Former Mayor of New York City and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg appeared on “CBS This Morning” with Gayle King recently.
Approximately half way into the interview, King brought up a tweet from President Trump, which reads: “Mini Mike Bloomberg has instructed his third rate news organization not to investigate him or any Democrat, but to go after President Trump only.”
The host then asked: “What’s your response to what he said?”
Bloomberg replied:
<blockquote>I think people have said to me, “How can you investigate yourself?” And I said, “I don’t think you can.” But if you take a look at the Bloomberg News organization, we carry news from lots of different places, like New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. There’s plenty of ways for people to get news about the candidates if they look at Bloomberg News.</blockquote>
King asked Bloomberg about his employees, some of whom have complained that “they’re not allowed to investigate other Democratic candidates because their boss is in the race.”
To that, Bloomberg was rather blunt, stating: “You just have to learn to live with some things. They get a paycheck, and it comes from the company, and from the company that I started – not running at the moment; turned it over to somebody else to do that – but with with your paycheck comes some restrictions and responsibilities.”
On the same day Bloomberg announced his candidacy, Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait sent out a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/bloomberg-news-wont-investigate-bloomberg-democrats-its-journalists-go-to-work-on-bloombergs-campaign">memo</a> that reads in part:
<blockquote>No previous presidential candidate has owned a journalistic organization of this size. We have electoral laws to follow – to do with both balance and opinion. We will certainly obey them, but I think we need to do more than just that – and I believe we can. So this is how we will proceed&#8230;
The place where Mike has had the most contact with editorial is Bloomberg Opinion: our editorials have reflected his views. David Shipley, Tim O’Brien and some members of the Board responsible for those editorials will take a leave of absence to join Mike’s campaign. We will suspend the Board, so there will be no unsigned editorials. Our columnists, who produced the majority of Bloomberg Opinion’s content, will continue to speak for themselves, and we will continue to take some op-ed articles from outsiders (although not op-eds on the election)&#8230;
On news, we will write about virtually all aspects of this presidential contest in much the same way as we have done so far. We will describe who is winning and who is losing. We will look at policies and their consequences. We will carry polls, we will interview candidates, and we will track their campaigns, including Mike&#8217;s. We have already assigned a reporter to follow his campaign &#8230; and in the stories we write on the presidential contest, we will make clear that our owner is now a candidate&#8230;
For the moment, our P&amp;I team are continuing to investigate the Trump administration, as the government of the day. If Mike is chosen as the Democratic presidential candidate (and Donald Trump emerges as the Republican one), we will reassess how we do that.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Bloomberg Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait just sent this note to staffers: &#8220;There is no point in trying to claim that covering this presidential campaign will be easy for a newsroom that has built up its reputation for independence in part by not writing about ourselves&#8230;&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/RvfvpsZgDV">pic.twitter.com/RvfvpsZgDV</a>
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) <a href="https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1198638671374761985?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
Later in the interview, Bloomberg was asked about accusations that he hadn’t apologized swiftly enough for the “stop and frisk” policy when he was mayor of New York City. He said that “in looking back,” he knows he “made a mistake,” and apologized.
When asked if he would choose a “woman running mate or a person of color,” Bloomberg said that his “criteria is plain and simple.”
“My only criteria is, if I drop dead, could the vice president take over and run this country such that my kids and grandkids were safe and had a future. That’s the only criteria,” Bloomberg said.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XyneGE1WBIc?start=890" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

Michael Bloomberg.

Bloomberg On Employees Of His News Org Complaining: ‘With Your Paycheck Comes Some Restrictions And Responsibilities’

2020 Election

Bloomberg News

Media

Media Bias

Michael Bloomberg

Former Mayor of New York City and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg appeared on “CBS This Morning” with Gayle King recently.
King first asked Bloomberg about his comments pertaining to a presidential run the last time he appeared on the show:
<blockquote>KING: What happened between September and now?
BLOOMBERG: I looked at our national government getting worse, the way we&#8217;re behaving overseas and domestically, led by our president. I said back in 2016, &#8220;He is the wrong person for the job. He doesn&#8217;t have the temperament or the ethics or the intellect to do the job.&#8221; And I said, &#8220;We just can&#8217;t have another four years of this.&#8221; And then I watched all the candidates. And I just thought to myself, &#8220;Donald Trump would eat them up.&#8221;</blockquote>
King pushed back on Bloomberg’s “eat them up” remark, and the candidate rephrased, saying that he believes he “would do the best job of competing with [Trump] and beating him.”
King later spoke about Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) lamenting the fact that the debate stage in December will feature (as of publication) an all-white group of candidates. She asked Bloomberg if that was a problem.
Bloomberg complimented Booker, then stated correctly that “the public is out there picking and choosing and narrowing down this field. The truth of the matter is you had a lot of diversity in the candidates, some of whom were very competent.”
As for why the field has narrowed as it has, the former mayor said: “I don’t know.”
King pressed Bloomberg on the progressive narrative that it’s “time for something new,” as opposed to another “old white gentleman.” Bloomberg pushed back, leading to the following exchange:
<blockquote>BLOOMBERG: Yes, it may be. But lots of people can enter. There was no reason – if you wanted to enter and run for president of the United States, you could have done that. But don&#8217;t complain to me that you&#8217;re not in the race. It was up to you. And I thought there was a lot of diversity in the group of Democratic aspirants. Entry is not a barrier.
KING: So you&#8217;re saying if you want diversity, then get in?
BLOOMBERG: That is exactly a good way to phrase it. Thank you very much.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XyneGE1WBIc?start=286" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> 
As the Democratic presidential field has winnowed, one of its most prominent minority members dropped out, and the other non-white candidates who remain in the race are all polling in single digits.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-kamala-harris-drops-out-of-presidential-race">announced</a> on Tuesday that she was dropping out of the presidential race, writing on Medium that her “campaign &#8230; simply doesn’t have the financial resources we need to continue.”
After Harris’ exit, some progressives on Twitter had a meltdown.
Journalist Lauren Duca tweeted:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Kamala Harris officially ended her campaign today, which means that all of the candidates who currently qualify for the December Democratic debate are white (Sanders, Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer).
White supremacy is not just a Fox News problem, folks.
— Lauren Duca (@laurenduca) <a href="https://twitter.com/laurenduca/status/1201930900445057024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>Kamala Harris officially ended her campaign today, which means that all of the candidates who currently qualify for the December Democratic debate are white (Sanders, Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer). White supremacy is not just a Fox News problem, folks.</blockquote>
Dr. Eugene Gu, a progressive who frequently comments on politics, made a similar remark:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Kamala Harris dropping out of the race while only white candidates qualify for the next presidential debate shows that white privilege and white supremacy cut across party lines. It’s not just Trump. We have a racism problem in all of the United States of America, and it sucks.
— Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) <a href="https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1201939626199379968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>Kamala Harris dropping out of the race while only white candidates qualify for the next presidential debate shows that white privilege and white supremacy cut across party lines. It’s not just Trump. We have a racism problem in all of the United States of America, and it sucks.”</blockquote>
As it stands, the other minority candidates in the Democratic field are businessman Andrew Yang, who is polling at 2.6%, according to the RealClearPolitics national average, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who is polling at 2%, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, who is polling at 1.4%, and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) who is polling at 1%.
Another minority candidate, former Governor of Massachusetts Deval Patrick, joined the race in mid-November, but has thus far failed to gain much if any traction among Democratic voters. He currently sits at 0.4%, according to the RealClearPolitics national polling average.

