Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) warned in a Senate speech on Monday about the alarming increase in people disregarding the rule of law across the country and announced that he has requested that Attorney General William Barr bring criminal charges against violent mobs that are destroying property.
&#8220;In recent weeks, violent mobs have roamed our streets, defacing and tearing down statues and monuments, in most cases with neither resistance from the police nor legal consequences,&#8221; Cotton said. &#8220;On Friday, a mob tore down another statue just a few blocks from here. The police stood idly by and watched as rioters toppled it and set it on fire. One can only assume they were ordered not to intervene by Washington’s left-wing mayor.&#8221;
Cotton repeatedly cited throughout his speech warnings from President Abraham Lincoln about the danger of mobs, specifically that the “lawless in spirit” will become “lawless in practice” because of mob violence, seeing no consequences for crimes.
&#8220;The mob doesn’t stop at statues. Rioters have already torched police precincts and low-income housing in Minneapolis. Churches and synagogues have been vandalized,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;Next, perhaps, the mob will target the homes of police officers. And soon enough, the mob may come for you, and your home, and your family.&#8221;
In a <a href="https://www.cotton.senate.gov/?p=press_release&amp;id=1386">letter</a> to Barr, Cotton mocked the rioters, writing that &#8220;they aren&#8217;t exactly criminal masterminds, typically filming their crimes and posting the videos on social media.&#8221;
&#8220;Federal laws such as the Anti-Riot Act and the Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act should cover some crimes. Other federal laws may also apply,&#8221; Cotton added. &#8220;I commend your efforts against rioting and looting earlier this month. Regrettably, there&#8217;s more work yet to quell the mob. The country is fortunate to have an Attorney General up to the task.&#8221;
WATCH:
<iframe title="June 22, 2020: The Danger of Mob Rule" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kmbnzd9pOaE?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<a href="https://www.cotton.senate.gov/?p=blog&amp;id=1385">TRANSCRIPT</a>:
<blockquote>I hope I am over wary; but if I am not, there is, even now, something of ill omen, amongst us. I mean the increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober judgment of courts; and the worse than savage mobs, for the executive ministers of justice. This disposition is awfully fearful in any community; and that it now exists in ours, though grating to our feelings to admit, it would be a violation of truth, and an insult to our intelligence, to deny. Accounts of outrages committed by mobs, form the everyday news of the times.”
Now those aren’t my words. Those are the words of a young Abraham Lincoln. But sadly, they ring with truth today. In recent weeks, violent mobs have roamed our streets, defacing and tearing down statues and monuments, in most cases with neither resistance from the police nor legal consequences.
On Friday, a mob tore down another statue just a few blocks from here. The police stood idly by and watched as rioters toppled it and set it on fire. One can only assume they were ordered not to intervene by Washington’s left-wing mayor. But here’s the thing: steps were already underway to move that statue lawfully; Washington’s delegate in Congress had legislation to that effect. But mobs don’t care to negotiate, only to destroy.
The delegate said, “I have no doubt I could have gotten that bill through, but the people got here before due process.” It’s hard to imagine a more chilling summation of mob rule.
As Lincoln knew, the mob threatens not just old statues, but the lives and livelihoods of us all. Indeed, the mob threatens civilization itself in many ways.
Most simply, Lincoln knew that mobs inevitably make mistakes and commit injustices. Some may celebrate the destruction of disfavored statues and monuments.
But what of the vandals in Boston who defaced a monument to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment—the first African-American regiment to fight for the Union? Whose bravery and skill were immortalized in the movie Glory. And what of the outlaws in Philadelphia who defaced a statue of Matthias Baldwin, a devout, passionate abolitionist? Mobs don’t discriminate between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” targets of their destruction. That’s because they are mobs.
Lincoln also warned that the “lawless in spirit” will become “lawless in practice” because of mob violence, seeing no consequences for crimes.
The mob doesn’t stop at statues. Rioters have already torched police precincts and low-income housing in Minneapolis. Churches and synagogues have been vandalized. Next, perhaps, the mob will target the homes of police officers. And soon enough, the mob may come for you, and your home, and your family.
And as the mob expands its power, Lincoln cautioned that good citizens, “seeing their property destroyed; their families insulted, and their lives endangered; their persons injured; and seeing nothing in prospect that forebodes a change for the better; become tired of, and disgusted with, a Government that offers them no protection.” Mob rule can only serve to demoralize our people and shake their faith in our government and our way of life. As the mob rises, civilization recedes.
Finally, Lincoln observed that “by operation of this mobocractic spirit, which all must admit, is now abroad in the land, the strongest bulwark of any Government, and particularly of those constituted like ours, may effectually be broken down and destroyed—I mean the attachment of the People.” The final victim of mob rule is the very spirit of civic-minded patriotism that’s necessary to preserve our republic.
And for all these reasons, Lincoln said, “There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.” We cannot tolerate mob rule and we cannot allow it to go unpunished.
While local authorities would usually take the lead in prosecuting these crimes, unfortunately many of them seem unwilling to stand up to the mob and uphold the rule of the law. Therefore, I call upon the Department of Justice to bring charges against these mob vigilantes, prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law.
The Anti-Riot Act and the Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act can provide legal grounds in some cases. Still other federal statutes may govern in other cases. But there must be consequences for mob violence. Because if you give the mob an inch, it’ll take a mile.
Witness the events of just this past weekend, where mobs tore down statues of George Washington and Ulysses S. Grant. When you tear down statues of Washington and Grant, it’s not about the Civil War—it’s because you hate America.
And indeed, these rioters hate America. In Portland, where they tore down the statue of Washington, they also spray-painted on him the date “1619”—a reference to the New York Times’s revisionist anti-American history project. Perhaps we should call them the “1619 Riots.” After all, the architect of that execrable project said, “it would be an honor.”
This hatred for America was nowhere on greater display than San Francisco, where the mob tore down the statue of Grant. That would be U.S. Grant, commander of the Union Army whose very initials embodied his tenacious, unrelenting approach to war: “unconditional surrender.”
That would also be President Grant, the political heir of Abraham Lincoln, a statesman who smashed the first Ku Klux Klan, signed the first major civil-rights legislation, and presided over passage of the Fifteenth Amendment. In one famous instance, President Grant sent in the troops to disperse a white mob in New Orleans that was terrorizing the city’s black and Republican residents, and had deposed the state’s lawful governor.
Grant had zero tolerance for mob rule. He said “neither Ku Klux Klans, White Leagues, nor any other association using arms and violence to execute their unlawful purposes can be permitted in that way to govern any part of this country.”
This was a man whom the great Frederick Douglass eulogized as “too broad for prejudice, too humane to despise the humblest, too great to be small at any point.” Yet the mob still came for Grant.
Some people have been asking, where is the line? I say, this is the line—the line between mob rule and the rule of law. And since I began by quoting Lincoln, I’ll conclude by borrowing from Grant, who wrote during the Battle of Spotsylvania: “I propose to fight it out on this line if it takes all summer.”
And I’ll fight it out on this line if it takes a lot longer than that.</blockquote>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

US-POLITICS-CONGRESS-INTELLIGENCE

Tom Cotton Cites Abraham Lincoln In Senate Floor Speech On Danger Of Mob Rule

Abraham Lincoln

Tom Cotton

Justice Roberts has reaped a whirlwind of criticism this week after siding with the Supreme Court&#8217;s liberal wing this week on two major decisions: the rescinding of DACA and workplace protections for LGBT individuals on the basis of sex under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) has gone as far to call on Justice Roberts to resign for showing himself to be a political actor rather than an impartial jurist.
&#8220;It cannot be the law that what Barack Obama has unlawfully done, no president may undo,” Cotton said in a statement, as reported by <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/18/cotton-if-john-roberts-wants-to-write-laws-he-should-resign-and-run-for-office/">The Federalist</a>. &#8220;John Roberts again postures as a Solomon who will save our institutions from political controversy and accountability. If the Chief Justice believes his political judgment is so exquisite, I invite him to resign, travel to Iowa, and get elected. I suspect voters will find his strange views no more compelling than do the principled justices on the Court.&#8221;
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) was equally vocal in his criticism of the Supreme Court.
“Judging is not a game. It’s not supposed to be a game but sadly over recent years more and more, Chief Justice Roberts has been playing games with the court to achieve the policy outcomes he desires,” Cruz said.
In the 5-4 decision on Wednesday, Roberts wrote the majority opinion in which he said that President Trump could not rescind the Obama administration’s Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Act with an executive order, alleging that the president did not reverse the program in their preferred way.
“We do not decide whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies. ‘The wisdom’ of those decisions ‘is none of our concern,&#8217;” Roberts <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-supreme-court-rules-against-trump-admin-on-daca-roberts-strikes-casts-swing-vote">wrote in the opinion</a>. “We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action.”
The Roberts opinion further alleged that the Trump administration &#8220;failed to consider the conspicuous issues of whether to retain forbearance,” demanding that the Department of Homeland Security take up the issue if DACA were to come to an end.
“That dual failure raises doubts about whether the agency appreciated the scope of its discretion or exercised that discretion in a reasonable manner,” Roberts wrote. “The appropriate recourse is, therefore, to remand to DHS so that it may consider the problem anew.”
Trump, who took a beating in the Supreme Court this week, blasted the justices for their jurisprudence on Twitter while demanding we get new justices on the court.
“The recent Supreme Court decisions, not only on DACA, Sanctuary Cities, Census, and others, tell you only one thing, we need NEW JUSTICES of the Supreme Court. If the Radical Left Democrats assume power, your Second Amendment, Right to Life, Secure Borders, and &#8230; Religious Liberty, among many other things, are OVER and GONE!”  he tweeted.
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Senate Select Intelligence Committee

Tom Cotton Calls On Justice Roberts To Resign Following DACA Ruling

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

John Roberts

Supreme Court

During his Wednesday radio program, conservative host Rush Limbaugh said Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Tom Cotton (R-AR) were positioning themselves for presidential runs in 2024, specifically capturing President Donald Trump&#8217;s populist movement, leaving behind so-called &#8220;old&#8221; conservatism.
Limbaugh started the segment by noting that Sen. Hawley &#8220;proclaimed that this now is the end of the conservative judicial movement, that there isn’t one&#8221; on Monday, following the shocking <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-supreme-court-rules-lgbt-individuals-protected-from-job-discrimination-under-title-vii">Supreme Court</a> decision that Title VII can be interpreted to include discrimination based on sexual orientation, extending the protections of federal employment law to gay and transgender individuals.
&#8220;Meaning, if the best and the brightest conservative judges can side with the liberals on the Supreme Court on something nobody ever thought any sensible conservative would do, then what is the point of having a conservative judicial movement?&#8221; Limbaugh explained.
&#8220;It’s the Left that has a liberal judicial movement. It is the Left that finds judges that never waver, that never do anything but what they are to do: They are to rule in favor of liberalism in every case,&#8221; the host added. &#8220;They are to rule in favor of liberal people in every case, liberal policy. They are there to write law from the bench. That’s their mission; that’s what they do.&#8221;
&#8220;We do not,&#8221; Limbaugh said of conservatives, &#8220;and yet we’re the ones demonized!&#8221;
&#8220;Hawley also said what that proves is legislation doesn’t happen in the Senate anymore, and it doesn’t happen in the House,&#8221; the 69-year-old said, noting that Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) won a &#8220;twofer&#8221; via the Supreme Court decision: &#8220;They (Democrats) get transgenderism in the Civil Rights Act plus they get conservative judges betraying the conservative movement,&#8221; he said. &#8220;That’s a win-win for her or any of the other Democrats out there that look at matters this way, count wins and losses this way.&#8221;
Limbaugh argued that Hawley is setting himself up a presidential run in 2024, adding Cotton to the mix, as well.
Assuming that Trump takes the 2020 election, the host said, &#8220;I think you’ve got two Republicans right now &#8230; Josh Hawley is making a move on it, and so is Tom Cotton, and they are positioning themselves as heirs of the Trump movement, heirs of a populist movement.&#8221;
&#8220;They are not selling some return to conservative, small government — you know, whatever the old conservative arguments were: Smaller, less spending, smaller government,&#8221; he argued.
&#8220;They’re setting themselves up to inherit the Trump agenda, which is populism, Make America Great Again,&#8221; added Limbaugh. &#8220;That’s okay. I mean, I’m fine with that. I think it’s cool for them to already be thinking about this. I like both of their reactions to what is going on.&#8221;
Partial transcript via <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/06/17/hawley-and-cotton-stand-out-as-conservative-heirs-to-trump/">RushLimbaugh.com</a> 
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh: Two GOP Senators Positioning To Pick Up Trump’s Populist Movement in 2024, Leave Old Conservatism Behind

