My mind is on the fight ahead.
I’m more than willing to be astonished two weeks from now when Sidney Powell produces irrefutable proof in a court of law that a cabal of international leftists cyber-switched millions of votes from Trump to Biden. But no, I’m not expecting that to happen.
It could happen. Of course, it could. I certainly think the Trump team has the right to try it if they think they’ve got the goods. I don’t think they’re obligated to show the evidence before that to the public or Tucker Carlson or anyone else.
And I’m not at all swayed by the nonsense claims of the media that this was, for the first time in all of human history, an election without even a smidgeon of fraud. I get a laugh when the “journalists” who told me Donald Trump was a Russian spy and Brett Kavanaugh was a mass rapist look indignant and cry, “Why won’t you believe us???”
Our news media is trash. Their words are worth nothing.
Finally, I yawn extremely at complaints from the Left that Trump is putting our democracy at risk by making his legal play. Legal plays are part of our democracy. And I seem to remember some of these same Bozos pleading with electors to go faithless and vote for Hillary after Trump won the last election. Screw ‘em.
But so far, the evidence I’ve seen of a Big Steal isn’t convincing either. There’s no reason to believe Dominion software had any dealings with Smartmatic, the software company involved in a suspect Venezuelan election. Dominion has hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts that would disappear if they were shown to be cheating: a lot of incentives to play it straight. Most of the spikes in voting are easily explainable. And verifying votes by name isn’t possible anymore — it would be a violation of the secret ballot.
A hundred and fifty million people voted. Just in the nature of things, there are going to be thousands of cases of fraud and error, maybe tens of thousands. But it’s hard to believe they can prove enough cases in a court of law to change the outcome.
So my mind is on the fight ahead.
It’s a twofold fight. One, is the battle for the culture. The schools, from kindergarten up, have to be broken and reshaped. The news media has to be beaten and replaced. Entertainment has to be expanded to include the rest of us. The church has to be abandoned and reformed.
That’s a big job, a long game, but as I wrote last week, it’s already underway. Conservatives are finally awake to the need now. We’re in the right. If we show up, we can win.
Two, we have to stop the Great Reset. Go on the website of the World Economic Forum — those are the clowns at Davos who think they have the right to plan our future. They want to use the pandemic as an excuse to impose international socialism on us. They want to “steer the market toward fairer outcomes” by having governments coordinate their tax and regulatory policy. They want to “ensure that investments advance shared goals.” And they want to harness innovation to the “public good.”
Amazingly, it has never occurred to these geniuses to wonder if they have to right to steer the market anywhere or decide which goals we share or define the public good. It has never occurred to them to ask whether they have the capability to do those things. It has never occurred to them to ask if the people want them to.
We have to ask those questions. Then we have to write them down on paper. Then we have to jam the paper down these jackasses’ throats, kick them in the pants, and chase them off into oblivion.
This is the fight that’s going to define the century. It’s going to be worldwide, and it could get ugly. But it has to be won.
The first step is winning the Senate races in Georgia. The second is taking back the House in two years. Then we have to find someone with the guts and America First agenda of Trump, but the manners of a gentleman or lady and reclaim the presidency.
I’m sorry some people are angry at me for not buying the Big Steal scenario. Again, I’m open-minded, ready to be surprised. I’m just telling you how it looks right now.
And right now, the fight ahead is real. In Georgia, in Washington, in academia, in Hollywood, in Davos.
If you’re looking backward, you’re looking the wrong way.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Man on blue walkway

KLAVAN: The Fight Ahead

2020 Election

Georgia

Socialism

My mind is on the fight ahead. I’m more than willing to be astonished two weeks from now when Sidney Powell produces irrefutable proof in a court of law

description

noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1

robots

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/klavan-the-fight-ahead/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/A4309346-8B09-4164-BBC8-D6E45B221026-1200x800.jpeg

twitter:card

Following eight long months of heartbreak, panic, and despair stemming from the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/collections/coronavirus-collection">Covid crisis</a>, government has once again worsened an already-terrible situation.
It’s not difficult to see how the government’s reaction to the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-4-factors-suggest-covid-19-lockdowns-restrictions-have-caused-more-harm-than-good">pandemic</a> has accelerated our path towards America’s economic ruin. Since the lockdowns began in March, roughly 163,000 businesses have closed their doors with the intention of doing so temporarily. Of these, <a href="https://fortune.com/2020/09/28/covid-buisnesses-shut-down-closed/">nearly 100,000</a> have been forced to close permanently. Other estimates suggest that, by the time the pandemic is over, as many as <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/16/yelp-data-shows-60percent-of-business-closures-due-to-the-coronavirus-pandemic-are-now-permanent.html">60%</a> of all COVID-related business closings will be permanent, with <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-n-warns-hunger-pandemic-amid-threats-coronavirus-economic-downturn-n1189326">130 million people</a> worldwide expected to starve due to government lockdowns.
Despite this tremendous loss of wealth and productivity, an extremely fortunate few have thrived in ways that would have been impossible without the government-mandated Covid lockdowns.
Standing head-and-shoulders above the tempestuous sea of economic uncertainty is multinational tech giant Amazon. Following a <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-52495958">26% surge</a> in sales throughout the first fiscal quarter of 2020, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos captured the attention of the globe by <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amazons-ceo-tells-investors-if-youre-shareowner-you-may-want-to-take-a-seat-as-he-explains-why-the-company-will-spend-entirety-of-4-billion-profit-2020-04-30?mod=article_inline">declaring</a>, “If you’re a shareowner in Amazon, you may want to take a seat, because we’re not thinking small.” At the end of the second quarter, the company posted <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amazon-promised-to-spend-all-its-profit-but-pandemic-sales-grew-too-fast-and-it-still-earned-billions-2020-07-30#:~:text=Amazon%20said%20it%20expects%20revenue,costs%20related%20to%20COVID%2D19.">record earnings</a>. One quarter later, Amazon saw its <a href="https://press.aboutamazon.com/news-releases/news-release-details/amazoncom-announces-third-quarter-results">profits jump again</a> by an additional 37% to $96.1 billion (compared with $70 billion at the same point in 2019).
But Amazon is not the only major company thriving amidst the chaos. In August, Walmart announced that it had enjoyed its <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/18/walmart-wmt-q2-2021-earnings.html#:~:text=In%20the%20second%20quarter%2C%20Walmart,per%20share%2C%20a%20year%20earlier.&amp;text=Excluding%20items%2C%20the%20company%20earned,by%20analysts%20surveyed%20by%20Refinitiv.">highest earnings in 31 years</a>, with e-commerce sales up <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/shelleykohan/2020/08/19/walmarts-e-commerce-grows-97-compared-to-industrys-27/?sh=4447e35128ca">97%</a> in one quarter. Apple is also posting <a href="https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/07/apple-reports-third-quarter-results/#:~:text=Cupertino%2C%20California%20%E2%80%94%20July%2030%2C,of%20%242.58%2C%20up%2018%20percent.">double-digit levels of growth</a>, with third-quarter revenue at $59.7 billion — 11% higher than in 2019. “Apple is in the midst of our most prolific product introduction period ever,” boasted Apple CEO Tim Cook last month. “From remote learning to the home office, Apple products have been a window to the world for users as the pandemic continues&#8230;”
The picture could hardly be clearer: As Americans are forced to isolate in their homes, endure poverty rates now <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5743308460b5e922a25a6dc7/t/5f87c59e4cd0011fabd38973/1602733471158/COVID-Projecting-Poverty-Monthly-CPSP-2020.pdf">rivaling the Great Recession</a>, and watch their locally owned businesses crumble, ultra-wealthy corporations capable of large-scale home delivery are eagerly positioning themselves as the only resource for essential household and teleworking needs. Such a bleak state of affairs could not reflect the vision of free-market capitalism any less; the state picking winners and losers is the very definition of crony capitalism. Corporations should have all the freedom in the world to make profits, but not as a result of the government shutting down the competition.
Like most government actions, Covid lockdowns have produced the exact opposite of their intended effect, stacking the cards against the hardworking small business owners who make this country great. The time is long past due to fight back against this tyrannical attempt to redefine the proper role of government. We either believe in liberty in times of crisis, or we do not believe in liberty at all. 
Cliff Maloney is the president of Young Americans for Liberty.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Jeff Bezos

Covid Lockdowns Have Created a Crisis of Crony Capitalism

Capitalism

Coronavirus

COVID-19

lockdown

Covid lockdowns have allowed a fortunate few to profit in ways that would have been impossible without the government-mandated restrictions.

Covid Lockdowns Have Created a Crony Capitalism Crisis

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/covid-lockdowns-create-crony-capitalism-crisis/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-450831356-e1606248542448.jpg

