Florida Law Defunds DEI in Higher Ed thumbnail

Florida Law Defunds DEI in Higher Ed

By Family Research Council

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) on Monday signed three bills to excise woke ideology from state higher education institutions and promote productive education goals.

SB 266 will “prohibit institutions from spending federal or state dollars on discriminatory initiatives, such as so called ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)’ programs,” the governor’s office summarized in a press release. HB 931 will “prohibit Florida’s public institutions from requiring students, faculty, or staff to take political loyalty tests,” and SB 240 will “expand workforce education programs and increase access to career and technical education (CTE) programs.”

The first of these laws doubles down on Florida Republicans’ efforts last year to crack down on woke ideology in institutions of higher education. SB 266 forbids “a Florida College System institution” to “expend any state or federal funds” on “any programs or campus activities that: (a) Violate s. 1000.05; or (b) Advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI], or promote or engage in political or social activism.”

The first prohibited category (violations of s. 1000.05) refers to a section of Florida law dealing with discrimination in K-20 public education, which the Individual Freedom Act (a.k.a. Stop Woke Act) modified last year. The Stop Woke Act added paragraphs stating that “it shall constitute discrimination … to subject any student or employee to training or instruction that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such student or employee to believe any of the following concepts.” The list that followed included foundational tenets of critical race theory (CRT) and other leftist ideologies, such as “A person’s moral character or status as either privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her race, color, national origin, or sex.”

In October, a federal judge in the Northern District of Florida temporarily blocked Florida officials from enforcing this section of the law, on the grounds that it ran afoul of First Amendment Freedom of Speech.

Following this legal setback, Florida Republicans devised a different approach to achieve their original objective — eliminating woke programming on academic campuses. It began with Governor DeSantis ordering all state universities and colleges “to provide a comprehensive list of all staff, programs, and campus activities” related to DEI or CRT. Within days, the same parties who had challenged the Stop Woke Act complained that Florida was violating the judge’s preliminary injunction against portions of the Stop Woke Act. However, the judge denied the motion on the grounds that the injunction had not been violated.

Perhaps in an effort to avoid another free speech challenge, SB 266 does provide an exception from its DEI funding ban for “student fees to support student-led organizations” and “use of institution facilities by student-led organizations.”

SB 266 also enacted other DeSantis objectives for higher education. It directed the Board of Governors to review the mission and curriculum of each university, gave university presidents (as opposed to less accountable academic departments) final authority over hiring full-time faculty, and prohibited left-wing loyalty pledges as a condition of employment. These changes are among those DeSantis set forth in his January 31 education agenda “to focus on promoting academic excellence, the pursuit of truth, and to give students the foundation so they can think for themselves.”

In addition to SB 266, DeSantis also signed HB 931, which states that “a public institution of higher education may not … Require or solicit a person to complete a political loyalty test as a condition of employment or admission into, or promotion within, such institution.” It also bars universities and colleges from giving “preferential consideration” for employment, admission, or promotion based on “an opinion or actions in support of: a. A partisan, a political, or an ideological set of beliefs; or b. Another person or group of persons based on the person’s or group’s race or ethnicity or support of an ideology or movement … that promotes the differential treatment of a person or a group of persons based on race or ethnicity.” This prohibition encompasses university diversity statements (not academic diversity but identity diversity), which require university staff to affirm a DEI agenda as a condition of employment.

While DeSantis’ educational initiatives make headlines for countering woke ideology, they reflect a fundamentally positive vision, not one that is negative or contrarian. Rather, the goal is to remove politics from education, thus “empowering students, parents, and educators to focus on creating opportunities for our younger generations,” said DeSantis. This mission, to prepare young people to be productive members of society, is reflected in the third bill DeSantis signed, SB 240, which will “expand workforce education programs and increase access to career and technical education (CTE) programs.”

Unsurprisingly, left-wing activists like the ACLU of Florida dislike Florida’s higher education reforms, which demolish the barriers protecting left-wing academic hegemony. But every significant reform will face opposition. Ray Rodrigues, Chancellor of the State University System of Florida, said the legislature and DeSantis were “re-orienting our distinguished universities to missions that treat people as individuals, that reward merit and achievement, and center on recruiting excellent faculty while creating the talent pipeline necessary to fuel Florida’s future.” Making the right enemies is worth it, for the right reasons.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a staff writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Florida Officially Bans Mutilation of Minors in Name of ‘Gender Affirmation’

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. Taylor Marshall: The LGBT Crowd is Not Oppressed- They’ve Conquered Nearly All of Society

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

FBI Special Agent Garrett O’Boyle, ‘The FBI Will Crush You. This Government Will Crush You and Your Family’ thumbnail

FBI Special Agent Garrett O’Boyle, ‘The FBI Will Crush You. This Government Will Crush You and Your Family’

By The Geller Report

Today’s Oversight Hearing on the Weaponization of the FBI targeting conservatives (more on that here and here) ended with this bombshell testimony. Multiple whistleblowers from within the FBI testified today against the agency’s leadership, describing obscene abuses of power.

These men risked and lost everything to come forward and tell the truth.  Their whole lives have been dedicated to service to this country and they have been destroyed.

Here is the closing testimony from FBI Special Agent Garrett O’Boyle,  O’Boyle was most recently in the FBI Kansas City field office. Prior to becoming an FBI agent, Mr. Boyle served our nation as an infantryman in the United States Army for six years in the Army, Mr. O’Boyle was deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan. He received numerous service awards including the Combat Infantryman Badge, Mr. O’Boyle received an honorable discharge from the army upon leaving, Mr. O’Boyle continued his commitment to public service serving as a police officer in Waukesha, Wisconsin for four years. Mr. O’Boyle joined the FBI in 2018. As an FBI agent, Mr. Boyle was selected to serve on the Joint Terrorism Task Force and the SWAT team. Mr. O’Boyle graduated Summa laude from Marquette University with a degree in criminology and Law Studies yet the FBI questions his loyalty to the Constitution into our country.

Agent O’Boyle: It doesn’t solve it, but the FBI will crush you. This government will crush you and your family. If you try to expose the truth about things that they are doing that are wrong, We are all examples of that.

Congressman Armstrong: Mr. O’ Boyle, If one of your really good friends same to you and said, I have this thing that has been covered up. And I think the American people No, no, no need to know about it.