Josh Hawley

On Sunday, Fox News’ Howard Kurtz and Chris Wallace engaged in a discussion about journalistic integrity.
“Is journalism becoming more intolerant?” Kurtz asked. “I mean, ten or twenty years ago, would we have seen the publisher of The New York Times completely flipping and criticizing a conservative op-ed that he had defended because a bunch of newsroom staffers didn&#8217;t like it?”
Wallace replied:
<blockquote>It feels like the inmates are running the asylum. You know, I&#8217;ve been critical sometimes of the Times, and I think that their liberal tendency tends to bleed out onto their news coverage – some people have accused Fox of the same thing in terms of our tendencies – but I thought that what happened in the last week at the Times was just extraordinary.</blockquote>
Wallace then explained that Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) had written an op-ed in which he advocated using the military to end the riots that erupted following the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
After the op-ed was published in The New York Times, the paper received major backlash from their own staffers, and publisher A.G. Sulzberger defended it before backing down. The editor for the NYT editorial page, James Bennet, later reportedly apologized and resigned.
“It was a profile in a lack of courage,” Wallace stated.
Kurtz continued, asking Wallace: “Given the long history of racism and police brutality in this country, crystallized by the killing of George Floyd, does it now seem to you that there are many people in newsrooms – this goes far beyond The New York Times – who just don&#8217;t believe that dissenting views, let&#8217;s say sending in the military to control riots, should be aired at all, that it&#8217;s just too offensive to them?”
Wallace replied in the affirmative, noting that while there aren’t “two sides to every issue,” it isn’t “over the line to even discuss the issue of how you put down violent protests,” which is what Cotton advocated in his op-ed.
“I&#8217;m not sure I agree with him about it, and it certainly would have been an extraordinary step, but it doesn&#8217;t seem to me that it&#8217;s so far over the line that there aren&#8217;t two sides to that argument,” Wallace said, later adding, “but to suggest that it was improper for that – and this is a U.S. Senator – to suggest it was improper for him to even express that opinion, boy, that&#8217;s not good.”
“It’s called debate; it&#8217;s called free expression,” Kurtz stated.
The host went on to explain that he believes the “new woke standard” began “in part” when President Trump was a candidate, and that there were journalists that discarded the rules of journalism because they “deemed Donald Trump to be such a threat to the country.”
Kurtz noted that he believes this is still going on.
“Now they want to see him defeated in November,” the host said. “Do you agree with me, and do you think that&#8217;s a slippery slope?”
Wallace agreed, but he added that this standard appears to have begun before Trump. The Fox News anchor claimed that people will compliment him on his “fairness,” which he said he finds “fairly depressing” as fairness is the most basic standard of journalism.
“Today, I think that it&#8217;s gotten so polarized, whether it&#8217;s on cable news, whether it&#8217;s in newspapers, that fairness is kind of unusual, and that is a terribly sad reflection on our business,” Wallace suggested.
Kurtz pivoted, asking Wallace about his criticisms of Trump referring to the press as “the enemy of the people,” but also the Fox News anchor’s indictments of the media.
Wallace replied in part:
<blockquote>You see some reporters now who have become advocates. I see it in the press briefings now. You know, I was pretty tough in the press briefings with Ronald Reagan and his press secretaries in the 80s, but we were basically trying to get information. Some of the press briefings now &#8230; it&#8217;s more playing gotcha or more just trying to get in arguments and advance their point of view. That’s not what we&#8217;re supposed to be doing, and that&#8217;s what I see too often among my colleagues in the media&#8230;</blockquote>
Kurtz then brought up the idea that younger journalists might see objectivity as an outmoded method of reporting, and Wallace rebutted that by saying that the “truth” is what matters. He cited the coverage of the civil rights movement and the “the brutality of southern sheriffs” as evidence of the importance of journalists simply “shining a light on reality.”
“When reporters start taking sides, I think that&#8217;s very dangerous,” Wallace concluded.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/05iedopz8bg" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Chris Wallace

Wallace BLASTS New York Times Over Cotton Op-Ed Scuffle: ‘A Profile In A Lack Of Courage’

Media Bias

New York Times

On Wednesday, Senator Tom Cotton got the last laugh on The New York Times, which had precipitated a brouhaha last week when its staff revolted because a Cotton op-ed had been published in the paper, causing the editorial page editor to resign and the paper officially stating it &#8220;should not have been published.&#8221;
Cotton&#8217;s affiliated political action committee, using funds that were raised   from those who supported Cotton after the Times attacked him, ran an ad attacking former Vice President and current prospective Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden — on the Times&#8217; website.
A top advisor to Cotton paid mock homage to the Times, telling <a href="https://freebeacon.com/media/tom-cotton-places-anti-biden-ads-in-new-york-times/">The Washington Free Beacon</a>, &#8220;While we were concerned that the woke mob would stifle debate, it&#8217;s admirable that The New York Times will run these ads from Senator Cotton&#8217;s PAC.” The Beacon added, “Cotton&#8217;s team said the drama caused a substantial boost to his fundraising that helped him purchase the ads placed in the Times … Cotton&#8217;s campaign said he has raised nearly $200,000 since his op-ed was published.”
In an editor&#8217;s note that was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-new-york-times-releases-new-statement-on-senator-tom-cottons-op-ed">featured</a> at the top of Cotton&#8217;s op-ed last week, The Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html">wrote</a>:
<blockquote>After publication, this essay met strong criticism from many readers (and many Times colleagues), prompting editors to review the piece and the editing process. Based on that review, we have concluded that the essay fell short of our standards and should not have been published.
The basic arguments advanced by Senator Cotton — however objectionable people may find them — represent a newsworthy part of the current debate. But given the life-and-death importance of the topic, the senator’s influential position and the gravity of the steps he advocates, the essay should have undergone the highest level of scrutiny. Instead, the editing process was rushed and flawed, and senior editors were not sufficiently involved.
While Senator Cotton and his staff cooperated fully in our editing process, the Op-Ed should have been subject to further substantial revisions — as is frequently the case with such essays — or rejected &#8230; Beyond those factual questions, the tone of the essay in places is needlessly harsh and falls short of the thoughtful approach that advances useful debate.</blockquote>
On Wednesday, Cotton tweaked the nose of the Times by noting it had no problem with an earlier op-ed he had written:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Happy that today <a href="https://twitter.com/StateDept?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@StateDept</a> is reopening its consulate in Nuuk, Greenland. PHASE ONE COMPLETE.
Thanks to <a href="https://twitter.com/nytopinion?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytopinion</a> for publishing my op-ed on this important issue!<a href="https://t.co/TzR1Jqz2dH">https://t.co/TzR1Jqz2dH</a>
&mdash; Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton/status/1270731367995899907?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 10, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Biden ad on the Times&#8217; website featured a voiceover stating, “China’s lies spread the China virus across the world, putting the health and jobs of the American people at risk. We need strong, decisive leadership to get through this crisis. Joe Biden fails the test. Biden doesn’t know what day it is. He doesn’t even know what office he’s running for.”
After showing clips of Biden unsure of which day it was and saying he was running for the U.S. Senate, the video continues, “So clueless. Biden called the China travel ban &#8216;xenophobic&#8217; and he wants to exploit this crisis to pass the ‘Green New Deal,’ putting more  American jobs at risk.”
Biden is shown saying, “We’re going to have an opportunity, I believe, in the next round here, to use my green economy, my green deal …”
The video concludes, “Joe Biden. Weak on China. Too confused to lead.”
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nzrYFLFhUG8" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Senate Impeachment Trial Of President Donald Trump Begins

New York Times Tore Apart Cotton’s Op-Ed. Now Cotton Gets The Last Laugh.

Despite the fact the he hasn’t voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 2004, retired General Colin Powell, who served as Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, made headlines in the mainstream media when he stated on <a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2006/07/sotu.01.html">CNN’s “State of the Union”</a> Sunday that he would vote for former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, in November.
Arkansas GOP Senator Tom Cotton quickly fired back, stating, “I respect Colin Powell’s service and he’s entitled to his opinion, like every other American. But he hasn’t voted Republican for sixteen years. Apparently John McCain and Mitt Romney were ‘too extreme’ for Secretary Powell.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I respect Colin Powell’s service and he’s entitled to his opinion, like every other American. But he hasn’t voted Republican for sixteen years. Apparently John McCain and Mitt Romney were “too extreme” for Secretary Powell. <a href="https://t.co/hf2Q14pwqN">https://t.co/hf2Q14pwqN</a>
&mdash; Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1269648154728828931?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ironically, as Cotton has been pilloried for suggesting in a New York Times op-ed that President Trump use military force as a backup if police are overwhelmed to stop rioters, not peaceful protesters, there was this exchange between Powell and Tapper:
<blockquote>Tapper: During the Rodney King riots in 1992, you counseled then President George H.W. Bush on a speech he was about to give. You wrote about this very movingly in your book.
You wrote — quote — &#8220;I read it with dismay.&#8221; This is the first copy of the speech. &#8220;I thought the tone was all wrong. Yes, the rioting was criminal, and law and order had to be restored, but the violence had not incubated in isolation. It had deep social roots. The speech, as it stood, recognized only the former and ignored the latter.&#8221;
&#8220;Do the law and order bit,&#8221; you said, &#8220;but there is language here that is only going to fan the flames. Turn down the heat, I suggested. Get some reconciliation into the president&#8217;s message.&#8221; And President George H.W. Bush did take your advice back in 1992. He talked about how he was disappointed that the cops who beat Rodney King had been acquitted, and on and on.
President Trump has been emphasizing law and order. Do you think that he is talking enough about reconciliation and empathy and what the people in the streets are calling for in his message in any way?
Powell: No, he&#8217;s not in any way that I recognize. He always is shooting toward his base. I remember the Bush conversation very, very vividly, because, at the same time, we had to bring law and order back into the streets. And we worked with the state of California, where it happened in Los Angeles, the riots.
And the president called me and said: &#8220;We may have to do something.&#8221;
I said: &#8220;Mr. President, go to the governor. The governor has the National Guard. And if the National Guard can&#8217;t do it, then you come back to me with a decision, and we will send in federal troops.&#8221;</blockquote>
During the Tapper interview, Powell ripped Trump, saying: &#8220;And the one word I have to use with respect to what he&#8217;s been doing for the last several years is a word I would never have used before, I never would have used with any of the four presidents I have worked for: He lies. He lies about things. And he gets away with it, because people will not hold him accountable.&#8221;
“Why is it so important to you that President Trump not be reelected?” Tapper asked.
Powell responded, “Because I think he has been not an effective president. He lies all the time. He began lying the day of inauguration, when we got into an argument about the size of the crowd that was there. People are writing books about his favorite thing of lying. And I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s in our interest. I didn&#8217;t vote for him in 2006 (sic). The situation for 2020, in my mind, in my life, has gotten worse.”
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

US President Barack Obama speaks with fo

Colin Powell: I’m Voting For Biden. Tom Cotton: Big Deal. You Haven’t Voted GOP In 16 Years.

