PARTICIPANTS/SPEAKERS – Moderated by Dean Michele Bachmann
Keynote Address – Dr. Ben Carson – Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Neurosurgeon, and Author
Panel: HR1 – An Effort to Correct the Irregularities, or Institutionalize Them?
Moderator: Dean Michele Bachmann
John Fund – National Affairs Reporter for National Review Online, Senior Editor at The American Spectator; authored Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy, and co-authored (with Hans von Spakovsky) Who’s Counting?: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk
Hans von Spakovsky – Former member of the Federal Election Commission, Manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative, Senior Legal Fellow at the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies; co-authored (with John Fund) Who’s Counting?: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk
Jay Ashcroft – Missouri Secretary of State; Organizer of the first National Election Security Summit; Member of the Elections Committee and former Executive Board Member of the National Association of Secretaries of State
Speakers – Jim and Joe Hoft – The Gateway Pundit – Evidence of Voter Fraud
Speaker – Dr. Peter Navarro – Former U.S. Director of Trade
Panel: Is Voter ID a Solution?
Moderator: Professor Henry Jones
Dr. Kris Kobach – Former Kansas Secretary of State, Vice Chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity; former Counsel to the Attorney General of the United States; former Professor of Law at the University of Missouri – Kansas City
William Wachtel – Managing Partner, Wachtel Missry, LLP; Co-Founder of the Drum Major Institute; Co-Founder and Member of the Board of Why Tuesday?; Chairman of the Board at Saker Aviation
The Honorable Robert Neal Hunter, Jr. – Attorney; retired North Carolina Supreme Court Justice and retired North Carolina Court of Appeals Jurist; Former North Carolina Deputy Attorney General; Former Chairman of the North Carolina State Board of Elections
Patricia Nation – Civil Rights Attorney and Appellate Advocate; Former Head of Civil Rights Division of the Department of Homeland Security; Former Civil Rights Civil Liberties Officer for the Department of Homeland Security; Former Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General
Speaker – Mark Steyn – Canadian Author and Commentator; Tucker Carlson Guest Host; Author of the New York Times bestsellers America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It and After America: Get Ready for Armageddon
Speaker – Eric Metaxas – His Thoughts
Speaker – Dr. David Clements – Law Professor, New Mexico State University
Filmmaker Justin Malone’s documentary showcases stories of Black conservative thinkers
By James Varney– The Washington Times – Sunday, August 16, 2020
An occasional interview series with everyday Americans who are challenging the status quo.
Jolted by an MSNBC host’s hostile treatment of the late Herman Cain in a 2011 interview, filmmaker Justin Malone set out on a path bucking the media establishment that has led him to directing this year’s surprise hit documentary “Uncle Tom.”
He was just coming out of film school, uncertain of his politics and his future, when he saw MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell accuse then-Republican presidential candidate Cain, who died this month, of civil rights cowardice.
“I just couldn’t believe what I was seeing,” Mr. Malone told The Washington Times. “I was sort of undergoing my own political transformation at the time and the seed was planted right there.”
He remains astonished that an accomplished Black professional could be treated with such boldfaced contempt on a television news program. The notion that conservative thinking could be perceived as hostile or alien to the Black experience captivated him.
“It just seemed silly, to think Black people couldn’t be conservative or couldn’t be Republican,” said Mr. Malone, who is White.
The outlook permeates his film “Uncle Tom,” a black-and-white documentary that showcases several Black conservatives.
Joe Biden’s disastrous plans for America’s suburbs
,
by Betsy McCaughey , the former Lieutenant Governors of New York July 21, 2020
f you live in the suburbs or you’re a city dweller eyeing a move to a quiet cul-de-sac where your kids can play outside, you need to know about Joe Biden’s plan for a federal takeover of local zoning laws.
The ex-veep wants to ramp up an Obama-era social engineering scheme called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing that mercifully barely got underway before President Trump took office, vowing to stop it.