Agent O’Boyle: I would tell them first to pray about it long and hard.

I would tell them, I could take it to Congress for them. Or I could put them in touch with Congress. But I would advise them not to do it.

Congressman Armstrong: You would legitimately try to protect one of your colleagues from doing what you have done.

Agent O’Boyle: Absolutely.

Congressman Armstrong: And how do you think that solves, being able to shine light on corruption weaponization any kind of MS DOS misconduct that exists with the Americans?

Agent O’Boyle: It doesn’t solve it, but the FBI will crush you. This government will crush you and your family. If you try to expose the truth about things that they are doing that are wrong, We are all examples of that.

Congressman Armstrong: I can’t think of more sobering way of ending a hearing.

WATCH: FBI Special Agent Garret O’Boyle’ testimony.

WATCH: They will crush you.

They will crush you. pic.twitter.com/cwwHwFhwev

— 🇺🇸 Pamela Geller 🇺🇸 (@PamelaGeller) May 18, 2023

WATCH: The full committee hearing from FBI whistleblowers.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Durham: FBI Dropped 4 Different Probes into Clinton Family Ahead of 2016

Beclowned Democrats Stall, Interrupt, Smear Witnesses, Run Cover for FBI as Whistleblowers Testify at Weaponization Committee

GOP Representative Anna Paulina Luna Submits House Resolution to Expel Pathological Liar Rep. Adam Schiff from Congress

Intel Agencies Massively Undercounted Searches On Americans Under FISA Surveillance Rule, Report Finds

Watch and Listen to What the FBI Did to This Whistleblower’s Family….

ANOTHER Soros DA Resigns in Disgrace

FBI Concerned Jan. 6 Footage Would Expose Undercover Agents, Informants: Whistleblower

RELATED TWEET:

Beclowned Democrats Stall, Interrupt, Smear Witnesses, Run Cover for FBI as Whistleblowers Testify at Weaponization Committeehttps://t.co/WqbLGITYbI pic.twitter.com/jo2gSssQgN

— 🇺🇸 Pamela Geller 🇺🇸 (@PamelaGeller) May 18, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Murder Charge Reduced For North Dakota Man Who Killed Conservative Teen thumbnail

Murder Charge Reduced For North Dakota Man Who Killed Conservative Teen

By The Geller Report

He hunted this teenager down.

There is no justice for the free standing against Democrat totalitarianism.

Murder charge reduced to manslaughter for North Dakota man who struck, ran over, and killed conservative teen

Shannon Brandt, 42, was originally charged with murder, a Class AA felony, over the death of 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson.

Murder charge reduced to manslaughter for North Dakota man who struck, ran over, and killed conservative teen

By: Jarryd Jaeger, The Post Millennial, May 18, 2023:

On Monday, the North Dakota man accused of running over a teenager he deemed to be a “Republican extremist” had his charges reduced to manslaughter.

Shannon Brandt, 42, was originally charged with murder, a Class AA felony, over the death of 18-year-old Cayler Ellingson in McHenry last September.

According to the Associated Press, Foster County State Attorney Kara Brinster’s decision to reduce the charges was not part of a plea deal, and Brandt is still expected to appear in court for trial beginning May 30.

“There is no evidence to support the misplaced allegation of intentional homicide,” Brandt’s lawyer Mark Friese said. “The state and defense forensic experts have provided comprehensive reports confirming this tragedy was an accident. Misplaced media hype and community conjecture is no substitute for evidence.”

An autopsy found that Ellingson’s injuries “weren’t caused from being struck by Shannon Brandt’s vehicle and were caused by being run over.”

As the Associated Press reports, investigators claim that the incident was not politically motivated, and that Ellingson was not part of a “Republican extremist” group, as Brandt originally said.

Following the incident, Brandt returned to the scene and called 911 on himself, but failed to stay until they arrived, opting instead to go back home. As a result, he was also charged with “fail[ing] to render aid as required” by North Dakota law.

Police soon caught up with Brandt, who had admitted to having consumed alcohol prior to the incident, and arrested him for driving under the influence. A chemical test later confirmed that he had, in fact, been over the legal limit.

With a murder charge, Brandt could have faced life in prison, however, if he’s found guilty of manslaughter, the maximum penalty is ten years.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED TWEETS:

BREAKING: Murder charge reduced to manslaughter for North Dakota man who struck, ran over, and killed conservative teenhttps://t.co/BH45mgoxDY

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 18, 2023

This is Kara Brinster, ND State’s Attorney

(701) 652-1270

Why did you drop Sannon Brandt’s murder charges, Kara? https://t.co/jggqLTWr4i pic.twitter.com/eLsI43e361

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 18, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Squad’ Dems Vote Against Honoring Police Officers Killed in Line of Duty thumbnail

‘Squad’ Dems Vote Against Honoring Police Officers Killed in Line of Duty

By Discover The Networks

During a vote Monday recognizing National Police Week, two members of the far-Left group “the Squad” were the only Democrats to vote against a resolution that memorialized police officers killed in the line of duty and expressed condolences to their loved ones.

Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Cori Bush (D-MO) uttered the only nays heard from the House floor as the chamber voted on the pro-law enforcement resolution. The resolution, which passed with unanimous support from Republicans and nearly all Democrats, amended H.Res. 363 title to read: “Resolution memorializing law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty.”

Its passing honored “the 556 law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty, including 224 officers killed in 2022, as well as 332 officers killed in previous years whose stories were recovered during 2022,” while also ensuring police are equipped with the resources and training necessary to keeping communities safe.

The amendment opposed by the Democrats expressed “unwavering support” for law enforcement officers and offered “condolences and solemn appreciation” for the loved ones of lost officers.

The resolution vowed that the House of Representatives would acknowledge “that police officers and other law enforcement personnel, especially those who have made the ultimate sacrifice, should be remembered and honored,” and recognized as heroes.

“Why did Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib just vote against a simple resolution to honor law enforcement officers during National Police Week?” Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX) posted on Twitter after the vote.

Tlaib and Bush claimed Tuesday in a joint statement that they view community safety as a “top priority”:

Let us be clear: the health and safety of every one of our community members — including our first responders — is a top priority for us. But this resolution is not a referendum on support for the safety of first responders. It is a document intended to advance Republicans’ false narrative around supporting law enforcement and gaslight the public about where they stand.