WATCH: Bloomberg Slams Democratic Debate ‘Diversity’ Narrative

Racism

On Friday, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) held a town hall-style event at a bowling alley in Petersborough, New Hampshire.
During the event, one woman asked Warren the following question about her ancestry: “What do I say to my native american relatives regarding the confusion around the native american ancestry issue?”
Warren replied:
<blockquote>I grew up in Oklahoma, and my three older brothers and I learned about our family [the] same way most people do – from our mom and from our dad. My family’s very important to me, and that’s why many years ago I sometimes identified as Native American.
Boston Globe did a big investigation about this, gosh, what about a year and a half ago, never had anything to do with any job I ever got or any benefit.
But even so, I shouldn’t have done it. I am not a person of color; I am not a citizen of a tribe; and I have apologized for confusion I’ve caused on tribal citizenship, tribal sovereignty, and for any harm that I’ve caused.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Whoa&#8230;
This is quite the admission from Elizabeth Warren on previously identifying as Native American:
“I shouldn’t have done it. I am not a person of color, I am not a citizen of a tribe. And I have apologized for confusion I have caused”<a href="https://t.co/ErjPhVb62h">pic.twitter.com/ErjPhVb62h</a>
— Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) <a href="https://twitter.com/NathanBrandWA/status/1203053849478602753?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
Sen. Warren has been dogged by the question regarding her ancestry for years. Even President Trump took to calling the senator “Pocahontas,” and dared her to take a DNA test.
In October 2018, Warren released a video in which she spoke with Stanford Professor Carlos D. Bustamante, who had conducted a DNA analysis on the senator in order to get to the bottom of the heritage question.
According to Bustamante, who “used samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia to stand in for Native American” due to a lack of available DNA from verified Native Americans, reports <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/warren-addresses-native-american-issue/YEUaGzsefB0gPBe2AbmSVO/story.html?et_rid=654126300&amp;s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter">The Boston Globe</a>, Warren had a Native American ancestor “in the range of 6-10 generations ago.”
Warren’s DNA test stunt troubled some in the Native American community.
Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-warren-i-have-more-indian-blood-she-does-frank-camp">said</a> that the use of “a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong &#8230; dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is [proven].”
Warren allegedly reached out an apologized, after which Hoskins <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/02/01/690806434/warren-apologizes-to-cherokee-nation-for-dna-test">stated</a>: “We are encouraged by this dialogue and understanding that being a Cherokee Nation tribal citizen is rooted in centuries of culture and laws not through DNA tests. We are encouraged by her action and hope that the slurs and mockery of tribal citizens and Indian history and heritage will now come to an end.”
In February, Cherokee Nation citizen Rebecca Nagle dragged Warren, <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/trump-appears-to-joke-about-trail-of-tears-in-tweet-about-elizabeth-warren-1440281667740">stating</a> in part:
<blockquote>Warren has zero Cherokee ancestry. Genealogists in 2012 did her genealogy. That’s what Cherokee genealogists do when somebody claims to be Cherokee &#8230; [Warren] comes from a line of very well-documented white people, going back to before the Trail of Tears&#8230;
There are over forty-five rolls of Cherokee people between the 1810s and the 1910s, and Cherokee genealogists went [and] looked up Warren’s family tree and then crossed-referenced her relatives with those forty-five rolls and looked for them, and they’re not there. So there is no evidence that she has a single Cherokee ancestor. The only evidence she has is this race-based science of a DNA test which you cannot use to lay claim to any tribe or any relationship to any tribe, and people don’t know that.</blockquote>
Warren’s troubles have continued. In February, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/elizabeth-warren-apologizes-for-calling-herself-native-american/2019/02/05/1627df76-2962-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?noredirect=on">The Washington Post</a> uncovered the senator’s 1986 “registration card for the State Bar of Texas.” On the card, Warren lists her race as “American Indian.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Here is the form Elizabeth Warren filled out for the State Bar of Texas claiming American Indian heritage. <a href="https://t.co/VwHifS7BCL">pic.twitter.com/VwHifS7BCL</a>
— Amy Gardner (@AmyEGardner) <a href="https://twitter.com/AmyEGardner/status/1092941590555971585?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
“The Texas bar registration card is significant, among other reasons, because it removes any doubt that Warren directly claimed the identity,” wrote Annie Linskey and Amy Gardner.
The Washington Post adds that “there’s no indication Warren had anything to gain by reporting herself as Native American on the Texas bar card.”
As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-warren-i-have-more-indian-blood-she-does-frank-camp">previously reported</a>, The Washington Post article notes that from 1986 to 1995, Warren listed herself as a “minority” in the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) directory. Additionally, from 1995 to 2004, Harvard Law School reportedly listed Warren as Native American on forms relating to affirmative action.
The Harvard Law School listing allegedly began well after Warren had been hired. Additionally, according to the outlet, Warren’s ethnicity listing at the University of Pennsylvania changed to “Native American” in December of 1989, two years after being hired.
Warren was even asked when she knew she wasn’t Native American during an appearance on “The Breakfast Club” in May, co-hosted by Charlamagne tha God.
“How long did you hold onto that?” he asked, noting the Texas Bar registration card. “Why’d you do that?”
Warren replied: “You know, so, it’s what I believed. Like I said, it’s what I learned from my family.”
Charlamagne tha God didn’t appear satisfied, asking: “When did you find out you weren’t?”
Warren stumbled. “Well, it’s, I&#8217;m not a person of color. I&#8217;m not a citizen of a tribe – and tribal citizenship is an important distinction.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none">
REMINDER: Elizabeth Warren has not addressed when she learned that she is not Native American.
Back in May, she refused to answer TWICE when asked at what point she learned that she wasn&#8217;t not Native American. <a href="https://t.co/xRnFBveqiT">pic.twitter.com/xRnFBveqiT</a>
— Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) <a href="https://twitter.com/NathanBrandWA/status/1203065322120646656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
Despite all this mess, Warren is still seen by many progressives as a possible lock for the Democratic nomination. However, recent polling out of Iowa and New Hampshire (the first two primary/caucus states) show Warren falling, and rival Pete Buttigieg rising.
According to the RealClearPolitics polling average, Warren currently sits in third place in Iowa with 17.7% of the vote. Buttigieg and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) rank first and second with 24% and 18.3%, respectively.
In New Hampshire, Warren faces almost identical problems, coming in third place with 14.3%, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average. Once again, Buttigieg and Sanders have taken first and second place with 20% and 17%, respectively.
In Nevada, Warren is behind Former Vice President Joe Biden by nine points, and in South Carolina, the senator is a whopping 19% down on Biden. In North Carolina (though the polling there is not as fresh), Warren falls 17% below Biden.
Warren sits atop the polls in only two states for which RealClearPolitics is keeping tabs. In California, which will hold its primary on Super Tuesday (March 3, 2020), Warren currently captures 21.5% support to Biden’s 21.3% support. In Massachusetts, the state from which Warren hails as a senator, Warren has 28.5% to second place Biden’s 22%.
Warren has also taken a dive in national polling.
Following a brief rise in October and early-November during which time she threatened to take the top spot from Biden, Warren has tumbled back down to third place. As of publication, Warren sits at 14.2% support in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, Behind Biden at 27.8% and Sanders at 15.6%.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Warren Faces Ancestry Question At Town Hall: ‘I Shouldn’t Have Done It. I Am Not A Person Of Color’

Democratic Party

Elizabeth Warren

Race

On Thursday, Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg held a town hall in Henniker, New Hampshire. During the event, a 7-year-old girl asked the South Bend mayor a question about abortion.
“Mayor Buttigieg, I have listened to you in the debates, and learned some stuff about you, and that you believe in a woman’s right to choose about her own body,” the girl said. “I agree with that. No one should mess with or choose about my body except me and my parents because I’m still a child.”
Buttigieg interjected: “You sound pretty sophisticated for a child. Do you mind if I ask how old you are?”
The girl said that she didn’t mind, and told the mayor that she was 7. Buttigieg replied: “Really? Well, you’re ahead of your time.”
The girl continued, asking: “I believe that you make your decision on whether you’re going to have a child, and then your decision is made, and the abortion is not part of it. What do you think about that?”
Buttigieg responded to the little girl, saying:
<blockquote>Well, first of all, thanks for speaking up about this, and thanks for being here, and I wish I was as tuned in to big issues when I was 7 as you seem to be. This is a hard issue for a lot of people because they believe different things – and where I live, people believe different things, including people that I respect. But the way I think about it is that this choice, it’s about drawing a line, and we might each, following our own beliefs, have a different idea about where to draw the line.
What I hope everybody, or at least most of us, can agree on is who gets to draw the line – and that’s the person making the decision, that’s the woman in question. And I trust women to make that choice. I don’t think that choice is easy. I know that it’s not going to be any better because the government’s saying what it ought to be. I trust women to make that choice. And it sounds like you and I view this issue the same way.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
WATCH:
Pete Buttigieg is no moderate.
He just told a 7-year-old pro-life girl it&#8217;s okay to kill babies in abortions.<a href="https://t.co/KYgPd7NJgV">https://t.co/KYgPd7NJgV</a> <a href="https://t.co/1W6IRTHp45">pic.twitter.com/1W6IRTHp45</a>
— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) <a href="https://twitter.com/LifeNewsHQ/status/1202726154257350656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2019</a></blockquote>
Buttigieg has made his position on abortion clear on numerous occasions, using similar verbiage. The extremity of his position can be seen during a Fox News town hall in which Chris Wallace asked the mayor about third trimester abortions.
“Do you believe at any point in pregnancy, whether it&#8217;s six weeks or eight weeks or 24 weeks or whatever, that there should be any limit on a woman&#8217;s right to have an abortion?” Wallace asked.
Buttigieg answered in typical fashion, saying: “I think the dialogue has got so caught up on where you draw the line that we&#8217;ve gotten away from the fundamental question of who gets to draw the line, and I trust women to draw the line when it&#8217;s [their own life].”
Wallace followed up, asking: “You’re saying that you would be okay with a woman well into the third trimester deciding to abort a pregnancy?”
Buttigieg pushed back, taking issue with the “hypothetical” nature of the question. Wallace then stated that at least 6,000 abortions a year are performed in the third trimester, and it’s therefore not hypothetical.
Buttigieg was finally forced to answer Wallace’s query:
<blockquote>So let&#8217;s put ourselves in the shoes of a woman in that situation. If it&#8217;s that late in your pregnancy, that means, almost by definition, you’ve been expecting to carry it to term. We&#8217;re talking about women who have perhaps chosen a name; women who have purchased a crib; families that then get the most devastating medical news of their lifetime – something about the health or the life of the mother that forces them to make an impossible, unthinkable choice.
And the bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is – that woman, that family may seek spiritual guidance; they may seek medical guidance – but that decision’s not going to be made any better medically or morally because the government is dictating how that decision should be made.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/p97xg-keEKg?start=615" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
As former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino said during an interview with Lila Rose, founder of anti-abortion organization Live Action, late-term abortions are never medically necessary to save the life of the mother.
<blockquote>ROSE: One of the biggest arguments of pro-abortion activists is that abortion is medically necessary. What&#8217;s your position on that?
LEVATINO: We hear all the time how abortion – including, especially late-term abortion – is necessary to save women&#8217;s lives. Nothing could be further from the truth. I spent nine years working at a tertiary medical center. I mean, there are only certain hospitals in the country that are designated to take care of the really, really high risk pregnancies&#8230;
I was faculty at the [Albany Medical Center] hospital for nine years, and I saw hundreds of cases of really severe pregnancy complications – cancers, heart disease, intractable diabetes, out of control, toxemia pregnancy, out of control, and I saved &#8230; in those nine years, I saved hundreds of women from life-threatening pregnancies, and I did that by delivering them, by ending their pregnancy by delivery, either induction of labor or caesarean section&#8230;
And I always tell people – in all of those years, the number of babies that I was obligated to deliberately kill in the process was zero. None.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kHNzoZ4oheU?start=564" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
While Mayor Pete Buttigieg stands in line with many of his Democratic presidential peers on the issue of abortion, he is wildly out of step with the American people.
A 2018 <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx">Gallup survey</a> asked respondents whether they believed abortion should be legal or illegal “in the last three months of pregnancy.” 81% said that it should be “illegal.” 65% stated that abortion should be illegal even in the second trimester.
In 2019, Gallup asked respondents if they believed abortion was morally wrong or morally acceptable, “regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal.” 50% said it’s “morally wrong,” while 42% said it’s “morally acceptable.”

Pete Buttigieg.