twitter:image

Everyone sucks, and that is why you should make extra sure to have a very happy Thanksgiving this year.
No, seriously. The most needful reminder of all this year is that everyone is — categorically, scripturally, and historically — the worst. The tale of humanity is a tale of murder, war, rape, disease, and other assorted catastrophes. I do not mean to be flippant about such things. They are agony, but they are the norm.
And so in order to grasp the true character of any event in any human society, one must understand that a large amount of human history is quite painful and terrible. There is no pure and unblemished culture against which we can measure the atrocities of those big bad Europeans who came to settle the New World centuries ago. Maya, Aztecs, Incas, Toltecs, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and Egyptians alike: at one point or another they have <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-native-american-slaveholders-complicate-trail-tears-narrative-180968339/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-native-american-slaveholders-complicate-trail-tears-narrative-180968339/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1EIM7kT0xqotO3XCFSQ3jn">all</a> gotten <a href="https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0zgOke15ELdz0eZ9GHMIzN">eagerly</a> about the <a href="https://newafricanmagazine.com/16616/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://newafricanmagazine.com/16616/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3ppRZ1BeSRMRTTztXVE-qH">business</a> of <a href="https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/discovering-columbus/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/discovering-columbus/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1XXY7fpcbkdSNixczUObAj">enslaving</a> each other, sacrificing one another to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/skeletal-remains-confirm-ancient-greeks-engaged-in-human-sacrifice" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/10/skeletal-remains-confirm-ancient-greeks-engaged-in-human-sacrifice&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1qw8GHop2RwY23SIjVFdc1">false gods</a>, or otherwise <a href="https://www.livescience.com/65283-crucifixion-history.html" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.livescience.com/65283-crucifixion-history.html&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1WxeGCC2dyAYX-HJGxrPJB">mistreating one another</a> quite dreadfully. You don’t need religion to tell you this: you just need a few history books and a pair of eyes.
Against this rather grim backdrop there occasionally emerge, by the grace of God, a few spots of light. The story of Thanksgiving is one such spot. The Puritan Pilgrims were what is called “Separatists” from the Church of England because of their refusal to participate in rituals they deemed unbiblical. They had been “harried” (to use the language King James employed at the time) out of their native land. Though they found sanctuary for a while in the Dutch town of Leiden, they so yearned to raise their children apart from the seductions of the world that they felt called to set out for distant shores.
On the way, they were given the runaround by some thoroughly opportunistic businessmen called “The Adventurers,” kept from departure until the worst possible time, and shunted into a 75-foot-long cavern in the belly of a ship, the Mayflower, which would suffer hair-raising damage on the 65-day journey to the New World.
They arrived to find the native Wampanoags either thoroughly wiped out by disease, or else humiliated by forced capitulation to sworn enemies such as the Narragansett. Of those who had occupied the area of Patuxet, now called Plymouth, only one, Squanto, remained alive — and that was because he had been enslaved, carried to Europe, and forced to find his way home after regaining freedom.
Half the Pilgrims died during their first brutal winter in Plymouth. Their meeting with Squanto and the regional chief, Massasoit, likely saved them from ruin. And so it was that, 399 years ago, in 1621, the Pilgrims and the Wampanoag made a pact that would last for decades of peace.
It can only be understood as a miracle: these two battered, beleaguered people, rendered desperate and needy by the cruel violence of this fallen world, came together in the midst of it all — all the disease, all the heartache, all the fear — and they broke bread. Like all miracles, it was a moment in which the warmth of fellowship glowed defiantly in spite of all else — a moment puncturing through the darkness, providing some hint that we are more than this world makes us out to be.
And indeed we are, though disease and fear threaten us still. We are told this year that we must not gather, because it is not safe to do so. But just like the accusation that the European settlers of America were uniquely evil, this warning against the plague of coronavirus is based on a deep misunderstanding about what kind of world it is we live in.
It is never simple, never clean, never easy, to do the things we humans are called by God himself to do. Eating together, building families, building nations: these things are not safe. Never have been, never will be. We do them anyway, not because we can be assured of their success or their security, but because our gift and our duty is to rejoice together in the midst of all this mess. Now we are told to wait until the mess is cleaned up. That is nonsense. We will die before that happens, and we will never have lived.
The Pilgrims’ eventual governor, William Bradford, <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/24950/24950-h/24950-h.htm" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.gutenberg.org/files/24950/24950-h/24950-h.htm&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw39QeoD8zTcdsAwX8CKJjU7">wrote</a> in his record of the journey that when the group left Holland, they were deathly afraid and bitterly sad. But “they knew they were pilgrims, and looked not much on those things, but lift[ed] up their eyes to the heavens, their dearest country, and quieted their spirits.” So are we pilgrims, all of us, on this earth — here to find what joy in it we can. May your own Thanksgiving, and every Thanksgiving, be one moment of such joy. Do not wait until it is safe to make it so.
Spencer Klavan is host of the <a href="http://youngheretics.com/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://youngheretics.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0GMUxg7VdCwuD3R6L_d0Ck">Young Heretics</a> podcast and associate editor of the <a href="https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2pFKJrpynA6Tw5SEUoWO-Q">Claremont Review of</a> Books and <a href="https://americanmind.org/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://americanmind.org/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0qDA523zYhtONSXhHcG_1m">The American Mind</a>. He can be reached on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/spencerklavan" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/spencerklavan&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1606332440226000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0Ut9TSIMBUWEolj8C35yBk">@SpencerKlavan</a>.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

First Thanksgiving

Why You Should Celebrate Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving

Everyone sucks, and that is why you should make extra sure to have a very happy Thanksgiving this year. No, seriously. The most needful reminder of all

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/why-you-should-celebrate-thanksgiving/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-102843931-e1606254715697.jpg

If 2018 was the Year of the Woman, then 2020 is the Year of the Republican Woman. 
But it wasn’t by accident. 
Just two years ago, Republicans elected just one new woman to the U.S. House of Representatives. Meanwhile, Democrats elected a wave of women to Congress who were rightfully applauded, celebrated, and featured on one magazine cover after the other. Too many qualified Republican women, however, watched from the sidelines. 
The Party vowed to change, sparking a movement led largely by women like Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY) and groups like Winning For Women Action Fund, the first Republican SuperPAC dedicated solely to electing women. This cycle, WFW Action Fund poured millions of dollars into races to support strong, qualified women candidates. 
For too long, Republican women have been targeted and outspent by the very groups on the Left that paint themselves as champions of women. But with new infrastructure built to counter these efforts, a slate of qualified candidates, and the support of Party leadership, Republicans ushered in a historic year for women. Next year, more Republican women than ever before will take seats in Congress.
Currently, nine of the twelve seats that Republicans flipped in the House were won by women from all walks of life. 
In Iowa, former TV news anchor and current state representative Ashley Hinson ousted one-term incumbent Abby Finkenauer. 
In Miami, Maria Elvira Salazar, a Cuban-American who knows firsthand the dangers of socialism, ousted one-term incumbent Donna Shalala. 
In Oklahoma, Stephanie Bice, who will be the first Iranian-American to serve in Congress, ousted one-term incumbent Kendra Horn.
In Minnesota, Collin Peterson was finally ousted after nearly 30 years in office. It took a Republican woman and the first woman to serve as Minnesota Senate President, Michelle Fischbach, to get it done.
The efforts this cycle should be the foundation of recruitment moving forward: seeking out and supporting qualified female candidates. When Republicans invest in women, Republicans win.
Electoral success is a numbers game that can’t be won unless the Republican Party continues to grow its tent. Republicans must work hard to ensure that conservative values like limited government, strong national defense, and economic opportunity resonate with as many Americans as possible. 
But when it comes to women, electing them is just one part of the equation. The Republican Party has long struggled appealing to some women, particularly suburban women. Winning these voters back will require sustained and focused outreach that makes a case for why voting Republican is in their best interest.  
Recent polling shows that three out of four Republicans believe having more female candidates would help win over more female voters. Meanwhile, the majority of Republicans polled said that having more Republican women in office helps ensure Republican women are appropriately represented. Ultimately, having more women at the helm of conservative politics is good for America.
Success among women, both candidates and voters, is critical to the long-term survival of the Republican Party. There’s no better or easier way to make gains on both fronts than by electing more qualified women. 
This election is a testament to the changing face of the Republican Party, which has proven its commitment to ensuring that more women see themselves and their interests reflected in the GOP. 
For the Republican Party, inclusion and diversity is the path forward. Let’s raise these women up as examples of leaders working to change their communities across the country. 
While 2020 is a great start, it is just the beginning. 
Olivia Perez-Cubas is the Communications Director at Winning For Women Action Fund, the first Republican SuperPAC dedicated solely to electing women. 
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

President Trump Delivers Statement On Senate Impeachment Trial’s Acquittal

Republicans Vowed To Elect More Women…They Did Just That

Republican Women

If 2018 was the Year of the Woman, then 2020 is the Year of the Republican Woman.  But it wasn’t by accident.  Just two years ago, Republicans elected

Republicans Vowed To Elect More Women...They Did Just That

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/republicans-vowed-to-elect-more-women-they-did-just-that/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1198920659.jpg

Parler, the social media platform founded in 2018 by software engineers John Matze and Jared Thomson, has been steadily gaining momentum in a landscape dominated by Silicon Valley giants such as Facebook and Twitter. 
The new social hub — which is built upon the notion of being open and transparent with its users and upholding free speech — experienced its most rapid rate of growth this month, amid the election. On November 9, according to market research firm <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/10/facebook-parler-election-claims/">Sensor Tower</a>, Parler had 850,000 downloads, its most successful day to date. The app climbed to the top spot of Apple’s App Store downloads chart, overtaking TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and Snapchat.
Many of the users flocking to Parler were motivated by the way establishment social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook glaringly injected themselves into our political dialogue and acted as purveyors of truth. Both Facebook and Twitter appended their own “fact check” disclaimers and warnings to random user posts, suggesting that the articles they shared or the opinions they echoed were misleading or false. 
On October 14, further fueling distrust of Silicon Valley, Twitter actively suppressed a breaking New York Post story on Hunter Biden. The story, reporting on a trove of leaked emails, revealed dealings and negotiations between the Democratic Presidential candidate’s son and various foreign companies. Twitter not only locked the New York Post’s account, but they also locked out users and prevented them from sharing the article — as well as a subsequent piece from the Post. 
Suspicions of Twitter’s political bias have also stemmed from its executive personnel’s proclivities. Earlier this year, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey announced that he had donated 10 million dollars to the Boston University&#8217;s Center for Antiracist Research, founded by radical activist and author Ibram X. Kendi. Following President Trump’s recent nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, Kendi <a href="https://twitter.com/dribram/status/1309916696296198146?lang=en">had said</a>, regarding Coney Barrett’s adopted Haitian children, “Some White colonizers “adopted” Black children. They “civilized” these “savage” children in the “superior” ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.”
It was with this in mind that spates of social media users flocked to Parler, the platform loudly purporting to uphold neutrality in both its policies and practices. I spoke with Dan Bongino, a part-owner and investor in Parler, as well as the politically neutral alternative to YouTube, Rumbler. Bongino’s relationship with the social media app began with a sponsorship on his show. It was only later, roughly six months ago, after getting to know the service and the team behind it that Bongino decided to put his support behind the app’s mission and back them financially, upon which he also began acting as Parler’s strategic advisor. 
Amid its rising popularity and growth — especially amongst conservatives — Bongino explained that he and the team at Parler do not intend to market or portray the social media network as a political platform with any partisan bias. While maintaining that he is content with Parler courting conservative voices, Bongino insisted that Parler isn’t a political platform — nor does it intend to be. “Parler is not a political platform; it is a micro-blogging platform,” he asserted.
As Bongino emphasized, Parler is not exclusive to right-wing commentators. The network already boasts an eclectic array of users, including actors and musicians and entertainers, all enticed by the minimalist and trivial idea of free expression. Singer Joy Villa expressed her support for the app, stating “I love that Parler is transparent with who views my posts and that they promote and actually support free speech and free thought.”
With regards to Parler’s long-term plan for expanding their user base, and whether Bongino would like to see it politically diversify, Bongino recalled an anecdote. “When I was an instructor at the Secret Service Training Academy, Roger Ailes once came to speak at a graduation ceremony. During the Q/A period at the end of his speech, Aisles was asked about his business plan for Fox News; he responded by saying, ‘well, I found this untapped market called fifty-one percent of the population.’” 
Most people use Twitter for two reasons. First, to share their content and draw traffic to their site. The second reason is much less pragmatic but much more fun. There isn’t any single specific term for it, but it is best described as “political jousting.” The political joust is where all belligerents of any contested issue will flippantly hurl snide remarks and wryly snub each other’s work based purely on their ideology, without reading past headlines. This is the Twitter atmosphere in a nutshell and, while toxic and objectively unhealthy, it’s ultimately what keeps most users coming back, like junkies looking to get their next fix.  
I asked Bongino how Parler could hope to achieve or replicate the natural vigor of such an environment without an ample serving of all facets of the ideological spectrum. “I think you have this the wrong way around,” Bongino explained, “It is a false assumption that we [conservatives] are here to fight with liberals. It’s what you can live without. The real question people should be asking is, can liberals live without harassing us?” 
Elaborating on his point, Bongino invoked the Charles Krauthammer law. “To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil,” positing that liberals believe conservatives aren’t just wrong, they are morally deficient, and that it is “their life mission to harass us [conservatives]” and pontificate atop a moral high horse.” Bongino’s main point was that if conservatives all flocked to Parler, deserting Twitter entirely, Parler would not remain an ideological echo chamber for long, as liberals themselves would soon follow suit. “We can live without them; they cannot live without us,” he said. 
Bongino added, “I am convinced that over time, in a few months to a year, as more and more people start engaging on Parler, we will start having the opposite conversation: Why even be on Twitter?”
On the topic of Twitter’s terms and conditions — which are <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/29/twitters-double-standard-has-become-painfully-clear/">often criticized</a> as being both vague and selectively enforced, Bongino stated, “Parler’s rules are crystal clear,” pointing to the terse, two-page <a href="https://legal.parler.com/documents/guidelines.pdf">document</a> on the site’s page. He added that while the practice of tinkering content recommendation algorithms to favor liberal voices — a practice coined as “shadow-banning” — was a concern on Twitter, Parler eschews such vague content tailoring and instead only shows users posts from accounts they follow.
Commenting on Twitter’s most recent decision to insert fact-checks and warning labels into tweets it deemed to contain misinformation, Bongino explained, “Twitter’s CEO, Jack [Dorsey], himself admitted that they [Twitter] have no expertise in voter fraud. Parler is not a political or a fact-check platform.” 
Parler’s politically neutral underpinnings were recently emphasized by the site’s co-founder, Rebekah Mercer, who said, “John and I started Parler to provide a neutral platform for free speech, as our founders intended, and also to create a social media environment that would protect data privacy&#8230; The ever-increasing tyranny and hubris of our tech overlords demands that someone lead the fight against data mining, and for the protection of free speech online. That someone is Parler, a beacon to all who value their liberty, free speech and personal privacy.”
On Parler’s recent growth up, Bongino was elated, telling me, “this was a slow day, today, for Parler, we were only #14 in the App Store, ahead of Google and Disney. And this is with almost zero marketing budget.” 
The future growth and expansion of budding challengers to Silicon Valley’s monopoly on social media may still be uncertain. However, the last several months have glaringly exposed the true penchants of Twitter and Facebook. Presiding over hundreds of millions — or even billions — of users, the tech titans of California have imbued their affection for big government into their domains. As such, they have assumed responsibilities far beyond the mere maintenance of a free platform. Convinced that they bear an obligation to discern and sieve information that permeates their own corners of the internet, they have elevated their role to effective “Ministers of Truth.” As the online social networks become more and more suffused with overbearing rules and regulations, it’s no wonder libertarian and conservative-leaning users are sent looking for freer, simpler and less overbearing social media outlets like Parler. 
<a href="https://twitter.com/Harry1T6">Follow Harry Khachatrian on Twitter</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Dan Bongino