Colin Powell

Donald Trump

George Floyd

Race

Sen Tom Cotton (R-AR) called out the different standards that were set during the coronavirus pandemic versus the standards that the media and some state and local-level officials have accepted during the protests that have morphed into riots across the nation over the past couple of weeks.
&#8220;Just a couple of weeks ago, we had mayors and governors upset by the lockdown, upset by the shutdown,&#8221; Fox News host Maria Bartiromo said on Sunday. &#8220;And now we have got all of these people on the ground protesting, many of whom are peaceful. But is there a worry that they&#8217;re going to get COVID, being so close to each other?&#8221;
&#8220;Well, I hope that&#8217;s not the case,&#8221; Cotton responded. &#8220;We won&#8217;t know for a week or two, given the incubation period of the virus.&#8221;
&#8220;But I think we can say that the lockdowns and the most extreme form are going to have to be finished, whether de facto or not,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;You just can&#8217;t expect people to continue to voluntarily comply with what some of these mayors and governors are saying.&#8221;
&#8220;It cannot be the case that thousands of Americans can exercise their First Amendment rights on the street, while dozens of Americans cannot exercise their First Amendment rights in churches,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;It cannot be the case that you can be arrested for opening a business, but not for looting one.&#8221;
WATCH:
<iframe title="Sen. Cotton: My op-ed far exceeded The New York Times’ standard" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Cmxp6aBwQu8?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>MARIA BARTIROMO, SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES ANCHOR: Controversy over Senator Tom Cotton&#8217;s New York Times op-ed this past week, which was on violence in protests across the country.
His piece Wednesday titled &#8220;Send in the Troops&#8221; called for an overwhelming show of force and sparked an online revolt at The New York Times.
The Times issued a statement after it published it, saying this: &#8220;We have examined the piece and the process leading up to the Republican &#8212; the publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an op-ed that did not meet our standards.&#8221;
Here to react right now is the senator himself, Senator Tom Cotton of the Armed Services, Intelligence and Banking, and Economic committees.
Good to see you, sir. Thank you so much for joining me, Senator.
What happened with The Times&#8217; op-ed? Was it rushed?
(LAUGHTER)
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Hardly, Maria.
I will say, my op-ed didn&#8217;t meet the Times&#8217; standards. It far exceeded their standards, which is usually sophomoric, left-wing drivel.
But here&#8217;s what happened behind the scenes. Last weekend, we saw rioting, rooting, really anarchy and insurrection on our streets. In Washington, D.C., seven days ago, a famous church was torched, memorials were desecrated, stores were looted.
And I said simply last Monday that, if the local police are overwhelmed by the numbers of these insurrectionists, if they need support from the National Guard, or, if necessary, as a last resort, federal troops, under the Insurrection Act, then that&#8217;s exactly what has to happen.
Now, fortunately, that&#8217;s what happened in most places over the course of the last week. So, what we saw yesterday was people exercising their First Amendment rights to demonstrate and to protest.
But, in the meantime, we published that exact argument in The New York Times. The New York Times editorial page editor and owner defended it in public statements. But then they totally surrendered to a woke child mob from their own newsroom that apparently gets triggered if they&#8217;re presented with any opinion contrary to their own, as opposed to telling&#8230;
BARTIROMO: Yes. It&#8217;s&#8230;
COTTON: &#8230; the woke children in their newsroom, this is the workplace, not a social justice seminar on campus.
BARTIROMO: Well, it&#8217;s unbelievable, because I know that it went back and forth three or four times in terms of edits and reedits. So, obviously, they have had a process with which to go.
I like what Howie Kurtz said. Howie Kurtz said, look, this is such a window into how biased The New York Times is, when &#8212; they have just totally exposed themselves. The opinion page is just that, an opinion page.
COTTON: Yes, that&#8217;s exactly right, Maria.
We have published op-eds in The New York Times before. It was the exact same process. And, again, the senior leaders of The New York Times publicly defended the decision to publish the op-ed after this woke mob began to rise up.
It was only after another day of infighting that they finally backpedaled. They still haven&#8217;t identified any facts that are wrong in the op-ed. They haven&#8217;t identified what was so rushed about this process.
They have only prostrated themselves in front of their young children who are acting like children&#8230;
BARTIROMO: Yes.
COTTON: &#8230; who are acting like kids in a social justice seminar, as exposed &#8212; as opposed to acting like grownups in the workplace.
BARTIROMO: Well, I want to get on to China.
But, first, let me get a word on the situation taking place right now. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had mayors and governors upset by the lockdown, upset by the shutdown. And now we have got all of these people on the ground protesting, many of whom are peaceful
But is there a worry that they&#8217;re going to get COVID, being so close to each other?
COTTON: Well, I hope that&#8217;s not the case. We won&#8217;t know for a week or two, given the incubation period of the virus.
But I think we can say that the lockdowns and the most extreme form are going to have to be finished, whether de facto or not. You just can&#8217;t expect people to continue to voluntarily comply with what some of these mayors and governors are saying.
It cannot be the case that thousands of Americans can exercise their First Amendment rights on the street, while dozens of Americans cannot exercise their First Amendment rights in churches. It cannot be the case that you can be arrested for opening a business, but not for looting one.
BARTIROMO: Unbelievable.
Real quick, before we go onto China, I wanted to mention that the number of people who have written op-eds for The New York Times, we have got one from the Taliban. I don&#8217;t think there was any controversy around this, the headline here, &#8220;What We, the Taliban, Want.&#8221;
That was an op-ed in The Times. There was also one from Putin. There was one years back from Hitler.
(LAUGHTER)
COTTON: Yes, I don&#8217;t remember all the woke staffers at The New York Times rising up in arms whenever they published the Taliban op-ed just a few months ago.
It just goes to show you the moral rot inside some of our media and academic institutions, that they don&#8217;t get outraged about the Taliban, but they do get outraged about conservative opinion.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
All right, let me move onto China, because we had more information and new information this week. China is now &#8212; forces, Communist Party forces, are on the border facing off against forces in India.
Did they invade India? They have militarized the South China Sea. And, of course, they are overreaching on Hong Kong.
Your reaction to the new developments coming out of the CCP this past week in terms of their military?
COTTON: Sure, Maria.
There&#8217;s been many aggressive steps out of the Chinese Communist Party over the last few weeks. They have been attacking fishing boats from other nations in the South China Sea. We all saw that they passed a law that cracked down on Hong Kong, in violation of their basic international commitments.
And, yes, in effect, they did invade Indian territory. Now, the border between China and India has always been murky in many places. But Chinese forces, no doubt, have taken territory that otherwise is claimed by India, significantly heightening tensions there.
Now, I commend the president for taking bold action, for example, about Hong Kong, withdrawing Hong Kong&#8217;s favored trade status, and refusing to allow Chinese students who are affiliated with the People&#8217;s Liberation Army to continue studying in our most advanced laboratories.
There&#8217;s a lot more, though, that we can continue to do to China&#8217;s ambitions and to prevent further Chinese aggression.
BARTIROMO: There is also news on Huawei, a real pushback.
You know, a week ago, we saw the English-speaking allies get together and write a memo, a press release, denouncing what China has done to Hong Kong. That includes Canada, U.K., Australia.
I&#8217;m wondering where Europe is. The European nations, like Germany, France, Italy, are they still using Huawei Telecom? And tell us what happened this past week in terms of Huawei and how it&#8217;s spying on people across the world that have infrastructure in place that&#8217;s Huawei.
COTTON: Yes.
So, one very big step the Trump administration has taken is to say that American can&#8217;t &#8212; technology can&#8217;t be used in foreign-manufactured semiconductor chips that then are bound for mainland China. This closed the loophole from a Trump administration decision last year to prevent American-made chips from going to China.
And that decision alone to cut off American technology to foreign semiconductor manufacturers could reverse a lot of the Huawei decisions you have seen in our allies. Germany has said they may no longer be able to use Huawei technology. I know the United Kingdom is reconsidering it as well. That&#8217;s a very good thing.
BARTIROMO: And I know that you have got legislation right now proposing $43 billion to beef up the U.S. military in the Pacific, partly for this reason.
Senator, I would love to hear more about that when you come back.
Great to have you this morning, sir. Thank you, sir.
COTTON: Thanks, Maria.
BARTIROMO: We will see you soon, Senator Tom Cotton.</blockquote>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Sen. Tom Cotton

Sen. Cotton Calls Out Different Social Distancing Standards During Pandemic Versus Riots

Coronavirus

Maria Bartiromo

On Sunday, The New York Times announced that their editorial page editor has resigned after blowback erupted because the paper published an op-ed by Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton arguing that the government should &#8220;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">send in the troops</a>&#8221; as a last resort in response to the wave of riots and looting that swept the country.
The Times had already issued a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/business/new-york-times-op-ed-cotton.html?auth=login-email&amp;login=email">statement on Thursday</a> saying that they should have never published Cotton’s op-ed. &#8220;We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication,&#8221; a spokesperson said. &#8220;This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards. As a result, we’re planning to examine both short-term and long-term changes, to include expanding our fact-checking operation and reducing the number of Op-Eds we publish.&#8221;
The resignation of the editorial page editor triggered Texas GOP senator Ted Cruz to issue a scathing obituary for the paper, writing:
<blockquote>The NYT literally fired their editorial page editor because he dared publish an op-ed that Leftists disagreed with. 
The totalitarian Left will brook no dissent. To hell with Free Speech—we are Pravda. 
New York Times: founded as an actual newspaper 9/18/1851. 
Died: 6/7/2020.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The NYT literally fired their editorial page editor because he dared publish an op-ed that Leftists disagreed with. 
The totalitarian Left will brook no dissent. To hell with Free Speech—we are Pravda. 
New York Times: founded as an actual newspaper 9/18/1851.
Died: 6/7/2020. <a href="https://t.co/YIzBihdhtO">https://t.co/YIzBihdhtO</a>
&mdash; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1269857708863299584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 8, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The publisher for the Times, A.G. Sulzberger, wrote a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/06/07/james-bennet-resigns-editorial-page-editor-new-york-times/">memo</a> to the the paper’s staff arguing that the Times’ &#8220;essential role&#8221; requires &#8220;fearless engagement with ideas from across the political spectrum, particularly those we disagree with.&#8221;
Sulzberger also stated, “There are also fundamental questions to address about the changing role of opinion journalism in a digital world, and we will begin work to reinvent the op-ed format so that readers understand why we choose to elevate each argument and where it fits in the national debate. None of these changes mark a retreat from The Times’s responsibility to help people understand a range of voices across the breadth of public debate. That role is as important as it’s ever been.&#8221;
&#8220;We believe deeply in principles of fairness, equality and human rights,&#8221; he concluded. &#8220;Those values animate both our news report and our opinion report. Thank you for your dedication to helping us to live up to our highest ideals.&#8221;
After the Times issued the statement on Thursday saying Cotton’s op-ed should never have been published, Cotton <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senator-tom-cotton-rips-the-new-york-times-to-pieces-for-caving-to-leftists-over-op-ed-that-featured-opinion-shared-by-majority-of-americans">fired back</a>:
<blockquote>I can tell you my op-ed doesn&#8217;t meet The New York Times&#8217; standards, it far exceeds their standards, which are normally full of left-wing sophomoric dribble. And I find it amazing that in the last 24 hours, the editor of “The New York Times” and the publisher of “The New York Times” have both defended the decision to publish the op-ed, but in the face of the woke mob of woke kids that are in their news room, they tucked tail and they ran, they confessed and said they were gonna go into reeducation camp and they were gonna cut the number of op-eds they run, and for that I will say to the world, you’re welcome for getting “The New York Times” to run less of the garbage that you normally see in their pages.</blockquote>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.  
’

Former Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein Testifies Before Senate Judiciary Committee

NYT Editorial Page Editor Resigns After Blowback For Cotton Op-Ed. Ted Cruz Publishes Scathing Obituary For The Paper.

Ted Cruz

The New York Times released a new statement in the form of an editor&#8217;s note in response to an op-ed written by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) that was published in the newspaper this week. The op-ed argued that the military should be deployed to stop the violent riots and looting that is ravaging inner cities across America.
The editor&#8217;s note came after leftist activists at The New York Times and throughout the media—along with <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ocasio-cortez-explodes-over-tom-cotton-op-ed-that-featured-ideas-supported-by-majority-of-americans">far-left lawmakers like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY)</a>—exploded in anger over Cotton&#8217;s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html">op-ed</a>, claiming without evidence that it put black lives at risk. Cotton made no reference to any racial demographic and instead argued that impoverished communities were the ones most likely to suffer from the lawlessness.
The New York Times initially defended its decision to publish the op-ed, but later caved after getting pounded by the online outrage mob.
In an editor&#8217;s note that was featured at the top of Cotton&#8217;s op-ed, The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html">wrote</a>:
<blockquote>After publication, this essay met strong criticism from many readers (and many Times colleagues), prompting editors to review the piece and the editing process. Based on that review, we have concluded that the essay fell short of our standards and should not have been published.
The basic arguments advanced by Senator Cotton — however objectionable people may find them — represent a newsworthy part of the current debate. But given the life-and-death importance of the topic, the senator’s influential position and the gravity of the steps he advocates, the essay should have undergone the highest level of scrutiny. Instead, the editing process was rushed and flawed, and senior editors were not sufficiently involved. While Senator Cotton and his staff cooperated fully in our editing process, the Op-Ed should have been subject to further substantial revisions — as is frequently the case with such essays — or rejected.
For example, the published piece presents as facts assertions about the role of “cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa”; in fact, those allegations have not been substantiated and have been widely questioned. Editors should have sought further corroboration of those assertions, or removed them from the piece. The assertion that police officers “bore the brunt” of the violence is an overstatement that should have been challenged. The essay also includes a reference to a “constitutional duty” that was intended as a paraphrase; it should not have been rendered as a quotation.
Beyond those factual questions, the tone of the essay in places is needlessly harsh and falls short of the thoughtful approach that advances useful debate. Editors should have offered suggestions to address those problems. The headline — which was written by The Times, not Senator Cotton — was incendiary and should not have been used.
Finally, we failed to offer appropriate additional context — either in the text or the presentation — that could have helped readers place Senator Cotton’s views within a larger framework of debate.</blockquote>
The one legitimate criticism that The New York Times had was that the standard editorial process was <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/06/05/new-york-times-staff-still-red-hot-over-tom-cotton-op-ed/">not followed</a> as the top opinion editor reportedly did not read it.
Aside from that, The New York Times&#8217; editor&#8217;s note is weak as it fails to even note that <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/06/02/58-of-voters-support-using-military-to-help-police-control-protests-poll-finds/#57c74fd22417">58% of Americans</a> support deploying the military to stop the riots and <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/americans-agree-policing-reform">71% of Americans</a> support deploying the National Guard to stop the riots.
This portion of The New York Times&#8217; editor&#8217;s note is incorrect:
<blockquote>For example, the published piece presents as facts assertions about the role of “cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa”; in fact, those allegations have not been substantiated and have been widely questioned.</blockquote>
<a href="https://twitter.com/DHS_Wolf/status/1267562571399344128">Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf</a>, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/attorney-general-william-barr-we-have-evidence-that-antifa-has-been-involved-in-instigating-violence-during-riots?itm_source=parsely-api?utm_source=cnemail&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_content=060520-news&amp;utm_campaign=position6">Attorney General William Barr</a>, and <a href="https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/william-barr-chris-wray-doj-press-conference-transcript-on-george-floyd-death">FBI Director Christopher Wray</a> have all stated that Antifa is involved in the rioting.
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