Cori Bush

78 Known Connections

Bush Signs Petition Asking Clemency for Black Triple-Murderer on Death Row

In October 2021, Bush co-signed a petition demanding that Missouri governor Mike Parson commute the death sentence that had been handed down to 61-year-old Ernest Lee Johnson, a black, convicted triple-murderer who in 1994 had brutally killed three general-store workers during a late-night robbery. His victims were 46-year-old Mary Bratcher, a single white mother of three children; 57-year-old Mable Scruggs, also a single white mother; and 58-year-old Fred Jones, an African-American man who was the only caregiver for his elderly mother and disabled brother. After a binge in which he had purchased three rocks of crack cocaine and traded one of them for a gun, Johnson killed all three victims by repeatedly smashing them over the head with a claw hammer; he also stabbed Bratcher multiple times and shot Jones in the head…

To learn more about Cori Bush, click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Bush Introduces Resolution for $14 Trillion in Slavery Reparations

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

REPORT: Prevalence of GSE Appraisal Waivers—March 2023 thumbnail

REPORT: Prevalence of GSE Appraisal Waivers—March 2023

By Edward Pinto

This report tracks trends for GSE appraisal waivers monthly and provides data on the risk characteristics of these loans.

To download the most recent data, please click here.

To read our comment letter to FHFA on appraisal-related policies, practices, and processes, please click here.

PDF to most recent report

Slide deck on GSE Appraisal Waiver Report

AUTHORS

Edward J. Pinto

Senior Fellow and Director, AEI Housing Center.

Tobias Peter

Research Fellow and Assistant Director, AEI Housing Center

EDITORS NOTE: This AEI report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Previous Reports

Origination Month Analyzed
March 2023
February 2023
December 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
June 2022
May 2022
March 2022
February 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
May 2020
3,000 Military Veterans Reject Pentagon’s ‘Left-Wing Social Agenda,’ Support Tuberville’s Fight thumbnail

3,000 Military Veterans Reject Pentagon’s ‘Left-Wing Social Agenda,’ Support Tuberville’s Fight

By Family Research Council

The cavalry is coming to help Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.). For months, the Alabama Republican has waged a fight against the Defense Department’s woke agenda by blocking the Senate’s approval of nearly 200 promotions for military generals and flag officers.

The military establishment, Senate Democrats, and the Biden administration have resorted to name-calling and unfounded warnings — even though Tuberville insists he won’t budge until the Pentagon reverses its policy subsidizing abortions.

Two weeks ago, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), touted a letter from seven former secretaries of defense to make his case. Today, a significantly larger number of current and retired service members announced they’re backing Tuberville.

In a new letter shared first with The Daily Signal, more than 3,000 veterans and active-duty members of the U.S. armed forces are expressing their support for Tuberville and calling on the Pentagon to rescind its politically motivated abortion policy. Four members of Congress joined state lawmakers, national leaders and thousands of everyday Americans who have served their country in the military.

“The undersigned stand united in condemning this policy,” they write in the letter to Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “This policy is not just illegal, it shamefully politicizes the military, circumvents the authority of Congress, and exceeds the authority of the Department of Defense.”

The letter includes 593 individual names — including Reps. Eli Crane (R-Ariz.), Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.), Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) — plus 32 endorsers and partners with the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, which represents the position of over 2,500 military chaplains.

The Defense Department issued its policy Feb. 16, providing three weeks of taxpayer-funded paid leave and reimbursement of travel expenses for military personnel and dependents who are seeking an abortion. An estimate from Rand Corporation predicts the number of abortions would skyrocket from 20 to more than 4,000 each year.

Using his leverage as a U.S. senator, Tuberville is holding the nearly 200 military promotions. He’s earned the support of Republican colleagues, including influential Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) who said this week, “I regret that it’s necessary, but I think it is.”

Last week, a group of House conservatives stood with Tuberville on the Senate floor. Previously, CatholicVote organized pro-life and conservative leaders to enlist their grassroots organizations to aid his effort. And now a diverse group of service members and veterans are speaking out in support.

Their letter directly refutes the claim by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his seven predecessors that Tuberville’s actions are affecting military readiness. Democrat senators, led by Schumer, have repeatedly made this assertion — without factual evidence — to attack Tuberville.

“Over the past few months, the senior senator from Alabama has singlehandedly hindered our national security by blocking hundreds of critical military appointments,” Schumer alleged Monday. “Those holds are hamstringing our military. According to former secretaries of defense who served presidents of both parties, this blanket hold ‘is harming military readiness and risks damaging U.S. national security.’”

Beyond broad warnings about military readiness, however, Democrats are unable to point to specific examples proving their case.

The letter from service members suggests the real readiness problem is a result of Austin’s actions as secretary and the “politicized agenda” of the Biden administration.

“The American people, including its service members, are disappointed by President [Joe] Biden and Secretary Austin’s recent decisions to mandate receipt of the COVID-19 vaccines, promote the radical LGBT agenda, and now subsidize abortion,” they write. “Because of these policies, the military now faces an unprecedented crisis of recruitment — missing its recruitment goal for the first time ever last year. The focus of our military must be on keeping the American people safe, not advancing the left-wing social agenda.”

Even when Democrats have pressed military leaders for evidence, they’ve come up empty.

At an April 20 hearing, Senate Armed Services Chairman Jack Reed (D-R.I.) asked U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Cmdr. John Aquilino about the consequences of Tuberville’s hold on readiness in the region. Aquilino responded, “Operationally … no impact, because Seventh Fleet commanders are not going anywhere until the proper replacement is in place.”

Retired three-star Gen. Jerry Boykin, executive vice president at the Family Research Council, flatly rejected the idea when FRC President Tony Perkins asked him if Tuberville’s effort was endangering the U.S. military. Boykin responded, “No, it is not.”

“In the military,” Boykin added, “you don’t replace somebody until you have a replacement for them, which means the person holding that slot stays there until he has a replacement. This whole thing is more propaganda than anything else.”

And last week, three Heritage Foundation vice presidents — including retired Lt. Colonel James Jay Carafano, vice president of Heritage’s Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy — pointed to greater threats to military readiness than the failure to promote flag officers.