WATCH: Buttigieg And 7-Year-Old Questioner Discuss Abortion

Abortion

Pete Buttigieg

On Friday, CNBC’s “Mad Money” host Jim Cramer appeared on the network’s “Squawk Box” to discuss the latest unemployment numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for the month of November.
“Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 266,000 in November. Job growth has averaged 180,000 per month thus far in 2019, compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018. In November, notable job gains occurred in health care and in professional and technical services,” reports <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm">BLS</a>.
The bureau also noted that the “seasonally adjusted” unemployment rate dipped from 3.6% in October to 3.5% in November. Last year (November 2018), the unemployment rate was 3.7% “adjusted.”
Additionally, average hourly earnings for “all employees on private nonfarm payrolls” are up 86 cents from November 2018 ($27.43 to $28.29).
After noting that there was “growth with not very much inflation,” Cramer stated that he wished people “were making more money.”
He then mentioned cable news bias pertaining to the economy:
<blockquote>There&#8217;s a fellow by the name of Michael Cembalest &#8230; he is the Chairman of Market and Investment Strategy at J.P. Morgan. He came up with a list of what the cable companies – CNN, [MSNBC] – what do they cover. 16th is positive economic news. All the rest of them are negative. So, you know what&#8217;s going on here, Joe. People don&#8217;t want to say good things, and this is the best number I&#8217;ve ever seen in my life!</blockquote>
Host Joe Kernan then asked Cramer “how can it last forever?”
Cramer replied, speaking directly about the ongoing trade war with China:
<blockquote>It has to go up, Joe, because when we win the trade war, which you now know we&#8217;re going to win now because we have the better numbers, then they&#8217;re going to have to put jobs here. That&#8217;s what they&#8217;re going to have to do. And we&#8217;re not even talking about that yet. In the end, the Chinese are going to have to put jobs here. Because this thing is – the president can walk away from the table with this number.</blockquote>
After Kernan stated that Americans won’t “see that written or said anywhere,” Cramer responded, saying the “truth sets people free.”
Cramer added:
<blockquote>You can&#8217;t contradict that these are the best numbers of our lives. &#8230; I don&#8217;t see inflation; I don&#8217;t see recession. 50 years ago that number was a curse, now it&#8217;s a blessing. And you know something, Joe? It doesn&#8217;t matter whether you hate [Trump] or like him, these are real numbers.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zKuEBt4DQzg" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
On Wednesday, J.P. Morgan’s Michael Cembalest published a piece covering a variety of finial topics. In the piece, as Cramer stated on “Squawk Box,” Cembalest <a href="https://am.jpmorgan.com/blobcontent/1383651198191/83456/12-04-2019%20-%20War%20of%20the%20Worlds_AMV.pdf">charted</a> the coverage of four cable news shows (CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360” and “Cuomo Prime Time,” and MSNBC’s “Rachel Maddow Show” and “Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell”) over the course of one year (September 2018 &#8211; September 2019).
What Cembalest and his team found was that “positive economic news” came in 16th place under the “number of times [a] topic [was] discussed in depth” metric, below the following:
<blockquote>Mueller investigation/Russian interference
Trump is inept/erratic/mendacious/biased
Asylum and immigration
Trump Administration corruption
Presidential politics
Supreme Court
Natural disasters
Gun violence
International relations
Senate/Governors Races
North Korea
Trade war
Data privacy
Climate change
Opioids and prescription drug pricing</blockquote>
This isn’t surprising to anyone who follows this type of thing closely. As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-former-msnbc-host-says-networks-coverage-frank-camp">previously reported</a>:
<blockquote>According to a report from the <a href="https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2019/01/15/networks-trashed-trump-90-negative-spin-2018-did-it-matter">Media Research Center</a> (MRC), from January 2017 through December 2018, 90% of the coverage of President Trump from the major network evening news programs (ABC, CBS, NBC) has been negative, while just 10% has been positive. The analysis excludes “neutral statements.”
MRC states: “To determine the spin of news coverage, our analysts tallied all explicitly evaluative statements about the President or his administration from either reporters, anchors or non-partisan sources such as experts or voters. Evaluations from partisan sources, as well as neutral statements, were not included.”
Of the 858 minutes spent by the big three networks’ evening newscasts discussing the Trump/Russia collusion story in 2018, 98% was “negative,” according to the MRC analysis. Of the 643 minutes covering immigration and the border, 94% was “negative.” The least negative of the big five “Trump-bashing” stories that received hundreds of minutes of airtime pertained to North Korea (410 minutes; 80% “negative”).</blockquote>

Thumbs up Trump.

CNBC’s Jim Cramer On Jobs Report: ‘Doesn’t Matter Whether You Hate’ Trump, These Are The ‘Best Numbers Of Our Lives’

Donald Trump

Economy

Jim Cramer

jobs

Unemployment

On Thanksgiving Thursday, when an Oklahoma police officer was given his order at a Glenpool Starbucks, the word “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/starbucks-reportedly-suspends-employee-who-wrote-pig-on-police-officers-cup">PIG</a>” was printed in all caps on the side of the cup where one would typically find the customer name.
Kiefer Police Chief Johnny O’Mara later shared a photo of the cup on social media.
“One of my on-duty officers decides to do something nice for our dispatchers,” O’Mara wrote, noting that the officer was grabbing beverages for the police dispatchers who were working on the holiday. “This is what he gets for being nice.”
“What irks me is the absolute and total disrespect for a police officer who, instead of being home with family and enjoying a meal and a football game, is patrolling his little town,” O’Mara continued.
The chief added that the incident was “another tiny symptom and a nearly indiscernible shout from a contemptuous, roaring and riotous segment of a misanthropic society that vilifies those who stand for what’s right and glorifies the very people who would usher in the destruction of the social fabric.”
The official Starbucks Facebook account reached out and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/starbucks-reportedly-suspends-employee-who-wrote-pig-on-police-officers-cup">apologized</a> for the incident.
Starbucks corporate also issued a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/starbucks-reportedly-suspends-employee-who-wrote-pig-on-police-officers-cup">statement</a>, saying that the “partner” who wrote the word “pig” on the cup “used poor judgement and is no longer a partner after this violation of company policy.”
After hearing about the incident, veteran and CEO of Black Rifle Coffee, Evan Hafer, reached out to the Kiefer police department to donate some of their product.
Speaking with The Daily Wire, Hafer said that he doubts “the majority of Starbucks employees would think that what the person did was acceptable,” however, he believes that what happened is the result of a “company culture issue.”
“I think that Starbucks has kind of been the example of more of the progressive aspects of culture, and this is just the way that it&#8217;s exemplified now,” Hafer said. “When your CEOs and founders are more progressive, and they’re pushing the company in a direction that&#8217;s somewhat anti-American, there&#8217;s going to be this friction.”
He added:
<blockquote>Starbucks can apologize and fire the employees who are at fault time and time again, but until it addresses its top-down culture of leftism and progressive intolerance, our first responders will have to wonder whether a quick cup of coffee is going to turn into a major media event.</blockquote>
According to Hafer, this goes well beyond Starbucks. “The outward face of a lot of companies in today&#8217;s corporate environment is more about placating the progressive, politically correct, AOC/tech generation versus taking a stand for being not only pro-law enforcement but pro-America,” Hafer told The Daily Wire.
“We shouldn&#8217;t be ashamed of having a giant flag poles in front of our corporate buildings. We&#8217;re proud of our service. We&#8217;re proud of the country. We&#8217;re proud of all of these things,” Hafer said.
Black Rifle Coffee Company is a veteran-owned business that strives to hire other veterans. As of 2019, all of Black Rifle’s “leadership team” are veterans, as are 40% of their employees, according to the company.

Starbucks.

Veteran-Owned Coffee Company Donates Coffee To Police Precinct That Received ‘PIG’ Cup At Starbucks

Police

Starbucks

On Sunday, Fox News’ Ed Henry and Howard Kurtz discussed MSNBC host Joy Reid’s suggestion that some Republican Trump support is like a “racial and religious cult of personality.”
First, Kurtz played a clip of Reid talking about a recent Economist/YouGov poll in which a majority of Republicans said that Donald Trump is a “better” president than Abraham Lincoln.
Reid stated in part: “There’s a lot of evidence that is a racial and religious cult of personality in which his base is solidly among the white evangelicals that almost worship him and say that he’s the chosen one of God.”
Kurtz then asked Henry why Reid would use the term “racial &#8230; especially from somebody who often accuses, like many of her fellow liberal pundits, the president of being racially divisive?” 
Henry replied:
<blockquote>I don’t understand why she injected race. I don’t think race applies. Certainly, the vast majority of the president’s supporters are white, but I think we’ve seen in recent weeks and months he’s making a strong play for more and more black voters. We’ll see if he’s successful – but when you have black unemployment at historic lows right now and you have a president who’s trying to reach out to people of all backgrounds and say, “I want your vote, I need your vote,” I just don’t understand why race is part of the conversation.
It just doesn’t apply, and I think some people like to project themselves, their own anger at the president, their own criticism, and read into what he’s doing or saying rather than just focusing on what he’s actually doing instead of projecting, “This is what he really means! We’re gonna divine it!”</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/llN_sZYiZ-A" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
On Saturday, MSNBC host Joy Reid had author and Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts on her show to discuss a new Economist/YouGov poll in which Republicans were asked to choose a “better” president – Donald Trump or Abraham Lincoln. 53% of Republicans selected Trump, while 47% selected Lincoln.
When asked for his comment, Pitts <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/msnbc-host-drags-republicans-who-chose-trump-over-lincoln-dems-did-the-same-with-obama">said</a>:
<blockquote>I think I need a brick wall before I can answer that. I hadn’t seen, I hadn’t heard of that poll, but it sort of speaks further to the delusionary aspect of the Republican Party right now. This is not a party. This is a cult, and it has been a cult for a long time. And it wasn’t just this Abraham Lincoln quote. I mean, what was it a week or so ago – maybe not even that – that Rick Perry said that Trump was a chosen one, and he wasn’t even the first person to say that … it’s amazing.</blockquote>
The two then had an exchange during which Reid claimed there is “a lot of evidence” that the president’s base is behaving like a “racial and religious cult of personality.”
As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/msnbc-host-drags-republicans-who-chose-trump-over-lincoln-dems-did-the-same-with-obama">reported</a>, a February 2018 poll from Economist/YouGov showed that, when asked to rank the best presidents, 33% of Democratic voters chose former President Barack Obama, whereas only 15% chose Abraham Lincoln.
Third, fourth, and fifth places went to Franklin Delano Roosevelt (14%), John. F. Kennedy (10%), and Bill Clinton (7%).

Ed Henry.