The New York Times Releases New Statement On Senator Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) blasted The New York Times on Thursday evening after the Times caved to leftists online and within their news organization and issued a statement saying that they should have never published Cotton’s op-ed, despite the fact that the idea presented in the piece is supported by the majority of the American public.
&#8220;I can tell you my op-ed doesn&#8217;t meet The New York  Times&#8217; standards, it far exceeds their standards, which are normally full of left-wing sophomoric dribble,&#8221; Cotton said. &#8220;And I find it amazing that in the last 24 hours, the editor of &#8216;The New York Times&#8217; and the publisher of &#8216;The New York Times&#8217; have both defended the decision to publish the op-ed, but in the face of the woke mob of woke kids that are in their news room, they tucked tail and they ran, they confessed and said they were gonna go into reeducation camp and they were gonna cut the number of op-eds they run, and for that I will say to the world, you’re welcome for getting ‘The New York Times’ to run less of the garbage that you normally see in their pages.&#8221;
On the notion that deploying the military to restore order in Democrat-controlled cities was somehow not needed, Cotton said, &#8220;I bet a lot of business owners in midtown Manhattan who had their business smashed by people who brought crowbars and bricks to a peaceful protest would beg to differ that the New York Police Department, not because of their own faults, but because of their hapless mayor, couldn&#8217;t protect their property, their livelihoods, and in some cases, many were threatened or felt threatened for their lives as well.&#8221;
&#8220;But look, &#8216;The New York Times&#8217; has run editorials by Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, by the Taliban, no problem there, but run one editorial from Tom Cotton on a position that’s supported by 58% of the American people, that we have a duty to protect our citizen&#8217;s lives and livelihoods, well, we are going to review our processes and we’re gonna cut the number of op-eds that we run,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;A child mob truly is in charge at ‘The New York Times’ tonight.”
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
After NYT staffers scolded the paper for printing an editorial they disagree with, the paper caves (though first defended it). Sen. Tom Cotton calls out the &quot;woke mob&quot; in his first interview since the controversy. <a href="https://t.co/me8sch3ymT">pic.twitter.com/me8sch3ymT</a>
&mdash; (((Jason Rantz))) on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) <a href="https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1268695921061027840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 5, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>FOX NEWS HOST MARTHA MACCALLUM: Tonight at about 700 paratroopers from the 82nd airborne division are returning to Fort Bragg. They were position in the D.C. area as a possible response to riots there, an idea that President Trump has since seemed to back off on, and one that was pushed by Republican Senator Tom Cotton in a op-ed in “The New York Times” calling to send in the troops.
When he submitted this and they decided to run it, the staffers at that time, some of them, lashed out over printing this piece, saying that the use of active-duty troops endangers their lives, and the lives of all black people, according to some of the quotes in these pieces. The editorial page editor responded to that criticism, tweeting this: “Times’ opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter arguments, particularly those made by people in a position to set policy.” But then tonight, just a short time ago, a spokesperson for “The New York Times” is singing a totally different tune, saying, “We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made it clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an op-ed that did not meet our standards.” Okay.
So here to react tonight, Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas joins me now. Senator, regardless of the content and what anyone thinks about your content, I was heartened by the fact that “The New York Times” said this is a place where you want to exhibit different opinions. It is the opinion page. The op-ed page. What do you make of the newest sort of walk-back on that, saying, “Oh, you know what, it was rushed. We made a rushed decision. We never should have printed it”?
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): I don’t know what to make of it. I can tell you my op-ed doesn&#8217;t meet The New York Times&#8217; standards; it far exceeds their standards, which are normally full of left-wing sophomoric dribble. And I find it amazing that in the last 24 hours, the editor of “The New York Times” and the publisher of “The New York Times” have both defended their decision to publish this op-ed, but in the face of the woke mob, of woke kids that are in their news room, they tucked tail and they ran, they confessed and said they were gonna go into reeducation camp and they were gonna cut the number of op-eds they run, and for that I will say to the world, you’re welcome for getting “The New York Times” to run less of the garbage that you normally see in their pages.
MACCALLUM: Well, you know, I think they should, as all media outlets and newspapers should, strive to show different opinions on their pages. It is interesting that apparently Jack Dorsey of Twitter stopped following “The New York Times” as a sign of protest to your piece. Also Eliot Engel, who is obviously up for his election again as a congressman for New York, says that he’s decided that he will not seek the editorial backing of “The New York Times,” which is interesting because Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has just backed the opponent who’s running against him, so who knows whether he would’ve gotten it anyway. But to the content that you were writing about that provoked this controversy, here is the police commissioner in New York asking about the underlying subject that you wrote about. Watch this.
MACCALLUM: So, there is a lot of push-back to this idea that New York City, that it would provoke things, that it would make things worse and potentially more dangerous. What do you say to that?
COTTON: Yeah, well, I bet a lot of those business owners in midtown Manhattan who had their business smashed by people who brought crowbars and bricks to a peaceful protest would probably beg to differ that the New York Police Department, not because of their own faults, but because of their hapless mayor couldn&#8217;t protect their property, their livelihoods, in some cases many were threatened or felt threatened for their lives as well. But look, “The New York Times” has run editorials by Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, by the Taliban, no problem there, but run one editorial from Tom Cotton on a position that’s supported by 58% of the American people, that we have a duty to protect our citizen&#8217;s lives and livelihoods, well, we are going to review our processes and we’re gonna cut the number of op-eds that we run. A child mob truly is in charge at “The New York Times” tonight.
MACCALLUM: As you also point out, it’s an action that has been used by many presidents in the past to protect people in various situations, during the civil rights movement as well. To the notion, you are a veteran yourself, served in Iraq, and I wonder what you think about the National Guard because Governor Cuomo has kept 13,000 National Guard, he said &#8230; de Blasio didn’t want them, and that he would have to override them to send them in, but it seems to me that they are the people who are suited the best for this line of defense, no?
COTTON: That’s right, Martha. And as I’ve said all week long that local law enforcement are on the frontline of protecting their communities. But as we’ve seen in too many places, local law enforcement was either outnumbered or they had hapless Democratic politicians that were constraining them from protecting livelihoods and lives. The next step is the National Guard. In many places the National Guard has been called out and helped to quell the rioting and the looting that was hijacking peaceful protesters in places like Minneapolis or even in the nation’s capital. But as you said, there are many historic examples that could be used [where] you use federal troops. That’s simply a fact.
MACCALLUM: Well, you make a good point. I&#8217;m sure a lot of those store owners would have loved to have the protection of the National Guard and still have their stores intact as New York starts to reopen. Also, I would just note that Mayor de Blasio was booed today at the New York celebration of life for George Floyd, to the point where he really couldn’t speak at that. Senator cotton, thank you very much.</blockquote>

Senator Tom Cotton Shreds New York Times For Caving To ‘Woke Mob’ Over Op-Ed

On Thursday, after staffers at The New York Times had rebelled because the Times had published an opinion piece by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) in which he suggested using the U.S. military to quell the violence rampaging across the nation, the Times meekly offered an apology, adding it would publish less op-eds in the future.
The Times stated: “We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards. As a result, we’re planning to examine both short term and long term changes, to include expanding our fact checking operation and reducing the number of Op-Eds we publish.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The New York Times has just issued this statement about the op-Ed. <a href="https://twitter.com/JBennet?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JBennet</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/jimdao?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jimdao</a> you need to resign. <a href="https://t.co/lbMCL13Si5">pic.twitter.com/lbMCL13Si5</a>
&mdash; Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) <a href="https://twitter.com/yashar/status/1268669116790890496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Ironically, on Thursday, prior to the Times issuing an apology for Cotton’s piece, Howard Kurtz of “MediaBuzz” <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/howard-kutz-tom-cotton-ny-times-outrage">praised the Times</a> for running it, telling Guy Benson on Fox News Radio, &#8220;This is so revealing about the culture of the New York Times because the paper did the right thing. If you read the editorial page and the op-ed page &#8230; it’s overwhelmingly anti-Trump … The idea of an op-ed page is to foster some kind of debate.&#8221;
Kurtz added, “I understand the sensitivity for black journalists who work at the Times. I don’t want to muzzle them either, but the idea that there&#8217;s some kind of outrage to publish an opposing piece by a U.S. senator who actually has some influence on policy &#8230; just strikes me as almost as anti-journalism.&#8221;
Kurtz lauded The New York Times editors for refusing to cave to those on its staff who believed “that if you&#8217;re not on the train, if you don’t agree with our view &#8230; you got to apologize, take it down &#8230; delete.&#8221; He concluded, “The editorial pages did the right thing. They published the Cotton piece.  You have the leadership of the paper making one step toward good journalism &#8230; to have a debate about this that doesn’t march in lockstep with the left-wing opinion.&#8221;
On Wednesday, some reporters from The New York Times issued identical tweets decrying the Times publishing the opinion piece from Cotton in which he argued that the Trump administration should send in the military to deal with violent riots and looting throughout the nation.
As Politico&#8217;s Alex Thompson <a href="https://twitter.com/AlxThomp/status/1268328158253715468?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1268328158253715468&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Feditorial.dailywire.com%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost.php%3Fpost%3D117840%26action%3Dedit">pointed out</a>, the four reporters, Taylor Lorenz, Caity Weaver, Sheera Frankel, and Jacey Fortin, all tweeted, “Running this puts Black @NYTimes staff in danger.”
In Cotton&#8217;s op-ed, he urged President Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 in order to protect communities from &#8220;nihilist criminals.&#8221; He wrote:
<blockquote>
These rioters, if not subdued, not only will destroy the livelihoods of law-abiding citizens but will also take more innocent lives. Many poor communities that <a style="font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit;" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/local/dc-riots-1968/">still bear scars</a> from past upheavals will be set back still further. One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers. &#8230;
This venerable law, nearly as old as our republic itself, doesn’t amount to &#8220;martial law&#8221; or the end of democracy, as some excitable critics, ignorant of both the law and our history, have comically suggested. In fact, the federal government has a constitutional duty to the states to &#8220;protect each of them from domestic violence.&#8221; Throughout our history, presidents have exercised this authority on <a style="font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit;" href="https://fas.org/man/eprint/disorders.pdf">dozens of occasions</a> to protect law-abiding citizens from disorder.
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
What&#39;s remarkable about what the New York Times is doing is that they&#39;re acting as if the legacy media is unassailable. 
It&#39;s not. No GOP politician henceforth has to take their reporters&#39; calls. They have plenty of options to get their message out.
&mdash; Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) <a href="https://twitter.com/Heminator/status/1268680643937959941?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here&#39;s an op-ed that nobody at the New York Times had any problem publishing <a href="https://t.co/2unGODXDY8">pic.twitter.com/2unGODXDY8</a>
&mdash; Greg Price (@greg_price11) <a href="https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1268681976044797956?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The New York Times has apologized for publishing an opinion supported by 58 percent of Americans, written by a U.S. Senator.
&mdash; Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) <a href="https://twitter.com/bdomenech/status/1268677314432425984?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I&#39;d point out that the <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> is a cowardly disgrace that is too sacred of the fussy fascist children on its staff to stand up for its own right to print unpopular views, but then we already knew that.
I hate the media, but I could never damage it the way it&#39;s damaged itself. <a href="https://t.co/dNqNGlOmyB">pic.twitter.com/dNqNGlOmyB</a>
&mdash; Kurt Schlichter (@KurtSchlichter) <a href="https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1268689099763793921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The New York Times’ Bari Weiss issued this thread:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The civil war inside The New York Times between the (mostly young) wokes the (mostly 40+) liberals is the same one raging inside other publications and companies across the country. The dynamic is always the same. (Thread.)
&mdash; Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) <a href="https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628680797978625?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The Old Guard lives by a set of principles we can broadly call civil libertarianism. They assumed they shared that worldview with the young people they hired who called themselves liberals and progressives. But it was an incorrect assumption.
&mdash; Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) <a href="https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628682521878529?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The New Guard has a different worldview, one articulated best by <a href="https://twitter.com/JonHaidt?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JonHaidt</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/glukianoff?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@glukianoff</a>. They call it &quot;safetyism,&quot; in which the right of people to feel emotionally and psychologically safe trumps what were previously considered core liberal values, like free speech.
&mdash; Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) <a href="https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628683952185346?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I&#39;m in no way surprised by what has now exploded into public view. In a way, it&#39;s oddly comforting: I feel less alone and less crazy trying to explain the dynamic to people. What I am shocked by is the speed. I thought it would take a few years, not a few weeks.
&mdash; Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) <a href="https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628688301633537?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here&#39;s one way to think about what&#39;s at stake: The New York Times motto is &quot;all the news that&#39;s fit to print.&quot; One group emphasizes the word &quot;all.&quot; The other, the word &quot;fit.&quot;
&mdash; Bari Weiss (@bariweiss) <a href="https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1268628689547386882?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.  
&nbsp;

US-POLITICS-COTTON

NYT Issues An Apology For Publishing Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