Dan Bongino Explains The Explosive Growth And Popularity Of Parler

Facebook

Parler

Social Media

Twitter

Parler, the social media platform founded in 2018 by software engineers John Matze and Jared Thomson, has been steadily gaining momentum in a landscape

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/dan-bongino-explains-the-explosive-growth-and-popularity-of-parler/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1156720731-1200x800.jpg

Come January, if we transition to a Biden administration, the Democratic Party will be left with a stark choice regarding the future of their platform. During the election, rather than supporting specific policies, Democrats largely unified against President Trump. However, while this decision may have been successful, will Democrats be able to unite over any issues other than their hatred of Trump in a post-Trump world? Having run against Trump’s so-called divisiveness, there are many growing divides among their own party members they will have to address before running against the GOP again in 2024, begging the question: what will the Democratic party choose to become?
On one side, the party can stick with their traditionally liberal platform, which would likely attract center-left and moderate voters, while potentially driving away far-left voters who yearn for more government involvement and even broader social welfare programs. In this scenario, the Democrats risk fracturing their base if the radical left reject moderation and form a third party.
The other choice lies with the growing subsection of the Democratic party, headed by self-described democratic socialists such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders. This faction in the Democratic party, though small, has been gaining momentum, especially among young people with whom the message of socialism resonates. Looking towards the long-term future of the party, the Democrats may decide to pivot towards socialism in order to cater to these younger generations.
The issue with this strategy is that the policies of the radical far-left, which includes the Green New Deal, defunding the police, and free healthcare, would become central to the Democratic party platform. Combined with the threat of Ocasio-Cortez and others to maintain a “list” of Trump supporters to presumably ostracize in the future, moderate Democrat voters would be presented with a difficult choice: vote for the Republicans, a third party, or abstain from the electoral process completely. For many in this large voting bloc, none of these options are ideal.
During the 2020 election, actions such as the rejection of Sanders’ Medicare for All platform were indicative of the moderate perception the Democratic Party hoped to achieve. Again, this was only made possible by the wider desire to unite against President Trump. Without Trump, such fundamental policy disagreements could tear the party in two. 
The Biden administration wouldn&#8217;t be able to hide behind shallow rallying cries of “orange man bad” or “vote him out.” Unless President Trump runs again in 2024, they will be forced to try and mobilize supporters around a single set of issues. Unfortunately for Biden, this can only be achieved by isolating a large group of voters, whether it be on the moderate wing or the radical wing. Without a common enemy in Trump, the Democratic party will be forced to finally address the growing policy divides which have been festering for years. With Biden claiming to be a moderate, and the radical far-left Kamala Harris waiting in the background, will it be the moderates or democratic socialists who truly lead the Democratic party?
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders

Biden Must Finally Decide Between Moderates and Democratic Socialists

Democrat Party

Democratic Socialism

Come January, if we transition to a Biden administration, the Democratic Party will be left with a stark choice regarding the future of their platform.

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/biden-must-finally-decide-between-moderates-and-democratic-socialists/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1158728082-1200x800.jpg

The most accurate information always comes from a first-hand account. That’s why commentator, journalist, and youtuber, Tim Pool started his journalism career on the ground. Traveling the streets, Pool captured the political upheavals that transpired overnight in Egypt, Ukraine, and Sweden. 
But Pool’s trip to Sweden was unlike his others.
At the time, Pool had just ended his contract with the newly “wokified” Fusion news-site and began an independent youtube channel with his own on-site reporting. He was vlogging on Sweden’s crime and refugee crisis, when Trump made his now-famous &#8220;look at Sweden&#8221; <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/19/516097504/trump-says-look-whats-happening-in-sweden-sweden-asks-wait-what">remark</a> during a Florida rally, causing the media to blow up. Pool then began receiving messages from journalist colleagues urging him not to investigate the story in Sweden. 
“Don&#8217;t do this one,” they would read, “Trump’s lying.” 
From this point on, Pool knew something was changing in the world of journalism. “They got really, really mad at me and that was when I could see this weird split starting to emerge,” Pool recalled. 
Now deep in the political media world as host of “Timcast,” Tim Pool is all too aware of the struggle for truth among the tangle of narratives spun by the legacy media. In last week’s “Sunday Special” interview, Pool met with Editor Emeritus, Ben Shapiro, to talk about this ongoing tension and the hard-hitting facts about the election, Antifa, and the continued efforts of the mainstream media to obscure those facts.
It’s challenging to put a political label on Pool, who acknowledged that he holds “a weird position.” 
“I&#8217;m kind of this heterodox individual — don&#8217;t really fit necessarily anywhere. Although I think I&#8217;ve been classified as like cultural right-wing, whatever that means. But my political positions are kind of just like where Democrats used to be,” described Pool. 
But with the rise of the cancel culture mob, Pool has found this works to his advantage as a commentator and journalist. “It doesn&#8217;t really work very well for the mainstream media to smear me as some kind of conspiracy theorist, when I don&#8217;t make an assertion beyond ‘here&#8217;s a fact,’” Pool told Shapiro.
Pool’s journey from street to studio was not freely chosen. While reporting on a variety of movements, including Occupy Wall Street, Proud Boys, and Antifa, his desire was to purely “cover what [was] happening on the ground.” 
Yet, Pool explained, “by telling the truth, these extremists and Antifa-type people were attacking me and threatening me.” 
“So I slowly stopped doing it because it was getting more and more dangerous,” Pool concluded.
But this hasn’t stopped Pool from answering the hard questions about 2020 politics. 
The election turmoil brewing in the nation was a major point of issue for Pool, who affirmed that we are witnessing a “kind of millennial bias” in the post-election processes.
“This is a really, really close race,” Pool noted. “It doesn&#8217;t make sense to say, ‘Joe Biden won,’ when there&#8217;s a legal process, you know, happening. Several states are too close to call still. The media has just decided this is it, ‘Joe Biden won, it&#8217;s over!’”
So while Trump is fighting battle’s in court, “it&#8217;s almost like they&#8217;re trying to tell us ‘Joe Biden won’ to convince us,” suggested Pool. 
One of Pool&#8217;s greatest fears is that the legitimacy of our election process could be threatened if the media continues to leave important questions unanswered.
“You&#8217;re gonna find a bunch of people saying in a sworn affidavit, ‘I saw this thing happen.’ You can&#8217;t just ignore that and say, ‘we will do nothing,’” urged Pool. “You have to let people know we&#8217;re doing everything in our power to clean up any potential errors so they view this election as legitimate. I mean, if Joe Biden really does get certified as the winner, he gets inaugurated, but they don&#8217;t look into this stuff, it would undermine his presidency, because you&#8217;ve got 72.2 million people now who have voted for Donald Trump.”
“I think everybody deserves to look at these affidavits or these whistleblowers and just say, ‘you know, is it going to change the election? Maybe it won&#8217;t. But we should investigate,’” argued Pool.
Despite Biden-favoring results, the uncertainty of the election has brought Trump supporters to the streets in recent days, along with opposition from Antifa.
“Apparently the media calling it for Joe Biden did nothing to change their minds,” observed Pool. 
“And in fact,” Pool continued, “I think it&#8217;s only likely to escalate if we do enter a Joe Biden administration. Because certainly, Joe Biden won&#8217;t be strong enough to deal with these groups that are pressuring him, and attacking him, and getting violent.”
Antifa has often been reduced to simply an idea and, while Pool agrees that it does encompass an idea, he also says there is much more to it. 
“It&#8217;s not necessarily wrong to say that they&#8217;re a movement or an idea but it&#8217;s the individual cells that we&#8217;re talking about,” said Pool. Antifa members, many of whom are authoritarian communists, he added, “typically agree with each other on their cause and their means to the end.”
“So you actually have a loose-knit group of various cells that coordinate with each other using violence against their political opponents — for the most part instigating it outright to win.”
The difficulty, Pool alludes, is bringing these facts into the public light. 
Because the Left is far more successful at “street-level organizing than the Right,” he told Shapiro, the media either cannot figure out what Antifa actually is or “outright defends them on purpose.”
“So long as you have these mainstream resistance-type Democrats who hate Trump, they won&#8217;t call these groups out,” maintained Pool.
Their actions, Pool claims, have been able to so easily slide under the radar because they claim they use a “diversity of tactics.” “The reality is these groups say ‘respect our diversity of tactics’ because that&#8217;s code for getting violent and hurting people.” 
Pool believes the key is not getting caught up in the semantics of the name Black Lives Matter or anti-fascist, the cloaks under which Antifa often hides, but rather focusing on the actions themselves. 
“Most people just read the headline,” Pool asserted. “They just they don&#8217;t actually investigate what the story is.” 
But those that Pool know who have made the political transition from liberal to conservative, no Trump to Trump, or those who just left the “woke cult,” did it “because they started doing their own research.”
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-107-tim-pool">Watch Pool’s full interview with Shapiro </a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