“America’s military readiness is of vital importance and one The Heritage Foundation takes seriously,” they wrote to Tuberville. “Each year, we publish an Index of U.S. Military Strength to gauge the U.S. military’s ability to perform its missions. This year, for the first time, we assess the military as weak and at growing risk of not being able to meet the demands of defending America’s vital national interests. While the reasons for this are many, your holds are not among them.”

Carafano was joined by two others from Heritage: John Malcolm, vice president of the Institute for Constitutional Government, and Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy.

Democrats could circumvent Tuberville’s hold by voting on each nominee individually. Doing so, however, would be a laborious process for senators who would rather approve the promotions as a group.

Just as he’s done several times already, Tuberville is prepared to continue his fight until the Pentagon changes course. Now, he has the backing of more than 3,000 service members and veterans.

“There is no truth more profound than the fact that all human life is sacred,” their letter concludes. “The mission of the United States Military is to defend and protect all American lives — not subsidize the practice of destroying innocent and vulnerable American children via abortion with taxpayer dollars. By pledging to hold these nominations to the Department of Defense until administration officials reverse course, Senator Tuberville is doing a great service for the American people — including its service members.”

This article was originally published in The Daily Signal.

AUTHOR

Rob Bluey

Rob Bluey is executive editor of The Daily Signal.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Assistant Professor Sues University That Allegedly Forces Faculty To Pledge Commitment To Diversity thumbnail

Assistant Professor Sues University That Allegedly Forces Faculty To Pledge Commitment To Diversity

By The Daily Caller

An assistant professor is suing a California university that allegedly requires faculty applicants to pledge their commitment to “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” (DEI) policies and ideology.

The Pacific Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit Thursday on behalf of Dr. John D. Haltigan, an assistant professor at the University of Toronto, against the University of California (UC), Santa Cruz alleging that institution violates faculty applicants’ First Amendment rights by requiring them to submit a statement displaying their support of DEI. Requiring a statement on increasing diversity along racial and ethnic lines forces faculty applicants to agree, or pretend to agree, with such values, the lawsuit alleges. 

“UC Santa Cruz’ DEI statement requirement is nothing more than a rebranding of the unconstitutional loyalty oaths that proliferated during the Cold War,” Wilson Freeman, an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, said in a press release. “Universities are not permitted to discriminate against applicants because of their political views. UC’s DEI statement screening is a thinly veiled attempt to do exactly that.”

Haltigan, who holds a Ph.D. in developmental psychology from the University of Miami, wished to apply for the institution’s tenure-track position in Developmental Psychology but did not because of the required DEI statement, the lawsuit shows. The application for the tenure-track position in Developmental Psychology allegedly tells applicants that its scoring rubric grants low scores to those applying if they “believe race and sex should not be used to judge individuals.”

“If Dr. Haltigan were to apply for this position, he would be compelled to alter his behavior and either remain silent about the many important social issues addressed by the DEI Statement Requirement or recant his views to conform to the dictates of the University administration,” the lawsuit alleges.

Throughout the country universities are requiring some sort of DEI statement from applicants outlining their competencies in diversity; in May 2022, Indiana University School of Medicine updated its standards mandating that professors who wish to be promoted, “show effort toward advancing DEI.” The University of Tennessee requires applicants to submit a diversity statement, which they are judged on, telling how they will help contribute to diversity and inclusion at the school.

“The University of California has adopted a modern day loyalty oath for professors who seek to join the faculty,” the lawsuit alleged. “Today’s loyalty oath does not demand a pledge that professors are not members of the Communist Party, but professed agreement with ‘Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion’ policies and ideology.”

The University of California, Santa Cruz did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

REAGAN REESE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: University Sexuality Program Hosts ‘Radical Playdate’ To Help 5-Year-Olds Explore Their ‘Gender Identity’

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Ongoing Californication of America thumbnail

The Ongoing Californication of America

By Wallace Bruschweiler

History is replete with political/cultural movements. For example The Renaissance during the 15th and 16th Centuries. Now, fast forward to today and we are eyewitnesses to a massive out-migration from California due, in large measure to the Marxism that has infected California’s politics since the 1960s. Recall, however, in earlier times, California’s politics were guided by the Conservatism of the Hispanics who held land grants from the Spanish Conquistadores, and were guided by the Conservatism of the high-born Mexicans who followed in the footprints of the Conquistadores.

Unfortunately for California’s Middle Class of today, the turmoil of the 1960s began a slow but steady seismic shift from Conservatism downward into sanctuary-welfare-state Marxism. When Ronald Reagan left for Washington in November 1980, the last vestige of Conservatism left with him.

Consequently, California’s once-comfortable Middle Class can no longer afford high taxes on their homes, auto gas, electricity, natural gas, and groceries. The Golden State is left with the rich in Silicon Valley and Hollywood and the poor in the agricultural water-starved Inland Empire between the Coastal Ranges and the Arizona and Nevada deserts. Consequently, between 2007 and 2016, California lost over one million residents to Texas, Nevada, Arizona and other lower-tax states.

Inexplicably, some of the fleeing Californians bring their socialist politics into other states, such as Colorado, and that begins the Californication thereof, sending property and other tax rates to unaffordable levels, prompting another wave of out-migration to states like Florida and Texas.

But there may be a much larger movement at work of which Californication is merely a symptom. Looking down from Mount Olympus, we may be seeing a massive effort to marginalize the values of people born in the 20th Century and maximize the values of people born in the 21st Century.

Recall, the 20th Century contained The Greatest Generation that fought and won WWII and the Silent Generation that continued the values of the Greatest Generation were all born in the 20th Century. The Boomer Generation, that rejected those values during the Vietnam War, was born in the 21st Century. And there is a culture gap.

Ask a 20th Century person about Bluetooth and the more educated would tell you that Harald Bluetooth was a Scandinavian king who ruled between 920 and 987 B.C. A 21st Century person would more likely tell you that Bluetooth is a short-wave system for wireless headphones.

Carried to its ultimate terrible conclusion, the Californication Movement will divide the United States into Liberal Blue States and Conservative Red States. Unfortunately, Californication has a not-so-secret weapon: the one-person-one-vote concept which, combined with increasing urbanization, will eventually lead to a U.S. House of Representatives with a vast majority coming from the most-liberal U.S. cities and states. Recall, only the House has to power to tax, As Chief Justice John Marshall said, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.”

