On Monday, Missouri GOP senator Josh Hawley issued an <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/sen-josh-hawley-investigate-chinas-coronavirus-actions-make-beijing-pay-for-lives-and-billions-lost">op-ed on Fox News</a> in which he called for an international investigation into the Communist Chinses government’s handling of the coronavirus crisis, adding, “It is time for Beijing to pay for the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/italy-death-toll-passes-10000">tens of thousands of lives</a> stolen and billions of dollars lost as a result of its lies.”
Hawley starts by stating that the Chinese Communist Party is aware that it bears responsibility for the coronavirus pandemic. He continues, “That’s why Beijing has gone on a propaganda offensive to try to deflect blame anywhere it can, including right here at the United States.”
Hawley states bluntly:
<blockquote>It is time for an international investigation into Beijing’s disastrous handling of the coronavirus. And it is time for Beijing to pay for the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/italy-death-toll-passes-10000">tens of thousands of lives</a> stolen and billions of dollars lost as a result of its lies. The Chinese Communist Party has done everything it can to hide the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Party officials interrogated and punished Chinese doctors who tried to warn others as the virus began to spread. They ordered laboratories to stop testing for the virus and destroy their samples when it became clear that an outbreak was underway. They even sat on evidence showing the virus could be transmitted between humans. By the time they shared that information, the virus had already spread to other nations.</blockquote>
Hawley notes that the Chinese Communist Party denied Ameican experts access to China in January, and “stole precious weeks from the United States and others who could have used that time to ready our national defenses.” He pointed out that the Chinese Communist Party protests that it handled the coronavirus outbreak transparently and did it well, but in reality, the opposite is true. He iterated, “Beijing wants the world to trust it and grow dependent on it, so that it can control us. But the world won’t easily do that if it knows that Beijing is responsible for this pandemic.”
Noting the claims from Chinese officials that the virus did not originate in Wuhan but instead that it came from the United States or Italy, that China “bought time” for the world to prepare for coronavirus, and that others wasted time, Hawley blasts, “These are outrageous lies. It is time to hold Beijing accountable for the suffering it has caused.
Hawley writes:
<blockquote>The first step to holding the Chinese Communist Party accountable is an international investigation. That is why I have introduced a Senate resolution calling on the United States and other nations to investigate how Beijing’s mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak contributed to this pandemic. We need to know exactly what the Party knew, when it knew it, and how the Party’s decisions to try and hide the virus allowed it to spread and kept the United States and other nations from protecting ourselves sooner.
… The next step to holding Beijing accountable is to force it to pay for the lives and livelihoods that it has destroyed. My resolution calls on the international community to seek justice together by quantifying the harm caused by the Party’s mishandling of this disease and designing a way to secure payment from Beijing to compensate for that harm.</blockquote>
Last week, James Kraska, the chair and Charles H. Stockton professor of international maritime law in the Stockton Center for International Law at the U.S. Naval War College, <a href="https://warontherocks.com/2020/03/china-is-legally-responsible-for-covid-19-damage-and-claims-could-be-in-the-trillions/">argued</a> that China should make recompense for the damage wrought by the coronavirus, writing:
<blockquote>As one of the 194 states party to the legally binding 2005 <a href="https://www.who.int/ihr/publications/9789241596664/en/">International Health Regulations</a>, China has a duty to rapidly gather information about and contribute to a common understanding of what may constitute a public health emergency with potential international implications … Article 6 of the International Health Regulations requires states to provide expedited, timely, accurate, and sufficiently detailed information to WHO about the potential public health emergencies identified in the second annex in order to galvanize efforts to prevent pandemics &#8230;
Under Article 31 of the <a href="https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/international-law-commission-articles-state-responsibility">Articles of State Responsibility</a>, states are required to make full reparations for the injury caused by their internationally wrongful acts. Injuries include damages, whether material or moral. Injured states are entitled to full reparation “in the form of restitution in kind, compensation, satisfaction and assurances and guarantees of non-repetition” (Article 34). Restitution in kind means that the injured state is entitled to be placed in the same position as existed before the wrongful acts were committed (Article 35).
&nbsp;</blockquote>

Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs Hears Testimony From Michael Horowitz

Senator Josh Hawley: Investigate China. They Must Pay.

China

Coronavirus

Josh Hawley

Far-left Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) called for a government takeover of all private hospitals on Tuesday night as a way of alleviating &#8220;pressures&#8221; that they are facing from the outbreak of the coronavirus, which originated in China.
Omar wrote on Twitter, &#8220;Here is maybe a radical idea to deal with some of the pressures our healthcare system is facing: All private hospitals should be made public for the duration of the virus.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here is maybe a radical idea to deal with some of the pressures our healthcare system is facing: 
All private hospitals should be made public for the duration of the virus.
&mdash; Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) <a href="https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1242648864936648704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 25, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Omar did not elaborate on how her call for a government takeover of private hospitals would solve anything.
The far-left Democrat&#8217;s call to takeover private hospitals comes as nearly every country around the world is dealing with the coronavirus, which has killed over 19,000 worldwide in just over two months.
The outbreak erupted out of China after the communist nation initially lied about the extent of the outbreak and tried to cover it up.
The Wall Street Journal earlier this month <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-it-all-started-chinas-early-coronavirus-missteps-11583508932">highlighted</a> how China tried to cover it up back in December:
<blockquote>For almost three weeks, doctors struggled to connect the dots between [patient 1] and other early cases, many of them [Wuhan market] vendors. Patient after patient reported similar symptoms, but many, like her, visited small, poorly resourced clinics and hospitals. …
When doctors did finally establish the [Wuhan market] link in late December, they quarantined [patient 1] and others like her and raised the alarm to their superiors. But they were prevented by Chinese authorities from alerting their peers, let alone the public.
One of the first doctors to alert Chinese authorities was criticized for “spreading rumors” after sharing with a former medical-school classmate a test result showing a patient had a coronavirus. Another doctor had to write a self-criticism letter saying his warnings “had a negative impact.”
Even after Chinese President Xi Jinping personally ordered officials to control the outbreak on Jan. 7, authorities kept denying it could spread between humans—something doctors had known was happening since late December—and went ahead with a Chinese Lunar New Year banquet involving tens of thousands of families in Wuhan.</blockquote>
On Tuesday, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senator-introduces-bill-to-investigate-chinas-coronavirus-cover-up-demands-china-pay-for-damage">introduced</a> legislation calling for an international investigation into China&#8217;s &#8220;cover-up&#8221; of the outbreak and demanding that China pay for all the damage that it caused the world.
“Since day one, the Chinese Communist Party intentionally lied to the world about the origin of this pandemic,” Hawley said. “The CCP was aware of the reality of the virus as early as December but ordered laboratories to destroy samples and forced doctors to keep silent. It is time for an international investigation into the role their cover-up played in the spread of this devastating pandemic. The CCP must be held to account for what the world is now suffering.”
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) also intends to introduce companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
“The Communist government of China knowingly withheld critical information needed to combat the spread of the Chinese-born COVID-19 and to this day continues to spread lies and disinformation on the origin of the deadly virus,” Stefanik said in a statement. “There is no doubt that China’s unconscionable decision to orchestrate an elaborate coverup of the wide-ranging and deadly implications of coronavirus led to the death of thousands of people, including hundreds of Americans and climbing. This Resolution calls for China to provide compensation for the harm, loss, and destruction their arrogance brought upon the rest of the world. Simply put – China must, and will, be held accountable.”

Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Testifies Before The House Foreign Affairs Committee

Ilhan Omar Calls For ‘Radical Idea’ To Fix Coronavirus Crisis Facing Hospitals

Ilhan Omar

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced a resolution calling for an international investigation into communist China&#8217;s cover-up of the coronavirus in Wuhan during the early days of outbreak.
In a statement, Hawley said that China must &#8220;pay back all nations impacted because China lied about the spread of the virus.&#8221;
&#8220;Since day one, the Chinese Communist Party intentionally lied to the world about the origin of this pandemic,&#8221; Hawley said. &#8220;The CCP was aware of the reality of the virus as early as December but ordered laboratories to destroy samples and forced doctors to keep silent. It is time for an international investigation into the role their cover-up played in the spread of this devastating pandemic. The CCP must be held to account for what the world is now suffering.&#8221;
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) is introducing companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
&#8220;The Communist government of China knowingly withheld critical information needed to combat the spread of the Chinese-born COVID-19 and to this day continues to spread lies and disinformation on the origin of the deadly virus,&#8221; Stefanik said in a statement. &#8220;There is no doubt that China’s unconscionable decision to orchestrate an elaborate coverup of the wide-ranging and deadly implications of coronavirus led to the death of thousands of people, including hundreds of Americans and climbing. This Resolution calls for China to provide compensation for the harm, loss, and destruction their arrogance brought upon the rest of the world. Simply put – China must, and will, be held accountable.&#8221;
The Wall Street Journal earlier this month highlighted some of the cover-up that China engaged in back in December when Wei Guixian, a seafood merchant in a Wuhan market, became one of the first people to become sick on December 10.
The Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-it-all-started-chinas-early-coronavirus-missteps-11583508932">reported</a>:
<blockquote>For almost three weeks, doctors struggled to connect the dots between Ms. Wei and other early cases, many of them Hua’nan vendors. Patient after patient reported similar symptoms, but many, like her, visited small, poorly resourced clinics and hospitals. &#8230;
When doctors did finally establish the Hua’nan link in late December, they quarantined Ms. Wei and others like her and raised the alarm to their superiors. But they were prevented by Chinese authorities from alerting their peers, let alone the public.
One of the first doctors to alert Chinese authorities was criticized for “spreading rumors” after sharing with a former medical-school classmate a test result showing a patient had a coronavirus. Another doctor had to write a self-criticism letter saying his warnings “had a negative impact.”
Even after Chinese President Xi Jinping personally ordered officials to control the outbreak on Jan. 7, authorities kept denying it could spread between humans—something doctors had known was happening since late December—and went ahead with a Chinese Lunar New Year banquet involving tens of thousands of families in Wuhan.</blockquote>
China also refused help from the World Health Organization for months and never let the CDC into the country to help contain the outbreak and to help research the virus.
A documentary by Vox highlighted how China&#8217;s communist government is also responsible for the wet markets in the country where the virus is believed to have originated from.
<iframe title="How wildlife trade is linked to coronavirus" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TPpoJGYlW54?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This report has been updated to include additional information.