On Wednesday night, the national press secretary for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, Brian Fallon, decided he had found a simple solution to America’s problems, tweeting, “Defund the police.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Defund the police
&mdash; Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1268370015612477440?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Ted Cruz, who apparently doesn’t bear the same hostility to policemen and policewomen that Fallon does, fired back on Twitter with a film reference: “Hillary’s press secretary makes the 2020 Dem agenda clear: &#8216;Defund the police.&#8217; Take your guns. Cheer on the rioters &amp; looters who burn your city. It’s like Mad Max at Thunderdome, brought home to America.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hillary’s press secretary makes the 2020 Dem agenda clear:
“Defund the police.”
Take your guns. 
Cheer on the rioters &amp; looters who burn your city. 
It’s like Mad Max at Thunderdome, brought home to America. <a href="https://t.co/mlVZWI2Pf1">https://t.co/mlVZWI2Pf1</a>
&mdash; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1268560141680611328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Tom Cotton wrote bitingly, “Wealthy liberals like Hillary Clinton&#8217;s former press assistant have no problem calling to defund the police—they can live in gated communities and hire security guards.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Wealthy liberals like Hillary Clinton&#39;s former press assistant have no problem calling to defund the police—they can live in gated communities and hire security guards. <a href="https://t.co/mw2ooySELZ">https://t.co/mw2ooySELZ</a>
&mdash; Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomCottonAR/status/1268561973156950016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Senator Josh Hawley echoed, “This is Hillary Clinton’s former spokesperson. Is this now the official position of the Democrat Party?”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is Hillary Clinton’s former spokesperson. Is this now the official position of the Democrat Party? <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeBiden?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JoeBiden</a>? <a href="https://t.co/9qhJyYHf3Z">https://t.co/9qhJyYHf3Z</a>
&mdash; Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1268568709200830465?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In 2018, Fallon tweeted that he had a plan to deal with academics who broke with the expected leftist line espoused by the Democratic Party: put them on a list:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Progressives should keep a list of names of the sellouts at Yale and elsewhere who are right now trying to smooth a path for the overturning of Roe and gutting of the New Deal. They should be unwelcome in future Democratic administrations.
&mdash; Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1017582935229325312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 13, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Fallon has an extensive Democratic Party resume, having worked on the Kerry-Edwards campaign as a press aide in 2004, on the Robert Menendez 2006 senatorial campaign in a similar position, then later becoming chief spokesman for New York Senator Chuck Schumer. In 2011 he became the spokesman for the Senate Democratic Policy and Communications Center. In 2013 he moved to the Justice Department as the department&#8217;s director of public affairs under Attorney General Eric Holder.
In December 2015, after Hillary Clinton <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/2058/videos-benghazi-isis-clinton-refuses-apologize-robert-kraychik">refused to apologize</a> for falsely claiming that videos of Donald Trump&#8217;s statements regarding Islamic terrorism were being used by ISIS to recruit Muslims, Fallon stated, “Hell no. Hillary Clinton will not be apologizing to Donald Trump for correctly pointing out how his hateful rhetoric only helps ISIS recruit more terrorists. The person that needs to apologize in this matter is Donald Trump, for his hateful bigoted rhetoric toward Muslim Americans.”
Just how far-left Fallon stands was amply demonstrated in July 2019, when Fallon lavished praise on far-left Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, writing that they had “done more to define the vision and moral center of today&#8217;s Democratic party than all of the message bills pushed by the party leadership combined.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The four House freshmen whom Pelosi dismisses in the Dowd column have done more to define the vision and moral center of today&#39;s Democratic party than all of the message bills pushed by the party leadership combined.
&mdash; Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) <a href="https://twitter.com/brianefallon/status/1147869654934872071?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 7, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Dave Abrams, Republican State Leadership Committee deputy executive director, responded to calls from Democrats to defund the police, asserting, “Every single Democrat in the country must answer to whether he or she agrees with this radical idea to rid communities of the women and men in blue who put their lives on the line to keep Americans safe. Silence is part of the problem, isn’t it? Time for Democrats to speak up,” as <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/4/hillary-clintons-2016-campaign-spokesman-brian-fal/">The Washington Times</a> reported.
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

US-VOTE-DEMOCRATS-CLINTON

Hillary’s 2016 Press Secretary: ‘Defund The Police.’ Cruz, Cotton, Hawley Fire Back Hard.

Brian Fallon

Hillary Clinton

Police

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocaiso-Cortez (D-NY) lashed out at The New York Times for allowing Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) to publish an op-ed in the newspaper that features ideas that are supported by the majority of Americans.
Cotton&#8217;s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html">op-ed</a> accurately describes the violent riots that have rocked Democrat-controlled inner cities across the country over the last week in response to the death of George Floyd, who died in police custody last week.
Cotton then describes how the violent riots are harming the most vulnerable communities and suggests that the solution to fixing the problem would by to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the military to highly unstable areas that are not doing what it takes to fix the problem:
<blockquote>One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers. But local law enforcement in some cities desperately needs backup, while delusional politicians in other cities refuse to do what’s necessary to uphold the rule of law.
The pace of looting and disorder may fluctuate from night to night, but it’s past time to support local law enforcement with federal authority. Some governors have mobilized the National Guard, yet others refuse, and in some cases the rioters still outnumber the police and Guard combined. In these circumstances, the Insurrection Act authorizes the president to employ the military “or any other means” in “cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws.”
This venerable law, nearly as old as our republic itself, doesn’t amount to “martial law” or the end of democracy, as some excitable critics, ignorant of both the law and our history, have comically suggested. In fact, the federal government has a constitutional duty to the states to “protect each of them from domestic violence.” Throughout our history, presidents have exercised this authority on dozens of occasions to protect law-abiding citizens from disorder. Nor does it violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which constrains the military’s role in law enforcement but expressly excepts statutes such as the Insurrection Act.</blockquote>
Ocasio-Cortez, along with leftist reporters at The New York Times, called James Bennet, Editorial Page Editor at The New York Times and brother to Democrat Sen. Michael Bennet (CO), for publishing the op-ed and made numerous false suggestions in doing so.
Ocasio-Cortez posed the following questions for Bennet:
<ul>
<li>Can you explain why you chose to publish misinformation in your pages in service of an “opinion” for state violence?</li>
<li>Can you explain your choice to publish it on the anniversary of Tiananmen Square?</li>
<li>Do you believe your Black colleagues saying your choices have put them at risk?</li>
<li>Other Qs: Did you consider the author‘s explicit call for violence (“no quarter”) when you chose to run this piece?</li>
<li>Is it your belief that you are not responsible for the factual integrity of what you publish?</li>
<li>Do you believe calling for violence is an “opinion”?</li>
</ul>
Ocasio-Cortez was unable to list off any of the &#8220;misinformation&#8221; that she claimed was contained in the piece.
Ocasio-Cortez falsely claimed that the op-ed, which was published on June 3, was published on the anniversary of Tiananmen Square massacre, which took place on June 4th and 5th in 1989.
Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s suggestion that Cotton&#8217;s idea somehow puts blacks &#8220;at risk&#8221; suggests that only blacks are responsible for the violent riots and looting that is taking place.
Ocasio-Cortez&#8217;s claim that Cotton explicitly calls for violence is also false.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
<a href="https://twitter.com/JBennet?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JBennet</a> Other Qs: Did you consider the author‘s explicit call for violence (“no quarter”) when you chose to run this piece?
Is it your belief that you are not responsible for the factual integrity of what you publish?
Do you believe calling for violence is an “opinion”?
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1268415067407749121?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Cotton correctly noted in his op-ed that <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/majority-americans-support-calling-military-assist-police-during-nationwide-unrest-polling-shows-1508210">the majority of Americans</a>, including nearly half of all Democrat voters, support deploying the military to stop the violent riots.
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

House Oversight And Reform Committee Holds Hearing On Confronting White Supremacy

Ocasio-Cortez Explodes Over Tom Cotton Op-Ed That Features Ideas Supported By Majority Of Americans

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

On Wednesday, some reporters from The New York Times issued identical tweets decrying the Times publishing an opinion piece from Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) in which he argued that the Trump administration should send in the military to deal with violent riots and looting throughout the nation.
As Politico&#8217;s Alex Thompson pointed out, the four reporters, Taylor Lorenz, Caity Weaver, Sheera Frankel, and Jacey Fortin, all tweeted, “Running this puts Black @NYTimes staff in danger.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
NYT reporters in a rare open revolt over the opinion side running Tom Cotton’s op-Ed calling to deploy the military to “restore order.” <a href="https://t.co/MgLuR8EunJ">pic.twitter.com/MgLuR8EunJ</a>
&mdash; Alex Thompson (@AlxThomp) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlxThomp/status/1268328158253715468?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Thompson also noted that Cotton and The New York Times &#8220;have a weird history going back to 2006 when they didn’t publish a letter to the editor he wrote while a lieutenant serving in Iraq.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Also, Cotton and the NYT have a weird history going back to 2006 when they didn’t publish a letter to the editor he wrote while a lieutenant serving in Iraq. <a href="https://t.co/lYZjDS37xo">https://t.co/lYZjDS37xo</a>
&mdash; Alex Thompson (@AlxThomp) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlxThomp/status/1268393954573156352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 4, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The reporters’ opinions were echoed by contributing op-ed writer Roxane Gay, who tweeted, &#8220;Running this puts black @nytimes writers, editors, and other staff in danger.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Running this puts black <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> writers, editors and other staff in danger. <a href="https://t.co/wCy4LMov5x">pic.twitter.com/wCy4LMov5x</a>
&mdash; roxane gay (@rgay) <a href="https://twitter.com/rgay/status/1268330942675824640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Gay also tweeted, &#8220;As a NYT writer I absolutely stand in opposition to that Tom Cotton editorial. We are well served by robust and ideologically diverse public discourse that includes radical, liberal, and conservative voices. This is not that. His piece was inflammatory and endorsing military occupation as if the constitution doesn’t exist.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
This is not that. His piece was inflammatory and endorsing military occupation as if the constitution doesn’t exist.
&mdash; roxane gay (@rgay) <a href="https://twitter.com/rgay/status/1268303329672617985?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In Cotton&#8217;s op-ed, he urged President Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 in order to protect communities from &#8220;nihilist criminals.&#8221; He wrote:
<blockquote>
These rioters, if not subdued, not only will destroy the livelihoods of law-abiding citizens but will also take more innocent lives. Many poor communities that <a style="font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit;" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/local/dc-riots-1968/">still bear scars</a> from past upheavals will be set back still further. One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers. &#8230;
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
This venerable law, nearly as old as our republic itself, doesn’t amount to &#8220;martial law&#8221; or the end of democracy, as some excitable critics, ignorant of both the law and our history, have comically suggested. In fact, the federal government has a constitutional duty to the states to &#8220;protect each of them from domestic violence.&#8221; Throughout our history, presidents have exercised this authority on <a style="font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit;" href="https://fas.org/man/eprint/disorders.pdf">dozens of occasions</a> to protect law-abiding citizens from disorder.
</blockquote>
As Scott Johnson of <a href="https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/04/when-tom-cotton-mailed-it-in-to-the-times.php">Powerline</a> reported in 2015, in 2006 Cotton was a lieutenant serving in Baghdad when he wrote the letter to the Times, which declined to publish it. It revolved around the alleged repeated violations of the Espionage Act by New York Times reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau.
Johnson wrote that in 2006, “Risen and Lichtblau blew the highly classified SWIFT terrorist finance tracking program in their Times story <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0">&#8216;Bank data is sifted by U.S. in secret to block terror.&#8217;</a> In addition to its illegality under the Espionage Act, in my opinion, the story was an act of wanton destruction with no arguable public purpose.”
Below is the full text of Cotton’s letter to then-executive editor of the Times Bill Keller and the two Times reporters that the paper refused to publish:
<blockquote>Dear Messrs. Keller, Lichtblau &amp; Risen:
Congratulations on disclosing our government’s highly classified anti-terrorist-financing program (June 23). I apologize for not writing sooner. But I am a lieutenant in the United States Army and I spent the last four days patrolling one of the more dangerous areas in Iraq. (Alas, operational security and common sense prevent me from even revealing this unclassified location in a private medium like email.)
Unfortunately, as I supervised my soldiers late one night, I heard a booming explosion several miles away. I learned a few hours later that a powerful roadside bomb killed one soldier and severely injured another from my 130-man company. I deeply hope that we can find and kill or capture the terrorists responsible for that bomb. But, of course, these terrorists do not spring from the soil like Plato’s guardians. No, they require financing to obtain mortars and artillery shells, priming explosives, wiring and circuitry, not to mention for training and payments to locals willing to emplace bombs in exchange for a few months’ salary. As your story states, the program was legal, briefed to Congress, supported in the government and financial industry, and very successful.
Not anymore. You may think you have done a public service, but you have gravely endangered the lives of my soldiers and all other soldiers and innocent Iraqis here. Next time I hear that familiar explosion — or next time I feel it — I will wonder whether we could have stopped that bomb had you not instructed terrorists how to evade our financial surveillance.
And, by the way, having graduated from Harvard Law and practiced with a federal appellate judge and two Washington law firms before becoming an infantry officer, I am well-versed in the espionage laws relevant to this story and others — laws you have plainly violated. I hope that my colleagues at the Department of Justice match the courage of my soldiers here and prosecute you and your newspaper to the fullest extent of the law. By the time we return home, maybe you will be in your rightful place: not at the Pulitzer announcements, but behind bars.
Very truly yours,
Tom Cotton 
Baghdad, Iraq </blockquote>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.  
<blockquote>&nbsp;</blockquote>

Tom Cotton’s NYT Opinion Piece Calls For Military To Quell Riots. NYT Writers Revolt.