Granted the non-urban areas will produce the food. But the big cities, with all the tax money, can hire armed mercenaries to confiscate the food. As Chairman Mao Zedong said, “Political power flows out of the barrel of a gun.” Readers would be well-advised to find all this very scary.

NB: Currently, California faces a $31.5 billion dollar budget deficit.

Suggested reading: McCulloch vs. Maryland, 1819. Quotations from Chairman Mao (Vest Pocket Edition), 1969.

©2023. William Hamilton. All rights reserved.

Watch ‘Groomed’ — Radical Trans Activists Targeting Children Online thumbnail

Watch ‘Groomed’ — Radical Trans Activists Targeting Children Online

By The Daily Caller

They’re After Your Kids.


In our newest documentary Groomed, we tell the story of a mother fighting for her child against all odds.

Radical Trans activists are running rampant in our country and America’s kids are their primary target – especially online. Our exclusive film has the inside story on their scheme.

Our schools, TikTok influencers, and even anime cartoons are actively targeting kids, grooming them for transition.

Many people think this insidious mission is confined to sex-ed and corrupt, liberal school boards, but they couldn’t be more wrong…

This is one story you can’t afford to miss.

Groomed: How They Get Your Kids comes out soon.

©2023 The Daily Caller Inc. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Expert: Public Schools Becoming Unintentional Grooming Grounds for Kids

New Premise Poll: President Donald J. Trump Only Republican Beating Biden, Dominating GOP Primary thumbnail

New Premise Poll: President Donald J. Trump Only Republican Beating Biden, Dominating GOP Primary

By Dr. Rich Swier

Mar-a-Lago, FL — A new Premise poll shows president Donald J. Trump holds a decisive lead in the 2024 GOP primary election with 58% of likely Republican primary voters supporting him.

According to the survey, conducted May 12-15, President Trump remains the only GOP candidate who can beat Joe Biden in a general election.

In the general election race between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump who would your prefer?

43% President Donald J. Trump (+5)
38% Joe Biden

In a general election race between Joe Biden and Ron DeSantis who would you prefer?

37% Joe Biden (+4)
33% Ron DeSantis

Who do you think the Republican Party should nominate as the party’s candidate for president in 2024?

58% President Donald J. Trump (+37)
21% Ron DeSantis
5% Mike Pence
3% Nikki Haley
1% Vivek Ramaswamy

Trump Leads DeSantis In Our New 2024 Republican Primary Polling Average

By 

Today, FiveThirtyEight is launching our national polling average for the 2024 Republican presidential primary. It shows former President Donald Trump receiving 49.3 percent of the national vote and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (who has not officially entered the race) receiving 26.2 percent. Former Vice President Mike Pence, another potential candidate, is at 5.8 percent, while declared candidate and former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley is at 4.3 percent.

Some people will say that national primary polls aren’t important because there is no national primary (just a series of state-by-state contests). Others will tell you it’s too early — more than nine months away from the Iowa caucuses — to put much stock in polls. But we think there’s value in a national polling average, even (especially?) this early: According to our research, national primary polls conducted the year before the election are reasonably predictive of the eventual nominee.

Specifically, when candidates are polling above about 30 percent nationally, they have historically had a decent chance of becoming the nominee. That chance increases the higher their polling numbers are. On the flip side, though, candidates with polling below around 20 percent have been pretty unlikely to win, and those polling below 10 percent are usually doomed.

Read more.

American Greatness Poll: Trump Leads DeSantis by 21 Percent in New Hampshire

Among likely GOP primary voters in New Hampshire, former President Donald Trump holds a 21-point lead over Governor Ron DeSantis, 39 percent to 18 percent. New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu is virtually tied with DeSantis for second place, garnering 17 percent of the vote.

Although Sununu is competing with DeSantis for the “not Trump” vote, among those who describe themselves as “very likely” voters, DeSantis leads Sununu by six points, 19 percent to 13 percent. Trump leads both men among these voters with 45%.

New Hampshire GOP voters prefer Trump over DeSantis to improve the economy (+41 percent) and oppose far-left progressives (+19 percent). Voters also say that Trump cares about their needs and concerns more than DeSantis by a 17-point margin.

The top issues for New Hampshire GOP primary voters are border security (22 percent), liberal politicians in D.C. (21 percent), and taxes/cost of living (16 percent.)

The poll from National Research Inc. and commissioned by American Greatness surveyed 500 likely Republican primary voters in the state of New Hampshire using live telephone interviews (landline and cell) and text-to-online.

The survey was conducted on May 15-17. The margin of error is +/- 4.38 percent.

Read more.

2024 Presidential Election Polls

Last Updated on May 17, 6:4 PM ET

30 Most Recently Added Polls

©2023 Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Bud Light Fiasco Proved Conservatives Already Have The Secret Weapon To Win

Top State Judge Handling Climate Lawsuit Worked With Environmental Group Tied To Plaintiffs’ Lawyers thumbnail

Top State Judge Handling Climate Lawsuit Worked With Environmental Group Tied To Plaintiffs’ Lawyers

By The Daily Caller

The Chief Justice of Hawaii’s Supreme Court, who is hearing Honolulu’s lawsuit against oil and gas companies for climate damages, has worked with a D.C-based environmental group that has close ties to the plaintiff’s attorneys.

Honolulu’s lawsuit against Sunoco, Shell, Chevron and other companies is one of many lawsuits cities have filed against energy companies in an effort to extract alleged damages for the firms’ contributions to climate change; the Supreme Court declined to hear these lawsuits in April, pushing them back to state courts—meaning Honolulu’s case is now squarely before Hawaii Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald. However, on May 9, Recktenwald disclosed that he engages in “educational presentations relating to environmental, energy, and natural resource issues” and has worked with the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), a group which routinely collaborates with environmental activists.

ELI co-founded the Climate Judiciary Project, which developed a climate science and law curriculum for judges handling environment litigation, and has worked closely with individuals who have consulted for or been employed by the environmental activist legal firm representing Honolulu in its lawsuit, Sher Edling LLP.

