Sunday, April 19, 2026

JORDAN: Mueller’s Prosecutors May Have Departed Because of Their Biases

‘I think people should view with some skepticism the notion that gets breathlessly reported every week that the Mueller investigation is coming to an end…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In late February, CNN broke the story that the investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into collusion between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia might wrap up any day.

But as the probe drags on, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, suggested another possibility in a recent interview with Fox News.

Jordan said the dismissal of two key investigators at the start of March—taken as a sign of closure—may have been due to their bias, the Washington Examiner reported.

Jordan, who is the ranking minority member of the House Oversight Committee and a prominent figure in the conservative Freedom Caucus, joined Rep. Mark Meadows, R-NC, in penning a March 1 letter to Attorney General William Barr, voicing concerns over Mueller staffers Andrew Weissmann and Zainab Ahmad.

“The reason Ms. Ahmad might have left is the fact that the report is coming soon. We all kind of suspect that it is,” Jordan told Fox News. “It also might be a letter that Mr. Meadows and I sent to Attorney General Barr just 19 days ago.”

The congressmen said that the two high-level prosecutors had undisclosed contact, prior to the opening of the investigation, with a key witness—then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr—as part of a small circle of colleagues at the Department of Justice.

“This development raises questions about the impartiality and independence of Weissmann and Ahmad as senior members of the Special Counsel’s investigation,” wrote Jordan and Meadows in the letter to Barr.

Ohr was revealed to have stepped outside the scope of his duties in acting as an intermediary between the FBI and political research/lobbying firm Fusion GPS, helping to launch an investigation into Trump that ultimately paved the way for Mueller’s probe.

The Fusion firm—where Ohr’s wife, Nellie, happened to work as a Russian expert—compiled the since-debunked Steele Dossier, which was originally commissioned as opposition research by the Hillary Clinton campaign and based on information from questionable, unvetted sources within the Kremlin.

Whatever the reason behind the two recent departures, political watchers have waited with bated breath for the potentially game-changing Mueller report.

Even Trump and his new attorney general’s office seemed to be making preparations for the release.

The final report would go directly to Barr, including recommendations from Mueller as to how to proceed with further investigative or legal action. Barr would then have the option to summarize it for Congress or to release as much as he deemed fit.

However, with notoriously partisan media leakers like Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., leading the House Intelligence Committee, that would almost certainly result in the public disclosure of even classified details.

As Barr’s Justice Department internally debated how much of the report to provide to Congress—which, in a rare bipartisan move, firmly demanded that they receive the whole thing—Trump this week also came out supporting the full public release of the report.

Meanwhile, indications pointed to the possibility that Mueller may yet have some work to do.

Rep. Jim Jordan, Others Cast New Doubt over Mueller Probe's Imminent Conclusion 1
Robert Mueller / IMAGE: CBS News via Youtube

Reuters reported that the former FBI director is still investigating leads in at least three areas:

  • the interactions between Paul Manafort and a Russian business associate
  • the role Roger Stone played in the Wikileaks release of hacked Clinton campaign emails
  • the claims that Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey a few months into his presidency may have constituted obstruction of justice

More cynically, perhaps, Reuters observed that funding for the special counsel’s office—which in FY2018 spent around $9 million—is approved through the end of the fiscal year, on Sept. 30.

Politico said also that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who directly oversaw the bulk of the nearly two-year-long investigation, has temporarily delayed his departure plans.

One former Obama-era U.S. Attorney, Preet Bharara, who was fired two months into Trump’s term after refusing to resign his post, also remained skeptical about the investigation nearing its end, reported the Examiner.

In a recent interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” while noting that he was now an outsider with no privileged information, Bharara said, “I think people should view with some skepticism the notion that gets breathlessly reported every week that the Mueller investigation is coming to an end.”

Vulnerable Alabama Sen. Doug Jones Dodges Question on Impeaching Trump

‘I think I’m just going to hold that one for a little bit…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., knows he holds one of the most at-risk seats in Congress.

His refusal to answer a question about impeaching President Donald Trump showed just how great the pressure is to appease his constituents in the reliably red state while suppressing any hints of solidarity with his radically leftist colleagues in Congress.

The conservative America Rising PAC posted video of Jones awkwardly dodging the question—submitted by an audience member—at a book-tour event in Birmingham on Saturday.

Aware that he is being recorded, Jones reads the question and laughs: “Would the country be better off if Trump is impeached or beaten in 2020?”

Tucking the card into his shirt pocket, he replies, “Well, I think I’m just going to hold that one for a little bit,” Jones says. “I’m sure there’s a tracker here recording this.”

