Biden Announces Initiative to Combat ‘Through Line of Hate in America’
President Joe Biden delivers remarks at the “United We Stand” summit on countering hate-fueled violence at the White House in Washington, D.C., September 15, 2022. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
President Biden on Thursday doubled down on his administration’s assertion that white supremacy-inspired domestic terrorism is the greatest threat to America, announcing an initiative to combat “hate-fueled violence.”
During a theatrical summit titled “United We Stand,” themed to suggest that rightwing hate is rampant in the country, Biden said the White House is launching a new strategy to stop domestic terrorism, “prevent people from being mobilized to violence,” and “counter exploitation of the internet.”
He mentioned the Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally in 2017, when a rightwing activist plowed through a crowd of counter-protesters with his vehicle, killing a woman and wounding dozens more, as the reason he ultimately ran for president after he had no intention to do so. Last November, a Charlottesville jury ordered the organizers of the march to pay $25 million in damages to the victims, although it did not conclude that they were guilty of a federal conspiracy to orchestrate a racially-motivated attack.
Biden got a rise out of the audience by invoking former President Trump, who at the time of the incident commented that there were “very fine people on both sides.” Paraphrasing the preamble of the Declaration of Independence, Biden bemoaned that “we’ve never lived up to it but we’ve never walked away from it.”
Citing America’s legacy of violence against Native Americans, slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, prejudice and discrimination against Irish and Italian immigrants, anti-semitism, and religious bigotry, Biden insisted that “there’s a through-line of hate” in America.
The “first of its kind” conference, according to Biden, was created at the urging of civil rights groups after the Buffalo shooting earlier this year, in which the gunman open fired in a grocery store located in a black-concentrated community. He was charged with one count of domestic terrorism motivated by hate, with the indictment claiming he acted “because of the perceived race and/or color of such person or persons” among the victims.
After the tragedy, mainstream media and Democrats attempted to implicate Republicans, suggesting that conservative ideology and institutions sparked and supported his murderous rampage. Rolling Stone published in a headline: “the Buffalo Shooter Isn’t a ‘Lone Wolf.’ He’s a Mainstream Republican.” A Washington Post piece alleged that “conservative media is familiar with Buffalo suspect’s alleged ‘[great replacement]theory.’”
“Hate’s been allowed to fester and grow,” the president declared Thursday. “Our own intelligence agencies have determined that domestic terrorism rooted in white supremacy is the greater terrorist threat to our homeland today.”
Biden pivoted into the rise of gun violence across the country, assuring, “I’m not going to stop until we ban assault weapons.”
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Protesters march toward the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 26 following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. (Photo: Nathan Howard/Getty Images)
Conventional D.C. wisdom says Republicans are about to pay a heavy political price for supporting the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. The prospects of a red wave election are deteriorating.
An “invisible army of women” are flocking to register to vote. Dobbs has fired up Democrats. President Joe Biden’s fortunes, miserable only a few months ago, have suddenly turned around. The Economist says that cheering on Dobbs was “one of the worst political decisions of recent memory.”
Even if all of this were true, and I’m highly skeptical it is, “cheering on” the Dobbs decision was completely worth it. Just as cheering the overturning of Dred Scott v. Sanford or Schenck v. United States was worth it. Not everything is about short-term partisan gain.
You might also cheer because if someone had told you 10, or even five, years ago that Roe would be overturned, you wouldn’t have believed them. Roe has been treated as a sacred text for over 50 years, not only by the press but by most of our institutions. The “right” to terminate life for convenience’s sake had been irrecoverably tethered to feminism and progress.
For millions, it probably remains the only SCOTUS decision they can name. And once the left procures a new “right,” it rarely relinquishes it. The prospect of there being six justices willing to uphold the Constitution in the face of this immense pressure was improbable, to say the least.
So, yes, cheer.
And, surely, once Roe was overturned, there would be a tumultuous political upheaval with a massive price tag? Even if we accept everything we’re hearing about the political fallout over Dobbs, the blowback is quite underwhelming. If a two-point swing in the presidential approval rating during a midterm election is the price for overturning Roe, then it was maybe the greatest bargain in history.
Just because Dobbs was “worth” celebrating doesn’t mean Republicans shouldn’t have been better prepared for the probable outcome. It always amazes me how timid and ineffective Republicans are at making the pro-life case, which makes me suspect many of them are unhappy that pro-life legislation is no longer just a theoretical proposition.
Full bans, without exemptions in cases of rape and incest—even if it is morally consistent—are probably never going to be popular nationally. But most Republican-run states allow for some level of first-trimester abortions, a position more in line with the mainstream than the Democrats’ maximalist position on abortion on demand, for any reason, until birth, funded by the taxpayers.
Few on the left, of course, need to worry about the consequences of their radical position because they are almost never asked to defend it. But, if, say, Gov. Ron DeSantis is the presidential nominee in 2024, he will be defending Florida’s 15-week ban against Biden’s NARAL-endorsed extremism. I’m not sure that works out exactly how Democrats imagine.
Democrats have been fooling themselves with faulty and push polling for years. Even if we conceded the tepid swing in national momentum toward Democrats is real, it could be attributable to any number of issues, including an easing of high gas prices. Yet I keep reading stories about how abortion has put Republican control of the Senate in jeopardy.
The GOP may or may not win back the Senate—I’m no prognosticator—but which specific Senate race has turned on Dobbs? In Pennsylvania, where even the Democratic Party’s existing senator still pretends to be pro-life, polls show Dr. Mehmet Oz tightening the race against John Fetterman. Herschel Walker seems to be gaining on Raphael Warnock. As is Adam Laxalt on Cortez Masto.
The evidence that Dobbs has been a critical factor in undermining Republican fortunes is unconvincing in other areas as well. A Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that only 8% of Democrats view “the end of national abortion rights” as their most important issue. Most other polling comes to similar conclusions. Were any of these people going to vote for Republicans to begin with?
Conservative enthusiasm remains high. Historically, midterms during the first term of a new president are tough on any administration. Despite the White House’s risible contention that the economy is humming, few people buy it. A new Marist poll finds that 62% of Americans believe we’re in a recession. The economy is, by far, the top concern of voters.
After decades of indoctrination on abortion “rights,” it’s also almost surely the case that a majority of Americans was under the impression that overturning Roe would mean a national ban on abortion. One recent poll found that 52% of registered Democrats still believe the Supreme Court outlawed abortions in the United States. The realization that this isn’t so may also temper any outrage over Dobbs. Then again, even if it didn’t, it would be worth it.
Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race? Co-authored by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop)
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
September 25, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? which can be found on You Tube. It is very valuable information for Christians to have.
Today I want to respond to your letter to me on July 9, 2021. Here it is below:
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 9, 2021
Mr. Everette Hatcher III
Alexander, AR
Dear Mr. Hatcher,
Thank you for taking your time to share your thoughts on abortion. Hearing from passionate individuals like me inspires me every day, and I welcome the opportunity to respond to your letter
Our country faces many challenges, and the road we will travel together will be one of the most difficult in our history. Despite these tough times, I have never been more optimistic for the future of America. I believe we are better positioned than any country in the world to lead in the 21st century not just by the example of our power but by the power of our example.
As we move forward to address the complex issues of our time, I encourage you to remain an active participant in helping write the next great chapter of the American story. We need your courage and dedication at this critical time, and we must meet this moment together as the United States of America. If we do that, I believe that our best days still lie ahead.
Sincerely
Joe Biden
Mr. President, my wife was born in JEFFERSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL in Pine Bluff, Arkansas and Adrian Rogers tells a story about another lady that was born in that same hospital: “They took that grocery sack and Maria home and one hour passed and two hours passed and that baby was still crying and panting for his life in that grocery sack. They took that little baby down to the hospital there in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and they called an obstetrician and he called a pediatrician and they called nurses and they began to work on that little baby. Today that baby is alive and well and healthy, that little mass of protoplasm. That little thing that wasn’t a human being is alive and well. I want to tell you they spent $150,000 to save the life of that baby. NOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THEY CAN SPEND $150,000 TO SAVE THE LIFE OF SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY WAS PAYING ANOTHER DOCTOR TO TAKE THE LIFE OF?”
Thanks for your recent letter about evolution and abortion. The correlation is hardly one to one; there are evolutionists who are anti-abortion and anti-evolutionists who are pro-abortion.You argue that God exists because otherwise we could not understand the world in our consciousness. But if you think God is necessary to understand the world, then why do you not ask the next question of where God came from? And if you say “God was always here,” why not say that the universe was always here? On abortion, my views are contained in the enclosed article (Sagan, Carl and Ann Druyan {1990}, “The Question of Abortion,” Parade Magazine, April 22.)
I was blessed with the opportunity to correspond with Dr. Sagan, and in his December 5, 1995 letter Dr. Sagan went on to tell me that he was enclosing his article “The Question of Abortion: A Search for Answers”by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan. I am going to respond to several points made in that article. Here is a portion of Sagan’s article (here is a link to the whole article):
(both Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer mentioned Carl Sagan in their books and that prompted me to write Sagan and expose him to their views.
For the complete text, including illustrations, introductory quote, footnotes, and commentary on the reaction to the originally published article see Billions and Billions.
The issue had been decided years ago. The court had chosen the middle ground. You’d think the fight was over. Instead, there are mass rallies, bombings and intimidation, murders of workers at abortion clinics, arrests, intense lobbying, legislative drama, Congressional hearings, Supreme Court decisions, major political parties almost defining themselves on the issue, and clerics threatening politicians with perdition. Partisans fling accusations of hypocrisy and murder. The intent of the Constitution and the will of God are equally invoked. Doubtful arguments are trotted out as certitudes. The contending factions call on science to bolster their positions. Families are divided, husbands and wives agree not to discuss it, old friends are no longer speaking. Politicians check the latest polls to discover the dictates of their consciences. Amid all the shouting, it is hard for the adversaries to hear one another. Opinions are polarized. Minds are closed.
Is it wrong to abort a pregnancy? Always? Sometimes? Never? How do we decide? We wrote this article to understand better what the contending views are and to see if we ourselves could find a position that would satisfy us both. Is there no middle ground? We had to weigh the arguments of both sides for consistency and to pose test cases, some of which are purely hypothetical. If in some of these tests we seem to go too far, we ask the reader to be patient with us–we’re trying to stress the various positions to the breaking point to see their weaknesses and where they fail.
In contemplative moments, nearly everyone recognizes that the issue is not wholly one-sided. Many partisans of differing views, we find, feel some disquiet, some unease when confronting what’s behind the opposing arguments. (This is partly why such confrontations are avoided.) And the issue surely touches on deep questions: What are our responses to one another? Should we permit the state to intrude into the most intimate and personal aspects of our lives? Where are the boundaries of freedom? What does it mean to be human?
Of the many actual points of view, it is widely held–especially in the media, which rarely have the time or the inclination to make fine distinctions–that there are only two: “pro-choice” and “pro-life.” This is what the two principal warring camps like to call themselves, and that’s what we’ll call them here. In the simplest characterization, a pro-choicer would hold that the decision to abort a pregnancy is to be made only by the woman; the state has no right to interfere. And a pro-lifer would hold that, from the moment of conception, the embryo or fetus is alive; that this life imposes on us a moral obligation to preserve it; and that abortion is tantamount to murder. Both names–pro-choice and pro-life–were picked with an eye toward influencing those whose minds are not yet made up: Few people wish to be counted either as being against freedom of choice or as opposed to life. Indeed, freedom and life are two of our most cherished values, and here they seem to be in fundamental conflict.
Let’s consider these two absolutist positions in turn. A newborn baby is surely the same being it was just before birth. There ‘s good evidence that a late-term fetus responds to sound–including music, but especially its mother’s voice. It can suck its thumb or do a somersault. Occasionally, it generates adult brain-wave patterns. Some people claim to remember being born, or even the uterine environment. Perhaps there is thought in the womb. It’s hard to maintain that a transformation to full personhood happens abruptly at the moment of birth. Why, then, should it be murder to kill an infant the day after it was born but not the day before?
As a practical matter, this isn’t very important: Less than 1 percent of all tabulated abortions in the United States are listed in the last three months of pregnancy (and, on closer investigation, most such reports turn out to be due to miscarriage or miscalculation). But third-trimester abortions provide a test of the limits of the pro-choice point of view. Does a woman’s “innate right to control her own body” encompass the right to kill a near-term fetus who is, for all intents and purposes, identical to a newborn child?
——-
End of Sagan Excerpt
When I was in high school the book and film series named WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? came out and it featured Doctor C. Everett Koop and Francis Schaeffer and they looked at the issues of abortion, infanticide, and youth euthanasia and they looked at comments from such scholars as Peter Singer and James D. Watson.
C. Everett Koop pictured above and Peter Singer below
Peter Singer, an endowed chair at Princeton’s Center for Human Values, said, “Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.”
James D.Watson
In May 1973, James D. Watson, the Nobel Prize laureate who discovered the double helix of DNA, granted an interview to Prism magazine, then a publication of the American Medical Association. Time later reported the interview to the general public, quoting Watson as having said, “If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice only a few are given under the present system. The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have.”
Carl Sagan
On August 30, 1995 I mailed a letter to Carl Sagan that probably prompted this discussion on abortion and it enclosed a lengthy story from Adrian Rogers about an abortion case in Pine Bluff, Arkansas that almost became an infanticide case:
An excerpt from the Sunday morning message (11-6-83) by Adrian Rogers in Memphis, TN.
I want to tell you that secular humanism and so-called abortion rights are inseparably linked together. We have been taught that our bodies and our children are the products of the evolutionary process, and so therefore human life may not be all that valuable to begin with. We have come today to where it is legal and even considered to be a good thing to put little babies to death…15 million little babies put to death since 1973 because of this philosophy of Secular Humanism.
How did the court make that type of decision? You would think it would be so obvious. You can’t do that! You can’t kill little babies! Why? Because the Bible says! Friend, they don’t give a hoot what the Bible says! There used to be a time when they talked about what the Bible says because there was a time that we as a nation had a constitution that was based in the Judeo-Christian ethic, but today if we say “The Bible says” or “God says “Separation of Church and State. Don’t tell us what the Bible says or what God says. We will tell you what we think!” Therefore, they look at the situation and they decide if it is right or wrong purely on the humanistic philosophy that right and wrong are relative and the situation says what is right or what is wrong.
This little girl just 19 years old went into the doctor’s office and he examined her. He said, “We can take take of you.” He gave her an injection in her arm that was to cause her to go into labor and to get rid of that protoplasm, that feud, that little mass that was in her, but she wasn’t prepared for the sound she was about to hear. It was a little baby crying. That little baby weighed 13 ounces. His hand the size of my thumbnail. You know what the doctor did. The doctor put that little baby in a grocery sack and gave it to Maria’s two friends who were with her in that doctor office and Said, “It will stop making those noises after a while.”
(Adrian Rogers pictured above)
Pine Bluff, ArkansasMy wife was born in main hospital in Pine Bluff, Arkansas
They took that grocery sack and Maria home and one hour passed and two hours passed and that baby was still crying and panting for his life in that grocery sack. They took that little baby down to the hospital there in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and they called an obstetrician and he called a pediatrician and they called nurses and they began to work on that little baby. Today that baby is alive and well and healthy, that little mass of protoplasm. That little thing that wasn’t a human being is alive and well. I want to tell you they spent $150,000 to save the life of that baby. NOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THEY CAN SPEND $150,000 TO SAVE THE LIFE OF SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY WAS PAYING ANOTHER DOCTOR TO TAKE THE LIFE OF? The same life!!! Are you going to tell me that is not a baby? Are you going to tell me that if that baby had been put to death it would not have been murder? You will never convince me of that. What has happened to us in America? We have been sold a bill of goods by the Secular Humanists!
Carl Sagan was elected the HUMANIST OF THE YEAR in 1982 by the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION
Carl Sagan asked, “Does a woman’s “innate right to control her own body” encompass the right to kill a near-term fetus who is, for all intents and purposes, identical to a newborn child?”
This message “A Christian Manifesto” was given in 1982 by the late Christian Philosopher Francis Schaeffer when he was age 70 at D. James Kennedy’s Corral Ridge Presbyterian Church.
Listen to this important message where Dr. Schaeffer says it is the duty of Christians to disobey the government when it comes in conflict with God’s laws. So many have misinterpreted Romans 13 to mean unconditional obedience to the state. When the state promotes an evil agenda and anti-Christian statues we must obey God rather than men. Acts
I use to watch James Kennedy preach from his TV pulpit with great delight in the 1980’s. Both of these men are gone to be with the Lord now. We need new Christian leaders to rise up in their stead.
To view Part 2 See Francis Schaeffer Lecture- Christian Manifesto Pt 2 of 2 video
The religious and political freedom’s we enjoy as Americans was based on the Bible and the legacy of the Reformation according to Francis Schaeffer. These freedoms will continue to diminish as we cast off the authority of Holy Scripture.
In public schools there is no other view of reality but that final reality is shaped by chance.
Likewise, public television gives us many things that we like culturally but so much of it is mere propaganda shaped by a humanistic world and life view.
_____________________________
I was able to watch Francis Schaeffer deliver a speech on a book he wrote called “A Christian Manifesto” and I heard him in several interviews on it in 1981 and 1982. I listened with great interest since I also read that book over and over again. Below is a portion of one of Schaeffer’s talks on a crucial subject that is very important today too.
A great talk by Francis Schaeffer:A Christian Manifesto by Dr. Francis A. SchaefferThis address was delivered by the late Dr. Schaeffer in 1982 at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. It is based on one of his books, which bears the same title._________
Infanticide and youth enthansia ———So what we find then, is that the medical profession has largely changed — not all doctors. I’m sure there are doctors here in the audience who feel very, very differently, who feel indeed that human life is important and you wouldn’t take it, easily, wantonly. But, in general, we must say (and all you have to do is look at the TV programs), all you have to do is hear about the increased talk about allowing the Mongoloid child — the child with Down’s Syndrome — to starve to death if it’s born this way. Increasingly, we find on every side the medical profession has changed its views.
The view now is, “Is this life worth saving?”I look at you… You’re an older congregation than I am usually used to speaking to. You’d better think, because — this — means — you! It does not stop with abortion and infanticide. It stops at the question, “What about the old person? Is he worth hanging on to?” Should we, as they are doing in England in this awful organization, EXIT, teach older people to commit suicide? Should we help them get rid of them because they are an economic burden, a nuisance? I want to tell you, once you begin chipping away the medical profession…
The intrinsic value of the human life is founded upon the Judeo-Christian concept that man is unique because he is made in the image of God, and not because he is well, strong, a consumer, a sex object or any other thing. That is where whatever compassion this country has is, and certainly it is far from perfect and has never been perfect. Nor out of the Reformation has there been a Golden Age, but whatever compassion there has ever been, it is rooted in the fact that our culture knows that man is unique, is made in the image of God. Take it away, and I just say gently, the stopper is out of the bathtub for all human life.
______________________________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]
I have been writing President Obama letters and have not received a personal response yet. (He reads 10 letters a day personally and responds to each of them.) However, I did receive a form letter in the form of an email on April 16, 2011. First you will see my letter to him which was mailed around April 9th(although […]
ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]
When I think of the things that make me sad concerning this country, the first thing that pops into my mind is our treatment of unborn children. Donald Trump is probably going to run for president of the United States. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council recently had a conversation with him concerning the […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Democrats’ bill “weakens accountability at the Census Bureau by placing massive power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats,” Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., tells The Daily Signal. (Photo illustration: Bill Oxford/Getty Images)
As the Census Bureau faces questions about a botched population count in 2020, the White House expressed conditional support Tuesday for legislation that would loosen the agency’s accountability to taxpayers and elected lawmakers.
The Office of Management and Budget released a statement of President Joe Biden’s administration policy in support of HR 8326, a bill dubbed the Ensuring a Fair and Accurate Census Act.
The bill, approved Tuesday by the House Rules Committee, would grant the Census Bureau’s director the sole authority to make operational, statistical, or technical decisions about the census. The bill also says the director would be removable only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
The president nominates and the Senate confirms the Census Bureau director, who currently may be fired at will by the president as with any other political appointee.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., chairwoman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, sponsored the bill.
“This legislation would safeguard the integrity of the Census Bureau and enhance the accuracy of census data,” the OMB statement says, adding:
The administration appreciates the Congress’ interest in improving the decennial census. Population data serves as the basis for political representation, determines how hundreds of billions of federal dollars are spent, and provides critical information to policymakers and business owners about their communities.
But Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow with The Heritage Foundation, warned that the measure would further insulate the Census Bureau from accountability if it becomes law. (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s multimedia news organization.)
“It is another step down the road of empowering a government bureaucracy that is not answerable to voters and is unsupervised by the elected leaders of the executive branch,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal. “It is a dangerous and reckless bill that expands the administrative state at the expense of democracy, accountability, and fairness.”
The provision that would empower the Census Bureau director to make statistical, operational, or technical decisions has been a longstanding goal of the left, which wants to conduct “statistical sampling” that doesn’t include a finite count, said Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio secretary of state who was co-chairman of the bipartisan U.S. Census Monitoring Board in 2000.
“When I was co-chairman of the board in 2000, we fought off the left’s efforts to use statistical analysis and instead insisted on counting real people and not statistics that were made up,” Blackwell, a Republican, told The Daily Signal.
“The statistical analysis is a sleight of hand to draw more favorable political districts for Democrats,” he said. “You would have to have the imagination of Walt Disney to think this is anything else.”
The Census Bureau’s Post-Enumeration Surveydetermined that the 2020 census undercounted six mostly conservative states and overcounted eight mostly liberal states. The errors potentially tilt both representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College in favor of Democrats.
The proposed changes could insulate the Census Bureau from accountability to the president required under current law. In the OMB’s statement, the Biden White House suggested it has concerns:
As HR 8326 proceeds through the legislative process, the administration looks forward to working with the Congress to ensure its provisions do not circumvent OMB’s role in formulating the president’s budget request and to avoid impinging on the president’s authority over executive branch agencies.
Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, says the increased power proposed for the Census Bureau director would undermine accountability for future problems.
“Democrats talk a big game about disinformation, but their so-called Ensuring a Fair and Accurate Census Act is a prime example of it,” Comer told The Daily Signal.
“The bill will do nothing to make the census more fair and accurate. Instead, it weakens accountability at the Census Bureau by placing massive power in the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats,” Comer said. “If Democrats are truly concerned about ensuring an accurate census, they would support adding a question on citizenship to guarantee a fair basis for the apportionment of congressional districts.”
The legislation also would establish a career deputy director to serve when the directorship is vacant. It would cap the number of Census Bureau political appointees at three, down from about two dozen now, and give civil service protections to more Census Bureau employees.
The House Oversight and Reform Committee approved the legislation in July, when Democrats sought to wrap the proposed changes around former President Donald Trump.
“After the Trump administration’s illegal efforts to weaponize the Census Bureau for political gain, it is clear we need stronger protections for this vital institution that impacts everything from congressional representation to the disbursement of public and private funding,” Maloney, the bill sponsor and Oversight Committee chairwoman, said in a public statement. “I’m proud that the committee took this important step to safeguard the integrity and independence of the Census Bureau.”
The legislative push to protect Census Bureau bureaucrats comes as the Post-Enumeration Survey found that the 2020 census undercountedthe population of Arkansas by 5.04%; Tennessee by 4.78%; Mississippi by 4.11%; Florida by 3.48%; Illinois by 1.97%; and Texas by 1.92%.
The survey also found that the 2020 census overcounted the population of Hawaii by 6.79%; Delaware by 5.45%; Rhode Island by 5.05%; Minnesota by 3.84%, New York by 3.44%; Utah by 2.59%; Massachusetts by 2.24%; and Ohio by 1.49%.
Because of the overcounts and undercounts, Florida lost out on two additional seats it should have gotten in the House and two Electoral College votes, while Texas lost one House seat and an electoral vote. Meanwhile, Minnesota and Rhode Island each kept a House seat that likely would have been lost under an accurate count, while Colorado gained a House seat it shouldn’t have gotten.
If passed by Congress and signed into law by Biden, the measure likely wouldn’t pressure bureaucrats to improve, Heritage’s von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal.
“This is a terrible bill that takes away all accountability and oversight of the Census Bureau and hands power to unelected bureaucrats,” von Spakovsky said.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Yesterday marked the 21st anniversary of 9/11. That was, as you know, the single deadliest terror attack in all recorded history. If you’re over 30, you did not need to be reminded. You remember it vividly. 9/11 changed America completely and changed it forever. Nothing has been the same here since, especially the relationship between Americans and their government.
A decade ago, the New York Times admitted this. The Times marked the anniversary of 9/11 by publishing a piece on the rise of domestic surveillance abuses, which exploded after the 9/11 attacks. The Patriot Act, according to the New York Times, “quickly became a sort of shorthand for government abuse and overreaching,” which “inflicted collateral damage on political dissent, religious liberty and the freedom of association.” That is still true, in fact, truer than it’s ever been, and it is still a tragedy.
What’s fascinating is that The New York Times has stopped acknowledging it. In fact, remarkably, there was not a single mention of the 9/11 anniversary on the front page of yesterday’s paper, the paper that purports to represent New York, the epicenter of the 9/11 attacks. Now, why would the New York Times ignore 9/11? Well, good question, because The New York Times and the tiny leadership class it panders to and in fact represents now wholeheartedly endorses the nationwide crackdown on civil liberties that 9/11 made possible and why wouldn’t they endorse it? They’re benefiting from it. It’s how they keep power. So, for them, in retrospect, 9/11 was less a tragedy than it was an opportunity and if you don’t believe that, watch how Joe Biden, the president of the United States, commemorated that anniversary yesterday.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: It’s not enough to gather and remember September 11, those we lost more than two decades ago, because on this day, it is not about the past. It’s about the future. We have an obligation, a duty, a responsibility to defend, preserve and protect our democracy.
U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during a rally hosted by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) at Richard Montgomery High School on August 25, 2022 in Rockville, Maryland. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
It’s not about the past. It’s about the future. This was in a speech that was supposed to mark the anniversary of the deaths of thousands of Americans at the hands of foreign adversaries. So, when Joe Biden speaks about the future, you should listen. The future of what? Don’t focus on the dead. Focus on what I want to do. OK, but what is it that Joe Biden wants to do? Fight Islamic terrorism? No. Protect democracy. But what exactly is this democracy that Joe Biden speaks of? Why won’t he define it ever? And how exactly is that democracy imperiled? These are pivotal questions and for answers, we’re going to turn to the source. That would be Chuck Todd of NBC News when practice is a slightly more articulate version of Biden publicist Karine Jean-Pierre.
If you want to know what the Biden administration is really thinking, listen to the guy with the comb over in the anchor chair at NBC. Here is his exchange with Kamala Harris, the sitting vice president yesterday.
CHUCK TODD: Not quite 20 years after 9/11, the Capitol came under attack from domestic terrorists. I began by asking the vice president about how over two decades our focus has had to shift from foreign terror to the threat from within.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: I think it is very dangerous and I think it is very harmful and it makes us weaker. So, you look at everything from the fact there are 11 people right now running for secretary of state, the keepers of the integrity of the voting system of their state who are election deniers. You’ve got.
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris smiles during her speech at the NAACP National Convention in Atlantic City, New Jersey, U.S. July 18, 2022. (Reuters/Hannah Beier)
TODD: And what’s that sending? What message does that send to the world?
HARRIS: Well, you couple that with people who hold some of the highest elected offices in our country who refuse to condemn an insurrection on January 6.
