Friday, June 5, 2026

Kamala Harris Panders to College Kids: Interest-Free Loans, No More Active-Shooter Drills

0

‘I’ve seen assault weapons kill babies and police officers…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In her ongoing bid to recast herself as a “happy warrior” while trying to regain traction in the presidential primary polls, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., pandered to college students Monday with expensive promises about college debt and gun control.

Harris took questions from the audience during a special college taping of “The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon.”

College Debt

Her first question came from a New York University student who said she was a first-generation college student of lower socioeconomic background.

NYU is ranked the 18th most expensive school in the country, with a tuition of around $50,000 that is estimated to be more than 70 percent costlier than the average four-year university. With room and board, it costs an estimated $70K per year.

“Student loans were kind of inevitable for me,” said the woman, “and with graduation right around the corner for me, I wanna know what you would do for students like me who are gonna graduate with massive amounts of student debt.”

Harris seemed to empathize with the student’s plight. While she stopped short of the promises made by socialist candidates like Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to forgive student loan debt, Harris omitted a crucial detail on the cost of her plan to taxpayers.

She called for “debt-free college” and “free community college” before adding, “I’m also prepared to make sure that we provide interest-free loans because nobody should be profiting of your desire to get an education.”

However, Harris neglected to mention that the only entity potentially profiting from it is the federal government after former President Barack Obama nationalized the student-loan industry in 2010.

That program is, in fact, already very costly. While the government has more than a trillion dollars tied up in loans, many students have begun to default on their payments after failing to attain marketable job skills in the far-left liberal-arts indoctrination centers.

The fixed interest rate on student loans currently sits at between 5 and 7 percent, which is roughly on par with the rate of inflation in many areas.

Gun Bans/Buybacks

Harris took a second question from a Fordham University student regarding her gun-control policies. She reiterated a promise to use executive action to repeal Second Amendment rights through a ban on “assault weapons.”

“First of all, let’s be clear about what ‘assault weapons’ are,” she said, before offering an explanation that was anything but clear.

“They have been designed to kill a lot of human beings quickly,” she said. “They are weapons of war with no place on the streets of a civil society. I’ve seen assault weapons kill babies and police officers.”

Gun-rights advocates have long maintained that the vague and overly broad definition of ‘assault weapons’ could effectively be used to ban all semiautomatic weapons.

Some states, like Harris’s home state of California, have defined any semiautomatic weapon paired with a high-capacity magazine clip as an ‘assault weapon.’

Harris also was purposefully unclear on whether her attempt at banning firearms would involve restrictions on their manufacture and possession.

She said if elected she would give Congress 100 days to pass legislation.

“If they do not do it, I will put in place by executive action a comprehensive background check requirement, and a ban on the assault weapons and importation of assault weapons into our country,” she said.

Whether mandatory or not, Harris’s gun proposal also would be an expensive proposition for taxpayers.

A buyback program is a good idea, she said. “Now, we need to do it the right way, and part of that has to be, you know, buy back and give people their value—the financial value of what they have and not just take things from people that have value without compensating them.”

“Just compensation” is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment, lest Harris find herself in violation of a second inalienable provision enumerated by the Bill of Rights.

Harris low-balled the estimate on how many weapons her buyback would involve, claiming there were “over 2 million assault weapons that are currently in the streets of America.”

While the total number of “assault weapons” that Americans already own is not known and would depend on how they were defined, gun-rights groups like the NRA put the figure at between 8.5 and 15 million, according to a 2018 McClatchy article.

FBI data estimated that the number of background checks conducted in recent years was around 25 million, while AR-15 rifles alone account for roughly 15 percent of the rifles manufactured in the U.S.

That tally alone would put the yearly domestic manufacture of the popular semiautomatic rifle in the millions, excluding what may be produced outside the U.S.

Fair market value would be another slippery determination, but one online estimate put the total pricetag at $25 billion—or 90 percent of the Justice Department’s annual budget.

While safety drills have been a common part of the school experience, with many of the Cold War era bemusedly recalling the “duck and cover” technique, Harris seemed to imply that her plan could eliminate the need for such precautions.

She asked how many of the college students in the audience had been obliged to participate in active-shooter drills, which most had during their middle- and high-school days under the Obama administration.

“It terrorized you. It is traumatizing,” she told the students.

“I don’t want that any of our children should have to sit in class, when you should be paying attention to what’s happening in the front of the classroom, letting your mind open up the wonders of science, math or art or whatever, and instead have to be worried about who’s gonna come banging through the door carrying some kind of weapon,” she continued.

Chaffetz Says ‘Ballot-Harvesting’ is How Calif. Will Steal Elections in 2020

0

‘They are not about election security. They are about election manipulation in 2020…’

Chaffetz Leads Oversight Hearing Into Defense Dept. Waste Under Obama
Jason Chaffetz/Photo by wickenden (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As last week brought a close to the nearly yearlong dispute over a congressional seat in North Carolina amid claims of ballot fraud, the focus now falls on California, where the very same type of fraud was legalized under former Gov. Jerry Brown and used to flip seven House seats in the 2018 election.

Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who headed the House Oversight Committee, details in a new book the similarities between the practice that Democrats have hypocritically condemned in one hand while condoning in another, based on whether it benefits them.