Jones narrowly triumphed over Republican nominee Roy Moore in the  2017 special election to replace then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Despite a deluge of dark-money funding and media attention, a targeted misinformation campaign on social media using fake Russian bots, accusations of outside voters flooding the state and an array of scandals—including accusations of pedophilia—swirling around his controversial opponent, Jones still eked by with an advantage of only 1.7 percentage points over the former state Supreme Court chief justice.

Although Nancy Pelosi recently declared that she would not pursue impeachment against Trump barring clear bipartisan support,  Jones’ position on impeachment could prove to be particularly significant.

Not only would bipartisan opposition help to derail partisan attempts to claim moral high-ground, but a recent rebuke of Trump’s national emergency declaration on the immigration crisis at the Mexican border showed that the president will need every bit of support possible if House Democrats do pursue impeachment.

The national emergency rebuke—though largely symbolic as Trump had promised a veto—may have been a sort of loyalty test for Trump and his agenda.

A dozen GOP senators voted against the president on the emergency declaration, including libertarian free-agent Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., as well as frequent Trump foes like Sens. Mitt Romney, R-Utah; Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; and Susan Collins, R-Maine.

While Jones and all his Democratic colleagues voted to pass the rebuke, the total fell eight votes shy of the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

The same majority would be necessary if the Senate, following an impeachment trial, were to vote on whether to find Trump guilty and remove him from office.

Facing a similar position during the impeachment proceedings of President Bill Clinton, voters made their voice heard in the 1998 midterm, reversing a massive Republican wave in Congress.

Several prominent GOP leaders, including House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., were forced out in the wake.

Jones will face re-election next year.

With the majority in the upper-chamber at stake and turnouts likely to be massive, his seat will be one of the most closely watched in the contentious political free-for-all.

Colorado Joins Sour-Grape Blue States’ Bid to End Electoral College

‘It’s going to be very difficult to explain… why you’re casting California’s electoral votes against the wishes of a supermajority of Californians in favor of Donald Trump…’

Colorado Joins Sour-Grape Blue States' Bid to End Electoral College
Jared Polis / IMAGE: NBC News

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Once considered a swing state, increasingly liberal Colorado dove headfirst into the partisan divide by joining a radical effort to eliminate the Electoral College in presidential elections.

Newly elected Gov. Jared Polis already had expressed support for the Democrat state legislature’s proposal to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. On Friday, Polis signed the bill, formally adding Colorado to the compact, Roll Call reported.

The agreement means Colorado would pledge all of its electors to the candidate who wins the popular vote nationally rather than letting its own voters determine whom the state will support.

It follows closely on the heels of the 2016 election in which Hillary Clinton officially received 2.8 million more votes than President Donald Trump while still handily losing the election.

Trump received 306 of the 538 total electors, with Clinton receiving only 232.

The popular-vote compact would be triggered only if it were to reach the 270 electoral votes needed to win an election. Until then, states may continue to assign their electors according to the votes of their own citizens.

Colorado’s addition puts the total number of would-be electors in states supporting the compact at 181.

So far, 11 other states and the District of Columbia have joined: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia.

All the previous states have supported Democratic presidential candidates in every election since at least 1992.

Colorado, on the other hand, was still considered a red state during the administration of George W. Bush and backed the Republican president in his 2000 and 2004 elections.

Colorado Public Radio noted that the popular-vote compact would have changed the state’s electoral vote twice in the past 10 elections—in the 1996 race where it supported Sen. Bob Dole over incumbent Bill Clinton, and in the 2000 race between Bush and Al Gore.

But despite its conservative, rural strongholds, the growth of far-left enclaves like Denver and Boulder has drastically shifted the political balance in Colorado since the Obama era.

Polis, a self-funded billionaire, made history after being elected last year as the country’s first openly gay governor. He welcomed the support of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on the campaign trail.

Two other states, Delaware and New Mexico, currently have legislature-passed bills supporting the popular-vote compact that are awaiting their governors’ signatures, Roll Call reported.

Barry Fadem, president of the California-based nonprofit National Popular Vote Inc., which is leading the effort, told Roll Call that Oregon, Maine and Nevada are also in the group’s cross-hairs.

The addition of those five states would put the total at 206 electoral votes.


Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

 

Fadem said that the effort was unlikely to reach 270 prior to the 2020 election, but he was optimistic about 2024.

However, if the compact were to take effect, it almost certainly would lead to federal court challenges.

Electoral College defenders maintain that the system is necessary for smaller states and more rural ones to have their voices be heard rather than letting national decisions be railroaded by only a handful of mega-states.

Norman Williams, a law professor at Oregon’s Willamette University, told Roll Call the measure could potentially come into conflict with the rules outlined in the U.S. Constitution.