USA – Occupy Wall Street – Day of Action

From Street To Studio: Tim Pool Fighting Antifa And Media Bias

Antifa

Ben Shapiro

Media Bias

Sunday Special

Tim Pool

The most accurate information always comes from a first-hand account. That’s why commentator, journalist, and youtuber, Tim Pool started his journalism

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/from-street-to-studio-tim-pool-fighting-antifa-and-media-bias/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/Tim-Pool.jpg

You know it’s Halloween when a flood of pumpkin spice memes and “problematic” costumes hit the news cycle.
Christmas, by comparison, arrives as soon as the first “Die Hard” Tweet crosses our smart phone screens. More specifically, “is the 1988 action classic a Christmas movie?” The very question is as seasonal as eggnog and mistletoe, and inspires fiery debate even among friends, and both sides refuse to back down.
“Die Hard” superstar Bruce Willis himself gave his answer at his 2018 roast, declaring that <a href="https://ew.com/movies/2018/07/15/bruce-willis-die-hard-not-christmas-movie/">“Die Hard” isn’t a Christmas movie</a>. Given the tone of the event, he could have been trolling the movie’s gargantuan fan base. Even if he wasn’t, the question is now far bigger than him or his opinion.
Why?
It’s not Christmas in 21st century America without a “Die Hard” mention. It’s as much a holiday staple as liberals finding new carols to cancel. Watch out, “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer,” you may be next.
The holiday season is all about traditions — the gaudy stocking you can’t throw away, the family Rottweiler knocking down the Christmas tree, and whining about how early stores put up their twinkly decorations.
The “Die Hard/Christmas” debate is now firmly entrenched in our culture. You can’t imagine a holiday season without the question coming up. Blame social media if you must, it’s still undeniable. Game. Set. Match. The “Die Hard” debate is now a seasonal staple and, by extension, a Christmas movie. 
The answer goes far beyond that, though.
The story itself brims with good cheer – in between the machine gun fire and Hans Gruber’s monologues. Songs like “Winter Wonderland,” “Let It Snow” and “Christmas In Hollis” decorate the soundtrack. 
The action begins on Christmas eve, and Nakatomi Plaza is festooned with wreathes and other seasonal fare.
The book that inspired the movie, 1979’s “Nothing Lasts Forever,” offers even more Christmas trappings than the big screen adaptation. That spirit snuck its way into the finished film, one originally dangled before both Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone. Both superstars declined the role that would allow Willis to leave TV behind for decades.
Alamo Drafthouse, the movie chain with a playful sense of pop culture essentials, offers “Die Hard” screenings – when else? – in December (at least they did in the pre-COVID era).
Willis’ John McClane character adds to the merriment by dropping a Santa Claus hat on one of the expired villains. It’s ho-ho hilarious in a black comedy sort of way.
The “Die Hard”/Christmas debate matters more to conservative Americans. The film captures the essential ‘80s spirit, from President Ronald Reagan’s “Peace Through Strength” mantra to storytelling free of political correctness.
Need proof of the latter? A modern review of the film by Common Sense Media warned that some viewers will find the film’s stereotypes “<a href="https://www.commonsensemedia.org/movie-reviews/die-hard?utm_expid=.RCp3TD4oT6qWuBfx5635Eg.0&amp;utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F">dated and offensive</a>.”
Action heroes like Willis, Stallone and Schwarzenegger didn’t clutch pearls while dispatching the baddies. They got the job done. Period. It’s one of many reasons our culture clings to the ‘80s as an oasis of normalcy in our woke age.
The heroic John McClane epitomizes that tone better than any character in modern times. He’s as red-blooded as the Duke wolfing down slabs of bloody prime rib. Willis’ hero cracked wise while taking out the Eurotrash. He never lost his sense of humor, nor his hunger to reunite with his family.
Isn’t that what the holidays are all about … family? John McClane may be as tough as they come, but he’s a softie when it comes to his estranged wife and children. 
The ultimate test of a Christmas movie is something harder to quantify. It’s how it makes the viewer feel. Even the darkest of yuletide stories, like the gazillion “Christmas Carol” variations, end on an uplifting note. (“Mr. Magoo’s Christmas Carol” is a personal favorite).
“Bad Santa,” the ultimate anti-holiday film, delivered a crush of cruelty before an ending that flirted with good cheer.
That’s certainly true of “Die Hard,” even if it takes a nail biter of an ending (two, actually) to set things in motion.
“Die Hard” caps with Hans Gruber decorating a sidewalk, the McClanes reunited in time for Christmas, and Officer Powell (Reginald VelJohnson) redeemed as the hero we all knew lay within him.
Some viewers will prefer Hallmark’s cavalcade of Christmas treats to Willis’ unorthodox holiday sampler. Others know it just isn’t the holidays unless their favorite cop christens the season with a Yippie Ki Yay salute.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Bruce Willis In ‘Die Hard’

‘Die Hard’ Is A Christmas Movie: Case Closed

Christmas

movies

You know it’s Halloween when a flood of pumpkin spice memes and “problematic” costumes hit the news cycle. Christmas, by comparison, arrives as soon as

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/die-hard-is-a-christmas-movie-case-closed/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-159822722-e1606179565365.jpg