Daily Life In Beijing Amid Coronavirus

Senator Introduces Bill To Investigate China’s Coronavirus ‘Cover-Up,’ Demands China Pay For Damage

Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) continues to face intense backlash for threatening Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch on Wednesday as a member of the U.S. Senate has now indicated that he intends to introduce a measure to censure Schumer.
Sen. Josh Hawley&#8217;s (R-MO) office released the following statement:
<blockquote>Tonight U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) announced he will introduce a motion to censure U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for inciting violence against U.S. Supreme Court Justices. In a pro-abortion rally in front of the Supreme Court today, Senator Schumer threatened Justices by name saying, “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”</blockquote>
&#8220;Now @chuckschumer is threatening Supreme Court Justices personally, to the point of implying their physical safety is endangered. Disgusting, shameful, and frankly, WEAK,&#8221; Hawley wrote on Twitter. &#8220;I would call on Schumer to apologize, but we all know he has no shame. So tomorrow I will introduce a motion to censure Schumer for his pathetic attempt at intimidation of #SupremeCourt.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I would call on Schumer to apologize, but we all know he has no shame. So tomorrow I will introduce a motion to censure Schumer for his pathetic attempt at intimidation of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SupremeCourt?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SupremeCourt</a>
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1235371033592545286?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 5, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Jimmy Williams, a senior adviser to Democrat Tom Steyer&#8217;s failed presidential campaign, responded to Schumer&#8217;s threat by suggesting that Schumer may need to step down.
&#8220;Threatening a sitting Justice regardless of their politics is dangerous,&#8221; Williams tweeted. &#8220;What Schumer said is gross inappropriate and unacceptable. He should clarify his words immediately or step down from leadership. We must be better than this.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Tom Steyer&#39;s former senior adviser <a href="https://t.co/qc6e9HxmcY">https://t.co/qc6e9HxmcY</a>
&mdash; Cameron Cawthorne (@Cam_Cawthorne) <a href="https://twitter.com/Cam_Cawthorne/status/1235357568668774400?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 5, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Leftist law professor Lawrence Tribe also hit Schumer, writing on Twitter, &#8220;These remarks by 
@SenSchumer were inexcusable. Chief Justice Roberts was right to call him on his comments. I hope the Senator, whom I’ve long admired and consider a friend, apologizes and takes back his implicit threat. It’s beneath him and his office.&#8221;
Democrat Jonathan Turley, Constitutional Law Professor at George Washington University, also slammed Schumer for his remarks, saying that he sounded like a “stalker.”
“Schumer’s threat to the Court that ‘you will pay the price’ is a direct attack on the integrity of our courts,” Turley wrote “I criticized Trump for his reckless comments about the courts. Where is the chorus of condemnation of Schumer? Schumer sounded more like a stalker than a statesman.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Schumer&#39;s threat to the Court that &quot;you will pay the price&quot; is a direct attack on the integrity of our courts. I criticized Trump for his reckless comments about the courts. Where is the chorus of condemnation of Schumer? Schumer sounded more like a stalker than a statesman.
&mdash; Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) <a href="https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1235327740632588289?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts also ripped Schumer, saying in a statement:
<blockquote>This morning, Senator Schumer spoke at a rally in front of the Supreme Court while a case was being argued inside. Senator Schumer referred to two Members of the Court by name and said he wanted to tell them that ‘You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.’
Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.</blockquote>

Senate Committee Holds Hearings On Emergency Economic Stabilization Act

Senator To Bring Motion To Censure Schumer, Democrat Suggests He Step Down

Brett Kavanaugh

Charles Schumer

John Roberts

Neil Gorsuch

Supreme Court

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released the questions that he intends to ask during the next phase of President Donald Trump&#8217;s Senate impeachment trial where senators engage in a question-and-answer period.
Hawley&#8217;s questions center around House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff&#8217;s contact with the Ukraine whistleblower and the work of former Vice President Joe Biden&#8217;s son, Hunter Biden, in Ukraine during the Obama administration.
Hawley intends to ask the Democrat House managers the following questions:
<ol>
<li>As Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, House Manager Adam Schiff lied about communications with the whistleblower prior to the filing of the whistleblower complaint. Schiff claimed on September 17, 2019, &#8220;We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,&#8221; when the whistleblower had in fact reached out to a committee aide prior to filing a complaint. Why did Manager Schiff lie?</li>
<li>The New York Times reported on October 2, 2019, that Representative Schiff learned the &#8220;outlines of a CIA officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power&#8221; days before the officer actually filed the complaint.
<ol>
<li>What precisely did Manager Schiff learn in advance?</li>
<li>Did Manager Schiff or any of his staff offer this individual substantive advice on his complaint?</li>
<li>Did Manager Schiff or any of his staff help the intelligence officer draft the complaint in any way or to any degree?</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>For House Managers: Since September 9, 2019—the date the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community notified the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that he received a whistleblower’s complaint—please disclose and explain any and all contact that any House Manager or their associates or staff have had with any current or former presidential candidate, or candidate’s campaign staff, in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and caucuses?</li>
<li>For House Managers: Under the House Managers’ theory of an impeachable abuse of power, did then-President Barack Obama or then-Vice President Joe Biden commit such an abuse when the Obama administration withheld aid from the Ukrainian government in exchange for the removal of Ukraine’s Prosecutor General?</li>
<li>For House Managers: When he took office, Viktor Shokin, Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, vowed to investigate Burisma. Before Vice President Joe Biden sought to remove Shokin, did the White House Counsel’s Office or the Office of the Vice President legal counsel issue ethics advice approving Mr. Biden’s involvement in matters involving Shokin, despite the presence of Hunter Biden on the Burisma board?</li>
<li>For House Managers: Was President Obama aware that Hunter Biden had been appointed to the board of directors of Burisma when Vice President Joe Biden withheld funds from Ukraine in exchange for the prosecutor’s removal? If so, did the President advise Mr. Biden to recuse himself?</li>
<li>For House Managers: Do you agree with Hunter Biden’s statement in an October 15, 2019, ABC News interview that he would &#8220;probably not&#8221; have been named a board member if his &#8220;last name wasn’t Biden&#8221;?</li>
<li>For White House Counsel: A significant portion of the House Managers’ theory of abuse of power depends on the idea that President Trump improperly withheld defense aid to Ukraine. Did the White House release the funds in question to Ukraine before they expired at the end of the fiscal year, on September 30, 2019? If so, did the Ukrainian government publicly announce any corruption investigation prior to the release?</li>
<li>For White House Counsel: What, if any, criminal statutes do the House Managers allege President Trump violated?</li>
</ol>
After the Senator’s question-and-answer period is over, the Senate will consider whether to allow new witnesses and documents to be brought forth in the case, which is something that the Democrats want.
Hawley noted that if the Senate votes to allow additional witnesses to testify that the Democrats did not call in the House, that he will issue motions to subpoena Schiff, Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, the whistleblower, Joe Biden, and Hunter Biden.
On Saturday, Hawley indicated in a tweet that he would issue subpoenas for those five individuals if the Senate decided to allow additional witnesses to be called in for questioning.
&#8220;I have drafted motions to subpoena Adam Schiff, the &#8216;whistleblower,&#8217; Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden to testify,&#8221; Hawley <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-senator-hawley-drafts-motions-to-subpoena-bidens-schiff-whistleblower">wrote</a>. &#8220;If the Senate calls witnesses, I will ask for votes on all these next week.&#8221;

Senate Armed Services Committee Holds Hearing On Military Services Response To Housing Complaints

Senator Hawley Releases Trial Questions He Plans To Ask About Bidens, Whistleblower, Schiff

Impeachment

On Friday, freshman Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), who is very outspoken on the 21s century geopolitical threat <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/end-forever-wars-and-face-chinas-threat-11574634656">posed by China</a>, raised with leading Trump administration officials the possibility of restricting or temporarily outright cutting off travel with the country due to the coronavirus that recently emanated from there.
Hawley &#8220;sent a letter Friday to the heads of four government agencies to ask whether the Trump administration was considering any potential Chinese travel ban to prevent an American outbreak of the coronavirus,&#8221; National Review <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/coronavirus-outbreak-josh-hawley-asks-trump-administration-for-possible-china-travel-ban/">reported</a>.
Specifically, Hawley tweeted: &#8220;As deadly #coronavirus spreads, this morning I’ve written to the Secretary of State and others to ask whether temporary travel restrictions from affected areas in China may be necessary, and if they are, when American travelers will be notified. Public safety must be #1 priority.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
As deadly <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/coronavirus?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#coronavirus</a> spreads, this morning I’ve written to the Secretary of State and others to ask whether temporary travel restrictions from affected areas in China may be necessary, and if they are, when American travelers will be notified. Public safety must be #1 priority
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1220726263956021248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The tweet accompanied a <a href="https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2020-01/Hawley-Letter-Coronavirus-Departments-Health-Homeland-Security-State-Transportation-Travel.pdf">letter</a> that Hawley sent on Friday to four Cabinet secretaries or acting secretaries: Alex Azar of the Department of Health and Human Services, Chad Wolf of the Department of Homeland Security, Elaine Chao of the Department of Transportation, and Mike Pompeo of the State Department.
Hawley&#8217;s letter concludes by asking four questions of the Cabinet secretaries:
<ol>
<li>Does the federal government have in place procedures and evaluative criteria to guide decisions about restrictions on air travel in the event of disease outbreaks such as this one?</li>
<li>Given the rate at which public health officials are capable of gaining insight into the severity of such an outbreak, can you offer guidance as to when and how the federal government would decide to implement travel restrictions in the event that an outbreak like this one merited them?</li>
<li>Have you begun exploring the means by which the federal government might continue to assist China and the international community in containing this outbreak in the event of restrictions on commercial air travel? If not, why not?</li>
<li>In the event that federal officials make a preliminary determination to rule out restrictions on air travel, will you commit to inform the public that such a determination has been made in the interests of transparency and appropriate public scrutiny?</li>
</ol>
&#8220;The virus, which, causes pneumonia-like symptoms, is related to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS, a virus that originated in China and killed hundreds of people in 2002 and 2003,&#8221; National Review also noted.
Since the virus&#8217;s breakout, China has quarantined the entire city of Wuhan in an attempt to staunch the virus&#8217;s pernicious spread.
Conservative commentator Daniel Horowitz, of Blaze Media, <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/will-trump-consider-suspending-travel-china-amid-coronavirus-outbreak/">wrote</a> today in support of a Chinese travel ban: &#8220;One would expect that the first course of action of the government would be to prevent Chinese from traveling here or Americans from traveling to China and returning, or at least to impose a travel ban on parts of China. That is the first step to ensuring that the disease doesn’t spread like wildfire in our country. Yet, as with epidemics of the past, there doesn’t seem to be any imminent warning of suspending travel.&#8221;
Taking a somewhat different approach, Daily Wire columnist Matt Walsh <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-the-media-wants-you-to-panic-over-the-coronavirus-dont-fall-for-it-here-are-the-real-facts">chalked up</a> the coronavirus as much ado about nothing: &#8220;I don’t mean to spoil the twist ending, but here’s how to protect yourself from the coronavirus if you live in America: Do nothing special at all. Carry on with your life. Wash your hands. Avoid ingesting the bodily fluids of strangers, as much as possible. Do all of the normal things you would do to maintain a healthy life. Media reports indicate that face masks are an &#8216;<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-face-masks-not-entirely-effective-2020-1" data-reader-unique-id="14">ineffective&#8217;</a> way of preventing the spread of the virus. What the reports forget to mention is that it would be a sign of delusional paranoia if a person in the United States went around wearing a mask for fear of a disease that almost nobody in this hemisphere actually has.&#8221;

Cargo containers with China and united States flag in the harbor.