Although states are free within the Constitution to choose their own electors, an inconsistency in the way those electors are determined—such as what happens if one state’s recount rules were triggered and resulted in a reversal of the popular vote—would then have national implications and undermine faith in the entire system.

Another example may be the differing approaches to ballot-harvesting in the last election.

While California passed a law prior to the 2018 race that permitted the third-party collection of absentee ballots—and reversed the election-night victories of several Republicans by continuing to count absentee ballots long afterward—a Republican victor in North Carolina was denied certification because the same practice was deemed fraud.

Conservatives criticize the popular-vote initiative as yet another blatant ploy to throw disproportionate power to sanctuary states that routinely turn a blind eye to illegal immigrants and other ineligible voters casting ballots.

Many, including President Trump himself, have questioned the legitimacy of Clinton’s popular-vote win, largely driven by regions that not only refuse to enforce immigration laws or to cooperate with law-enforcement officials, but that allow illegal residents to obtain driver’s licenses and vote in local elections, leaving ballot integrity severely compromised.

Even if poll workers in states like California and New York were to be trusted to follow election laws—despite the weight of evidence to the contrary—Democrats continue pushing to expand their voting base and electoral influence through an open-border policy, effectively violating the existing laws in order to force themselves into power and impose new ones.

As often is the case, however, with the Left’s bad-faith efforts to secure its own power at the expense of democratic norms and institutions, there is always the possibility that a Republican candidate might, one day, win the popular vote—which then would trigger the likely refusal of hypocritical blue states to observe their own self-imposed mandates.

Offering the 2020 race as a hypothetical, Williams said, “It’s going to be very difficult to explain to Californians—to your California constituents as a California representative or senator—why you’re casting California’s electoral votes against the wishes of a supermajority of Californians in favor of Donald Trump.”

Either way, Williams added, the compact inevitably opened the door to voter disfranchisement somewhere down the line.

“That will be true in all of the states that are having to cast their electoral votes against the wishes of how the state voted,” he said.

CAIR’s Use of Tragedy to Quiet Critics Leads to Uneasy Alliance w/ Mosque Shooter

‘Leftist and Islamic groups have been trying for years to silence all criticism … and in the New Zealand massacre they see the best chance…’

CAIR's Use of N.Z. Tragedy to Blame Critics Leads to Uneasy Alliance w/ Mosque Shooter
CAIR’s Nihad Awad / IMAGE: Fox News via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In a 74-page manifesto posted by the Australian man charged with killing 50 people Friday in two attacks on New Zealand mosques, the shooter repeatedly said his goal was to foment tension and division.

He now is getting help in that effort from the unlikeliest of sources, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has capitalized on the tragedy to pursue its own political objectives, including total suppression of Islamic criticism within the U.S.

According to the manifesto, the shooter sought “to create conflict between the two ideologies within the United States on the ownership of firearms in order to further the social, cultural, political and racial divide within the United [S]tates.”

The self-proclaimed white-supremacist’s objectives mirrored, in many ways, those of Middle Eastern jihadis in their bid to undermine alleged U.S. imperialism and global influence.

“[T]his balkanization will also reduce the USA’s ability to project power globally,” wrote the killer.

In a bizarre twist, one of those blamed for helping flame the “Islamophobia” that led to the attack was Chelsea Clinton, who was confronted by Muslim activists at New York University during a candle-light vigil Friday evening.

“This, right here, is a result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words that you put out into the world,” a student activist told her.

The criticism apparently related to Clinton’s platitudinous condemnation following the series of anti-Semitic comments that Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., had made.

“We should expect all elected officials, regardless of party, and all public figures to not traffic in anti-Semitism,” tweeted Clinton—whose husband, Marc Mezvinsky, is Jewish.

In response to the abuse heaped on Clinton, current First Son Donald Trump Jr. tweeted his solidarity with her.

The hollow effort by Islamic activists to deflect criticism of anti-Semitic positions using claims of “Islamophobia” defied all logic.

But some also worried that Islamist advocacy groups would attempt to use the New Zealand violence to silence other types of criticism by pressuring social media platforms to suppress it.

Jihad Watch Director Robert Spencer, described by the radical leftist Southern Poverty Law Center as “one of the most prolific anti-Muslim figures in the United States,” said he expects platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Google will take the opportunity to de-platform him.

“Leftist and Islamic groups have been trying for years to silence all criticism of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others,” Spencer wrote in a piece published by Frontpage Mag on Monday, “and in the New Zealand massacre they see the best chance in a long time to move in for the kill.”

Spencer said the International Union for Muslim Scholars had called for a ban on Islamophobia at the end of a two-day summit in Istanbul on Friday.

“Since analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror is routinely smeared as ‘hatred of Islam and Muslims,’ this will likely outlaw all such analysis and make opposition to jihad terror effectively impossible,” Spencer said.