So, you’re slack-jawed watching something like this. Did I just see that? And I’m quoting “I began by asking the vice president about how over two decades our focus has had to shift from foreign terror to the threat within.” The threat within? What does that mean? What the hell are you talking about, you freaking lunatic? There is no group of Americans anywhere in the United States half as dangerous as the 9/11 hijackers. To suggest otherwise is literally insane. Drawing a parallel between the election justice protests of January 6 and the fall of the Twin Towers – true lunacy, but Kamala Harris didn’t even pause, almost like the whole question was a setup. She just nodded. This unspecified internal threat, she confirmed, is in fact, just like Al-Qaeda, “very dangerous and very harmful.”
You may be wondering at this point, what is this threat since we’ve just declared a new war on terror, but against whom? Who is the threat? Well, of course, it’s you and anyone else in the way of the Biden administration, and especially as the vice president just said and you saw it, anyone who questions the legitimacy of the last election, but wait a second, you ask, didn’t Kamala Harris herself call the 2016 presidential election illegitimate? Your memory is not failing. Yes, she did and so did every leader of the Democratic Party and they will say the same to this day and yet she is telling us, the sitting vice president, that anyone who questions the 2020 election should be in jail. Watch.
TODD: What is a semi-fascist?
HARRIS: Listen, I think that when we, let’s not get caught up in politicizing the fact that most people in America know that it is not helpful to our country when we have people who are denying elections or trying to obstruct the outcome of an election where the largest number of people in our country voted for the president of the United States and when we look at where we are, I think that we have to admit that there are attacks from within to your first question and we need to take it seriously.
So again, that’s the sitting vice president who they tell us over and over—and you just heard her say it—received more votes than any vice president in history and if you don’t believe that (and there are reasons not to believe that) if you don’t believe that, you’re like Mohamed Atta, your beliefs are acts of terror. You’re comparable to a mass murderer and you need to be pursued by law enforcement. They’re saying that. She just said the greatest threat to our country is that Republicans might be elected to statewide office in 11 states. That’s comparable to 9/11. Is no one noticing this? The Biden administration’s message, and of course, as it always is, completely consistent across the board on 9/11, on the anniversary of 911, was that any American who disapproves of Joe Biden’s performance is a terrorist. Here’s the DHS Secretary Mayorkas:
HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS: The threat landscape has evolved considerably over the last 20 years. We are seeing an emerging threat, of course, over the last several years of the domestic violent extremists, the individual here in the United States radicalized to violence by a foreign terrorist ideology, but also an ideology of hate, anti-government sentiment, false narratives propagated on online platforms, even personal grievances.
Is no one paying attention to this? Does no one see this happening? That’s the DHS secretary saying that opinions he doesn’t agree with expressed online, which most of us thought were constitutionally protected, in fact, we thought that was the whole reason we lived here. That’s why this is a different nation from, say, Iran, but the fact that people have different political opinions, including about the last election, Stacey Abrams has spent the last five years saying she’s the rightful governor of Georgia, we think she’s a lunatic. We also believe that view is constitutionally protected. There’s the DHS secretary saying those people are Al-Qaeda. This is terrifying and it’s not just words. They’re acting and they’re acting at scale. It was just a few weeks ago, on Thursday, September 1, two months before the midterm elections, not an incidental fact that Joe Biden declared his political opponents enemies of the state. You remember it. Here’s a clip:
BIDEN: Too much of what’s happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic. We’re all called by duty and conscience to confront extremists who put their own pursuit of power above all else. Democrats, Independents, mainstream Republicans, we must be stronger, more determined, and more committed to saving American democracy than MAGA Republicans are to destroying American democracy.
So, the upside of having a senile president is that no one takes him very seriously and so it’s possible for the rest of us to see something like that, a declaration of war on an entire political party in a two-party system, which would leave this, if we were to follow his urging, a one-party state. It’s very easy to dismiss that as the ramblings of a man who has no idea what he’s saying and a lot of people did and yet the very next day, the morning after Joe Biden delivered that speech at 8:30 a.m, a woman called Lisa Gallagher was sick in bed at her home in suburban New Jersey.
Her daughter came upstairs and told her that the FBI was waiting outside. Now, Lisa Gallagher is not a criminal, never has been. She is an active Trump supporter, particularly on Facebook. She did Trump (flag on her lawn). She’s a patriotic American. She describes herself as a rule follower. She’s never once been in trouble with the law at any level, and she had nothing whatsoever to do with January 6 and yet, outside her door with three FBI agents with guns. “We got an anonymous tip you were at the Capitol on January 6.” That’s what they said. Gallagher was terrified. “I thought they were going to take me out of here in handcuffs,” she told the show this morning.
Ultimately, her husband came home and the two of them showed the FBI agents her daily calendars from January of 2021 and finally convinced the agents that she was not at the Capitol that day. Imagine armed FBI agents showing up at your house because you supported Trump on Facebook and demanding records of your whereabouts on a date nearly two years ago and of course, the FBI already knew that Lisa Gallagher was not there because they have sophisticated facial recognition software, so they were never planning to arrest her. The point (and this is a theme in every authoritarian regime), the point was to use government agents to intimidate enemies of the regime on the basis of an anonymous tip. “I have never been so frightened in my life,” Lisa Gallagher said.
The rest of us should feel the same way. Snitches? Anonymous snitches? The secret police showing up at your door when you’re in bed? This is Soviet and there’s no other word for it. But it’s not just Lisa Gallagher. The same thing is happening to dozens, maybe scores of other supporters of the former president.
Amy Kremer, for example, is a former Tea Party member and a candidate for the House of Representatives. She also obtained special permits for the National Park Service, which authorized Donald Trump’s rally on January 6, 2021. To be perfectly clear, Amy Kremer never went to the Capitol on that day. She never encouraged anyone else to go, either. But for the crime of organizing a lawful political event, an election justice rally protected by the Constitution, Amy Kremer is now being terrorized by Merrick Garland’s DOJ.
On Wednesday morning, FBI agents showed up at her home, first at the home of her ex-husband, carrying a subpoena for her daughter Kylie. Kremer received a call from Kylie’s stepmother saying, “The FBI is here for her.” The FBI subpoenaed demands, all communications from Amy Kremer and Kylie, including their social media posts (what) from October 1st, 2020 to the present day.
Now, why would the FBI, Joe Biden’s FBI need Amy Kremer’s daughter’s Instagram posts? Because this isn’t about the events leading up to January 6. Obviously, it’s about mining all of her personal information. This is harassment on political grounds. It’s illegal. It’s unconstitutional. It shocks the conscience of everyone who sees it, but the number of people who see it is very small because it is not covered by any media and it’s not just happening to Amy Kremer. This show has obtained a subpoena from Merrick Garland’s DOJ issued in the past week and what it demands is both unlawful and without precedent in American history. The subpoena claims to be investigating, “any claim that the vice president and/or president of the Senate had the authority to reject or choose not to count presidential electors.”
Now keep in mind that any claim you make as an American citizen about electors, any claim you make about American politics, period, is protected explicitly under the First Amendment. That’s our core freedom. It’s why we live here. It’s why we’re proud to be Americans. It’s why so many American servicemen died protecting our country. Those are the freedoms that they fought to preserve. That’s why nobody prosecuted leading Democrats in 2016 when they sought to reject electors for Donald Trump. Right. It’s why none of those people, including Kamala Harris, is now in jail.
But right now, according to the subpoena that we have obtained, Merrick Garland’s DOJ is demanding all communication from the following people on this topic and let’s be clear before we read their names, that it is not clear what the investigation is actually about and that’s the most terrifying part.
What is this? On what grounds are you demanding my private communications with people? They never say but included in this precedent-breaking sweep of political opponents of the Biden White House would be former White House adviser Bernie Kerik, who was the former police commissioner of New York City; Boris Epshteyn, who is the current attorney for Donald Trump (At no time in American history has it been okay to grab the personal communications of someone’s lawyer because those are privileged. Not anymore.) Matt Morgan; Justin Clark; Kenneth Chesebro and Mike Roman; RNC official Joshua Findlay; Trump Attorneys John Eastman, Jenna Ellis, Joe DiGenova, James Troupis, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Victoria Toensing, Cleta Mitchell, and Bruce Marks. We could go on and on and on and on.
The DOJ is now going after former White House official Stephen Miller, a frequent guest on this show, with a subpoena. Why? Well, it could be because Stephen Miller went on this network and said, “If we win these cases in the courts, then we can direct the alternate state of electors are certified.”
In other words, he didn’t call for the insurrection, much less violence or a coup. He called for alternate electors to be seated if the court ordered them to be seated. In other words, he was following the constitutionally prescribed process post-election. He’s doing what is supposed to do. He was following the rules, but under Joe Biden, that apparently is now a crime. By the way, every one of these people has to hire lawyers to defend him or herself and a lot of them at this point, after two years of harassment by Joe Biden, can’t afford it.
In addition, we should say, we’ve obtained the subpoena, this subpoena goes on to demand the communications from dozens of other Republicans and people who have spoken to them, including State Representative Jake Hoffman in Arizona, Republican National Committee member Kathleen Berden in Michigan, former U.S. Representative Lou Barletta in the state of Pennsylvania and Republican State Party Secretary James DeGraffenreid in Nevada, among dozens and dozens of others.
So, what is this about? It can’t possibly be about January 6, the fake insurrection, the only insurrection in history with no guns, the insurrection in which the only person shot to death was a Trump supporter. No, the point of this is to suppress political dissent, to hobble an entire political party and to keep any of these people from ever participating in American politics again and by the way, the cost to each one of these individuals or to any person at whose house the FBI shows up is enormous. Ask anybody you saw the FBI showed up with guns at their home what that’s like. By accusing these people of insurrection for asking questions about electors by comparing them to Confederate soldiers, Merrick Garland’s DOJ plans to disenfranchise them if not jail them. Really?
So, prohibit people from participating in American politics in the name of democracy? Too ironic to be real? Oh, it’s real. It Just happened in New Mexico. A state judge in New Mexico just removed an elected county commissioner from office, overturning the will of the voters. Why? Because he had dared to exercise his constitutional rights by participating in the election justice protest on January 6. So, this is a full-blown political purge. That’s not a talking point. It is not in any sense a conspiracy theory. It’s completely real and it began shortly after January 6 when Republicans, as usual, just as they were after the death of George Floyd, were so blown back, so intimidated by the aggression of the rhetoric from the other side that they let it happen.
And because they let it happen, as with the BLM riots, its effects are accelerating now. So, if you’re accused of supporting Joe Biden’s political opponents, you could be visited by armed agents from Joe Biden’s FBI. As you reported last year in our documentary, which was mocked, turned out to be prescient, it has happened to people living as far away as remote Homer, Alaska.
PAUL HEUPER: It really felt like it was a violation of our space, definitely, to have people barge in uninvited. We gladly would have sat down and had a cup of tea with them went, “Okay, what do you need?” You have to tear my door down. You don’t have to terrorize me with guns and handcuffs and all of that.
MARILYN HEUPER: I turn around, they cut me with my hands behind my back and put me in a chair.
PAUL HEUPER: Initially, they would not present a search warrant.
MARILYN HEUPER: And then we ask, “What is this about?”
PAUL HEUPER: What are you doing inside my house with guns and handcuffs?
MARILYN HEUPER: It never occurred to me they would actually think we had anything to do with anything inside the Capitol because we never made it inside the Capitol. So, why is this happening? Because no one pushed back against it. Why did the lunatics get to defund the police, something that no normal person supported, the overwhelming majority of Americans never supported them, but they did it anyway. How did they get to do that? Because there is no opposition, no one pushed back. George Floyd died. They started screaming, calling everyone a racist and everyone just obeyed their most ludicrous demands.
January 6 is exactly the same thing. “It was an insurrection. It was a racist insurrection.” No, it wasn’t. What are you talking about? No one said that. No one pushed back at all. So, it got completely out of control, and at this point, it’s not just a threat to the Republican Party. On one level, a lot of conservatives say, “Well, who cares? Mitch McConnell is inconvenienced? No one cares.”
That’s not what it’s about. It’s a threat to the American system. This kind of behavior, politicized federal law enforcement, is a threat to democracy. It’s a threat to the system we live under. It’s a threat to everything we have that’s valuable. We cannot allow this, but no one’s even mentioning it.
Tucker Carlson currently serves as the host of FOX News Channel’s (FNC) Tucker Carlson Tonight (weekdays 8PM/ET). He joined the network in 2009 as a contributor.
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Sixty-five on-duty members of the FDNY lost their first-responder fathers in the Sept. 11 terror attacks, or watched them die of diseases caused by toxic smoke and debris at Ground Zero.
These young Bravest — including three women — decided to honor their fathers’ courage and sacrifice by following in their paths.
“Knowing what happened that day, it just shows their bravery and willingness to face those challenges,” FDNY Commissioner Daniel Nigro said of these legacies — the sons and daughters of firefighters and officers killed in the line of duty. Some were as young as 5 or 6 years old on 9/11.
Twenty years after the horror of that day, many of them posed for a portrait and shared favorite memories of their dads as they explained why they could not resist the FDNY’s siren call.
Many say working in the same job — sometimes in the same firehouse and wearing the same badge number as their dads — feels like having a guardian angel watch over them.
FDNY legacy: Anthony RagagliaHero father: Leonard Ragaglia Sr.
Anthony Ragaglia wears a tattoo on his left arm that shows what he shared with his father, Leonard Ragaglia, and what he lost on 9/11 at age 7.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Leonard RagagliaCourtesy of FDNY
Puzzle pieces that fit his dad’s portrait depict baseball and hockey, the teams his dad coached, the video games they played together, and “the toy car he pushed me around in.” Broken pieces show Anthony’s 8th birthday, basketball, weight lifting, high school and college graduation.
“He was a very loving family man,” the 27-year-old recalls. “The thing I remember the most is waiting for him to come home from work and jumping on him when he came in.”
Once pondering a career in the sports world, Anthony graduated from Mount Saint Mary College determined to become a firefighter to honor his dad and “make him happy.”
Facing the prospect of another life-threatening crisis like 9/11 caused no hesitation, he said. “I kind of put it aside. It’s the dangers that come with the job.”
Now assigned to Engine 217 in Brooklyn, he has no regrets. “I love how everyone’s part of a family, and everything you do together you do as a team.”
Anthony’s brother, Leonard Ragaglia, Jr., 30, started his career as an NYPD officer, but graduated from the Fire Academy at the same time, in September 2019. Leonard is assigned to his father’s Engine 54 in Midtown, which lost 15 members on 9/11 — more than any other firehouse in the city.
FDNY legacy: John Bergin Hero father: John P. Bergin
It could be any child’s dream to spend the day in a firehouse, ride an engine with lights and sirens and eat supper with the firefighters in their raucous kitchen. That’s what John Bergin did as a boy.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />John P. BerginCourtesy of FDNY
“My coolest memories are going to work with him,” John said of his father, John P. Bergin, of Rescue 5 in Staten Island.
“Every once in a while, in the summer, on weekends or a holiday, I got randomly woken in the morning and went to work with him for the day. I went on the runs, but had to stay on the rig. I’ve seen him dive in the water. I’ve seen him go to fires.” He helped with chores. “We’d go out and shop for the meal, and everyone cooked together. Like a big family.”
John was 9 years old on 9/11 when his father, 39, and 10 fellow Rescue 5 firefighters responded to the World Trade Center call and never came home.
The late father of three loved the job and the family life it let him enjoy. “He just seemed happy, like there was nothing better in the world,” John said. “That pretty much locked it in for me, what I wanted to do.”
At 29, John wears his father’s badge, No. 6359, at Ladder 157 in Flatbush.
FDNY legacy: Chris HowardHero father: George Howard
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Chris Howard
The Port Authority Police badge, No. 1012, that Chris Howard treasures is a duplicate.
That’s because the original one belonging to his dad, emergency services specialist George Howard, spent eight years in a US president’s pocket.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />George Howard
“When President Bush came into town, on Sept. 14, he wanted to meet with everybody who had [family members] confirmed missing or killed in action,” Chris Howard said.
His father, a 16-year Port Authority veteran and a volunteer fire captain in their hometown of Hicksville, LI, had the day off on Sept. 11, but he rushed to the World Trade Center to assist. He was killed when the North Tower fell. Chris was 18.
“We brought the badge down and my grandmother … pressed it into George’s, President Bush’s, hand,” Howard, now 38, said. “And then for the rest of his presidency he always had the badge on him.”
Then-Rep. Peter King (R-NY) “would call him out, say ‘Where’s the badge?’” Howard said. “And he always had it in his pocket.”
Today, George Howard’s badge is on display at the Bush Presidential Library in Dallas, Texas — and George Howard’s son is a firefighter with Ladder 157 in Flatbush, Brooklyn.
“I think he always wanted to be a fireman, that’s why he became an ESU cop,” Chris mused. “So I hope he’s looking down and laughing.”
FDNY legacy: Emmet MeehanHero father: Edward Meehan
“I was in a weird state of mind after he died, a little bit of depression, I guess,” said Emmet Meehan, 30. “I had no direction, no purpose. The Fire Department was the structure I needed.”
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Edward T. Meehan
Meehan took the Fire Department test “for the hell of it” in 2017 after abandoning his life in California to be with his dad, Lt. Edward Meehan, who had been diagnosed with cancer as a result of his rescue efforts on 9/11.
“I was with him those last two or three months every day,” Meehan said. “We always were close, but when you’re facing death it’s like anything you were holding back is going out the window. That’s a time I cherish a lot.”
Edward Meehan died in February 2018, just six months after his diagnosis, as his son’s test was being graded. “He had no idea I would join the department. It wasn’t a thought at all,” Meehan said.
A prayer card from his dad’s funeral — bearing a photo of Ed from his days as a probie and another with his beloved Engine 45 truck — is tucked into Meehan’s helmet as he works at Ladder 34 in Washington Heights.
“I’m just keeping him with me,” he said.
FDNY legacies: Erik Wieber and Chris Wieber Hero father: Robert J. Wieber
The brothers’ dad, Robert J. Wieber, a firefighter at Engine 262 in Astoria, Queens, developed a rare non-Hodgkin lymphoma brain cancer as a result of his rescue and recovery work at the World Trade Center. He was 50 when he died in 2006.
“I guess you could say we were fortunate enough to have a couple more years with him,” Chris said. “But eventually it got him.”
Chris, now 33, always planned to become a firefighter, but Erik — his elder by two years — took a more circuitous route.
“I was doing accounting and it just wasn’t working out for me,” Erik recalled. “My dad, he loved his job, so that’s what made me want to change.”
Carl Kumpel was only 8 years old when his father Kenneth, a firefighter with Ladder 25 on the Upper West Side, died in the collapse of the South Tower — but his colleagues’ response made a lasting impression.
“I became a firefighter because there’s so much camaraderie,” he said. “Especially after 9/11, I saw how much they came together and helped our family out.”
Carl, now 28, swore in as a Fire Department probie in 2017. Two years later his older brother Greg, 30, followed suit. Today, they work in neighboring Harlem firehouses — Carl at Engine 37, Greg at Engine 80 — 14 blocks apart.
“I saw just how much fun he was having and how much he truly loved and was passionate about the job,” Greg said.
He finds the work enormously satisfying.
“You get called to something, and the adrenaline’s up,” Greg said. “But then there’s that moment when you get to reflect and realize what you did and the impact that you have on people’s lives on a daily basis.”
Their mother, Nancy Kumpel, is a bit less enthusiastic, they admit with knowing laughs.
“She’s a little nervous, but she’s very proud of both of us,” Carl said.
“Yeah, I’d say my mom is 10 percent nervous, 90 percent very happy,” his brother agreed.
FDNY legacy: James DowdellHero father: Kevin C. Dowdell
“This is the only thing we ever recovered from him down there,” said James Dowdell, hefting a heavy Halligan tool in his hands.
The initials “KD” soldered onto the head of the multipurpose pry bar makes it instantly recognizable: It belonged to Lt. Kevin C. Dowdell, James’ father, who raced to the World Trade Center with his unit, Rescue 4 from Woodside, Queens. Six members of the squad were killed.
“It got to us in early October of ‘01,” Dowdell, now 37, said. “We never found his body, but … as a family, I guess, we took it as our memento of him.”
He and his brother Patrick, 39, have cherished the tool that somehow survived the South Tower collapse — even whisking it to safety from the onslaught of Hurricane Sandy, which flooded Patrick’s home in Breezy Point, Queens.
Kevin Dowdell’s heroics with Rescue 4 included national recognition for his recovery efforts in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. Today, James Dowdell works at another of the city’s elite companies, Brooklyn’s Rescue 2.
“Being a firefighter does make me feel closer to my father,” he said. “It makes me proud to put on the same uniform he died for.”
FDNY legacy: Robert WallaceHero father: Robert F. Wallace
“Sometimes I’ve been in situations on the job when I’ve talked to him, you know, ‘point me the way, show me what to do,’” firefighter Robert Wallace said. “It’s a real confidence booster to feel like he’s with me.”
Wallace, 39, the son, grandson, and great-grandson of New York City firefighters, has spent his entire 14-year career at Engine 275 in Jamaica, Queens. The “War Wagon” responded to 715 fires in 2019, making it one of the city’s most active engine companies.
“I was very, very fortunate to land a spot here,” Wallace said. “As a fireman you want to be busy. I love it, never a dull moment.”
His dad, he said, was “a whack job” with “the biggest sense of humor” — known for his habit of gazing and pointing up at the sky until friends and random strangers craned their necks to see what he was looking at (which was never anything at all).
“After he died, guys from his firehouse down at the [World Trade Center] site would take pictures of each other, pointing up,” Wallace said. “Just to remember him.”
FDNY legacy: Terence PfeiferHero father: Raymond J. Pfeifer
Terence Pfeifer tucks two prayer cards from his father’s wake into his FDNY helmet. One shows a vigorous Ray Pfeifer at a fire. “F–k cancer,” is written over the picture.
“He would say it a lot. He would make light of it,” his son said.
On the morning of 9/11, Ray was golfing with other off-duty firefighters when the first plane crashed into the World Trade Center. They grabbed gear at their firehouse, Engine 40, Ladder 35, near Lincoln Center, and raced to Ground Zero.
Ray spent the next eight months digging through toxic rubble for victim remains. Diagnosed with advanced kidney cancer eight years later, he died in 2017 from the disease that ravaged his body.
“I’m a lucky guy,” Ray Pfeifer told The Post in 2015. “I’ve had 15 years with my kids after 9/11, and I’m still here with Stage 4 cancer.”
Terence, 29, dwells on happy times when his dad pitched for his firehouse softball team. “I just remember how fun that was. A lot of the guys would bring their kids, so we’d all hang out and play.”
Ray became an ardent advocate — a “poster boy,” as he called it — for compensation and health care for hundreds of ailing responders.
At age 59, he died three days after learning that his son was admitted to the next FDNY class, clinging to life until he got the good news. Terence is assigned to Engine 79 in the Bronx.
“He was the highest-ranking uniformed firefighter in the city,” Chris Ganci smiled. “But if you asked him what he did for a living, he’d say he was a New York City firefighter.”
Chris, then 25, had a well-paid pharma job and was about to earn his MBA from New York University.
“But I wasn’t happy,” he said. “So I thought, basically, what’s the closest example? And he was always happy going to work.”
He completed his MBA program — but soon left the business world to join the FDNY.
“It’s the best decision I ever made in my entire life.”
Chris, now 45, joined the department in 2005. Today he’s a battalion chief, leading the 19th Battalion in the West Bronx. His brother Peter, 47, is a Fire Department captain.
“There’s a reason we call each other ‘brother’ on the fire ground,” he said. “It’s more than a relationship. That’s how I feel about my father every single day I walk through those doors.”
“When I was little, I would listen to it all the time,” John Leahy said of the message that his dad, NYPD officer James Leahy, left on the family answering machine on the morning of Sept. 11.
“He was super calm,” Leahy remembered. “It was just, ‘I’m here helping out and I’ll call you later.’”
Officer Leahy was on patrol in Greenwich Village, two miles away from the attack, when he witnessed the first plane’s impact. He raced to the scene to assist. John, the youngest son he called “his buddy,” was 6 years old.
“Everyone told my dad he didn’t have to be there,” John said.
“He was last seen bringing oxygen tanks up the stairs of Tower 1 for the firefighters” — without any protective equipment of his own.
“He chose to go and help the Fire Department out. So I decided that’s what I wanted to do.”
“My firehouse lost 10 guys in the tower where my dad was,” he said. “I don’t know if they were together in there, but they were all in the same building.
“So it’s funny, now, that I ended up here. It’s like he’s looking out for me.”
FDNY legacy: Josephine SmithHero father: Kevin Smith
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Josephine Smith
“My father would do anything and everything for anybody, whether he knew you or not,” said Josephine Smith.
“Selfless would have been the way to put it,” she added with a nostalgic smile.
Her dad, firefighter Kevin Smith, was a Marine Corps veteran and a founding member of Hazmat 1 in Maspeth, Queens, the Fire Department’s dedicated company of hazardous materials experts.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Kevin Smith
The unit was quickly deployed to the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 — and was almost entirely wiped out there. Twelve of its members, including Smith, were slain.
“I’ve always wanted to be a firefighter my whole life,” Josephine Smith, now 41, said. “Just watching my father as I grew up, saving people, protecting the city of New York and loving what it is that he did made me want to do and be everything that he was.”
Smith became the Fire Department’s first female legacy in 2014, at the age of 34. Today, she’s a firefighter at Engine 39 on Manhattan’s Upper East Side.
“We’re all a family in a different way than anybody else is,” she said of the deep bond that 9/11 legacy firefighters feel among themselves.
“It’s something that nobody else can really understand except for us.”
FDNY legacy: Kelly Fullam Hero father: Martin Fullam
“I’m the first and only girl my firehouse has ever had,” Kelly Fullam said.
“There’s a little bit of an adjustment period — you know, for them,” she added, flashing a mischievous grin. “But it’s good … I feel like I have 50 big brothers.”
Fullam was the oldest of three sisters whose dad, Lt. Martin Fullam, died in 2013 of polymyositis, a rare autoimmune disease that he and several other first responders developed as a result of their World Trade Center rescue efforts.
After his death, Kelly, 30, joined her father’s beloved Fire Department herself and is now stationed at Engine 284 in Brooklyn’s Dyker Heights neighborhood.
“I’ve always wanted to be a firefighter, just seeing how my dad … loved the job,” she said. “It was never ‘I have to go to work’ — it was always ‘I get to go to work.’”
Lt. Fullam’s 2010 testimony before the US Senate was instrumental in the passage of the Zadroga Act, the law that extended federal aid to 9/11 victims who, like Fullam, developed WTC-related illnesses years after the attacks.
“I was very lucky to have him as a dad,” she said.
FDNY legacies: Matt, Carl, Rebecca and Marc Asaro Hero father: Carl Asaro Sr.
“I see him in all of us — especially in how witty he was,” Rebecca Asaro said of her father, Carl Asaro, who inspired four of his six children to follow him into the Fire Department.
“He always had something smart or wise to say, and I see that in my brothers,” she said.
“In the firehouse, you’ve always got to have the witty comeback, so my home throughout my childhood was basically training. I’ve been a probie for 30 years now,” she laughed.
Rebecca was 9 when her dad — along with every member of the 15-man shift at Midtown’s Engine 54/Ladder 4/Battalion 9 — was killed on 9/11. It was the heaviest loss of life suffered by any single firehouse that day.
“We never found my dad, so there was never really closure for us,” she said.