Fox News Host Drags MSNBC’s Joy Reid Over Her Comparing Some Trump Support To A ‘Racial And Religious Cult Of Personality’

Ed Henry

Joy Reid

MSNBC

At approximately 3:20 a.m. on Sunday, a gunman opened fire on the 700 block of Canal Street in New Orleans, Louisiana.
10 people were wounded by the gunman, all of whom are being treated at local hospitals, according to police. Two of the wounded are reportedly in critical condition, both having been shot in the torso.
Speaking with the media at around 5 a.m., New Orleans Police Superintendent Shaun Ferguson said that there was already a police presence at the scene. <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-people-shot-bayou-classic-football-game-orleans/story?id=67415863">ABC News</a> reports that the police were out in force because of the annual Bayou Classic football game between Southern University and Grambling State University.
“Our officers were out here throughout this entire incident, within feet when this incident occurred. Unfortunately, there were so many people out here, we were unable to determine who was actually firing the shots at that time,” Ferguson stated.
According to the <a href="https://twitter.com/nopdnews/status/1201115438333206529?s=21">NOPD Twitter</a> account, while “an individual was detained near the scene” following the shooting, “their possible involvement &#8230; remains under investigation,” and “no arrests have been made.”
Officers heard the shots, reports Ferguson, and “took position to try to detain that individual that was detained, as well as help the victims themselves.”
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0TpnX_kU-I8" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
As for the victims, Ferguson said he could “not confirm” any ages or genders.
Additionally, after being asked by a reporter about the potential motive of the unidentified shooter, Ferguson said: “We do not know how it started.”
New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell released the following statement via Twitter:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The shootings on Canal Street early this morning were an ugly disruption of an otherwise beautiful holiday weekend. We will do everything we can to wrap the victims and their families in our love and support, and to bring the criminals responsible to justice.
— Mayor LaToya Cantrell (@mayorcantrell) <a href="https://twitter.com/mayorcantrell/status/1201192793147924488?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>When people resort to gun violence to resolve problems, it never creates solutions – only innocent victims and trauma. The shootings on Canal Street early this morning were an ugly disruption of an otherwise beautiful holiday weekend. We will do everything we can to wrap the victims and their families in our love and support, and to bring the criminals responsible to justice.
The City of New Orleans will not allow incidents like this to derail the progress we have made, or to further disrupt our community. I applaud our public safety team for their instant and efficient response – particularly our @NOPDnews officers who were on the scene within seconds. This tragedy will not define us, and it will not deter us from moving our City forward and keeping our people safe.</blockquote>
The NOPD Twitter account also released a statement from Superintendent Ferguson in which he urges anyone with information pertaining to the crime to contact “NOPD Eighth District detectives” or call Crimestoppers of Greater New Orleans.
“A reward of up to $5,000 is available for information leading to an arrest in this investigation,” the statement reads.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Statement from <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NOPD?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NOPD</a> Superintendent Shaun Ferguson re: shooting on Canal Street earlier this morning that wounded 11 victims. <a href="https://t.co/k4F08hVVQk">pic.twitter.com/k4F08hVVQk</a>
— NOPD (@NOPDNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/NOPDNews/status/1201197385587793922?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
Ferguson also stated: “What happened in our city overnight was a cowardly and senseless act that we cannot and will not tolerate. For a fourth straight year, New Orleans continues to see significant reductions in violent crime. Mayor Cantrell, myself, and all of City leadership remain steadfast and committed to continuing that trend. We will not let the acts of a few deter us. While this investigation is in the very beginning stages, one thing is certain – we will not stop until we identify and arrest those responsible.”
“To the victims – you are in our thoughts and prayers, and we will work tirelessly to bring those behind this cowardly act to justice. That is a promise,” the statement concludes.

Police tape.

Shooting In New Orleans; 10 Injured

Crime

New Orleans

Shooting

On November 23, a priest at St. Stephen Catholic Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, reportedly told 63rd District Court Chief Judge Sara Smolenski that he could not serve her communion.
“It was good to see you in church on Sunday. Because you and Linda are married in the state of Michigan, I&#8217;d like you to respect the church and not come to communion,” Smolenski <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/30/us/gay-michigan-judge-communion/index.html">claims</a> Father Scott Nolan said to her over the phone.
According to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/30/us/gay-michigan-judge-communion/index.html">CNN</a>, Smolenski grew up attending St. Stephen, was baptized there as a child, and even went to the church’s school for multiple years.
“This feels like selective discrimination. Why choose gay people, and why now?” Smolenski told CNN.
Speaking with a <a href="https://www.woodtv.com/news/kent-county/priest-stands-by-denying-communion-to-gay-judge/">CNN affiliate</a>, Father Nolan defended his decision: “I’ve taught what all of the popes who have ever said something about the emergent family have said up to and including Pope Francis.”
Though Smolenski has made the claim that “all these other priests” who are “good and decent” have given her communion, Nolan says he is “not responsible” for the actions of other church leaders.
The Diocese of Grand Rapids issued a <a href="https://grdiocese.org/statement-woodtv8-story-regarding-st-stephen-parish/?fbclid=IwAR37npPbiEtI9MUAjJ9iDaSQ55epw6EBUpRkEs7el3LTR_w4jR0UuVdmEDw">statement</a> supporting Nolan:
<blockquote>We appreciate Judge Sara Smolenski’s service to the community. We are grateful for her past generosity. These facts are not at issue in this matter.
As Pope Francis explains in Amoris Laetitia, “The Eucharist demands that we be members of the one body of the Church. Those who approach the Body and Blood of Christ may not wound that same Body by creating scandalous distinctions and divisions among its members.” (186) Lifelong Catholics would surely be aware of this.
Inclusion and acceptance have been a hallmark of Catholic Churches in the Diocese of Grand Rapids throughout the diocese’s history. They remain so. They presume, however, a respect on the part of individuals for the teachings and practice of the wider Catholic community. No community of faith can sustain the public contradiction of its beliefs by its own members. This is especially so on matters as central to Catholic life as marriage, which the Church has always held, and continues to hold, as a sacred covenant between one man and one woman.
Father Scott Nolan, pastor of St. Stephen Parish, has dedicated his priesthood to bringing people closer to Jesus Christ. Part of his duty in pursuing that end is to teach the truth as taught by the Catholic Church, and to help it take root and grow in his parish. Mercy is essential to that process, but so are humility and conversion on the part of anyone seeking to live an authentically Catholic Christian life.
Father Nolan approached Judge Smolenski privately. Subsequent media reports do not change the appropriateness of his action, which the diocese supports.</blockquote>
As the culture evolves, the pressure against various Christian denominations and the Catholic Church to submit to the modern social fabric – even if doing so would be in direct defiance of scripture – continues to intensify.
According to scripture, homosexual conduct is considered a sin.
Romans 1:26-27 reads: “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.”
1 Corinthians 6: 9-10 reads: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
The New Testament features other passages pertaining to homosexual conduct.

Communion.

Lesbian Judge Denied Communion In Michigan; Local Diocese Supports Priest

Catholic Church

Christianity

Homosexuality

LGBT

On Saturday, MSNBC’s Joy Reid brought on author and Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts to talk about a <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/a10nw9wbas/econTabReport.pdf#page267">new poll</a> in which Republicans rated President Donald Trump as “better” than the 16th President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln.
Republicans who were surveyed preferred Trump to Lincoln 53% to 47%.
“Republicans are asked: Who is a better President: Donald Trump or Abraham Lincoln?” Reid stated, quoting the survey, which was conducted between November 24 &#8211; 26 by Economist/YouGov.
“They&#8217;re the only group. Only Republicans said Trump was a better president than Lincoln,” Reid continued. “What do make of that?”
Pitts replied, “Is there a brick wall I can bang my head against a few times?”
Reid shot back, “I can get you one.”
Pitts continued:
<blockquote>I think I need a brick wall before I can answer that. I hadn’t seen, I hadn&#8217;t heard of that poll, but it sort of speaks further to the delusionary aspect of the Republican Party right now. This is not a party. This is a cult, and it has been a cult for a long time. And it wasn&#8217;t just this Abraham Lincoln quote. I mean, what was it a week or so ago – maybe not even that – that Rick Perry said that Trump was a chosen one, and he wasn&#8217;t even the first person to say that &#8230; it’s amazing.</blockquote>
Reid went on to claim that “white evangelicals” in Trump’s base seem to “almost worship” the president. Pitts agreed, saying that there is “a very cult-like aspect” surrounding Trump and his supporters.
Reid added that she “felt this same kind of vibe during George W. Bush’s presidency.”
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hdCVTx_xI9g" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen">﻿</iframe>
If this poll speaks to the “delusionary aspect of the Republican Party,” as Pitts claims, what would he say about a similar Economist/YouGov poll in which Democrats ranked former President Barack Obama higher than Lincoln by a factor of two-to-one?
In February 2018, <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/bs88nyx7rs/econTabReport.pdf#page69">Economist/YouGov</a> asked respondents: “Who was the best President in U.S. history?”
33% of Democrats surveyed selected Obama, while 15% selected Lincoln. Franklin Delano Roosevelt came in third place with 14%, John F. Kennedy landed in fourth place with 10%, and rounding out the top five was Bill Clinton with 7%. George Washington came in sixth with 6% of the vote, followed by “other” with 5%.
Among African American respondents, Obama ranked even higher, commanding 47% support to Lincoln’s 10%.
In 2017, approximately 100 “historians and biographers” <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-20-presidents-in-us-history-according-to-historians-2017-2#18-andrew-jackson-seventh-president-had-strong-public-persuasion-during-his-tenure-according-to-historians-3">ranked</a> all 44 presidents (excluding Trump) based on a variety of factors, including “public persuasion, crisis leadership, economic management, moral authority, international relations, administrative skills, relations with Congress, vision, pursued equal justice for all, and performance within the context of his times.”
While Abraham Lincoln came in first, and George Washington second, Barack Obama ranked 12th, three spaces below Ronald Reagan, who placed ninth. Bill Clinton came in 15th, James Madison in 17th, Andrew Jackson in 18th, John Adams in 19th, and George H.W. Bush in 20th.
President Trump wasn’t listed, as the survey is reportedly only conducted following “a sitting president’s term,” according to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/the-top-20-presidents-in-us-history-according-to-historians-2017-2#18-andrew-jackson-seventh-president-had-strong-public-persuasion-during-his-tenure-according-to-historians-3">Business Insider</a>.

Joy Reid.