“The process of ballot harvesting should be illegal for very good reason,” Chaffetz wrote in an opinion piece published Monday on Fox News. “It violates the chain of custody, exposing the ballot to potential manipulation by campaign operatives or nonprofit political groups.”

Geographically one of the largest and last states to close on Election Day, California has notoriously taken weeks to tally its final results in recent elections.

In several cases, conservatives who believed they had won on Election Day found those victories suspiciously reversed as the state continued to receive and count mail-in ballots.

One of the biggest concerns with the state’s lax policies on provisional ballots, Chaffetz said, is vote tampering.

“They could harass voters to turn in ballots, ‘assist’ them in filling them out, and potentially ‘lose’ ballots that don’t support the candidate the ballot harvester is paid to help,” he said.

Such was the allegation in North Carolina, where a longtime political operative in a rural county was hired for get-out-the-vote initiatives by Republican candidate Mark Harris.

McCrae Dowless, who had long been involved with elections in Bladen County and worked for both political parties, was accused of illegally collecting and discarding some of the ballots benefiting Harris’s opponents.

Harris won the race by 905 votes, but the State Board of Elections refused to certify him after a partisan left-wing board member with ties to some of Dowless’s business associates raised the voter fraud concern at the very last minute.

Chaffetz said voter proportions gave clear indications that the same suspicious circumstances were present in California—on a much larger level.

“Studies of absentee voters have consistently shown they tend to reflect the population or lean slightly to the right,” he wrote. “But when ballot harvesting was deployed in California, we saw late ballots break heavily for Democrats.”

While technically ineligible to vote, the sanctuary state‘s vast population of illegal immigrants had a large presence in the ballot-collection initiatives, he said.

That included soliciting votes from homeless people and helping them to fill out their ballots.

The Los Angeles Times reported after the November 2018 election that at least nine people had been arrested for such electioneering efforts.

Chaffetz recounted a January 2019 story by the Times that, in one case, an “Dreamer” activist approached a man smoking a cigarette on a couch behind a local group shelter.

“He politely tried to wave her off until she ‘reminded him’ he had a right that she as an immigrant without citizenship didn’t have,” Chaffetz said. “Half an hour later, she was helping the voter lookup candidates as he filled out his ballot by the light of her phone.”

Chaffetz said recent congressional efforts to enhance election security, which cast the focus on Russia and other foreign threats, failed to address the biggest concerns.

Texas Democratic Party Sends Voter Applications to Noncitizens 1
screenshot via Youtube

In fact, the Democrat-led House had sought to reinforce the shady practices by encouraging more laws to promote absentee and provisional ballots.

“These measures are designed to enforce less secure voting processes on local communities, including the very vulnerable mail-in ballot,” Chaffetz said. “They are not about election security. They are about election manipulation in 2020.”

The vulnerabilities are even more alarming as the Left pushes for a national popular vote referendum to replace the Electoral College in deciding presidential elections.

This would ensure that populous states with corrupt election practices could effectively disenfranchise those in other states with stricter laws and tighter enforcement—including North Carolina.

“If we want to get serious about securing our elections, state and local lawmakers and election officials must crackdown on the practice of ballot harvesting,” Chaffetz said. “Otherwise, Democrats will use it to manipulate the results of the 2020 elections.”

Gun Companies Rebuke NASCAR for Pulling Ads from Program

0

‘They are a sporting organization trying to take sides on a political issue. That never goes well for any company…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Long associated with a blue-collar, conservative-leaning fan base, NASCAR has become the latest casualty in the corporate-pressure campaign to ban Second-Amendment gun rights.

The stock-car racing circuit is now taking criticism for excluding advertisements from firearms companies in its summer raceway programs, the Daily Mail reported.

The blocked ads included one from Dark Storm Industries that featured an an AR-15. Another one from K-Var featured an AK-47 and a 9mm handgun.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

NASCAR decided to turn their back on their customer base, joining the likes of Yeti, Dick’s and Under Armour. We were approached by a NASCAR publication eager to earn our business, but after submitting our ad it was immediately rejected, stating that we cannot depict “assault weapons”… whatever those are. We resubmitted the ad after adding a large ‘CENSORED’ bar over the rifle, with a tag reading “This publication rejected our ad”. This too was rejected by NASCAR. They said they did not like that we called them out. We resubmitted a third time, with a tag line reading “Visit www.Dark-Storm.com to find out why!”. This was again rejected. They did not like the words “FIND OUT WHY”. As we have learned, NASCAR has made a “gradual shift” but this doesn’t seem very gradual to us. It seems as though NASCAR has turned their back on the overwhelming majority of their fan base in the most embarrassing way possible. #nascar

A post shared by Dark Storm Industries (@darkstormindustries) on

K-Var General Manager David Dolbee called it a “colossal mistake” by NASCAR.

“Do they not understand their own base?,” he wondered to CNN. “They are a sporting organization trying to take sides on a political issue. That never goes well for any company.”

The companies received notice from NASCAR via its advertising vendor, National Events Publications, that a change in political attitudes was driving the move.