Today, all four of the firefighting Asaros serve in Manhattan: Carl, now 33, at Ladder 23; Matt, 32, at Engine 33; Marc, 27, at Engine 22; and Rebecca, 29, who was thrilled to be assigned to their father’s old outfit, Engine 54.
“I am literally following my father’s footsteps every single day,” she said.
“Some days I don’t think too much about 9/11,” she said. “But working that house, seeing the memorial there, you really can’t avoid it.”
To help preserve her father’s memory, she offers tours to visitors, showing off the bronze bas-relief panel at Eighth Avenue and 48th Street that pays tribute to him and his lost comrades.
FDNY legacy: Michael SullivanHero father: John P. Sullivan
Third-generation firefighter Michael Sullivan feels he has a lot to live up to.
“Walking through the same doors, sharing the same locker that he had … it’s pretty amazing,” said Sullivan, a firefighter at Ladder 34 in Washington Heights.
“And my grandfather was also in the same firehouse, so — no pressure,” Sullivan said with a self-deprecating chuckle.
John Sullivan died in 2010, just weeks after his retirement at age 52.
“It was pancreatic cancer,” said Michael of his father’s diagnosis, related to the toxic environment at Ground Zero. “We only really had him for a month after his diagnosis.”
Colleagues remember his dad’s “very calming” presence, no matter how chaotic or dangerous the scene.
“You always felt safe with him. Whether it was on the job or off the job, you would feel a blanket of safeness,” the 27-year-old Sullivan said.
“Because you never see a firefighter run, it’s just not how you operate,” he explained. “Everything’s smooth. You’ve just got to be easy, and take it all in, because there’s a lot going on.
“That’s him, he was smooth,” he said. “And now I carry the torch.”
FDNY legacy: Manny MojicaHero father: Manuel Mojica Jr.
“He was my superhero then, and still is,” he said of Manuel Mojica Jr., a firefighter at Squad 18 in Greenwich Village known for his motorcycle, tattoos and big mustache.
Now 25, Manny pays tribute to his dad with tattoos on his muscular right arm. They depict the logo of the Grateful Dead, his dad’s favorite band; the words from a song, “Inspiration, move me brightly;” the Harley-Davidson; a kneeling fireman with two beams of light for the Twin Towers; and a Maltese Cross marked 9017, his dad’s badge number.
Manny, who joined the Bravest in 2019, wears that number at Engine 298 in Jamaica, Queens, fulfilling his lifelong dream of becoming a firefighter like his father. “That was my only plan.”
He remains close to retired members of his dad’s old firehouse.
“They were always there to help my mother, sister and me, and always made us feel welcome,” he said.
Now a mirror-image of “Big Manny,” he rides a motorcycle and likes to work on cars. He is refurbishing the old Harley, but only to ride on his dad’s birthday, Father’s Day, and 9/11 anniversaries.
FDNY legacies: Jonathan and Christopher OttenHero father: Michael J. Otten
“I knew he was going to be there that day when I saw the fire on the news. I knew he was saving other people,” Jonathan Otten recalled of his father on 9/11, when he was 8 years old.
Michael J. Otten, 42‚ was killed with all 10 fellow Bravest from Engine 40/Ladder 35 in Midtown who raced to the blazing Twin Towers.
Before then, Jonathan knew little about the dangers of the job.
He remembers how his dad “always walked into a room with an ear-to-ear grin, and never let anything get to him.”
A “big kid,” as Marion Otten called her husband, the father of three spent hours on end playing football, soccer and baseball with the boys on their East Islip front lawn.
“He taught us right from wrong, to always be polite and respectful of other people. But he was able to have fun with us whenever he could,” said Jonathan, 28, who is due to graduate from the Fire Academy this month. He will be a fourth-generation FDNY firefighter, following his father, grandfather Richard and great-grandfather Henry into the department.
“I grew up my whole life thinking I was going to be a fireman. This was going to be my career, my passion and there was no looking away from it.”
His father’s death did not deter him. “I know he died doing what he loved. I do it for the same reason — to put your own life on the line to help other people when they need it the most.”
His brother Christopher, 31, joined the Bravest first. He serves with Ladder 35, the “Cavemen,” on the Upper West Side.
FDNY legacy: Pete J. CarrollHero father: Peter J. Carroll
Firefighters wear a hood under their helmets to prevent their head, neck and ears from burns. Pete Carroll keeps a brown hood that belonged to his dad, Peter J. Carroll, in his fireman’s coat pocket.
“I carry it with me every single day on every single run. I like to think he’s looking out for me and the guys I work with.”
Pete’s older brother Michael, who joined the FDNY three years after 9/11, carried the fire-resistant hood for 13 years. Michael, now at Rescue 5, bestowed it on Pete when he became a firefighter in 2019.
Just 8 years old on 9/11 when his father was killed, Pete has vivid memories of the time he spent with his dad, “just me and him,” in the woods and swamps near his grandparents’ home upstate.
“Me and him used to catch frogs and snakes and keep them as pets. It was the most fun in the world.”
After 9/11, the family received a letter from a woman who worked in the Twin Towers. “He pulled her out and went back in,” Pete said she wrote.
“He was one of those extremely brave people,” Pete said. “I’m blessed to live in his footsteps.”
Pete, 28, serves at Ladder 120 in Brownsville, Brooklyn, near his dad’s Squad 1. His younger brother, Christopher, 26, will soon join the FDNY as well.
FDNY legacy: Glenn Perry Hero father: Glenn C. Perry
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Glenn Perry
Glenn Perry’s dad never tried to persuade his son to become a firefighter.
“He wanted me to do something else. He wasn’t pushing it,” Perry said. Lt. Glenn C. Perry had been so eager to follow the path of his own dad into the FDNY that he ran up and down the stairs at a Staten Island rail station with an oxygen canister to train for the test.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Glenn Perry Sr.
Before 9/11, the younger Perry thought about becoming a gym teacher or joining the military. That changed when he was 16. Lt. Perry, 41, died in the World Trade Center collapse.
“After that happened, it was pretty much a no-brainer. Shove it down the terrorists’ throats, and tell them ‘You didn’t win,’” the son said.
“After 9/11, he would have wanted me to join the FDNY. To become a third-generation firefighter and try to fill my dad’s shoes … is a very difficult task.”
Perry, 36, who joined the Bravest in 2006, is assigned to Ladder 34 in Washington Heights, the same firehouse where his dad last served — and where one of his dad’s fellow firefighters still works.
“I plan on doing another 15 years,” he said.
FDNY legacy: Thomas HeedlesHero father: Dennis Heedles
“That got me thinking — yes, you’re taking a risk every time you go to work,” he said. “But at my dad’s funeral, I felt, they got our back.”
Dennis Heedles, who was stationed at Ladder 76 in Tottenville, Staten Island, on Sept. 11, died 14 years later — weeks after being diagnosed with WTC-related lung cancer.
“It was sudden,” said Thomas, now 31 and a firefighter at Ladder 148 in Borough Park, Brooklyn. “We all thought he was the strongest guy in the world. By the time they caught it, it was too late.”
“A legacy already has a respect for the job,” he explained. “You’re in the firehouse all the time from when you’re a little kid; it’s already part of you.
“Some guys feel like it’s just work,” Heedles said. “We come in knowing a little bit better what it’s all about.”
FDNY legacy: James TancrediHero father: Vincent Tancredi
“Then I realized what the job was all about,” James said. “And that it’s the only thing I want to do with my life.”
Tancredi, now 32 and a father himself — with an 18-month-old son and another baby on the way — marvels at the time and energy that his dad lavished on his boys, James and Kevin, during their childhood years.
“He came home and always gave us his full attention, no matter how tired he was,” he recalled. “And now I realize how tired he actually could be, coming home from a 24 [hour shift].”
His day-to-day work at Ladder 39 in the Wakefield neighborhood of the Bronx “definitely makes me feel I have a closer bond with my dad,” Tancredi said.
“I wish we could have conversations about things that happen on the job. But doing it makes me feel…” he paused for a moment, searching for the right word. “Whole.”
FDNY legacy: Larry SullivanHero father: Lawrence J. Sullivan
“This picture reminds me how much he loved the job, how happy he was to work in Rescue 5,” Larry Sullivan said of his father, Lawrence J. Sullivan, who died in 2012 at age 53 of a rare cancer linked to his digging at Ground Zero.
Larry was with his dad in 2011 when a Sloan Kettering doctor told him the tumor in his small intestine could not be removed.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Lawrence J. Sullivan
“The first thing he said, in tears, was, ‘I’ll never be a fireman again.’”
After chemo and radiation failed, Sullivan spent his final months in bed at home, but had plenty of company with his wife Virginia, three sons and two daughters.
Larry and his dad watched Yankees games, laughed and talked about his job with the FDNY. As he was ailing, Rescue 5 comrades visited and tended to his every need.
The Staten Island veteran voiced a final hope that this death would give sons Larry and James the “legacy points” to catapult them into the Bravest.
“He wanted me and my brother to be firemen so badly. He used to always tell me, ‘It’s the best job in the world.’”
In 2014, Larry, now 39, was assigned to Ladder 148 in Borough Park. One year later, James, 30, joined Engine 310 in East Flatbush. Their brother Robert, 33, is a member of the NYPD’s Emergency Service Unit.
FDNY legacy: Thomas Van Doran Hero father: Thomas R. Van Doran
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Thomas Van Doren
“My dad never stopped learning,” Thomas Van Doran said.
“When he turned 50, my mom bought him a saxophone,” said Van Doran, 27, a firefighter at Ladder 154 in Jackson Heights, Queens.
<img class="i-amphtml-intrinsic-sizer" role="presentation" src="data:;base64,” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />Thomas R. Van Doren
“He had no musical experience whatsoever, and it was pretty rough in the beginning, but he taught himself how to play. He’d even bring it to the firehouse with him.
“To this day I’ll meet guys from his firehouse who’ll say to me, ‘Just tell me you’re not playing the saxophone, please!’” Van Doran laughed.
Thomas R. Van Doran was a captain with Engine 95 in upper Manhattan on Sept. 11. “He was on restricted duty at the time,” his son said. “But he went down to the pile that day and was there for six months.”
Around his neck, the younger Van Doran wears a St. Florian pendant honoring the patron saint of firefighters — another gift from his mother, Elizabeth.
“My mom met my dad when he was at Engine 23 in Manhattan,” Van Doran said. “She gave him this pendant when they started dating. He wore it to work every single day.
“It was kind of a way to stay safe, and it worked,” he said. “Maybe it’ll protect me, too.”
FDNY legacy: Peter Regan Hero father: Donald J. Regan
Peter Regan was a Marine stationed at Camp Pendleton outside San Diego when the Twin Towers collapsed, killing his father, Donald Regan, 47, of Rescue 3 in the Bronx.
The 20-year-old flew to New York and raced to Ground Zero, where he dug and dug for days in the smoking rubble “because my father was in there.” He found human remains, but his family never recovered his father’s.
After 9/11, Peter served two tours in Iraq, including Operation Enduring Freedom, before joining Ladder 174 in Brooklyn, a former firehouse of his dad’s where some members had worked with Donald.
Peter knew how his father felt about firefighting.
“My dad loved going in. He was in a much better mood when he came home knowing he did something good for someone else. He would always have the attitude, ‘I wish I could do more.’”
Now 40, Peter is married and has four children, ages 3 to 9, and appreciates his dad, who also had four kids, more than ever.
“Now I look back and I’m like, ‘How did he do this every day?’”
Donald worked a second job as an HVAC technician to support his family. With his children all playing sports at the same time, “He tried to make at least an inning of every game,” he recalled.
Peter said he aims to live up to his father’s legacy every day.
“What he modeled I’m trying to stick with,” he said. “It’s a good pressure to put on yourself. You’ve got to do well because you’re living up to expectations. I don’t want to let up.”
FDNY legacy: Aric TegtmeierHero father: Paul A. Tegtmeier
Tegtmeier was just 6 years old when his firefighter father was killed at the World Trade Center, yet memories of angling on family vacations in the Adirondacks, Poughkeepsie and Outer Banks, NC — or just on outings to a local pond — still come to mind.
Looking back now, the 26-year-old sees his dad as much more than a happy, gone-fishing kind of guy who doted on Aric and his two sisters. He was also a volunteer firefighter for more than 20 years in Roosevelt, NY, who kept testing for the FDNY. When he finally made it, he gave up a higher-paying career with the phone company to join the Bravest.
“It’s all he ever wanted to do.”
His father became an FDNY probie at the “pretty old” age of 40 (the limit has since dropped to 29) and died on 9/11 just 18 months later.
His dad’s accomplishments impressed his young son to follow suit. “If he could do it at 40 years old, I could do it at my age.”
Aric, who has a degree in arson investigation, is a member of Ladder 58 in the Bronx, near his father’s old firehouse, Ladder 46.
FDNY legacy: Chris MascaliHero father: Joseph A. Mascali
“It takes a special person to do this job, not to pat us all on the back,” said Chris Mascali, 38, an eight-year FDNY veteran assigned to Ladder 157 in Flatbush, Brooklyn.
“And I have a different understanding of that, now that I’m doing the same thing my father did.”
Joseph A. Mascali was one of 11 members of Staten Island’s elite Rescue 5 unit who perished at the World Trade Center on the morning of Sept. 11.
“I always felt like I might become a fireman,” Chris Mascali said. “I went to college and thought for a while that maybe I’d take a different path. But the 11th drew me back in.
“The job, it’s my connection with my dad,” he said.
His fondest memory of his father dates back to the summer of 2001, as Chris competed in a prestigious junior golf tournament in Staten Island.
“I never liked the family or anyone to watch me play,” he recalled. “But unbeknownst to me, my dad was there the whole time, watching from a distance.
“I won the tournament, and suddenly out from behind the trees he came walking down to me,” Mascali said.
“It was one of the last moments we shared — a hug on the 18th hole I’ll never forget.”
FDNY legacy: Michael O’Hanlon Jr.Hero father: Michael O’Hanlon Sr.
When O’Hanlon Sr. died in 2017 of stomach and esophageal cancer developed after spending months at Ground Zero, his son was just about to take the firefighter’s test to follow his dad’s path.
“Becoming a firefighter was one of my dreams as a kid,” O’Hanlon said. “I think God had it in his plan all along that that would be the time.”
Today O’Hanlon, who joined the department in 2019, works at Ladder 59 in the Bronx’s University Heights neighborhood — just a mile away from Engine 68 in Highbridge, his dad’s home turf for his entire 30-year career.
“I’m meeting so many people now who worked with him or knew him from the Emerald Society,” he said, of the group of firefighters with Irish heritage. “To hear them praise him, talk about his character, how he conducted himself — it makes me so proud.”
“Now that I’m experiencing it firsthand, I’m learning to appreciate the honor, the prestige, and the responsibility he felt in the way he did the job.”
FDNY legacy: Brian Phillips Hero father: Raymond R. Phillips
Raymond R. Phillips played Santa so well, his own kids couldn’t recognize him. “One of us said, ‘Santa’s got daddy’s eyes,’ and Mom was like, ‘The kids are onto us,’” his son Brian remembered.
The 6-foot-3 firefighter’s nickname was “Gonzo,” which came from Godzilla, but he brought joy for 30 years as St. Nick at a burn center and the annual FDNY Widows & Children’s holiday party.
“He was a big guy with a big personality,” said Brian, 31, now a firefighter assigned to Ladder 37 in Bedford Park, the Bronx.
On Sept. 11, Raymond was called to the Twin Towers from the Special Operations Command on Roosevelt Island. He spent weeks on the smoking pile searching for bodies. He developed asthma, which ultimately triggered a fatal heart attack in 2018.
Over the years, the FDNY fellowship made an impression on Brian. Last summer, a Bronx firefighter came up to him and said, “When my dad passed, Gonzo went above and beyond for our family.”
Added Brian: “I love the firefighting side of the job, but I fell in love with the camaraderie and brotherhood behind it.”
Raymond encouraged his kids to explore public service, but never pushed it, Brian said. His older brother, Raymond, 33, is an NYPD officer. His younger sister, Courtney, 29, is in nursing school.
Brian joined the Bravest a year after his dad died. When he inherited his father’s badge number, 5659, his mom, Maureen, bestowed upon him the gold Maltese cross, with 5659 engraved on it, that she had given her husband as a gift.
FDNY legacy: Gary Watson Hero father: Kenneth T. Watson
Gary Watson, who was 7 years old when he lost his doting father, firefighter Kenneth T. Watson, felt reluctant at first about taking the same career path.
“What I went through as a child was tough. God forbid, if something happened to me, I wouldn’t want my kids growing up without a dad.”
“The older I got, I realized you can’t really think about it that way. I want to save lives. I want to help people out. You can’t think about the negative ‘what ifs,’” said Gary, 27, who is set to graduate from the Fire Academy this month.
“I think about the good stuff,” like summer camping trips to the Catskills with the families of the firefighters in his dad’s Engine 214/Ladder 111 in Bedford-Stuyvesant, dubbed “Nut House.”
Gary and his three siblings played with the other kids and everyone bonded around the campfire. “It’s something I would like to share with my family when that time comes.”
His father had been a star lacrosse player at Smithtown West High School, where he met his wife Susan, and passed his athletic ability onto his three sons and daughter. Gary’s older brother Ken and sister Angela are Nassau County cops.
On his back, Gary has tattoos of a kneeling firefighter with angel wings in front of the Twin Towers, his father’s badge number 11685 and the simple tribute: “Dad.”
“I’m positive now,” he said. “Everything I do now I’m hoping he’s proud of me.”
FDNY legacy: Thomas ‘Tommy’ Palombo Hero father: Frank Anthony Palombo
“That’s grandpa’s truck!” little Anthony Frank said excitedly as his dad turned the pages of the picture book “Goodnight Firehouse.”
“We try to tell him about my dad in a way that works for his age level,” Palombo, 29, said of the boy named in honor of Frank Anthony Palombo, one of seven firefighters from Brooklyn’s Ladder 105 lost on 9/11.
“Last year on September 11 I took him to the fountains and to my dad’s firehouse to start the tradition with him,” Palombo said. In another year or two Anthony’s little brother Luca, 11 months, will join them.
Tommy himself was just 9 when he lost his dad in the terror attacks, and he has cherished a Mass card from his funeral ever since.
“Now I wear it behind my fronties,” he said — the leather helmet badge that identifies his unit, Engine 69 in Harlem, where he’s worked since 2015. “It helps me, just his presence.”
Two members of the 10-sibling Palombo family, Tommy and his brother John, 28, joined the department.
“Me and him were not that close growing up, but now we might be the closest,” Palombo said. “It’s that bond — it’s hard to describe but it means a lot.”
At the 40 minute mark Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath discuss Deena Burnett’s assertion that her husband Tom was an instrument carrying out God’s will in stopping the plane from hitting the White House.
On September 11, 2001, while on board United Airlines Flight 93, Burnett sat next to passenger Mark Bingham. Burnett called his wife, Deena, after hijackers took control of the plane. During his second call to her, she relayed to him that the Towers of the World Trade Center had collapsed.[7] Upon learning of the situation, Deena, a former flight attendant, recalled her training and urged Burnett to sit quietly and not draw attention to himself, but Burnett instead informed her that he and three other passengers, Mark Bingham, Todd Beamer and Jeremy Glick, were forming a plan to take the plane back from the hijackers, and leading other passengers in this effort.[5][6][8] He also told Deena not to worry.[9] Burnett and several other passengers stormed the cockpit, foiling the hijackers’ plan to crash the plane into the White House or Capitol Building,[5][10] and forced it to crash in a Pennsylvania field, killing all 44 people on board.[5][6]
________________
Let me make a few points here. I am told that Tom and Deena used to attend Fellowship Bible Church in Little Rock when they were visiting her parents in Little Rock. Deena actually grew up in a Southern Baptist Church like I did. It is a common view in many evangelical circles that the problem of evil must be explained in light of the events of Genesis chapter 3 and the fall of man. You can see this pointed out in the Evangelism Explosion leader’s guide written by Dr. D. James Kennedy. Francis Schaeffer and Ravi Zacharias have written much on this subject too and some their work is below:
___________
So many tragic things happen in this world and many ask ” How can a good God allow evil and suffering?”
Their thinking is that either God is not powerful enough to prevent evil or else God is not good. He is often blamed for tragedy. “Where was God when I went through this, or when that happened.” God is blamed for natural disasters, Even my insurance company describes them as “acts of God.” How to handle this one- (O.N.E.) a. Origin of evil— man’s choice- God created a perfect world… b. Nature of God—He forgives, I John 1:9—He uses tragedy to bring us to Himself, C.S. Lewis, “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is His megaphone to arouse a deaf world.” c. End of it all—Bible teaches that God will one day put an end to all evil, and pain and death. “God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4).As Christians we have this hope of Heaven and eternity. Share how it has made a tremendous difference in your life and that you know for sure that when you die you are going to spend eternity in Heaven. Ask the person, “May I ask you a question? Do you have this hope? Do you know for certain that when you die you are going to Heaven, or is that something you would say you’re still working on?”How could a loving God send people to Hell? (O.N.E.) a. Origin of hell—never intended for people. Created for Satan and his demons. Jesus said, “Depart from Me, you cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt 25:41). Man chooses to sin and ignore God. The penalty is death (eternal separation from God) and, yes, Hell. But God doesn’t send anyone to Hell, we choose it by refusing or ignoring God in attitude and action. b. Nature of God—“ God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). He is so loving that He sent His own Son to die and pay the penalty for our sin so that we could avoid Hell and have the assurance of Heaven. No one in Hell will be able to blame God. He doesn’t send people there, it’s our own choice. We must choose to repent, to stop ignoring God in attitude and action, accepting His salvation and yielding to His leadership.c. End of it all—Bible teaches that God will one day put an end to all evil, pain, death, and penalty of Hell. “God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away” (Rev. 21:4).As Christians , we need not worry about Hell. The Bible says, “these things have been written . . . so that you may know you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). I have complete confidence that when I die, I’m going to Heaven. May I ask you a question?___________________________-
The problem of evil is a significant moral issue in the atheist’s arsenal. We talk about a God of goodness, but what we see around us is suffering, and a lot of it apparently unjustifiable. Stephanie said, “Disbelief in a personal, loving God as an explanation of the way the world works is reasonable–especially when one considers natural disasters that can’t be blamed on free will and sin.”{17}
One response to the problem of evil is that God sees our freedom to choose as a higher value than protecting people from harm; this is the freewill defense. Stephanie said, however, that natural disasters can’t be blamed on free will and sin. What about this? Is it true that natural disasters can’t be blamed on sin? I replied that they did come into existence because of sin (Genesis 3). We’re told in Romans 8 that creation will one day “be set free from its slavery to corruption,” that it “groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.” The Fall caused the problem, and, in the consummation of the ages, the problem will be fixed.
Second, I noted that on a naturalistic basis, it’s hard to even know what evil is. But the reality of God explains it. As theologian Henri Blocher said,
The sense of evil requires the God of the Bible. In a novel by Joseph Heller, “While rejecting belief in God, the characters in the story find themselves compelled to postulate his existence in order to have an adequate object for their moral indignation.” . . . When you raise this standard objection against God, to whom do you say it, other than this God? Without this God who is sovereign and good, what is the rationale of our complaints? Can we even tell what is evil? Perhaps the late John Lennon understood: “God is a concept by which we measure our pain,” he sang. Might we be coming to the point where the sense of evil is a proof of the existence of God?{18}
So,… if there is no God, there really is no problem of evil. Does the atheist ever find herself shaking her fist at the sky after some catastrophe and demanding an explanation? If there is no God, no one is listening.
__________________
Francis Schaeffer and Gospel of Christ in the pages of the Bible
FRANCIS SCHAEFFER’S WORDS BELOW:
The Personal Origin of Man
The Scriptures tell us that the universe exists and has form and meaning because it was created purposefully by a personal Creator. This being the case, we see that, as we are personal, we are not something strange and out of line with an otherwise impersonal universe. Since we are made in the image of God, we are in line with God. There is continuity, in other words, between ourselves, though finite, and the infinite Creator who stands behind the universe as its Creator and its final source of meaning. Unlike the evolutionary concept of an impersonal beginning plus time plus chance, the Bible gives an account of man’s origin as a finite person make in God’s image, that is, like God. We see then how man can have personality and dignity and value. Our uniqueness is guaranteed, something which is impossible in the materialistic system. If there is no qualitative distinction between man and other organic life (animals or plants), why should we feel greater concern over the death of a human being than over the death of a laboratory rat? Is man in the end any higher?
Though this is the logical end of the materialistic system, men and women still usually in practice assume that people have some real value. All the way back to the dawn of our investigations in history, we find that man is still man. Wherever we turn, to the caves of the Pyrenees, to the Sumerians in Mesopotamia, and even further back to Neanderthal man’s burying his dead in flower petals, it makes no difference: men everywhere show by their art and their accomplishments that they have been and have considered themselves to be unique. They were unique, and people today are unique. What is wrong is a world-view which fails to explain that uniqueness. All people are unique because they are made in the image of God.
The Bible tells us also, however, that man is flawed. We see this to be the case both within ourselves and in our societies throughout the world. People are noble and people are cruel; people have heights of moral achievement and depths of moral depravity.
But this is not simply an enigma, nor is it explained in terms of “the animal in man.” The Bible explains how man is flawed, without destroying the uniqueness and dignity of man. Man is evil and experiences the results of evil, not because man is non-man but because man is fallen and thus is abnormal.
This is the significance of the third chapter of Genesis. Some time after the original Creation (we do not know how long), man rebelled against God. Being made in the image of God as persons, Adam and Eve were able to make real choices. They had true creativity, not just in the area we call “art” but also in the area of choice. And they used this choice to turn from God as their true integration point. Their ability to choose would have been equally validated if they had chosen not to turn away from God, as their true integration point, but instead they used their choice to try to make themselves autonomous. In doing this, they were acting against the moral absolute of the universe, namely, God’s character – and thus evil among people was born. The Fall brought not only moral evil but also the abnormality of(1) each person divided from himself or herself; (2) people divided from other people; (3) mankind divided from nature; and (4) nature divided from nature. This was the consequence of the choice made by Adam and Eve some time after the Creation. It was not any original deformity that made them choose in this way. God had not made them robots, and so they had real choice. It is man, therefore, and not God, who is responsible for evil.
We have to keep pointing out, because the idea is strange to a society by which the Bible has been neglected or distorted, that Christianity does not begin with a statement of Christ as Savior. That comes later in its proper setting. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created….” Christianity begins with the personal and infinite God who is the Creator. It goes on to show that man is made in God’s image but then tells us that man is now fallen. It is the rebellion of man that has made the world abnormal. So there is a broken line as we look back to the creation of man by God. A chasm stands there near the beginning, the chasm which is the Fall, the choice to go against God and His Word.
What follows from this is that not everything that happens in the world is “natural.” Unlike modern materialistic thought on both sides of the Iron Curtain, Christianity does not see everything in history as equally “normal.” Because of the abnormality brought about by man, not everything which occurs in history should be there. Thus, not all that history brings forth is right just because it happens, and not all personal drives and motives are equally good. Here, then, is a marked difference between Christianity and almost all other philosophies. Most other philosophies do not have the concept of a present abnormality. Therefore, they hold that everything now is normal; things are now as they always have been. By contrast, Christians do not see things as if they always have been this way. This is of immense importance in understanding evil in the world. It is possible for Christians to speak of things as absolutely wrong, for they are not original in human society. They are derived from the Fall; they are in that sense “abnormal.” It also means we can stand against what is wrong and cruel without standing against God, for He did not make the world as it now is.