MSNBC Host Drags Republicans Who Chose Trump Over Lincoln. Dems Did The Same With Obama

Abraham Lincoln

Barack Obama

During a recent college speaking engagement, The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles focused on the danger of “cancel culture.”
He began by describing one of the forms cancel culture takes:
<blockquote>Of far greater concern to society is the recent scourge of cancel culture, which threatens to make our public discourse courser, falser, and crueler. Cancel culture takes two forms. In one version, cancel culture occurs when a once obscure individual achieves some modicum of fame or success, at which point a social media swarm stirs up and digs up some tweet that that guy sent ten years ago, at which point his achievement is totally taken away from him and he is canceled&#8230;
Even the kindest of souls find themselves subject to this sort of cancel culture. I&#8217;m not talking about myself. I&#8217;m talking about a guy named Carson King, just recently, an Iowa football fan. Carson King held up a sign at a game that said, please send beer money, and it included his Venmo address.</blockquote>
As Knowles was beginning to explain the Carson King story, a group of people walked out of his speech. Knowles then used their exit as an example of “cancel culture.”
<blockquote>Well, I&#8217;ll tell you about Carson King, and you can leave &#8230; if you want. He held up that sign and raised $1 million, and the reaction that he got from the American public was exactly the reaction that we&#8217;re seeing in this room – people who don&#8217;t want to listen to a thing, who don&#8217;t want to look at grace, who don&#8217;t want to live in a culture that takes each other seriously, but a culture that merely wants to rip people down for no reason.</blockquote>
In September, prior to attending the Iowa State University vs. University of Iowa football game, 24-year-old Carson King held up a sign that was featured on ESPN’s “College GameDay.”
The sign read: “Busch Light supply need replenished.” King included his Venmo account details for anyone who would donate. After the sign went viral, thousands of dollars began pouring into King’s account, at which point, he decided to donate the money to University of Iowa Stead Family Children’s Hospital.
In total, King reportedly raised <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/10/02/viral-beer-money-guy-carson-king-raises-nearly-3-million/">approximately $2.95 million</a> before shuttering his account.
On September 24, a Des Moines Register reporter penned a <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/sports/college/iowa-state/football/2019/09/24/meet-carson-king-whos-raised-over-1-million-charity-asking-beer-money-childrens-hospital-tweet/2427538001/">profile piece</a> about King. In the piece, the reporter included the following passage:
<blockquote>A routine background check of King&#8217;s social media revealed two racist jokes, one comparing black mothers to gorillas and another making light of black people killed in the holocaust. The joke tweets date back to 2012, when King was a 16-year-old high school student. When asked about the tweets, King was remorseful and thanked the Register for pointing them out, saying they made him &#8220;sick.&#8221; He has since deleted them.</blockquote>
King apologized:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://t.co/5pM1D6jh5H">pic.twitter.com/5pM1D6jh5H</a>
— Carson King (@CarsonKing2) <a href="https://twitter.com/CarsonKing2/status/1176651876487639042?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
King also noted that he wasn’t upset by the way the Des Moines Register covered him:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The Des Moines Register has been nothing but kind in all of their coverage, and I appreciate the reporter pointing out the post to me. I want everyone to understand that this was my decision to publicly address the posts and apologize. I believe that is the right thing to do.
— Carson King (@CarsonKing2) <a href="https://twitter.com/CarsonKing2/status/1176692362321547265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
The Des Moines Register released statement about the story:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
A statement from our editor: <a href="https://t.co/ZH9AhcrYbg">pic.twitter.com/ZH9AhcrYbg</a>
— Des Moines Register (@DMRegister) <a href="https://twitter.com/DMRegister/status/1176705031468457985?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
The reporter was eventually terminated after his own years-old offensive tweets were <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/des-moines-register-iowa-reporter-fired-aaron-calvin-carson">uncovered</a>. Cancel culture, it seems, came for him just as it came for Carson King.
King has continued to involve himself in charitable endeavors.
Separate from the Carson King story, and speaking of the “cancel culture” movement more broadly, Knowles noted that “cancel culture” is a form of political correctness taken to a new level:
<blockquote>In fact, what we find is very often the truer a statement is the more liable it is to incur the ire of cancel culture. Cancel culture is political correctness with teeth. Political correctness is the leftist speech codes and behavior codes that we all make fun of because they&#8217;re so ridiculous. Cancel culture is the mutant spawn of political correctness. Cancel culture is what happens when you contradict those codes of speech and behavior that political correctness dictates.
PC and cancel culture threaten our public discourse. They stifle speech; they stifle thought. Worst of all, they encourage lies. We must fight both of those scourges tooth and nail. We must do it. We must not be forced to live in lies. We must not be forced to live in fear. Nobody benefits from living in lies. Nobody benefits from living in fear. We&#8217;re told that they do. They don&#8217;t.
This entire speaking tour is a rebuke to that hideous culture of intimidation and lies. &#8230; In “Alice in Wonderland,” Humpty Dumpty says to Alice, &#8220;When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.&#8221; Alice responds to Humpty Dumpty. She says, &#8220;The question is whether you can make words mean so many different things.&#8221; Humpty Dumpty knows better. He corrects her. He says, “The question is – which is to be master? That’s all.&#8221;</blockquote>
Knowles concluded, telling his audience that truth must win out, and that lies lead to “misery.”
<blockquote>Those who would re-define reality would be our masters. They tell us not to believe our own eyes – but fantasy is not reality. Ideology is not truth. Men are not women. Most importantly, and this is an important subject of the whole tour, lies are not comforting, they&#8217;re not comforting. To “comfort” means to encourage, that&#8217;s what it means, with forte, like forte, strength. It means to give strength. Lies do not give strength, and they don&#8217;t encourage. They deceive, they weaken, they give harm. Increasingly, our society shies away from what we call “uncomfortable truths.” This is a misguided plan destined to cause misery.
We need comfort. We need to be strong. The way you get strong is with the truth. No matter the cost, we must choose the truth above all things. There is a lot more at stake than bathrooms and pronouns.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_-SdCbl1lDE" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

Michael Knowles.

WATCH: Michael Knowles Slams ‘Cancel Culture’ As ‘Scourge’

Cancel culture

Michael Knowles

On Thanksgiving Thursday, an Oklahoma police officer went to a Starbucks in Glenpool to grab drinks for dispatchers who were working the holiday. When the officer received his drinks, the word “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cop-working-on-thanksgiving-goes-to-starbucks-for-coffee-to-thank-dispatchers-cup-gets-labeled-pig">PIG</a>” was printed in all caps on the side of the cup where one would typically find the customer name.
Following the incident, Kiefer Police Chief Johnny O’Mara took to Facebook, where he shared a photo of the cup and rebuked anti-police culture:
<iframe style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fphoto.php%3Ffbid%3D10158154592321742%26set%3Da.10150426758096742%26type%3D3&amp;width=500" width="500" height="739" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
<blockquote>So&#8230; One of my on-duty officers decides to do something nice for our dispatchers. It’s Thanksgiving Day; our dispatchers are under appreciated as it is. My officer goes to Starbucks to get the dispatchers coffee as a thank you for all they do (especially when they’re working a holiday.)
This is what he gets for being nice.
What irks me is the absolute and total disrespect for a police officer who, instead of being home with family and enjoying a meal and a football game, is patrolling his little town.
This cup of coffee for a “pig” is just another little flag. It’s another tiny symptom and a nearly indiscernible shout from a contemptuous, roaring and riotous segment of a misanthropic society that vilifies those who stand for what’s right and glorifies the very people who would usher in the destruction of the social fabric. It’s another tiny pinprick into the heart of men and women who are asking themselves more often: “Why am I doing this?”
Just pour the coffee, please. Are we at a point where a task as simple as pouring an exceptionally overpriced cup of coffee is so complicated that it cannot be accomplished without “expressing oneself?”
As a side note, I called the store and was told they’d be happy to “replace the coffee with a correct label.” The proverb “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me” came to mind.
Thank you, first responders, for risking it all this Thanksgiving away from your families. If you’re looking for coffee, use a place where you pour your own and you’re certain of what’s in it. Stay safe; go home.</blockquote>
The post has been shared more than 30,000 times as of publication. As one would expect, a vast majority of the comments are either condemnatory toward the anonymous Starbucks employee or expressing thanks for the work of officers and dispatchers.
In the comments below the post, the official Starbucks Facebook account replied:
<blockquote>This is totally unacceptable and offensive to all law enforcement. We are deeply sorry and have apologized directly to the officer who experienced this. We have launched an internal investigation into this matter and our leaders would like to connect with you directly to apologize to you and the entire department. We invite you to send us a private message so that we may connect you with our leadership.</blockquote>
Starbucks also issued an <a href="https://stories.starbucks.com/stories/2019/joint-statement-from-starbucks-and-kiefer-okla-police-after-regrettable-incident/">official statement</a> on Thursday, which reads:
<blockquote>This is absolutely unacceptable, and we are deeply sorry to the law enforcement officer who experienced this. We have also apologized directly to him and connected with the Chief of the Kiefer Police Department as well to express our remorse. The Starbucks partner who wrote this offensive word on a cup used poor judgement and is no longer a partner after this violation of company policy.
This language is offensive to all law enforcement and is not representative of the deep appreciation we have for police officers who work tirelessly to keep our communities safe.</blockquote>
According to Starbucks’ own <a href="https://www.starbucks.com/about-us/company-information/starbucks-company-profile">website</a>, the term “partner” is used to describe employees. With this definition in mind, the coffee giant’s statement seems to indicate that the individual who wrote “PIG” on the police officer’s cup has been fired. However, there has been no official word regarding the status of the employee except that they have been “suspended &#8230; pending the outcome of [an] investigation,” according to <a href="https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/update-starbucks-suspends-employee-who-sold-coffee-labeled-pig-to/article_927899b8-9831-53e0-a200-f73f8e6a207d.html">Tulsa World</a>.
The officer who received the “PIG” cup reportedly told <a href="https://ktul.com/news/local/chief-kiefer-officer-receives-starbucks-coffee-cups-with-pig-printed-on-label">KTUL</a> that the employee contacted him and apologized, claiming that the insult was simply a joke. According to Chief O’Mara, who spoke with a reporter from <a href="https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/social-media-whispers-spread-regarding-starbucks-drink-labeled-pig">KJRH</a>, the barista was trying to prank a fellow employee.
O’Mara stated: “Her intention was to see if the barista would yell out ‘PIG’ when they announced that the order was ready. She said that it was not intended for the officer to see the word.”
On Friday, Starbucks released a <a href="https://stories.starbucks.com/stories/2019/joint-statement-from-starbucks-and-kiefer-okla-police-after-regrettable-incident/">second statement</a> about partnering with Kiefer law enforcement.
“Starbucks and the Kiefer Police Department are committed to using this regrettable incident as an opportunity to leverage our shared platforms to promote greater civility. In the coming days, Starbucks will be meeting with the Kiefer Police Department to begin discussing ways to work together, including a jointly hosted Coffee with a Cop event at Starbucks where local law enforcement can meet with baristas and members of the community to discuss the critical role dispatchers and police offers play in keeping our communities safe,” the statement reads. “Together with law enforcement agencies, Starbucks will jointly look for educational opportunities for our partners across the United States to promote better understanding and respect.”
Although the word “pig” as a slur for law enforcement has a long history, stretching all the way back to the early-1800s, according to Ron Kurtus, it didn’t enter <a href="http://www.school-for-champions.com/history/when_cops_were_pigs.htm#.XeHNVIFOmfC">mainstream vernacular</a> until approximately 1968:
<blockquote>Starting in August 1968 and for a number of years afterwards, police officers were called pigs by young people, the disenchanted, and even the media. This came about when a group who called themselves the Yippies, protested near the 1968 National Democratic Convention in Chicago. They had a small pig as their presidential candidate, and when police disrupted their demonstration, they started to call the police pigs. The expression caught on.</blockquote>
Anti-police activists routinely use the word “pig” or use images of pigs to denigrate police officers. One of the more recent examples of this came when former 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who has called out police brutality on multiple occasions, wore <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/colin-kaepernicks-practice-socks-pig-cops-hat-james-barrett">socks depicting pigs</a> wearing police hats during a practice game in 2016.

