413 private links
BASH: You just said that you're creating a story.
VANCE: We ought to be talking about public policy. [09:15:05]
BASH: Sir, you just said that you're creating the story.
VANCE: What's that, Dana?
BASH: You just said that this is a story that you created...
VANCE: Yes.
BASH: So, the eating dogs and cats thing is not accurate.
VANCE: We are creating -- we are -- Dana, it comes from firsthand accounts from my constituents.
I say that we're creating a story, meaning we're creating the American media focusing on it. I didn't create 20,000 illegal migrants coming into Springfield, thanks to Kamala Harris' policies. Her policies did that, but yes, we created the actual focus that allowed the American media to talk about this story and the suffering caused by Kamala Harris' policies.
David K
6 hours ago edited
RFK Jr understands the basics of the Reagan 80/20 rule: i.e., "The person who agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20% traitor." Never Trumpers have the Reagan Rule backwards and support Democratic candidates that have less than 20% agreement with their so-called "True Conservative" values and they hate Trump and MAGA supporters even thought they arguably have more than 80% policy agreement with them. Unlike these Never Trumpers, RFK Jr isn't taking his ball and going home in a hissy fit, but following the Reagan 80/20 Rule. Similarly, Trump understands that 100% political alignment with the majority of voters is an impossible dream. He also understands that he and RFK Jr don't need to be in complete agreement for each of them to get their best possible outcome in the 2024 election. Like life, politics is not a strict zero-sum, all-or-nothing game.
etba_ss David K
2 hours ago
These people endorsing Harris to "save conservatism/democracy/the republic" are lying. They don't really believe that. They just hate Trump. Just like the left didn't believe Dick Cheney was "literally Hitler". As soon as he turns a trick for them, they like him again. The left thinks like Voldomort, both being pure evil, that there is no good or evil, only power. Only evil claims that.
Let's also acknowledge people like Dick Cheney hate us. They tolerated us when we knew our place, sat down, shut up and let them run the country. Since that gig is up, they expose themselves. They don't agree with us 80% of the time. That's why they hate us. They agree with Harris closer to 80% of the time than they do with us. They just want to funnel favors to a different set of friends. They are all for power, forever war, globalism and elitism. If they just hated Trump, they wouldn't also be campaigning against Ted Cruz. They wouldn't hate Ron DeSantis too.
These are the people who hated Reagan. Then when he got power and was so popular, they pretended they were like him. Reagan also spent a lot of money on defense, which lined their pockets. Reagan was winning the Cold War. This isn't 1980 anymore. There is no USSR. China is a real threat, but we are doing next to nothing about them. We are too busy meddling in everything else in the world to get serious about the real threat.
Republicans, you’re not going to best the anchor on the facts, because the anchors aren’t conceding any facts. The best you can do is beat them into submission. //
A conversation of “Yes, she was,” “No, she wasn’t” is useless and a wasted opportunity. Instead, there are two options for taking advantage of these little shows:
One is to force the trifling anchor to fully expose himself as a Democrat surrogate by demanding he explain and defend his counterpoint.
Senator Tom Cotton did this expertly in a recent interview with ABC’s Jonathan “Milhouse” Karl. When Karl attempted to run interference for Kamala by insisting Kamala no longer supports every godawful policy she professed to support and even aided in implementing as vice president, Cotton challenged Karl to show his math. “How do you know that’s not her position?” said Cotton in a way that kind of turns me on. “How do you know that’s not her position? She has not said that. She has not said that. She has not said that.” //
Karl went on to say on behalf of the Kamala campaign that the vice president is “clearly making an effort to move to the middle,” revealing whom he supports in this race and whom he believes needs help across the finish line.
At that point, Republicans, you can proceed to acknowledge that the anchor is here to assist Kamala, nothing more, and you can continue to make the points you want.
The second option is to aggressively confront every rebuttal sputtered by the anchor because the media collectively and individually have proven themselves to be irredeemable liars and fiends. Say so. They deserve it. The voters are on your side when you do. //
Why are you defending her?
Why are you speaking for her?
Why are you letting Kamala and the Democrats dictate your coverage?
Why are you trying to debate on their behalf?
If you want a debate, host one and demand that she be here to answer for herself, rather than you answering for her.
Why are you repeating her campaign’s lies, which you know are false, and which you refuse to “fact-check”?
Why do you apologize for her campaigners’ lies when they’re not here and then get snippy with me for rebutting them, even though I did you the courtesy of showing up while they refuse to answer your calls?