This understanding of the chasm between what mankind and history are now and what they could have been – and should have been, from the way they were made – gives us a real moral framework for life, one which is compatible with our nature and aspirations. So there are “rules for life,’ like the signs on cliff tops which read: DANGER – KEEP OUT. The signs are there to help, not hinder us. God has put them there because to live in this way, according to His rules, is the way for both safety and fulfillment. The God who made us and knows what is for our best good is the same God who gives us His commands. When we break these, it is not only wrong, it is also not for our best good; it is not for our fulfillment as unique persons made in the image of God.
___________
Below is a transcript of the discussion between a student at Nottingham and Ravi Zacharias about evil and morality and it also discussed in the video clip above.
Student: There is too much evil in this world; therefore, there cannot be a God! Speaker: Would you mind if I asked you something? You said, “God cannot exist because there is too much evil.” If there is such a thing as evil, aren’t you assuming that there is such a thing as good? Student: I guess so. Speaker: If there is such a thing as good, you must affirm a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. Speaker: In a debate between the philosopher Frederick Copleston and the atheist Bertrand Russell, Copleston said, “Mr. Russell, you do believe in good and bad, don’t you?” Russell answered, “Yes, I do.” “How do you differentiate between good and bad?” challenged Copleston. Russell shrugged his shoulders and said, “On the basis of feeling – what else?” I must confess, Mr. Copleston was a kindlier gentleman than many others. The appropriate “logical kill” for the moment would have been, “Mr. Russell, in some cultures they love their neighbors; in other cultures they eat them, both on the basis of feeling. Do you have any preference?” Speaker: When you say there is evil, aren’t you admitting there is good? When you accept the existence of goodness, you must affirm a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. But when you admit to a moral law, you must posit a moral lawgiver. That, however, is
who you are trying to disprove and not prove. For if there is no moral lawgiver, there is no moral law. If there is no moral law, there is no good. If there is no good, there is no evil. What, then, is your question? Student: What, then, am I asking you?
When Deena Burnett Bailey spoke of the last time she heard her late husband’s voice, the rattle of silverware against china, the whispers and the general noise of a luncheon ceased.
Bailey is the widow of Tom E. Burnett, who led resistance efforts on United Flight 93 on Sept. 11, 2001.
PHOTO BY JIM WEBER BUY THIS PHOTO »Deena Burnett Bailey, widow of Tom Burnett who orchestrated the resistance against the terrorists aboard Flight 93, talks during the Salvation Army Women’s Auxiliary’s God Bless America Luncheon on Wednesday at the University of Memphis Holiday Inn.
The story of Burnett’s heroism is still a difficult one to tell, Bailey said, especially so close to the anniversary. But she wants to share it to inspire others, she said.
Bailey is the co-author of “Fighting Back: Living Life Beyond Ourselves,” a book about her husband and the others who took action against the terrorists who held the passengers hostage on Flight 93.
Bailey and former New York City police officer Jim Shepherd spoke Wednesday at a Salvation Army Women’s Auxiliary luncheon.
Bailey, now remarried and living in Little Rock, was living in California on Sept. 11. She was waiting with their three daughters for her husband to return from a business trip.
As Bailey watched the two terrorist-controlled planes collide with the World Trade Center in New York, Burnett called and told her he was on a third plane that had been hijacked, and that the hijackers had “already knifed a guy.” He told her to call the authorities.
Bailey called 911 and was eventually connected with the FBI.
Her husband called again, asking questions about the World Trade Center, and then a third time to tell her passengers were hatching a plan to overtake the plane.
He called one last time to say the passengers were waiting until the plane was over a rural area before moving in on the hijackers. While everyone on the airplane was ultimately killed, no one on the ground was injured when Flight 93 went down.
Now, Burnett is honored as an American hero. Bailey says it’s a word her husband felt was overused. She says he believed in making good choices and making a difference in the lives of others.
“Tom’s last words to me were ‘Do something.’ They ring true for each of us to stand up, fight back, do something,” she said.
For Shepherd, who now lives in Memphis, the fateful day began as he drank coffee at the gym. He saw the first airplane circle but assumed it was out of its flight pattern and looking for an airport.
“At the last moment I thought, ‘Oh my God I hope he misses the buildings,’” Shepherd said.
By the time he reached his precinct, the second plane had hit the South Tower.
Later, rescuers found three stories of the building compacted into a pile only 12 feet high, with easily distinguishable layers of concrete floor, carpet and debris, he said.
Shepherd thanked the Salvation Army, which marched quietly into New York and got to work.
“You really felt like you weren’t alone,” he said. “You had another army behind you to help.”
Fighting Back is the timely and inspiring story of Thomas Burnett, the ringleader of the small group of courageous men that fought back against the terrorists on United Flight 93 on September 11, 2001, that crashed in the fields in Pennsylvania. His wife Deena tells about the incredible details ofthat horrific day, the now famous four cell phone calls her husband made to her from the plane, his quick assessment of the alarming suicidal flight plan, and his decision to “do something.” She tells about all that happened to her and her children in the days and months after that devastating day, and how the love, faith and strength of her departed husband helped her to fight back to find purpose and joy in her life again.
She also tells about Tom’s life story, showing how he was an ordinary American who was deeply patriotic, a very good athlete, a loving father and husband, a successful businessman, and a devout Catholic and daily communicant. This powerful book reveals the inspiring courage, character, faith and integrity that Tom Burnett showed in all the aspects of his life as a father, husband and businessman, and how his valor and leadership in that perilous plane were the result of how he lived his life every day. His story will strengthen and inspire all “ordinary” Americans, and Catholics, to imitate this man’s life of commitment to excellence, patriotism, devotion to family, and love of God. It is a story of suffering, sacrifice and of rebirth.
Carl E. Olson, editor of IgnatiusInsight.com, recently spoke with Deena Burnett about her late husband, the events of 9/11, and her faith in God.
IgnatiusInsight.com: When and how did you first decide to write Fighting Back?
Deena Burnett: I was approached right after Tom had died, and my first reaction was, “No, I don’t want to write anything.” But after a few months I realized that it would be important to write it down for my children. In January [of 2006], Anthony [Giombetti] and I got together and started writing. He would interview me and record the interviews, and then he would transcribe those interviews and then we would get together and edit it. That’s really when we started. And the idea was to chronicle Tom’s life and what had happened on September 11th, and talk about what he did and why he did it. In my mind, it was for my children, to record it, so that they would not forget. Then it evolved into something that I believe with inspire the reader to make a difference.
IgnatiusInsight.com: What do you hope readers will learn from reading the book?
Deena Burnett: Actually, just that; I hope that they are inspired to make a difference, that they see the value of having faith in God and know the importance of passing that faith on to their children.
IgnatiusInsight.com: A central theme of the book is that seemingly ordinary people can do extraordinary things. How did Tom exemplify that it in his ordinary life and in his extraordinary actions on Flight 93?
Deena Burnett: I think that is found throughout the whole book. You certainly see that I try to stress that it wasn’t just what he did on September 11th, but that he lived his life with integrity, and I think that it was certainly his upbringing in the Faith that made him kind and attentive and concerned about other people. And I think that those are the values that he brought into the way that he lived, that helped him be a hero everyday of his life, and not just on September 11th.
Deena Burnett: Well, as early as the morning of September 11th, I was requesting to hear the cockpit voice recorder. I felt like it would just give me some answers as to what happened in those final moments. I didn’t know how to go about finding someone who could allow me to hear it. Anyone who had anything to do with the government, I’d just ask them, “Help me.” Very early on I met a lady, Ellen Tauscher, a representative from California, who really took me on as her project and helped me. She helped me go through the channels, writing the letters and making the phone calls and putting the pressure on different channels within the FBI and our government to release that cockpit voice recorder. I have told her so many times, “You know, Ellen, that you did this; it was you, but I’m getting all the credit for it.” And she would just laugh and say, “That’s okay, because I’m just here to help you.” She’s a great lady, absolutely a great lady. She guided me through the channels and made it happen.
We went to New Jersey in April 2002. We were allowed four family members, each family. We went in to hear it and I went through it twice. They had a transcript on the wall that we were able to see and read in sequence with hearing the audio. And I heard Tom’s voice for the first time in several months, and it gave me this incredible sense of peace that I had not expected to find through listening to it. And the peace came because, I think, for the first time in months I knew exactly what had happened by hearing the sounds and being able to visualize what he experienced. After that, it just gave me the energy and the strength to keep moving forward, to keep doing the things that needed to be done, in raising my family and making sure that those responsible for September 11th came to justice.
IgnatiusInsight.com: In the months following 9/11 you gave numerous interviews on high profile televisions programs and dealt with the media quite often. What is your impression, in general of the mainstream media, and how do you think they’ve handled coverage of 9/11 and its aftermath?
Deena Burnett: I think that almost immediately the press was very respectful, and I was incredibly grateful for that. I initially was very afraid of the media. I kind of laugh about that now because I had a degree in journalism, and yet I was scared to death. But they were very respectful. One thing that I have found during the five years is that they have been very interested in different family members — any family members, it doesn’t matter who they are — who had something to do with September 11th, and they have created this aura of casting 9/11 family members as authorities on different issues, whether it be political issues, or issues dealing with the war on terrorism. Anything happening with our government having to do with immigration laws, the transportation department, or the war on terrorism, the first thing they do is pull a 9/11 family member away and start interviewing them: “What do you think?”
They have cast them in roles of authority, and I think that is odd, that there would be so much interest in the opinion of 9/11 family members. You know, we have this one experience to fall back upon; I’m sure there are people who are far better qualified than we are to answer most of the questions the media asks concerning these issues.
We can fix the IRS problem by going to the flat tax and lowering the size of government. Why the IRS Persecuted the Tea Party and How to Fix the Problem May 27, 2013 by Dan Mitchell Did President Obama and his team of Chicago cronies deliberately target the Tea Party in hopes of thwarting free speech […]
How can a loving God allow evil like the Boston Marathon explosions to happen? Here are some of the details of the explosions: Boston Marathon Explosion 04/15/2013 Published on Apr 15, 2013 Prayers go out to the victims and their families! View this image › Via: @theoriginalwak The Boston Globe is reporting that at least a […]
The Bible and Archaeology (1/5) For many more archaeological evidences in support of the Bible, see Archaeology and the Bible . (There are some great posts on this too at the bottom of this post.) Till Is Batting Around .250 on Daniel by Everette Hatcher III 1999 / March-April Let me address three of the […]
Here are videos from the HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE? film series: Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” , episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence”, episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation”, episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” , episode 6 “The Scientific Age” , episode 5 […]
Is the USA endanger of going broke? The answer is yes, although liberals don’t want to admit it. Elwood from the Arkansas Times Blog objected, take a look below: How many paid attention to Cager Griffin on AETN debates using the familiar FEAR TACTIC of “AMERICA IS BROKE” in danger of becoming another “GREECE?” …Fayetteville […]
Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989) Roger Ebert called this flick one of Allen’s best. The director, pictured with cinematographer Sven Nykvist on set, was nominated for three Academy Awards, including best director and writing. “Who else but Woody Allen could make a movie in which virtue is punished, evildoing is rewarded and there is a lot of […]
The Associated Press reported today: The signature under the typewritten words on yellowing sheets of nearly century-old paper is unmistakable: Adolf Hitler, with the last few scribbled letters drooping downward. The date is 1919 and, decades before the Holocaust, the 30-year-old German soldier — born in Austria — penned what are believed to be […]
A Pakistani immigrant’s $100,000 stretch limousine was set ablaze after being vandalized with graffiti of “We the People” and the Antifa logo following the inauguration of Donald Trump as president on Jan. 20, 2017, in Washington, D.C. It was part of a much larger “attack on democracy” by the left that Democrats would prefer that voters forget. (Photo: Mark Makela/Getty Images)
Strategic amnesia is a new syndrome that lets Democrats forget their being guilty of the same behavior for which they demonize Republicans—especially when the GOP is innocent as charged.
Strategic amnesia is, essentially, what happens as psychological projection ripens over time.
Strategic-Amnesiac-in-Chief Joe Biden embodied this neurosis during the Snarl Heard ’Round the World—his corrosive, divisive Sept. 1 speech from Philadelphia’s Independence Hall.
Biden vilified “MAGA Republicans”—that is, President Donald Trump’s 74 million voters.
Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>
“They refuse to accept the results of a free election,” Biden shouted, in remarks translated here from the original German. “They embrace anger. They thrive on chaos. They live not in the light of truth, but in the shadow of lies.”
Biden shook his fists at the MAGA Republicans and added that “they fan the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights … .”
Just as it has addled his fellow leftists, Biden’s strategic amnesia befogged his memories of how Democrats handled Trump’s 2016 triumph over Hillary Clinton.
To recollect the anger, chaos, lies, and violence that Democrats unleashed after Nov. 8, 2016, Biden and his Kameraden should consult “Rigged.” Mollie Hemingway’s first-rate chronicle of the 2020 election recaps what happened when Clinton blew an election that she supposedly had locked up.
The Democrat Non-Acceptance Caucus denounced Trump as a faux president.
“I know he’s an illegitimate president,” Clinton declared.
Former President Jimmy Carter told NPR: “Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016.”
“The Russians participated in helping this man get elected,” said the since-deceased Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga.
Lewis boycotted Trump’s swearing-in ceremony, as did at least 66 other House Democrats. They collectively spat on the peaceful transfer of power, a hallowed tradition of U.S. democracy.
Next, the Democrat chaos campaign targeted the Electoral College. Martin Sheen, Noah Wyle, and other actors starred in ads for Americans Take Action. They urged Republican Electoral College members to ignore their voters’ will and, instead, dump Trump.
Sharon Geise, Robert Graham, Ash Khare, and Rex Teter were among Trump’s electors whom Clinton’s supporters bombarded with thousands of abusive phone calls, emails, and even death threats. Michigan elector Michael Banerian told CNN: “I’ve had people talk about putting a bullet in the back of my mouth.”
During January 2017’s election-certification ceremony, seven House Democrats challenged Trump’s electors from 10 states, including Alabama and Wyoming, which he carried by 28.3 and 47.6 percentage points, respectively. The Constitution and the Electoral Count Act of 1887 enabled these Democrats to object, just as those documents empowered Republicans to oppose pro-Biden electors on Jan. 6, 2021.
After Clinton lost, her supporters clogged streets from coast to coast. Some bawled. More carried placards that read, “We don’t accept the president-elect.”
Others weren’t saying, “Give peace a chance.”
“In Oakland, rioters set trash cans, cars, and a building on fire,” Hemingway recalled. “They smashed store windows, hurt police, and blocked a freeway.”
That Nov. 9, a Chicago mob attacked David Wilcox, yelled, “You voted Trump!” at him, carjacked his Pontiac Bonneville, and then dragged him along its side.
Three days later, while riding a Bronx subway train, MAGA hat-wearing Corey Cataldo endured an attacker’s attempted strangulation for being “another white Trump supporter.”
Others soon learned that MAGA hats attract fists.
Terry Pierce, Bryton Turner, Gunnar Johnson, Jonathan Sparks, Hunter Richard, Eugenior Joseph, and Jahangir Turan are among the MAGA hat-wearing Trump lovers whom Trump haters eventually attacked—often drawing blood.
Radical film director Michael Moore instructed leftists to “disrupt the Inauguration.”
Message received.
“On Inauguration Day, more riots erupted in Washington, D.C.,” Hemingway wrote. “Hundreds were arrested as black-clad rioters set cars on fire, threw bricks, and injured police.”
While Team Biden’s strategic amnesia obscures these facts, the right should use them to expose their leftist sins.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch said Thursday that he hopes the investigation into the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization draft opinion leak will be completed soon.
It was Gorsuch’s first public comments since the late June ruling striking down a nationwide constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. Gorsuch spoke before a group of lawyers and judges Thursday in Colorado Springs at the 10th Circuit Judicial Conference.
Protesters hold up signs during an abortion rights demonstration, Saturday, May 14, 2022, in New York. (AP Photo/Jeenah Moon)
“The chief justice appointed an internal committee to oversee the investigation,” Gorsuch said. “That committee has been busy, and we’re looking forward to their report, I hope, soon.”
Fox News confirmed the comments first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
A majority draft opinion, reflecting that the high court would, in fact, overturn Roe v. Wade, was leaked in May and first reported by Politico.
Justice Neil Gorsuch stands with his wife Marie Louise Gorsuch on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., June 15, 2017. (JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)
Chief Justice John Roberts ordered the Court’s marshal to conduct an internal investigation, but there have been few updates, and it is not clear whether the court’s leak report will be made public.
Multiple sources previously told Fox News that the investigation into the approximately 70 individuals in the court who may have had access to the draft opinion has been narrowed. Sources say much of the initial focus was on the three dozen or so law clerks, who work directly with the justices on their caseload.
The Supreme Court, at the time, acknowledged that a “copy of a draft opinion in a pending case” was made public but stressed that it did “not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case.”
Following the leak, conservative justices on the bench began receiving threats and experienced protests outside their homes.
Seated from left are Associate Justice Samuel Alito, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer and Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Standing from left are Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett. (AP)
The Supreme Court will come back for the October term just weeks before Americans head to the polls to cast their ballots in the midterm elections.
—
Abortion: When Does Life Begin? – R.C. Sproul
–
Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race? Co-authored by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop)
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
September 25, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? which can be found on You Tube. It is very valuable information for Christians to have.
Today I want to respond to your letter to me on July 9, 2021. Here it is below:
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 9, 2021
Mr. Everette Hatcher III
Alexander, AR
Dear Mr. Hatcher,
Thank you for taking your time to share your thoughts on abortion. Hearing from passionate individuals like me inspires me every day, and I welcome the opportunity to respond to your letter
Our country faces many challenges, and the road we will travel together will be one of the most difficult in our history. Despite these tough times, I have never been more optimistic for the future of America. I believe we are better positioned than any country in the world to lead in the 21st century not just by the example of our power but by the power of our example.
As we move forward to address the complex issues of our time, I encourage you to remain an active participant in helping write the next great chapter of the American story. We need your courage and dedication at this critical time, and we must meet this moment together as the United States of America. If we do that, I believe that our best days still lie ahead.
Sincerely
Joe Biden
Mr. President, my wife was born in JEFFERSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL in Pine Bluff, Arkansas and Adrian Rogers tells a story about another lady that was born in that same hospital: “They took that grocery sack and Maria home and one hour passed and two hours passed and that baby was still crying and panting for his life in that grocery sack. They took that little baby down to the hospital there in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and they called an obstetrician and he called a pediatrician and they called nurses and they began to work on that little baby. Today that baby is alive and well and healthy, that little mass of protoplasm. That little thing that wasn’t a human being is alive and well. I want to tell you they spent $150,000 to save the life of that baby. NOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THEY CAN SPEND $150,000 TO SAVE THE LIFE OF SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY WAS PAYING ANOTHER DOCTOR TO TAKE THE LIFE OF?”
Thanks for your recent letter about evolution and abortion. The correlation is hardly one to one; there are evolutionists who are anti-abortion and anti-evolutionists who are pro-abortion.You argue that God exists because otherwise we could not understand the world in our consciousness. But if you think God is necessary to understand the world, then why do you not ask the next question of where God came from? And if you say “God was always here,” why not say that the universe was always here? On abortion, my views are contained in the enclosed article (Sagan, Carl and Ann Druyan {1990}, “The Question of Abortion,” Parade Magazine, April 22.)
I was blessed with the opportunity to correspond with Dr. Sagan, and in his December 5, 1995 letter Dr. Sagan went on to tell me that he was enclosing his article “The Question of Abortion: A Search for Answers”by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan. I am going to respond to several points made in that article. Here is a portion of Sagan’s article (here is a link to the whole article):
(both Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer mentioned Carl Sagan in their books and that prompted me to write Sagan and expose him to their views.
For the complete text, including illustrations, introductory quote, footnotes, and commentary on the reaction to the originally published article see Billions and Billions.
The issue had been decided years ago. The court had chosen the middle ground. You’d think the fight was over. Instead, there are mass rallies, bombings and intimidation, murders of workers at abortion clinics, arrests, intense lobbying, legislative drama, Congressional hearings, Supreme Court decisions, major political parties almost defining themselves on the issue, and clerics threatening politicians with perdition. Partisans fling accusations of hypocrisy and murder. The intent of the Constitution and the will of God are equally invoked. Doubtful arguments are trotted out as certitudes. The contending factions call on science to bolster their positions. Families are divided, husbands and wives agree not to discuss it, old friends are no longer speaking. Politicians check the latest polls to discover the dictates of their consciences. Amid all the shouting, it is hard for the adversaries to hear one another. Opinions are polarized. Minds are closed.
Is it wrong to abort a pregnancy? Always? Sometimes? Never? How do we decide? We wrote this article to understand better what the contending views are and to see if we ourselves could find a position that would satisfy us both. Is there no middle ground? We had to weigh the arguments of both sides for consistency and to pose test cases, some of which are purely hypothetical. If in some of these tests we seem to go too far, we ask the reader to be patient with us–we’re trying to stress the various positions to the breaking point to see their weaknesses and where they fail.
In contemplative moments, nearly everyone recognizes that the issue is not wholly one-sided. Many partisans of differing views, we find, feel some disquiet, some unease when confronting what’s behind the opposing arguments. (This is partly why such confrontations are avoided.) And the issue surely touches on deep questions: What are our responses to one another? Should we permit the state to intrude into the most intimate and personal aspects of our lives? Where are the boundaries of freedom? What does it mean to be human?
Of the many actual points of view, it is widely held–especially in the media, which rarely have the time or the inclination to make fine distinctions–that there are only two: “pro-choice” and “pro-life.” This is what the two principal warring camps like to call themselves, and that’s what we’ll call them here. In the simplest characterization, a pro-choicer would hold that the decision to abort a pregnancy is to be made only by the woman; the state has no right to interfere. And a pro-lifer would hold that, from the moment of conception, the embryo or fetus is alive; that this life imposes on us a moral obligation to preserve it; and that abortion is tantamount to murder. Both names–pro-choice and pro-life–were picked with an eye toward influencing those whose minds are not yet made up: Few people wish to be counted either as being against freedom of choice or as opposed to life. Indeed, freedom and life are two of our most cherished values, and here they seem to be in fundamental conflict.
Let’s consider these two absolutist positions in turn. A newborn baby is surely the same being it was just before birth. There ‘s good evidence that a late-term fetus responds to sound–including music, but especially its mother’s voice. It can suck its thumb or do a somersault. Occasionally, it generates adult brain-wave patterns. Some people claim to remember being born, or even the uterine environment. Perhaps there is thought in the womb. It’s hard to maintain that a transformation to full personhood happens abruptly at the moment of birth. Why, then, should it be murder to kill an infant the day after it was born but not the day before?
As a practical matter, this isn’t very important: Less than 1 percent of all tabulated abortions in the United States are listed in the last three months of pregnancy (and, on closer investigation, most such reports turn out to be due to miscarriage or miscalculation). But third-trimester abortions provide a test of the limits of the pro-choice point of view. Does a woman’s “innate right to control her own body” encompass the right to kill a near-term fetus who is, for all intents and purposes, identical to a newborn child?
——-
End of Sagan Excerpt
When I was in high school the book and film series named WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE? came out and it featured Doctor C. Everett Koop and Francis Schaeffer and they looked at the issues of abortion, infanticide, and youth euthanasia and they looked at comments from such scholars as Peter Singer and James D. Watson.
C. Everett Koop pictured above and Peter Singer below
Peter Singer, an endowed chair at Princeton’s Center for Human Values, said, “Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.”
James D.Watson
In May 1973, James D. Watson, the Nobel Prize laureate who discovered the double helix of DNA, granted an interview to Prism magazine, then a publication of the American Medical Association. Time later reported the interview to the general public, quoting Watson as having said, “If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice only a few are given under the present system. The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so choose and save a lot of misery and suffering. I believe this view is the only rational, compassionate attitude to have.”
Carl Sagan
On August 30, 1995 I mailed a letter to Carl Sagan that probably prompted this discussion on abortion and it enclosed a lengthy story from Adrian Rogers about an abortion case in Pine Bluff, Arkansas that almost became an infanticide case:
An excerpt from the Sunday morning message (11-6-83) by Adrian Rogers in Memphis, TN.
I want to tell you that secular humanism and so-called abortion rights are inseparably linked together. We have been taught that our bodies and our children are the products of the evolutionary process, and so therefore human life may not be all that valuable to begin with. We have come today to where it is legal and even considered to be a good thing to put little babies to death…15 million little babies put to death since 1973 because of this philosophy of Secular Humanism.
How did the court make that type of decision? You would think it would be so obvious. You can’t do that! You can’t kill little babies! Why? Because the Bible says! Friend, they don’t give a hoot what the Bible says! There used to be a time when they talked about what the Bible says because there was a time that we as a nation had a constitution that was based in the Judeo-Christian ethic, but today if we say “The Bible says” or “God says “Separation of Church and State. Don’t tell us what the Bible says or what God says. We will tell you what we think!” Therefore, they look at the situation and they decide if it is right or wrong purely on the humanistic philosophy that right and wrong are relative and the situation says what is right or what is wrong.
This little girl just 19 years old went into the doctor’s office and he examined her. He said, “We can take take of you.” He gave her an injection in her arm that was to cause her to go into labor and to get rid of that protoplasm, that feud, that little mass that was in her, but she wasn’t prepared for the sound she was about to hear. It was a little baby crying. That little baby weighed 13 ounces. His hand the size of my thumbnail. You know what the doctor did. The doctor put that little baby in a grocery sack and gave it to Maria’s two friends who were with her in that doctor office and Said, “It will stop making those noises after a while.”
(Adrian Rogers pictured above)
Pine Bluff, Arkansas
My wife was born in main hospital in Pine Bluff, Arkansas
They took that grocery sack and Maria home and one hour passed and two hours passed and that baby was still crying and panting for his life in that grocery sack. They took that little baby down to the hospital there in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and they called an obstetrician and he called a pediatrician and they called nurses and they began to work on that little baby. Today that baby is alive and well and healthy, that little mass of protoplasm. That little thing that wasn’t a human being is alive and well. I want to tell you they spent $150,000 to save the life of that baby. NOW CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THEY CAN SPEND $150,000 TO SAVE THE LIFE OF SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY WAS PAYING ANOTHER DOCTOR TO TAKE THE LIFE OF? The same life!!! Are you going to tell me that is not a baby? Are you going to tell me that if that baby had been put to death it would not have been murder? You will never convince me of that. What has happened to us in America? We have been sold a bill of goods by the Secular Humanists!
Carl Sagan was elected the HUMANIST OF THE YEAR in 1982 by the AMERICAN HUMANIST ASSOCIATION
Carl Sagan asked, “Does a woman’s “innate right to control her own body” encompass the right to kill a near-term fetus who is, for all intents and purposes, identical to a newborn child?”
This message “A Christian Manifesto” was given in 1982 by the late Christian Philosopher Francis Schaeffer when he was age 70 at D. James Kennedy’s Corral Ridge Presbyterian Church. Listen to this important message where Dr. Schaeffer says it is the duty of Christians to disobey the government when it comes in conflict with God’s laws. So many have misinterpreted Romans 13 to mean unconditional obedience to the state. When the state promotes an evil agenda and anti-Christian statues we must obey God rather than men. Acts I use to watch James Kennedy preach from his TV pulpit with great delight in the 1980’s. Both of these men are gone to be with the Lord now. We need new Christian leaders to rise up in their stead. To view Part 2 See Francis Schaeffer Lecture- Christian Manifesto Pt 2 of 2 video The religious and political freedom’s we enjoy as Americans was based on the Bible and the legacy of the Reformation according to Francis Schaeffer. These freedoms will continue to diminish as we cast off the authority of Holy Scripture. In public schools there is no other view of reality but that final reality is shaped by chance. Likewise, public television gives us many things that we like culturally but so much of it is mere propaganda shaped by a humanistic world and life view.