Starbucks Has Reportedly ‘Suspended’ Employee Who Wrote ‘PIG’ On Police Officer’s Cup

Colin Kaepernick

PragerU’s Will Witt recently traveled to the National Mall in Washington, D.C., and asked passersby about American history. Their answers were less than encouraging.
“Who was the first president?” Witt asked a woman wearing a red beanie.
After a lengthy pause, the woman replied, “That’s a good question. I don’t know.” Witt then asked her who the 16th president was (Abraham Lincoln), and she replied: “If I don’t know the first, I don’t know the 16th.”
They were standing directly in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
Witt asked a woman wearing a black jacket who her favorite president was. After a brief moment of reflection, she stated: “I would say Obama, and Lincoln, and Jackson.”
“You like Andrew Jackson? Trail of tears?” Witt asked.
“Yeah, I guess” the woman replied.
Witt also asked others who their favorite presidents were. Typical answers abounded – Obama, Clinton.
“When was the Declaration of Independence signed?” Witt asked several individuals.
While some answered correctly (1776), an alleged “history major” guessed “1773.” She also failed to identify the 16th president.
“When did World War II end?” Witt queried. The history major guessed that the war ended in 1952. Witt then corrected her, noting that the war actually came to an end in 1945.
Witt asked two individuals who appeared to be a couple when the Declaration of Independence was signed. The woman first stated that “it was nineteen something.” After Witt joked that she was “close,” the woman guessed 1904 and 1901. Following the reveal that the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, the woman replied, “That was not close.”
A man wearing a Chicago Bulls beanie seemed to know at least a bit of history, quickly and correctly identifying the first president, George Washington. However, he misidentified the second president as “Samuel Adams.”
“Like the beer,” Witt joked.
Moving on, Witt asked several people to what political party Abraham Lincoln belonged.
“Democratic?” stated a woman wearing a huge white scarf.
“No,” Witt shot back.
“No?” the woman, seemingly surprised, responded.
As Witt informed the woman that Lincoln actually helped develop the Republican Party, the woman in the white scarf suggested that her belief must have been a “misconception.”
“I guess Republicans aren’t so bad,” Witt said.
“No. I guess not,” white scarf replied.
Witt asked the same question of the history major. Like the woman in the white scarf, the history major claimed that Lincoln was a member of “the Democratic Party.” When Witt corrected her, she seemed somewhat gobsmacked.
The following is an exchange Witt had with a man wearing a camouflage jacket:
<blockquote>CAMO: Republicans had a very different outlook back in the 1800s.
WITT: They wanted to free the slaves back then.
CAMO: Was that the Republican Party, or was that just kind of a general consensus?
WITT: That was the Republican Party. The Republican [Party] was pretty much the anti-slavery party. The Democrats were like the party of the KKK, things like that.
CAMO: Ironic how things change, isn’t it?</blockquote>
Once again, the man wearing the Bulls beanie knew some history. “He was part of the conservative party,” he said.
When Witt asked the man if he was surprised by Lincoln’s involvement in the Republican Party, the man said, “Not at all. Nope.”
“Are you a Republican?” Witt asked.
“I am. Proud Republican,” the man stated.
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/tv/B5WHXtDgMCJ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="12">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"></div>
</div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<a style="color: #000; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word;" href="https://www.instagram.com/tv/B5WHXtDgMCJ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">people do not know history and getting a college education doesn’t help. if americans don’t know their own history, how are they supposed to make educated decisions about the future? did you get all the questions right? @prageru #throwbacktuesday</a>
<p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;">A post shared by <a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px;" href="https://www.instagram.com/thewillwitt/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> Will Witt</a> (@thewillwitt) on <time style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px;" datetime="2019-11-26T22:36:29+00:00">Nov 26, 2019 at 2:36pm PST</time>
</div>
</blockquote>

Lincoln Memorial.

WATCH: PragerU’s Will Witt Asks People In D.C. About American History, And It Goes&#8230;Poorly

American History

Prager University

Will Witt

In a recent episode of Variety’s “Actors on Actors,” Chris Evans and Scarlett Johansson came to the defense of Marvel movies in light of the ongoing back and forth about “cinema” that all began with legendary director Martin Scorsese.
As the name implies, “Actors on Actors” is a YouTube series in which two actors interview each other about recent projects in a casual setting.
Johansson first brought up the Marvel versus “cinema” debate, saying that several people have mentioned that “a couple of extremely esteemed directors” have been “really vocal” about blockbuster Marvel movies:
<blockquote>At first I thought, “That seems kind of old-fashioned.” Somebody sort of had to explain it to me because it seemed so, kind of, disappointing and sad in a way – and then they said, “No, I think that what these people are saying is that in the actual theater, there&#8217;s not a lot of room for different kinds of movies, or smaller movies, or independent movies because the theater is actually just taken up by these huge blockbuster movies, and there’s actually no space for these movies.”</blockquote>
Johansson added that she then contemplated the consumption of media, especially in light of streaming services and technology, and that the “cinematic experience &#8230; has changed for people.”
Evans then offered his take on the issue, first noting that “original content inspires original content,” and that television is where such content is blossoming at the moment.
He then spoke directly to the issue:
<blockquote>I just believe there’s room at the table for all of it, you know what I mean? Like, it&#8217;s like trying to say a certain type of music isn&#8217;t music. Well, why bother? Who are you to say that? It just feels like a strange, you know – same team, same team.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZKSzrJkHtVg?start=1040" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
In October, director Martin Scorsese spoke with <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/samuel-l-jackson-responds-to-scorsese-everybody-doesnt-like-his-stuff-either-its-okay">Empire Magazine</a>, and compared Marvel movies to “theme parks.”
“I don’t see them. I tried, you know? But that’s not cinema,” Scorsese said. “Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isn’t the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.”
His remarks have been met with backlash from Marvel fans, as well as actors and directors who have participated in various Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films. Other notable individuals have sided with Scorsese.
Paul Rudd, who plays Scott Lang in the MCU, offered perhaps the most robust <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/benedict-cumberbatch-and-paul-rudd-offer-different-opinions-on-the-marvel-as-cinema-debate">defense</a> of Marvel as “cinema,” telling Howard Stern:
<blockquote>Ultimately, you really care about relationships with people. It isn’t all just special effects-driven action – whatever genre it falls into – you want to see people in human behavior and talking to each other. I know that when we’re working on these things, we care about the characters. In “Ant-Man,” I have a whole relationship with my daughter, and the human struggles of being a superhero. I think we’re trying to deal with human issues and things that are relatable, that are not just rides.</blockquote>
Scorsese later <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/benedict-cumberbatch-and-paul-rudd-offer-different-opinions-on-the-marvel-as-cinema-debate">doubled down</a> on his opinion, telling an audience at the London Film Festival: “What has to be protected is the singular experience of experiencing a picture, ideally with an audience. But there’s room for so many others now, and so many other ways. &#8230; The value of a film that’s like a theme park film, for example, the Marvel-type pictures, where the theaters become amusement parks, that’s a different experience. I was saying earlier, it’s not cinema, it’s something else.”

Chris Evans.

WATCH: Chris Evans Dives Into The Marvel As ‘Cinema’ Debate

Chris Evans

Martin Scorsese

Marvel

Scarlett Johansson

During a campaign stop in Iowa on Saturday, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) distinguished herself from the likes of rival candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) by proclaiming that she is “not a socialist.”
<blockquote>I&#8217;m not trying to upend and blow up systems. I&#8217;m not trying to start a revolution. I am not a socialist, okay? So, there you go. But what I do know is this – capitalism assumes that everyone is starting out on the same base, and then people will compete, and the best will rise. Well, in American today, the majority of people aren&#8217;t starting out on the same base, and we&#8217;ve got to lift people up and in particular working people and working families. So, a large part of my agenda is focused on that.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
In Washington, IA <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@KamalaHarris</a> says &#8220;we are at the stage of the campaign where contrasts need to be made.&#8221;
&#8220;I am not trying to upend and blow up systems. I am not trying to start a revolution. I am not a socialist.&#8221;<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IACaucus?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#IACaucus</a> <a href="https://t.co/xf4QTb3gqX">pic.twitter.com/xf4QTb3gqX</a>
— Musadiq Bidar (@Bidar411) <a href="https://twitter.com/Bidar411/status/1198280999337156611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
Harris has been struggling to gain support in the months leading up to the Iowa Democratic caucuses on February 3, 2020.
Following a much ballyhooed confrontation with former Vice President Joe Biden during the first Democratic primary debate in late-June, Harris experienced a sharp rise in national polls. During that brief period of time, Harris became a top-tier candidate.
Over the course of the next two months, however, the senator’s gains were essentially erased. Support for Harris’ candidacy has continued to dwindle ever since. As of publication, Harris sits in fourth place nationally with just 4%, according to the <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html">RealClearPolitics</a> national polling average.
In Iowa, Harris is in sixth place (3.3%), behind Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). In New Hampshire, Harris is in tenth place (1.7%), behind Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Andrew Yang, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), and billionaire Tom Steyer.
Even in Harris’ home state of California, she places a distant fourth with just 8% support, according to <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ca/california_democratic_primary-6879.html">RCP</a>.
On the other end of the race, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is a loud and proud “democratic socialist.”
During an October interview on ABC’s “This Week,” Sanders differentiated himself from rival Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), <a href="https://youtu.be/tBfFr3kegJI">saying</a>: “There are differences between Elizabeth and myself. Elizabeth I think, as you know, has said that she is a capitalist through her bones. I’m not.”
Socialism has gained renewed attention in the United States as Sens. Sanders and Warren, who currently sit second and third place in the national polls, have proposed policies that would allow the federal government to play a much larger role in the everyday lives of American citizens. These policies include Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and student debt relief, among others.
Polling indicates that socialism is at least somewhat popular among younger voters.
According to a September 2019 <a href="https://www.victimsofcommunism.org/2019-annual-poll">survey</a> by YouGov/Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, “70% of Millennials say they would be at least somewhat likely to vote for a socialist candidate.”
The survey also notes that “about one-in-five Millennials (22%) believe that ‘society would be better if all private property was abolished,’ compared to 1% of the Silent Generation.”
<a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725/democrats-positive-socialism-capitalism.aspx">Gallup</a> reports that from 2010 to 2018, the percentage of Democrats with a “positive view of socialism” has increased by 4% (53% to 57%).
“Americans aged 18 to 29 are as positive about socialism (51%) as they are about capitalism (45%). This represents a 12-point decline in young adults&#8217; positive views of capitalism in just the past two years and a marked shift since 2010, when 68% viewed it positively. Meanwhile, young people&#8217;s views of socialism have fluctuated somewhat from year to year, but the 51% with a positive view today is the same as in 2010,” according to Gallup.