A deliberate attempt by the Left to completely rewrite American history, motivated by bitter activism and postmodern ideals, continues to take place at an alarming rate. Though once isolated to the ivory towers of higher academia under the guise of Critical Theory, such revisionism has now made its way into our mainstream culture. Our educational system, alongside the legacy media, now present much of American history – with all its triumphs and tribulations – as more of an abomination than as a momentous struggle that allowed our nation to become one of the most just and egalitarian in all of human history. In doing so, they seek to supplant traditional American culture and values with what can only be defined as “woke” totalitarianism informed by Marxist thought. 
Critical Theory and its offshoots are rooted in Marxism
While Critical Theory carries an exhausting, broad, and ever-evolving definition, at its root, it’s an ideology and outlook developed in the early part of the twentieth century by the <a href="https://iep.utm.edu/frankfur/">Marxist Frankfurt School</a>.
“The Critical Theory of the…Frankfurt School,’” <a href="https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-theory/">New Discourses</a> details, “focused on power analyses that began from a Marxist…perspective with an aim to understand why Marxism wasn’t proving successful in Western contexts. It rapidly developed a ‘post-Marxist’ position that criticized Marx’s primary focus on economics and expanded his views on <a href="https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-power-systemic/">power</a>, alienation, and exploitation into all aspects of post-Enlightenment Western culture.”
This focus on “power, alienation, and exploitation” led to the “study of various types of power relations within myriad aspects of culture.” This resulted in Critical Theory branching out to form a seemingly endless array of lesser so-called theories including “queer Theory, critical race Theory, intersectional feminism, disability studies, and fat studies.”
These are no longer simply fringe ideas relegated to academia and obscure corners of the internet. Corporations and branches of government on state and federal levels are actively integrating such “theories” into their various training protocols. <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/critical-race-theory-in-american-classrooms">City Journal</a> reports that “NASA spent half a million dollars” for workshops on male privilege and that the FBI holds “weekly ‘intersectionality’ workshops.” 
Most importantly, these offshoots of Critical Theory have moved away from the traditional Marxist critique of capitalism in favor of an overarching indictment of “liberal Western culture.” As such, they serve as the galvanizing force behind such extremist movements as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-5-radical-goals-of-the-black-lives-matter-organization-the-media-ignores">Black Lives Matter</a> and Antifa which seek to eradicate traditional American history and culture as we know it.
Critical Theory has invaded our schools
The most pernicious influence of Critical Theory is occurring in our public schools. Teachers have now been trained for years in various colleges and universities to indoctrinate their students with these neo-Marxist ideas — and often unwittingly so.
<a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/higher-education-critical-theory-attacks-americas-norms-traditions/">The National Review</a> reports that “colleges of education are the training grounds for <a href="https://www.jamesgmartin.center/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/The-Politicization-of-University-Schools-of-Education.pdf">translating this leftist academic theory</a> into K–12 pedagogy and practice.” This is having a harmful effect on young minds all across our nation as “prospective elementary and secondary teachers are steeped in the philosophy of Critical Theory.”
“Some school districts have become proud indoctrination factories” for critical race theory, according to Max Eden of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/critical-race-theory-in-american-classrooms">City Journal</a>. Some of the lessons being taught to elementary kids include “What is the Black Lives Matter Movement and what is our role in it?” and “Think About It George Washington: The Beginnings of 273 Years of Hypocrisy in America.” 
“Parents may wonder how our public schools became propaganda mills,” Eden continues. “The answer…is two ways: gradually, then suddenly. Critical race theory was largely pioneered in U.S. schools of education; a generation of teachers has been trained in its toxic assumptions. Then, after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May, a host of major education trade associations <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/rise-of-woke-schools">publicly vowed</a> to imprint this ideology onto the next generation.”
Generations of young Americans are now being educated through the filter of Critical Theory to actively despise our nation, its history, and even themselves if they cannot effectively categorize themselves as marginalized “victims” under some definition of Critical Theory and its various offshoots. 
The American Association of School Administrators (AASA) recently released a statement rife with the “woke” totalitarianism of Critical Theory by echoing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-the-truth-about-the-anti-racist-movement-and-its-founder-ibram-x-kendi">the zealotry of Ibram X. Kendi</a> in order to “dismantle systemic racism” in our schools: 
“We are living at a time of obscene inequities and merely trying to compensate is not enough. Equity is more than making things more accessible and AASA’s work on equity must go further and become actively anti-racist. The perpetual traumas of inequality and discrimination manifest as more than the acts themselves, taking a significant toll on the mental health and well-being of all those impacted. Now is the time for all educational leaders to intensify our commitment to address inequities and work to dismantle systemic racism.”  
The legacy media and the inherent failings of The 1619 Project
Nikole Hannah-Jones, an investigative journalist and creator of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html?mtrref=www.poynter.org&amp;assetType=PAYWALL">The 1619 Project</a> for The New York Times, doesn’t just seek to revise American history for the storied newspaper. She wants to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html">rewrite</a> it from the ground up along distinctly racial lines. 
“The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.”
Hannah-Jones argues that “The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie.” She insists that the founding proclamation of our nation that “all men are created equal” was a falsehood “the white men who drafted those words did not believe…to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.”
In a concerted effort to counter the many glaring inconsistencies and half-truths in Hannah-Jones’ ambitious project of outright revisionism, a coalition of black scholars has formed <a href="https://1776unites.com/about/scholars/">1776 Unites</a> that includes such notable names as Glenn Loury and Coleman Hughes.
Writing for <a href="https://1776unites.com/essays/we-cannot-allow-1619-to-dumb-down-america-in-the-name-of-a-crusade/">1776 Unites</a>, scholar John H. McWhorter excoriates The 1619 Project as an “outright misrepresentation” of history, as well as being “simplistic” and “anti-intellectual.” Most importantly, McWhorter reminds the likes of Hannah-Jones that the very ideals our nation was founded upon are what led to the abolishment of slavery. 
“America has always been an experiment, ever imperfect, always in rehearsal,” McWhorter writes. “That its beginnings 400 years ago were founded in casual bondage of other humans is appalling from our viewpoint, but should surprise no one given what was ordinary in all human societies worldwide at the time. That in this nation, slavery gradually was abolished, via a movement in which white people vigorously and crucially participated, was a kind of miracle in itself. It demonstrated that the rehearsal was a progressive one, moving ever towards justice even if never achieving its quintessence.”
Coleman Hughes also offers <a href="https://1776unites.com/essays/lets-arm-black-children-with-lessons-that-can-improve-their-lives/">tremendous insight</a> into the failings of The 1619 Project. While quick to “support teaching Americans of all ages about the horrors of slavery,” Hughes argues that Hannah-Jones’ ungainly attempt at blatant revisionism “is an attempt to weaponize that history to fight ideological wars in the present.”
“Instead of teaching black children lessons they can use to improve their lives — such as the importance of education and geographic mobility — the 1619 Project seems hellbent on teaching them to see slavery everywhere: in traffic jams, in sugary foods and, most surprisingly, in Excel spreadsheets…Without doubt, America would be a very different place — in ways both large and small — if not for slavery. Yet the arguments marshalled in support of this fact too often rely on an intellectual sleight of hand that would be plain to see if applied to any other historical event.”
Such “weaponizing” of historical facts remains at the root of what many in the legacy media engage in as evidenced by The 1619 Project. Journalistic integrity and academic rigor are now being replaced by fervent, dogmatic activism, devoid of fact and substance. 
Howard Zinn’s Marxist retelling of American history
First published in 1980, the late Howard Zinn’s wildly popular work, “A People’s History of The United States” ushered in a deluge of Marxist tropes into mainstream American culture. Daniel J. Flynn of <a href="https://www.city-journal.org/html/fbi-history-howard-zinn-10752.html">City Journal</a> refers to Zinn’s work as an “unremittingly Marxist retelling of the nation’s past” that was “[f]ueled by enthusiastic professors who made the book required reading and by pop-culture name-dropping by the likes of The Simpsons, Good Will Hunting, and The Sopranos.” 
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/lies-the-debunkers-told-me-how-bad-history-books-win-us-over/260251/">The Atlantic</a> defines Zinn’s work as a relentless critique of “capitalism and American nationalism” that “has been taught in countless middle school and high school classes.”
In a 1998 interview for the Communist newspaper, <a href="https://revcom.us/a/v20/980-89/987/zinn.htm">The Revolutionary Worker</a>, Zinn himself echoes many of the underlying objectives of Critical Theory embodied in his work stating, “I wanted my writing of history and my teaching of history to be a part of social struggle.” Zinn viewed the teaching and writing of history as a fundamentally “political act.” 
The website, <a href="https://www.marxist.com/memory-of-howard-zinn-life-and-ideas.htm">In Defense of Marxism</a>, compares Zinn’s approach to writing history to the abject radicalism of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky">Leon Trotsky</a>. Both abandoned any attempt of a “traditional, mainstream telling of history.” In fact, the title of Zinn’s autobiography, “You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train,” very much echoes Trotsky’s disdain for what he viewed as “treacherous impartiality” toward historical facts. 
In his review of Mary Grabar’s book, “Debunking Howard Zinn,” <a href="https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2020/04/a-radical-pseudo-historian-meets-his-match/">Professor Wilfred McClary</a> offers the most searing and eloquent critique of Zinn and his work emphasizing that “Zinn was not an original scholar and, in fact, not even a historian by training.”
While arguing against the “patently untruthful 1619 Project,” McClary also insists that Nikole Hannah-Jones is following directly in the footsteps of Zinn in her zealous, dogmatic pursuit of rewriting American history to accord with the radical Left. 
Though McClary laments that if “young Americans are being taught their history at all, Zinn is likely to be what they are being taught,” he finds some solace in Grabar’s critique of Zinn that depicts the radical author as an “utter charlatan and naked partisan, an admirer of Stalin and Mao, a relentless self-promoter and self-mythologizer, and a media-savvy celebrity of the Left.” 
“Through it all Grabar is unsparing in her treatment of Zinn’s historical distortions,” McClary continues. “From his unfair depiction of Columbus as a genocidal maniac, to his comic-book romanticizing of American Indians as residents of nonviolent hippie communes, to the depiction of the Founding as the creation of a preserve for wealthy white males, to his depiction of the “good war” of World War II as a war between morally equivalent sides, he had to play fast and loose with the facts to support his fantastical assertions — and Grabar calls him on every one of them. She is devastatingly effective.”
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Nikole Hannah-Jones

How The Left Is Rewriting American History To Push Their Radical Agenda

1619 Project

critical race theory

A deliberate attempt by the Left to completely rewrite American history, motivated by bitter activism and postmodern ideals, continues to take place at an

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/how-the-left-is-rewriting-american-history-to-push-their-radical-agenda/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/Nicole-Hannah-Jones-1200x800.png

I’m sure I don’t have to tell you what a cesspit Twitter has become. What was once a promising platform for the immediate dissemination of information has devolved into the preferred hangout for bullies, bots, trolls and mean girls. And if you’re conservative? Twitter boss Jack Dorsey has higher regard for the debris in his quarantine beard than he does for you. Instead of offering a free and open forum for varying opinions, he’s more than happy to de-platform or shadow ban those with whom he and his henchmen disagree. 
Twitter is still where news breaks — but it’s usually broken beyond recognition, irretrievably tainted by the bias of the messenger. Sports Twitter is no different. It’s where you’ll find the pro-China, anti-Trump musings of LeBron James, or the anti-cop, pro-cop killer ruminations of Colin Kaepernick — not to mention the historically illiterate reflections of sportswriters for whom leftism is truth and history began yesterday.
All that said, I haven’t given up on Twitter quite yet. There are pockets of sanity, decency, cleverness and common sense that are worth seeking out. There are still those using it for good rather than evil. 
So, now that I’ve thoroughly denounced and discredited the forum, let me present 10 sports figures who are worth following on the world’s worst social media platform (except for all the others). 
Jay Bilas (<a href="https://twitter.com/JayBilas">@JayBilas</a>)
Yes, he’s opinionated, but college basketball’s most intelligent analyst backs up his opinions in a reasoned, coherent fashion — not much flamethrowing, but a lot of common sense. Gets extra points for his frequent beclowning of the NCAA. His signature “I gotta go to work” tweets showcasing rapper and urban philosopher Young Jeezy are a morning source of inspiration. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Prеacher told me I need to live my lifе with grace. Lawyer wanted twenty before he even touched the case. I gotta go to work.
&mdash; Jay Bilas (@JayBilas) <a href="https://twitter.com/JayBilas/status/1330466135154810881?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
David Feherty (<a href="https://twitter.com/Fehertwit">@Fehertwit</a>)
Golf’s wittiest analyst has provided much of the soundtrack to the Tiger Woods era. His compelling personal story — he’s overcome addiction and mental illness — adds to his Twitter appeal. He’s also a tireless supporter of the troops defending his adopted home country. 
Kirk Herbstreit (<a href="https://twitter.com/KirkHerbstreit">@KirkHerbstreit</a>)
College football’s top analyst was basically run out of Columbus for not being an Ohio State homer, while simultaneously being accused of Buckeye homerism by OSU haters. A tough spot to be in, but one that Herbie has handled with aplomb by deftly refuting both sides. Plus, the guy just knows and loves college football.  
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Such a GREAT message for people to hear. Especially hope kids see this-feel like many kids feel such pressure to be perfect in all as aspects of their lives. It’s not realistic-being frustrated and more determined after a failure is a huge life lesson. Have a great weekend. <a href="https://t.co/N59VuXQqGv">https://t.co/N59VuXQqGv</a>
&mdash; Kirk Herbstreit (@KirkHerbstreit) <a href="https://twitter.com/KirkHerbstreit/status/1324701722133045254?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Chad Johnson (<a href="https://twitter.com/ochocinco">@ochocinco</a>)
His career as a social media influencer may have eclipsed his former career as a highly productive, if eccentric, wide receiver. That eccentricity only adds to his Twitter appeal, and he knows it. The erstwhile Chad Ochocinco may be the funniest athlete on Twitter.
Lane Kiffin (<a href="https://twitter.com/Lane_Kiffin">@Lane_Kiffin</a>)
The well-traveled, oft-reviled college football coach has used humor to ingratiate himself with college football fans, who are now more apt to forgive his professional and personal shortcomings thanks to his amusing Twitter presence, which proves that he’s in on the joke. Example: Fined $25,000 for criticizing the refs, Kiffin took to Twitter to try to figure out how many pennies it would take to pay the fine.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Where can I find 25,000 pennies??
&mdash; Lane Kiffin (@Lane_Kiffin) <a href="https://twitter.com/Lane_Kiffin/status/1320904303838699520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 27, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Phil Mickelson (<a href="https://twitter.com/PhilMickelson">@PhilMIckelson</a>)
Lefty has the hang of this Twitter thing, using his 280 characters for humorous self-deprecation and witty observations. His posts far outshine the sanitized, sterile, corporate output of his rival, Tiger Woods.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Just when I think I’ve arrived ( I was the answer to tonight’s final Jeopardy question) I realize I still have a ways to go (they all got it wrong ):
&mdash; Phil Mickelson (@PhilMickelson) <a href="https://twitter.com/PhilMickelson/status/1309674188534210560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Shaquille O’Neal (<a href="https://twitter.com/SHAQ">@SHAQ)</a>
Folk hero, pitchman nonpareil, and, as he puts it in his Twitter tagline, very quotatious. Shaq uses the platform to promote causes he supports and companies he does business with, but he does it with a light touch that belies his Paul Bunyan frame. 
Tim Tebow (<a href="https://twitter.com/TimTebow">@TimTebow</a>)
Decency hasn’t been entirely eradicated from Twitter. Exhibit A is Tim Tebow, who might just be the most encouraging presence on the internet. Just don’t dig through his mentions and replies, where the haters reveal themselves. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Sometimes it seems easier to just give up on people, or to shut down emotionally ourselves. This is just fear talking. 
God is bigger than our greatest fears.
&mdash; Tim Tebow (@TimTebow) <a href="https://twitter.com/TimTebow/status/1330640839605882889?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Clay Travis (<a href="https://twitter.com/ClayTravis">@ClayTravis</a>)
Whoever thought that a lawyer who voted twice for Obama could become the face of the counterculture center/right? With his partner Jason Whitlock, the “Outkick the Coverage” founder is a lonely but essential voice of reason in the monolithically leftist world of sports journalism. Travis’ stubborn pushback against the COVID fearmongers, whom he has dubbed “coronabros”, earns him extra points.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
There hasn’t been a single case of covid spreading from one team to another during a game in the entire world. Not one. Wearing masks during games is absolute idiocy. <a href="https://t.co/oqa7c4dAiS">https://t.co/oqa7c4dAiS</a>
&mdash; Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) <a href="https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1329894178076168198?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Jose Canseco (<a href="https://twitter.com/JoseCanseco">@JoseCanseco</a>)
There’s a place for the insane in this world, and it’s on Twitter. Canseco is the entertaining kind of insane, covering topics ranging from vampirism to Bigfoot to aliens to steroids in sports. He’s a leftist of sorts, but he has enough disdain for both sides that we’ll allow it. 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
all we need is a dollar from everyone in this country who wants change to finance my running for president
&mdash; Jose Canseco (@JoseCanseco) <a href="https://twitter.com/JoseCanseco/status/1269025007797071874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 5, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Reebok Classic Breakout