_____________________________
I was able to watch Francis Schaeffer deliver a speech on a book he wrote called “A Christian Manifesto” and I heard him in several interviews on it in 1981 and 1982. I listened with great interest since I also read that book over and over again. Below is a portion of one of Schaeffer’s talks on a crucial subject that is very important today too.
A great talk by Francis Schaeffer:A Christian Manifesto by Dr. Francis A. SchaefferThis address was delivered by the late Dr. Schaeffer in 1982 at the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. It is based on one of his books, which bears the same title._________
Infanticide and youth enthansia ———So what we find then, is that the medical profession has largely changed — not all doctors. I’m sure there are doctors here in the audience who feel very, very differently, who feel indeed that human life is important and you wouldn’t take it, easily, wantonly. But, in general, we must say (and all you have to do is look at the TV programs), all you have to do is hear about the increased talk about allowing the Mongoloid child — the child with Down’s Syndrome — to starve to death if it’s born this way. Increasingly, we find on every side the medical profession has changed its views.
The view now is, “Is this life worth saving?”I look at you… You’re an older congregation than I am usually used to speaking to. You’d better think, because — this — means — you! It does not stop with abortion and infanticide. It stops at the question, “What about the old person? Is he worth hanging on to?” Should we, as they are doing in England in this awful organization, EXIT, teach older people to commit suicide? Should we help them get rid of them because they are an economic burden, a nuisance? I want to tell you, once you begin chipping away the medical profession…
The intrinsic value of the human life is founded upon the Judeo-Christian concept that man is unique because he is made in the image of God, and not because he is well, strong, a consumer, a sex object or any other thing. That is where whatever compassion this country has is, and certainly it is far from perfect and has never been perfect. Nor out of the Reformation has there been a Golden Age, but whatever compassion there has ever been, it is rooted in the fact that our culture knows that man is unique, is made in the image of God. Take it away, and I just say gently, the stopper is out of the bathtub for all human life.
______________________________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]
I have been writing President Obama letters and have not received a personal response yet. (He reads 10 letters a day personally and responds to each of them.) However, I did receive a form letter in the form of an email on April 16, 2011. First you will see my letter to him which was mailed around April 9th(although […]
ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]
When I think of the things that make me sad concerning this country, the first thing that pops into my mind is our treatment of unborn children. Donald Trump is probably going to run for president of the United States. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council recently had a conversation with him concerning the […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
7 Follow my advice, my son; always keep it in mind and stick to it. 2 Obey me and live! Guard my words as your most precious possession. 3 Write them down,[a] and also keep them deep within your heart. 4 Love wisdom like a sweetheart; make her a beloved member of your family. 5 Let her hold you back from affairs with other women—from listening to their flattery.
6 I was looking out the window of my house one day 7 and saw a simpleminded lad, a young man lacking common sense, 8-9 walking at twilight down the street to the house of this wayward girl, a prostitute. 10 She approached him, saucy and pert, and dressed seductively. 11-12 She was the brash, coarse type, seen often in the streets and markets, soliciting at every corner for men to be her lovers.
13 She put her arms around him and kissed him, and with a saucy look she said, “I was just coming to look for you and here you are! 14-17 Come home with me, and I’ll fix you a wonderful dinner,[b] and after that—well, my bed is spread with lovely, colored sheets of finest linen imported from Egypt, perfumed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. 18 Come on, let’s take our fill of love until morning, 19 for my husband is away on a long trip. 20 He has taken a wallet full of money with him and won’t return for several days.”
21 So she seduced him with her pretty speech, her coaxing and her wheedling, until he yielded to her. He couldn’t resist her flattery. 22 He followed her as an ox going to the butcher or as a stag that is trapped, 23 waiting to be killed with an arrow through its heart. He was as a bird flying into a snare, not knowing the fate awaiting it there.
24 Listen to me, young men, and not only listen but obey; 25 don’t let your desires get out of hand; don’t let yourself think about her. Don’t go near her; stay away from where she walks, lest she tempt you and seduce you. 26 For she has been the ruin of multitudes—a vast host of men have been her victims. 27 If you want to find the road to hell, look for her house.
There is nothing quite so devious as moral impurity. But there is also nothing quite so predictable. Our great Enemy knows that he doesn’t have to be creative with immorality. The bait is so strong that it just needs to be placed within our reach. If we do not immediately apply God’s remedy, we will be ensnared. Sweet for a moment, the end results are always excruciating.
DAVID’S GREAT FAILURE
There was no one like David who was “a man after God’s own heart.” Perhaps the story of David’s failure is included in the Scripture to remind us that no one is immune to moral temptation and its possibilities. Even the most godly can fail if unguarded. In all that is recorded of David’s 40-year reign as a spiritual King in Israel, just four short verses chronicle his greatest fall.
1 Then it happened in the spring, at the time when kings go out to battle, that David sent Joab and his servants with him and all Israel, and they destroyed the sons of Ammon and besieged Rabbah. But David stayed at Jerusalem.
2 Now when evening came David arose from his bed and walked around on the roof of the king’s house, and from the roof he saw a woman bathing; and the woman was very beautiful in appearance.
3 So David sent and inquired about the woman. And one said, “Is this not Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?”
4 David sent messengers and took her, and when she came to him, he lay with her; and when she had purified herself from her uncleanness, she returned to her house.
PAYING ATTENTION TO THE VERBS
There are an important set of actions that describe David’s progression into sin. These verbs show us David’s defeat and forever give us insight into what we must do to avoid moral failure.
1. David STAYED in Jerusalem (verse 1).
David should have been in battle with his army. Instead, he shirked his responsibilities, perhaps thinking that he had now risen to a place of such importance that he was above these tasks.
Idleness gives the Devil the greatest avenue for moral sin. Satan doesn’t care how long it takes to get you; he just wants to catch you. He often comes in the most unguarded moments.
*WINNING THE BATTLE: Give yourself fully and continually to the tasks God has before you. Resist random idleness. Even in moments of rest, give yourself to the pursuit of God’s will.
2. David AROSE from his bed and WALKEDaround on the roof (verse 2).
There was nothing inherently wrong with this action, which reminds us that the Enemy can present temptation at the most innocent of times. We must not assume temptation is not lurking at the door at any moment.
*WINNING THE BATTLE: Be always aware that sin can present itself when you least expect it.
3. He SAW a woman bathing and the woman was very beautiful in appearance (verse 2).
The gate that opens the door to immorality is almost always the eyes. “I will set no worthless thing before my eyes,” a wiser David would later say in Psalm 101:3. “It shall not fasten its grip on me.”
This is not hard to understand. Evaluate your struggle with lust and you will find this predictably true. An image, a person of the opposite sex can come within your line of sight. This is called “temptation” and temptation is not sin. Jesus was tempted in all ways just like us, yet He did not sin.
There was nothing wrong with Bathsheba taking a bath. There was nothing wrong with David innocently seeing her (although, if he had been at war he would not have seen her). But there was something drastically wrong with David not being wise enough to avert his eyes. To turn and walk away. God’s consistent instruction to us when we are confronted is summed up in one word: FLEE!
When my sons were coming to an age when temptations took on new meanings, I taught them the little trick I’d learned in ROTC military training in college. When the military leaders would say “Eyes right!” or “Eyes left!” on a battlefield march, you snapped your eyes in that direction. This was a choice you made to obey the Commander. To this day my sons and I practice “Eyes right (or left)” when moral temptation comes into our view.
*WINNING THE BATTLE: Don’t go places that provide visual temptation. And when presented with moral temptation, instantly avert your eyes.
4. David SENT and INQUIRED about the woman (verse 3).
David now makes a deliberate choice to pursue sin. Gone was the innocence. David might have rationalized this moment. “I’m just going to search the internet, or browse the television, or walk by her desk at the office.” We are no longer innocent when we take the next curious step. This step is described in the foolish man in Proverbs 7:8-9.
“Passing through the street near her corner; and he takes the way to her house. In the twilight, in the evening, In the middle of the night and in the darkness.
*WINNING THE BATTLE: Realize that when you take a deliberate next step you are headed to almost certain failure. Resist the next curious step and the casual closeness to temptation.
5. David SENT messengers and TOOK her and … LAY with her (verse 4).
Here was the killing blow. Now determined to sin, David deliberately pursued his immorality. The end was inevitable. Almost no man nor woman can turn away when they have taken multiple steps towards their sin. To PURSUE immorality is to DO immorality. Jesus is clear about this.
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)
* WINNING THE BATTLE: Even if you have not consummated your immorality, you have already committed the sin if you take steps to pursue. Resist the next step! The heart-sin is the issue before God. He knows that the consummation is sure to follow.
Each time we read the account of David’s sin we want to scream at him to flee. We know the end of the story and it’s not pretty. David’s sin had great consequences for himself, his friends, his family, and the entire nation. Immorality takes you farther than you want to go and makes you pay a price higher than you want to pay.
But be encouraged. You can win this battle! Millions have by consistently applying God’s remedies. In heaven one day, you will be eternally grateful that you resisted moral temptation.
Our overcoming God, help us. Make us wise regarding immorality. Keep us vigilant. Help us master the tools that defeat this deadly temptation. And give us “running” grace! Help us to not put ourselves in vulnerable positions and give us the power to flee at temptation’s slightest presence.
I started this series on my letters and postcards to Hugh Hefner back in September when I read of the passing of Mr. Hefner. There are many more to come. It is my view that he may have taken time to look at glance at one or two of them since these postcards were short and from one of Hef’s favorite cities!!!!
Today is Feb 7 so I want to quote from Proverbs 7. Good advice today from anyone in New Orleans like me.
This chapter 7 of Proverbs is so sad and it plays out everyday here in New Orleans when a young man is seduced.
12 As I stood at the window of my house looking out through the shutters, Watching the mindless crowd stroll by, I spotted a young man without any sense Arriving at the corner of the street where she lived, then turning up the path to her house. It was dusk, the evening coming on, the darkness thickening into night. Just then, a woman met him— she’d been lying in wait for him, dressed to seduce him. Brazen and brash she was, restless and roaming, never at home, Walking the streets, loitering in the mall, hanging out at every corner in town.
13-20 She threw her arms around him and kissed him, boldly took his arm and said, “I’ve got all the makings for a feast— today I made my offerings, my vows are all paid, So now I’ve come to find you, hoping to catch sight of your face—and here you are! I’ve spread fresh, clean sheets on my bed, colorful imported linens. My bed is aromatic with spices and exotic fragrances. Come, let’s make love all night, spend the night in ecstatic lovemaking! My husband’s not home; he’s away on business, and he won’t be back for a month.”
With much seductive speech she persuades him; with her smooth talk she compels him. 22 All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, or as a stag is caught fast[e] 23 till an arrow pierces its liver; as a bird rushes into a snare; he does not know that it will cost him his life.
—-
How many homes have been wrecked by young men’s trips to New Orleans?
I wrote to Hefner in an earlier letter these words:
Don’t you see that Solomon was right when he observed life UNDER THE SUN without God in the picture and he then concluded in Ecclesiastes 2:11:
“All was vanity and a striving after wind, and there was nothing to be gained UNDER THE SUN.”
Notice this phrase UNDER THE SUN since it appears about 30 times in Ecclesiastes. Francis Schaeffer noted that Solomon took a look at the meaning of life on the basis of human life standing alone between birth and death “under the sun.” This phrase UNDER THE SUN appears over and over in Ecclesiastes. The Christian Scholar Ravi Zacharias noted, “The key to understanding the Book of Ecclesiastes is the term UNDER THE SUN — What that literally means is you lock God out of a closed system and you are left with only this world of Time plus Chance plus matter.”
My name is Tom Beaman. When I was 38, as a confirmed skeptic of all things religious, I had a life-changing encounter with Jesus. Within a couple of years I sold my concert sound company and enrolled in Denver Seminary, preparing for a new career as a pastor and preacher. One of the biggest surprises for me was how rich and fascinating the study of the Bible can be when you strip away all the stuffiness and formality. It is astonishing that this collection of – individual writings, written by dozens of authors from differing cultural situations, over a span of hundreds of years, fits together with such precision. Recently retired, I’ve begun this blog as a way of continuing to share my love and amazement for God’s Word.
I live in Longmont, Colorado, am recently single, after the death of my wife of 47 years in 2015. We raised two kids and now have four grand-kids. My hobbies include camping, playing guitar, woodworking and baking bread.
PS – When I quote from the Bible, most of the time it will be from: The Holy Bible : New International Version. 1996, c1984, Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Being Elvis was not enough. He needed more. Why? You might think singing for a living would be satisfying. Throw in vast wealth, Graceland, being known as “the King” and worshiped around the world would pretty much cover all your needs. But all that was not enough. Why not? Solomon (introduced in Part 1) never met Elvis (so far as we know…. wink, wink…) but he applied himself to figure it out. There must be a reason we humans work so hard to achieve money, fame, power, pleasure, success – you name it – and when we do, we discover those things don’t satisfy.
He didn’t just read up on the topic; Solomon held his nose and cannon-balled into the quest. But nothing he tried was enough. Wisdom didn’t satisfy:
I said to myself, “Look, I have increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge.” 17 Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind. 18 For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief (Ecclesiastes 1:16-18)
Carnal pleasure didn’t satisfy. His life that would have been the envy of Donald Trump, HUGH HEFNER and Bill Gates:
1 I said to myself, “Come now, I will test you with pleasure to find out what is good.” But that also proved to be meaningless. 2 “Laughter,” I said, “is madness. And what does pleasure accomplish?” 3 I tried cheering myself with wine, and embracing folly—my mind still guiding me with wisdom. I wanted to see what was good for people to do under the heavens during the few days of their lives. 4 I undertook great projects: I built houses for myself and planted vineyards. 5 I made gardens and parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. 6 I made reservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees. 7 I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me. 8 I amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. I acquired male and female singers, and a harem as well—the delights of a man’s heart. 9 I became greater by far than anyone in Jerusalem before me. In all this my wisdom stayed with me. 10 I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure. My heart took delight in all my labor, and this was the reward for all my toil. (Ecclesiastes 2:1-10)
And yet, none of that was enough:
11 Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 2:11)
Why is it that none of these things we strive for pay off in a lasting, satisfying way? You can read ahead in Ecclesiastes to discover what Solomon concluded. Hint: One is the “D word,” the great equalizer that awaits us all. The second thing is a matter of having the wrong perspective. There is a solution.
Millionaire publisher of Playboy magazine Hugh Hefner poses with Playmate Bunnies at one of his clubs in 1962.
Keystone Features / Getty Images
Exterior of Hefner’s Playboy Club in midtown Manhattan, circa 1966.
Bettmann / Bettmann Archive
Hefner inspects new and improved fabric for the Playboy Bunny costumes in the main room of the Playboy Mansion in Chicago, circa 1966.
Edward Kitch / Edward Kitch / AP/REX/Shutterstock
Hugh Hefner “rescues” one of the swimmers in the indoor pool of his Chicago apartment in 1961.
Bettmann / Bettmann Archive
A crowd of partygoers inspect Hefner’s stereo system at his Playboy Mansion in Chicago, circa 1966.
Pa Images / Getty Images
The “badge of the bunnies” on a Rolls-Royce picks up Hefner after arriving from the US in 1966.
Anonymous / Anonymous / AP/REX/Shutterstock
Hefner makes a telephone call aboard his private plane in 1970.
George Brich / AP
Playboy Bunnies welcome Hugh Hefner on the inaugural flight of his new DC-9 jetliner, The Big Bunny, on March 17, 1970.
Mirrorpix / Getty Images
Hefner arrives with an entourage of Bunnies at London Heathrow Airport on June 25, 1966. During this trip to Britain, he opened his 16th Playboy Club, located in Park Lane, London.
Herrmann / AP / REX / Shutterstock
During a press conference, a little “Bunny” offers sweets to Hugh Hefner and his girlfriend Barbara Benton after they arrived in West Berlin to shoot the film What Is A Nice Girl Like You Doing In This Business, in 1969.
Araldo Di Crollalanza / ARALDO DI CROLLALANZA/REX/Shutterstock
Hefner speaks to an audience during the release party for the Playboy 25th anniversary issue in 1979.
Hefner dances with playmate Sandra Theodore, alongside actress Rita Hayworth and her former choreographer Hermes Pan, during a fundraising party to save the Hollywood sign in Los Angeles in 1978.
Ron Galella / WireImage
Hefner and Playboy Bunnies celebrate as he receives a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in 1980 for his achievements in television.
Anonymous / AP / REX/ Shutterstock
Hefner poses with a group of current and former Playboy Bunnies at the Los Angeles Playboy Club in 1986.
Kip Rano / REX / Shutterstock
Luxury and high-end sports cars line the driveway of Hefner’s Playboy Mansion during a party in 1991.
Brad Elterman / Getty Images
Hefner sits with his wife Kimberley and two children during an event at the Playboy Mansion in April 1994.
Reed Saxon / ASSOCIATED PRESS
Hefner poses next to a laser-generated image of his head on a computer screen following a laser scanning session on Sept. 26, 2000, at the Playboy Mansion in Los Angeles. The resulting image was used to create an exact wax model of his head for a figure at the Hollywood Wax Museum.
Michael Bezjian / WireImage
Hefner and model Crystal Harris, later Crystal Hefner, attend a signing in Los Angeles on Dec. 10, 2009.
Jeff Kravitz / FilmMagic, Inc
Hugh Hefner shares a moment with Pamela Anderson during the launch party for Spike TV at The Playboy Mansion in 2003.
Denise Truscello / WireImage
Hefner looks at past Playboy covers during a Las Vegas party celebrating Playboy’s 50th anniversary in 2009.
Michael Kovac / FilmMagic
Hefner arrives at the 2011 Playboy Jazz Festival at the Playboy Mansion on Feb. 10, 2011, in Beverly Hills.
Hefner poses for a portrait at the Playboy Mansion in 2010. He died in September 2017 at the age of 91.
Ecclesiastes 2-3 Published on Sep 19, 2012 Calvary Chapel Spring Valley | Sunday Evening | September 16, 2012 | Derek Neider _____________________________ I have written on the Book of Ecclesiastes and the subject of the meaning of our lives on several occasions on this blog. In this series on Ecclesiastes I hope to show how secular […]
Is Love All You Need? Jesus v. Lennon Posted on January 19, 2011 by Jovan Payes 0 On June 25, 1967, the Beatles participated in the first worldwide TV special called “Our World”. During this special, the Beatles introduced “All You Need is Love”; one of their most famous and recognizable songs. In it, John Lennon […]
___________________ Something happened to the Beatles in their journey through the 1960’s and although they started off wanting only to hold their girlfriend’s hand it later evolved into wanting to smash all previous sexual standards. The Beatles: Why Don’t We Do It in the Road? _______ Beatle Ringo Starr, and his girlfriend, later his wife, […]
__________ Marvin Minsky __ I was sorry recently to learn of the passing of one of the great scholars of our generation. I have written about Marvin Minsky several times before in this series and today I again look at a letter I wrote to him in the last couple of years. It is my […]
Why was Tony Curtis on the cover of SGT PEPPERS? I have no idea but if I had to hazard a guess I would say that probably it was because he was in the smash hit SOME LIKE IT HOT. Above from the movie SOME LIKE IT HOT __ __ Jojo was a man who […]
__ Francis Schaeffer did not shy away from appreciating the Beatles. In fact, SERGEANT PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND album was his favorite and he listened to it over and over. I am a big fan of Francis Schaeffer but there are detractors that attack him because he did not have all the degrees that they […]
On 11-15-05 Adrian Rogers passed over to glory and since it is the 10th anniversary of that day I wanted to celebrate his life in two ways. First, I wanted to pass on some of the material from Adrian Rogers’ sermons I have sent to prominent atheists over the last 20 years. Second, I wanted […]
Looking back on his life as a Beatle Paul said at a certain age you start to think “Wow, I have to get serious. I can’t just be a playboy all of my life.” It is true that the Beatles wrote a lot about girls!!!!!! The Beatles – I Want To Hold your Hand [HD] Although […]
Below is a full transcript of Trump’s speech, which started with a new video, combining Sean Hannity‘s voice speaking over clips of Biden’s Thursday speech.
A man waves an American flag depicting former President Donald Trump outside the Mohegan Sun Arena in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania on Saturday ahead of the campaign rally where Trump will support candidates Dr. Mehmet Oz and Doug Mastriano.SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES
Full text of former President Donald Trump’s Pennsylvania speech
Well thank you very much and hello, Pennsylvania. Hi.
I’m thrilled to be back in this incredible Commonwealth with the thousands of proud hardworking American patriots that I have gotten to know so well.
Two months from now, the people of Pennsylvania going to fire the radical left Democrats and you are going to elect, Doug Mastriano is your next governor.
You’re going to send my friend Oz, Oz is a great guy, to the U.S. Senate. you’re going to elect an amazing slate of true America First Republicans to Congress. We are going to end the Nancy Pelosipolitical career, the Biden political career.
Our country is going to hell.
This election is a referendum on skyrocketing inflation, ramping crime, soaring murders, crushing gas prices, millions and millions of illegal aliens pouring across our border, race and gender indoctrination, converting our schools and above all this election is a referendum on the corruption and extremism of Joe Biden and the radical Democrat party.
If you want to stop this destruction of America, you must vote Republican you gotta get out
As you know this week Joe Biden came to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to give the most vicious, hateful and divisive speech ever delivered by an American president, vilifying 75 million citizens, plus another probably 75 to 150.
If we want to be accurate about it, As threats to democracy and as enemies of the state, you’re all enemies of the state. He’s an enemy of the state, you know that? The enemy of the state is him and the group that control him, which is circling around him, ‘Do this. do that Joe, you’re going to do this Joe.”
Right. I think Philadelphia was a great choice to make this speech of hatred and anger. His speech was hatred and anger. By the way, the next morning he forgot what he said, you saw that.
I do like the red lighting behind him, like the devil.
But Philadelphia was a great choice because the city is being devastated under Democrat rules. Devastated. He could tell you, we love Pennsylvania. I went to school in Philadelphia, what’s happening to Philadelphia?
Fourteen people were shot last weekend in Philadelphia, 14, and the fake news will—God, that’s a lot of fake news lately. A lot of fake news.
Well, they’ll go out and check the facts for people were killed last weekend. At one point last month, seven people were shot in the span of just 71 minutes, in Philadelphia this year. Philadelphia has already seen more than 1,400 people shot including numerous beautiful little children.
Last year, the city set an all time murder record with 560 homicides, and it’s on track to shatter that record. Again in 2022 numbers that nobody’s ever seen other than some other Democrat-run cities. Armed robberies in Philadelphia are up 62 percent. Doug, you have to take care of this. You have to take care of it, and we’ll send you the goods, I’ll send him the goods. You know what the goods are: lots of police officers. That’s what the goods are.
Retail theft is up 59 percent from last year.
There have been more than 750 carjackings this year. Anybody have a nice car, because you’re not gonna have it long. More than triple the average for 2010 to 2019. And it’s heading way up heading up in other cities that are run by Democrats also.
Instead of trying to demonize half of the population, Biden and congressional Democrats should focus on stopping the killing and the bloodshed in Philadelphia and every other Democrat-run city in America where record death and destruction is taking place every single day.
Biden thinks making America great again is bad for our country. Do you believe it? That was in his—Biden says “We got to stop MAGA.” That’s when I defined it, because I don’t think he knows what it meant. It means “make America great again.” We have to stop it. Stop MAGA. Stop making America great again.
He thinks making America great again is a threat to our country. No, making America great again is great for our country.
There’s only one party that’s waging war in American democracy by censoring free speech, criminalizing dissent. You see that happening? Disarming law-abiding citizens, issuing lawless mandates and unconstitutional orders, imprisoning political protesters. That’s what they’re doing, rigging elections. weaponizing the Justice Department and the FBI like never ever before. And raiding and breaking into the homes of their political opponents. I wonder who that could be.
Republicans in the MAGA movement are not the ones trying to undermine our democracy. We are the ones trying to save our democracy very simple. The danger to democracy comes from the radical left, not from the right. Not from the right.
This November, we’re going to stand up to this rising tyranny of sickness, lawlessness And death. And we are going to take back our country. We’re going to take it.
There could be no more vivid example of the very real threats from American freedom. And just a few weeks ago, you saw when we witnessed one of the most shocking abuses of power by any administration in American history, the shameful raid and breaking into my home Mar-a-Lago was a travesty of justice.
That made a mockery of America’s laws, traditions and principles. Before the entire world the entire world was watching and they’re shocked. They’re shocked. South American countries, numerous of them, their leaders said could you imagine if that was ever done in our country? What the United States would be saying about us. The Biden administration invaded the home of their chief political opponent who is absolutely destroying him and everyone else in the polls. I hate to say it.
Even including the Republicans, but we love the Republicans, on a phony pretext getting permission from a highly political magistrate who they hand-picked late in the evening, just days before the break-in. And trampled upon my rights and civil liberties as if our country, that we love so much. We’re a third world nation. We’re like a third world nation.
They rifled through the First Lady’s closet drawers and everything else, and even did a deep and ugly search of the room of my 16-year-old son, leaving everything they touched in far different conditions than it was when they started. Can you believe it?
The FBI and the Justice Department have become vicious monsters. controlled by radical left scoundrels lawyers and the media who tell them what to do—you people right there—and when to do it.
They’re trying to silence me and more importantly, they are trying to silence you. But we will not be silenced, right. We will never stop speaking the truth. We have no choice because we’re not going to have a country love. The evil and malice of this demented persecution of you and me should be obvious to all entities.
Even media companies that are pretty far left have come out and said we can’t believe this is happening in the USA. We are being assaulted by the same groups, the FBI and DOJ, that just a few years ago declared no reasonable prosecutor would charge Crooked Hillary Clintonafter she set up a secret illegal server to hide her family’s pay-for-play schemes. Crammed full of classified information, allowed it to be plundered by foreign hackers. You know that happened? And then deleted 30,000 emails, think of that, 30,000 emails, and what else did she do? Bomb with a hammer, smashed her phone systems to smithereens after receiving the highest level of subpoena from the U.S. Congress. Think of that?
Thank you. That yet, now, the same people, the exact same people are sending the FBI storming through the home of their number one political rival. It’s a disgrace, a disgrace, like possibly never before. Our country has never seen anything like it. They talked about documents not being properly stored. Yet they go in and take documents, dump them on the floor, stage a photoshoot, and pretend that I had done it like I had put them all over the floor.
They took that back. After a lot of product then they put out for public consumption, a picture which is seen all over the world. this is what they do. it’s called disinformation. These are very dishonest, sick people. Very dishonest people.
Americans are sick of the lies sick of the hoaxes and scams, and above all sick of the hypocrisy. But our opponents have badly miscalculated. This egregious abuse of the law is going to produce a backlash the likes of which nobody has ever seen before.
Before our very eyes, our beloved country is being taken over by the very people who turned democracies into dictatorships and into ultimately, ruination. They think they can divide us but they can’t. Can’t divide us.
The MAGA movement is the greatest in the history of our country. And maybe in the history of the world, maybe in the history of the world.
In any event, we have no choice. We are trying to save our country because such bad things are happening to our beautiful, beloved America. We will make America great again. I will never turn my back on you.