Kamala Harris.

WATCH: Kamala Harris Declares That She Is ‘Not A Socialist’

Bernie Sanders

Kamala Harris

Socialism

On Saturday afternoon, former Mayor of New York City and President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani sent out a tweet seemingly meant to clarify his recent “insurance” remarks.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
TRUTH ALERT:
The statement I’ve made several times of having an insurance policy, if thrown under bus, is sarcastic &amp; relates to the files in my safe about the Biden Family’s 4 decade monetizing of his office.
If I disappear, it will appear immediately along with my RICO chart.
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) <a href="https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1198352974000644097?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
<blockquote>TRUTH ALERT: The statement I’ve made several times of having an insurance policy, if thrown under bus, is sarcastic &amp; relates to the files in my safe about the Biden Family’s 4 decade monetizing of his office. If I disappear, it will appear immediately along with my RICO chart.</blockquote>
Giuliani’s tweet seems to be a reference to at least two <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/giuliani-responds-to-those-who-say-trump-might-scapegoat-him-i-have-insurance">recent interviews</a> – one with The Guardian and another with Fox News.
On Saturday, Giuliani appeared on Fox News with anchor Ed Henry. During the segment, which largely focused on the ongoing impeachment inquiry, Henry asked Giuliani the following questions about his relationship with the president: “Have you talked to President Trump in the last week or two? Have you met with him? Are you still his counsel?”
After noting that he and the president “have a very, very good relationship,” Giuliani <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/giuliani-responds-to-those-who-say-trump-might-scapegoat-him-i-have-insurance">stated</a> in part:
<blockquote>I mean, I’ve seen things written like, he’s gonna throw me under the bus. When they say that, I say, “He isn’t, but I have insurance.” [It’s] ridiculous. We are very good friends. He knows what I did was in order to defend him, not to dig up dirt on Biden.</blockquote>
During a recent telephone interview with The Guardian, Giuliani was asked if he was worried that President Trump might attempt to “throw him under a bus,” to which he <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/giuliani-responds-to-those-who-say-trump-might-scapegoat-him-i-have-insurance">replied</a>: “I’m not, but I do have very, very good insurance. So if he does, all my hospital bills will be paid.”
Giuliani’s own attorney, who was on the call with his client, made sure to note that the insurance line was simply a joke.
Rather than put the “insurance” question to bed, Rudy Giuliani’s latest tweet adds a new layer of intrigue to an already unusual story.
The attorney suggests that he has evidence relating to Biden family corruption tucked away in his safe. This alleged multi-decade corruption involves Biden “monetizing” his position as an elected official. Giuliani also claims that if he were to “disappear,” those files would be released along with his “RICO chart.”
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act was passed in 1970 for the express purpose of <a href="https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-109-rico-charges">targeting organized crime</a> such as the Mafia.
According to <a href="https://legaldictionary.net/rico-law/">Legal Dictionary</a>, RICO law “allows the government to punish individuals associated with criminal activity, specifically the leaders of crime organizations. Before RICO law existed, crime bosses would order their minions to carry out crimes for them, and claim innocence if the police found out. Their argument was that, technically, no one could prosecute them for crimes like murder because they weren’t the ones doing the killing. The RICO Law made it possible for the police to arrest even the leaders of crime organizations.”
A tweet published several hours before the “truth alert” tweet might provide additional information regarding Giuliani’s thought process.
“I discovered a pattern of corruption that the Washington press covered up for years! I’m also going to bring out a massive pay-for-play scheme under the Obama Administration that will devastate the Democrat Party,” the president’s attorney wrote. “Do you honestly think I’m intimidated?”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
I discovered a pattern of corruption that the Washington press covered up for years!
I’m also going to bring out a massive pay-for-play scheme under the Obama Administration that will devastate the Democrat Party.
Do you honestly think I’m intimidated?
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) <a href="https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1198309490069790720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
Questions abound. First, does Giuliani actually have the evidence he claims to have? Second, if he does, why hasn’t he released it already? Third, if he plans to release it, when will he do so?

Rudy Giuliani.

Giuliani Claims To Have Decades Of Evidence Relating To ‘Biden Family’ Corruption In Latest Tweet

Joe Biden

Rudy Giuliani

On Friday, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg appeared on CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper.”
During the segment, Tapper asked Buttigieg about one of the candidate’s most prominent issues &#8212; his lack of support from African American voters.
<blockquote>TAPPER: So, you know this &#8212; no Democratic candidate in modern presidential history has won the Democratic nomination without winning the majority of black votes. A Quinnipiac poll out this week has you polling at 0% among black voters in South Carolina.
Now it&#8217;s just one poll, and it&#8217;s just a snapshot, but it&#8217;s not good. You said voters are still getting to know you. South Carolina&#8217;s primary is just 92 days away. Is that enough time?
BUTTIGIEG: It is. I recognize and welcome the work we have ahead. That same poll you mentioned showed that a majority of black voters in South Carolina say they don&#8217;t have an opinion of me right now. That means we&#8217;ve got work to do, but we&#8217;re doing the work. We’re making investments, both on the air and on the ground. I&#8217;ll be engaging a lot personally.
And what we do know is that when black voters hear the agenda that I have for black America &#8212; and what motivates me to deal with these issues &#8212; the response is supportive, it is powerful, and I believe that that is going to carry us to success in South Carolina and across the country.</blockquote>
Tapper then pivoted from African American voters to a specific endorsement. Oliver Davis, a prominent member of the African American community in South Bend, Indiana, who recently endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden.
Tapper quoted Davis, who said that Buttigieg’s problems with African Americans in South Bend are “a consistent issue that has not gone away.”
“These are voters who have known you now for years,” Tapper said. “What&#8217;s the issue?”
Buttigieg replied, saying that while he respects Davis, they have “disagreed on politics a great deal.” &#8220;Obviously, no one person speaks for black voters in South Bend, and I&#8217;m proud of some of the black supporters who know me best from Indiana and from South Bend, who have not only supported our campaign, but traveled with us and helped tell the story of our community,&#8221; he continued&#8221;
Tapper then suggested that several of the Buttigieg campaign’s missteps have essentially been unforced errors. The host brought up the fact that a photograph of a Kenyan woman was initially used to promote the Buttigieg “black economic empowerment plan.”
Then Tapper cut to the bone: “Separately, you mistakenly listed two black South Carolinians as endorsing you when they only endorsed the plan.”
Buttigieg spun, saying that he would “own” any mistakes made on the campaign because he’s at the head of it.
“But we&#8217;re also proud of the hundreds of people who have stepped up to support the Douglass Plan, which has been praised as the most comprehensive plan put forward in the 2020 campaign for doing something concretely and systematically about systemic racism in this country,” the mayor stated.
“Again, it gets a powerful and favorable response as I reach out to voters and make sure I communicate exactly what we&#8217;re going to do,” Buttigieg concluded. “And we&#8217;re going to make sure that we do the strongest possible job as we go forward of getting that message out.”
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/StL_1iT3WIQ" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen">﻿</iframe>
While Tapper did mention the recent <a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/11/15/pete-buttigieg-campaign-black-voters/">Douglass plan debacle</a> in which the Buttigieg campaign promoted endorsements from prominent African Americans in South Carolina who hadn’t necessarily endorsed the plan or the candidate, Buttigieg didn’t provide a direct answer, and Tapper simply moved on to the next question.
Buttigieg has struggled mightily to gain traction among African American voters.
The most recent <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/u9tu99dui5/econTabReport.pdf">Economist/YouGov</a> poll asked respondents, “If the Democratic presidential primary or caucus in your state were held today, who would you vote for?”
While 9% of the national sample said they would vote for Buttigieg, only 2% of African American voters said the same. For comparison, front-runner Joe Biden has 47% African American support in the same Economist/YouGov poll.
A <a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/470911-sanders-reclaims-second-place-in-new-poll">Hill-HarrisX</a> survey has Buttigieg at 1% support nationally among African Americans.
While Buttigieg has seen surges in overall support in Iowa and New Hampshire &#8212; predominantly white states &#8212; in the more diverse South Carolina, where African Americans represent 27% of the population, he sits in fourth place, polling at 0% among African American voters, according to the most recent <a href="https://poll.qu.edu/south-carolina/release-detail?ReleaseID=3649">Quinnipiac</a> poll.