Ironically, Saudi Arabia, which received international condemnation over its state-sanctioned dismembering of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, also chimed in on the mosque attack.

Saudi Arabia’s King Salman tweeted that the attack “reaffirms the responsibility of the international community in combating hate speech and terrorism that is not condoned by religions or the values of tolerance.”

But CAIR, which held a press conference on Friday, was perhaps the most egregious in its bid to exploit the shooting.

“CAIR’s press conference was a full-court press for censorship, and it painted, yet again, a large target on our backs for increasingly unhinged and violent Leftists,” Spencer said.

At the press conference, CAIR founder and CEO Nihad Awad cited a sentence from the killer’s own manifesto to delegate blame onto President Donald Trump “as symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose” while somehow missing the many parts where he had discussed Islamic extremism as a motivating factor.

Spencer said the Islamist groups and Leftist allies—all eager to avoid confronting the faith’s anti-Semitic, anti-female, anti-LGBT and pro-violence track record—sought to muddy the waters between reasonable censorship of the New Zealand murderer’s hate-based rhetoric and reasonable criticism of Islamic extremists’ hate-based rhetoric, creating a sort of uneasy alliance between the opposing groups that seek to stoke U.S. tensions.

“They have succeeded in fooling many people into thinking that it is ‘bigotry’ and ‘racism’ to oppose jihad terror, and have made those who discuss the motivating ideology behind jihad terror toxic in the public square,” Spencer said.

“Now Hamas-linked CAIR is attempting to use the New Zealand massacre to achieve total victory: the complete closure of all media platforms to foes of jihad terror and Sharia oppression,” he said.

Kasich Agency Tasked w/ Cutting Gov’t Regs Instead Caused Backlog

‘They got caught up in the bureaucracy trying to cut the bureaucracy…’

2020 Presidential Rumors Abound With John Kasich Back in NH
John Kasich/Photo by Michael Vadon (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) An Ohio agency put in place by then-Gov. John Kasich to reduce government inefficiency instead became part of the problem.

It may be an appropriate symbol, in some ways, of the flip-flopping Kasich’s transformation from conservative politician to Trump-bashing CNN commentator, as well as his inability to translate talk into effective action.

The Columbus Dispatch reported that Kasich established the Common Sense Initiative in 2011 “to make Ohio business-friendly by slashing state bureaucracy and streamlining business regulations.”

But CSI’s effort to slash regulations resulted in a backlog of 1,233 rules awaiting action. The Dispatch said that included 139 awaiting state-agency response, 229 were in a public comment period, and 865 were things that CSI simply hadn’t done.

CSI now falls under the oversight of Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, who criticized the backlog last month at a meeting of the National Federation of Independent Business.

“I let my staff know that was unacceptable,” Husted said. “We are not going to tolerate delays in getting our work done.”

After slapping CSI with an April deadline, Husted was able to clear more than three-quarters of the backlog.

“I’m trying to change the culture,” he said. “ … What I’m trying to do is establish a standard of customer service.”

The Dispatch cast much of the blame on Husted’s predecessor, former GOP Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor.

Although the law also established that stalled rules could move after 15 days to the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review, Taylor’s office discouraged moving the rules to JCARR until after they had received a CSI recommendation.

Kasich often touted CSI’s review of more than 2,100 rules per year on average, offering them as evidence of a business-friendly administration, said The Dispatch, but his reports and the agencies neglected to mention the backlog.

Roger Geiger, Ohio executive director of the NFIB organization where Husted delivered his comments, was among seemed to defend the agency’s efforts, saying it was the other state agencies’ lag in response that was the problem.

“If the government doesn’t respond, it can gum things up,” he said. “They got caught up in the bureaucracy trying to cut the bureaucracy.”

SPLC Ousts Co-Founder Dees amid Claims of Racism, Misconduct

‘You know, it’s sort of like the pot calling the kettle black…’

SPLC Ousts Iconic Co-Founder amid Allegations of Racism, Misconduct
Morris Dees / IMAGE: Biography via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Following hushed allegations of “misconduct,” Morris Dees, one of the iconic co-founders of the Southern Poverty Law Center was fired Wednesday.

“[O]ur work is about the cause, not the person,” wrote SPLC President Richard Cohen in an online announcement about the decision.

Cohen’s statement gave no elaboration on the reasons for the firing, but it obliquely hinted at internal strife within the organization.

“We’re committed to ensuring that our workplace embodies the values we espouse—truth, justice, equity, and inclusion,” he said. “When one of our own fails to meet those standards, no matter his or her role in the organization, we take it seriously and must take appropriate action.”