And you will never turn your back on me because we love our nation. And we will save our nation from people who are trying to destroy it. It was not just my home that was rated last month. It was the hopes and dreams of every citizen who I’ve been fighting for since the moment I came down the golden escalator in 2015, wanting to represent the people. Wanting to stop the massive corruption in our country and determined to finally in this world, put America first. I want to put America first and we did.
We did.
There’s never been a period of time, both before COVID—or the China virus as we say—and after COVID. From that moment on, I became the enemy of the Washington swamp for six years. The radical Democrat party, the RINOs, the media and the Deep State have tried relentlessly to stop me and you.
First they fabricated the Russia Russia Russia scam you so it was a total fabrication. Now they all admit it. Then we had impeachment hoax number one, impeachment hoax number two, and now the same exact people at Justice and the FBI, the same people along with outside scum, are at it again with the horrific raid of my home.
They just go on and on. And they have to be stopped. We have to spend time on our country, not on defending ourselves against scams.
Think about it, about Russia and the Muller—no collusion, right? Came in no collusion. That was your decision after two and a half years, no collusion. I could have told them that after the first hour. And they could have said that because they had the laptop from hell, which had everything, so they knew immediately.
But it went on—but think of this, you know what, I tell this story on occasion very seldom because it’s too sad to tell. But I tell this story because it’s very important. Russia Russia Russia was a hoax. It was developed by Hillary Clinton and a group of people. Small group around the kitchen table, as a way of explaining why she lost an election that a lot of people thought she would win because the Democrats have an advantage in elections. Because of a lot of things, aside from the fact they cheat like hell.
So when they lost, Hillary Clinton and her people, guys like Adam “Shifty” Schiff , watermelon head. Watermelon Head, he’s a watermelon head, but no dummy.
Think of this, think how bad they are, think how evil they are. We’re all fathers and your mothers and your children are great people, and all of the people are represented here—think how bad they are. They make up a story that’s false. It’s now been admitted to be false. The FBI is the last one to tell us that. But it’s now admitted even in the newspapers, even by the people back there, they will not fight it. They make up now think of this or think of this.
So they make up a story about Russia. Let’s say, you know, I was tougher on Russia than any president before. I’m the one that stopped Nord Stream II, the pipeline. I’m the one that did the big sanctions.
And I guarantee you one thing, Putin was not going into Ukraine. I guarantee you that. I guarantee you, nobody was tougher than me, but I also got along with them. That’s a good thing. You know, getting along with other countries. It’s a good thing. Not a bad thing, but think of it. So they make up a story, Russia, Russia. Russia. It was made up so that when they launched, they could say it was Russia.
I’m saying, what the hell did Russia have to deal with? It was Russia. Okay, so Adam Schiff knows it’s a fake story. He made it up with other people. They know it’s a fake and I see Adam Schiff go solemnly to the microphones in the Capitol building, And stand. They’re so sad and say, “Donald Trump Jr. will be going to prison because of what he did with Russia.” Now think of it, he knows the story is a scam. He knows the story’s a fake.
And he wants my son, who’s a good kid, he wants my son to go to prison over something that they made up, that they know is a phony story, and has now been, as they say, fully debunked.
In other words, it was a total lie, and he’s standing before microphones with many of those people standing there and they can’t get enough, saying that my son is going to prison. And I then call my son I say, “Donnie, you okay, what’s going on? What’s going on?”
Think of this. If you’re a parent, think of it. My son’s going to prison on something that they made, which is a total hoax. These are bad people. They’re trying to destroy our country, and we can’t let it go on. Any longer because we have too much work to do.
Whether through activist Attorney Generals, the state attorney generals. If I fly over a state, they send me before a grand jury. “Trump is up there. Let’s see what can we do with the grand jury?”
I’ve been going through this for six years now. Local Democrats and county prosecutors, congressional committees or federal agencies, the radical Democrats are engaging in a desperate attempt to keep me from returning to the White House where they know I will clean this mess up again.
They want to stop us from completing our mission to bring back American values. Secure America’s borders, millions and millions of people are pouring into our country. Nobody has any idea where they’re from. Last month, 129 countries were represented. They’re emptying their prisons into the United States of America
They know we’ll continue to fix America’s trade deals. Continue to lower taxes. Nobody gave tax decreases like Trump, bigger than the Reagan cuts. And lower regulations created all of those jobs, defend and protect our police and our military. We have to protect our police. You know, our police want to protect us. They’re stymied from doing it.
We have to protect our police.
No, we’re going to reclaim our energy independence. We’re going to save our Second Amendment which is under siege.
We’ll build our manufacturing base, just like I was doing. In other words, they know that we’re going to make America great again. You know, we had a different saying because after we did so well we were all set. And we had a statement remember Keep America Great. But after they destroyed it, I’d love to use it. But I must say there’s nothing like MAGA.
I don’t know. I don’t know KAG. KAG wasn’t the same. Keep America Great. The problem I had though wasn’t the fact that KAG can’t compete with MAGA, the real problem I had that.
We can’t use the word Keep America Great because they’ve destroyed our country. So we can’t keep it great because it’s not great. Right now. Our country is a laughingstock. Our leaders are a laughingstock.
You know, we just sent another $13 billion to Ukraine, that gets us close to $80 billion now. Well, it angers me more for a different reason. It would have never happened before, Putin really wouldn’t have done it. Said “Vladimir, you’re not gonna do that, Vladimir.”
He knew that. He knew it. He knew it. But he did it soon as the election was rigged and it was considered over. I don’t know if it’s ever going to end, if you look at what’s going on, because more and more facts are coming out, like the FBI with Facebook the other day can you believe but you know what?
Our country, it would have been so inappropriate to say Keep America Great, because who the hell wants to keep our country the way it is right now? I don’t know.
But together, we have easily beaten every single witch hunt in the past think of that—the time and the money and the effort it takes. And now we will likewise do that in the future if they continue their craziness, and if they don’t stop they don’t stop that’s all they’re good at is disinformation, they put out disinformation.
You know, when I heard about Russia was right after I came down that beautiful golden escalator.
First lady, I said “you’ll be a great first lady.” She has been a great first lady. Great first lady. They love our first lady.
But people would come up to me, this was right at the beginning. Right after the escalator ride, but people have shared, “you know anything about Russia?”
Young guys come up, beautiful, staffers, there a lot of them here right now and here all over the place. That just came up to me. You won Pennsylvania by a lot, sir. That’s right. You’re right about that. I think at nine o’clock in the evening, we went 950,000 votes up with 73 percent of the vote cast. All of a sudden, around 3:02 or something, the equipment closed down. It all closed down. And then you had that massive spike. Remember the spike that went to heaven and came back? It should have gone to hell and come back.
And all of a sudden we were tied and then all of a sudden, we lost by a whisper. A rigged election. But the people would come upm some of them are here, “Sir, sir. It’s such an honor to meet you, sir. Sir. Can I ask you a question? You know, what is it? What do you think about Russia?”
No, not really, but I know probably less than you know. But I have a lot of common sense and I know how to defend our country and I’ll end up being friendly with them and will do just fine.
Then a month later another one came up. “Hello, Uncle Sam. Look, send up Uncle Sam.” Great people, great people.
And a month later, another young person came up. A little naive, and said, it was really, actually, was cute. He said, “Oh sir, it’s such an honor to go for a couple of minutes.” He said, “Sir, can I ask you one question has been bothering me.” Yeah, what is it? “Do you, what do you think about Russia?”
And then again and again, then after about five or six times you’re gonna think about Russia. When I looked at my people, my help people that are a little older. I said, “What the hell is going on with Russia?”
This is all I knew what was going on. It was a scam. And we took two and a half years to win. But all of that time and effort and money and the corruption and the people that were in charge of that scam are horrible, and they’re the same people that we have now. They never leave. They never leave. And if we would have had an attorney general with courage, instead of somebody that was afraid to be impeached, so I don’t want to be—we would have gotten to the bottom of the very quickly.
We’ve been waiting for Durham for a long time, Durham, please come in and give us your work, please. You’re up, Durham. We gotta get Durham going here.
But this battle is not about me. This is a struggle for the very fate of our republic. Our movement is fighting against a corrupt group of unelected tyrants who believe they can wield absolute power over you, with the help of a willing and very corrupt media.
They think the deep state, not the citizens should be the true masters of this country.
On our watch, we will never let that happen. And we will never let it happen, even though we’re going to be gone. We’re going to set this country up so strong and so powerfully that we may not be here, at least some of the older ones—that I love you all, but we’re going to have the country set up properly. Like it was before the COVID came in, before the China dust came in.
And even after we handed it off where we had a higher stock market, because we did it twice. We had a higher stock market on January 20 than we did—think of it—the so-called handoff. I hate to even use the term it’s so ridiculous. It’s so ridiculous. I have to use that term. But the handoff, we handed it off, the market was higher than it was just prior to COVID coming into our country. We did an incredible job, an incredible job.
But we have no choice in 2022 and 2024. We have to smash the grip of his vile and vindictive political class. We have to clean house in Washington, D.C. and we have to restore government for the people.
If we do not, our republic and, indeed, our country will be destroyed and we will never be able to do what is called a comeback. You won’t be able to do it. It’ll never come back again.
It’s so fragile, you know, it’s so fragile. You will never bring it back again. You remember in the campaign, I used to say if these people get in we’re going to end up with Venezuela on steroids. I said it many many times. I never thought it was much of a possibility. But I never knew people could cheat like that. Not like last week. Weirdo. He’s a weirdo.
Mark Zuckerberg came to the White House, kissed my ass all night. “Sir, I’d love to have dinner, sir. I’d love to have dinner. I’d love to bring my lovely wife.” All right, Mark, come on in. “Sir, you’re number one on Facebook. I’d like to congratulate you.” Thank you very much, Mark. I appreciate it.
Well, Mark Zuckerberg confessed that in 2020, the FBI went to Facebook and the media and gave them the false narratives that the Hunter Biden laptop from Hell was Russian disinformation, even though they knew that was not true. So they went in they said it was Russian disinformation, by the way. The guy that came in with that stuff just got fired. He perp-walked, he was perp-walked out of the FBI on Friday.
But that doesn’t help us, and the election of 2020, that doesn’t help us. They perp-walked him because of all the things he did. So many more than what we’re even talking about. The FBI made it clear that they did not want the truth about the criminality and influence peddling of the Biden family coming out before the election, because that would hurt the chances of Joe Biden who virtually never left his basement winning the election.
You know, he came to Philadelphia, as you know, you know many people they had almost nobody showed up. And we have a lot of people. A lot of people, and we’re not even talking about all the people outside that couldn’t get in, because you have better real estate, right? We got a lot of people outside watching. I hope they’re watching the big screens we put up outside.
You know this place? I think it holds 12,000 people. So we sold out in about 15 seconds and I said what are we going to do? For the people that can’t get in? That’s why a lot of times, I like fields because fields, you could just keep having them. In Alabama, we had 66,000 people. Figure this: Outside of Houston, Texas, we had 89,000 people show up.
But what the FBI did was corruption and election interference on a scale that we have never seen before in our country. According to pollsters, it made a 10 to 20 point difference, not even including all of the other totally determinative evidence of illegality that was found having to do with the 2020 presidential election scam, including ballot stuffing and not adhering to the laws, rules and regulations of state legislatures, which is totally illegal. They just did whatever they wanted to do. And frankly, Republicans locally that ran things in a lot of states—should be ashamed of themselves.
Should be ashamed of yourself. And a guy like Mitch McConnell, who allowed this stuff to happen, should be ashamed. You should be ashamed. The 2020 election was rigged, and now our country is being destroyed by people who got into office through cheating and through fraud.
Now watch, the cameras will all turn off as soon as I say that because they’re not allowed to put the cameras. They’ll all turn off. They don’t want to hear that. They don’t want to hear that. You know why?
But Republican leadership just doesn’t fight because in many cases, they are intimidated. They’re afraid they’re actually afraid, Republicans must get tougher and stronger and fast.
The way I’ll tell you a guy that fought back that’s why he’s here. Today is your nominee. Doug Mastriano. He fought, he fought, but he was dealing with RINOs, all such crap.
Doug, you fought like very few people fought, that’s really why he’s here, because everybody saw that. He fought. You know, after people figured it out. They all ran on the basis of “we’re gonna stop” but they were not there. He was there at the beginning. And the people understood it.
So the big deal—by the way, I saw a poll today, Doug, that you’re tied or up one point. Just so you know, again, all they do well is cheat on elections and use this information. So when he’s running, he’s got a big base, and he won by a lot. He won by even more when I endorsed him, but that’s okay. And you know what?
They said this guy Shapiro, who’s a lightweight, they said the following. They saw he was going to win, he was doing well, he was way up and he had a big base and they don’t like that. So what do they do? “The one we really want to run against is Doug Mastriano. That’s the one.”
Well, they say that one every time, they have somebody that’s going to kick their ass, they go out and they say, “go on, we want to run again.” The one person they didn’t want to run against is Doug Mastriano. This information I kept hearing it, I’d be out I see the people going crazy for Doug, for his incredible wife but it’s true.
He was right there from the beginning, day one, got to fight the Republicans and the Democrats, yet to fight people. American elections should be determined only by the American people. And that did not happen in 2020. and I’m just talking to FBI but there are many, many other things. We won’t go into it.
The Mar-a-Lago raid was a desperate effort to distract from Joe Biden’s record of misery and failure. The many disasters that our country in the world are now suffering would never ever have happened. If I was in the White House, you all know that all of this stuff when you could take the five worst presidents in American history and put them together, and they would not have done the damage Joe Biden has done to our country in less than two years. They could not have done it.
Two years ago when I was in office, gas was $1.87.
We weren’t talking about going to all electric cars which are twice as expensive. I mean, the problem is—a friend of mine wanted to do something for the environment. He went out and bought a electric car and he made a certain trip. I won’t say from where—Kentucky—I won’t say from, and he’s a good person. He wants to do what’s well, now he understands. Not so good.
And he bought an electric car and he made the trip often from Kentucky to Washington, and he made it and he drove down and put the car away and drive back. He was getting like 38 miles a gallon and he was fine. And then he goes to hybrids and all the other things they can do.
But he wanted to go all-electric, because he wants to save our country, wants to save the atmosphere. And he called me, he said “I’m exhausted.” Why? He said, “This damn trip took me forever. I drive for two hours, and then I’d have to have my car charged. And in two cases I couldn’t find a place to charge it, but even if I could, it took me more time to charge the damn car than I could spend in it driving.”
He said, “It took me two and a half times. Please Please let’s get rid of this stuff. Please.” And you see in California, you see what’s happening there, with going all electric cars. Number one, people can’t afford them. Number two, the batteries are made all in China, all the earth, the rare earth comes out of China.
And interesting. We have all the guests, and the guests to leave the gasoline, when it’s refined. We have it all right under us, we don’t have any of the other stuff. And if we did, our environmentalists wouldn’t let us take it. It all comes out of China and a little bit in the Congo, guess who controls the Congo, China.
We play right into their hands you see where I’m getting a lot of great press because I told Germany, don’t make a deal with Russia on the pipeline. And they said, “Oh, that’s so funny.” I actually didn’t during the meeting, G7, I sent, Angela, Angela Merkel, a white flag of surrender. She said, “Donald, Donald, but why’d you send me this white flag?”
I said, “Angela, you’re going to surrender, 75 percent of your energy is coming from Russia. If you look back over the decades, Russia and Germany haven’t done too well together. When there’s a war, when there’s a problem, they’ll just turn it off, Nord Stream II, and Angela, you’re not going to be able to defend yourself.” “Oh, that will never happen.”
Well, that was about two years ago. The only thing, I never thought it was gonna happen this fast. And now they’re giving me great—remember, I made the speech at the United Nations. And the German delegation was all smiling. They thought it was so funny. They’re not smiling. No one said it better than me. They’re not smiling.
But now gas is $5 and $6 and $7. And it’s going to be going up. Think of it, and they brag because it came down slightly. You know, it came down about 42 cents.
We actually had it down to $1.42. Remember that? But I had to get it a little up. We had to let the oil companies make a couple of bucks. I didn’t want to wipe out the oil companies.
But what’s happened is one of the big reasons for inflation is what this guy has done with energy, because energy is so all-encompassing. It’s so big. With the help of Pennsylvania energy workers. Did you get screwed or what? Remember, I told you they were gonna do this to you. He lied during the debate. He said, “No, no, I would never do that.” The first thing he did practically was kill the pipeline. Right? That was like the first thing he did.
And you know, all those workers voted for me, but the head of the Union voted. I wonder if he’s still the head, check it out. He ought to be fired real fast. The Keystone pipeline would have been great. A lot of jobs, would have done a good job, with the help of Pennsylvania energy workers, under my leadership. We had American energy independence for the first time ever, ever.
And within a short period of time, we would have been energy-dominant. We would have been bigger that Russia and Saudi Arabia combined, times two, and now we’re beggars.
We’re like a beggar nation. You think that, we’re energy beggars, we would have been bigger than everybody combined. The two biggest, the biggest energy suppliers combined times two. We’re going to be energy-dominant and figures we gave you the largest tax cuts and regulation cuts in American history. The radical Democrat Congress just passed one of the largest tax hikes in American history, pulverizing the middle class and now you have the privilege of having 87,000 IRS agents go after you. And they’ve actually been approved. I’d never heard of this one. They got approved to carry guns so they can go after you with guns. You know, they don’t want to have guns but it’s okay for the IRS. It’s like an army.
Can you imagine that that was approved? That they allowed that to get through?
And all Mitch McConnell had to do is waive that debt ceiling. I’m not approving anything having to do with debt ceiling, unless you drop all this crap, $4 trillion. Because McConnell folded like a dog, you saw that, and I always said he would, I told you he will, he did. And West Virginia which voted for me—45 points I was up 45 points—West Virginia is not happy with Joe Manchin, because he killed coal, and they put taxes on coal. Clean beautiful coal, he killed it. I can’t imagine he’s going to do well. I don’t know—well, the heck to him.
Under the Trump administration, we had the greatest economy in the history of the world with no inflation. Biden and the Democrat Congress created the worst inflation in 50 years, 9.1 percent. It is gonna go a lot higher. And now they are making it worse with their immoral plan to wipe out hundreds of billions of dollars of debt for college graduates. Now think of this. How unfair is it, how unfair is it all of those, people, many of you are here, that paid and worked so hard. I saw they were doing a story about Pocahontas. That’s Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts.
And this big strong guy came up, a really good looking guy. And he looks at he goes, “Hey, well, what’s going on with this debt? You want to cancel the debt? I’ve been working my ass off for 12 years,” he said, “and I’ve almost got my daughter’s debt paid off. I worked weekends for 12 years. My neighbor, he’s my friend but he hasn’t worked at all. And now his debts could have been canceled, but I worked. This is unfair.”
And then he was not doing nice after that. So we’ll forget what he said, that he was not too happy. But you can multiply that times millions and millions of people. They paid for it on the backs of hardworking citizens and they’re raising your taxes. Remember this, you don’t realize it, you’re getting the biggest tax increase in history. So all this information, they’re saying under, under 400,000, You’re getting the biggest tax increase in the history of our country. So enjoy paying it.
And you know what? It’s paying for things like that, but the “Green New Deal,” which is like taking the money and throwing it out the window, and it’s actually worse. It’s actually like taking the money and destroying our country. Because it sets us back. Just like Germany, you know, Germany’s back to building and opening its plants because they got so screwed up with a green new energy.
They got carried away, windmills all over the place, killing all the birds, destroying all the values of homes, destroying the planes and fields, beautiful planes. If you want to see a dead bird cemetery, go under a windmill sometime. It’s not a pretty sight. It’s also the single most expensive form of energy you can get. And all of those big giant turbines are built in China and Germany to a lesser extent.
I rebuilt our military including our nuclear capability and hope to God we never have to use it. And the creation of the Space Force. See what they’re doing with Iran. Iran was dying to make a deal with them, without a deal done, within one week after the election. And now we’re going to pay them hundreds of billions of dollars and they’re gonna have nuclear weapons within a short period of time.
These people are crazy, this figure. I mean, they honestly, they can’t be stupid. They must hate our country. They must hate our country. They surrendered our strength and our wisdom, our everything. They turned Afghanistan into the greatest humiliation our country has ever seen. I believe it was the most humiliating thing, time that our country’s ever gone through.
Thirteen dead soldiers, but they never mentioned those soldiers who lost their legs and arms and face. They were obliterated. Nobody talks about them and there were many. Nobody talks about them. We left American citizens behind. And we left $85 billion worth of the best military equipment in the entire world, planes and tanks and goggles 700,000 rifles and AK-47s.
We left it all behind, figure this, 70,000 vehicles is not a used car lot in the country that has probably 500 vehicles, 70,000 vehicles we left behind. Some of those vehicles cost millions of dollars because they’re armor-plated with six inches of steel. We left it all behind. I built much of it. Because I rebuilt our entire military, think of it, $85 billion worth of military equipment. And you know, I saw a number the other day, the second largest arms dealer in the entire world is Afghanistan.
Because they’re selling their cars. They don’t need 700,000 rifles and guns—700,000—they need 40,000 or 20,000. What were we thinking? You don’t take the military out first. And remember this, in Afghanistan 18 months, we didn’t lose one soldier. You heard the numbers’ Philadelphia, 18 months.
I spoke to Abdul, I said, Abdul don’t do that. Don’t do that. “Why sir. Why do you send me a picture of my house?” I said Abdul, That’s a different story. Don’t go and we were fine. Remember, they said, why is he speaking to the Taliban? Because that’s where the problem was, right. That’s where the problem was.
Eighteen months and Biden, actually a couple of months ago, well, I’ll say one thing. We didn’t lose one soldier in 18 months and they’re screaming at him. You don’t take it back. You’re not supposed to say that, because it’s good. We didn’t lose a soldier in 18 months. They were so afraid. They didn’t want anything. We could have gotten out, I want to get out more than anybody. I’m the one that got it down to 2,000.
But also, we should have kept Bagram because if China—Bagram Airbase costs billions and billions of dollars, years ago, to build. It’s one hour, a day from where China makes its nuclear weapons. We should have never left without keeping Bagram. What a shame.
The most humiliating time I believe, actually, that probably, Putin went in because when he saw the incompetence of that, he said, “This is going to be easier than I thought.” And now we have a war between Russia and Ukraine with potentially hundreds of thousands, and even millions of people, are going to die. That would have never happened if I was your president. Would have never happened. I promise you.
Vladimir, you can’t do that.
Those beautiful golden terrorists in Moscow, Vladimir, I want to leave them alone. Please. You can’t do it, Vladimir. He would never have done it. He would never have done it.
He said “Why should I believe you? You did kill me on Nord Stream.” Nobody thought that was possible. I ended Nord—can you imagine? Biden came in and he opened up the pipeline. I ended it. Then he says, “Oh, Trump was soft on Russia.” I was soft.
The only one that doesn’t think that is Putin. He didn’t think I was too soft with the sanctions. But think of it, the biggest deal they’ve ever done is Nord, that nobody ever heard of until I came along. They were building this massive pipeline. Nobody ever heard of Nord Stream II till I came along.
We created the border in United States history. We ended catch and release, we deported record numbers of illegal aliens, gang members, and we built hundreds and hundreds of miles of border wall. In two and a half years of Democrat-inspired losses, we’re delivered lawsuits. I want every one of them, look, two and a half years that went. And you know, we completely finished our original plan for the wall and they came to me for some other sections. They said, “Let’s do it. Come on. Let’s go fast.” Then we added much more wall, 200 miles, and we almost got that finished on top of what we did. And I figured that this guy would finish it up. And he didn’t!
Not only didn’t finish when Texas wanted to use the stuff that was sitting there ready to be erected, it was going to be erected very quickly. Very quickly. very effectively. Great, great wall. It’s actually what Border Patrol wanted. I said what do you want? This is exactly what, steel. They wanted concrete. They wanted rebar, heavy set rebar. They wanted exactly that, and they have to be able to see through, so we see what’s happening on the other side.
I want to just give a nice big beautiful concrete plank but they didn’t want that. So we gave them exactly what they wanted. And this could have been finished in a few weeks. And not only didn’t they give this free to Texas, Texas could have put it up. They actually took it away, and put it in a secure area. And nobody can take it. That’s just a terrible thing. Three weeks was all it would have taken to complete the job.
Our country is paying a terrible price for the rigged election. I ran twice. I won twice and did much better the second time than I did the first, getting millions and millions more votes in 2020 than we got in 2016.
Doug knows that we got millions of more votes. I tell people, yeah. Oh, what a great job you did. I was being interviewed by this fake news reporter. And he said what happened in 2020? I said, Well, we did much better actually. We got New Orleans, more votes, we get the largest number of votes of any sitting president in history. They said, “You know, I never thought of it that way.” I said why don’t you start thinking about that way. Got a rigged election. And likewise getting more votes than, think of it, there has never been a person as the sitting president got anywhere near. I think we got like 10 million more votes than Obama. You know, so popular.
He’s so popular. They say he’s so handsome. Oh, Obama is such a great speaker. What does he say? He says nothing. And we’re leading Biden, and everyone else including the Republicans, by record numbers in the polls. So I may just have to do it again. You’ll be starting to have to do it again. Do it again. Have to do it again.
But first, we have to win a historic victory for the Republican Party this November.
Among our highest priorities must be to end the nightmare Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have created on our southern border, that nightmare.
Remember this, we had the strongest, best border we ever had two years ago. Now we have the worst border. I believe it’s worse than any border anywhere in the world. Because no country would let people come into the country the way we have. Right here in Pennsylvania, last year two illegal alien criminals allegedly brutalized and bludgeoned women to death. On a busy street corner in Chester County and illegal alien stands accused of grabbing a 33 year old woman by the hair, pulling her down and around the ground and stabbing her to death in front of her 7-year-old daughter.
Just a few weeks ago, an illegal alien murderer was charged with shooting to death a 76-year-old man from Pennsylvania. He took a walk every morning and this guy killed him for no reason whatsoever. He didn’t know, he didn’t know him, didn’t do anything. Just wanted to kill him.
The radical Democrat Congresses turned our country into one giant sanctuary for serious criminal aliens. We protect all of the criminals, we don’t protect our own people. In fact, they raid our people. And the Republican Party. We believe our country should be a sanctuary for law abiding citizens who love America. If we’re going to make America great again, our first pass is to make America safe again. We have to have a safe country.
You know, I told you before, I love the fields, but I like these better because of the air conditioning system, but that conditioning is not working too well. It’s about 100 degrees up here. I’m sweating like a dog but I’m cold. Dr. Oz? Dr. Oz.? Am I okay Doctor? Am I okay? He says yes. I was in Arizona for his show years ago and Dr. Oz, in a second, but I was at a show years ago and he did like an examination of me—I don’t know what the hell they did the show for, I wasn’t like even a politician at that. But he did an examination, and the word he said is extremely healthy. Very, very fine, fit man but he should lose 20 or 25 pounds. I was so angry. I didn’t speak to him. He said he was great but he could lose a couple of pounds.
He’s great. He’s gonna be great.
Under a Democrat, all the streets of our great cities are drenched in the blood of innocent victims. Much of this crime is caused by drug dealers, who during the course of their lives will kill an average of 500 a month. Citizens, every drug dealer is responsible. And that doesn’t include what they’ve done to families of people that haven’t died, but families that are just devastated by what happened to their children and to themselves. Think of it, 500 people the average drug dealer kills. I’m calling for the death penalty for drug dealers which will upon stashes reduce drug distribution in our country on day one by 75 percent.