Josh Hawley Proposes Possible China Travel Ban In Response To Coronavirus

Health

Health Care

Immigration

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-SC), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has drafted motions to subpoena Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, his son, Hunter Biden, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), and the Ukraine whistleblower.
&#8220;The Missouri Republican is preparing to file subpoena requests for witnesses and documents that Democrats and Republicans alike won&#8217;t want to vote on, a tactic intended to convince a handful of senators to sink a vote next week to consider new evidence in President Donald Trump&#8217;s impeachment trial,&#8221; Politico reported. &#8220;Hawley&#8217;s strategy harmonizes with plans from GOP Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky to force votes to hear from Hunter Biden, the former vice president&#8217;s son who was on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.&#8221;
On Twitter, Hawley wrote, &#8220;I have drafted motions to subpoena Adam Schiff, the &#8216;whistleblower,&#8217; Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden to testify. If the Senate calls witnesses, I will ask for votes on all these next week.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-cards="hidden" data-lang="en">
I have drafted motions to subpoena Adam Schiff, the “whistleblower,” Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden to testify. If the Senate calls witnesses, I will ask for votes on all these next week <a href="https://t.co/NW1fuyYVF4">https://t.co/NW1fuyYVF4</a>
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1221215365692370944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 25, 2020</a></blockquote>
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has sought to create a narrative that Senate Republicans are engaged in a cover-up because they are not allowing additional witnesses or evidence to be introduced into the trial outside of what the Democrat-controlled House already presented.
Schumer&#8217;s remarks contradict his past statements on the issue when he <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/schumer-demands-witnesses-at-senate-trial-heres-what-he-said-during-clintons-impeachment">said</a> that it made no sense for the Senate to call witnesses to testify when they were not called by the House.
Politico added, &#8220;Hawley would also seek communications among the whistleblower, Schiff and his staff, transcripts of [Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael] Atkinson&#8217;s congressional testimony, communications between the House impeachment managers and Democratic presidential candidates as well as documents related to Biden&#8217;s drive to oust former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-legal-team-lays-out-6-point-case-crushing-democrats-impeachment-claims">Republicans kicked off their defense of Trump on Saturday</a> in the Senate with deputy White House counsel Michael Purpura laying out the following six points that are going to be the outline of Trump&#8217;s defense:
<ol>
<li>“The transcript shows that the president did not condition either security assistance or a meeting on anything. The paused security assistance funds aren’t even mentioned on the call.”</li>
<li>“President Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials have repeatedly said that there was no quid pro quo and no pressure on them to review anything.”</li>
<li>“President Zelensky and high-ranking Ukrainian officials did not even know, did not even know, the security assistance was paused until the end of August, over a month after the July 25 call.”</li>
<li>“Not a single witness testified that the President himself said that there was any connection between any investigations and security assistance, a presidential meeting, or anything else.”</li>
<li>“The security assistance flowed on September 11 and a presidential meeting took place on September 25 without the Ukrainian government announcing any investigations.”</li>
<li>“The Democrats blind drive to impeach the president does not and cannot change the fact, as attested to by the Democrats own witnesses, that President Trump has been a better friend and stronger supporter of Ukraine than his predecessor.”</li>
</ol>
This report has been updated to include additional information.

BREAKING: Senator Hawley Drafts Motions To Subpoena Bidens, Schiff, Whistleblower

Adam Schiff

Hunter Biden

Joe Biden

whistleblower

On Wednesday, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-senator-josh-hawley-most-important-freshman-josh-hammer">ascendant</a> freshman Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) had some particularly harsh words for the way House Democratic impeachment managers comported themselves thus far during the Senate&#8217;s nascent impeachment trial.
&#8220;#ImpeachmentTrial Day 1 = epic fail for House managers,&#8221; Hawley tweeted. &#8220;Used 13 h[ou]rs to grandstand, repeatedly taking rebuttal time just to delay. Attacked senators. Alienated their audience. Admonished by the Chief Justice for unprofessionalism. If this is best they can do, should just stop now.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ImpeachmentTrial?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ImpeachmentTrial</a> Day 1 = epic fail for House managers. Used 13 hrs to grandstand, repeatedly taking rebuttal time just to delay. Attacked senators. Alienated their audience. Admonished by the Chief Justice for unprofessionalism. If this is best they can do, should just stop now
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1220033771086458880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But Hawley, a formerly prolific constitutional attorney and Missouri attorney general who once served as a law clerk on the U.S. Supreme Court for Chief Justice John Roberts, also had some strong words to describe the Democratic antics that precipitated his former boss&#8217;s remarkable rebuke, in the wee hours of the morning, of the rambunctious trial he saw unfolding before him.
As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chief-justice-roberts-finally-the-umpire-he-wanted-to-be-criticizes-both-sides-of-impeachment-trial">reported</a> earlier today, Roberts reprimanded what he deemed the overly fraught and puerile behavior of the dueling parties:
<blockquote>“It is appropriate at this point for me to admonish both the House managers and the president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body,” Roberts sternly rebuked. “One reason it has earned that title is because its members avoid speaking in a manner, and using language, that is not conducive to civil discourse.”
“In the 1905 [Judge Charles] Swayne [impeachment] trial, a senator objected when one of the managers used the word ‘pettifogging’ — and the presiding officer said the word ought not to have been used,” the chief justice continued. “I don’t think we need to aspire to that high a standard, but I do think those addressing the Senate should remember where they are.”</blockquote>
The chief justice&#8217;s excoriation took Hawley aback: As Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hawley-calls-chief-justice-roberts-admonishment-at-impeachment-trial-extraordinary">reports</a>, Hawley said he has &#8220;never heard [Roberts] deliver an admonishment like that from the bench ever.&#8221;
&#8220;He chooses his words very very carefully,&#8221; Hawley continued, according to Fox News. &#8220;He cited a 1905 case impeachment case in which &#8230; one of the sides was &#8230; using language that was thought to be inappropriate. And so while he was careful to &#8230; I think &#8230; to be even-handed about it as is appropriate judicially, it&#8217;s very clear what the impetus for that was &#8230; [Rep. Jerry] Nadler [(D-NY)] getting up and calling the president&#8217;s counsel a bunch of liars.&#8221;
&#8220;I mean, that&#8217;s an extraordinary thing to say on the floor the United States Senate the middle of the trial and that&#8217;s what drew the rebuke [from Roberts] and rightly so,&#8221; Hawley concluded. &#8220;I can tell you, there was an open, open gasping on the Senate floor when Nadler was saying these things.&#8221;
Chief Justice Roberts, a George W. Bush high court nominee who is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-kavanaugh-and-gorsuch-have-issues-john-josh-hammer">widely reputed to care tremendously</a> about preserving the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-it-past-time-trump-openly-defy-court-order-josh-hammer">purported</a> non-politicization of Alexander Hamilton’s <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed78.asp">“least dangerous”</a> branch, famously analogized the role of a Supreme Court justice to that of a baseball home plate umpire calling balls and strikes during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing.
&#8220;[T]his time, [Roberts] really is just the umpire,&#8221; Politico <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/01/20/john-roberts-trump-impeachment-101114">observed</a> earlier this week. &#8220;He’s not the one we’re tuning in to see, and the game’s most important decisions and actions belong to other people. And the rulings he makes, for once, can be made under an umpire’s decision-making conditions: All by himself, yes or no, and maybe in real time.&#8221;

Josh Hawley: Chief Justice’s Impeachment Criticism In Response To ‘Extraordinary’ Democratic Antics

U.S. Senate

For House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), it’s time to fish or cut bait.
Most Missouri voters are familiar with this colloquial expression; it means either take action or step back —and do something useful instead. That’s the position Pelosi finds herself in, now that Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senator-josh-hawley-introducing-measure-to-dismiss-democrats-articles-of-impeachment">introduced a resolution</a> that would allow the Senate to dismiss the articles of impeachment if the House continues to refuse to formally transmit them to the Senate.
The Republican senator’s message is as sensible as it is salient — the Constitution does not abide your half measures, and neither will we.
Sen. Hawley’s proposal is by no means revolutionary. According to his resolution, if the House has failed to send the articles to the Senate after 25 days, a senator could offer a motion to dismiss “with prejudice for failure by the House of Representatives to prosecute such articles” with a simple majority vote. This idea of dismissal for want of prosecution, or &#8220;DWOP,&#8221; is commonplace in both civil and criminal litigation.
To date, House Democrats’ rationalizations for holding impeachment in a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-at-the-new-york-post-pelosis-newest-dirty-trick-putting-trumps-senate-trial-on-hold">perpetual state of suspension</a> are marked by rampant hypocrisy and duplicity. A month ago, when the House announced that it would move forward with an impeachment vote, Pelosi claimed there was urgency to do so because “civilization as we know it &#8230; is at stake in the next election.” But once the House, with bipartisan opposition, did vote to impeach, House Democrats acted immediately and urgently — to go home for the holidays.
The Constitution clearly establishes each chamber’s role in the impeachment process. While Article I, Section 2 gives the House the power to impeach, Section 3 unequivocally provides the Senate with “the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” This was, by no means, an inconsequential part of the Framers’ constitutional design.
As Alexander Hamilton explained in <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed66.asp">The Federalist No. 66</a>, dividing impeachment “between the two branches of the legislature, assigning to one the right of accusing, to the other the right of judging, avoids the inconvenience of making the same persons both accusers and judges.” It is the Senate’s sole prerogative to resolve the impeachment process.
<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/josh-hawley-dismiss-impeachment-senate-pelosi" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.foxnews.com/media/josh-hawley-dismiss-impeachment-senate-pelosi&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1578499082587000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFAtj6CNmkObeLQd_BuqSksdA1JMQ">As Hawley himself has pointed out</a>, perpetual stalemate in the impeachment process could easily result in some sort of October surprise (a last-ditch attempt to sway the November election) or, worse still, an attack on the president’s second term following re-election. If House Democrats truly respected the will of the people, they would act now on impeachment rather than using it to influence or undermine this year’s election. If the House won’t decide whether to cast or cut the line, then Hawley, joined by 10 original co-sponsors, signaled that the Senate will.
Congress already has a long list of unfinished business from 2019 and other urgent matters at hand in 2020 that are vital to the continued safety and prosperity of our country. Iran continues to make threats and escalate tensions. The border remains unsecured. Obamacare is failing, with no legislative fix in sight. And our government’s reckless spending continues to pilfer from future generations.
If House Democrats still think that all these things should be placed on the back burner in order to impeach this president, they should get on with it. And if not, they should move on. But either way, Hawley is right — delaying the process while distracting from the important work that needs to be done on behalf of the American people should no longer be an option.
&nbsp;
The Honorable Robert &#8220;Rob&#8221; Henneke is the general counsel and director of the Center for the American Future at the <a href="https://www.texaspolicy.com">Texas Public Policy Foundation</a>.