‘We just heard from NASCAR on a number of gun related ads and unfortunately, due to a gradual shift in NASCAR’s position on guns, these ads must be edited/changed—especially those that are depicted as assault-style rifles/sniper rifles,” Sunny Berlin, art director for National Event Publications, told Dolbee in an email, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

 1
NASCAR / PHOTO: 12019 (cc) via Pixabay

The vendor said NASCAR was still open—for the time being—to advertising “less controversial” items like gun accessories, concealed-carry licensing programs or training classes. It asked K-Var to submit another ad for review following those guidelines, but the company refused.

“You can’t do ‘this gun’s good, that gun’s bad.’ You know?” Dolbee told the Free Beacon. “I said we wouldn’t deal with them at all if that was going to be the case. We could never go forward with that type of a policy.”

Despite the claims of a gradual shift, the firearms companies said the move was a dramatic reversal following a recent spate of nationally publicized mass shootings that had driven left-wing legislators to clamor once again for the repeal of gun rights.

The decision “seems like a pretty rapid and dramatic shift to me,” said Dark Storm’s Ed Newman.

Several major retailers have recently caved to pressure from anti-gun activists and politicians. Among them was Walmart, following a massacre in El Paso, Texas where an assailant targeted shoppers at one of its stores near the U.S–Mexico border.

Others—both open-carry activists and leftist anti-gun radicals—elevated tensions in the aftermath by causing public panics at Walmart stores elsewhere in the country.

In March, the virtue-signaling CEO of Dick’s Sporting Goods made a similar decision to discontinue its sale of firearms. Conservative gun-rights advocates boycotted in response, resulting in a marked decline in sales.

A similar boycott befell the NFL after it caved to players’ demands that they be allowed to kneel during the national anthem to protest racial discrimination.

President Donald Trump also was said to be considering certain components of proposed weapons bans, including extended background checks and red-flag legislation that would temporarily allow authorities to disarm anyone profiled as a potential threat.

Some in his conservative base have cautioned that acquiescing to the anti-gun lobby could have political consequences in next year’s re-election effort.

NYTimes Forced to Correct Kavanaugh Hatchet Piece

0

‘Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue…’

Kavanaugh Hearing Back on Track After Dems Try to Shut it Down
Brett Kavanaugh/IMAGE: YouTube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) The New York Times dropped another potentially libelous bombshell on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh—then quietly dialed it back Sunday evening after the sensationalist headline had already broken.

Undeterred by plummeting media credibility in the wake of recent scandals involving careless or biased journalism, the paper published an article Saturday, adapted from a forthcoming book by two reporters, with claims that another sexual assault accusation had emerged against Kavanaugh.

In response, several radical Democrats seeking the nomination to run in next year’s presidential election reflexively called for Kavanaugh to be impeached.

Sens. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., as well as former Housing Secretary Julian Castro, were among those who rushed to falsely accuse Kavanaugh of lying and demand extreme measures.

However, a day after unloading its hit piece, the Times updated the online article to reflect that the purported victim in the assault refused to be interviewed and that several friends said she did not recall the incident.

The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway was one of those to point out the far-left newspaper’s stealthily inserted correction.

As Hemingway noted, the only firsthand source used by the Times was Max Stier, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s with close ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Conservative groups on Monday condemned the Left’s reckless and harmful pattern of using sloppy reporting to wage attacks against political and ideological adversaries.

“Each week Democratic presidential candidates offer up a different far-left idea that alienates the vast majority of voters in America,” said  Jesse Hunt, communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which called on Senate Democrats and Democratic candidates to denounce the smear.

“This shameful attack—aided by a few members of the media—is nothing more than a blatant attempt to undermine the Supreme Court and the will of the people who voted for a conservative judiciary,” Hunt said. “Every Democratic Senate candidate who sits in silence will be held accountable by voters in their respective states.”

President Donald Trump also defended Kavanaugh and encouraged him to hold the media accountable for its willful, politically motivated negligence.

Character Assassination

Mitchell Report Reveals Many Holes in Ford's So-Called Credible Testimony 1
Christine Blasey Ford/IMAGE: screenshot via Fox News

The latest episode mirrored several other debunked claims of sexual assault by Kavanaugh as a teenager and college student—including allegations pushed by disgraced attorney and accused domestic abuser Michael Avenatti, who frequently appeared on CNN and other cable networks during the Kavanaugh hearings.

Only one accusation—the vague, three-decades-old account by Christine Blasey Ford—despite being rife with inconsistencies and conflicting witness accounts, could not otherwise be discredited.

After Ford and Kavanaugh testified at a highly watched hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee, former Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., brokered an agreement to send the beleaguered judge to a full floor vote pending the results of a comprehensive FBI investigation.

That investigation ultimately concluded that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate Ford’s claims.

Even so, one of Ford’s highly-partisan attorneys, Debra Katz, who had been recommended to her by Sen. Dianne Feinstein and funded by anti-Kavanaugh activist groups, recently celebrated that the unproven accusations had cast lingering aspersions on the father of two and tarnished his reputation.

Katz told a feminist conference in April that in their underlying bid to “harm misogynist Republicans,” those promulgating the hazy high-school rape claims had succeeded.

“Elections have consequences, but he will always have an asterisk next to his name,” Katz said of Kavanaugh at the University of Baltimore conference.

“When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.”

Ford had claimed under oath before Congress that she had come forward out of a sense of civic duty, free from any personal or political vendettas.