“Judges are supposed to not only be impartial, but to maintain the appearance of impartiality so that the public can have faith in their rulings,” Rob Schilling, Executive Director of Energy Policy Advocates, a nonprofit that works for transparency in energy policy, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “It appears that the judge may have attended (or even presented at!) seminars organized for those on one side of this type of case. Those on the other side were not permitted to present their view, and the seminar took place outside of the courtroom and outside the protections provided by the rules of evidence.”

Recktenwald presented a remote course, “Rising Seas and Litigation: What Judges Need to Know About Warming-Driven Sea Level Rise,” in collaboration with the Environmental Law Institute on April 4, according to his disclosure. Recktenwald also presented at a December 2022 ELI webinar on “Hurricanes in a Changing Climate and Related Litigation and a 2020 symposium on “Judiciary And The Environmental Rule of Law: Adjudicating Our Future,” which was also in collaboration with ELI but was omitted from his May 9 disclosure.

Moreover, those connected to ELI and the CJP curriculum’s development have direct links to Sher Edling.

Ann Carlson, President Joe Biden’s nominee for National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) administrator who served on the board of directors for the Environmental Law Institute from 2016 to 2020, previously consulted for Sher Edling and solicited donations on behalf of the firm, according to Fox News.

Carlson, who is a professor at UCLA Law School’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Center, which previously hosted events supporting the cause of climate lawsuits, was also an advisor for ELI’s curriculum instructing judges on how to examine climate-based cases.

She also used money from funds she had access to at UCLA, titled the “Ann Carlson Discretionary Fund,” to help fund a 2019 trip that allowed her to “encourage Hawaii to consider a nuisance lawsuit,” according to emails obtained by Climate Litigation Watch. Honolulu filed its lawsuit in March 2020.

Michael Burger, who currently works on climate cases at Sher Edling in his capacity as Of Counsel, has spoken at an ELI briefing and conference. Burger has also filed multiple amicus briefs in support of cities suing oil and gas companies as executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School.

Former Sher Edling employee Meredith Wilensky was a Public Interest Law Fellow at the Environmental Law Institute before she joined the firm in 2017, according to LinkedIn.

Schilling said the connection to the law firm backing plaintiffs in these climate lawsuits is “clear.”

“In short, after the climate plaintiffs lost in California and New York, with one judge not only keeping the case in federal court but requesting a day of evidence on the science, the Environmental Law Institute scrambled to organize what became this running operation to get the plaintiffs’ case in front of as many judges as possible,” he said. “Their materials don’t even bother a nod at [subtlety].”

Northern District of California Judge William Alsup tossed climate cases from San Francisco and Oakland in June 2018, and Southern District of New York Judge John F. Keenan tossed a case from New York City in July 2018. The Climate Judiciary Project was launched in April 2019.

“As the body of climate litigation grows, judges must consider complex scientific and legal questions, many of which are developing rapidly,” its website states. “To address these issues, the Climate Judiciary Project of the Environmental Law Institute is collaborating with leading national judicial education institutions to meet judges’ need for basic familiarity with climate science methods and concepts.”

Modules in the Climate Judiciary Project’s curriculum from January 2023 include “Overview of Climate Litigation,” “Judicial Remedies for Climate Disruption: A Preliminary Analysis,” and “Procedural Techniques Available for Climate Litigation.”

Recktenwald notes in his disclosure that he also intends to present at a June 20 virtual event titled, “Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Disputes: The Use of Special Masters in Resolving Complex Litigation,” as co-chair of the Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee of the Conferences of Chief Justices and Chief Court Administrators. His notice asks “any party who has concerns” about his participation to object by May 19, 2023.

“And so, these seminars parade a series of plaintiffs’ witnesses and supportive amicus brief filers before potential judges,” Schilling said. “In fact, another activist seminar presenter, Prof. Charles Fletcher, just sought leave from the Hawai’i Supreme Court on Friday to file an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs.”

Recktenwald isn’t the only judge who has participated in ELI seminars. Two additional judges on the Hawaii Supreme Court, Associate Justice Sabrina McKenna and Associate Justice Michael Wilson, also participated in the 2020 symposium, along with judges on other Hawaii courts and from different states.

In March, the Hawaii Supreme Court found in a separate case that citizens have a right to a “life-sustaining climate system.”

Wilson wrote in a concurring opinion that we are facing a “climate emergency” that puts the “lives of our children and future generations” at stake.

“[T]he history of these seminars, from their timing and origins to the widespread and extremely active participation by judges hearing these cases — which of course was the seminars’ entire objective — is something that it is difficult to conceive is actually happening in the U.S,” Schilling said.

Recktenwald, Sher Edling, ELI and the companies being sued by Honolulu did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Disappointing’: SCOTUS Won’t Hear Energy Companies’ Appeals To Climate Damage Lawsuits

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Democrats Will Use Deep-State ‘Falsehoods’ to Win ‘Election after Election’: Senator thumbnail

Democrats Will Use Deep-State ‘Falsehoods’ to Win ‘Election after Election’: Senator

By Family Research Council

The Democratic Party has burrowed so deeply into the federal bureaucracy that it conducts “one continuous operation” of disinformation designed “to impact and interfere in our election using falsehoods across the board, election after election,” said Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.).

Federal agents’ refusal to investigate Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, conducting a three-year-long inquest against Donald Trump over baseless charges of “collusion” with Russia, and classifying evidence of Joe Biden’s influence peddling taken from Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation is “literally part and parcel of the exact same operation,” Johnson told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” recently.

“The individuals in the FBI that exonerated Hillary Clinton moved, went on to [the] Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That was a fraudulent investigation,” said Johnson, citing Special Counsel John Durham’s final report. “Then the FBI sees Hunter Biden’s laptop in December 2019. We have whistleblowers that said higher ups in the FBI said, ‘You will not look at that Hunter Biden laptop.’ We also have whistleblowers from the FBI who said that the FBI developed a scheme in August of 2020 to downplay any derogatory information on Hunter.”

The FBI Erases Hillary Clinton’s Foreign Bribery Scandals

The Durham report details how the FBI refused to investigate, much less prosecute, Hillary Clinton over three incidents involving receiving donations intended to sway her foreign policy following the 2016 election.