HENNEKE: Josh Hawley Is Right To Tell Nancy Pelosi To ‘Fish Or Cut Bait’ On Impeachment

Constitution

Federalist

Nancy Pelosi

U.S. House of Representatives

Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley announced on Thursday that he is introducing legislation that will dismiss House Democrats&#8217; articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump because of Democrats&#8217; abuse of the Constitution.
Hawley&#8217;s announcement comes as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has continued to refuse to send the articles of impeachment to the U.S. Senate because she is concerned that the political trial will be biased.
&#8220;Dems said impeachment was URGENT. Now they don’t want to have a trial, because they have no evidence. In real world, if prosecution doesn’t proceed with case, it gets dismissed. So on Monday, I will introduce measure to dismiss this bogus impeachment for lack of prosecution,&#8221; Hawley wrote on Twitter.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Dems said impeachment was URGENT. Now they don’t want to have a trial, because they have no evidence. In real world, if prosecution doesn’t proceed with case, it gets dismissed. So on Monday, I will introduce measure to dismiss this bogus impeachment for lack of prosecution
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1212827693856763907?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;This will expose Dems’ circus for what it is: a fake impeachment, abuse of the Constitution, based on no evidence. If Dems won’t proceed with trial, bogus articles should be dismissed and @realDonaldTrump fully cleared,&#8221; Hawley continued. &#8220;My proposal will take form of motion to update Senate impeachment rules to account for this unprecedented attempt to obstruct Senate trial. Stay tuned.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
My proposal will take form of motion to update Senate impeachment rules to account for this unprecedented attempt to obstruct Senate trial. Stay tuned
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1212848014877958144?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Leftist Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe responded to Hawley, writing, &#8220;This loony idea has no substance. The Senate cannot &#8216;dismiss&#8217; articles of impeachment that have been voted by the House but have yet to be filed in the Senate. Neither the Senate rules nor the Constitution permit any such move.&#8221;
Hawley responded, &#8220;Hey Dems, this is the guy who got you into this jam by recommending you withhold the Articles from Senate. Now he’s literally making up constitutional provisions. Constitution says nothing about &#8216;filing&#8217; (Tribe’s word) Articles in Senate or otherwise giving House power over trial.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hey Dems, this is the guy who got you into this jam by recommending you withhold the Articles from Senate. Now he’s literally making up constitutional provisions. Constitution says nothing about “filing” (Tribe’s word) Articles in Senate or otherwise giving House power over trial <a href="https://t.co/Vje6gWlxjz">https://t.co/Vje6gWlxjz</a>
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1212867217135669249?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Constitution says House has power to impeach, Senate has sole power to try impeachment cases. For 1st time in history, Dems trying to obstruct an impeachment trial. Senate should update its rules to dismiss these (bogus) Articles if House Dems refuse to try their case,&#8221; Hawley added. &#8220;I once knew a federal judge who said, &#8216;I only cite <a class="css-4rbku5 css-18t94o4 css-901oao css-16my406 r-1n1174f r-1loqt21 r-1qd0xha r-ad9z0x r-bcqeeo r-qvutc0" role="link" href="https://twitter.com/tribelaw" data-focusable="true">@tribelaw</a> ironically.&#8217; Good advice&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I once knew a federal judge who said, “I only cite <a href="https://twitter.com/tribelaw?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@tribelaw</a> ironically.” Good advice
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1212869649257381889?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Democrats&#8217; impeachment of Trump represents the first time in U.S. history that impeachment has been a partisan exercise as only one party voted in favor of it while there was bipartisan support against it.
&#8220;I think we have to be careful about trivializing the process and they put in a hurdle of high crimes – of treason, bribery, and other high crimes,&#8221; Attorney General William Barr <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/impeachment-expert-slams-pelosi-its-a-phony-impeachment-will-have-asterisk-in-history-books">said</a>. &#8220;The articles of impeachment here do not allege a violation of law and it looks as if it’s going to be along partisan lines – I think – I’m concerned about it being trivialized and used as a political tool.&#8221;
Impeachment expert Ken Starr, whose criminal investigation into former Democrat President Bill Clinton ultimately led to Clinton&#8217;s impeachment, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/impeachment-expert-slams-pelosi-its-a-phony-impeachment-will-have-asterisk-in-history-books">called</a> Pelosi’s impeachment a “phony impeachment” and that will be remembered in the history books with a “footnote” or an “asterisk.”
Democrats&#8217; articles of impeachment have been viewed as so toxic that former Illinois Democrat Governor Rod Blagojevich, a convicted felon who was impeached and removed from office, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/impeached-democrat-governor-unloads-from-prison-democrats-abused-power-in-trump-impeachment">wrote</a> an op-ed from his prison cell this week saying that Democrats&#8217; impeachment of Trump was so thin and political that it was an abuse of the Constitution.
This report has been updated to include additional information.

JOSH HAWLEY

Senator Josh Hawley Introducing Measure To Dismiss Democrats’ Articles Of Impeachment

On Wednesday, right-leaning political personality and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/intellectual-dark-web.html">&#8220;Intellectual Dark Web&#8221;</a> icon Dave Rubin announced the launch of a previously teased venture whose goal is to combat the status quo of rampant Big Tech censorship, de-platforming, and de-monetization practices: <a href="https://locals.com">Locals.com</a>.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If you’re a creator and you want to own your own community, set your own rules, post video and audio to a curated feed, chat with supporters, sell tickets to events, build your own network with other creators and much more, join us on <a href="https://t.co/WLIO0Cxwe0">https://t.co/WLIO0Cxwe0</a>
The future is now. <a href="https://t.co/JfSRcGbMDq">pic.twitter.com/JfSRcGbMDq</a>
&mdash; Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) <a href="https://twitter.com/RubinReport/status/1202288504006307841?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
With the tag line of &#8220;Own your community, Own your future,&#8221; Locals pitches itself to content creators as a one-stop &#8220;home for all your content&#8221; through which creators can &#8220;[p]ost videos, photos, podcasts, messages, and polls,&#8221; as well as &#8220;[s]ell tickets to events, and offer exclusive content to your supporters.&#8221; The site advertises that it can strengthen content creators&#8217; relationship with their fans by removing the Big Tech middlemen and serve as a networking/community hub by allowing content creators to easily and freely associate with others. Perhaps most importantly, Locals tells creators to &#8220;[s]et your own rules&#8221; for interaction, in marked distinction with the &#8220;inconsistent and unfair moderation&#8221; of Big Tech.
Rubin, who is currently the only person publicly identified with launching the Locals project, spoke exclusively with The Daily Wire for a wide-ranging interview about the origins and importance of Locals.
&#8220;Everyone knows there is a massive problem with Big Tech,&#8221; Rubin began. &#8220;We have all outsourced all of our ability to communicate with each other to these Big Tech behemoths — no one really owns their content or knows what their terms of service are.&#8221;
Creators have very little access to their own audiences, Rubin continued, because Big Tech companies are clearly manipulating their algorithms and engaging in clandestine shadow-banning-type behavior. With the status quo, content creators have no way of ensuring that they can actually reach all of their followers and subscribers.
&#8220;For someone like me, from a libertarian/classical liberal way of thinking,&#8221; Rubin went on, &#8220;it’s time to reverse this. It’s time for creators, who are the real drivers of social media — the people who are generating clicks and creating podcasts — to be in control. It&#8217;s time for a new model.&#8221;
Locals, Rubin explained, &#8220;is a community-based app and desktop website where you can post audio, post video, communicate with your fans, and so forth. It’s subscription-only, so that takes care of all the bots and trolls and anonymous haters. One of the reasons that everyone hates everything online is that you have smart people arguing with these pink fox anime avatars on Twitter.&#8221;
Rubin&#8217;s signature &#8220;Rubin Report&#8221; program is the very first Local, he said, and he promised that more big-name creators will be rolled out soon. It will be up to each content creator to decide how much to charge for access to his/her Local, beginning with as little as three dollars per month. Each Local not only sets his/her own rules, but also owns his/her users&#8217; data — &#8220;so that, even if you leave Locals,&#8221; Rubin noted, &#8220;you can still communicate directly&#8221; with your fans.
Suffice it to say this is a very different model than the one currently deployed by Big Tech giants like YouTube.
&#8220;There are so many people out there around the world who have all this great stuff to say, but these platforms are controlled by external platforms who manipulate,&#8221; Rubin said, coming to a crescendo. &#8220;I want to give every creator the chance to be truly independent. I created a tech company, not a platform.&#8221;
Combatting Big Tech censorship is an increasingly popular political agenda for the American Right. Freshman Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has made taking on Big Tech a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-josh-hawleys-bill-taking-big-tech-josh-hammer">focal point of his first year</a> in office. Earlier this week, furthermore, numerous leading conservative thinkers co-signed an <a href="https://americanmind.org/essays/for-real-american-greatness-a-tech-new-deal/">essay</a> for the Claremont Institute&#8217;s American Mind online journal that called for a &#8220;Tech New Deal&#8221; intended to ultimately &#8220;ensure[] America can extend its greatness well into the digital age.&#8221;