Dees, 82, was a longtime public face of the SPLC, the Montgomery, Ala.-based civil rights group. He ushered it fame in the 1970s by suing members of the Ku Klux Klan and spun it into a leftist advocacy empire with a $44 million operating budget through his fundraising prowess.

The Los Angeles Times elegized Dees after the ouster as a  “swashbuckling figure” whose autobiography read “like a treatment for a Hollywood epic.”

According to UPI, Dees said he had no part in the move and denied knowing the reasons behind it.

“It was not my decision, what they did,” he said. “I wish the center the absolute best. Whatever reasons they had of theirs, I don’t know.”

But recently, the SPLC has faced persistent criticisms from all directions that it may have lost its way.

On the Right, many have condemned its appallingly partisan efforts to target legitimate conservative and Christian organizations over issues unrelated to civil rights and label them as “hate groups.”

Center for Immigration Studies Sues Southern Poverty Law Center for 'Hate Group' Label
SPLC’s ‘Hate Map’/IMAGE: Screenshot via splcenter.org (Fair Use)

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen said last year that the SPLC had lost all credibility and become a caricature of itself after it attacked a reformed Islamic radical and included him on a list of “Anti-Muslim Extremists” for criticizing elements of his own religion.

Those on the Left, meanwhile, have long bemoaned the organization’s predominantly white, male leadership hierarchy and, since at least the 1980s, have said Dees’ dominant influence was problematic.

Appropriately, the organization’s own mission appeared to have turned on itself as Dees was said to be embroiled in allegations of racism.

Sources including The L.A. Times said that Dees’ firing came after employees sent letters to management demanding reforms when a respected black attorney had resigned last week.

One letter, signed by around two dozen employees, reportedly complained of “mistreatment, sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and racism” and said they threatened the SPLC’s moral authority and integrity.

Cohen said Dees’ departure was one of several planned measures to address the crisis, the Montgomery Advertiser reported.

“Today we announced a number of immediate, concrete next steps we’re taking, including bringing in an outside organization to conduct a comprehensive assessment of our internal climate and workplace practices, to ensure that our talented staff is working in the environment that they deserve—one in which all voices are heard and all staff members are respected,” Cohen said.

A 1994 Pulitzer-nominated series published by the Advertiser delved into some of the earlier allegations against Dees.

“I think there’s a real question as to the sincerity and legitimacy of the organization because of the noticeable absence of blacks there,” said Donald Jackson, a former SPLC  intern. “You know, it’s sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.”

Cuomo Punishes NY Student-Athletes to Protest Defunct NC Bathroom Law

‘North Carolina welcomes all people, and student–athletes shouldn’t be used as political pawns…’

Photo by Patja

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Not long ago, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo found a way to blame his state’s $2.3 billion budget shortfall on the federal tax-regulation overhaul supported by President Donald Trump in 2017.

Now, the king of passive–aggressive finger-pointing is back at it, voicing his disapproval of another state’s laws by punishing student–athletes from his own, reported the New York Post.

Cuomo said he would be forcing 13 State University of New York swimmers competing next week at the NCAA Division III national championships in Greensboro, N.C., to stay in Virginia due to a longstanding boycott of North Carolina over a since-amended law on transgender bathrooms.

Although North Carolina’s 2016 transgender bathroom ban, HB2, was repealed after widespread protests and boycotts, Cuomo griped that its replacement, HB142, still did not advocate to his satisfaction for LGBT potty privileges.

“It left discriminatory practices in place,” said grandstanding Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi.

“In New York, we do not support blatant discrimination, bigotry and bias,” Azzopardi crowed. “Standing up for equality is not a fad and as long as this anti-LGBTQ law remains in effect, New York tax dollars are not going to be spent there.”

The replacement bill ruled that North Carolina’s public restroom facilities would fall under the jurisdiction of the General Assembly, meaning that cities within the state could not create their own policies. HB2 was a response to efforts in left-leaning Charlotte to impose a mandatory, citywide transgender restroom policy.

Republican legislators in New York appealed to the governor’s office to reconsider for the sake of the athletes.

“It puts them at a competitive disadvantage and could have a negative impact on their performance,” said state Sen. Pat Gallivan.

The most direct route from Greensboro to Virginia would send the team approximately 40 miles away to Whitfield, Va.

Whitfield, Va.’s Travel Inn as seen from the pool area / IMAGE: Hotels.com

According to Hotels.com, the Travel Inn located there was a “no frills motel” with rooms available for $48 per night. It has a rating of 2 stars out of 5 possible.

Fortunately for the New York delegation, it does have a swimming pool where they could practice if the two-hour round-trip commute proved too prohibitive.

More likely, the team would extend its commute even farther north to Danville, which has choices including a Marriott, Holiday Inn, Comfort Inn and Hampton Inn.