On Wednesday, Senator Ted Cruz introduced a bill in the Senate that would lessen American dependence on China for life-saving medications and treatments and turn toward cooperation with Israel instead.
The bill, which was offered by a bipartisan group of senators including Chris Coons (D-DE), Martha McSally (R-AZ), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tom Cotton (R-AR), and Ron Wyden (D-OR), is titled the ‘‘Expanding Medical Partnerships with Israel to Lessen Dependence on China Act.’’ It <a href="https://www.cruz.senate.gov/files/documents/Bills/2020.05.12%20-%20Expanding%20Medical%20Partnerships%20with%20Israel%20to%20Lessen%20Dependence%20on%20China%20Act.pdf">states</a> it would “authorize funding for a bilateral cooperative program with Israel for the development of health technologies with a focus on combating COVID-19.”
This week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in a brief eight-hours in Israel, told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, “You’re a great partner. You share your information, unlike some other countries that try and obfuscate and hide information. And we’ll talk about that country, too,” as <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/us-senate-legislation-would-expand-covid-19-projects-with-israel-628117">The Jerusalem Post</a> reported.
A senior State Department official asserted China is “not a reliable partner,” adding, “I think COVID sort of highlights the dangers of dealing with states that are not transparent, that don’t have fair trade practices, that really leverage and torque their trade to leverage certain things out of their trade partners … I think it’s important for us as allies, strategic partners to be able to discuss the type of threats and the types of ways to mitigate those kind of threats.”
Cruz stated: “Our dependence on China for life-saving medications and treatments is deeply problematic. We’re now seeing leaders of the Chinese Communist Party – in the midst of a public health crisis they allowed to go global and endanger millions – threaten to withhold live-saving medical supplies and medications from the United States. By expanding partnerships with Israel – an ally and a global leader in medicine – to develop coronavirus treatments, this legislation is a common sense step to address that threat.”
<a href="https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/collins-joins-bipartisan-group-introducing-bill-enhance-medical-partnerships-israel-lessen">Collins</a> echoed:
<blockquote>The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the significant risk of overreliance on any one country for lifesaving medical products. We should redouble our efforts to work with friendly nations to diversify our medical supply chains.  This bipartisan bill would strengthen our partnership with our ally Israel and combine our research and manufacturing efforts to develop new medications and medical products that will help fight COVID-19.</blockquote>
The bill states:
<blockquote>There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Health and Human Services $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2021 through 2023 for a bilateral cooperative program with the Government of Israel for awarding grants for the development of health technologies, including such technologies described in subsection (b), subject to subsection (c), with an emphasis on collaboratively advancing the use of technology, personalized medicine, and data in relation to COVID-19.
The health technologies described in this subsection shall include technologies such as artificial intelligence, sensors, monitoring devices, drugs and vaccinations, respiratory assist devices, diagnostic tests, telemedicine, and remote monitoring.
The funding under subsection (a) is subject to a matching contribution from the Government of Israel.</blockquote>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.  
&nbsp;

President Donald J. Trump

Cruz, Cotton, Introduce Bill To Turn Away From China And Toward Israel To Fight Virus

China

Israel

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) told Fox News&#8217;s Maria Bartiromo on Sunday that there was no doubt that Chinese dictator Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) pressured the World Health Organization (WHO) to downplay the coronavirus outbreak that originated in Wuhan, China.
&#8220;There&#8217;s no question Xi Jinping and senior officials in the Chinese Communist Party were pressuring the WHO all the way back to December to undersell the risk of this virus,&#8221; Cotton said. &#8220;They knew in China, early on, probably as early as the early days of December, that this virus was both highly contagious among humans and it was very deadly for certain people.&#8221;
&#8220;They wanted to make sure – they wanted to make sure that this – in addition to saving face, that, once they realized this virus was going to cripple their own economy, that it did not remain limited to China,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;So, the WHO has some real answers to provide the world about why they bowed to Chinese pressure throughout December and January and turned what could have been a local health emergency in Wuhan into a global pandemic.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenTomCotton</a>: There’s “No Question” that Xi Jinping pressured the <a href="https://twitter.com/WHO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@WHO</a> to downplay the risk of Coronavirus. <a href="https://t.co/7DH4GqvYOu">pic.twitter.com/7DH4GqvYOu</a>
&mdash; Benny (@bennyjohnson) <a href="https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1259537554984120321?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 10, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.  
TRANSCRIPT PROVIDED VIA FOX NEWS:
<blockquote>MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: We have new developments this morning on the Chinese lab at the center of the coronavirus pandemic.
A new analysis of cell phone data points to a shutdown at that Wuhan facility for a week last October, two months before the virus reportedly first escaped from the lab.
My next guest was the first U.S. lawmaker to sound the alarm on the Communist Party&#8217;s handling of the outbreak.
Republican Senator Tom Cotton is with me. He&#8217;s a member of the Intelligence, Armed Services, and Banking committees.
And, Senator, it is an honor once again to have you on the program. Thanks so much for joining us.
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Thanks, Maria. Thank you.
BARTIROMO: We want to break news, so that our audience understands clearly what has taken place here. This is very important.
There is cell phone data that we have seen now that indicates that there was a shutdown of the Wuhan virology lab, the origin, likely origin of the coronavirus. Explain the cell phone data and why it&#8217;s important.
COTTON: So, Maria, reports emerged yesterday in the media that publicly available cell phone data suggests that roads around the lab in Wuhan was closed in the middle of October.
Again, this information is publicly available. American media has used it to analyze mobility patterns in states to see if our people are practicing social distancing. So the reports indicate that on major roads around these labs, Wuhan, you obviously had thousands and thousands of cell phones pinging towers day in and day out.
And then, all of a sudden, it stopped. And it remained stopped for several days. That would suggest, without any further information, that those roads were blocked for some reason.
Now, we need to go confirm that. We need to look at the data carefully. We also need to try to use other means to verify if there were, in fact, shutdowns of roads around those labs in the middle of October. The Chinese Communist Party could obviously help us with that, if they would open up and allow us to investigate what happened in Wuhan.
But if it is confirmed that roads around that lab were shut down for a number of days in mid-October, it is highly coincidental that there was a major shutdown of those roads at about the time one might have expected this virus to first get transmitted to humans, whatever the origins may have been.
But this would be another piece of circumstantial evidence that there was some kind of accident or outbreak from those labs, not from the seafood market or anywhere else. That&#8217;s why it&#8217;s so important we get to the bottom of this data.
BARTIROMO: So, why would they shut down all activity around the Wuhan lab?
And, also, how weird is it that all activity would be shut down? I mean, analyze it in terms of comparing it to something else in America, so we can understand better. There&#8217;s always a lot of activity around that lab, right?
COTTON: There is.
So, remember, Wuhan is a city that is larger than New York City. So, obviously, its roads are highly trafficked and heavily congested. So to shutdown roads around the lab would suggest that they had some good reason to disrupt traffic patterns so severely.
So, again, first, we need to verify these reports, the cell phone data say what these media reports indicate, and then we need to use other sources to try to confirm what they suggest, which is, those roads were shut down.
And if that&#8217;s the case, if roads were shut down around these laboratories for several days in mid-October, then we need to figure out exactly why, because it&#8217;s simply another piece of circumstantial evidence that would support the idea that this virus originated from one of those labs.
BARTIROMO: Now, Senator, there is a conversation which is being written about in Der Spiegel, the German newspaper, which is also reported in The New York Post today.
The report is published this weekend. It says that Xi Jinping urged the World Health Organization chief to &#8212; quote &#8212; &#8220;delay a global warning&#8221; about the pandemic and hold back information on human-to-human transmission of the virus.
We know that the WHO, the World Health Organization, came out with a tweet on January 14 and said no human-to-human transmission of this virus, which was absolutely 100 percent wrong.
But now we&#8217;re getting news that, in fact, Xi Jinping himself talked to the head of the WHO to tell him, don&#8217;t go public with this.
COTTON: So, Maria, I don&#8217;t know about all of the specific details about those reports.
But there&#8217;s no question Xi Jinping and senior officials in the Chinese Communist Party were pressuring the WHO all the way back to December to undersell the risk of this virus.
They knew in China, early on, probably as early as the early days of December, that this virus was both highly contagious among humans and it was very deadly for certain people.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
COTTON: Yet they wanted to save face.
BARTIROMO: But, by the way&#8230;.
COTTON: They wanted&#8230;
BARTIROMO: Yes.
COTTON: They didn&#8217;t&#8230;
BARTIROMO: They wanted to save face, yes.
COTTON: They wanted to make sure &#8212; they wanted to make sure that this &#8212; in addition to saving face, that, once they realized this virus was going to cripple their own economy, that it did not remain limited to China.
So, the WHO has some real answers to provide the world about why they bowed to Chinese pressure throughout December and January and turned what could have been a local health emergency in Wuhan into a global pandemic.
BARTIROMO: Let me switch gears and ask you about your investigation into the Thousand Talents Program.
Tonight, on FOX News, we are running a special which is part of my three-year investigation into China. It will run tonight at 10:00 p.m. Eastern to discuss China&#8217;s behavior. And that&#8217;s why I want to talk about the Thousand Talents Program.
This has nothing to do with the coronavirus, but this is another way that the Chinese Communist Party has been able to spy on Americans and steal intellectual property.
Tell us what you&#8217;re doing with the Thousand Talents Program, and explain that program.
COTTON: So, Maria, the Thousand Talents Program sounds benign, even beneficial, but, in reality, it&#8217;s an espionage program.
The Chinese Communist Party is recruiting spies in United States. So, what they do is spun research, oftentimes at our most advanced laboratories or prestigious institutions of higher learning, to get technology, to get cutting-edge trade secrets back to China, and to train Chinese Communist Party-affiliated graduate and post-graduate students.
This just broke out a few months ago at Harvard, where the director, the chairman of the Department of Chemistry was arrested by the FBI and charged with lying about being part of the Thousand Talents Program.
What I think is the real scandal, though, is that participation in this talent program is legal. People who have been arrested for it tend to be arrested for things like lying to federal investigators, or wire fraud, or mail fraud, or what have you.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
COTTON: I&#8217;m going to propose legislation that would ban any researcher from accepting Chinese-affiliated funds&#8230;
BARTIROMO: That&#8217;s unbelievable.
COTTON: &#8230; if they are also working on federally funded programs and that would require universities to make their best efforts not to employ anyone who is a part of these talent programs.
BARTIROMO: So, that&#8230;
COTTON: We should not be &#8212; we should not be underwriting those people who are on the Chinese Communist Party&#8217;s payroll to&#8230;
BARTIROMO: Of course. Of course.
COTTON: &#8230; to send our most advanced cutting-edge technology back to China.
BARTIROMO: That professor was getting paid from Harvard. He was also getting paid from the CCP.
Real quick, before we go, I have got to get your take. You mentioned this the last time you were with us, that the Chinese Communist Party has sent engineers, research engineers, to some of our leading medical institutions.
Senator Cruz told me last week M.D. Anderson is having a major issue with this, because there are engineers trying to steal information to get China to get a cure for cancer before the United States.
Do you think they are in our medical institutions right now stealing science data to try to beat us to a COVID-19 vaccine? And, also, after they steal the data, are they then going ahead and filing for patents, their own Chinese patents, based on the information they got from America?
COTTON: Yes, Maria, China is using the exact techniques they have used in agriculture and semiconductor or computer chip technology to try to steal our most cutting-edge life science knowledge, to include coronavirus information, whether companies are working on therapeutic drugs or vaccines.
The Department of Homeland Security just issued a warning recently cautioning laboratories and companies and universities to keep their guard up for cyber-theft.
And, of course, like the Thousand Talents Programs, China runs talent programs to use human spies as well to try to steal that technology.
So, all of our institutions in the medical field, in the life sciences and pharmaceutical fields need to have their guard up against Chinese espionage.
BARTIROMO: And, by the way, in terms of the cell phone data that we know was completely stopped for that time in Wuhan in October, do we know if schools were closed, were businesses closed, in and around that area as well?
Can you glean that from the fact that there&#8217;s no cell phone activity as well, Senator?
COTTON: From the media reports, I don&#8217;t think you can, Maria.
But those are the kind of questions that you would want to ask to try to understand what was happening around those labs.
BARTIROMO: OK. I see. OK.
COTTON: It&#8217;s a very good point that, if you had schools closed or other businesses closed, that would again be an indicator of something happening, that the Chinese Communist Party wanted to kind of shut off activity around those labs.
BARTIROMO: Senator, thank you.
COTTON: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Thank you, Senator Tom Cotton</blockquote>

Senator Cotton: ‘No Question’ That China Pressured W.H.O. In December To ‘Undersell The Risk Of This Virus’