Dave Rubin

Dave Rubin Launches ‘Locals,’ A New Venture To Combat Big Tech Censorship

Censorship

Facebook

Free Speech

Intellectual Dark Web

Technology

Twitter

YouTube

On Wednesday, in the wake of the murder of nine Americans in Mexico on Monday, Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley issued a blunt tweet challenging the Mexican government, writing, “With Mexico, enough is enough. US government should impose sanctions on Mexican officials, including freezing assets, who won’t confront cartels. Cartels are flooding MO w/ meth, trafficking children, &amp; openly slaughtering American citizens. And Mexico looks the other way.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
With Mexico, enough is enough. US government should impose sanctions on Mexican officials, including freezing assets, who won’t confront cartels. Cartels are flooding MO w/ meth, trafficking children, &amp; openly slaughtering American citizens. And Mexico looks the other way
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1192121566638825472?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 6, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
On Thursday, the Mexican Ambassador to the United States, Martha Barcena Coqui,  responded with a letter apparently linking the U.S. to the increased violence of the drug cartels in Mexico, bringing up Americans’ demand for black-market drugs. Barcena wrote:
<blockquote>In the wake of the tragic loss of lives during the heinous assault that took place against the binational Mormon community of Lebaron in Mexico, my government categorically rejects your recent mischaracterization on Mexico not actively combating transnational organized crime and suggesting to impose sanctions on Mexican officials.
One of the top priorities of President Lopez Obrador is to promote security with a new approach, not seek a violent confrontation with organized crime groups, a strategy that failed in previous administrations leading to unprecedented escalation of violence.</blockquote>
After writing that Mexico “reiterates its willingness to work with the United States,” Barcena added a handwritten note at the bottom of the typed letter, stating, “I hope to be able to discuss these matters with you personally, including how to reduce drug demand in the U.S.”
Hawley noted, “In response to my call for sanctions, yesterday the Mexican Ambassador responded w/ letter taking zero responsibility, offering no change in Mexico’s failed policies, &amp; suggesting real problem is Americans’ “drug demand.” As if Americans are responsible for the cartels’ crimes.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In response to my call for sanctions, yesterday the Mexican Ambassador responded w/ letter taking zero responsibility, offering no change in Mexico’s failed policies, &amp; suggesting real problem is Americans’ “drug demand.” As if Americans are responsible for the cartels’ crimes <a href="https://t.co/zo0jl7u2kG">pic.twitter.com/zo0jl7u2kG</a>
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1192524833340477440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 7, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As Tristan Justice reported at <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/08/mexican-ambassador-blames-drug-cartel-violence-on-addicted-americans/">The Federalist</a>, “Democratic Rep. Ben McAdams of Utah, one of six Mormons in the House of Representatives, joined Hawley in challenging Congress to consider sanctions on the Mexican government.
McAdams told the Federalist, “The unspeakable violence against U.S. women and children this week in the border region of Mexico shocks the conscience and demands action. These criminals place no value on human life and cannot be tolerated by the U.S. or Mexican governments. I call on Congress to join me in considering a range of ideas, including imposing sanctions on Mexican officials who won’t confront the cartels, and declaring Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations.”
Justice also spoke to Republican Rep. Chris Stewart, (R-UT), who asserted:
<blockquote>Following these horrific attacks, I believe the U.S. must partner with the Mexican government, not sanction them. Sanctioning Mexico will cripple our neighbor and reduce the incentive for mutual cooperation in delivering justice to the cartels who carried out this heinous attack.</blockquote>
On Tuesday, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/newt-gingrich-mexican-drug-cartel-shootout-wake-up-call-mormon-family-homicide-abduction">stated</a>, &#8220;Mexico is a vital American interest. And, our desire to make sure the Mexican government defeats the cartels, should be enormous. And I hope this will be a wake-up call &#8212; that we had better find a way to have a partnership with the Mexican government and help them with whatever intelligence training equipment they need to decisively defeat the cartels who are now, frankly, a state within a state.&#8221;
According to the <a href="https://www.cfr.org/interactive/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/criminal-violence-mexico">Council of Foreign Relations</a>:
<blockquote>By 2016, drug-related homicides had<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-homicides-in-2016-under-enrique-pena-nieto-2017-2" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> increased by 22 percent</a>, with more than twenty thousand killed, and in 2017 a mass grave containing the remains of more than 250 victims of crime-related violence was <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/15/americas/mexico-mass-grave-skulls-found-veracruz/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">uncovered</a> in Veracruz State. Since 2006, crime-related violence has resulted in an <a href="https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41576.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">estimated 150,000 deaths</a>. &#8230; In 2018, the <a href="http://secretariadoejecutivo.gob.mx/docs/pdfs/nueva-metodologia/CNSP-V%C3%ADctimas-2018_dic18.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">number of drug-related homicides</a> in Mexico rose to 33,341, a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/01/23/687579971/mexico-reports-highest-ever-homicide-rate-in-2018-tops-33-000-investigations" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">15 percent increase</a> from the previous year—and a record high.</blockquote>

Key Speakers At The Economist Mexico Summit

Mexican Ambassador To U.S. Implies Americans At Fault For Increased Cartel Violence

Cartels

Mexico

Violence

Last evening, The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/469133-graham-predicts-controversial-trump-court-picks-will-clear-panel">reported</a> that U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) plans to bring Halil Suleyman (&#8220;Sul&#8221;) Ozerden back up for a Committee-wide vote this Thursday. Ozerden, who (by pure happenstance!) <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/mulvaney-halil-suleyman-fifth-circuit-1362794">seems to have had</a> Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney as a groomsman at his 2003 wedding, was <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-announces-judicial-nominees-3/">announced</a> this past summer by the White House as its pick to fill a long-vacant Mississippi-based seat on the crucial U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In addition to Mulvaney, Ozerden has the backing of each of Mississippi&#8217;s two Republican senators.
Ozerden, who is only a recent convert to Federalist Society membership and whose judicial track record seems <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/conservatives-voice-concerns-over-potential-fifth-circuit-nominee/">scattershot</a> at best, has long faced <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/key-conservatives-double-down-opposition-trump-josh-hammer">fairly intensive</a> movement conservative opposition. As I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sul-ozerden-very-weak-fifth-circuit-pick-josh-hammer">noted</a> last summer in launching my own anti-Ozerden salvo, much of the opposition centers around the 2012 Southern District of Mississippi case of <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FA-MS-0001-0002.pdf">Catholic Diocese of Biloxi v. Sebelius</a>, wherein the eponymous diocese challenged the intrusive and conscience rights-undermining Obamacare contraceptive mandate promulgated by President Barack Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services. Ozerden, then the district court judge presiding over the case, went so far as to <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FA-MS-0001-0003.pdf">deny the diocese’s mere motion for oral argument</a> — thereby treating a Catholic diocese pleading a genuine infringement of its right to conscience in much the same manner as a judge swatting away a pro se prisoner&#8217;s filing of a risible habeas corpus petition.
At the time, I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sul-ozerden-very-weak-fifth-circuit-pick-josh-hammer">urged</a> Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) to &#8220;lead this battle&#8221; and predicted that, &#8220;[w]ith Cruz’s leadership, it is hard to see how at least [Sen. Josh] Hawley [(R-MO)] does not follow.&#8221; Not to toot my own horn, but that is indeed precisely what happened. Cruz <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/ted-cruz-halil-sul-ozerden-nomination-1492305">came out in public opposition</a> to Ozerden in early September, and <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/josh-hawley-judicial-nominee-1513793">Hawley followed</a> two weeks later. Lacking the votes to pass Ozerden out of the Judiciary Committee with a favorable recommendation, then, Graham <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/josh-hawley-judicial-nominee-1513793">tabled a vote</a> on Ozerden&#8217;s nomination. And in the time since Graham tabled the Ozerden nomination, furthermore, Eliana Johnson of The Washington Free Beacon broke a <a href="https://freebeacon.com/issues/white-house-judicial-nom-violated-judicial-code-of-conduct-ex-wife-alleged/">scandalous story</a> about Ozerden allegedly once pressuring his wife to make an illegal campaign contribution to then-Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott&#8217;s (R-MS) political action committee.
Lacking the Republican votes on the Judiciary Committee and with a genuine scandal garnering headlines in conservative media, it seemed that the Ozerden nomination was heading for a slow but painful death. But rumors started circulating last week that Graham was actively courting Democratic votes on the Judiciary Committee to help favorably pass through Ozerden. Knowledgeable Senate sources confirmed to me this week that Graham planned to try to push through the Ozerden nomination with Democratic votes, and The Hill&#8217;s aforementioned <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/469133-graham-predicts-controversial-trump-court-picks-will-clear-panel">report</a> last evening followed. Sources tell me that the Committee Democrat most likely to cross the aisle to vote for Ozerden is either Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) or Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE).
If Graham follows this through to conclusion, let us call this spade a spade: It would be a betrayal of movement conservatism and the coronation of a thoroughly milquetoast, unfit nominee for the Anthony Kennedy-style swing seat on one of the nation&#8217;s most influential federal courts of appeal. The Fifth Circuit, which covers the red states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, represents the geographical and ideological heartland of post-Reagan conservatism in America. Mississippi, which has two Republican senators, could do a lot better than to nominate a scandal-tied non-movement conservative jurist with an inconsistent judicial track record and an expressed hostility to the foundational issue of religious liberty.
Lindsey Graham should stop what he is doing and not embark upon this path. There is no world in which Democratic votes should be relied upon to pass through a weak nominee who is opposed by large swaths of the conservative movement. Allowing Ozerden to move through would be a tremendous proverbial middle finger to the scores of conservative and religious liberty activists who have opposed his nomination from the get-go.
But if Graham does proceed, then the onus will fall on another courageous Judiciary Committee Republican to join forces with Cruz and Hawley in opposing Ozerden. Perhaps that courageous Judiciary Committee Republican is someone who is allegedly still on the fence, with respect to the Ozerden nomination, and who has a demonstrable <a href="https://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/1/sasse-op-ed-important-win-for-religious-liberty">track record</a> of defending the interests of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3VblIoWpDs">religious liberty</a>.
Are you listening, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)?

Lindsey Graham

HAMMER: Lindsey Graham Would Betray Conservatives By Relying On Democrats To Pass Through Sul Ozerden

Ben Sasse

Conservatism

Judicial Branch

Judiciary

Mississippi

Ted Cruz

Trump Administration

Last evening, on the verge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke&#8217;s confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, the much-vaunted American Bar Association (ABA) released a shockingly ad hominem, scathing <a href="http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/10/30/2019.10.29_chair_rating_letter_to_graham_and_feinstein_re_nomination_of_lawrence_j.c._vandyke.pdf">letter</a> that concluded that VanDyke is &#8220;Not Qualified&#8221; for his proffered perch. The most shocking paragraph in the ABA&#8217;s letter accuses VanDyke, a religious Christian, of harboring animus against the LGBT community:
<blockquote>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Some interviewees raised concerns about whether Mr. VanDyke would be fair to persons who are gay, lesbian, or otherwise part of the LGBTQ community. Mr. VanDyke would not say affirmatively that he would be fair to any litigant before him, notably members of the LGBTQ community.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
This is a vicious and malicious <a href="https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1189369387263954950">smear</a> made against a good and decent man. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/30/politics/american-bar-association-nominees-vandyke/index.html">Moved to tears</a> at his confirmation hearing earlier today while questioned by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), VanDyke protested the ABA&#8217;s grotesque libel with an affirmation of the teachings of his Christian faith: &#8220;It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of God. &#8230; [litigants in court] should all be treated with dignity and respect.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Lawrence VanDyke brought to tears because of the shameful and false accusation by the <a href="https://twitter.com/ABAesq?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABAesq</a> that he holds animus toward the LGBT community. Thank you to <a href="https://twitter.com/SenHawleyPress?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenHawleyPress</a> for highlighting this injustice. The ABA has lost all credibility for trying to destroy this good man’s life. <a href="https://t.co/4ARyHvw3Zu">pic.twitter.com/4ARyHvw3Zu</a>
&mdash; Gregory T. Angelo (@gregorytangelo) <a href="https://twitter.com/gregorytangelo/status/1189579775414808576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fellow Judiciary Committee member Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) captured the essence of the whole sordid affair: &#8220;The ABA has lost its credibility as a neutral arbiter; it should be treated no differently than any other special interest group, which it is.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
In judiciary hearing <a href="https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenMikeLee</a> rips <a href="https://twitter.com/ABAesq?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABAesq</a> over controversial &quot;not qualified&quot; rating for Trump judicial nominee Lawrence VanDyke :
&quot;The ABA has lost its credibility as a neutral arbiter; it should be treated no differently than any other special interest group, which it is.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/8DHwVOGq0E">pic.twitter.com/8DHwVOGq0E</a>
&mdash; Nate Madden (@NateOnTheHill) <a href="https://twitter.com/NateOnTheHill/status/1189637851257982976?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 30, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
To conservatives, it should be obvious that Sen. Lee is emphatically correct. The ABA, which has also <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/the-confirmation-process-that-was-then-this-is-trump/">attempted</a> to claim other Trump judicial nominee <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/seventeen_judicial_nominees_advance_to_the_senate_including_two_rated_not_q">scalps</a>, is institutionally controlled by leftist trial lawyers and bigwig Democratic Party donors. As Thomas Jipping <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/another-self-inflicted-wound-for-the-aba/">noted</a> this morning for National Review&#8217;s &#8220;Bench Memos&#8221; blog, &#8220;since the 1970s, the ABA House of Delegates has passed hundreds of resolutions on all the hot political topics, all of them taking a liberal position.&#8221; In fact, the lead ABA reviewer of VanDyke, Marcia Davenport, is a partisan Democrat who once <a href="https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1189362031561990145">donated</a> to VanDyke&#8217;s opponent in his 2014 Montana Supreme Court election. VanDyke, additionally, is qualified by any objective metric: He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, served as an editor of the Harvard Law Review, clerked for the highly prestigious former Judge Janice Rogers Brown on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and has entertained a supremely successful career as an appellate litigator. Accordingly, the Judicial Crisis Network&#8217;s Carrie Severino <a href="https://judicialnetwork.com/in-the-news/aba-has-outdone-itself-lvd/">opined</a>: &#8220;The ABA has amassed quite the history of bias against conservatives over the last few decades, but with VanDyke, it has really outdone itself.&#8221;
Indeed.
Over the years, I have heard gripes from no shortage of conservative friends working in the judicial nominations arena that the ABA is a biased, left-wing organization that merely masquerades as politically neutral in the self-interested pursuit of its own institutional clout. This is undoubtedly true — and the obvious solution is to stop treating the ABA&#8217;s ratings with any respect. For both Judiciary Committee Republicans and GOP presidents alike, that requires a systemic disclaiming of any legitimacy for the ABA&#8217;s judicial nominee qualifications. Republicans must resist the urge to tout the ABA&#8217;s more customary &#8220;Well Qualified&#8221; ratings for even the GOP&#8217;s own judicial nominees. Only by refusing to play the ABA&#8217;s game, across the board, will the GOP ever make headway in pushing back against this partisan organization. Much like the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">judicial supremacist game</a>, the ABA qualifications game is not something that conservatives can ever win.
There is no reason whatsoever to care about how the trial lawyer-dominated ABA vets judicial nominees. But for conservatives, that means that we literally cannot ever care — whether the ABA&#8217;s ratings are helpful or harmful to our cause. Only by demonstrating such consistency will we ever help discredit an organization that deserves nothing but discrediting.
</div>
</div>
</div>