However, those options are likely to stretch the tight New York budget even farther.

One GOP congressman from North Carolina, Rep. Mark Walker, offered to pay for the SUNY athletes to stay in Greensboro.

“Maybe Governor Cuomo has been so busy trying to raise taxes, scare off businesses and limit protections for unborn babies that he did not realize the H.B. 2 debate has passed,” Walker said in a release posted to his campaign website.

In addition to the state’s budget woes and a recent decision by Amazon to withdraw from a major New York facility, Walker made reference to the governor—and possible 2020 White House contender—signing the nation’s first law to legalize partial-birth abortions in January.

Cuomo controversially celebrated/gloated the abortion law’s passage by illuminating a symbol of national unity and resilience, World Trade Center One, in pink.

Walker condemned the petty, partisan games, which did nothing but harm Cuomo’s own constituents.

“North Carolina welcomes all people, and student–athletes shouldn’t be used as political pawns,” he said. “We would be proud to have the SUNY students stay in our great state.”

But some were less ready to let the issue drop.

As North Carolina faces two special elections this year to fill open Congressional seats, Democrats said they would make the defunct transgender law a centerpiece of their campaign messaging, reported WFAE.

NC Lawmaker Offends Jihad Media with Term 'Jihad Media'
Dan Bishop/YouTube

State Sen. Dan Bishop, one of the original sponsors of the HB2 bill, on Thursday entered into the race to replace Mark Harris in the 9th Congressional District, where a monthslong ballot-fraud investigation annulled the election results in February.

Bishop echoed Walker’s sentiments that the transgender spat was old news, reported the Charlotte Observer.

“The people of North Carolina have put that controversy behind them, and they’re ready to move on,” Bishop said. “It’s an exhausted issue. We’re on to a new campaign and new issues.”

Cuomo is not the only liberal outside of North Carolina who still harbors a grudge.

The creator of an upcoming Netflix show set in the state’s coastal Outer Banks area said in January it would refuse to shoot the series there unless North Carolina amended the law to allow municipalities to pass their own bathroom ordinances.

“OBX” creator Jonas Pate said he was “sending a message to those people who can bring these jobs and more that North Carolina still doesn’t get it.”

Kids’ Green New Deal Activism Part of Coordinated Shakedown

‘A lot of terrified, indoctrinated kids skipping school to serve as props in political, and legal, campaigns…’

RECORDS: Kids' Green New Deal Activism Part of Coordinated Shakedown
PHOTO: @ClimateReality via Twitter

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Few believed that the Sunrise Movement‘s use of children to aggressively lobby Congress on behalf of the Green New Deal was the youngsters’ own idea.

What may not have been apparent, though, was just how cynical a ploy it was to turn one type of green into another.

Climate Litigation Watch, a nonprofit watchdog dedicated to accountability and oversight in the realm of climate-change lawsuits, revealed Wednesday that the recent efforts—which spawned an eyebrow-raising viral video of Sen. Dianne Feinstein scolding the youths—were part of a larger, well-funded litigation campaign originally mapped out seven years ago.

The campaign also is linked with the International Youth Climate Strike, a school walkout planned for Friday that has been endorsed by a litany of radical leftist organizations, including former Vice President Al Gore‘s Climate Reality Project.

According to The Nation, Friday’s staged protest, which will incorporate Green New Deal advocacy, may involve tens of thousands of middle- and high-school students in 30-some countries, disrupting many a classroom in the process.

All of it, said Climate Litigation Watch, is linked back to a 2012 closed-door meeting in La Jolla, California, organized by a coalition of groups supported by the Rockefeller Foundation.

An Untrustworthy Trust

Ironically, the descendants of Standard Oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller—one of the wealthiest people ever to walk the planet—now use their ill-gotten gains in a coordinated effort to bilk the fossil-fuels industry out of hundreds of billions of dollars to support green causes.

The La Jolla meeting, described as “infamous” by Climate Litigation Watch, was in response to the failures of cap-and-trade efforts to impose additional fines on carbon emissions, widely rejected by the energy consumers who would have borne the brunt of the costs.

The workshop instead produced a blueprint for a litigation campaign, using as its model the earlier effort to take down the tobacco industry.

“With the voters and their elected representatives repeatedly disappointing the activists, even in the face of the $-billion-plus-a-year climate industry’s media and pressure group campaigns, the lawyers had plans,” said Climate Litigation Watch.  “These plans included sending children in waves to the streets.”

Colo. Supreme Court Shuts Down Children's Efforts to Kill All Fossil Fuel Development
Our Children’s Trust/IMAGE: screenshot via Youtube

Very much on the activists’ minds was how to successfully deploy their litigation strategy while continuing to sway “the broad cultural shift in public perception,” and the necessity of choosing the right plaintiffs for the task.