10 Sports Figures You Should Be Following On Twitter

Chad Ochocinco

Clay Travis

Jay Bilas

Jose Canseco

Kirk Herbstreit

Phil Mickelson

Shaq

Tim Tebow

I’m sure I don’t have to tell you what a cesspit Twitter has become. What was once a promising platform for the immediate dissemination of information has

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/10-sports-figures-you-should-be-following-on-twitter/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-451943676.jpg

In 1960, the vice president of ABC News quit his job the week after the election to protest the way his station covered the results. The issue? ABC had showed episodes of “Bugs Bunny” during lulls in their election coverage. Pair this tale with the fact that NBC’s election night coverage desk was originally located in Studio 8-H, the current filming location of “Saturday Night Live,” and one has to wonder if election night television coverage wasn’t destined to be a satirical farce from the very beginning.
We don’t have to look far to find examples of media interference influencing the results of presidential elections.
In 1948, the polls and pundits were certain that Thomas Dewey would win. Now, the only reason anyone remembers the name Dewey is from the image of Harry S. Truman holding up the The Chicago Tribune, which had made the call too early.
During the 1980 election between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, NBC News relied on exit polling to call the state of California for Ronald Reagan before the polls had even closed. Carter accepted these results and chose to concede, likely hurting down-ballot Democrats in the state still in tight races. 
And of course, in 2000 a litany of news outlets touted different results, only adding to the madness that surrounded one of the closest presidential races in history.
That brings us to today. 2020. Where, in addition to states being called and then reversed and then called again, we are also dealing with an astounding number of mail-in ballots—some of which were counted on election day and some several days later. For many, these variables have cast doubt on the promise that every &#8220;call&#8221; comes with “99.5% certainty,” as AP editors claim. 
So, what’s the role of the media in all this? In an ideal world, they’re the watchdog. Without the media, the people would have to sit on their hands while waiting to receive election results directly from the government. In that sense, we need election coverage. We need Fox and CNN and NBC and CBS and ABC to do their jobs—to ensure the veracity of results and the fairness of the process. The problem arises when these should-be referees become players in the game. 
When 119 newspaper editorial boards formally endorse one candidate while only 6 endorse the other, evenhandedness goes out the window. When pollsters drastically miscalculate in favor of the same party in back-to-back campaigns, either their job proficiency or their political preference has to be questioned. When social media posts and ads from only one side of the aisle are being “fact-checked” or outright banned, does the word unbiased lose its meaning?
There’s no doubt that we’ve put those in charge of reporting election results in a tough position. They want to report the correct results, but they also want to report the results first. And if Fox News calling Arizona early is a sign of anything, it’s that being first seems to be the top priority at the moment. And while it’s easy to blame the media and only the media, it helps to take a look in the mirror.
We’re the ones demanding results before they can realistically be calculated. We’re the ones complaining that it’s taking multiple days for people to count votes, when it&#8217;s often <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-are-some-states-so-slow-at-counting-votes">illogical state laws </a>impeding the process in the first place. We’re the ones that expect elections decided by the narrowest of margins to be decided by the end of the same day we voted.
Asking the media to be unbiased and to report the results within 24-hours has become too tall of a task. Instead, we can remember that the winner of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-a-contested-election">the election isn’t decided until December 14</a>, when the electors cast their votes. Is it so crazy to say that we can’t wait until that day?
If election night coverage is going to be so overwhelmingly biased, then it has not only stopped serving its purpose—it has defeated its purpose. We asked the media to hold the government accountable for how votes are collected, counted, and reported. Now, we have to do the opposite and trust the electors to cast their votes for the candidate who rightly won—not the candidate who received the most media support.
If that’s what election night has come to, America is better off waiting for the results to come in through the traditional electoral process. The media’s role is to hold a megaphone to the mouth of the people. They should shout our desires to our leaders. Instead, they’ve claimed the megaphone as their own. It may be too late to take the megaphone back, but there’s still time to stop listening.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

CBS News

It’s Time To Cancel Election Coverage Forever

Bias

Legacy Media

Media

In 1960, the vice president of ABC News quit his job the week after the election to protest the way his station covered the results. The issue? ABC had

It&#039;s Time To Cancel Election Coverage Forever

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/its-time-to-cancel-election-coverage-forever/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-623169932.jpg

In recent months, social media titans have been on the hot seat on Capitol Hill. We’ve seen all the elected officials try to make a name for themselves by aggressively questioning Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey. In most cases, these politicians have shown how little they actually understand social media.
And while these elected officials have been mugging for the cameras on Capitol Hill, online “news” outlets like BuzzFeed, NowThis and Teen Vogue have been brilliantly, strategically and diabolically “informing” the youngest generations of voters. Make no mistake: These sites are an even greater threat to the future of our republic.
BuzzFeed is a news site founded in the early days of social media. Initially, it churned out low-level, easily digestible stories and marketed them to the masses. None of it was political. This enabled BuzzFeed to build a following of millions of people from across the ideological spectrum. Currently it has more than <a href="https://www.facebook.com/BuzzFeed" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.facebook.com/BuzzFeed&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGmfAVhSaWROI3CLoLUnGYamC9wCQ">12 million followers on Facebook</a> alone. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rachel_Maddow_Show#:~:text=In%20March%2C%202018%2C%20The%20Rachel,narrowly%20topping%20Hannity's%203.00%20million.%22" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rachel_Maddow_Show%23:~:text%3DIn%2520March%252C%25202018%252C%2520The%2520Rachel,narrowly%2520topping%2520Hannity's%25203.00%2520million.%2522&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEMBhF7ZkBLGzUYMke-76OskoN16A">Rachel Maddow is lucky to draw 3 million viewers for her MSNBC show</a>. But unlike <a href="https://pos.org/whos-watching-a-look-at-the-demographics-of-cable-news-channel-watchers/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://pos.org/whos-watching-a-look-at-the-demographics-of-cable-news-channel-watchers/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNG-1lMO4n42zW0lPRp3eh2uZQo4CQ">Maddow’s viewers</a>, <a href="https://today.yougov.com/topics/media/articles-reports/2017/11/27/buzzfeed-and-atlantic-readers-are-largely-one-and-" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://today.yougov.com/topics/media/articles-reports/2017/11/27/buzzfeed-and-atlantic-readers-are-largely-one-and-&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGUvK2Yo1bX-ZbyjG9rhIZHTr-9SQ">BuzzFeed’s audience is young and impressionable</a>.
After five years growing its audience with “clickbait” stories, the writers responsible for stories such as, “10 Signs Your Cat is a Wizard” and “Which Disney Princess are You?” decided to report on American politics. “Report” is a polite description of what BuzzFeed began to do. Their stories were so obviously left-wing propaganda that even CNN began to criticize them. (Or perhaps CNN was just upset about new competition in the “fake news” business?)
Soon after, they gained a competitor: NowThis. NowThis is essentially a PR arm of the Democratic Party masquerading as a news site. In fact, multiple executives from NowThis News came directly from the DNC, or campaign staffs of Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton. College students think they’re reading news when, in fact, they’re reading Democrat talking points. NowThis has <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NowThisNews/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.facebook.com/NowThisNews/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF-zZNYj7B_DFtYNf39_RWT4t6E5Q">15 million Facebook likes</a> and 2.7 million <a href="https://twitter.com/nowthisnews" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://twitter.com/nowthisnews&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEeg5W8XuITaR3DlOfCwrTvDb_Z7w">Twitter followers</a>. NowThis Politics has <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNF3p7AHGWJjyrB4nWYDdsOEmcOqwA">7 million Facebook likes</a>.
Politifact, to its credit, has corrected their outrageous lies on multiple occasions. During Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, NowThis repeatedly claimed that Trump lied about Bill Clinton signing NAFTA. NowThis’ young readers were not alive for the signing of NAFTA, and I guess NowThis assumes this audience won’t use YouTube to watch a video of Clinton signing the treaty.
Conservatives think their children become progressive because of their professors. But it’s often because of the content produced by BuzzFeed, NowThis and other sites like them. College kids don’t love their homework or going to class, but they do love reading stories on their phones.
While you and I might not take these sites seriously, investors do. By 2014, BuzzFeed was reporting $100 million in revenue. The next year NBC-Universal invested $200 million. NBC also invested in NowThis and announced a partnership with them to create content around the Olympics. Considering how effective these two sites are at getting young people to read left-wing news, this is basically the equivalent of NBC investing hundreds of millions of dollars in College Democrats.
The dangerous players are the ones who share their propaganda with an easily influenced audience. This playbook was perfected by junk-news sites BuzzFeed and NowThis. Each and every day they put out left-wing content disguised as news. And they’re growing rapidly. This week, BuzzFeed announced the<a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/buzzfeed-to-acquire-huffpost-in-stock-deal-with-verizon-media-11605808800" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wsj.com/articles/buzzfeed-to-acquire-huffpost-in-stock-deal-with-verizon-media-11605808800&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFqypUU0ahAGKk60rIuYiKbTLp1yg"> acquisition of HuffPost from Verizon</a>.
The first step to solving a problem is to recognize that you have one. Attacking Dorsey and Zuckerberg on Capitol Hill may make for good clips to send to constituents, but it’s not getting to the root of the problem. <a href="https://www.aim.org/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.aim.org/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHCTimFaOO8hJhdEzZoAvx2LkAiBg">Accuracy in Media</a> has been exposing these sites and making sure that young people realize they’re being lied to by partisan players. Our activists are holding them accountable for unethical, inaccurate stories.
Conservatives and libertarians must remember that political technology is philosophically neutral. Rather than trying to force apolitical college kids to read bland policy papers or watch overtly ideological videos, we need to shift the fight to the most important battlefield there is—the culture.
Adam Guillette is the President of Accuracy in Media, <a href="http://www.aim.org/" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.aim.org&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1605992956682000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFrf6l4FL1SnPYQg249pNgMxn2rLg">www.aim.org</a>.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Digital Media Company BuzzFeed’s New York Headquarters