ABA logo

HAMMER: Who Cares About The ABA’s Judicial Nominee Ratings?

Christianity

Homosexuality

LGBT

Mike Lee

Religion

Transgender

Sens. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) introduced legislation on Wednesday that would move most federal agencies out of Washington, D.C. and into a variety of regions throughout the United States that have been deemed economically distressed.
&#8220;Every year, Americans&#8217; hard-earned tax dollars fund federal agencies that are mainly located in the D.C. bubble,&#8221; Hawley wrote in a statement. &#8220;That&#8217;s a big part of the problem with Washington: They&#8217;re too removed from the rest of America.&#8221;
The <a href="https://www.hawley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/HIRE-Act-bill-text.pdf">Helping Infrastructure Restore the Economy</a> (HIRE) Act would require that ten executive agencies relocate their headquarters to predetermined areas that are not only financially struggling, but also have a geographic nexus to the assigned agency.
The legislation would generate an influx of permanent, well-paying jobs that would subsequently boost local economies, as well as cut costs for the American taxpayer by reducing the number of federal workers located in an area with a high cost of living.
&#8220;The HIRE Act will move policymakers directly into the communities they serve, creating thousands of jobs for local communities and saving taxpayers billions of dollars along the way,&#8221; Hawley added.
The proposed agency relocations include moving the Department of Agriculture to Missouri, the Department of Commerce to Pennsylvania, the Department of Education to Tennessee, the Department of Energy to Kentucky, the Department of Health and Human Services to Indiana, the Department of Housing and Urban Development to Ohio, the Department of the Interior to New Mexico, the Department of Labor to West Virginia, the Department of Transportation to Michigan, and the Department of Veterans Affairs to South Carolina.
&#8220;Moving agencies outside of Washington, D.C. both boosts local economies and lowers costs — that&#8217;s a winning combination,&#8221; Blackburn said. &#8220;This legislation would enable Americans across the country to have greater access to good jobs.&#8221;
&#8220;Tennesseans would greatly benefit from having portions of the Department of Education in the Volunteer State,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;It is my hope that the HIRE Act will quickly pass the Senate.&#8221;
Hawley introduced the legislation only a day after he defended the White House&#8217;s decision to move part of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to Missouri. The freshman senator got into a heated back-and forth-with a former USDA researcher who authored an article in The Washington Post entitled: &#8220;The White House didn&#8217;t like my agency&#8217;s research. So it sent us to Missouri.&#8221;
&#8220;I assume this is a parody, right? D.C. bureaucrats aren&#8217;t actually saying out loud that moving to Missouri is … punishment, are they?&#8221; Hawley said in response to the op-ed. &#8220;Because surely nobody could be that condescending [and] elitist.&#8221;
&#8220;What&#8217;s really &#8216;condescending&#8217; here is the sort of smarmy, smirking contempt for people&#8217;s intelligence that [Hawley] is displaying,&#8221; replied Greg Sargent, an opinion writer for the Post. &#8220;Coming from a leading intellectual light of the new &#8216;conservative nationalism,&#8217; this unmasks the phony pastoral posturing that lies at its core.&#8221;
After Hawley fired back that Sargent was a &#8220;smug, rich liberal elitist&#8221; that shows &#8220;utter, open contempt for the people of the heartland,&#8221; CNN&#8217;s Jake Tapper implied that the Missouri lawmaker&#8217;s attack was anti-Semitic.
&#8220;For defending my homestate of Missouri, liberal media have called me &#8216;phony,&#8217; &#8216;ugly,&#8217; &#8216;smarmy,&#8217; a racist and now an anti-Semite. All in 24 [hours],&#8221;  Hawley responded to the backlash. &#8220;This is how they bully those who aren’t part of the DC club. But I don&#8217;t care what slurs they use, I will ALWAYS defend Missouri.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
For defending my homestate of Missouri, liberal media have called me “phony,” “ugly,” “smarmy,” a racist and now an anti-Semite. All in 24 hrs. This is how they bully those who aren’t part of the DC club. But I don’t care what slurs they use, I will ALWAYS defend Missouri <a href="https://t.co/pfUGKEbcv5">https://t.co/pfUGKEbcv5</a>
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1186653943885160449?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 22, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Just another day in the swamp,&#8221; he added.

USA, Washington, D.C., Aerial photograph of the United States Capitol and the Federal Triangle

GOP Lawmakers Seek To Move Most D.C. Bureaucracy Jobs To Economically Distressed Areas

Jake Tapper

According to a letter obtained by The Daily Wire, a group of prominent conservative leaders have staked out their opposition to Judge Halil Suleyman (&#8220;Sul&#8221;) Ozerden, the president&#8217;s <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/16/trump-judicial-nominee-1417561">controversial</a> pick to fill a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-announces-judicial-nominees-3/">vacant Mississippi-based seat</a> on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Ozerden, who is presently a U.S. district court judge in Mississippi, has been assailed by many due to concerns stemming from alleged exegetical sloppiness and alleged hostility to religious liberty.
The letter&#8217;s signees include First Liberty Institute President and CEO Kelly Shackelford, Conservative Action Project Chairman Alfred Regnery, Morton Blackwell, Dr. James Dobson, Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund Chairman Jenny Beth Martin, ForAmerica President David Bozell, March for Life Action President Tom McClusky, and Wallbuilders Founder David Barton. The letter reads, in relevant part:
<blockquote>Conservatives have grave concerns about the nomination of Judge Halil Ozerden to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Specifically, the undersigned raise issue with his commitment to religious liberty, and more broadly, with his commitment to advancing the original meaning of the Constitution. &#8230;
Ozerden’s indifference to religious liberty in [the case of Catholic Diocese of Biloxi, Inc. v. Sebelius, No. 1:12-cv-00158-HSO-RHW, slip op. at 7–8, 15 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 20, 2012)] is indicative of a judicial style that is short on substance and which demonstrates a troubling indifference to the textualism we would hope to see in a circuit court judge.
A demonstrated commitment to religious liberty and a deference to the Constitution as it was originally written are the hallmarks of a prudent jurist. Principled conservatives must stand against judges being elevated because of who they know, rather than a proven history of a solid conservative judicial philosophy.
As Sen. Ted Cruz, who has argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, &#8220;for a lifetime appointment on the court of appeals, I believe we should be looking for someone with a strong, demonstrated record as a constitutionalist. I have significant concerns that Judge Ozerden&#8217;s judicial record does not indicate that he meets that standard. For that reason, I do not believe he should be on the court of appeals, and I will oppose his nomination.&#8221; Senator Cruz is correct. Hopefully, other principled senators who care about our courts will join him.</blockquote>
As the letter indicates, stalwart conservative Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has already <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/ted-cruz-halil-sul-ozerden-nomination-1492305">come out in public opposition</a> to Ozerden&#8217;s nomination. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has indicated he will support the Ozerden nomination, while many conservative eyes remain fixed on Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) — a fellow former U.S. Supreme Court clerk and member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee who has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47899/hammer-senator-josh-hawley-most-important-freshman-josh-hammer">already fought multiple battles</a> thus far in 2019 against Trump administration judicial nominees. It is unclear whether Hawley will fight at least one more.
As a recent judicial clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit myself, I wrote a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/48881/hammer-sul-ozerden-very-weak-fifth-circuit-pick-josh-hammer">Daily Wire op-ed</a> in June explaining my own personal opposition to the Ozerden nomination:
<blockquote>What Judge Ozerden did in Catholic Diocese of Biloxi represents nothing less than a deliberate indifference — indeed, perhaps an outright hostility — to the interests of religious liberty. And religious liberty, of course, is easily one of the most indispensable issues by which senators ought to vet and assess judicial nominees. &#8230;
As a very recent Fifth Circuit law clerk, I can attest that the Court&#8217;s en banc votes — in which important cases are brought before all active judges — are oftentimes nail-biting affairs. The Fifth Circuit is being made great again, but it is not quite fully there yet. &#8230; And this Mississippi seat promises to be the proverbial Anthony Kennedy seat on the Court — the swing vote in en banc voting who will decide crucially important matters of intense interest to conservatives.
We should have zero question marks from the nominee for this Mississippi seat.</blockquote>
Some of Ozerden&#8217;s tough-on-crime defenders have attempted to defend his nomination by pointing to his purported tough sentencing practices as a district court judge but, as I tweeted yesterday, even that proposition is unclear at best.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Pablo Vega-Ontanon, an illegal alien from Mexico, was caught with enough fentanyl to kill 500,000 people. Maximum sentence was life imprisonment and a $10 million fine.
Sul Ozerden sentenced him to six years plus supervised release. <a href="https://t.co/Ko1nPnHNaM">https://t.co/Ko1nPnHNaM</a>
— Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1174778372225785856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Time is running short for fellow conservative senators to join Cruz — Ozerden&#8217;s U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation vote will likely be held next week.

US. Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals

Key Conservatives Double Down On Opposition To Trump Judicial Nominee

Birth Control

First Amendment

Lawsuit

Obamacare

Freshman Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) criticized Democrats&#8217; renewed calls to impeach Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and subsequently sabotage the federal judiciary.
&#8220;You know, they want to impeach Justice Kavanaugh, they want to pack the Supreme Court, I mean, talk about destroying any institution that they can&#8217;t control — it is really unbelievable,&#8221; Hawley said during an interview with <a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/461648-josh-hawley-dem-calls-for-kavanaugh-impeachment-show-war-with-constitution?rnd=1568673950">Hill.TV</a> on Monday. &#8220;This is a Democratic Party that increasingly is at war with the American Constitution.&#8221;
&#8220;I mean, they&#8217;re willing to destroy an entire branch of government,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;The independent judiciary, they want to destroy it. Why? Because it won&#8217;t rule the way they want it to. I mean, is there anything more dangerous to constitutional government than that way of thinking?&#8221;
Hawley&#8217;s remarks come after a host of high-profile Democratic lawmakers have begun calling anew for Kavanaugh&#8217;s impeachment, following a new sexual misconduct allegation. Only days earlier, The New York Times published a report alleging that a friend of the Supreme Court justice pushed his genitalia into the hand of a female student while attending a party at Yale University in the 1980s.
After publication, the Times issued an editor&#8217;s note stating that the alleged victim reportedly did not recall the incident. The omissions received massive backlash.
Despite the flubbed report, the majority of Democratic presidential candidates stood by their earlier impeachment calls, including Sens. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), former Rep. Beto O&#8217;Rourke (D-TX), South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, and former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro.
Kavanagh&#8217;s impeachment was also endorsed by members of the so-called &#8220;Squad,&#8221; even after the report was revealed to have been botched. While Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) tweeted their support for forcing the justice to step down, Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) went even further, introducing a resolution calling for an impeachment inquiry to begin.
&#8220;I believe Christine Blasey Ford. I believe Deborah Ramirez. It is our responsibility to collectively affirm the dignity and humanity of survivors,&#8221; Pressley wrote <a href="https://www.wbur.org/news/2019/09/16/pressley-kavanaugh-impeachment-effort">in a statement</a> to Boston Public radio station WBUR.
&#8220;Sexual predators do not deserve a seat on the nation’s highest court and Brett Kavanaugh&#8217;s confirmation process set a dangerous precedent,&#8221; the statement continued. &#8220;We must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions.&#8221;
Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court in October 2018 after a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/tags/brett-kavanaugh">contentious confirmation process</a> that was largely viewed as an orchestrated smear campaign against the Republican judicial nominee.
Despite multiple investigations into Kavanaugh by both the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI, as well as independent journalistic investigations, none of the sexual misconduct allegations have ever been corroborated.
&#8220;My message to my Democratic colleagues would be, look: It is an independent judiciary. Sooner or later, you&#8217;ll have your chance to appoint judges to the bench and you should appoint qualified judges to do so,&#8221; Hawley said. &#8220;But don&#8217;t destroy people and institutions in order to try and get your way.&#8221;
&#8220;I mean, that&#8217;s just not who we are as Americans,&#8221; he added.

joshhawley.jpg

Josh Hawley Slams Democrats For ‘Destroying Any Institution They Can’t Control’

Democratic Party

Among his many exhortations to conservatives is Russell Kirk’s insistence that they be guided by the principle of prudence. Prudence, properly understood, requires the ability to be self-critical — to avoid an unmoving fealty to outmoded dogmas, to re-examine assumptions, and, most of all, to have the courage and foresight to correct course if and when things have gone wayward.
Leading lights on the Right gathered last week under the banner of “national conservatism” to apply some prudent self-examination to the now well-trodden path of the traditional conservative consensus. It was a necessary effort, and one that may prove to be transformational.
The “consensus,” as it was once described, is hardly without its cracks. At the <a href="https://nationalconservatism.org/">National Conservatism Conference</a> last week, the orthodoxy that has defined the Right for the last 40 years — philosophical allegiance to the three-legged stool of markets, moral values, and military might — was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/49750/hammer-national-conservatism-conference-josh-hammer">visibly and profoundly challenged</a>.
That it was challenged so enthusiastically and with such intellectual rigor suggests that there is, in fact, an ascendant movement afoot.
It arises out of an acknowledgment that there is a rootlessness in America today that conservatism, as it has been traditionally defined, has left unaddressed. &#8220;Fusionism,&#8221; the prevailing political consensus between traditional social conservatives and economic libertarians, has made America rich, but it has also left us morally bereft.
All of this provided the context for a deeply resonant <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPAUQKY9Jyw">closing speech</a> by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO). The new Republican senator from Missouri has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/43923/hammer-judicial-crisis-networks-open-attack-sen-josh-hammer">made quite a name for himself</a> by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/47899/hammer-senator-josh-hawley-most-important-freshman-josh-hammer">vigorously vetting</a> lifetime judicial nominees and unapologetically <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/49361/hammer-josh-hawleys-bill-taking-big-tech-josh-hammer">taking Silicon Valley giants to task</a>.
But Hawley&#8217;s philosophical roots have not had much public exposure in Washington, D.C. Hearing them was worth the wait.
The senator did not hesitate to make his mark as the clear embodiment of this self-critical, self-aware, shifting consensus on the Right.
“For too long now,” Hawley opened, “this country has been badly led &#8230; by a political consensus forged by a political class that has lost touch with what binds us together as Americans.”
In a statement that left little room for doubt about where Hawley stands on the need to cling to old shibboleths, he declared the great divide was “not between Trump supporters and Trump opponents, or between suburban voters and rural ones, or between Red America and Blue America,” but between “the political agenda of the leadership elite and the great broad middle of our society.”
In a searing indictment of the current political arrangement, the senator did not mince words:
<blockquote>Because in this bargain, foreign competitors get to make the goods, and we just buy them. And then they buy up American companies with the profits. And yes, in this bargain there are lots of jobs — jobs on Wall Street, or in Hollywood, or in Silicon Valley.
Because the truth is, the cosmopolitan economy has made the cosmopolitan class an aristocracy. At the same time, it has encouraged multinational corporations to move jobs and assets overseas to chase the cheapest wages and pay the lowest taxes.
And it has rewarded these same corporations for then turning around and investing their profits not in American workers, not in American development, but in financial instruments that benefit the cosmopolitan elite.</blockquote>
The elite have benefited at the expense of middle America — which is left with flat wages, lost jobs, and declining opportunity. “Is it any surprise,” Hawley pondered, “that in the last half century, as our leaders have pursued a program that the American middle does not espouse, does not support, and does not benefit from, that public confidence in American government has collapsed?”
It should not surprise anyone who has paid attention to how President Trump was elected. Salena Zito and Brad Todd wrote an <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Great-Revolt-Populist-Coalition-Reshaping/dp/1524763683">entire book</a> about it, based largely on interviews with voters from both parties who pulled the lever for Trump. Both parties had let them down, they said. Not only that, but these voters felt disrespected, unheard, and belittled.
Trump was a disrupter, with allegiance to no one, and an allergy to being pushed around by orthodoxies on any side — the orthodoxies which Hawley identifies on the Left as “champion[ing] multiculturalism that degrades our common identity,” and on the Right as “celebrat[ing] hyper-globalization and promis[ing] that the market will make everything right in the end, eventually &#8230; perhaps.”
So what is to be done?
The new consensus that Hawley sets forth includes support for policies ranging from more investment in middle America, upending “the economic concentration that stifles small producers and family enterprises,” removing mountainous college debt as a barrier to entry to the modern workforce, an immigration system that “rewards and nourishes American labor,” and trade policies that prioritize American workers over cheap foreign goods and “arbitrage schemes by the great corporations.”
In just a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/49681/watch-josh-hawley-defends-americas-heartland-molly-prince">20-minute speech</a>, Sen. Hawley set himself at the head of a vanguard that presents a new way for conservatives to think about old problems.
It was also personally meaningful. I grew up in a small, rural town in upstate New York plagued by low wages and low expectations — offset only by high rates of heroin addiction. By the time I graduated high school, I had lost classmates to suicide, overdose, and murder. In the seventeen years since then, I have heard many on the Right appeal to me on the basis of our shared, and deeply held, principles.
But I can mark Hawley’s speech as the first time in my life that I’ve heard a Republican so forcefully and intentionally address the very real problems of the impoverished, rural communities that truly do not care about the corporate tax breaks or the Mueller investigation.
It is time for conservatives to acknowledge that while our principles remain steadfast, their application — and the political consensus that guides them — is in need of self-critical review.
Josh Hawley may be the senator best positioned to do this. His fearlessness in subjecting the old assumptions to rigorous evaluation is breathing new life into our increasingly rusty and irrelevant Congress. And his embodiment of the commitment to the foundations of conservatism with a profound understanding for grievances that animate the populists makes him one of the most intellectually interesting and relevant policymakers to watch.
Like he did so many things, Russell Kirk anticipated this. His adage to all of us would seem appropriate to where Josh Hawley has the potential to take conservatism: “Men cannot improve a society by setting fire to it: they must seek out its old virtues, and bring them back into the light.”
Rachel Bovard is policy director at <a href="http://www.conservativepartnership.org/">Conservative Partnership Institute</a>.