Biden’s plan is to force suburban towns with single-family homes and minimum lot sizes to build high-density affordable housing smack in the middle of their leafy neighborhoods — local preferences and local control be damned.
Starting in 2015, President Barack Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development floated a cookie-cutter requirement for “balanced housing” in every suburb. “Balanced” meant affordable even for people who need federal vouchers. Towns were obligated to “do more than simply not discriminate,” as a 2013 HUD proposal explained. Rather, towns had to make it possible for low-income minorities to choose suburban living and provide “adequate support to make their choices possible.”
Had the rule been implemented nationwide, towns everywhere would have had to scrap zoning, build bigger water and sewer lines to support high-density living, expand schools and social services and add mass transit. All pushing up local taxes. Towns that refused would lose their federal aid.
The rule was one of the worst abuses of the Obama-Biden administration — a raw power grab masquerading as racial justice.
In Westchester, County Executive Rob Astorino battled the Obama-Biden administration for years, successfully resisting the baseless smear of racism. Zoning laws limit what can be built in a neighborhood in neutral fashion, Astorino explained, not who can live there.
To be absolutely clear, denying anyone the chance to rent or buy a home because of their race is abhorrent and illegal. It should be prosecuted whenever it still happens.
She promises to investigate Trump officials after she wins.
Editorial Board January 23, 2020
Think the fog of partisan Trump investigations will lift once the President leaves office, either in 2021 or 2025? Not if Elizabeth Warren has anything to say about it. With the Iowa caucuses approaching and her campaign fortunes flagging, Senator Warren now says that as President she’d launch an open-ended criminal investigation into her predecessor and anyone who worked for him.
Ms. Warren’s latest “anti-corruption” plan says she would create “a Justice Department Task Force to investigate corruption during the Trump administration and to hold government officials accountable for illegal activity.” She would order Justice to look for violations of “federal bribery laws, insider trading laws, and other anti-corruption and public integrity laws” as well as immigration-enforcement offenses.
“This will be no ordinary transition between administrations,” the document says ominously. Team Warren won’t be satisfied with taking control of the executive branch in an election. They also want scalps of choice ex-officials. The plan links to news articles about Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, White House Adviser KellyanneCon way and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson.
If there is evidence of a crime by a former Administration official, it should be investigated through the normal channels. Ms. Warren is proposing something different: A law-enforcement task force dedicated to searching for wrongdoing only by political opponents. This would be familiar in Latin American dictatorships where the party that loses an election may be jailed as retribution.
Pundits said Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign threat to investigate Hillary Clinton for her email mismanagement was a chilling breach of democratic norms. We opposed such an investigation but at least the alleged misconduct was limited to specific conduct by one official, whereas Ms. Warren wants investigations of all Republican officials for any political offenses.
Despite all the apocalyptic think-pieces and high-minded books, America has not become an “autocracy” three years into Donald Trump’s Presidency. The opposition party won the House in the midterms, proceeded to impeach the President, and its leading candidates are ahead in the head-to-head 2020 presidential election polls.
Yet in polarized times the temptation to criminalize political differences is stronger than ever. It will be especially strong for Democrats once they are back in control of the Justice Department. Down Senator Warren’s road lies a real threat to liberty.
The Republican convention officially began on Monday, July 18, 2016, and the speakers were fantastic. I’ve included links to each of the speeches as they were all so incredibly powerful and informative. Be sure to scroll down to see the “Special Surprise” !! Nancy
Amber Smith is the author of Danger Close: My Epic Journey as a Combat Helicopter Pilot in Iraq and Afghanistan, published by Atria Books, an imprint of Simon and Schuster and will be released September 6, 2016. Smith served in the United States Army as an OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter pilot-in-command and air mission commander in the 101st Airborne Division. She is a combat veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
North Carolina Representative Patricia Hurley with Amber Smith
Our state troopers, police, Homeland Security and secret service were all very helpful while making sure all went very smoothly
I wouldn’t mess with this Secret Service guy if I were you !