In 2014, a foreign nation sent an asset to curry favor with Hillary Clinton, who had not yet officially declared her candidacy. Agents sought a FISA warrant almost immediately, but officials in Obama’s FBI held up the application for five months. One agent remembered that “everyone was ‘super more careful’” about her application and “scared with the big name [Clinton]” involved. “[T]hey were pretty ‘tippy-toeing’ around HRC, because there was a chance she would be the next [p]resident.” Two officials, including Peter Strzok, “alluded to the fact that they did not want a presidential candidate on tape.”

Ultimately, the warrant came down 11 months later, “conditioned on the requirement that the FBI give defensive briefings to the various public officials and candidates of both political parties”: that is, that the FBI warn both candidates of attempts by foreign agents to affect policy. The offer came although Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe admitted that defensive briefings “reduce your ability to get to the bottom of the threat.”

Hillary Clinton did not attend the briefing, opting to have her attorneys attend in her place.

In November 2015, an FBI informant embedded in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign warned of another foreign agent seeking to influence her impending administration. The informant made a $2,700 donation on behalf of the U.S. citizen fronting for this foreign agent seeking to influence the Clinton campaign. The foreign citizen was known by the FBI “to have foreign intelligence and criminal connections,” and a contribution of that sort would violate 52 U.S. Code § 30121. Federal Election Commission records confirmed a donation.

The informant told the FBI handling agent, “They [the campaign] were okay with it. […] yes they were fully aware from the start” of its origins, and intent to purchase access.

Yet “this apparent illegal contribution was not documented in FBI records,” Durham noted. “Instead, the FBI effectively removed their sole source of insight into this threat.” The agent in charge of the case, “responding to direction” from above, told the informant to have nothing more to do with Clinton fundraising:

“do NOT attend any more campaign events, set up meetings, or anything else relating to [Clinton’s] campaign. We need to keep you completely away from that situation. I don’t know all the details, but it’s for your own protection.”

Finally, Andrew McCabe quashed an FBI investigation into foreign donations to the Clinton family’s “philanthropic” nonprofits. Paul Abbate, now the FBI deputy director and then the assistant director of the Washington Field Office, described McCabe as “negative,” “annoyed,” and “angry” that the investigation took place, during a meeting on February 22, 2016. McCabe then told investigators in multiple FBI field offices that he must personally approve all investigations into the Clintons’ foundations.

In August 2016, Obama-era FBI Director James Comey shut down the investigation, turning it over to the New York office, and subpoena power was given to the U.S. Attorneys offices in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. Those offices refused to issue subpoenas to investigate the Clintons.

The Southern District of New York issued 34 charges against former President Donald Trump at an April 4 arraignment over campaign finance violations, charges legal experts call strained.

Durham contrasted that with the way agents rushed to investigate 2016 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump over charges they knew to be hearsay. Agents received the Steele dossier on September 19, 2016, and, within two days, incorporated it into a FISA application targeting the Trump campaign.

Hillary Clinton is “the one, with the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, that was cozy with the Russians,” Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) told Perkins on Tuesday. “Clinton was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to go deliver speeches in Russia.” But the FBI responded to their prodding after “they created this narrative, they paid for this narrative, and they pulled together documentation and hired people to push this narrative. And the media went along with them every single step of the way.”

The CIA Peddles Disinformation about Russian Disinformation

When the Hunter Biden laptop story broke on the eve of the 2020 election, Obama-era Acting CIA Director Mike Morell, “at the direction of current Secretary of State Anthony Blinken,” who was then “working for the Biden campaign [came] up with a fraudulent letter signed by 51 intelligence officials” asserting the story carried all the hallmarks of Russian propaganda, Senator Johnson told Perkins. “But also, we now know the CIA tried to solicit signatures from current CIA employees.”

The CIA uncharacteristically expedited approval of the statement, which deemed any mention of Hunter Biden’s laptop “Russian disinformation,” according to a report released last week by the House Judiciary Committee. Morell asked the CIA’s Prepublication Classification Review Board for a “rush job” to approve a statement via email on October 19, 2016 — three days before the final debate between President Trump and Joe Biden.

In an email to former CIA Director John Brennan the same day, Morrell revealed the letter’s intention was starkly political: to “give the [Biden] campaign, particularly during the debate on Thursday, a talking point to push back on [President] Trump on this issue.”

Partisan political appointees manifested their political bias in each of these cases — and tried, or succeeded, in changing the course of multiple elections, Johnson said.

“This is one continuous operation of the Left, of Democrats, of the Biden campaign, the Hillary Clinton campaign, to impact and interfere in our election using falsehoods across the board, election after election,” Johnson told Perkins on Monday.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) echoed his words Tuesday night. “We’ve got the pattern of recognition here,” Gaetz told Newsmax TV host Chris Plante. “You’ve got Big Government, Big Media, Big Tech all in this conspiracy to try to reshape the nature of truth. And guess what? You saw the very features of that conspiracy reemerge in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.”

Truth “shouldn’t be something defined by the powerful,” said Gaetz.

The Deep State ‘Goes Down Very Low’: Trump

Former President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a pledge to “drain the Swamp,” said clearing left-leaning partisans out of the U.S. government’s bureaucracy will take a herculean effort.

“There is a Deep State, and there are a lot of problems,” he told Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt on Tuesday. “I did a lot of firings, but it goes down very low” into the ranks of federal employees.

Durham closed out his nearly four-year-long investigation by declining to make any criminal referrals, or call for any new policies, to prevent future election-tampering. “Not every injustice or transgression amounts to a criminal offense,” wrote Durham. “If this report and the outcome of the Special Counsel’s investigation leave some with the impression that injustices or misconduct have gone unaddressed, it is not because the Office [of Special Prosecutor] concluded that no such injustices or misconduct occurred. It is, rather, because not every injustice or transgression amounts to a criminal offense, and criminal prosecutors are tasked exclusively with investigating and prosecuting violations of U.S. criminal laws.”

The Biden administration’s FBI responded to the Durham report by declaring the agency needs no reform, because “current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time. Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented.”

Impeachment, Expulsion Resolutions Introduced in the House

While Trump states the Deep State goes low, House Republicans are starting at the top.