BOVARD: Josh Hawley Is Quickly Becoming One Of The Most Important Conservatives In America

Nationalism

Republican Party

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) circulated a video of former President Barack Obama using the word “cosmopolitan” after the freshman senator was accused of being anti-Semitic for using the same word during a speech he delivered a week earlier.
“Hmmm. Watch this video of [Obama’s] criticism of ‘international elite’ who are ‘cosmopolitan in their outlook,’” Hawley tweeted on Tuesday. “Will liberal language police hysterically denounce Obama for being anti-Semitic?”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">Not as well as when your boss bailed out the big banks. But question for you: is Obama an anti-Semite? PS Great work on that Obama speech in Johannesburg. “International elites” with “cosmopolitan outlook.” <a href="https://t.co/0Gw72OXCPN">https://t.co/0Gw72OXCPN</a> <a href="https://t.co/BFekK2NnSa">pic.twitter.com/BFekK2NnSa</a>
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1153736890543218689?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Hawley’s tweet included a segment of 2018 address that Obama delivered at the 16th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture in Johannesburg, South Africa. In the clip, Obama is discussing the disproportionate political influence of those with economic clout.
“…this new international elite, the professional class that supports them, differs in important respects from the ruling aristocracies of old,” Obama said at the time. “It includes many who are self-made. It includes champions of meritocracy.”
“Although still mostly white and male, as a group they reflect a diversity of nationalities and ethnicities that would have not existed a hundred years ago,” he continued. “A decent percentage consider themselves liberal in their politics, modern and cosmopolitan in their outlook.”
Hawley received massive criticism from members of the left-wing media for his keynote address at the 2019 National Conservatism Conference on July 16. The speech was a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/49681/watch-josh-hawley-defends-americas-heartland-molly-prince">fiery defense of America’s heartland</a> against the global elite; however, the speech was met with accusations of anti-Semitism for the use of the term “cosmopolitan elite.”
“Anyone [with] a Stanford BA in history and a JD from Yale (like Hawley) knows exactly the implications of ‘cosmopolitan.’ Again, not ‘everyone’ knows this. But Hawley must,” journalist <a href="https://twitter.com/JamesFallows/status/1152023408630095872">James Fallows</a> responded on Twitter, linking a 2017 Public Radio International (PRI) article that contended the word “cosmopolitan” is an “anti-Semitic fighting term” harkening back to Adolf Hitler’s Germany that was “used against Jews by Nazis and Bolsheviks alike.”
Washington Post opinion columnist <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/07/22/what-comes-after-trump-may-be-even-worse/?utm_term=.fb69ee7b74b8">Max Boot</a> also put forth that Hawley was referring to Jews and <a href="https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1152974372430405632">Josh Marshall</a>, an editor at Talking Points Memo, contended that the Missouri senator was “contemptuous of American Jewish life.” Former Weekly Standard editor-in-chief Bill Kristol argued that the speech was either “creepy culture-warring” or demagogic dog-whistling.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">One can argue policies have often favored the interests of the wealthy over the middle-class. But &#8220;the cosmopolitan upperclass?&#8221; &#8220;The American middle?&#8221; That&#8217;s at best creepy culture-warring, at worst demagogic dog-whistling. Which pretty much sums up &#8220;national conservatism.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/g6wuj8D0ez">https://t.co/g6wuj8D0ez</a>
— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) <a href="https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1151467084095922176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
“… Hawley, a graduate of Stanford and Yale, doubled down, giving a speech to a conservative group in which he quoted Jewish professors out of context, and lamented to the elitism of the ‘left,’ marked by ‘globalization’ and ‘cosmopolitan consensus,’” <a href="https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/columns/tony-messenger/messenger-at-peak-of-civil-rights-movement-speech-in-st/article_51f180ed-4806-560f-bb3e-ded61f3b564b.html">Tony Messenger</a> of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote. “Many Jewish scholars and activists recognize the speech as a dog whistle to white supremacists, using the same language long affiliated with anti-Semitism.”
Yoram Hazony, the organizer of the National Conservative Conference and a prominent Orthodox Jewish intellectual, immediately came to Hawley’s defense.
“Sorry but ‘cosmopolitan’ is a normal term in political theory, history and other academic disciplines. It means ‘citizen of the world’ and has no anti-Jewish valence,” Hazony said. “[Hawley] used it correctly in his National Conservatism speech.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">Sorry but &#8220;cosmopolitan&#8221; is a normal term in political theory, history and other academic disciplines. It means &#8220;citizen of the world&#8221; and has no anti-Jewish valence. <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HawleyMO</a> used it correctly in his National Conservatism speech. Let&#8217;s take a little tour of how others use it: <a href="https://t.co/JbesGcLY2F">https://t.co/JbesGcLY2F</a>
— Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) <a href="https://twitter.com/yhazony/status/1152216490898272258?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Hazony further provided examples of scholarly publications that referred to global citizenship by the term “cosmopolitan,” including the Harvard University Press, the Oxford University Press, and the Cambridge University Press.
“This term, descended from Stoic philosophy, is in common use in educated discourse to mean ‘citizen of the world.’ In common use, it has no anti-Jewish valence,” Hazony continued. “Sen. [Hawley] is, as you emphasize, an educated man. And so it’s not surprising that he used the term ‘cosmopolitan’ exactly correctly in his well-received speech at the National Conservatism Conference.”

WATCH: Josh Hawley Is Accused Of Anti-Semitism For Using The Term ‘Cosmopolitan.’ Then A Video Surfaces Of Obama Using The Same Term.

Anti-Semitism

Barack Obama

Globalization

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) slammed the divisive priorities of the leadership elite, which have abandoned the interests of the “great American middle” in favor of their own globalist agenda.
“The great divide of our time is between the political agenda of the leadership elite and the great and broad middle of our society,” Hawley said while giving the closing keynote address at the National Conservatism Conference on Tuesday evening.
“For years, the politics of both Left and Right have been informed by a political consensus that reflects the interests not of the American middle, but of a powerful upper class and their cosmopolitan priorities,” he continued.
The so-called “cosmopolitan elite,” Hawley put forth, reside in the United States, yet self-identify as “citizens of the world.” However, the common thread amongst these individuals is a shared set of globalist values such as “the importance of global integration and the danger of national loyalties, the priority of social change over tradition, career over community, and achievement and merit and progress.”
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DkIapXCfPGE" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
“Call it the ‘cosmopolitan consensus,’” Hawley said, noting that the end goal is to eliminate national boundaries, consolidate markets, and ultimately create a single monolithic economy.
“But it’s about more than economics — according to the cosmopolitan consensus, globalization is a moral imperative,” he continued. “That’s because our elitists distrust patriotism and dislike the common culture left to us by our forbearers.”
The freshman senator contended that the cosmopolitan consensus has transformed the cosmopolitan elite into an American aristocracy. While jobs “on Wall street, or in Silicon Valley, or in Hollywood” flourish under its rule, the American heartland is left with “flat wages, with lost jobs, with declining investment, and declining opportunity.”
“The Left champions multiculturalism and degrades our common identity,” Hawley said. “The Right? Well, the Right celebrates hyper-globalization and promises that the market will make everything alright in the end. Eventually. Maybe. Hopefully.”
“In truth, neither political party has seemed much interested in the American middle for quiet a long time, and neither has seemed much interested in the republic the middle sustains,” he continued. “But the old political platforms have grown stale and the old political truisms now ring hollow. The American people are demanding something different and something better.”
“It’s time we ended the cosmopolitan experiment and recovered the promise of the republic,” Hawley added.
Bizarrely, Hawley’s fiery defense of the American middle was met with accusations of anti-Semitism from some members of the left-wing media.
“Anyone [with] a Stanford BA in history and a JD from Yale (like Hawley) knows exactly the implications of ‘cosmopolitan.’ Again, not ‘everyone’ knows this. But Hawley must,” journalist James Fallows responded on Twitter, before adding that “America is great precisely because its ideals and embrace are universal.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">1) Anyone w a Stanford BA in history and a JD from Yale (like Hawley) knows *exactly* the implications of “cosmopolitan.” <a href="https://t.co/7BmcNxPsTp">https://t.co/7BmcNxPsTp</a>
Again, not “everyone” knows this. But Hawley must.
2) America is great precisely *because* its ideals and embrace are universal. <a href="https://t.co/VXUJPdR2DR">https://t.co/VXUJPdR2DR</a>
— James Fallows (@JamesFallows) <a href="https://twitter.com/JamesFallows/status/1152023408630095872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Fallows’ tweet included a link to a 2017 Public Radio International (PRI) article, contending that the word “cosmopolitan” is an “anti-Semitic fighting term” harkening back to Adolf Hitler’s Germany that was “used against Jews by Nazis and Bolsheviks alike.”
“I’m going to be charitable, and just say it’s very important that we find out exactly what this man, a U.S. senator, thinks he is saying,” said <a href="https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/1152021442113896448">Adam Serwer</a>, a staff writer at The Atlantic.
“I mean, it is not particularly surprising that Jewish people’s ears pricked up when they heard a U.S. senator making arguments using language that has targeted them particularly,” Serwer <a href="https://twitter.com/AdamSerwer/status/1152204393535741952?s=20">later tweeted</a>. “But that’s not really what we are talking about here.”
Leftist economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman also somehow interpreted Hawley’s speech as an anti-Semitic dog whistle, <a href="https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1151942187854303233">tweeting</a> that “If you’re Jewish and the use of ‘cosmopolitan’ doesn’t scare you, read some history.”
Yoram Hazony, the organizer of the National Conservatism Conference and a prominent Orthodox Jewish intellectual, immediately came to Hawley’s defense.
“Sorry but ‘cosmopolitan’ is a normal in political theory, history and other academic disciplines. It means ‘citizen of the world’ and has no anti-Jewish valence,” Hazony said. “[Hawley] used it correctly in his National Conservatism speech.”
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">Sorry but &#8220;cosmopolitan&#8221; is a normal term in political theory, history and other academic disciplines. It means &#8220;citizen of the world&#8221; and has no anti-Jewish valence. <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HawleyMO</a> used it correctly in his National Conservatism speech. Let&#8217;s take a little tour of how others use it: <a href="https://t.co/JbesGcLY2F">https://t.co/JbesGcLY2F</a>
— Yoram Hazony (@yhazony) <a href="https://twitter.com/yhazony/status/1152216490898272258?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Hazony offered multiple examples of scholarly publications, such as the Princeton University Press, Cambridge University Press, Harvard University Press, and the Oxford University Press, all referring to global citizenship by the term “cosmopolitan.”
“This term, descended by Stoic philosophy, is in common use in educated discourse to mean ‘citizen of the world.’ In common use, it has no anti-Jewish valence,” Hazony continued. “Sen. [Hawley] is, as you emphasize, an educated man. And so it’s not surprising that he used the term &#8216;cosmopolitan&#8217; exactly correctly in his well-received speech at the National Conservatism Conference.”
Daily Wire Editor-at-Large Josh Hammer, who is also Jewish, echoed Hazony and similarly came to Hawley&#8217;s defense. Hammer lamented the implication that Hawley is somehow anti-Semitic as &#8220;merely comical were it not so insidious.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The notion that <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HawleyMO</a> has a single anti-Semitic bone in his body would be merely comical were it not so insidious.
Hawley is a brilliant student of Western thought and chooses his words carefully — and precisely. Great thread by <a href="https://twitter.com/yhazony?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@yhazony</a> here. <a href="https://t.co/iZv5MlwbF6">https://t.co/iZv5MlwbF6</a>
— Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) <a href="https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1152229253423013889?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
“The liberal language police have lost their minds,” Hawley <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1152239573566709760">responded</a> today.
Since joining the Senate in January, Hawley has consistently taken a pro-Israel posture.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Voted AGAIN this afternoon to secure our ally Israel. Dems AGAIN blocked it as they continue their shutdown. Anti-Israel and anti-Semite groups celebrating. Dems: are you proud of this?
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1083478430652485632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 10, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">.<a href="https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AbigailShrier</a> nails the Democrats’ shocking turn to anti-semitism: “Actively working to isolate Israel and accusing pro-Israel Jews of bribing Congress isn’t ‘insensitive.’ It’s something far darker and more malevolent.” It’s hate pure &amp; simple. <a href="https://t.co/O3B4BndSxE">https://t.co/O3B4BndSxE</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/WSJ?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@WSJ</a>
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1095870712114499584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 14, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>

WATCH: Josh Hawley Defends America’s Heartland Against The Global Elite, Met With Bizarre Accusations Of Anti-Semitism

Globalism

Menu