After the revelations on Katz’s statements surfaced earlier this month, Senate Judiciary Committee member Thom Tillis, R-NC, called for a deeper investigation into the truthfulness of Ford’s statements before the committee.

Clinton Revenge?

Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton/IMAGE: ABC 15 Arizona via Youtube

Hemingway noted that the most recent Kavanaugh accuser, Stier, had a long history of being “pitted” against him politically.

The two worked on opposite sides of the scandal that resulted in Bill Clinton’s impeachment, with Kavanaugh on the team of investigators under special prosecutor Ken Starr and Stier on Clinton’s defense team.

Another close Stier associate, David Kendall, went on to represent Hillary Clinton in her own scandal involving the cover-up of an unsecured, private server that she used to send classified emails during her tenure as secretary of State in the Obama administration.

Hemingway noted that a “surprisingly large number of Clinton-affiliated attorneys … kept popping up during [Kavanaugh’s] confirmation hearings,” leading him to say during the opening statement of his testimony that revenge on the Clintons’ behalf may have been a motive.

It would not be the first time that Clinton surrogates had used dubiously sourced claims of salacious sexual innuendo as part of an anti-conservative smear campaign.

The same was true of the Steele Dossier, which Hillary Clinton’s campaign commissioned as opposition research against her opponent, Donald Trump, during the 2016 presidential race.

Deep-state partisans used back channels to convey the now-discredited memos from a British intelligence operative with Kremlin ties to the upper ranks of the Obama FBI.

The agency then used the dossier as justification to spy on the Trump campaign. Partisan intelligence operatives are also believed to have leaked the dossier to the media in January 2017 as part of an effort to discredit the president-elect.

The result was the two-year-long Mueller investigation, which turned up no evidence of misconduct between the Trump campaign and Russia. However, Congressional Democrats continue to insist that the president is guilty and to advance efforts to impeach him.

Congressmen Want to Halt Nationwide Injunctions by Activist Judges

0

‘A district court in California should not be given sweeping authority to issue a ruling—let alone on dubious legal reasoning—striking down policy from a duly elected President…’

Rep. Meadows Blasts Rosenstein Over 'Extortion' Remark
Mark Meadows/Photo by Gage Skidmore (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Two influential conservative congressmen and Trump allies introduced a bill Wednesday to rein in the activist courts that have constantly hindered President Donald Trump’s agenda with costly legal battles.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-NC, and Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., unveiled the Nationwide Injunction Abuse Prevention Act in response to a California district court attempting to reinstate an earlier nationwide injunction on President Donald Trump’s immigration policy that was ruled overly broad by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“[I]t makes zero sense for the legality of a nationwide law to rest entirely on the opinion of one judge, or one district court,” Meadows said in a statement jointly issued by the two Republicans.

“A district court in California should not be given sweeping authority to issue a ruling—let alone on dubious legal reasoning—striking down policy from a duly elected President,” he said.

The decision blocked the Trump administration from moving forward on policies that would require asylum-seeking migrants traveling through Mexico to first seek safe harbor in that country, effectively limiting their ability to claim U.S. refuge simply because it has nicer perks.

Radical activist District Court Judge Jon Tigar, who originally blocked the policy in July following a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union, reinstated the injunction on Monday, but the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately overruled him on Wednesday in a 7-2 decision.

The absurdly partisan intervention by the Obama-appointed Berkeley Law School grad proved a bridge too far for the legislators, however, amid outrage over the nonstop legal obstructions.

Activist groups have used lawsuits to block countless other efforts, from construction of the southern border wall to the defunding of Planned Parenthood.

Tom Cotton is Calling on the IRS to Investigate the SPLC
Tom Cotton / IMAGE: Fox News via Youtube

“In the past few years, we’ve seen an explosion of activist forum shopping and nationwide injunctions to thwart the administration’s priorities and grind government to a halt,” said Cotton.

Meadows said he recognized the need for laws to be “vigorously vetted” by the courts, but the judicial abuse of power actually undermined the system of jurisprudence that the courts were duty-bound to uphold.

“Current law inadvertently empowers detrimental judicial activism, and it needs to change,” said Meadows, giving partisan benches the benefit of the doubt that their assault on the U.S. Constitution was unintentional. “This is a common-sense reform that returns our system of checks and balances where it was intended to be.”

The new bill would set forth to limit the scope of injunctions to the specific cases and regions that fell within the judges’ jurisdiction.

“This legislation would restore the appropriate role of district court judges by prohibiting them from issuing nationwide injunctions broader than the parties to the case or the geographic boundaries of the federal district in which the judge presides,” said the statement.

Congressional Republicans have attempted previously to block judges from abusing injunctions but have failed to gain traction with their Democratic colleagues.

After now-retired House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., introduced the Injunctive Authority Clarification Act last year with a similar goal in mind, opponents on the Left called it an affront to civil liberties.

Democrats Denounce Attorney General Barr for Skipping House Hearing
Jerrold Nadler/Photo by Jerry Nadler (CC)

“There are good reasons, of course, to act cautiously before issuing such a broad remedy, but we should not completely dismantle this important tool and risk depriving Americans of the protections they deserve,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-NY.