Clickbait and Switch: How Junk News Sites Influence Young People

Big Tech

Jack Dorsey

Mark Zuckerberg

In recent months, social media titans have been on the hot seat on Capitol Hill. We’ve seen all the elected officials try to make a name for themselves by

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/clickbait-and-switch-how-junk-news-sites-influence-young-people/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1071861824.jpg

It&#8217;s been over two weeks since election day and our news cycles continue to be dominated by declarations that the election is over and Joe Biden is “President-elect,” accusations that widespread voter fraud and corruption occurred, or quieter voices with positions which lie somewhere in-between. Unfortunately, while our collective attention remains focused on a past election, we are in danger of missing an upcoming election which has the potential to redefine American politics entirely.
Currently, control of the U.S. Senate hangs in the balance. After November 3rd, Democrats hold 48 seats and Republicans hold 50. Under a 1960s Georgia <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/politics/georgia-senate-runoff-explainer.html">law</a>, “candidates must receive a majority of the vote to win an election.” If neither candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, “the top two vote-getters then face off again in a runoff election to determine the winner.” Due to this law, neither of Georgia’s Senate races have been decided, meaning Georgia will hold two runoff elections on January 5th. On this day, Georgia will decide whether Republican incumbents Sen. David Perdue and Sen. Kelly Loeffler will survive challenges from Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. If both Sen. Perdue and Sen. Loeffler fail to retain their seats, the Senate will be split 50 seats to 50, handing ultimate power to presumptive Vice President Kamala Harris with the tie-breaking vote.
Now, if the outcome of January 5th replicates the results we saw on November 3rd, both Sen. Perdue and Sen. Loeffler would expect to retain their positions. Perdue beat Ossoff by over 88,000 votes (1.8%), missing the required 50% majority by just 0.3%. In the second Special Election, Raphael Warnock did receive the most ballots, with 1,617,046 votes (32.9%). However, two Republicans ran against him, with incumbent Loeffler receiving 1,273,215 votes (25.9%) and Doug Collins receiving 980,459 votes (20%). With Warnock and Loeffler advancing to the runoff, if Loeffler receives Collins’ support, she would beat Warnock by over 636,000 votes (13%).
However, it would be naïve and foolish to assume anything about any election, let alone one which could be the difference between relative legislative gridlock and at least two years of unavoidable Democratic Party dominance. One sign that this race has drawn focus on a national level is the “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/19/us/politics/georgia-senate-races-donations.html">crazytown</a>” amount of funding which has flooded into the state of Georgia, with “more than $135 million in TV ads” being booked as we approach January 5th. 
Warnock has raised around $40 million since November 3rd, with Ossoff not far behind. Republicans announced a haul of $32 million within the first week after Election Day. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/18/politics/georgia-senate-runoff-races-republican-cash/index.html">Estimates</a> suggest that Republicans have outspent Democrats by around $28 million when it comes to advertising. 
Another symptom of the nationalization of statewide elections is the open partisanship and support from residents of other states, with <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/11/17/californians-flock-to-georgia-to-aid-democrats-in-senate-run-offs/">Californians</a> “volunteering to temporarily move to the Peach State to help get out the vote for Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock.” 
It is also likely that Stacey Abrams — the famous imaginary winner of Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial race — will also continue as the Democratic Party’s hero and play some part in the upcoming runoff elections.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
UPDATE: We have raised $6 million (!) so far to help jumpstart the Jan 5 Senate runoff elections. Help keep up the momentum for <a href="https://twitter.com/ReverendWarnock?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ReverendWarnock</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/ossoff?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ossoff</a> by donating at <a href="https://t.co/bqQFTB4mRL">https://t.co/bqQFTB4mRL</a>! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/gapol?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#gapol</a> <a href="https://t.co/pgTJyHndfR">https://t.co/pgTJyHndfR</a>
&mdash; Stacey Abrams (@staceyabrams) <a href="https://twitter.com/staceyabrams/status/1325800443834986502?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Abrams’ “Fair Fight” organization is being celebrated for their supposed “voter turnout” success, with around 900,000 more people voting in 2020 compared to 2016. In reality, all we know is that “<a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-georgia-turned-blue/">Biden won Georgia because he did really well in the Atlanta area</a>,” and the assumption that it was the so-called “black vote” which decided the result is far from certain. However, the fact that Georgia voted for a Democrat in a presidential race for the first time since 1992 should stand as a warning sign for Republicans, with Abrams and others now focused on driving Georgia to elect a Democrat to the U.S. Senate for the first time since 2005.
It is, of course, important for conservatives to remain focused on the presidential election while any legitimate hope of overturning the result in favor of Donald Trump remains. However, it’s also crucial we don&#8217;t forget that American political power rests on far more than the occupant of the White House. If we’re not careful, the Right could lazily view Perdue and Loeffler’s November 3rd tallies as an insurmountable obstacle for the Democrats. Such complacency could be disastrous, and we simply cannot ignore the runoff elections in Georgia and risk handing Democrats the ability to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/7-policies-biden-could-push-if-the-democrats-win-the-u-s-senate">reshape fundamental political institutions and norms</a> for generations to come.
All eyes on Georgia, folks.
Ian Haworth is host of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkPxdVsNp7k&amp;list=PLhi-aq-5DfuTQRVv1IOVMnA735vEYO0f5">The Ian Haworth Show</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E05t2L69Sks&amp;list=PLhi-aq-5DfuRHu5r0IV5qr4h2rBAV9oBd">The Truth in 60 Seconds</a>. Follow him on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe"> member</a>.

Stacey Abrams

All Eyes On Georgia: The Runoff Elections Which Could Decide The Future Of America

David Perdue

Jon Ossoff

Kelly Loeffler

Raphael Warnock

U.S. Senate

It&#039;s been over two weeks since election day and our news cycles continue to be dominated by declarations that the election is over and Joe Biden is

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/all-eyes-on-georgia-the-runoff-elections-which-could-decide-the-future-of-america/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1229445570-1-e1605915392357.jpg

twitter:creator

Ever since the media declared Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election, the Left has wanted those of us on the Right to understand two things: that they desperately wish to heal our national wounds and unite with us as one people, and also that we are vile, subhuman, barely sentient redneck scum. These two messages would seem to be in tension with each other, but it may only appear that way to me because I am myself barely sentient redneck scum. 
Credit where it’s due, New York Times op-ed writer Wajahat Ali has found a way to merge these two apparently conflicting messages. In a Times piece that provides an extraordinarily clarifying look into the elitist left-wing mentality, Ali describes his attempts to “reach out” to Trump supporters and explained why he has now given up the effort.
It may be useful, before examining the article, to review one of Ali’s outreach efforts on CNN earlier in the year. In a segment with Don Lemon and Never Trump guru Rick Wilson, Ali performs his (rather poor) impression of a blue collar conservative, mocking them for not knowing how to spell or read a map. Here it is:
<iframe title="CNN Panel Guffaws And Laughs Itself Into Tears Ridiculing Stupidity Of Trump Voters" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2dvalDyYHEY?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Some flaws in his outreach strategy may already be obvious. The Times piece sheds more light. Ali begins: 
<blockquote>73 million Americans<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-president.html"> voted for Donald Trump</a>. He doubled down on all his worst vices, and he was rewarded for it with 10 million more votes than he received in 2016. The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html?action=click&amp;pgtype=Article&amp;state=default&amp;module=styln-elections-2020&amp;region=TOP_BANNER&amp;context=election_recirc">majority of people of color</a> rejected his cruelty and vulgarity. But along with others who voted for Joe Biden, we are now being lectured by a chorus of voices including Pete Buttigieg and Ian Bremmer, to<a href="https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1325506992056770560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1325506992056770560%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthepostmillennial.com%2Fpete-buttigieg-tells-his-followers-to-reach-out-to-trump-supporters-as-his-staff-compiles-blacklist-of-them"> “reach out”</a> to Trump voters and<a href="https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1325135387707269121"> “empathize”</a> with their pain. This is the same advice that was given after Trump’s 2016 victory, and for nearly four years, I attempted to take it. Believe me, it’s not worth it.</blockquote>
Explaining that his Islamic faith calls him to “repel evil with good,” Ali said he tried to find common ground with Trump supporters. On second thought, perhaps labeling them “evil” to be “repelled” may not have been a good starting point for this project. Here’s how he went about it: 
<blockquote>So in late 2016, I told my speaking agency to book me for events in the states where Trump won. I wanted to talk to the people the media calls “real Americans” from the “heartland,” — which is of course America’s synonym for white people, Trump’s most fervent base. Over the next four years I gave more than a dozen talks to universities, companies and a variety of faith-based communities.
My standard speech was about how to “build a multicultural coalition of the willing.” My message was that diverse communities, including white Trump supporters, could work together to create a future where all of our children would have an equal shot at the American dream.</blockquote>
So, for Ali, “reaching out” means delivering lectures on multiculturalism. This is what “empathizing” looks like, in his world. Namely, like a bunch of people sitting in chairs listening obediently while he explains things to them. And how did he know that the outreach failed? 
<blockquote>Those in the audience who supported Trump came up to me and assured me they weren’t racist. They often said they’d enjoyed the talk, if not my politics. Still, not one told me they’d wavered in their support for him. Instead, they repeated conspiracy theories and Fox News talking points about “crooked Hillary.&#8221;</blockquote>
And if this wasn’t bad enough, Ali shares that he spent a whole hour and a half in a car with a Trump supporter, and even after the dumb rube had been exposed to Ali’s brilliance in such close quarters for that long, he still wouldn’t change his worldview:
<blockquote>In Ohio, I spent 90 minutes on a drive to the airport with a retired Trump supporter. We were cordial to each other, we made jokes and we shared stories about our families. But neither of us changed our outlook. “They’ll never take my guns. Ever,” he told me, explaining that his Facebook feed was filled with articles about how Clinton and Democrats would kill the Second Amendment and steal his guns. Although he didn’t like some of Trump’s “tone” and comments, he didn’t believe he was a racist “in his heart.”</blockquote>
You read that right. A retired man refused alter his deepest convictions based on a 90 minute conversation with a New York Times op-ed writer. Some people are just hopelessly stubborn, I suppose. 
Ali concludes on a note that is as self-pitying as it is self-aggrandizing: 
<blockquote>We cannot help people who refuse to help themselves. Trump is an extension of their id, their culture, their values, their greed. He is their defender and savior. His their blunt instrument. He is their destructive drug of choice. Don’t waste your time reaching out to Trump voters like I did.
…Just as in 2016, I don’t need Trump supporters to be humiliated to feel great again. I want them to have health insurance, decent paying jobs and security for their family. I do not want them to suffer, but I also refuse to spend any more time trying to understand and help the architects of my oppression.
I will move forward along with the majority who want progress, equality and justice for all Americans. If Trump supporters decide they want the same, they can always reach out to me. They know where to find me. Ahead of them.</blockquote>
It seems unlikely that a retiree from Ohio could be the “architect” of anyone’s oppression, much less the oppression of a wealthy metropolitan media pundit. But anything is possible in a mind clouded by its own sense of entitlement. We should be grateful for this opportunity to gaze into such a mind, as disorienting as the experience may be, because it tells us something important about the “unity” which the Left seeks. 
As Ali makes clear, he is only interested in uniting with those who will give up their dirty habit of disagreeing with him. His idea of compromise is for the two sides to come together and agree that he is right about everything. Submission is a better word for the relationship he seeks. We can hardly be blamed for declining the invitation.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e9p3YkAT0og?start=173" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen">﻿</iframe>
More from Matt Walsh: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-our-society-is-confronting-mortality-for-the-first-time-and-its-not-going-well">Our Society Is Confronting Mortality For The First Time, And It’s Not Going Well </a>
 The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