COVID-19

World Health Organization

Four GOP senators, determined that the world never forget the Chinese doctor in Wuhan who warned the world about the coronavirus before he was allegedly silenced by the Chinese Communist Party, <a href="https://www.cotton.senate.gov/?p=press_release&amp;id=1359">introduced a bill</a> to rename the street outside the Chinese embassy after him.
Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ben Sasse (R-NE), Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TE) intend to honor the late Dr. Li Wenliang by naming the street outside the Chinese embassy in Washington, D.C. “Li Wenliang Plaza.”
<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/category/health/infectious-disease/coronavirus">Fox News</a> stated of Dr. Li Wenliang:
<blockquote>A week after his death, Li&#8217;s mother Lu Shuyun demanded an explanation from the police about his treatment, saying in an online video that her son was &#8220;summoned by the Wuhan Police Bureau&#8221; and forced to sign an &#8220;admonishment notice&#8221; for allegedly spreading inaccurate information about the outbreak. &#8220;We won’t give up if they don’t give us an explanation,&#8221; she said at the time. He was reportedly then summoned to the Public Security Bureau where he was forced to sign a letter stating that he made false comments about the virus.</blockquote>
Li Wenliang later died of the coronavirus.
Cotton stated, “The Chinese Communist Party wants the world to forget Dr. Li Wenliang, who tried to warn his colleagues about the Wuhan virus and later succumbed to that very disease. We can ensure his name is never forgotten by placing it permanently outside the embassy of the regime responsible for his persecution and death.”
Sasse added, “Dr. Li’s professional ethics made him an enemy of the Chinese Communist Party and a hero to the Chinese people. Chairman Xi can try to claim Dr. Li as the Party’s own martyr, but the Chinese people know that it was Dr. Li’s selfless work and voice that the Party sought to silence. We can honor that work by renaming the street outside the Chinese Embassy after him. The street outside the embassy will draw a glaring contrast between the cruelty and lies of the Chinese Communist Party and the decency and compassion of the Chinese people.”
Rubio echoed, “The Chinese Communist Party may have forcefully silenced Dr. Li for informing the public about COVID-19, but Beijing’s totalitarian censorship cannot erase what the global community now knows. Renaming the street outside of the Chinese embassy ensures that Dr. Li will never be forgotten, will serve as a stark reminder to the Chinese government and Communist Party that the U.S. will stand with the oppressed and not with their oppressors.”
Blackburn concluded, “Dr. Li took a great personal risk to tell the world about COVID-19 despite the looming threats of, and subsequent forced censorship by, the Chinese Communist Party. Even when he contracted the virus, Dr. Li continued his efforts to communicate his experience and what he knew about it. Dr. Li is a hero. In naming this street in his honor, we will show the Chinese government and the world that truth prevails and free speech is paramount to who we are as a nation. The American people are grateful for his sacrifice.”
Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY), who introduced a similar bill in the House, stated,  “The Chinese Government attempted to silence Dr. Li Wenliang who, at great personal risk, warned about the danger of Coronavirus. While the Chinese Communist Party caused the virus to be spread around the globe, resulting in death and economic devastation, brave medical professionals like Dr. Li spoke truth to the regime. I am honored to introduce this legislation to rename the street in front of the Chinese Embassy after Dr. Li. May this serve as a constant reminder to the world and to the Chinese Government that truth and freedom will prevail, that we will not forget the bravery of Dr. Li, and that the Chinese Communist Party will be held accountable for the devastating impact of their lies.”
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

US-CHINA-CONGRESS-HEARING

GOP Senators Push To Rename Chinese Embassy Street For Doctor Allegedly Silenced After Warning About Virus

Ben Sasse

Liz Cheney

Marco Rubio

Marsha Blackburn

On Sunday, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) appeared on Fox News with host Maria Bartiromo where he discussed China’s culpability in the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as his belief that the United States should “take a very hard look at” issuing visas for Chinese nationals studying science and technology.
Bartiromo asked Cotton about the Chinese Communist Party’s theft of U.S. intellectual property “that has been going on for decades,” and if he believes the CCP is stealing IP even during the pandemic in order to “save face” and develop a vaccine before the rest of the world.
Cotton replied, first stating that the CCP wouldn’t stop the theft of intellectual property, and that there are “active cases against Chinese nationals” throughout the U.S. pertaining to such theft.
<blockquote>In the middle of the pandemic, what&#8217;s the most valuable intellectual property in the world? It’s the research that our great laboratories and life science companies are doing on prophylactic drugs, therapeutic drugs, and ultimately a vaccine. So, I have little doubt that the Chinese intelligence services are actively trying to steal America&#8217;s intellectual property as it relates to the virus that they unleashed on the world because, of course, they want to be the country that claims credit for finding those drugs or finding a vaccine, and then use it as leverage against the rest of the world.</blockquote>
Bartiromo then asked the senator to explain his position on reevaluating the issuance of visas to “Chinese students who want to study advanced sciences.”
Cotton responded, saying that “it’s a scandal to me that we have trained so many of the Chinese Communist Party&#8217;s brightest minds to go back to China, to compete for our jobs, to take our business, and ultimately to steal our property, and design weapons and other devices that can be used against the American people.”
<blockquote>So, I think we need to take a very hard look at the visas that we give to Chinese nationals to come to the United States to study, especially at the postgraduate level in advanced scientific and technological fields.</blockquote>
He said that if Chinese nationals want to “study Shakespeare and the Federalist Papers,” that’s fine, but not “quantum computing and artificial intelligence.”
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wktH8sdPHl0?start=294" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
In 2019, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/us-intelligence-chinese-student-espionage/index.html">CNN</a> published a major story about the Chinese Communist Party using students studying abroad in the United States “as a form of espionage.”
In 2015, “at the direction of a high-level Chinese intelligence official,” a Chinese student named Ji Chaoqun sent an email titled “midterm test questions” to a Chinese national.
However, the email didn’t relate to school at all. Ji had “allegedly attached background reports on eight US-based individuals who Beijing could target for potential recruitment as spies, according to a federal criminal complaint.”
Ji was arrested in September 2018. A Justice Department <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-national-arrested-allegedly-acting-within-united-states-illegal-agent-people-s">statement</a> reads in part: “The complaint charges Ji with one count of knowingly acting in the United States as an agent of a foreign government without prior notification to the Attorney General.” The statement makes sure to note that Ji is innocent until proven guilty.
Ji was indicted by a grand jury in January.
The CNN story includes a quote from a World Wide Threat Assessment from the U.S. intelligence community stating that “China&#8217;s intelligence services will exploit the openness of American society, especially academia and the scientific community, using a variety of means.”
Also quoted is William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, who said that while nearly all of the approximately 350,000 Chinese students admitted to U.S. universities are there for legitimate purposes, our “liberal visa policy” could be “used by the Chinese government to facilitate nefarious activity here.”
The issue of Chinese students being coerced or recruited by the CCP to act as information funnels is a daunting one for United States, notes the CNN report.
NBC News <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/american-universities-are-soft-target-china-s-spies-say-u-n1104291">reports</a> that in January, two individuals were arrested with ties to China:
<blockquote>&#8230;the chairman of Harvard&#8217;s chemistry department was arrested by FBI agents in his office, charged with lying about a lucrative relationship with a Chinese talent recruitment program. The same day, a former Boston University student was accused of visa fraud after she allegedly failed to disclose her status as a lieutenant in the People&#8217;s Liberation Army.</blockquote>
The story continues, listing four other instances of arrests for various alleged crimes, including a “Chinese scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles” who “was <a href="https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ucla-professor-military-china-20190711-story.html">convicted in June</a> of shipping banned missile technology to his homeland.”
Despite requests from the “FBI and other agencies” to better police policies that might lead to these kinds of breaches, some university faculty, as well as lawmakers and others have pushed back, claiming, among other things, that such policies could engender racism and create unpleasant situations.
The report cites an instance in which a Chinese professor was allegedly accused of spying, but it was later revealed to be a “misunderstanding.” The professor reportedly spoke at a panel where he “choked up as he recalled being taken out of his house in handcuffs in front of his children by FBI agents.”
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">subscriber</a>.

Sen. Cotton: U.S. Needs To ‘Take A Very Hard Look’ At Visas To Chinese Nationals To Study Advanced Science And Tech

espionage

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) told Fox News&#8217; Maria Bartiromo on Sunday that he believes that China allowed flights out of Wuhan during the coronavirus outbreak &#8220;because they didn&#8217;t want to see their relative power and standing in the world decline because this virus was contained within China.&#8221;
&#8220;Wherever it originated &#8230; we know that the Chinese Communist Party was both criminally negligent and incompetent at first, and then deliberately, deliberately malevolent in the way they responded to this virus, for their own people and the world,&#8221; Cotton said. &#8220;As early as the second week of December, it was clear that this virus was spreading from person to person. By late December, it was spreading to doctors in Wuhan hospitals. Some doctors were trying to blow the whistle on these facts, and the secret police arrived at their doorsteps in the middle of the night.&#8221;
&#8220;So only after China fessed up to the WHO on December 31 did the world know what was happening. Yet, still they continued to deny that it was spreading from person to person into mid-January. That allowed millions of people to leave Wuhan,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;And then, finally, China continued to pressure the WHO and other countries not to stop international travel from China. That meant that hundreds of thousands of persons left China after this virus was spread far outside of Wuhan, which allowed the virus to escape China&#8217;s borders and get to the United States and get to Europe and get to essentially every country in the world.&#8221;
&#8220;I believe that was a deliberate and conscious choice by the Chinese communist leadership, because they didn&#8217;t want to see their relative power and standing in the world decline because this virus was contained within China,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;Again, it was obvious by mid-December to Chinese authorities that this virus was highly contagious and very deadly.&#8221;
&#8220;They also knew that, once this virus began to spread outside of Wuhan, it would wreak economic havoc throughout China. And, in fact, China had the first contraction in the first quarter of this year since the cultural revolution ended in the 1970s,&#8221; Cotton continued. &#8220;I believe the Chinese communist leaders, when they were aware of those facts by mid-January, made the conscious decision not to explain to the world that it was transmissible between humans, not to shut down travel, not to ask for American or other kind of international scientific help, but to allow this virus to escape their borders, because if they were going to suffer an economic contraction, they were not going to allow the world to continue to prosper, and China be the only country whose economy was declining.&#8221;
&#8220;They might see an absolute decline in their economy, but they refused to see a relative decline, especially relative to the United States,&#8221; Cotton concluded. &#8220;If China had been up-front about this virus from the very beginning, some studies suggest that they could have reduced the number of cases in China itself by 65 to even 90 percent.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The Chinese Communist leadership did not want to see their relative power and standing in the world decline because this virus was contained within China so they deliberately hid it from the world. MORE: <a href="https://t.co/GGLdmJaFT6">https://t.co/GGLdmJaFT6</a>
&mdash; Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton/status/1254428850911576069?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 26, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">subscriber</a>.  
TRANSCRIPT:
<blockquote>MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: And new information this morning coming to light on what China really knew about the coronavirus pandemic, including words that they drastically underreported the number of cases in the country.
President Trump, in a stunning move, questioning whether or not this was deliberate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now, the question was asked, would you be angry at China?
Well, the answer might very well be a very resounding yes. But it depends. Was it a mistake that got out of control, or was it done deliberately, OK? There&#8217;s a big difference between those two.
In either event, they should have let us go in. You know, we asked to go in very early, and they didn&#8217;t want us in. I think they were embarrassed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, first sounded the alarm about China right here on this program months ago.
He joins me right now live.
And, Senator, it&#8217;s great to see you this morning. Thanks so much for being here.
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Good morning, Maria.
BARTIROMO: So, you knew very early on and you questioned very early on the origins of this disease. And you knew that it likely came from that lab, that level four super lab in Wuhan.
I want to ask you about what China knew, because you and I spoke over the weekend, this weekend. And I asked you, do you think it&#8217;s deliberate?
You said, you don&#8217;t have any evidence right now, but it should be investigated, but we do know what China did once they knew how severe this coronavirus be.
Tell us what you think China did.
COTTON: So, Maria, I want to distinguish between the origins of the virus and China&#8217;s reactions to the virus.
So, right now, as you say, the most plausible explanation, supported by literally all of the circumstantial evidence, is that the virus originated in one of those two laboratories in Wuhan.
All the way back in January, it was pretty well-documented by Chinese scientists that it didn&#8217;t originate in the food market. But wherever it originated, Maria, we know that the Chinese Communist Party was both criminally negligent and incompetent at first, and then deliberately, deliberately malevolent in the way they responded to this virus, for their own people and the world.
As early as the second week of December, it was clear that this virus was spreading from person to person. By late December, it was spreading to doctors in Wuhan hospitals. Some doctors were trying to blow the whistle on these facts, and the secret police arrived at their doorsteps in the middle of the night.
So only after China fessed up to the WHO on December 31 did the world know what was happening. Yet, still they continued to deny that it was spreading from person to person into mid-January. That allowed millions of people to leave Wuhan.
And then, finally, China continued to pressure the WHO and other countries not to stop international travel from China. That meant that hundreds of thousands of persons left China after this virus was spread far outside of Wuhan, which allowed the virus to escape China&#8217;s borders and get to the United States and get to Europe and get to essentially every country in the world.
I believe that was a deliberate and conscious choice by the Chinese communist leadership, because they didn&#8217;t want to see their relative power and standing in the world decline because this virus was contained within China.
BARTIROMO: So, a deliberate move because they expected this virus to cause economic contraction in China.
Tell me what they expected in China and what they didn&#8217;t want to see from the &#8212; they didn&#8217;t want to happen with the rest of the world being fine.
COTTON: So, Maria, again, it was obvious by mid-December to Chinese authorities that this virus was highly contagious and very deadly.
They also knew that, once this virus began to spread outside of Wuhan, it would wreak economic havoc throughout China. And, in fact, China had the first contraction in the first quarter of this year since the cultural revolution ended in the 1970s.
I believe the Chinese communist leaders, when they were aware of those facts by mid-January, made the conscious decision not to explain to the world that it was transmissible between humans, not to shut down travel, not to ask for American or other kind of international scientific help, but to allow this virus to escape their borders, because if they were going to suffer an economic contraction, they were not going to allow the world to continue to prosper, and China be the only country whose economy was declining.
They might see an absolute decline in their economy, but they refused to see a relative decline, especially relative to the United States.
BARTIROMO: In other words, they didn&#8217;t want to see the Chinese economy contract 20 percent, with the rest of the world contracting 2 percent?
COTTON: That&#8217;s exactly right.
I mean, it was inevitable that we would have economic impacts all around the world, because so much of the world has outsourced manufacturing productive capacity to China. So it was inevitable, if China&#8217;s economy was declining, that it would have effects all around the world.
But what wasn&#8217;t inevitable was that we would loss 26 million jobs in America in a month. If China had been up front about this virus from the very beginning, some studies suggest that they could have reduced the number of cases in China itself by 65 to even 90 percent.
Imagine what that would have done for the spread of the virus, not only in China but, more importantly for us, all around the world. But once they knew that it was spreading all around China, they were not going to take the responsible action of bringing in international scientists and shutting down international air travel.
Rather, they were going to let the virus escape their borders, so the rest of the world would suffer along with China.
BARTIROMO: So, one of the issues that we have spoken about in the past is this intellectual property theft that has been going on for decades.
China, the Chinese Communist Party, continues to steal intellectual property. You believe that they are stealing intellectual property right now, as we speak.
Let&#8217;s talk a bit about that, because the whole world is looking for a vaccine. And I wonder, is China trying now to come out of this trying to save face, look better than the rest of the world, while coming up with a vaccine before the United States?
What&#8217;s happening right now with regards to that kind of science?
COTTON: Well, Maria, the Chinese Communist Party has been stealing America&#8217;s intellectual property for decades. And they aren&#8217;t going to magically stop in the middle of a pandemic.
In almost every state in the union, there are active cases against Chinese nationals. In Arkansas, for instance, they are accused of having stolen proprietary genomes of our farmers in East Arkansas.
But in the middle of a pandemic, what&#8217;s the most valuable intellectual property in the world? It&#8217;s the research that our great laboratories and life science companies are doing on prophylactic drugs, therapeutic drugs, and ultimately a vaccine.
So I have little doubt that the Chinese intelligence services are actively trying to steal America&#8217;s intellectual property as it relates to the virus that they unleashed on the world, because, of course, they want to be the country that claims credit for finding those drugs or finding a vaccine, and then use it as leverage against the rest of the world.
BARTIROMO: So, I want to ask you about your three pieces of legislation that you have already put out to keep China accountable. I&#8217;m going to get to that in a moment.
But just what you just said, that is why you believe we shouldn&#8217;t be giving visas to Chinese students who want to study advanced sciences. They want to get into the Gilead Sciences and the Googles of the world to steal that research; is that right?
COTTON: Yes, Maria, it&#8217;s a scandal to me that we have trained so many of the Chinese Communist Party&#8217;s brightest minds to go back to China to compete for our jobs, to take our business, and ultimately to steal our property and design weapons and other devices that can be used against the American people.
So, I think we need to take a very hard look at the visas that we give the Chinese nationals to come to the United States to study, especially at the post-graduate level in advanced scientific and technological fields.
If Chinese students want to come here and study Shakespeare and the Federalist Papers, that&#8217;s what they need to learn from America. They don&#8217;t need to learn quantum computing and artificial intelligence from America.
BARTIROMO: Well, they&#8217;re certainly making sure that anybody in China is learning the culture of China. You make a good point. Let&#8217;s make sure people understand the culture of America.
So, you have introduced three pieces of legislation. And you think bringing pharmaceutical manufacturing back to America is critical.
You also think military spending and the measures there are going to actually keep them accountable as well.
Real quick, tell me about those pieces of legislation.
COTTON: So, I think most Americans are shocked to learn that so many of our basic drugs are made in China.
We need to stop that. We need to bring it back to the United States and get it out of China. So, we would give incentives to companies to build new plants here, create more jobs here, so we are not dependent on China in a pandemic or even in any kind of health concerns.
Second, China is continuing, even now, to take aggressive action throughout the region to break its commitments.
It&#8217;s cracking down on Hong Kong, in violations of its commitment to Great Britain when Great Britain returned Hong Kong. It&#8217;s taking aggressive action in the South China Sea. We need to invest more in our defense industrial base to offset some of the losses we&#8217;re going to see because of this virus.
We need more ships, we need more submarines, we need more bombers, we need more fighters, the exact kind of systems that will deter China from aggressive action against the United States and our interests in the Western Pacific and ultimately all around the globe.
BARTIROMO: And, by the way, right now, they are also capitalizing on the problems we&#8217;re having in this country on meat. A couple of meat processing plants have been taken offline. They&#8217;re buying all the meat at discounted prices.
That&#8217;s going to be a problem for the U.S. come next couple of weeks. We&#8217;re going to see a skyrocketing price of meat, right?
COTTON: Yes, we have a lot of our biggest processing plants that are going offline. Unfortunately, that may hit supplies in grocery stores in the weeks ahead.
At the meantime, China is buying a lot of cut-rate protein from the United States, just another example of the way they are trying to take advantage of this crisis. They are not resting on their laurels.
BARTIROMO: All right.
COTTON: They&#8217;re not breathing a sigh of relief. They are trying to advance their interests and ambitions all around the world.
BARTIROMO: All right, we will leave it there.
Senator, do you think they are going to keep their promise to buy the $250 billion of stuff that they promised President Trump in that phase one trade deal?
COTTON: Let me just say, Maria, I&#8217;m skeptical of any promises made by any communists. And the Chinese communists don&#8217;t have a very good record of keeping their promises.
And they may not even have the resources to begin with, because, remember, even though the rest of the world is taking a big economic hit, China is taking it as well.
So, I would fall back here to Ronald Reagan&#8217;s maxim of trust, but verify.
BARTIROMO: All that, and they lied again on the phase one trade deal.
Senator, thank you for your great work. We appreciate your time this morning. Thank you, sir.
COTTON: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Senator Tom Cotton joining us there.</blockquote>

