politicians are liars, but today’s Democratic Party leadership is particularly prone to dishonesty about policies great and small. In the final part of our series on Democratic lies, inspired by the fantastic fraud perpetrated by the party on the subject of President Joe Biden’s mental acuity, we see that almost the entire Democratic narrative is built on demonstrable falsehoods. The series has covered climate, immigration, the economy, and crime. On the latter, for example, new FBI protocols deter accurate reporting, so the Biden administration can claim crime is decreasing when everyone knows it is doing nothing of the sort. Let’s look at a few more ways Democrats twist the truth. On abortion, they repeatedly accuse former President Donald Trump of supporting a “national ban.” But even the stories to which they link for proof, on which the headlines don’t match the contents, report Trump saying, “It shouldn’t be a federal issue; it’s a state issue.” The real abortion extremists are the 210 out of 212 House Democrats who voted against requiring medical personnel to try to save the lives of babies born alive, breathing the air of day, after botched abortions. On Afghanistan, U.S. generals say Biden has been lying ever since the U.S. military withdrawal was botched. He says they recommended complete withdrawal when they didn’t and insists his administration followed their advice on how to proceed, which, again, it didn’t. Biden also claimed in last month’s debate that no American troops died on his watch despite the 13 deaths in Afghanistan, but that may have been senility rather than a deliberate lie. On voting rights, Democrats repeat almost weekly the canard that Republicans have engaged in “voter suppression,” even though almost every time a Republican election integrity law is passed, voter participation goes not down but up. The caterwauling about Georgia’s voting reforms in 2021, which resulted in higher turnout and shorter wait times, is a good example. On Israel, presidential heir apparent Kamala Harris on July 25 echoed the full-time Democratic narrative that Israel is responsible for an unacceptable “scale of human suffering in Gaza, including the death of far too many innocent civilians … with over 2 million people facing high levels of food insecurity,” even though the ratio of civilian-to-combatant deaths is lower than in any war the vice president might name and the people stealing food aid are the terrorists. On Republican corporate tax policy, almost every Democratic official in Washington blames then-House Speaker Paul Ryan’s corporate income tax cuts for starving the government of revenue and harming the poor. The fact is that in 2017, the last year before the cuts, receipts from those taxes amounted to $230 billion but now have risen to $410 billion. The Democratic narrative is pure bunk. On the other hand, Democrats’ targeted sweetheart tax breaks for left-leaning industries or politically strong banks, included in Biden’s various budget boondoggles, are costing the federal government $650 billion in a 10-year span, according to data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. In years past, Democrats, including Harris, pushed flagrantly dishonest narratives on supposedly racially oriented violent policing, which now they have gone mum on because it makes them look weak on crime. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER This litany of Democratic lies could continue indefinitely. The late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid once shrugged off his utter falsehood that presidential candidate Mitt Romney hadn’t paid taxes for 10 years. There wasn’t a grain of truth in it. But Reid insouciantly noted, “They can call it whatever they want — Romney didn’t win, did he?” It was a cardinal statement of amorality. The lie worked so what’s not to like? Democrats increasingly care only if they win, and they don’t care how many lies they tell to do it., , , https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Kamala-Harris-policies.webp, Washington Examiner, Political News and Conservative Analysis About Congress, the President, and the Federal Government, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cropped-favicon-32×32.png, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/feed/, Washington Examiner,