Mary Christina Wood, a University of Oregon law professor, mentioned the nascent “atmospheric trust litigation” strategy that she had pioneered to demand government and third-party corporations foot the bill for massive reforestation and soil carbon sequestration initiatives.

“The beneficiaries in the case are citizens—both current and future—who claim that the defendants (the state or federal government or third-party corporations) have a duty to protect and not damage that resource, which they oversee or for which they bear some responsibility,” said the report from the Workshop on Climate Accountability, Public Opinion, and Legal Strategies.

The campaign ultimately produced the lawsuit Juliana vs. United States and several other spin-offs that used children as the plaintiffs.

Organizations such as Our Children’s Trust now provide teams of lawyers to help coach and direct the juveniles, doted upon by the liberal 9th Circuit court in San Francisco, to launch their attacks on energy producers.

However, the children’s lawsuits have met with mixed results elsewhere. In January, the Colorado Supreme Court shot down a bid by a group of Boulder teens to block future drilling permits in the state.

‘Dedicated to a Shakedown’

The shaky and uncertain legal foundation of the campaign means that the efforts now must branch out into other types of advocacy, such as legislation.

Whether or not the Green New Deal was part of the master plan, or if the proposal sponsored by socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, D-N.Y., was a happy coincidence, the existing infrastructure for exploiting youth activism was already in place.

The La Jolla strategy “turned out to mean a climate litigation industry, dedicated to a shakedown,” said Climate Litigation Watch. “And a lot of terrified, indoctrinated kids skipping school to serve as props in political, and legal, campaigns.”

In a rare break from attacking Israel with anti-Semitic stereotypes, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., was among those who tweeted in support of Friday’s walkout, saying her own 16-year-old daughter, Isra Hisri, was one of the movement’s co-leaders.

But according to Climate Litigation Watch, the children’s activism campaign was not the only shady strategy to emerge from the La Jolla blueprint.

To support the litigation agenda, it said, “State attorneys general can also subpoena documents, raising the possibility that a single sympathetic state attorney general might have substantial success in bringing key internal documents.”

A shocking investigative report from Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute recently revealed that liberal billionaire Michael Bloomberg had helped spearhead and fund the effort to embed climate activists within the offices of state attorneys general.

Since the revelations became public last November, one state legislature, the Virginia General Assembly, has passed new legislation to restrict its AG from employing non-government employees to do the bidding of special-interest activists.

“We applaud this vote while wondering, what’s wrong with the rest of these legislatures?” Horner said.

Western Caucus Condemns Obama’s Massive Land Grab

‘It is clear to us that our hopes, our lives, our investments and our existence have been relegated to an acceptable level of collateral loss…’

Trump Exec Order May Make Short Work of Obama Monument Designation
Bear’s Ears/Photo by Jeffrey Beall (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In the twilight days of his presidency, Barack Obama decreed by executive order a massive land-grab to assert federal control over state- and privately owned land by declaring it a national monument.

“With the stroke of his pen, President Obama locked up 1.35 million acres … in Utah with his unilateral Bears Ears Monument designation,” said a recent press release from the Congressional Western Caucus, criticizing the theft.

Over the course of his presidency, in fact, Obama took more than 550 million acres of land and water—nearly 865,000 square miles—which amounts to more than the total land area of Alaska and Texas combined (833,738 square-miles) with enough room left over to add Maine (30,862 square-miles).

Western Caucus Condemns Obama's Massive Theft of Private Land
SOURCE: Congressional Western Caucus

All in all, the CWC said, the federal government owns close to half of the land in the western U.S.

However, President Donald Trump’s modest return of about 3,200 square miles—approximately the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined (2,999 square-miles)—was met with an outsize, hysterical response from the conservationist lobby, whose partisan disinformation campaign seeped into everything from social media to travel articles.

On Wednesday, the CWC held a hearing to address the Left’s brazen exploitation of the 1906 Antiquities Act.

“They continue to perpetuate the falsehood that recent national monument designations have been locally-driven and done out of genuine concern for the protection of antiquities,” said the CWC press realease.

The hearing came in response to a separate hearing from the House Natural Resources Committee, which criticized Trump’s Interior Department for its audacious reapportionment of the monuments to the “smallest area compatible with the proper care of the objects to be protected,” in keeping with the legal parameters defined by the Antiquities Act.

“The reality is that the Obama and Clinton Administrations, urged on by well-heeled activist groups, abused their executive authority to lock-down massive amounts of land—without public review and irrespective of whether legitimate antiquities were protected in the process,” said the press release.

The CWC hearing included private property owners, energy and natural-resources advocates, representatives of American Indian tribes, and others who were adversely impacted by the previous administration’s actions.