With Nadler now chairing the House Judiciary Committee, hope of passing meaningful legislation likely faces long-shot odds at best.

U.S. attorneys general William Barr and his predecessor, Jeff Sessions, have both condemned the pernicious practice.

Barr noted in a May speech to the American Law Institute that one of the most egregious abuses was an injunction that prevented Trump from using executive action to end the non-enforcement of underage illegal immigrants known as Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals.

Judges in California and New York forced the reinstatement of the policy, even though former President Barack Obama had originally instated it through executive order and not through the legislative process.

The judges inserting themselves into the political process established a frightening precedent, Barr said.

“[O]nce a district judge forced the Executive Branch to maintain DACA nationwide for the indefinite future, the President lost much of his leverage in negotiating with congressional leaders who wanted him to maintain DACA nationwide for the indefinite future,” he said. “Unsurprisingly, those negotiations did not lead to a deal.”

Kamala Claims ‘Happy Warrior’ Persona Despite Prosecutorial Style

0

‘It’s just trying to pursue or portray a certain image of herself, as opposed to her authentic self…’

Kamala Harris Won't Vote for Kavanaugh Because It's 'the Swing Vote'
Kamala Harris/IMAGE: PBS via YouTube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) While on the presidential campaign trail, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., has secured a reputation for flip–flopping and Pinocchio-garnering falsehoods about her policy positions.

Now, it seems, the misleading backpedals have spilled over into her own personality.

Prior to the third round of Democratic debates on Thursday, Harris—whose numbers have plummeted since her June bump for attacking front-runner Joe Biden‘s past record of racism—sought to regain her momentum, CNN reported.

The plan: Emphasize her warm and bubbly charm, according to one unnamed advisor.

“This is a crucial month for her in fundraising and debates,” said the source. “The campaign can’t survive on glimpses and glimmers. If she doesn’t do well, it’s harder to reverse the shift.”

Harris has previously pitched herself as a hard-nosed prosecutor, but she now seeks to recast image as more of a “happy warrior,” said the article.

That may be a tough sell for anyone who has watched her in action.

She gained notoriety for relentlessly attacking then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in his confirmation hearings, raking him across the coals even before allegations of sexual assault threatened to derail his appointment.

She proved to be even less empathic during the politically charged hearings in which Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee confronted Kavanaugh over the unsubstantiated accusations made by Christine Blasey Ford.

Harris noted the similarities between Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch, who had been appointed the previous year.

“The only difference is that you have been accused of sexual assault,” Harris grilled. “How do you reconcile your statement of a conspiracy against you with the treatment of someone who was before this body not very long ago?”

Harris again went for the jugular in a highly watched hearing where Attorney General William Barr went before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In a testy exchange, she interrupted him frequently while oddly trying to suggest that Rod Rosenstein—the deputy attorney general who had long overseen the Mueller investigation—had not been properly vetted, even though the newly appointed Barr had no part in the process.

She also accused Barr of reaching a foregone conclusion on the Mueller Report while levying an attack on his personal ethics.

“It’s clear you have not looked at the evidence,” a visibly peeved Harris asserted.

The cold and calculating candidate wasn’t limited, though, to political adversaries. Her attack on Biden showed that her stone-faced glare could be extended to anyone who had the misfortune of crossing her.

“I do not believe that you are a racist,” Harris began during the June debates, but “… it was hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States Senators who built their reputations and careers on segregation of race in this country.”

She then went in for the coup de grace, questioning Biden’s early support opposition to busing minority students to newly de-segregated schools.

“And there was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools and she was bused to school every day,” she said. “And that little girl was me.”

Harris’s bid to soften her image will certainly be a struggle given her past confrontational nature.

She desperately seeks traction to escape single-digit numbers where she trails Biden, along with heavy-hitting Senate colleagues Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

“I think sometimes she feels like she’s putting a guard up,” one undecided voter told CNN. “Like it’s more of a show, you know what I mean? It’s just trying to pursue or portray a certain image of herself, as opposed to her authentic self.”

But the anonymous aide said that Harris’s kinder, gentler, more cheerful demeanor had been resonating so far.

“Her entire tagline as being a joyful warrior is something that people respond to really well on the campaign trail,” said the source, “and that’s something they want people to see on the debate as well.”

Supporters may not want to get to used to it, as Harris undoubtedly would shed the smile in a general election battle against President Donald Trump, whom she recently referred to as a “predator” while rekindling her prosecutorial instincts.

“The thing about [predators] is, by their very nature and character and instinct they prey on the vulnerable,” she told ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel. “They prey on those they believe to be weak. They prey on those who are in need of help, and often desperate in need of help.”

Holder Warns 2020 Dems Against Attacking Obama’s Legacy in Debates

0

‘If Democrats are to have any hope of winning next fall, we need our presidential contenders to do better…’

Holder blames Republican gerrymandering for unfair districts
Eric Holder/IMAGE: The Daily Show

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As a waning pool of Democratic candidates prepared to take the stage again on Thursday for another debate, former President Barack Obama’s top “wingman” took them to the carpet for their past criticisms.

Eric Holder—Obama’s first attorney general and designated attack-dog when it is necessary to “kick” people instead of “go high“—was dispatched to convey the erstwhile administration’s displeasure with the 2020 hopefuls for going after his old boss.