Linda and Matt Arnold
Convention floor before the session begins
Linda Arnold and Sue Googe, Republican candidate, Congressional NC District 4
Ben Carson asks why the media has not been interested in the fact that Obama’s school records are sealed and why the media was not interested in his relationship with Bill Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis, and Jerimiah Wright
Raymond Ibrahim is a Judith Friedman Rosen fellow at the Middle East Forum and a Shillman fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
The Gatestone Institute
September 28, 2015
Originally published under the title “MSM Lies about Muslim Lies (Taqiyya).”
Dr. Ben Carson’s recent assertion that the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya encourages Muslims “to lie to achieve your goals” has prompted the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler to quote a number of academics to show that the presidential candidate got it wrong:
The word “taqiyya” derives from the Arabic words for “piety” and “fear of God” and indicates when a person is in a state of caution, said Khaled Abou El Fadl, a professor of law at the University of California at Los Angeles and a leading authority on Islam…. “Yes, it is permissible to hide the fact you are Muslim” if a person is under threat, “as long as it does not involve hurting another person,” Abou El Fadl said.
The other academics whom Kessler quotes—including Omid Safi, director of the Duke University Islamic Studies Center, and Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School—make the same argument: yes, taqiyya is in the Koran but it only permits deception in the case of self-preservation, nothing more.
Not exactly.
Although the word taqiyya is related to the Arabic word “piety” and its root meaning is “protect” or “guard against”—and the Koran verses that advocate it (3:28 and 16:106) do so in the context of self-preservation from persecution—that is not the whole story. (more…)
BEN CARSON – USA SHOULDN’T ELECT A MUSLIM PRESIDENT
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson is under attack for saying: “I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that.”
Candor about Islam will guarantee you the hot seat at the center of a media firestorm.
The GOP is the only one of the two parties that will even discuss the 800-pound elephant in the room: jihad and Muslim terrorism. Islamic supremacists and their leftist lapdogs in the media are waging their own jihad to silence this debate, and it is critical that we push back and support candidates who dare to speak against the gravest threat to our national security.
The enemedia is in an uproar and the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is howling for his head. CAIR is calling for his withdrawal — the terror-tied advance team is laying down the law, sharia law, making it perfectly clear that jihad terrorism and criticism of Islam is off-limits, in accordance with sharia. Interestingly enough, they cite religious freedom, something that is forbidden in Muslim countries under Islamic law.
The Islamic State (usually called ISIS) and the other advocates of Shariah law are growing rapidly, along with their zeal to eradicate or convert all “infidels.” For those who are asleep at the wheel, in the opinion of these fanatics, most of Western civilization — including America — fits into the infidel category.
I normally encourage conversation and compromise where possible, but how does one negotiate or compromise with someone who desires your elimination? Maybe if you meet some of their demands, they will only dismember you or kill you more slowly. Obviously, the expansion of groups like the Islamic State represents an existential threat to our own nation and our way of life. If ever there was a time to work together for self-preservation, the time is now. There really is no time to squabble about who was right and who was wrong in the past regarding our activities in the Middle East. Our enemies will use every opportunity to divide us and distract us, which will make their jobs of destroying us much easier.
In order to prevail in the war on terrorism, we must have an overall strategy, the goal of which is annihilation of the terrorists, as opposed to simply winning battles with them here and there. This means paying much more attention to military preparedness, both offensive and defensive. That means significantly increasing our covert operations, without blabbing to the world about what we will or will not do. It means cultivating strong and trusting relationships with our allies and never leaving them to worry about abandonment for political reasons. It means helping other countries in the region to realize that they, too, will soon be targets of the Islamic State, which will radically alter their comfortable lives.
When it comes to elimination of those trying to destroy us, we have to be smart enough to realize that we must have airtight borders to prevent easy access for terrorists. Some say this is too difficult. I guarantee that it is easier than trying to rebuild a nation that has been destroyed because we thought logical defense was too difficult. There is no question that unpleasantries brought about by our own forces will be necessary to accomplish our goals and defeat terrorism, but you cannot win a politically correct war. (more…)