More than 200 former aides to the three GOP presidential nominees who preceded former President Trump in 2016 — former President George W. Bush, former Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) — endorsed Vice President Harris on Monday.
The majority of the group also endorsed President Biden in 2020. The group wrote a letter announcing the endorsement, USA Today first reported. //
If most of these people were already supporting Biden in 2020, then guess what? While they might identify as Republicans, they're supporting Democrats. It tells you a lot more about them. They're not just being anti-Trump -- they're supporting Biden and Harris. If they can support Biden or the radical ideas of Harris, then they're not conservatives, in my humble opinion. Also, this just confirms that there were a lot of people who weren't conservative working for Romney et al.
Harmeet K. Dhillon @pnjaban
·
Prolife activists who are trying to suppress Republican votes over prolife policy differences, enabling enthusiastic abortion cheerleaders to write the rules and appoint the judges and prosecute the journalists, are grossly irresponsible and destructive to the prolife cause.
3:08 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //
Peachy Keenan @KeenanPeachy
·
If you want women to have fewer abortions, the tool for this job is not DONALD TRUMP lol.
If Donald Trump is the only guy you are waiting on to deliver you the no-abortion utopia of your dreams, you might want to rethink your strategy.
Overturning Roe was about returning it to the States.
THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT and what the movement marched for - for decades.
Now your fight is in the state houses. Ohio, Kansas - lots of low hanging fruit out there!
Not as high-profile as fighting with Trump but it will get you farther.
Suggesting a Trump boycott is a full-throated call for Kamala and Roe4Evah.
7:46 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //
Harmeet K. Dhillon @pnjaban
·
Replying to @pnjaban
It’s almost as if their goal is increasing their own perceived power instead of saving the lives of innocent children.
3:15 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //
The alliances that Trump is forming with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard have nothing to do with rejecting conservative principles or becoming more Democrat: it's about saving the lives of America's children. The execution may not be to the liking of certain voices in the pro-life movement, but the goal hasn't changed. It is a tragedy that many of these self-proclaimed activists appear to have forgotten this or are so focused on their loss of perceived power that they no longer care to.
But for those not compelled by conscience, please consider the ramifications: If Kamala Harris wins, Democrats will pass a federal law which, at a minimum, makes Roe v. Wade (and not the more limited holding of Casey), the law of the land, preempting the pro-life laws currently in place in some states. Harris will hold the power to appoint federal judges and possibly replace one to three Supreme Court justices — and that’s if Democrats don’t expand and stack the high court. Harris will hold the bully pulpit and will only further dehumanize the unborn, making it more difficult to change the hearts and minds of Americans.
Trump may not govern as a pro-life president, but Harris will most assuredly be the most pro-abortion president ever elected. With Trump in office, the status quo can be maintained until four years from now, a primary battle can demand a candidate willing to fight for the sanctity of life. While society will still not be open to laws that protect all human life, a pro-life candidate can support a federal ban on late-term abortions while working to support pregnancy resource centers and promoting life.
It took us 50 years to get to where we are and it will take decades more to move society toward a place where the populace will agree to ban most abortions. But if Harris is elected, we may never have the chance to start changing hearts, minds, and laws.
For instance, being a third-party candidate on a debate stage alongside Republicans and Democrats is borderline impossible thanks to rules that were created through a group founded by both Republicans and Democrats. I wrote of the Commission on Presidential Debates in 2016 and how it effectively pushed out the League of Women Voters to seize control of the debate stage:
The organization itself was founded in 1987 by a bipartisan Republican/Democrat effort, and has run the debates ever since. //
Before the CPD, the debates were run by the League of Women Voters from 1976 to 1984. The League withdrew when Republicans and Democrats made a deal that would give them full control over the debates, and how they were run.
Nancy Neuman, then head of the League, called the deal “outrageous,” and noted that the Democrats and Republicans wanted to control the questioners, composition of the audience, press access, and more. All of this was done behind closed doors. By the time the deal was done, the League was presented with 16 pages of non-negotiable rules for the debates.
The League departed with a statement that called out exactly what the dual parties were doing and remains accurate to this day:
“The League of Women Voters is withdrawing its sponsorship of the presidential debate scheduled for mid-October because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter,” League President Nancy M. Neuman said today.
“It has become clear to us that the candidates’ organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions,” Neuman said. “The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.”