“If Democrats are to have any hope of winning next fall, we need our presidential contenders to do better,” Holder wrote in an opinion piece for CNN.

“Falling short of our policy ideals is not the same as affirmatively and deliberately harming innocent families, and it’s counterproductive—even offensive—to suggest otherwise,” he said.

In an effort to deflate former Vice President Joe Biden‘s invoking of the Obama administration during the last round of debates, several candidates flanked the front-runner with attacks from the left, including what they dubiously claimed was a hard-line approach by Obama to enforcing illegal immigration laws.

“You invoke President Obama more than anybody in this campaign,” Sen. Cory Booker, D-NJ, said while confronting Biden. “You can’t do it when it’s convenient and then dodge it when it’s not.”

Holder chastised the leftists via Twitter in the debate’s immediate aftermath.

Holder, who frequently deployed bullying tactics during his tenure in the Justice Department to force policy changes where legislative action fell short of the Obama agenda, sounded less menacing in his latest missive.

He conceded that “[a]ny critique of our most recent President is, of course, fair game—even if … it doesn’t amount to a sound political strategy or a good use of precious speaking time during a debate.”

Still, the thin-skinned ex-campaign bundler offered his unsolicited advice to the candidates, assuring them that any effort to question the previous administration would backfire.

“[W]ith polls suggesting, at this early stage, that victory could potentially be within reach for virtually any candidate,” Holder wrote, “when I tune in this Thursday, the most important question on my mind will be which Democrat is the most effective advocate not only for her or himself, but for the record, vision and values of the Democratic Party of today and years past.”

He dismissed attacks on fellow Democrats’ records as “wonkish hair-splitting” that bored viewers and were “missing the forest for the trees” by failing to focus on the Trump administration.

“Many candidates spent too much time in the weeds, developing ‘gotcha’ moments or straining to draw personal or policy distinctions—at once testing viewers’ patience,” Holder said.

Now overseeing the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a well-funded activist group designed to enahance Democrats’ post-census gerrymandering efforts by forcing red states to redraw their maps, Holder plugged his current work in the CNN commentary.

“Where Republicans stand for voter suppression and gerrymandering that allows politicians to pick their voters (rather than the other way around), Democrats support voting rights and fair elections,” he claimed, contrary to evidence including his own acknowledgement of the group’s true mission.

He also hinted at other radical policies—such as packing the Supreme Court—that he has recently advocated.

“Where Republicans support minor changes to the criminal justice system, Democrats support the broad changes that are required to make the system more just,” he said.

Holder, who also asserted in March that America was never “great,” appealed to Democrats’ sense of their own past—while seeming to ignore or forget the party’s deeply troubling legacy of slavery, racism and other injustices.

“Advocating hard for the broader Democratic agenda that is rooted in our history as a party should be our candidates’ major focus on Thursday night,” he said.

Several candidates, however, previously attacked the Democrats’ racist legacy, honing in on Biden’s controversial comments that he was able to work cooperatively with pro-segregationist Democratic legislators early in his career.

“I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland. He never called me boy, he always called me son,” Biden said at a Manhattan speech in June.

“A guy like Herman Talmadge, one of the meanest guys I ever knew,” he continued. “You go down the list of all these guys—well, guess what? At least there was some civility.”

DEBUNKED: Fake News Claims Victory—Despite Loss—in NC Special Election

0

‘Republicans normally would have been expected to dominate in a district that Trump won…’

 1
Donald Trump and Dan Bishop / PHOTO: Jackson A. Lanier via Wikimedia Commons

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Media spin on the Republican victory in Tuesday’s “bellwether” election for North Carolina‘s 9th Congressional District proved to be the only thing predictable about the contest between GOP Rep.-elect Dan Bishop and his opponent, Democrat Dan McCready.

After months of playing up the likelihood of a blue rout and preemptively declaring it to be a defeat for President Donald Trump, left-wing pundits continued to grasp at paper straws in the face of certain defeat.

“Republicans normally would have been expected to dominate in a district that Trump won, but data released to the public ahead of the Tuesday vote showed a close race, underscoring GOP troubles in the suburbs during the Trump era,” CNN falsely reported.

Unlike his predecessor, Mark Harris, who took on McCready last year — securing a margin of 905 votes that was later invalidated amid allegations of ballot fraud — Bishop expanded his victory margin to more than 4,000 votes for the newly redrawn district, revealing a clear upswing in Trump’s favor.

Other factors also suggested that the race could portend a strong 2020 showing for Trump—as well as possible reversals in many of the red districts that Democrats claimed in 2018, should they continue to ignore the warning signs.

Coattail Voters

Midterms traditionally (with the exception of George W. Bush in the patriotic post-9/11 surge and Bill Clinton in the prelude to his impeachment hearings) favor the opposing party.

Presidential elections, conversely, are more likely to benefit the party of the incumbent president.

Since the Reagan era, every sitting president has enjoyed a coattail effect in his re-election year that offered mild (often single-digit) gains in the House of Representatives. With the exception of George H.W. Bush, all have also been re-elected during that same 35-year span.

This would suggest that Republicans may, at the very least, erode Democrats’ 35-member advantage (discounting Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich., who was elected as a Republican) if not retake the majority in the House next year.