WATCH: Buttigieg Dodges CNN Question On ‘Douglass Plan’ Debacle

On Thursday, Rasmussen Reports released a <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/november_2019/voters_fear_violence_from_trump_s_foes_more_than_his_supporters">survey</a> showing that a majority of “likely voters” believe that removing the president from office via impeachment would “lead to violence.” Perhaps more shocking, a larger majority believe that anti-Trump individuals will “resort to violence.”
The survey was conducted between November 18-19 on 1,000 “likely voters.”
Specifically, the survey asked respondents: “How concerned are you that President Trump&#8217;s impeachment and removal from office will lead to violence?”
Rasmussen reports that 53% of respondents indicated that they are concerned. 24% are “very concerned.”
The survey also asked: “How concerned are you that those opposed to President Trump&#8217;s policies will resort to violence?”
59% of respondents indicated that they are concerned. 34% are “very concerned.”
Democrats don’t appear nearly as worried about opposition violence.
“While 40% of Democrats are very concerned that those opposed to Trump’s policies will resort to violence, just 18% feel that way about his supporters if the president is removed from office,” according to Rasmussen.
When asked about the likelihood of a new “civil war” occurring within “the next five years,” 31% of respondents said that such a scenario is likely. 9% said it was “very likely.”
Awareness of political aggression and politically-motivated violence seems to have moved to the forefront of America’s collective consciousness.
According to a <a href="https://www.people-press.org/2019/06/19/public-highly-critical-of-state-of-political-discourse-in-the-u-s/">Pew Research</a> survey conducted in April and May, 85% of respondents believe that the “nature of political debate &#8230; has become more negative in recent years.”
An October 2018 <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-u-s-college-students-afraid-to-disagree-with-professors-1540588198">survey</a> conducted by McLaughlin &amp; Associates on “800 full-time undergraduates” found that a significant number of students believe that violence is justified as a preventative measure against “hate speech.”
According to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/most-u-s-college-students-afraid-to-disagree-with-professors-1540588198">The Wall Street Journal</a>, the survey asked students if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “If someone is using hate speech or making racially charged comments, physical violence can be justified to prevent this person from espousing their hateful views.”
33% said that they “agree” with the statement.
In early-October, Nathan Kalmoe, assistant professor of political communication at Louisiana State University, tweeted out some troubling information from a YouGov survey:
<blockquote>In a 2019 YouGov survey w/ <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/LilyMasonPhD">@LilyMasonPhD</a>, 70% of Reps &amp; 56% of Dems saw the other party as &#8220;a serious threat to the United States &amp; its people.&#8221;
55% of Reps &amp; 44% of Dems said the other party is &#8220;not just worse for politics—they are downright evil.&#8221; 34% of Reps &amp; 27% of Dems said the other party &#8220;lack the traits to be considered fully human—they behave like animals.&#8221;</blockquote>
A small but disturbing percentage of respondents indicated favorability toward “political violence,” according to Kalmoe.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
We also asked several questions about attitudes toward political violence. Here&#8217;s one. Other items asked about threatening leaders &amp; citizens, &amp; support for violence if your party loses in 2020. You can see most (but not all) people rejected partisan violence today. 3/ <a href="https://t.co/IqgakBCOWr">pic.twitter.com/IqgakBCOWr</a>
— Nathan Kalmoe (@NathanKalmoe) <a href="https://twitter.com/NathanKalmoe/status/1179144868813127680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 1, 2019</a></blockquote>
The survey asked: “How much do you feel it is justified for [own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days?”
While a strong 87.3% of respondents said “not at all,” 5.2% said “a moderate amount,” 4.7% said “a little,” 1.5% said “a great deal,” and 1.3% said “a lot.”
That means that out of all respondents, approximately 12.7% were at least a little bit comfortable with the idea of using violence as a tool of political power.

Protest police (France).

POLL: Majority Concerned That Trump Opponents ‘Will Resort To Violence’

Impeachment

Leftism

On Saturday, former Mayor of New York City and President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani appeared on Fox News with anchor Ed Henry to discuss the ongoing impeachment process.
At one point during the nearly 15-minute interview, Henry asked Giuliani about his professional relationship with the president:
<blockquote>HENRY: Have you talked to President Trump in the last week or two? Have you met with him? Are you still his counsel?
GIULIANI: I do not discuss my conversations with my client. You can assume that I talk to him early and often.</blockquote>
Giuliani continued, saying that he and the president “have a very, very good relationship,” and that the comments he’s seen suggesting that he might be made into a fall guy are “ridiculous.”
<blockquote>I mean, I’ve seen things written like, he’s gonna throw me under the bus. When they say that, I say, “He isn’t, but I have insurance.” [It’s] ridiculous. We are very good friends. He knows what I did was in order to defend him, not to dig up dirt on Biden.</blockquote>
The president’s attorney added that he started his investigation “a year ago” when Biden hadn’t yet “decided to run for president,” and that the “evidence” he has has allegedly gathered will ultimately reveal a “conspiracy” in which some elected Democrats participated.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/u8WJtT3vINE?start=596" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Rudy Giuliani has used the “insurance” line before, according to <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/471792-giuliani-threatens-he-has-insurance-if-trump-turns-on-him-in">The Hill</a>.
Speaking with <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/14/rudy-giuliani-donald-trump-insurance-loyal">The Guardian</a> earlier this month, the former mayor was asked about the possibility that President Trump might attempt to “throw him under a bus.” Giuliani reportedly replied with a similar “insurance” comment, adding that if such a thing were to happen, “all my hospital bills will be paid.”
Giuliani’s personal attorney made sure to note that his client was just “joking,” according to The Guardian.
During the impeachment hearings this week, EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sondland-yes-there-was-a-quid-pro-quo-for-white-house-meeting">claimed</a> to have received direct orders from Giuliani about a “quid pro quo” pertaining to Ukraine and Burisma:
<blockquote>Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.</blockquote>
Under questioning from Republican counsel Steve Castor, Sondland noted that President Trump never personally told him that a visit to the White House by Ukrainian president Zelensky was tied to the announcement of an investigation:
<blockquote>CASTOR: Did the president ever tell you personally about any preconditions for anything?
SONDLAND: No&#8230;
CASTOR: The president never told about any preconditions for a White House meeting?
SONDLAND: Personally, no.
CASTOR: You said you didn’t have your records or your documents from the State Department, but if you did, there wouldn’t be any documental record that ties President Trump personally to any of this, correct?
SONDLAND: Boy, I don’t want to speculate what would be on –
CASTOR: No, your documents or records.
SONDLAND: I don’t recall anything like that.</blockquote>
Castor then asked Sondland about his testimony regarding Giuliani allegedly requesting a White House visit “quid pro quo.”
<blockquote>CASTOR: You indicated that you believe that was – he was evincing President Trump’s interests, correct?
SONDLAND: My contact with Mr. Giuliani began, as I said, very late in the process, after August 1, when I was first introduced to him by a text from Ambassador Volker. So, we had already begun those discussions, I believe, with the Ukrainians prior to August 1, so everything was being funneled through others, including Mr. Volker.
CASTOR: You testified that Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the president, correct?
SONDLAND: That’s our understanding, yes.
CASTOR: But how did you know that? Who told you?
SONDLAND: Well, when the president says, “Talk to my personal attorney,” and then Mr. Giuliani, as his personal attorney, makes certain requests or demands, we assume it’s coming from the president. I’m not testifying that I heard the president tell Mr. Giuliani to tell us, so if that’s your question.</blockquote>
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0XDCKRpLk4E" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Giuliani <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/11/20/giuliani-slams-gop-impeachment-lawyer-demands-apology/">responded</a> to Sondland’s testimony with the following: “I came into this at Volker’s request. Sondland is speculating based on VERY little contact. I never met him and had very few calls with him, mostly with Volker. Volker testified I answered their questions and described them as my opinions, NOT demands. I.E., no quid pro quo!”

Giuliani Responds To Those Who Say Trump Might Scapegoat Him: ‘I Have Insurance’

Gordon Sondland

Ukraine

On Friday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) announced that Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) would be one of three new co-chairs of her 2020 Democratic presidential campaign. The other two co-chairs will be Democratic congresswomen from New Mexico and California, reports <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/471679-warren-adds-ayanna-pressley-as-campaign-co-chair">The Hill</a>.
Warren released a statement, which reads in part:
<blockquote>I’m deeply grateful to be standing shoulder to shoulder with Deb, Katie, and Ayanna as we fight for big structural change &#8230; Together, we will continue building a grassroots movement to root out corruption in Washington and make our democracy work for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected.</blockquote>
Sen. Warren also tweeted out the following video on Friday:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
It&#8217;s my honor to have <a href="https://twitter.com/Deb4CongressNM?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Deb4CongressNM</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/katieporteroc?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@KatiePorterOC</a>, and <a href="https://twitter.com/AyannaPressley?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AyannaPressley</a> as my Campaign Co-Chairs. Big structural change can&#8217;t wait, and we&#8217;ll fight for it—together. <a href="https://t.co/ZnI2xat8xN">pic.twitter.com/ZnI2xat8xN</a>
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) <a href="https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1197930289827385344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
In the video, which features clips of the three new co-chairs speaking about Warren, Rep. Pressley says: “I&#8217;m talking about deliberate, thoughtful, targeted policies created in partnership with community that will create a seismic shift &#8230; I am here today to officially announce my endorsement of senator Elizabeth Warren for President of the United States!”
Rep. Pressley endorsed Sen. Warren on November 6, breaking with the other members of “the Squad,” all of whom endorsed Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the 2020 Democratic primary race in October.
The announcement of Rep. Pressley as a campaign co-chair comes the day after Warren suffered an uncomfortable confrontation during a rally in Atlanta, Georgia.
As The Daily Wire’s Amanda Prestigiacomo <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-white-warren-supporters-shout-down-black-parents-for-school-choice-warren-summons-rep-pressley-for-help">reported</a>, while Warren was giving a speech to a seemingly friendly crowd on Thursday, a large group of African American school choice advocates (reportedly from Powerful Parent Network) began chanting: “Our children, our choice!”
As the protesters made their presence known, Warren stopped speaking, and a number of the senator’s supporters began chanting back: “Let her speak! Let her speak!”
Moments into this war of chants, Rep. Pressley approached the podium. The microphone then picked up Sen. Warren asking Pressley, “What do we do with this?”
Pressley then took to the mic, and told the protesters:
<blockquote>I want to say something. No one is here to quiet you – least not this black woman who know what it is when people have tried to put me in a corner and tell me to be silent.
You are welcome here. The senator is here to talk about the contributions fighters like you have made to history. So in this moment, there are many people that do not know this story because we have been rendered as a historical footnote in history. So, I am going to appeal to you to not dishonor that history.
We are grateful for your activism and your voice, and you are welcome here, and we would love to convene after this about the issue that you are here to stoke our consciousness about. But when these women have been ignored this long, this is their moment, and we are going to hear the story.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The moment protestors are escorted out and <a href="https://twitter.com/AyannaPressley?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AyannaPressley</a> takes the mic <a href="https://t.co/guwvXglZzJ">pic.twitter.com/guwvXglZzJ</a>
— Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou (@misyrlena) <a href="https://twitter.com/misyrlena/status/1197669221351804928?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
Rep. Pressley’s remarks drew sustained cheers and applause from the audience, followed by chants of “Warren! Warren! Warren!” The pro-school choice protesters had interrupted Warren as she was telling the story of the “Washerwoman Strike,” which took place in 1881.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren &#038; Rep. Ayanna Pressley.

Warren Names Rep. Ayanna Pressley ‘Campaign Co-Chair’ Just One Day After Pressley Rescued Her At Georgia Rally

Ayanna Pressley

School Choice

Menu

Frank Camp

Articles by Frank Camp