Even Walter Cronkite called it an "unconscionable fraud." //
No matter how insane you might think the person is, they deserve a fair shot at winning the people's affections. The rules should not be weighted against them, and the other parties should not be able to manipulate rules to keep them from reaching the people.
It's my honest opinion that a two-party system is incredibly dangerous and limiting. If America's economic system has taught us anything, it's that competition brings out the best in people and the best people overall. Yet, we're currently tied to a dual-party system so filled to the brim with corruption that sometimes it's hard to know where one party begins and the other ends.
I will say that Clear Choice — this PAC, this DNC-aligned PAC — that was created specifically to take us out has spent millions of dollars to take us out. They have, unfortunately, turned us into a spoiler. And we don't want to be a spoiler. We wanted to win. We wanted a fair shot. The DNC made that impossible for us. They have banned us, shadowbanned us, kept us off stages, manipulated polls, used lawfare against us, sued us in every possible state. They've even planted insiders into our campaign to disrupt it and to create actual legal issues for us. And I mean, the extent by which the sabotage they've unleashed upon us, it's mindblowing. I mean, we're still learning new ways that they have sabotaged us.
It is exclusively because of the Democratic Party taking us out. And I am so disappointed I ever helped them. //
And, you know, given this, I think we are taking a very serious look at making sure that the people that have corrupted our fair and free democracy do not end up in office in November. It's hard — I mean, it's really hard, Tom, to say these words, because it's also acknowledging how bad things are.
If Johnson and GOP leadership actually cared about providing a contrasting vision from that produced by Democrats, they’d put their majority to good use. This means spending the August recess holding daily congressional hearings that underscore the severity of the ongoing border invasion and making the case to the American public on why government funding should be withheld next month unless the Biden-Harris administration fixes the crisis.
But Republicans aren’t doing any of that.
When they’re not issuing performative outrage tweets about what Democrats are saying at the DNC, they’re rushing to the nearest Fox News camera to warn viewers about how dangerous the modern left has become.
“Vote Republican to save America!” says the House GOP that’s funded a myriad of Democrat priorities since winning the majority nearly two years ago. //
Even if they lose an election here or there, Democrats recognize that Republicans lack the willpower to overturn tyrannical policies implemented during their time in power, and that voters will put them in charge once the electoral pendulum swings back in their favor. They also have the added bonus of a hyper-politicized federal bureaucracy that advances leftist causes even when a Democrat isn’t in the White House.
What we’re seeing at the DNC this week is an open acknowledgment of this paradigm. Democrats realize they can expose the most unhinged elements of their worldview to the American populace, and vapid Republicans will produce no long-term consequences for it. Their willingness to play the long game has allowed them to push America further away from the constitutional framework created by the Founders into an increasingly unrecognizable dystopia.
There’s only one political force playing to win in America, and it sure as heck isn’t the Republican Party.
What’s more difficult to understand and accept is how all of this is the inevitable consequence of a liberal worldview that the GOP has already accepted, which means what we’re seeing this week at the DNC we will eventually see at the RNC.
I don’t just mean that the Trump campaign and the Republican Party have softened their opposition to abortion in the post-Dobbs era. It’s not merely that abortion was all but removed from the GOP platform and the party’s previous position in favor of federal abortion limits was abandoned. It’s that Trump and his Republican Party would like very much to stop talking about abortion altogether now, as if the matter is settled and we can move on to more important matters, like the border and inflation.
That’s the same attitude they have about gay marriage, which, like abortion once was, is supposed to be a settled debate, not up for discussion anymore. The choice to take these issues off the table, or try to, is usually framed as pragmatic. We want a big tent, Democrats are radical, Republicans can present their side as reasonable.
But it doesn’t work like that. There’s a reason the Democrats went from talking about how abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare” in the 1990s to celebrating it with free abortions from the back of an RV in 2024. Once you cede the principle of the thing, once you accept the premise that it’s justifiable to kill the unborn under certain circumstances, the list of allowable circumstances will continuously expand.
This is of course true of any moral principle, which is why the left moved with alarming speed from arguing that gay marriage wouldn’t hurt or affect anyone to demanding that everyone actively endorse and celebrate it or face ruin. There is no limiting principle to the argument that consenting adults have a right to have their sexual arrangements officially recognized by the state. That’s why the rationale used in the gay marriage debates of the 2010s is exactly the rationale deployed today in the transgender debate, which will in turn eventually be successfully deployed on behalf of plural marriage, polyamory, and even pedophilia.