NC Voters Furious after Dems' Redistricting Prevents Vote in Special Election
North Carolina 9th District Special Election / PHOTO: Liberty Headlines

In covering North Carolina’s special election, left-wing media played up the fact that McCready bested Bishop by about 8,000 votes in the affluent suburbs of Mecklenburg County, southeast of Charlotte.

This ignored, however, the fact that most of the races in the county also overlapped with Democratic primaries for the municipal elections coming up in November.

It is impossible to conjecture which way the coattail effect may have swung in such cases—whether Democrats voting in those primaries might otherwise have come out to vote in the special congressional election, or if it positively impacted the county races that overlapped.

But in a race with a relatively small overall turnout of just under 200,000 votes, the effect of the local primaries on mobilizing Democratic voters compared with the effect of next year’s presidential race mobilizing more Republicans can’t be dismissed.

Centrist vs. Socialist

Bishop full-throatedly embraced the current administration—which did, as many have asserted, make the race a test of the president’s continuing support among his base after three years of mostly anti-Trump headlines.

On the Democrat side, though, McCready’s campaign was hardly a measure of how radical progressives at the national level will fare in the district.

McCready ran his campaign by actively courting Republican defectors with catchphrases like “country over party” and heavy emphasis on a pro-military, pro-business background that misleadingly suggested he would side with House Republicans.

NC County Allegedly Counted Early Votes Illegally, Shared Results
Dan McCready/IMAGE: MSNBC via YouTube

This, of course, belied the millions of dollars in far-left special-interest money he allowed to flood both the 2018 and 2019 races on his behalf.

Nationally, while former Vice President Joe Biden could potentially tap into the same disingenuous “centrist” appeal, Democratic candidates running in the 2020 primary all fall sharply to McCready’s left in terms of policies.

Suggesting that McCready’s success in eroding Trump’s margin of support in the district will mirror that of other socialism-supporting candidates seems vastly optimistic for a party that has moved so far leftward as to make even Hillary Clinton seem moderate.

If anything, the momentum seems already to be shifting toward Trump. Bishop was able to win two counties of the district that previously supported McCready.

Moreover, in Robeson County, where Harris lost to McCready by 15 percentage points last year, Bishop was able to narrow the gap to 1 percent with help from Trump, even overcoming a substantial deficit in early voting that favored the Democrat.

Different Maps

One of the most egregious ways that liberal pundits attempted to cherry-pick their false conclusions in the race was by treating the 9th Congressional District as if it were the same in 2016.

Since the last presidential election, liberal activists have repeatedly sued Republican state legislators to insist that the maps were biased.

Dem. Attorney Marc Elias Used Activist Court Rulings to Redraw GOP Districts 1
North Carolina’s Congressional districts/IMAGE: USA Today via Youtube

The result was court-forced gerrymandering to create more left-friendly electoral maps, making it an apples-and-oranges comparison.

This change was so greatly downplayed by the press that many voters in the neighboring 12th district arrived at the polls expecting to vote in the special election, only to be disappointed.

The 2016 map, under which Republicans dominated, may actually have pulled from an area that was less red overall than the current district.

The old district was largely concentrated around the outskirts of Charlotte, where Hillary Clinton won by large margins.

The previous Republican incumbent, Robert Pittenger—who also carried the suburbs, despite his opposition to Trump policies—was ousted after the redrawing of the districts led to a contentious GOP primary, from which the more conservative Harris emerged victorious.

Although a handful of Trump regions in the lower suburbs of Mecklenburg County swung for McCready on Tuesday, they may just as easily be accounted for by shifting demographics and other candidate-specific circumstances as by a reversal in political attitudes.

But the maps may well change again before next year’s race, rendering moot any effort to divine how the district might look, even if the people living in it were to remain largely the same.

A recent state-court decision—celebrated by former President Barack Obama and the National Democratic Redistricting Committee—ruled in favor of the activist group Common Cause, which had complained that the districts they helped to forcibly redraw in 2017 did not go far enough in making the elections more favorable to the Left.

Should Democrats nominally claim the district at some point in the future, they can thank the liberal courts for delivering it to them rather than the strength and appeal of their messaging.

Incumbency Advantage

 1
Robert Pittenger / IMAGE: CNN via Youtube

For all practical purposes, after two years of running in a closely followed race, McCready had the same benefits of financing and name exposure as a sitting incumbent—and, indeed, he straddled the center–left line much the way Pittenger had before him from the center–right.

Bishop also was a known entity in the county, having represented it previously as a state senator, where he drew headlines for his strong conservative values—including his sponsorship of HB1, the transgender bathroom bill.

While it is possible that McCready may once again challenge Bishop in next year’s election—or that another high-profile Democrat may emerge to take on the battle-weary incumbent—having been entrenched in Congress for a year will likely shore up additional support for the GOP as true swing voters will see little need to drastically change courses.

NC Voters Furious after Dems’ Redistricting Prevents Vote in Special Election

0

‘There is some onus on the voter…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) The well-publicized, high-stakes special election in North Carolina‘s 9th Congressional District seems to have been a rude awakening for some of its former voters who only now are seeing the effects of Democrat-led gerrymandering forced by the activist courts.