No more blue ribbon committees. What to do, you know, I was setting them up in the White House, is a blue ribbon committee headed by socialites, and they just want—I mean, look, they’re very nice people, but they just want a little publicity for themselves. They can’t deal with the kind of killers that would—We want the death penalty for drug dealers, and you will save millions of lives. You know, we’re gonna lose 250,000 people I think this year, you know, just to go off for a second. Does anybody mind that? I do that.
Is there any perfect place to be on a beautiful Saturday evening than a Trump rally?
But just to go for a second. So you know, I got to know a lot of the foreign leaders and let me tell you, unlike our leader, they’re at the top of their game. There’s no one in like Central Casting that could play the role in Hollywood, all of Hollywood. Nobody can play the role of President Xi of China. Nobody could play the role. He’s a fierce person. Putin, fierce, is smart. You know, a lot of times I’ll say somebody’s smart, and the fake news go, he thought President Xi smart.
He rules with an iron fist 1.5 billion people. Yeah, I’d say he’s smart, wouldn’t you say he’s smart? So I’m with President Xi. And I got along with him to work. I mean, once COVID is yourself, but we made a great trade deal with him, helped our farmers, helped our manufacturers, but I’m with him. And I really had a great relationship with him. And then I asked him a question I said, “President,” he’s president for life, by the way, like thinking as a king. He said, “but I am not a king.” I said, “You are to me, you’re president for life. It’s the same.”
You will be very soon, you know that—another thing by the way. Do you notice a lot of ships are circling Taiwan. That wouldn’t have happened either, by the way. But I said, “President could I ask you a very simple question. Do you have a drug problem?” He looked at me like, what’s wrong with that? “No, of course not.” He goes, “No, no.” He’s like, “What the hell of a stupid question it is. No.”
I said you don’t have a drug problem with 1.5 million people. His big problems, they make the drugs, he sent them into our country. That’s their problem. That would have been their problem and he was stopping it too. But now they’re sending the fentanyl in numbers that you wouldn’t believe, wouldn’t believe it, pouring through that portal. At numbers you wouldn’t believe, I had him very close to stopped. He couldn’t do it. “So President, President, you don’t have a drug problem, but why? But why don’t you have a drug problem?”
“We have quick trial. It’s a what is it quick. We immediately catch the drug dealer. We give him quick trial. And if he is guilty, which I would say probably,” Would you say, Oz, would you say they’re getting 100 percent? Or only 99?
“If the drug dealer is guilty, he is immediately executed. So we have no drug problem.” And they have other countries like that to Singapore, other countries. And if you do that, you know, I’m told this and it’s a hard thing to say, because calling for the death penalty stuff, but think of it.
They kill 500 people during a lot of time, and I think it’s much worse than that. I think that’s only what we hear about who would stop it. If you didn’t get it down, 75 percent. Person said from day one, I’d be surprised and these committees that they set up, it’s laughable, it’s a horrible thing. We would solve that problem so fast and I’m calling on Republicans and Democrats immediately to institute to get to 10, and institute the death penalty for drug dealers. You will no longer have a problem.
Philadelphia has become, as you heard many times over the last short period of time, worse than it’s ever been. It’s become a killing field a few days ago. A 4-year-old boy was shot while getting a haircut. For his first day in school. His mother was so proud of him, is getting a hug. He was shot.
Recently, a mother was shot in the head and horribly murdered, her unborn baby was miraculously saved. Under a Republican Congress. We should pass emergency funding to hire thousands and thousands more police officers nationwide to put violent criminals behind bars and keep them behind bars and also leave our police alone to do their job.
Give them back the respect, they know what to do and nobody can do it better but they’re under siege. They don’t want to lose their house. They don’t want to lose their families. What they do to police officers. What they do to police. You’re always gonna have some bad apples, but they’re very few and we have a country that’s become one of the most unsafe countries in the world.
Think of it, you’re gonna deal with third world nations where they’re much safer than many parts. Think of it. what I said in Afghanistan, we didn’t lose one soldier in 18 months. And yet I just read off numbers in Philadelphia. If you look at Atlanta, I have a district attorney in Atlanta, she’s asking for a perfect phone call. And yet, it’s even worse proportionately than Chicago for killing.
But the district attorney, Trump made a phone call, because he was challenging the election. So they’re after me for perfect—by the way, perfect for you. Be very proud of me. Just like the call to Ukraine was a perfect call. The one in Atlanta was a perfect, perfect call and yet Atlanta is even worse than Chicago. Proportionately restoring safety. Market starts with defeating the Democratic stream. It’s right here in Pennsylvania, your state’s radical Democrat candidate for Senate. John Fetterman is the most dangerous Democrat.
He’s the most dangerous Democrat.
He came to join Congress this year and one of the most fringe far-left freak shows ever to seek election for any offense, at any stage and I’ve watched them over the last couple of years. And I said, “You gotta be kidding.”
Actually I saw Conor Lamb, I don’t know, kind of be a decent politician, you know he can’t pay into the sort of middle Democrat area and he was doing commercials that was so good for me, they people thought that he was a Republican. I like Conor Lamb.
But Fetterman got it. He got it in a landslide. And this guy is a disaster. He comes in with a sweat suit on, I’ve never seen him wear a suit. A dirty dirty, dirty sweat suit. It’s really disgusting. You know, I’m a clean freak. I’m a clean freak, Oz, I don’t like those dirty sweat suits that disgusting.
Fetterman may dress like a teenager getting high in his parents basement. But he’s a raging lunatic, hell bent on springing hardened criminals out of jail in the middle of the worst crime wave in Pennsylvania history. He wants everybody out of jail.
And, by the way, he wants to get rid of the police. Fetterman is a defund the police Marxist who’s just pulling the wool over people’s eyes, who literally said that if he had a magic wand and could fix one thing, he would end life sentences without parole for murderers, cop killers, rapists and other monsters. Criminals. That’s what he said. He wants him to get them out of jail.
Get addicts? Yeah, let’s put Trump in jail. Let’s get these murderers, let these murderers out, put Trump in jail. That Trump is no damn good. He has worked his ass off for this country through his position on the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons. Fetterman has released a record number of dangerous criminals, back on the streets, many of which have created horrible just atrocious crimes. He supports setting loose one out of every three inmates in your prisons. And he bragged that his goal is to get as many criminals out onto the street as quickly as possible.
Fetterman supports taxpayer-funded drug dens and the complete decriminalization of illegal drugs including heroin, cocaine, crystal meth, and ultra-lethal fentanyl, and by the way, he takes them himself—which would mean death and despair for every community in Pennsylvania and every community in the United States of America.
Compare that to President Xi of China, a little different, wouldn’t you say? Fetterman openly supports deadly sanctuary cities and he signed a pledge to ban fracking which would demolish almost a million jobs in Pennsylvania. I told them, I told you they were going to do that Pennsylvania, well you did listen to because I won Pennsylvania by a lot.
I can only hold accountable the people that counted the votes. Did you ever hear the statement by, I believe it was Lenin, did anyone ever hear of—many people would say it with less sophistication, Lenin. Lenin, I like the way they say that. Where he said the vote-counter is far more important than the candidate, well that turned out to be true. The vote-counter is far more important than the candidate, said by Lenin.
And while Fetterman wants to raise your taxes, he is a spoiled and entitled socialist loser who leached off his parents’ money, you know he lives on the parents money until he was 49 years old. And on top of it all, he’s too cowardly to even show up and debate. A very nice man. Nice. He’s very nice, and you’ll treat him nicely, right?
Because he knows that his positions are totally indefensible, and in all fairness, you need to be out there and just ripping it for you, otherwise you’re going to lose out to all the other southerners that are going to bring back money to the states, et cetera. And as we’ll do it.
Fetterman is running against a man I’ve known for many years. I told you I had a real problem with him when he said I was a little heavy. I didn’t like that. And of course it was wrong, was he wrong? And who is with our MAGA movement all the way. he’s with us all the way. And you know, some people thought that, “Oh gee, maybe it was a little bit of a controversial thing,” but I know him very well. And he’s a guy that gets it done. He’s a good person, and his wife is a fantastic person, I think I like her even more than I like him, Lisa.
So I’d like to ask Dr. Oz to step forward and say a few words. He’s been an incredibly successful man on television, in medicine. He knows what’s happening, and he’s going to work and fight for Pennsylvania. Thank you.
Dr. Oz: Pennsylvania, we have one question, one important question we have to answer by November 8. Are you ready for it? Is the country headed in the right direction? If your friends say “Yes,” take away their car keys. They should not be driving in that condition, people should stay home. But if the answer is no, we’ve got a big problem. This country has dramatically turned in the wrong direction. I’m the person for change.
I’ll make the change based on our family values here in Pennsylvania, because I believe in the American dream, I am part of the American dream. My whole life has been about hard work, and earning, and supporting kids because that’s what Americans do. I believe we can make safe city streets and communities. I believe we can have a secure border and allow legal immigration but not the fentanyl brought by traffickers bringing human beings and fentanyl from China which took 100,000 lives last year.
And I know people just aren’t hurt by fentanyl. I believe we can have an economy that hurts the American people but most importantly, I believe in each and every one of you and so should you. God bless you.
Donald Trump: We have a great record of endorsement, all of us together. Very close to 90 percent. And I endorsed that guy and I’m telling you, I will always tell you this. I’ll tell you the truth and he’s going to be a phenomenal representative for Pennsylvania. You gotta vote him and you got to vote.
Great guy. And Lisa, thank you very much. Thank you very much for what you have to put up with, Lisa. Thank you very much. You know they spent, just so you know, they spent like $50 million trying to destroy that man. $50 million. Like it was water. And they didn’t come close. This guy is tough and he’s strong and he loves us
This November, you also have to defeat the far left Democrat candidate for governor, Little Josh Shapiro—who is so much like Fetterman, other than he’s about half his height which is fine. It’s fine. I would say it’s absolutely fine as we don’t want to tell height jokes. Not here to tell any jokes today. Not weight jokes, not heighte jokes. I’ve got them all covered.
But he is a disaster for the state. He’s the one that kept saying “Oh, after” after it came out that we have a great man running against him. “Oh, that’s the man I wanted to run against.” No it’s not. Because that’s the man that had a base like I do. He has a base that’s so powerful and so strong. He doesn’t want to run again. As attorney general, he presided over the complete disintegration of law and order and letting things and criminals run wild.
Look at the numbers I just talked to you about in Philadelphia. Well, he’s the guy who knows those numbers are getting worse. There is nothing to stop these animals from continuing, those numbers are gonna get worse, if that’s possible. It’s not even—you would think it’s not possible.
Shapiro supports sanctuary cities, and he sided with Marxist anti-American BLM radicals and Antifa, and he’s a vicious hater of free speech and a hater of your Second Amendment. So he’s gonna let criminals roam your streets, and he’s not gonna let you have a gun to protect yourself. Shapiro is also using his office to shut children’s schools and force masks to be strapped to your children’s faces, doing unimaginable harm.
And like Fetterman, Shapiro is a pro-abortion extremist who supports totally unrestricted abortion on demand. Right through the ninth month. Think of this and you know where I am. You know where I am, the exceptions, I believe in the exceptions. He supports it the right through the ninth month and beyond. You know what beyond means, after the baby is born, after the baby is born. So as I said in my debate with Crooked Hillary Clinton, rip the baby out of the womb at anytime, and if the baby’s already out of the womb, he’s there too. “Just talk to the doctor.”
Now you don’t want that. States will make the decision by the way, the states will make the decision and in Pennsylvania, I have a feeling that decision will be an interesting decision, but it’s up to the states and that’s the way it was always supposed to be. But he wants to let things happen that no civilized person would allow. They don’t allow it in other countries.
No Pennsylvanian should listen to one word on abortion from these two twisted sickos who believe in killing and dismembering babies right up until that that time that time of birth. Shapiro is running against an incredible patriot and a fearless warrior for Pennsylvania workers and Pennsylvania values. Doug Mastriano, who has been with me right from the beginning, I mean right from the beginning. I remember that. They all wanted my endorsement. They all ran.
I know you had the U.S. attorney, nice guy. He was a nice guy, but he didn’t do anything in terms of the election fraud. “No, there was no problem in Pennsylvania, there was no problem.” There was massive problems. And then he wants to run, he said, “Sir, Bill Barr would not let me go after anybody. He wouldn’t let me touch anybody.” What a shame what an opportunity, but he wanted to run. Others wanted to run.
I said the one guy that supported election integrity and supported me right from the beginning. Is Doug Mastriano. One day he came to the White House with a whole group of people. He brought them and he was working like hell, it was really an uphill battle because you had the Democrats. They didn’t want to hear anything. And then you had some bad RINOs that just—somebody, someday, somebody’s going to explain the RINOs. Why are they doing it?
But Doug is a former Army colonel who honorably served our country in uniform for 30 years before going on to fight for you. In the State Senate, he became the most respected person in the Senate and definitely the hardest fighter. He was the relentless person out there fighting against lockdowns and COVID mandates. He didn’t want to destroy real Americans, he got it long before the so-called doctors who weren’t very good, and a true champion for election integrity and tough as hell on a thing called illegal immigration.
We want people to come into our country legally. As your governor, he will back down from nobody, he’ll back down those violent criminals and crack down on violent crime and COVID mandates, protect Pennsylvania oil and gas workers, which right now—enjoy your job for another couple of months, because you’re not gonna have it longer.
And defend your jobs, your rights and your freedoms. Doug is joined by an incredible person who I also got to know because we were in a real fight with a lot of really sick, bad people. Rebby, thank you very much. Thank you, stand up. And she was a big part. She’s a great partner to a man that will be one of the greatest governors in this country. Doug, please come up. Please come up.
Doug Mastriano: Oh, yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. Philadelphia loves you and America needs you. Thank you for your leadership.
Thank you for paving the way for people like me and everyone you see out here to fight for freedom. Thank you for taking the shots. And standing boldly and leading by example, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania is the Keystone State. On 8 November, we’re taking our state back by storm. That’s right. We’re gonna do it. We’re gonna do it. We’re gonna be the state where people want to come to raise their families, to succeed in business on day one. We’re out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. We’re gonna drill and dig like no tomorrow. That’s right. That’s right. We’re gonna do it. Oh, yeah.
On day one, we’re no longer a sanctuary state. So Joe Biden can have these illegals, we’ll drop them off at his beach house where he spends all his time anyway. You can have them on day one. We’re gonna have the backs of law enforcement on day one, there’s no more mask requirement or COVID jab requirement. That’s right.
We’re gonna walk like free people like never before, Pennsylvania. This is where the light of liberty was lit in 1776, a new birth of freedom in 1863. And something very near and dear to both of our hearts: We’re going to fight like hell for voting integrity, and we’re going to start with voter ID. That’s right. That’s right.
The left, my opponent, is too dangerous, too extreme and too radical. When he can’t even define what a woman is, then the guy is nuts. Pennsylvania is less safe with his six year record of failure as attorney general that all ends on 8 November. Pennsylvania, the key to our nation starts with us. And let’s not forget that on September 11, 2001, and you are a champion on 9/11/2001, Mr. President, and he was. We saw him at the World Trade Center. Meanwhile, Flight 93 over Somerset County, the terrorists had it. Todd Beamer and other people on that flight took action. What did they say?
Pennsylvania, let’s roll!
Donald Trump: You know, Doug said a lot in a few short sentences. One of the things he mentioned was voter ID. The Democrats don’t want voter ID. Actually it’s interesting. The leadership, the people want it, 91 percent Democrats, but the leaders don’t want voter ID, OK. I think the only reason you don’t want voter ID, there’s only one reason because you want it cheap, right. That’s the only reason.
When you had the Democrat National Convention, the last one, they had signs, and the biggest signs, they were like billboards, pictures, fingerprints, everything. You couldn’t get in. But the greatest thing happened over the last few days, Starbucks, this guy Schultz. The one with the extremely thin legs. I think maybe Dr. Oz would have said he’s either really good or very, very, very thin. But he was doing a debate. He was sitting down, I thought his legs—I didn’t think he’d be able to stand up. But Schultz, he’s the head of it.
But he just announced unions are trying to take over stuff. But he will not under any circumstance allow mail-in voting because it’s evil and corrupt. And the process can be corrupted. And yet when he was running for president for about three days before he realized he couldn’t do it, took him about two days. But when he was running for president, he was talking about mail-in ballots. Now that he’s got his company that he’s got a nice piece of, he wants nothing to do with voting by mail-in ballots for unions, because he says you can’t get their vote, and it’s easily corruptible.
When are people going to get smart, and get rid of this mail-in voting in Pennsylvania, killing our country. You’ll do it. We’re also joined tonight by the next congressman from Pennsylvania’s 8th congressional district. Jim Bognet. Jim, thank you very much. Good luck. I hear you doing well, these two guys are gonna help you a lot. Thank you, Jim. Great job.
So Jim’s running against radical Democrat socialist Matt Cartwright. That’s another beauty. Who said he’s all on board for the Green New Deal. Greatest waste of money in history. The Green New Deal, why don’t you just throw the money right out the window. And he absolutely supports defunding the police and votes with Biden 100 percent of the time, so you know he can’t be any good. Everybody get out and vote for Jim. Okay.
Also with us, our Pennsylvania treasurer, a very good person, good woman, Stacy Garrity. Hello, Stacy. Thank you, Stacy. Great job you’re doing. Friend of mine—a warrior. Never laid down, always been their representative. Dan Meuser. Dan, thank you. Great job. Great job. Thank you. And also Fred Keller. Another warrior. Fred stand up, what a good guy. Thank you for all your help. He comes to our defense. He gets out there the two of them.
Now a woman is with us. She’s very silent. Very shy. doesn’t believe in using guns to protect yourself. Says anybody can come into my house anytime you’d like. No, no. She did a little ad I saw, her first time, and her ad was something to the effect. “Sure. Anybody can come into my house. He can be big,” and she took this gun. I never saw anybody used this gun. Boom, put it back and she said, “But he might not get out of my house alive.” And I said “I think I like her,” Marjorie Taylor Greene.
A man I’m very proud of. He’s got a tough race. But I’m very proud of this. You have a RINO governor in Maryland. His name is Larry Hogan. I think he wants to run for president. I think he wants to run for president, they said you got to look in the mirror first—it’s not gonna work. Not gonna work. But he’s a real RINO and he doesn’t want this man because this is all for our country.
His name is Dan Cox. And he beat he beat Larry Hogan’s candidate by like 20 points with my endorsement. With my endorsement, and he’s doing fantastically Dan. Congratulations. And Larry Hogan—and this is my fault, I’m sorry, Dan—but Larry Hogan is not going to be supporting you only because I am supporting you. So I don’t know what that means. But I can tell you that Maryland has a great, great man running and I hope you’re going to do well and we’ll be out there helping you.
Okay, thank you. I have a feeling you’ll do very well. A friend of mine who’s a great businessman and a great person, Mr. Woody Johnson and his wife, Suzanne Johnson. Where’s Woody? Stand up, Woody! He’s shy. They own a very small company named Johnson. Johnson, does anybody like Johnson? I want to own a piece of that company, too. Great job. We love your boss. And Cynthia Hughes and Gina Pernod with the Patriot Freedom Project. What a job they do. Where are you? Where are you, stand up for the job. And we all appreciate it. We all appreciate it.
With the help of everybody here today we are going to fight for Pennsylvania. We’re going to win for Pennsylvania this November. One of the first things we will do is stand up for parents’ rights. It’s time to finally and completely break the radical local education cartel. Can you believe like 10 years ago, let’s put yourself back, that somebody would stand up—I can’t believe I’m calling myself a politician. But I guess I am. I don’t know. I can’t stand politicians.
But can you believe that 10 years ago—like put yourself in that position—a politician would be standing up saying we’re going to defend parental rights? I mean, that’s about as basic as it gets, but that’s what we have to do because these people are crazy. Our children are captive to unhinged Marxist educators who are pushing inappropriate sexual, racial and political material on our children from the youngest possible age.
At long last, every parent in America must be empowered to opt out of the indoctrination and send their child to the public, private, charter, religious or home school of their choice. In addition, we will get critical race theory the hell out of our schools, out of our military and out of every part of our federal, state and local government, just like I did two years ago, it was out. We had it out, but they put it right back in.
We will also keep men out of women’s sports. You know those stories that I tell? I love to tell those stories, the woman swimmers, I tell it again, should I, you want me to? Mr. Wall, stand up Wall, please. This is Mr. Irving Q. Wall, you know, it’s so ridiculous. And you know, it’s not politically correct, and a lot of people are afraid to talk about it, but I’m not—men in women sports.
So you have this swimmer, who’s really—I met her the other day, very high quality swimmer and she’s gonna break the record. She’s worked like hell. She’s worked all her life. The big meet is on and she looks to the left and she sees all of those great athletes that she’s been fighting for years. She looks to the right, and she sees this massive human being, he’s looking up, what is he, like 6’6″ or something? He’s got a wingspan bigger than Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt was small by comparison and she looked over, I’ve never seen her before. Anyway, she wanted to break that record she fought so hard to do. And the race started and as you know, she was severely injured. She was injured by windburn because he went by her so fast.
The wind burned the hell out of her. And she didn’t quite make it that day for the record. But he did. He broke the record by 38 seconds. You know, usually you break it by—she wants to break it by 1/8 of a second. But he was far better than her. He broke it by 38 seconds. That’s one that no woman’s ever gonna catch.
And then the better one is the weightlifter. You had a woman she’s gonna lift the 213 pounds and that’s a lot of weight. Do you think I could lift, Oz, you think I could lift 213 pounds and she got up and she was gonna break it. They put it half an ounce and a half an ounce and have these big barbells and dumbbells and she’s up there and she pulls it up and she’s gonna do it—couldn’t do it too. So she was ashamed but she couldn’t do it.
And then this person comes in you know, they actually call it—this is the correct term. A person in a man’s body. That’s what they call it. This is supposed to be politically correct. I hope it is. Otherwise they’ll be very rude to me. The fake news will be very rude.
This guy walks up, they asked him before, did you lift? “No, not too much.” And he gets up—ding—that was the end of that record. It’s ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. And no teacher should ever be allowed to teach transgender to our children without parental consent.
Another one of our highest priorities under a Republican Congress will be to stop left wing censorship and to restore free speech in America. We don’t have free speech. Go out and sign up, by the way, for Truth Social. Anybody on Truth Social? It’s hot. And it’s much better than Twitter. You see what’s going on with Twitter. Twitter’s not doing do well. Frankly, if we didn’t have Truth we wouldn’t be able to get the word out like they do. We get the word out fast.
The Radical Left Democrat Party is not, in my opinion, a 50 percent party within our country. They’re against God, guns, oil, law enforcement, voter ID, tax cuts, regulation cuts, the Constitution and they’re against our founding fathers. But other than that, actually, they’re quite good. The way they win is to cheat in elections. I really believe that. How can you be against all of those things and for some of the things that therefore and be considered a 50/50 party? I don’t believe it.
They cheat like hell on elections all over the country, and they’re really good at it. Everywhere the Republican Party has the chance, we must pass critical election integrity reforms, including Universal voter ID citizenship confirmation. No more fake drop boxes by Zuckerberg and these people, no private money pouring into local election offices. And ultimately, we need same day voting with only paper ballots. Same day voting. Same day paper.
France just had an election. Big country—35 million people. They hd same day voting, all paper ballots. The election ended at 11 o’clock. They had the vote, that was it. Nobody walked away. Right here in Pennsylvania, Democrats are still trying hard to rig your elections.
Act 77 clearly violates your state Constitution encouraging widespread abuse of mail-in ballots, and your radical left state Supreme Court just violated the Constitution a second time by overturning a decision by an unbiased lower court. Republicans in the state legislature need to get to work immediately to kill Act 77 by a state constitutional amendment, they have to do it immediately.
We are just two months away from the most important midterm election in American history. And we need a landslide so big that the radical left just cannot rig it. You know the more we win by, it gets harder, harder, harder, harder. They can cheat a lot but once you get to a certain level, it gets very hard. This is the year we’re going to take back the House. We’re going to take back the Senate, we’re going to take back America. We’ll take back America.
And in 2024, most importantly, we are going to take back our magnificent White House. Together we will fight for more jobs for Pennsylvania families, fair trade for Pennsylvania workers and more Pennsylvania factories forging more products stamped with those beautiful, beautiful words, “Made in the USA,” right? Made in the USA.
We will shut down Biden’s border disaster, reinstitute our strong Remain in Mexico policy. How good was that, Remain in Mexico? You think it was easy for me to get Remain in Mexico from Mexico, but I got it. I said “You don’t give it to me, you’re gonna pay big tariffs on your cars.” “Oh, we’d love to give it to you.” Strengthen the patriots of ICE and Border Patrol. They’re patriots and they’re great. We will again end catch and release. We will end chain migration, we will end the visa lottery and we will clamp down on illegal immigration. Just like we did less than two years ago when we had the most secure border in our country’s history.
We will stop the crime wave in Democrat-run cities, we will give our police the power they need and the respect they deserve. And we will not take legal protection away from our police. These maniacs want the police officers go out and hire lawyers so they can defend themselves. We won’t do that. We will restore law and order in America. And we will override governors that don’t look for law and order.
We will hold China accountable for unleashing the virus upon the world. We will protect innocent life. We will defend our Constitution. We will defend the Second Amendment and we will proudly uphold the Judeo-Christian values and principles of our nations. We will restore education to our schools and we will teach our children to love their country, honor our history and to always respect our great American flag.
In conclusion, our MAGA movement, Make America Great Again, is by far the greatest political movement in the history of our country. Together we are standing up against some of the most menacing forces, entrenched interests and vicious opponents our people have ever seen. Despite great outside dangers, our greatest threat remains the sick, sinister and evil people from within our own country. But no matter how big or powerful the corrupt radical left Democrats are—and they are corrupt and they are powerful. We have to make them much less powerful. We will never allow anyone to forget that this nation does not belong to them. This nation belongs to you. This is your home. This is your heritage.
And our American liberty is your God-given right. From Allentown to Johnstown from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh, and from Philadelphia to Scranton, PA. We stand on the shoulders of American legends who poured out their blood, sweat and tears for our rights and for our freedom. They were so great.
Pennsylvania is where our founding fathers declared independence. It’s where the army weathered its brutal winter at Valley Forge, where General George Washington led his men on a daring mission across the Delaware and where our union was saved by immortal heroes at Gettysburg. And this is the state where generations of tough strong Pennsylvania miners, factory workers and steel workers forged the greatest nation in the history of the world.
But now we are a nation in decline. We are a nation that is failing. We are a nation that has the highest inflation in over 50 years and where the stock market just finished the worst first half of the year since 1872. Likewise, we are a nation that has the highest energy costs in its history. We are no longer energy independent or energy-dominant as we just were two short years ago. We are a nation that is begging Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and many others for oil. “Please, please, please help us,” Joe Biden says, but we have liquid gold right under our feet than any other country in the world.
We are a nation that is consumed by the radical left’s Green New Deal, yet everyone knows that the Green New Deal will lead to our destruction. We are a nation that is surrendering all over, but in particular to Afghanistan, leaving behind dead soldiers, American citizens and 85 years’ worth of the finest military equipment anywhere in the world. We are a nation that allowed Russia to devastate a country, Ukraine, killing hundreds of thousands of people and it will only get worse.
It would never have happened with me as commander-in-chief. And for four long years, it didn’t happen. Never happen. And China with Taiwan is next. We are a nation that has weaponized its law enforcement against the opposing political party like never before. We’ve got a Federal Bureau of Investigation that won’t allow bad election-changing facts to be presented to the public and a Department of Justice that refuses to investigate egregious acts of voting irregularities and fraud.