“When the Bears Ears National Monument was originally made by President Obama, it was a very upsetting day,” said Suzette Morris, vice president of the Stewards of San Juan County and a member of Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, who dispelled the false narrative that Obama’s expansion of the southeastern Utah national monument was meant to preserve tribal lands.

“Our voices had not only been forgotten, they had been silenced by special interest groups funded by Hollywood actors, and by tribes who do not live anywhere near Bears Ears,” Morris said. “… They chose to ignore our voices and supported the Obama monument in secret rather than hearing our point of view. They did not ask us to support the monument, because the majority of us do not.”

Trump’s restoration of stolen land in the uranium-rich Bear Ears has been a focal point of much of the controversy, but others criticized the Left’s efforts more broadly, saying the Antiquities Act has been warped from its intended purpose of safeguarding resources into a means of imposing additional regulations and fees on the regions’ established industry and agricultural enterprises.

Steve Wilmeth, a rancher from Luna and Dona Ana County, N.M., said his private property—and means of livelihood—happened to be in the wrong place when Obama created the Organ Mountain Desert Peaks National Monument.

Wilmeth said 40 percent of the ranch now lies within the boundaries of the monument, but that the government staff overseeing it effectively asserts control over 100 percent of his enterprise by also claiming administrative purview of lands within the designated monument’s “footprint.”

“It is clear to us that our hopes, our lives, our investments and our existence have been relegated to an acceptable level of collateral loss,” Wilmeth said. “…We have one pasture that will have at least three overlapping management plans.”

Republican Candidate's Siblings Release Attack Ad Against Him
Rep. Paul Gosar/IMAGE: Fox 10 Phoenix via Youtbe

Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., who chairs the CWC, sharply criticized the federal usurpation and executive overreach,

“President Trump is doing what should have been done long ago, carefully reviewing egregious national monument designations of previous Administrations that usurped power from the people and right sizing these monuments,” Gosar said.

His attack, ironically, seemed to parallel the rhetoric that some Trump opponents themselves have used to condemn the recent national emergency declaration for securing border wall funds.

“No president should have exclusive authority to circumvent Congress and singlehandedly rip away millions of acres of land and water from the American people and indigenous communities,” Gosar said.

Advisers Say de Blasio Would Be ‘F***ing Insane’ to Run for President

‘The strongest advocate for a de Blasio candidacy seems to be de Blasio himself…’

NYCity to Guarantee Health Care for All, Including Illegals
Bill de Blasio/Photo by Todd Crusham (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Another New York politician may soon bite the dust in the crowded 2020 presidential primary field.

Politico reported on Monday that many of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio‘s closest advisers say he would be “f***cking insane” to run.

Nearly three dozen aides, consultants and allies of de Blasio that Politico spoke with dismissed the notion of a White House run.

Among the other i-word descriptors they used were “insufferable” and “idiotic,” said the article.

It quoted the mayor’s former campaign and City Hall adviser, Rebecca Katz, who said on a local podcast, “I believe Bill de Blasio has 100 percent the right message; I’m just not so sure he’s the right messenger.”

Of course, that is only what his supporters think.

As de Blasio of late has worked to relay his message, crowing about his liberal record and agenda in places like Iowa and South Carolina, he may face tough questions about his headline-grabbing proposal to guarantee health care for all (including illegals), as well as the New York legislature’s recent bill to permit partial-birth abortion.

Surprisingly, in January, de Blasio hinted during a CNN interview that he might attempt to court Trump voters.

While underscoring the current president’s perceived negatives, de Blasio said, “[O]n the economic issues, he understood people were hurting. Their lives were getting harder, not easier.”

He said Democrats needed to reclaim their working-class appeal: “We could go a lot farther. … We could be a lot bolder than what we’re doing.”

But even de Blasio’s effort to court Amazon to the city with a sweetheart tax-incentives deal in return for some 25,000 jobs drew criticism and proved disastrous when the e-commerce giant withdrew.

The mayor, who has seen his pool of enthusiastic advisers winnowed down to two volunteer aides and his wife, Politico said, was inverting the narrative of a candidate being drafted into higher office by loyal believers in the cause.

“It’s a stark contrast to the typical dynamics of a presidential exploration in which aides and allies tend to egg on the potential candidate” said the article. “Indeed, the strongest advocate for a de Blasio candidacy seems to be de Blasio himself.”

Still, Politico said, de Blasio seemed undeterred and has written off the criticism and discouragement as familiar refrains—ones that he has heard over and over throughout his political career and never paid attention to.

“I assure you I had a lot of folks who were friends and allies warmly put their arm around my shoulder and tell me what a crazy idea it was to run for Public Advocate, what a crazy idea it was to run for mayor,” he said.