The point here is not to sow discord on the right or decry a big tent strategy for the GOP, but merely to point out that when you violate the moral principles on which a social order is based, you don’t get to say when enough is enough. The slippery slope does not cease to be slippery when you think you’ve had enough. You will go all the way down it.
Put another way, the time to say “no” was before the moral principle was violated, not after. Having accepted, for example, that abortion is morally licit in cases where the child is conceived through rape or incest, or that it should be allowed in the first trimester because that seems a reasonable compromise with the left, today’s Republican Party has lost the ability to object to abortion on any grounds whatsoever.
Either an unborn child is a human being, with the same right to life as an infant or a toddler, or it has no rights and can be killed with impunity. Compromising on this is incoherent. It is to admit defeat.
“No, not at all,” Vance told a Fox News reporter in an interview that aired Sunday. “It doesn’t hurt my feelings.”
“Look, the price of admission — meaning, the price of getting to serve the people of this country — is the Democrats are going to attack us with everything that they have. I think it’s an honor,” Vance continued.
“As Harry Truman once said, ‘if you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen,’” he said.
The fact that Democrats even went with this strategy reveals a remarkable inability to read the room. If you think men can get pregnant, dress up in explicit costumes, wear African garb when you’re a white woman, and call other people “weird,” then perhaps you might consider taking a look in the mirror.
The reality is that there is weirdness in each political movement. Indeed, one has to be at least a little weird to run for office. But when parts of your political party resemble a Ringling Bros. circus, it is not a good idea to call other people “weird,” especially when social media is a thing.
Watching the RNC last night was fascinating in more ways than one. It was incredible to see the unity there, but that unity wasn't forced at all. People were very excited to be charging forward under one banner.
It wouldn't be a stretch to say that the banner the RNC was rallying around had the name Trump/Vance plastered in bold letters on it, but despite that fact, the RNC's primary focus wasn't Trump. Don't get me wrong, it was a massive part of the messaging to be sure. It would be weird if it wasn't, given recent events and the fact that he's the official Republican candidate.
But ultimately, the RNC's message was very simple but very profound.
"This is about you."
The funny thing is, in any other election cycle, this message would have been worthy of eye rolls. Every election cycle, politicians and talking heads smile at the camera and tell you how much they want to get into office to fix all the problems for Americans, but this year, it actually felt genuine. //
The thing is, the left's message is also "this is about you." However, now that we've watched them at their most unhinged, "this is about you" looks pretty unhinged when the left says it. It's like a salivating wolf saying the phrase to sheep.
The Democrat Party's approach to "helping" America takes on the feel of them saying, "This is for your own good," whereas the Republican Party's approach is "You don't need us in your way to thrive." The Democrats want you to submit; the Republicans want you to live like an American should. //
Many within the party, and indeed on the left, truly believe they know better and that what they're doing is a good thing. They think they're the heroes.
But they lost the plot. They forgot they are fallible humans themselves. They got so infected with their own hate that they think their hatred of people is good. They willfully operate on this hate under the full understanding that their hatred causes them to, as was pointed out by Trump last night, operate for only half the country while damning the other half, but doing so in good conscience.
They brainwashed themselves into thinking villainy is a virtue.
The reason the RNC seemed so genuine and united is because amidst all the villainy we've experienced over the past few years, one party still remembers an America as it's supposed to be.
First, any civil or criminal defendant in a federal case who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool can veto the Washington DC circuit and receive a hearing in his or her choice of another randomly chosen circuit or the circuit of his or her home dwelling.
Second, regardless of what circuit a federal case is filed in, any civil or criminal defendant who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool shall be entitled to a jury pool that is proportionally selected from a region that did not vote more than 70 percent in favor of one party’s candidate in the most recent presidential, senatorial, or congressional election.
Third, plaintiffs or prosecutors in a federal case may elect to have the case decided in a randomly assigned circuit other than the District of Columbia. This would ensure that corrupt and criminal Democrats do not get a free pass on anything they do simply because they know a DC jury pool would never convict them of anything, no matter how egregious the offense.
Fourth, Congress should mandate that any states receiving federal funds for any legal or law enforcement purposes must abide by the same rules guaranteeing a defendant a politically fair jury pool.
Fifth, state legislators should enact similar laws ensuring political fairness for trials in their state.