Hundreds of voters from Charlotte and surrounding Mecklenburg County showed up at the polls Tuesday expecting to have their say in the race to fill the last disputed seat of the midterm election, only to be disappointed, reported the Charlotte Observer.

The historically red 9th district—which wrapped around the affluent southern suburbs of Charlotte, the state’s largest city—was forcibly redrawn in 2017 after left-wing activists sued the state’s Republican-led legislature, claiming racism had factored into the map’s creation during the previous round of redistricting.

Last year’s victory by Republican candidate Mark Harris over Democrat Dan McCready was invalidated after partisan members of the State Board of Elections claimed ballot fraud against a longtime political operative in one of the rural counties within the new district.

In the special election, McCready—now at the tail-end of a two-year-long campaign—faced Republican state Sen. Dan Bishop, as well as two other outside candidates. Outside political-action committees invested millions in TV ads and other get-out-the-vote messaging.

NC Voters Furious after Dems' Redistricting Prevents Vote in Special Election 1
North Carolina 9th District Special Election / PHOTO: Liberty Headlines

The close involvement of President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence made it a mandate on the president’s administration if not a bellwether portending the outcome of his re-election campaign next year.

But while the media has hyped the district’s conservative history, most have remained silent on the redistricting that drastically shifted the electoral dynamics.

So silent, it seems, that even the voters were caught unaware.

Kristin Mavromatis, spokeswoman for the Mecklenburg County Board of Elections, said she was one of the local officials who was inundated with calls from angry voters claiming they had been disenfranchised.However, she shrugged off the confusion, saying it was their obligation and civic duty to be aware of what district they were in.

“Know before you go,” Mavromatis told the Observer. “There is some onus on the voter.”

Soros Op-Ed Praising Trump’s China Policy Arouses Heavy Suspicion on Motives

‘The greatest—and perhaps only—foreign policy accomplishment of the Trump administration has been the development of a coherent and genuinely bipartisan policy toward Xi Jinping ’s China…’

Soros Makes Massive Investments on Fossil Fuels
George Soros/photo by Niccolò Caranti (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) George Soros, one of the most reviled villains on the political Left, offered surprise praise to President Donald Trump for his handling of the ongoing trade war with China.

Soros is said to have doubled-down heavily on the Chinese yuan prior to the 2008 crash that ushered in a recession in the U.S. and other Western countries, to the benefit of the Asian market.

But he has since encouraged a hard-line approach to dealing with China and seems to have welcomed Trump’s calls to divest in its rival industries.

“The greatest—and perhaps only—foreign policy accomplishment of the Trump administration has been the development of a coherent and genuinely bipartisan policy toward Xi Jinping ’s China,” Soros began in an op-ed piece published Monday by the Wall Street Journal.

Nonetheless, the billionaire financier—whose so-called philanthropic ventures are heavily invested in open borders and many subversive efforts to disrupt America’s democratic process—said he feared Trump may cave in negotiations by offering concessions to Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei.

“It’s hard to know exactly what’s motivating Mr. Trump,” Soros said, “but he appears desperate for a deal with President Xi to bolster the U.S. stock market and economy to improve his chances at re-election—putting his electoral interests ahead of America’s interests.”

Huawei is currently on the Commerce Department’s “entity list,” which labels it a “national security threat” and prevents U.S. companies from engaging in business with it, CNBC reported.

Soros called on readers to support Republican-led efforts in Congress that would block the company’s removal from the entity list.

“If Republicans allow Mr. Trump to bail out the Communist Party-run telecom giant, they will be abdicating their most basic democratic responsibilities,” he said.

Huawei—along with another sanctioned Chinese company, ZTE—has been a key player in the race to develop the 5G radio network that will replace existing cell-phone and Internet technology over the next few years, rendering old 4G devices obsolete.

Many fear that its technology could surreptitiously aid the Chinese government with spying.

The Justice Department previously filed charges accusing Huawei of corporate espionage and fraudulent trade practices.

Additionally, it may be “a dangerous rival in artificial intelligence and machine learning,” Soros said.

However, the ban on doing business with American companies has given it a disadvantage by blocking crucial access to developing technologies, he added.

“[F]or now it still depends on about 30 U.S. companies to supply Huawei with the core components it needs to compete in the 5G market,” Soros said.

Soros admitted that he, too, had his own business interests in mind by wanting to limit China’s competitive advantage because his “open societies” agenda ran counter to the country’s more totalitarian policies, such as a social-credit system that may restrict travel.

Of course, the 89-year-old plutocrat likely has a considerable financial stake tied to the Asian markets, as well.

In 2011, he wrote that China’s decision to devalue the yuan—generally giving it a competitive edge over U.S. rivals—could also spike inflation in the country, just as it was beginning to surpass Western economies.

China recently announced a plan to do the same as it sought to undermine U.S. tariffs on its products.

That could signal that Soros needs the U.S. to win the trade war in order to protect his investments.

More likely, though, is that he stands to gain the most by having everybody lose.

A sustained trade war between the two economic forces would risk triggering another unstable market that would leave him well positioned both politically and economically.

“The reality is that we are in a Cold War that threatens to turn into a hot one,” Soros said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last January.

“On the other hand, if Xi and Trump were no longer in power, an opportunity would present itself to develop greater cooperation between the two cybersuperpowers,” he added.