New York Times

WALSH: NYT Writer Says He Tried To ‘Reach Out’ To Trump Voters. His Outreach Was A Lecture On Multiculturalism.

Ever since the media declared Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election, the Left has wanted those of us on the Right to understand two things: that they

WALSH: NYT Writer Says He Tried To &#039;Reach Out&#039; To Trump Voters. His Outreach Was A Lecture On Multiculturalism.

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/walsh-nyt-writer-says-he-tried-to-reach-out-to-trump-voters-his-outreach-was-a-lecture-on-multiculturalism/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/New-York-Times-1-1200x800.jpg

Each year after election season, both parties look back on their performance and conduct an autopsy of sorts. “What could we have done differently?” “How could we improve?&#8221; 
Self-reflection is a vital part of formulating successful strategies for the future and ensuring longterm success. While analyzing the 2020 election, it&#8217;s become increasingly clear that the GOP has reason to be optimistic, while the Democratic Party needs to take a long look in the mirror.
This might be a strange concept to some. How could the GOP, the party which presumably lost the presidency, be on a better trajectory than the party which beat them? When looking at key demographics and data shifts, the concept becomes less strange.  
First, take into account the inroads GOP candidates made with minority voters compared to the 2016 election. In Texas, a state with an increasingly minority population, President Trump increased voter turnout by <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/10/house-races-historic-gains-gop-women-erode-democratic-majority/6169709002/">nearly 25%</a>. Trump and other down-ballot GOP candidates made significant gains in counties that had majority Hispanic populations, picking up seven counties along the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/texas-election-democrats-chuck-devore">Rio Grande Valley</a>. In Texas&#8217; Starr County — a county with 96% latino voters — President Trump lost by just 5%. In 2016, he lost the same county by 58%. 
Elsewhere, in Florida&#8217;s Miami-Dade County, the GOP saw another surge in latino support. The county, which Hillary Clinton <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/florida">won</a> by 29 points just four years ago, was far closer this election, with Joe Biden only winning by <a href="https://www.local10.com/vote-2020/2020/10/25/miami-dade-county-election-results-2020/">6 points</a>.
Those aren&#8217;t incremental gains.
As well, a record number of minority and female GOP candidates were elected throughout the country. In addition to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/experts-listed-27-house-races-as-toss-ups-republicans-won-all-27">winning</a> all 27 &#8220;toss-up&#8221; races in the House, the GOP added 17 new female Congress members, bringing their total to 33, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/17/republicans-women-minorities-congress-record/">a record</a> for the Party. 
The party of “old white men”, as the left tries to portray it to be, is performing increasingly well with women and minorities, two voting blocs traditionally dominated by the Democrat Party. That could spell trouble in the midterms. 
One proclamation that those on the Right heard incessantly from the mainstream media and pollsters alike, was how much President Trump was going to hurt the GOP brand amongst the electorate. Well, that argument seems to have fallen completely apart.
As mentioned earlier, House Democrats have now lost every single toss up this cycle. Far from the promised &#8220;blue wave,&#8221; Republicans performed shockingly well, narrowing the Democrat majority to 218-204, with 13 races remaining too close to call (Republicans lead in 8 of those 13). If that trend continues, we might be looking at a Republican majority in the House by 2022. 
Republicans also exceeded expectations in the United States Senate. Despite projections from &#8220;experts&#8221; that Democrats were poised to gain as many as 6 seats, they&#8217;ve so far stalled at 3, with the two remaining seats in Georgia still up for grabs. 
The absolute best case scenario for Senate Democrats would be to win both seats and make the Senate partisan vote tied 50-50, with Kamala Harris, Biden’s Vice Presidential choice, breaking the tie. However, even if only one of these seats is won by the GOP, the chamber will still belong to the GOP caucus, with <a href="https://www.wevv.com/content/news/Sen-McConnell-re-elected-as-Republican-Majority-Leader-573033661.html#:~:text=Senator%20Mitch%20McConnell%20was%20re-elected%20as%20the%20Republican,Sen.%20McConnell%20will%20hold%20the%20position%20through%202023.">Leader Mitch McConnell</a> continuing to hold the reigns of Senatorial power. 
In an election where we saw the largest voter turnout in nearly a century, Republicans were expected to lose the presidency, decrease their seats in the house, and possibly even lose their majority in the United States Senate. It is likely now that only one of those scenarios will come to fruition. 
Despite Democrats presumed success at the Presidential level, they would be wise to take a long look in the mirror before celebrating too loudly. Republicans have plenty to be optimistic about.
Kenny is an educator, political activist, and writer from Northeastern Tennessee. He is the Chairman of the Cocke County (TN) Republican Party and has served as a columnist for The Libertarian Republic since January 2020.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>. 
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-MEXICO-CANADA-NAFTA-TRADE-TRUMP

Why the GOP Should Be Optimistic After 2020 Election

Democrats

trump

Each year after election season, both parties look back on their performance and conduct an autopsy of sorts. “What could we have done differently?” “How

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/why-the-gop-should-be-optimistic-after-2020-election/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/GettyImages-1024541712.jpg

The city of Washington, D.C. will be brought to court for alleged First Amendment violations.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) <a href="https://www.studentsforlife.org/2020/11/18/lawsuit-filed-after-unjust-arrest-of-pro-lifers-in-washington-d-c/">filed</a> a lawsuit this week on behalf of Students for Life of America (SFLA) and the Frederick Douglass Foundation after pro-life students were arrested for legally writing their message on the streets of the District of Columbia in August.
While a whole plaza is named and <a href="https://wtop.com/dc/2020/10/dc-council-votes-to-make-black-lives-matter-plaza-permanent/">permanently painted</a> with “Black Lives Matter” (BLM), pro-life students were barred from writing “Black Preborn Lives Matter” in chalk outside of a Planned Parenthood building, despite the fact that they&#8217;d received a permit to do so from the city.
The students’ chalk message,“Black Preborn Lives Matter,” served to address the fact that unborn children of minority mothers have a higher likelihood of being aborted, according to <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-483/72192/20181115123021558_37089%20pdf%20Mannix.pdf">this</a> Supreme Court amicus curiae brief.
According to SFLA, the group had obtained a permit from the city to peacefully protest with the use of temporary paint on sidewalks, but police said otherwise, warning that they&#8217;d be arrested for the use of temporary paint, despite the fact that pro-BLM protesters had been allowed to use paint for their &#8220;Defund The Police&#8221; <a href="http://npr.org/local/305/2020/06/08/872234932/activists-painted-defund-the-police-next-to-the-new-black-lives-matter-mural">message</a>.
In an attempt to comply with police, the pro-life activists instead used chalk, as it was far easier to remove, but the authorities still wouldn&#8217;t allow it.
As video shows, after refusing the orders of police to stop, two individuals clad in &#8220;Black Preborn Lives Matter&#8221; shirts were handcuffed and led away by D.C. Police.
“Two students were arrested trying to express in chalk what they were not allowed to say in paint,&#8221; <a href="https://www.studentsforlife.org/2020/11/18/lawsuit-filed-after-unjust-arrest-of-pro-lifers-in-washington-d-c/">said</a> Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins. &#8220;That kind of viewpoint discrimination cannot be allowed to continue unchallenged.”
In a letter sent to Mayor Muriel Bowser before the incident, Hawkins noted:
<blockquote>Your original decision to paint ‘Black Lives Matter’ on the street is government speech. However, your decision to allow protestors to paint ‘Defund the Police’ opened the streets up as a public forum. You are not permitted to discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in making determinations relating to public assemblies in public fora.</blockquote>
Viewpoint discrimination is the unconstitutional practice of a government prohibiting certain speech and expression on the basis of the message it promulgates. 
Such discrimination has been defined by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions in tandem with interpreting the extent of First Amendment rights.
In the opinion of the Court Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley (1972), Justice Thurgood Marshall <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/408/92.html">wrote</a> “the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content.”
Years later, the unconstitutionality of viewpoint discrimination was solidified in Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995). 
Justice Anthony Kennedy <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/515/819">delivered</a> the opinion of the court, stating, “When the government targets not subject matter but particular views taken by speakers on a subject, the violation of the First Amendment is all the more blatant.&#8221;
Justice Kennedy further noted viewpoint discrimination as an “egregious form of content discrimination.”
“Because of the city’s actions, Frederick Douglass Foundation and Students for Life of America weren’t able to participate in the public square as other groups have,” <a href="https://www.studentsforlife.org/2020/11/18/lawsuit-filed-after-unjust-arrest-of-pro-lifers-in-washington-d-c/">said</a> Legal Counsel Elissa Graves of ADF, the group heading up the lawsuit. “The government can’t discriminate against certain viewpoints by allowing some voices to be heard while silencing others.”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

SFLA YouTube

Pro-Life Students Arrested For “Black Preborn Lives Matter” Chalking… Now They’re Suing The City

Black Lives Matter

Defund The Police

Lawsuit

pro-life

The city of Washington, D.C. will be brought to court for alleged First Amendment violations. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) filed a lawsuit this week

Pro-Life Students Arrested For &quot;Black Preborn Lives Matter&quot; Chalking... Now They&#039;re Suing The City

https://editorial.dailywire.com/news/pro-life-students-arrested-for-black-preborn-lives-matter-chalking-now-theyre-suing-the-city/

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-20-at-9.50.40-AM.png

Menu