In summary, all Americans are entitled to a jury of our peers, or at least a jury that is not politically biased. Unfortunately, conservative Americans are being increasingly subjected to politically weaponized lawfare. //
Indylawyer
10 hours ago
This is a badly needed reform. Excellent point. We also need to eliminate most federal criminal statutes, and make sure the ones that are left are clearly and narrowly defined. They wouldn't be able to wage most of this lawfare without these vague and overweening criminal statutes. //
anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
All this articles says to me is conservatives have been woefully neglectful in preparing to fight the opposition, and still are. We all knew that though.
GBenton anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
If Trump wins in November we have to view this as the last opportunity to right the ship. After what Biden has done, including the lawfare and threats to pack the Supreme Court and end the filibuster, the mission is to destroy the corruption and neutralize the threat should a Democrat win in 2028.
That said, I think if the American people knew the full truth about the left there might not be much of a Democrat party for a while. Trump should declassify anything and everything on the Dems and their corruption going back to JFK (and before, as relevant), since I believe they had JFK killed, they set up Nixon, and they have their fingerprints on a whole lotta bad stuff including Waco, etc, not to mention what Hillary and Obama did.
Expose all the dirt. make it public.
GBenton Arik
12 hours ago
Stealing elections needs to carry a price similar to treason since it interferes with the peaceful tranfer of power and threatens the stability and survival of the republic and invites tyranny. //
I would only note it's not really "tit for tat" — it's about adhering to the law and applying it equally. //
Dieter Schultz
14 hours ago
"I'm not talking about violence," she made clear. "I'm talking about tit for tat," she said.
I'd just be happy if the GOP just decides to fight like they're in an existential war for this country's soul and act accordingly.
That might mean something that resembles "tit for tat" but, more important than that is just playing to win rather than playing to let the Dems win.
Betterdeadthanred Dieter Schultz
9 hours ago
Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here. Its certainly not going to get us out or guarantee a place at the back of the line at the camps.
Dieter Schultz Betterdeadthanred
9 hours ago edited
Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here.
I'm pretty sure it's not principles we're sticking to that's gotten us here.I keep saying that there are two kinds, and definitions, of conservative, the ideological and the personality type.
We can't seem to grok that the personality type conservative sounds a lot like the ideological conservative but with the basic impetus of "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change" and, because of that, they are NOT the same and, in fact, behave like RINOs.
It's not principles that are 'getting us here', it is being confused about which 'conservative' we're working with and wondering why people that 'tend to oppose change', you know, refuse to change the status quo that the left is clever enough to create for them so that they will 'refuse to act' to correct the ideological errors of the left's positions.
It's almost as if Democrats don't want Republicans protected. Hmmm. //
anon-ev27
12 hours ago
Deja Vu all over again. We have Milwaukee city hall, (the mayor and chief of staff), the Milwaukee police chief, and the Federal US Secret Service all refusing to properly protect an event. They claim they are not expecting any violence, but they want violence, they want another riot to ensue so they can blame MAGA again. The free speech zone for the DNC convention is 3 miles away so you can be sure no main stream media cameras will be filming "that mostly peaceful protest". Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. The GOP is being setup again. They should move the convention or force the USSS to change their plans. //
anon-u50m anon-ev27
4 hours ago
GOP always brings marbles to a gunfight.
There are many reasons the faculties at law schools are overwhelming liberal and crazy but the main reason is because that is where the money is. Many are the well-funded liberal law firms — the ACLU being the most notorious one. They are hiring. Rare are the conservative groups.
To be sure, big corporations pay better to defend themselves, but that does not stop abuses outside the corporate world. There is no money to be made by Exxon (for example) in stopping the student loan steal. And so the theft occurs with Republicans talking the talk but walking away.
Until Republicans go to court, get a TRO and force Biden to defend forcing women to undress before men in their locker room, I do not want to hear Republican complaints.
On Monday, Donald Trump announced that his stance on abortion is that the states should decide the intricacies of their abortion laws within their respective territories. I found this to be a very solid move for a few reasons, chief among them is that it is the constitutional view, and it makes the abortion fight for pro-abortion groups that much harder to win. //
As I wrote later, the Republican Party could actually use this avenue of handing power to the states to great effect. They could remove a lot of the deciding power about a lot of subjects from the federal government, craft laws for the government that close the doors on these subjects forever, and hand all the deciding power to the states. They could rightfully bill it as giving the power back to the people.