And we have a president who is cognitively impaired and in no condition to lead our country and everybody knows it. We are a nation that no longer has a free and fair press. Fake news is all you get and they are truly the enemy of the people. We are a nation where free speech is no longer allowed. Where crime is rampant like never before, where the economy has been collapsing, where more people died of COVID in 2021 than did in 2020.
We are a nation that is allowing Iran to build a massive nuclear weapon, which they are incredibly being allowed to do right now in China to use trillions and trillions of dollars that is taken from us to build a military, to rival our own. And just two years ago we had Iran, China, Russia and North Korea in check. They weren’t going to do a thing against us. And everybody knows it.
And perhaps most importantly, we are a nation that is no longer respected or listened to around the world. We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke. We are a nation that is hostile to liberty, freedom and faith. We are a nation whose economy is floundering, whose stores are not stocked. Whose deliveries are not coming and whose educational system is ranked at the bottom of every single list.
But we are not going to let this continue. Two years ago, we had the greatest election that we’ve ever had. But it was taken away from us. We weren’t allowed to use the power of the people to make America great again. Two years ago, we also had greatness like no one had ever seen. And soon we have that greatness again.
It was hard-working patriots like you who built this country. And it is hard-working patriots like you who are going to save our country. We will stand up to the radical left lunatics, RINOs and we will fight for America like no one has ever fought before.
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Joe Biden’s Blundering, Insincere Philadelphia Speech
President Joe Biden delivers remarks in front of Independence Hall at Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia, Pa., September 1, 2022. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)
Joe Biden’s speech last night at Independence Hall in Philadelphia was a disaster — several bad ideas terribly executed at once. It was a speech that couldn’t decide what it wanted to be, delivered by a man who didn’t believe it. And it will come back to bite him in court and on the campaign trail. Let us count the ways.
Problem #1: Giving the speech at all. Biden’s greatest political asset is when Americans are focused on Donald Trump and not on the bumbling, rambling fossil in the White House and his overreaching and under-delivering presidency. A big, set-piece Biden speech that was supposed to highlight Trump instead consumed media attention that would be, for the Democrats’ interests, better spent on more news cycles about Mar-a-Lago and Trump talking about holding a do-over election.
Problem #2: The title. Biden’s speech was entitled “The Continued Battle for the Soul of the Nation.” If Biden is trying to present himself as a unifying, back-to-normalcy figure who can calm the waters — a guy who, in the words of the speech itself, wants to “see politics not as total war but mediation of our differences” — talking about a “continued battle” won’t help. If he wants to reassure us that the president is sticking to his day job, talking about how he wants to shape “the soul of the nation” won’t help. And really, talking about a national crisis of soul is reminiscent of nothing so much as Jimmy Carter’s “Crisis of Confidence” speech, which is remembered today simply as the “malaise” speech. The scorched-earth partisanship of the speech is a replay of his disastrous Georgia voting-rights speech.
Problem #3: The staging. Independence Hall was lit up as if somebody directing one of the later Star Wars sequels said, “We want the new Empire to look just a little more Nazi.” The building was dark, but with blood-red eagle wings and Marines flanking an angry, fist-shaking Biden. The photos from this speech are certain to be used by a lot of campaigns this fall — none of them Democrats. Even aside from the politics, if Biden wanted to reassure ordinary Americans that he isn’t declaring some sort of war on his political enemies — taking a page from the Democratic Party adviser who declaredthat “the Republican Party is basically a domestic terrorist cell at this point and they should be treated as such” — he accomplished precisely the opposite. The best thing you could say about the staging is that it reminds us that this White House is run by incompetent amateurs who couldn’t get jobs on the Obama team.
Problem #4: Indecision. Biden still can’t decide what kind of president he wants to be, so he couldn’t decide what kind of speech he wanted to give. Did he want to use the moral authority of the presidency to speak in nonpartisan terms about a threat to the country? Did he want to give an arch-partisan speech denouncing the other party’s leadership? Did he want to lay out a contrast between the two parties on social issues? Did he want to offer a laundry list of his accomplishments and his agenda? Yes, he wanted to do all those things, so he tried to cram them all into a 3,000-word speech that stepped on its own messages.
Problem #5: Insincerity. Time and again, Biden accused “MAGA Republicans” of the things he refuses to denounce when they come from his own side, his own White House, or his own mouth and pen. He told us that, “There is no place for political violence in America. Period. None. Ever.” He denounced “rioting in the streets” and thundered, “We can’t allow violence to be normalized in this country. It’s wrong. We each have to reject political violence with — with all the moral clarity and conviction this nation can muster.” But in 2020, Biden was conspicuous in not naming any of the violent actors and rioters on his own side as they torched their way through American cities. That pattern continued last night: “We saw law enforcement brutally attacked on January the 6th. We’ve seen election officials, poll workers — many of them volunteers of both parties — subjected to intimidation and death threats. And — can you believe it? — FBI agents just doing their job as directed, facing threats to their own lives from their own fellow citizens.” Notice what’s missing from that list? Firebombings of pro-life crisis-pregnancy centers. An assassination attempt on Justice Brett Kavanaugh. If Biden really wanted “all the moral clarity this nation can muster” against political violence, his Justice Department wouldn’t be cutting sweetheart deals with political protestors who threw Molotov cocktails into a police car during a riot.
Examples proliferate. Biden wrapped himself in the mantle of the “rule of law,” which his administration has so flagrantly disregarded with illegal orders on the CDC eviction moratorium, the OSHA vaccine mandate, and now student-loan debt. He talked about the Constitution, yet his list of rights he intends to protect — “right to choose,” “right to privacy,” “right to contraception,” “right to marry who you love” — consisted entirely of things the Constitution never mentions; he couldn’t spare a word for free speech, free exercise of religion, the right to bear arms, or due process of law, all of them punching bags for his administration. He complained that, “Democracy cannot survive when one side believes there are only two outcomes to an election: either they win or they were cheated,” that, “You can’t love your country only when you win, and that, “I will not stand by and watch — I will not — the will of the American people be overturned by wild conspiracy theories and baseless, evidence-free claims of fraud.” Again, he attributed this only to his political opponents, ignoring all mannerof offenses against this norm by his own side, ranging from Biden himself branding the 2022 elections as illegitimate unless Congress passed a bunch of bills that won’t pass, to Chuck Schumer calling American elections a “rigged game,” to election-deniers Terry McAuliffe (whom Biden eagerly supported in 2021) and Stacey Abrams (whom Biden is eagerly supporting in 2022).
Indeed, if Biden really believed that “MAGA Republicans” were an existential threat to the country above politics, he would speak out against his own party spending tens of millions of dollars to intervene in more than a half-dozen Republican primaries across the country to boost such candidates solely for the purpose of yielding less-electable Republican nominees. Biden acted as if that isn’t happening.
Problem #6: Admission against interest. Biden’s fig leaf of a legal justification for his monarchical fiat forgiving student-loan debt is that we are still in a Covid emergency. But here is what he said last night: “I believed we could lift America from the depths of Covid, so we passed the largest economic-recovery package since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. And today, America’s economy is faster, stronger than any other advanced nation in the world . . . today, Covid no longer controls our lives. More Americans are working than ever. Businesses are growing. Our schools are open.” Does that sound like a man who believes we remain in emergency conditions?
Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., seen delivering opening remarks on June 13 at the U.S. Capitol during a Jan. 6 hearing, deliberately edited former President Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” exhortation to omit the fact that he urged supporters to be peaceful. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
To listen to House Democrats’—and Reps. Liz Cheney’s and Adam Kinzinger’s, but I repeat myself—shrieks of hysteria from the opening nights of the Jan. 6 House select committee dais is to hearken back to the Soviet-era show trials of yesteryear.
Vladimir Lenin, as the veteran conservative commentator Roger Kimball reminds us, referred to them as “model trials,” wherein the “aim isn’t to discover the truth—which was supposedly already known—but to stage a propagandist exhibition.”
For Democrats, the aim of the Jan. 6 select committee’s “propagandist exhibition” is twofold: First, to attempt (in vain) to distract a besieged citizenry from the myriad problems now tearing asunder the country, under their leadership, in this midterm election year; and second, to lay the foundation for a Justice Department indictment against the 45th president that could hamstring his efforts to seek a second term come 2024.
To anyone paying even a modicum of attention—and I’d recommend no more than that—to the committee’s theatrics, it is obvious that the game is rigged.
Consider as but one data point how Cheney, who will be looking for a new job come January, deliberately edited former President Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” exhortation from that fateful rally so as to omit the fact that he urged his supporters to make their way to the Capitol “peacefully and patriotically.”
Or how about the fact that the committee has thus far made no effort to subpoena the families of the roughly 800 people who have been arrested—and sometimes placed in solitary confinement, per columnist Julie Kelly’s exceptional reporting—for wandering in and traipsing around the Capitol, often shepherded right in by Capitol Police? Curious, that.
A legitimate committee interested in investigation and arriving at the truth would surely want to call some of those families as witnesses. Perhaps that hypothetical legitimate committee would also be interested in hearing from the family of Ashli Babbitt, the Air Force veteran fatally shot on that day by a subsequently exonerated Capitol Police officer. Alas.
Instead, to take Democrats at their word—an always-dubious endeavor—is to believe that Jan. 6, 2021, represented the closest thing to an “insurrection” since the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter in April 1861.
To be sure, some—a very small minority—of the protesters who made their way into the Capitol on that day did so with malicious intent. And that very small minority should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But as a whole, Jan. 6, 2021, looks something like a limper version of the Whiskey Rebellion of the 1790s, which amounts to no more than an asterisk in the high school history textbooks.
But the Democrats have found their “insurrection”—and they want to make the dreaded Orange Man, conductor of this benighted orchestra, pay for what he has wrought. Or so they tell us.
The Democrats’ obsession with the word “insurrection” raises an obvious additional question, though: How might we describe the recent attempt—thankfully aborted at the last moment—by a deranged California man to assassinate Trump-nominated Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, following last month’s seminal leak of the draft majority opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization abortion case?
Black’s Law Dictionary defines an “insurrection” as “a rebellion, or rising of citizens or subjects in resistance to their government.”
Surely, any sober assessment of the trajectory of events pertaining to the court’s possible overturning of Roe v. Wade—from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer nakedly threatening Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch from the court’s steps to the unprecedented Dobbs leak to the now month-and-a-half of grueling (and illegal) “protests” outside the conservative justices’ homes to the closest thing to a high-profile politically motivated assassination in America since Robert F. Kennedy in 1968—would lead one to conclude that this intimidation campaign against the court, culminating in a literal assassination plot, amounts to a soft “insurrection.”
And it is definitely more of an “insurrection”—more of a straightforward attempt to rebel and implement a coup against our constitutional edifices—than what happened on Jan. 6, 2021.
Nonetheless, after the Senate last month unanimously passed a bill to increase security for the Supreme Court justices in the aftermath of the Dobbs leak, it languished on Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s desk.
That bill finally passed the House this week—against the repulsive dissenting votes of 27 House Democrats. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez even openly bragged about her efforts to block the bill’s passage. If she had any sense of shame, she’d hide her head in a bag.
On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell issued a statement that concluded with this admonition: “The same Democrats who want to make a national spectacle out of their supposed opposition to political violence will not even call out violence and intimidation from their own side. Let alone fulfill their oaths and put a stop to it.”
No reasonable observer of our fractious politics can disagree with that bleak assessment. Because for Democrats, what constitutes an actual “insurrection” is merely in the eye of the beholder.
COPYRIGHT 2022 CREATORS.COM
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The left praises democracy when elected but claims the right will destroy democracy when it loses. Pictured: Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton discusses the 2016 election during her 2017 book tour. (Photo: Bastiaan Slabbers, NurPhoto/Getty Images)
Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.
As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when it expects to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when it fears losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.
A cynic might suggest that those on the left praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose. Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.
After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old 50-state union?
Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?
The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former President Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?
Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?
The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.
Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?
New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration new potentially lifesaving COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”
The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?
In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity—if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.
Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.
The Biden administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border—in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.
The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.
Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.
At various times in our nation’s history—1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63—America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.
In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.
Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.” Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command. Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander in chief. Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.
Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.
All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.
The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.
We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish, one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property—all under the banner of revolutionary justice.
Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.
(C)2022 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.
Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.
The Honorable Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Washington D.C.
Dear Representative Adam Kinzinger,
I noticed that you are a pro-life representative that has a long record of standing up for unborn babies! It was in the 1970’s when I was first introduced to the works of Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop and I wanted to commend their writings and films to you.
Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Adam Kinzinger (IL-16) joined his House Republican colleagues in a press conference urging Democratic leadership to allow a vote on the Born Alive protections. The proposal would protect babies who survive abortion and provide them with the same medical care that any other premature baby would receive. Yesterday, the Democrats blocked the proposed legislation—for the 17th time—from coming before the House for a vote.
Joining the Congressman and House Republican leaders at the press conference this morning was Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse and pro-life advocate who has witnessed the devastating realities of these pro-abortion laws. The Illinois legislature is currently debating two abortion bills, similar to the extreme pro-abortion agendas in New York and Virginia.
It seems you have a grudge against President Trump while our freedoms under President Biden are being taken away. I recommend to you the article below:
Roger Kimball Editor and Publisher, The New Criterion
Mr. Kimball concludes his article with these words:
That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.
Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”
There were a few Republicans Thursday who surprised observers when they voted in support of holding former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress and referring him to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.
Prior to the vote, four Republicans were considered a lock to approve the criminal referral, according to Capitol Hill sources: Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Fred Upton of Michigan and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
Cheney and Kinzinger are on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and have for months stood alone as the only two House Republicans willing to speak out against former President Donald Trump’s continued lies about the 2020 election. They were the only two House Republicans to vote for the formation of the select committee on June 30.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi formed the select committee after Republicans rejected a bipartisan commission that would have been evenly split between five Democrats and five Republicans. Only 35 Republicans voted for that measure when itpassed the House of Representatives, and it was defeated by a GOP filibuster in the Senate.
From left: Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, a Democrat, and Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois arrive for the House Select Committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
More
Upton has served in the House for more than three decades, since 1987, and will face a primary challenge next year because of his willingness to stand up to Trump.
Gonzalez is retiring from Congress next year, after only four years in the House. “While my desire to build a fuller family life is at the heart of my decision, it is also true that the current state of our politics, especially many of the toxic dynamics inside our own party, is a significant factor in my decision,” Gonzalez said in September when heannounced he would not seek another term.
The remaining five Republicans included three who voted for impeachment — Peter Meijer of Michigan, John Katko of New York and Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington — and two House Republicans who did not vote to impeach Trump: Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.
Trump seems never to have discerned what a viper’s nest our politics has become for anyone who is not a paid-up member of The Club.
Maybe Trump understands this now. I have no insight into that question. I am pretty confident, though, that the 74 plus million people who voted for him understand it deeply. It’s another reason that The Club should be wary of celebrating its victory too expansively.
Friedrich Hayek took one of the two epigraphs for his book, The Road to Serfdom, from the philosopher David Hume. “It is seldom,” Hume wrote, “that liberty of any kind is lost all at once.” Much as I admire Hume, I wonder whether he got this quite right. Sometimes, I would argue, liberty is erased almost instantaneously.
I’d be willing to wager that Joseph Hackett, confronted with Hume’s observation, would express similar doubts. I would be happy to ask Mr. Hackett myself, but he is inaccessible. If the ironically titled “Department of Justice” has its way, he will be inaccessible for a long, long time—perhaps as long as 20 years.
Joseph Hackett, you see, is a 51-year-old Trump supporter and member of an organization called the Oath Keepers, a group whose members have pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.” The FBI does not like the Oath Keepers—agents arrested its leader in January and have picked up many other members in the months since. Hackett traveled to Washington from his home in Florida to join the January 6 rally. According to court documents, he entered the Capitol at 2:45 that afternoon and left some nine minutes later, at 2:54. The next day, he went home. On May 28, he was apprehended by the FBI and indicted on a long list of charges, including conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, and illegally entering a restricted building.
As far as I have been able to determine, no evidence of Hackett destroying property has come to light. According to his wife, it is not even clear that he entered the Capitol. But he certainly was in the environs. He was a member of the Oath Keepers. He was a supporter of Donald Trump. Therefore, he must be neutralized.
Joseph Hackett is only one of hundreds of citizens who have beenbranded as “domestic terrorists” trying to “overthrow the government” and who are now languishing, in appalling conditions, jailed as political prisoners of an angry state apparat.
Let me recommend that you read this letter below from Senator Ron Johnson and his colleagues:
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), along with senators Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), sent a letter on Monday to Attorney General Merrick Garland requesting information on the unequal application of justice between the individuals who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, and those involved in the unrest during the spring and summer of 2020. The senators sent 18 questions to the attorney general on what steps the DOJ has taken to prosecute individuals who committed crimes during both events, and requested a response by June 21.
“Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances,” the senators wrote. “This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning.”
The full text of the letter can be found here and below.
June 7, 2021
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is currently dedicating enormous resources and manpower to investigating and prosecuting the criminals who breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. We fully support and appreciate the efforts by the DOJ and its federal, state and local law enforcement partners to hold those responsible fully accountable.
We join all Americans in the expectation that the DOJ’s response to the events of January 6 will result in rightful criminal prosecutions and accountability. As you are aware, the mission of the DOJ is, among other things, to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Today, we write to request information about our concerns regarding potential unequal justice administered in response to other recent instances of mass unrest, destruction, and loss of life throughout the United States.
During the spring and summer of 2020, individuals used peaceful protests across the country to engage in rioting and other crimes that resulted in loss of life, injuries to law enforcement officers, and significant property damage.[1] A federal court house in Portland, Oregon, has been effectively under siege for months.[2] Property destruction stemming from the 2020 social justice protests throughout the country will reportedly result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion in paid insurance claims.[3]
In June 2020, the DOJ reportedly compiled the following information regarding last year’s unrest:
“One federal officer [was] killed, 147 federal officers [were] injured and 600 local officers [were] injured around the country during the protests, frequently from projectiles.”[4]
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), “since the start of the unrest there has been 81 Federal Firearms License burglaries of an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms; 876 reported arsons; 76 explosive incidents; and 46 ATF arrests[.]”[5]
Despite these numerous examples of violence occurring during these protests, it appears that individuals charged with committing crimes at these events may benefit from infrequent prosecutions and minimal, if any, penalties. According to a recent article, “prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.”[6]
DOJ’s apparent unwillingness to punish these individuals who allegedly committed crimes during the spring and summer 2020 protests stands in stark contrast to the harsher treatment of the individuals charged in connection with the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. To date, DOJ has charged 510 individuals stemming from Capitol breach.[7] DOJ maintains and updates a webpage that lists the defendants charged with crimes committed at the Capitol. This database includes information such as the defendant’s name, charge(s), case number, case documents, location of arrest, case status, and informs readers when the entry was last updated.[8] No such database exists for alleged perpetrators of crimes associated with the spring and summer 2020 protests. It is unclear whether any defendants charged with crimes in connection with the Capitol breach have received deferred resolution agreements.
Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. This constitutional right should be cherished and protected. Violence, property damage, and vandalism of any kind should not be tolerated and individuals that break the law should be prosecuted. However, the potential unequal administration of justice with respect to certain protestors is particularly concerning. In order to assist Congress in conducting its oversight work, we respectfully request answers to the following questions by June 21, 2021:
Spring and Summer 2020 Unrest:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the unrest in the spring and summer of 2020? If so, how many times and for which locations/riots?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020 were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals were incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals were released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?[9]
How many DOJ prosecutors were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with protests in the spring and summer of 2020?
January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol Breach:
Did federal law enforcement utilize geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones to track protestors associated with the January 6, 2021 protests and Capitol breach? If so, how many times and how many additional arrests resulted from law enforcement utilizing geolocation information?
How many individuals who may have committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach were arrested by law enforcement using pre-dawn raids and SWAT teams?
How many individuals are incarcerated for allegedly committing crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many of these individuals are or were placed in solitary confinement? What was the average amount of consecutive days such individuals were in solitary confinement?
How many of these individuals have been released on bail?
How many of these individuals have been released on their own recognizance or without being required to post bond?
How many of these individuals were offered deferred resolution agreements?
How many DOJ prosecutors have been assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
How many FBI personnel were assigned to work on cases involving defendants who allegedly committed crimes associated with the Capitol breach?
I want to recommend to you a video on YOU TUBE that runs 28 minutes and 39 seconds by Francis Schaeffer entitled because it discusses the founding of our nation and what the FOUNDERS believed:
Edith Schaeffer with her husband, Francis Schaeffer, in 1970 in Switzerland, where they founded L’Abri, a Christian commune.
________________
______________________
March 23, 2021
President Biden c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view. Although we are both Christians and have the Bible as the basis for our moral views, I did want you to take a close look at the views of the pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff too. Hentoff became convinced of the pro-life view because of secular evidence that shows that the unborn child is human. I would ask you to consider his evidence and then of course reverse your views on abortion.
___________________
The pro-life atheist Nat Hentoff wrote a fine article below I wanted to share with you.
Nat Hentoff is an atheist, but he became a pro-life activist because of the scientific evidence that shows that the unborn child is a distinct and separate human being and even has a separate DNA. His perspective is a very intriguing one that I thought you would be interested in. I have shared before many cases (Bernard Nathanson, Donald Trump, Paul Greenberg, Kathy Ireland) when other high profile pro-choice leaders have changed their views and this is just another case like those. I have contacted the White House over and over concerning this issue and have even received responses. I am hopeful that people will stop and look even in a secular way (if they are not believers) at this abortion debate and see that the unborn child is deserving of our protection.That is why the writings of Nat Hentoff of the Cato Institute are so crucial.
I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have. Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.
Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION
_____________________________________
Dr. Francis schaeffer – from Part 5 of Whatever happened to human race?) Whatever Happened To The Human Race? | Episode 5 | Truth and History
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – A Christian Manifesto – Dr. Francis Schaeffer Lecture
Francis Schaeffer – A 700 Club Special! ~ Francis Schaeffer 1982
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – 1984 SOUNDWORD LABRI CONFERENCE VIDEO – Q&A With Francis & Edith Schaeffer
http://www.NewsandOpinion.com | A longtime friend of mine is married to a doctor who also performs abortions. At the dinner table one recent evening, their 9-year-old son — having heard a word whose meaning he didn’t know — asked, “What is an abortion?” His mother, choosing her words carefully, described the procedure in simple terms.
“But,” said her son, “that means killing the baby.” The mother then explained that there are certain months during which an abortion cannot be performed, with very few exceptions. The 9-year-old shook his head. “But,” he said, “it doesn’t matter what month. It still means killing the babies.”
Hearing the story, I wished it could be repeated to the justices of the Supreme Court, in the hope that at least five of them might act on this 9-year-old’s clarity of thought and vision.
The boy’s spontaneous insistence on the primacy of life also reminded me of a powerful pro-life speaker and writer who, many years ago, helped me become a pro-lifer. He was a preacher, a black preacher. He said: “There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of a higher order than the right to life.
“That,” he continued, “was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore out of your right to be concerned.”
This passionate reverend used to warn: “Don’t let the pro-choicers convince you that a fetus isn’t a human being. That’s how the whites dehumanized us … The first step was to distort the image of us as human beings in order to justify what they wanted to do — and not even feel they’d done anything wrong.”
That preacher was Jesse Jackson. Later, he decided to run for the presidency — and it was a credible campaign that many found inspiring in its focus on what still had to be done on civil rights. But Jackson had by now become “pro-choice” — much to the appreciation of most of those in the liberal base.
The last time I saw Jackson was years later, on a train from Washington to New York. I told him of a man nominated, but not yet confirmed, to a seat on a federal circuit court of appeals. This candidate was a strong supporter of capital punishment — which both the Rev. Jackson and I oppose, since it involves the irreversible taking of a human life by the state.
I asked Jackson if he would hold a press conference in Washington, criticizing the nomination, and he said he would. The reverend was true to his word; the press conference took place; but that nominee was confirmed to the federal circuit court. However, I appreciated Jackson’s effort.
On that train, I also told Jackson that I’d been quoting — in articles, and in talks with various groups — from his compelling pro-life statements. I asked him if he’d had any second thoughts on his reversal of those views.
Usually quick to respond to any challenge that he is not consistent in his positions, Jackson paused, and seemed somewhat disquieted at my question. Then he said to me, “I’ll get back to you on that.” I still patiently await what he has to say.
As time goes on, my deepening concern with the consequences of abortion is that its validation by the Supreme Court, as a constitutional practice, helps support the convictions of those who, in other controversies — euthanasia, assisted suicide and the “futility doctrine” by certain hospital ethics committees — believe that there are lives not worth continuing.
Around the time of my conversation with Jackson on the train, I attended a conference on euthanasia at Clark College in Worcester, Mass. There, I met Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society, and already known internationally as a key proponent of the “death with dignity” movement.
He told me that for some years in this country, he had considerable difficulty getting his views about assisted suicide and, as he sees it, compassionate euthanasia into the American press.
“But then,” Humphry told me, “a wonderful thing happened. It opened all the doors for me.”
“What was that wonderful thing?” I asked.
“Roe v. Wade,” he answered.
The devaluing of human life — as the 9-year-old at the dinner table put it more vividly — did not end with making abortion legal, and therefore, to some people, moral. The word “baby” does not appear in Roe v. Wade — let alone the word “killing.”
And so, the termination of “lives not worth living” goes on.
______________________
Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. Now after presenting the secular approach of Nat Hentoff I wanted to make some comments concerning our shared Christian faith. I respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.
Sincerely,
Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733,
Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis ________________ Picture of Francis Schaeffer and his wife Edith from the 1930′s above. I was sad to read about Edith passing away on Easter weekend in 2013. I wanted to pass along this fine […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
It is truly sad to me that liberals will lie in order to attack good Christian people like state senator Jason Rapert of Conway, Arkansas because he headed a group of pro-life senators that got a pro-life bill through the Arkansas State Senate the last week of January in 2013. I have gone back and […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
Sometimes you can see evidences in someone’s life of how content they really are. I saw something like that on 2-8-13 when I confronted a blogger that goes by the name “AngryOldWoman” on the Arkansas Times Blog. See below. Leadership Crisis in America Published on Jul 11, 2012 Picture of Adrian Rogers above from 1970′s […]
In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented against abortion (Episode 1), infanticide (Episode 2), euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such as abortion, human rights, welfare, poverty, gun control and issues dealing with popular culture. Here is another exchange I had with them a while back. My username at the Ark Times Blog is Saline […]
E P I S O D E 1 0 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]
E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]
E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]
E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]
E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]
E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]
Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]
Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]
Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]
Print-friendly version
Deena Burnett: Well, as early as the morning of September 11th, I was requesting to hear the cockpit voice recorder. I felt like it would just give me some answers as to what happened in those final moments. I didn’t know how to go about finding someone who could allow me to hear it. Anyone who had anything to do with the government, I’d just ask them, “Help me.” Very early on I met a lady, Ellen Tauscher, a representative from California, who really took me on as her project and helped me. She helped me go through the channels, writing the letters and making the phone calls and putting the pressure on different channels within the FBI and our government to release that cockpit voice recorder. I have told her so many times, “You know, Ellen, that you did this; it was you, but I’m getting all the credit for it.” And she would just laugh and say, “That’s okay, because I’m just here to help you.” She’s a great lady, absolutely a great lady. She guided me through the channels and made it happen.
The Daily Hatch 
