Ben Johnson   September 11, 2024

Ben Johnson@TheRightsWriter

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

Presidential debates have often been compared to professional wrestling matches, but the ABC News debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris more closely resembled a handicap match, with Trump taking on three opponents at once: Harris and both moderators.

As “World News Tonight” anchor David Muir and ABC News Live “Prime” anchor Linsey Davis regularly fact-checked Trump in real time, they allowed Harris to get by with numerous evasions and false statements on such issues as late-term abortions, post-birth executions, government pregnancy monitors, the economy, and haggard canards about “very fine people” at Charlottesville.

Here are a few of Harris’ misstatements that the ABC News moderators let her get away with.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

1. Late-Term Abortion Is a Myth?

Harris attempted to deny Trump’s charge that the Democratic Party supports late-term abortion by denying such abortions take place. “Nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion,” Harris dodged.

In reality, 21 states allow abortion until birth: Six states have no legal limit protecting unborn children, and the rest allow abortion after the point of viability thanks to a vague and expansive “health of the mother” exception.

Late-term abortions are well-documented. In 2022, pro-life advocates found the remains of five babies whom abortionist Cesare Santangelo aborted late in their term or possibly after birth at the Washington Surgi-Clinic in Washington, D.C. The Biden-Harris Justice Department advised the District of Columbia to destroy the evidence.

“In 2013, New Mexico abortionist Shelley Sella faced medical board sanctions after she committed an abortion on a child at 35 weeks,” reports Carole Novielli of Live Action. “In 2003, abortionist Charles Rossmann gave abortion pills to a woman who was past 30 weeks.” Southwestern Women’s Options in Albuquerque’s website advertised that “abortion services are available through 32 weeks. Exceptions after 32 weeks are provided on a case-by-case basis.”

A 1981 Philadelphia Inquirer article documented that, in abortion facilities, “unintended live births are literally an everyday occurrence,” but they are “hushed up” instead of treated as “a problem to be solved.”

More than 56,000 abortions took place after 21 weeks, according to the most recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.

(more…)

Effective July 2025, teacher licensing rules passed last year in Minnesota under Democrat Gov. Tim Walz will ban practicing Christians, Jews, and Muslims from teaching in public schools. Walz is now the presidential running mate of current U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris. His resume includes a stint as a high school social studies teacher who sponsored a student queer sex club in 1999.

Starting next July, Minnesota agencies controlled by Walz appointees will require teacher license applicants to affirm transgenderism and race Marxism. Without a teaching license, individuals cannot work in Minnesota public schools, nor in the private schools that require such licenses.

The latest version of the regulations requires teachers to “affirm” students’ “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” to receive a Minnesota teaching license:

The teacher fosters an environment that ensures student identities such as race/ethnicity, national origin, language, sex and gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, physical/developmental/emotional ability, socioeconomic class, and religious beliefs are historically and socially contextualized, affirmed, and incorporated into a learning environment where students are empowered to learn and contribute as their whole selves (emphasis added).

Last spring, administrative law judges finally approved these pending changes The Federalist reported one month before they were finalized. Universities are also affected: starting in 2025, they must either train their teaching students to fulfill these anti-Christian requirements or be banned from offering state licensing — and thus the ticket to the vast majority of teaching jobs — to their students.

Since 2020 in Minnesota, teachers renewing their licenses, which is usually required every five to seven years, must demonstrate “cultural competency” similar to the requirements imposed in 2025 on new teaching licensees. Teachers renewing their licensing must “Show[] evidence of self-reflection and discussion of” topics that include “Gender Identity, Including Transgender Students” and “Sexual Orientation.” They must also show they understand “bias” in themselves and their students related to race, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other cultural Marxist categories.

PLEASE CLICK ON THE ABOVE LINK TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE

By Ben Weingarten

August 12, 2024

America’s speech police are reassembling to once again influence our elections. At the same time the security state is creating potential pretexts for renewed censorship by issuing warnings of cyberattacks that could “hinder public access to election information,” they are also reprising old claims of coming Russian election interference on behalf of Donald Trump.

The little-noticed development comes in a report from the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) on the DOJ’s efforts to “Coordinate Information Sharing About Foreign Malign Influence Threats to U.S. Elections” — a euphemism for the chief law enforcement agency’s prior censorship activities.

During the 2020 election, as revealed in litigation, congressional oversight, and reporting, national security and law enforcement agencies used the threat of foreign misinformation and disinformation on social media to U.S. elections as a pretext to surveil and suppress domestic news and opinions deemed derogatory to our ruling regime.

An alphabet soup of agencies coerced, cajoled, and colluded directly and via cutouts with social media companies to get those companies to squash all manner of wrongthink on election integrity and outcomes at mass scale.

While the OIG explicitly omitted the “FBI’s information sharing with social media companies with respect to domestic actors” from its report, the DOJ’s response to the office’s recommendations will likely have substantial bearing on Americans’ speech.

That response, appended to the report, comes in the form of a DOJ memo revealing that the law enforcement agency has now codified its protocols for reporting purported “foreign malign influence” information with social media companies, and is redoubling its efforts to do so in the run-up to the 2024 election.

In fact, the FBI has been implementing new Standard Operating Procedures since February.

Under those procedures, the FBI is required to identify “specific, credible, and articulable facts that provide high confidence for assessing that the information at issue relates to activity attributable to a foreign government, foreign non-state actor, or their proxy engaged in an FMI [foreign malign influence] operation.”

The Bureau is also required to include a disclaimer — akin to one authorities often included in censorship requests from 2020 — explaining it “does not request or expect” recipients to take any specific action based on shared information.

A related summary of the procedures posted on the FBI website notes that communications to social media platforms must make clear that the FBI “does not investigate solely based on First Amendment-protected activity.” [Emphasis mine]

On top of implementing these procedures, the memo adds that the FBI will be resuming regular meetings with social media companies regarding foreign malign influence threats; that FBI field offices will be engaging in outreach efforts to foster relationships with social media companies in their jurisdictions, in coordination with the FBI’s “Foreign Influence Task Force” — a key cog in censorship activities in 2020; and that senior DOJ officials will be making the rounds with relevant stakeholders to discuss their information sharing strategy.

The Justice Department assures us that its extensive interaction with Big Tech companies is of a completely passive nature, solely concerning clear-cut foreign influence operations, and will strictly protect our right to free speech.

(more…)