U.S. Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) speaking at the Hudson

Tom Cotton Explains Why He Thinks China Allowed Flights Out Of Wuhan During Outbreak

Wuhan

On Thursday, writing in <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/03/joe-biden-is-chinas-choice-for-president/">National Review</a>, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) blasted former Vice President Joe Biden for his consistent support for Communist China; the title alone was a withering attack, stating, “Joe Biden Is China’s Choice for President.”
Cotton began by noting, “The Democratic Party has always been weak on national security when it comes to China. But some credit is due when it comes to China’s atrocious human-rights record and its theft of American jobs. For a generation, prominent Democrats loudly criticized Beijing on these fronts … Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi have been longstanding China trade hawks, for instance. Even a socialist like Bernie Sanders has been a reliable critic.&#8221;
Then Cotton turned his sights on Biden, “Despite the occasional box-checking, wishy-washy comment slapping Beijing on the wrist for the worst of its abuses, the reality is that the former vice president’s support of the People’s Republic of China is deep and longstanding.”
Cotton listed Biden’s actions that buttressed his attack: Biden had shot down opposition to granting China most-favored-nation trade status and World Trade Organization membership in the 1990s when Biden served as the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Biden’s support for Chinese president Xi Jinping as he seized absolute power as Biden “continued to push for closer ties and even more trade,” while millions of American jobs were being lost, and most closely of all, circumstances surrounding Hunter Biden.
Cotton wrote sardonically, “&#8230; Hunter Biden, Biden’s prodigal son, accompanied him on a trip to Beijing in 2013. That same year, Hunter joined the board of a Shanghai-based private equity firm. In 2017, a few months after his father left office, he invested a substantial chunk of his own money in the company. We don’t know what he’s made off the deal, but I expect Hunter is doing better than laid-off workers in Arkansas or Delaware. Must be nice.”
Cotton points out how the vacillations in China’s actions have reflected whether Biden’s star was waxing or waning:
<blockquote>Biden’s announcement of his campaign alone was enough to encourage Beijing suddenly to take a harder line on trade negotiations with the Trump administration. As Biden’s star seemed to fade, China suddenly got easier to deal with, striking a “Phase 1” deal with us in January. It’s a safe prediction that they are about to take a tougher line again.</blockquote>
Cotton notes Biden’s fawning attitude toward China, referencing Biden saying, “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man. They’re not bad folks, folks. But guess what? They’re not competition for us.” And, “Our workers are literally three times as productive as workers . . . in Asia. So what are we worried about?”
Cotton continues, “I’ve worked extensively with Democrats on China — with Chuck Schumer on cracking down on Chinese fentanyl trafficking, with Chris Van Hollen and numerous others on Huawei’s threat to the world’s telecommunications infrastructure. I don’t exactly hear Biden hammering on these important issues on the campaign trail.”
He rips Biden for referring to President Trump’s decision to impose travel restrictions on China as “hysterical xenophobia.” Then he points out the hypocrisy of Democrats, writing, “Since 2015, Democrats have claimed hysterically that Donald Trump is a Russian agent. On the other hand, it’s ridiculous to say Biden is a Chinese asset — if he were, his handler would tell him to oppose China here and there to build credibility. But China can count on Joe Biden always to take China’s side.”
He bluntly concludes, “The competition between the United States and China, strategic and economic, will define the next century for our nation. We will need to be led by presidents for whom there’s no question as to which side they are on.”

Menu

Tom Cotton

Tom Cotton Cites Abraham Lincoln In Senate Floor Speech On Danger Of Mob Rule

Tom Cotton Calls On Justice Roberts To Resign Following DACA Ruling

Limbaugh: Two GOP Senators Positioning To Pick Up Trump’s Populist Movement in 2024, Leave Old Conservatism Behind

Wallace BLASTS New York Times Over Cotton Op-Ed Scuffle: ‘A Profile In A Lack Of Courage’

New York Times Tore Apart Cotton’s Op-Ed. Now Cotton Gets The Last Laugh.

Colin Powell: I’m Voting For Biden. Tom Cotton: Big Deal. You Haven’t Voted GOP In 16 Years.

Sen. Cotton Calls Out Different Social Distancing Standards During Pandemic Versus Riots

NYT Editorial Page Editor Resigns After Blowback For Cotton Op-Ed. Ted Cruz Publishes Scathing Obituary For The Paper.

The New York Times Releases New Statement On Senator Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

Senator Tom Cotton Shreds New York Times For Caving To ‘Woke Mob’ Over Op-Ed

NYT Issues An Apology For Publishing Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

Hillary’s 2016 Press Secretary: ‘Defund The Police.’ Cruz, Cotton, Hawley Fire Back Hard.

Ocasio-Cortez Explodes Over Tom Cotton Op-Ed That Features Ideas Supported By Majority Of Americans

Tom Cotton’s NYT Opinion Piece Calls For Military To Quell Riots. NYT Writers Revolt.

Cruz, Cotton, Introduce Bill To Turn Away From China And Toward Israel To Fight Virus

Senator Cotton: ‘No Question’ That China Pressured W.H.O. In December To ‘Undersell The Risk Of This Virus’

GOP Senators Push To Rename Chinese Embassy Street For Doctor Allegedly Silenced After Warning About Virus

Sen. Cotton: U.S. Needs To ‘Take A Very Hard Look’ At Visas To Chinese Nationals To Study Advanced Science And Tech

Tom Cotton Explains Why He Thinks China Allowed Flights Out Of Wuhan During Outbreak

Tom Cotton Crushes Biden: ‘Joe Biden Is China’s Choice For President’

Menu

Tom Cotton

Tom Cotton Cites Abraham Lincoln In Senate Floor Speech On Danger Of Mob Rule

Tom Cotton Calls On Justice Roberts To Resign Following DACA Ruling

Limbaugh: Two GOP Senators Positioning To Pick Up Trump’s Populist Movement in 2024, Leave Old Conservatism Behind

Wallace BLASTS New York Times Over Cotton Op-Ed Scuffle: ‘A Profile In A Lack Of Courage’

New York Times Tore Apart Cotton’s Op-Ed. Now Cotton Gets The Last Laugh.

Colin Powell: I’m Voting For Biden. Tom Cotton: Big Deal. You Haven’t Voted GOP In 16 Years.

Sen. Cotton Calls Out Different Social Distancing Standards During Pandemic Versus Riots

NYT Editorial Page Editor Resigns After Blowback For Cotton Op-Ed. Ted Cruz Publishes Scathing Obituary For The Paper.

The New York Times Releases New Statement On Senator Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

Senator Tom Cotton Shreds New York Times For Caving To ‘Woke Mob’ Over Op-Ed

NYT Issues An Apology For Publishing Tom Cotton’s Op-Ed

Hillary’s 2016 Press Secretary: ‘Defund The Police.’ Cruz, Cotton, Hawley Fire Back Hard.

Ocasio-Cortez Explodes Over Tom Cotton Op-Ed That Features Ideas Supported By Majority Of Americans

Tom Cotton’s NYT Opinion Piece Calls For Military To Quell Riots. NYT Writers Revolt.

Cruz, Cotton, Introduce Bill To Turn Away From China And Toward Israel To Fight Virus

Senator Cotton: ‘No Question’ That China Pressured W.H.O. In December To ‘Undersell The Risk Of This Virus’

GOP Senators Push To Rename Chinese Embassy Street For Doctor Allegedly Silenced After Warning About Virus

Sen. Cotton: U.S. Needs To ‘Take A Very Hard Look’ At Visas To Chinese Nationals To Study Advanced Science And Tech

Tom Cotton Explains Why He Thinks China Allowed Flights Out Of Wuhan During Outbreak

Tom Cotton Crushes Biden: ‘Joe Biden Is China’s Choice For President’

Don't miss a beat of our coverage.