This would have an insane amount of benefits. Not only would the Republican Party become the party of the people, but it would also result in far less chaos around the nation as power becomes more localized. //
I know this is a very solid path to take and that this iron is hot to strike thanks to the people being made well aware of just how bad centralized power can be, compliments of the Biden administration. The Democrats are well aware of the danger of this as well, and they actually reached out to corporate media sources to swiftly have them correct headlines about Trump's stance.
I hear a lot about a "uni-party," or the belief that the Republican and Democrat parties are one and the same. While it's not entirely true, it's not necessarily wrong either. While there are definitely Republicans who would be more suited with a "D" next to their name, the Republican Party does have a number of people in it who actually understood their assignment.
The reason the "uni-party" label works so well is because the Republican Party might have different goals but ultimately, they think the way to achieve them is to do what Democrats do to achieve their goals, and that's to grow the government. //
If Republicans truly wanted to distance themselves from Democrats, then the solution is actually simple. They need to remember what their core purpose is. It's not to make laws, it's to unmake laws. At some point, Republicans largely lost their appetite for shrinking government and chose instead to grow it for their own purposes. //
The goal is to get power out of the federal government's hands, and not just on this subject. Any decision-making power we can take from Washington, we should. The Republican party's goal is ultimately to decentralize the power in America, not make the federal government bend to its will, which has always been a temporary thing and a losing battle in the long run. //
If Republicans truly want to stop the Democrats from exerting and abusing as much power as they do, the solution is to take that power out of their hands and give it to the people. As our government is constantly in a tug-of-war between two parties, it doesn't make sense to grow the federal government's power, which will only serve to make the abuse of power worse as time goes on.
Republicans should endeavor to shrink the power of the federal government whenever they're in office and the only laws they should write are laws that close the doors on the federal government's power for good. [forever] //
Cafeblue32 Laocoön of Troy
a day ago
Coolidge is more famous for what he didn't say and do than what he did. He was known for saying little, and his response to the recession he faced was to leave it alone and let business right its own ship, which it did in a matter of months, and led to the Roaring 20s. //
Laocoön of Troy Cafeblue32
a day ago edited
The post-WWI Republican Congress rejected the Treaty of Versailles. They passed laws removing US troops from Europe. They dismantled Wilson's endless agencies, commissions, boards, bureaus, and other administrative offices. They ended food rationing, price controls, censorship, the Gestapo-like American Protective League, and released German and other ethnic prisoners Wilson imprisoned for the duration of the war.
In my opinion the post-WWI Republican Congress was far more important. //
anon-js5k
a day ago
Recently, when Larry Elder was asked, if Trump wanted Larry Elder to be a part of his Cabinet, which department would Larry want to be the secretary for. His answer was quick and to the point. He said he would like to head the Department of Education and that his goal as Secretary would be to eliminate the department and subsequently his job as head of that department. That is what a true conservative Republican would do.
When Biden recently passed an order to make it harder to layoff or fire a government employee, Elder's response shows how to circumvent what Biden did. If the Department of Education no longer exist, firing is no longer an issue. The DoE should have never existed in the first place. By extension the national teachers would lose their clout with the federal government, both of which have too much power over local districts, including budgets and policies.
January 09, 2018
After 35 years, the consent decree that prohibited the Republican National Committee (RNC) from engaging in ballot security activities wasterminated by a federal judge. RNLA Chair John Ryder, former General Counsel to the RNC, stated:
Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ended the consent decree that had banned the Republican National Committee from engaging in activities to ensure that elections are open, fair, and honest since 1982. Despite years and much money spent searching for evidence of Republican voter suppression, the Democratic National Committee could not present evidence to the court sufficient for the consent decree to remain in effect. We applaud the fact that the RNC may now, on the same, lawful, non-discriminatory basis as other political organizations, ensure that every eligible voter is able to vote and that the votes of ineligible voters are not counted. //
While the consent decree has been in effect, other Republican organizations, such as the RNLA, NRCC, NRSC, Republican state parties, and other groups, have worked to ensure that elections are open, fair, and honest. As Mr. Ryder noted, we look forward to a new era where the RNC can, if it so chooses, be a part of this effort to protect the right to vote of every eligible voter.
Partnering with Presler (who contributes the occasional column here at RedState when he has the time) is a no-brainer for the RNC, and this is another sign that it's an entirely new day over at RNC headquarters. //
AdeleInTexas
34 minutes ago
Moving to aggressively check voting problems in real-time and [honest] ballot harvesting is the best possible strategy. Looks like the RNC finally read the playbook and is bringing in the right coaches and players.