FBI Director Christopher Wray faces impeachment, thanks to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). Her legislation, introduced Tuesday and reported first by The Daily Caller, raps Wray “for facilitating the development of a [f]ederal police force to intimidate, harass, and entrap American citizens that are deemed enemies of the Biden regime,” including pro-life advocates and traditional Roman Catholics.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) introduced a bill to expel Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a Democratic hopeful for U.S. Senate, from Congress, citing his role in promoting the Russian collusion narrative. “Schiff lied to the American people. He used his position on House Intel to push a lie that cost American taxpayers millions of dollars,” Luna said. “He is a dishonor to the House of Representatives.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has invited Durham to testify before his committee and co-authored a letter to Biden administration CIA Director William Burns over “the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election.” Burns has until Sunday to respond.

Republican presidential candidates have called for massive retaliation against the agency. Aside from Trump, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) said the next president will “need to clean house at these agencies, as they’ve never been held accountable for this egregious abuse of power.” Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley agreed. “Heads need to roll over this. Anybody that touched it or had a part in it needs to be fired and every one of their senior managers needs to be fired. The FBI has lost complete credibility when it comes to this.”

Equality Under the Law Is a Battle ‘for the Soul of America’

Restoring even-handed administration of justice has spiritual connotations, one rising Republican said.

“The Democrats try to lecture us on democracy,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) told Schmitt on Tuesday. “It is Republicans, it is conservatives: We’re the ones that are actually fighting for the soul of America and for our republic, because we want the law to be applied equally.”

The Bible repeatedly condemns “respect of persons” (James 2:9Colossians 3:25Ephesians 6:9), especially in applying the law (Deuteronomy 1:17 and 16:19II Chronicles 19:7Proverbs 24:23).

The ongoing bias of deeply embedded federal bureaucrats in favor of one party across multiple election cycles “is going to have to be a campaign issue,” Tony Perkins told Senator Blackburn.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

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

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Destroy The Role Of Parents’: Karine Jean-Pierre Gets Angry Reactions For Saying Children ‘Belong To All Of Us’ thumbnail

‘Destroy The Role Of Parents’: Karine Jean-Pierre Gets Angry Reactions For Saying Children ‘Belong To All Of Us’

By The Daily Caller

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has drawn angry reactions for commenting that children “belong to all of us” at an award ceremony held by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).

Jean-Pierre made the comments during an interview with Jezebel magazine at the 2023 GLAAD awards, weeks after President Joe Biden said there’s, “[n]o such thing as someone else’s child. Our nation’s children are all our children.” She was advocating for children to have increased access to sex change operations, procedures which are banned or restricted in many countries.

The activist organization Catholic Vote accused the Biden Administration of “working to destroy the role of parents at every turn,” in a tweet Wednesday.

In a comment provided to the Daily Caller, Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, Board Chairman of the medical group Do No Harm said that children can’t “make informed judgements” about these sorts of treatments.

“Miss Jean-Pierre is correct that the state plays an important role regarding children,” Dr. Goldfarb said. “That role is to protect children from child abuse and from their own inability to make good judgments. That is why children cannot drive, cannot smoke, and cannot vote.”

“There’s no such thing as someone else’s child.”

Yes, that’s a real thing President Biden said.

Democrats, from the president to the local level, are fighting to prevent parents from being able to protect their own children.https://t.co/QsOiGIxtLk

— SBA Pro-Life America (@sbaprolife) May 17, 2023

“The idea that children can make informed judgments about altering their body and their reproductive future suggests that adults, particularly those in healthcare, who support so-called gender, affirming care, are betraying these children.”

Pro-life advocacy group Protect Women Ohio commented that, “No parent wants to hear the government tell them their kids are not theirs.”

“Democrats, from the president to the local level, are fighting to prevent parents from being able to protect their own children,” another pro-life group, Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, tweeted.

“Biden Admin Says Your Kids Belong to the Them. Guess what? NO THEY DON’T. We the Parents won’t let Big Government and their schools along with the ACLU & URGE remove our rights/responsibilities as parents so they can destroy our kids and our future,” the conservative group Eagle Forum said.

AUTHOR

SARAH WEAVER

Social issues reporter.

RELATED VIDEO: They’re Coming for Your Parental Rights

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Had An Erection Visible’: Girls Speak Out About Being Forced To Allow Male Into Sorority House

Here Are All The Conservative-Leaning Outlets That Call Dylan Mulvaney A ‘She’

Miller Lite’s New Feminist Spokeswoman Previously Ran ‘Horny 4 Tha Polls’ Stripper-Themed Comedy Tour

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘That’s Election Interference’: Musk Rips Suppression Of Hunter Biden Laptop thumbnail

‘That’s Election Interference’: Musk Rips Suppression Of Hunter Biden Laptop

By The Daily Caller

Billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk called the Hunter Biden laptop scandal “election interference” during a Tuesday interview with CNBC’s David Faber.

Musk joined the network to discuss a host of topics including Tesla stock and Twitter.

“You do some tweets that seem to be, or at least give support to some who would call others conspiracy theories,” Faber said.

“Well, yes, but I mean, honestly, you know, some of these conspiracy theories have turned out to be true,” Musk said.

“Which ones?”

“Well, like the Hunter Biden laptop.” (RELATED: ‘The Answer Is Nuanced’: Musk Says Biden Won In 2020 But Trump’s Election Fraud Claims Are Not Entirely False)

“That’s true?” Faber said. “Yeah.”

“So you know, that was a pretty big deal. There was Twitter and others engaged in an act of suppression of information that was relevant to the public. That’s a terrible thing that happened. That’s election interference.”

The New York Post was locked out of its Twitter account, along with several other high profile individuals, after reporting on the laptop. The laptop was initially dismissed as Russian disinformation though that narrative has since been debunked.

Musk also discussed free speech on the platform, and claims of fraud in the 2020 election.

“To be clear, I don’t think it was a stolen election,” Musk said. “But by the same token, if somebody is going to say, that there was never any election fraud anywhere, this is obviously also false.”

“It’s important to acknowledge that without saying that the fraud was of sufficient magnitude to change the outcome. So, my opinion would be that there was some small amount of fraud, but it was not enough to change the outcome.”

AUTHOR

BRIANNA LYMAN

News and commentary writer. Follow Brianna on Twitter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

How Trump Is Winning The ‘Invisible Primary’ And Besting DeSantis

Biden’s Pick To Head NIH Got Millions In Research Grants From Pfizer, Big Pharma, Records Show

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Bud Light Sales Plummet For Fifth Straight Week Since Promoting Trans Influencer thumbnail

Bud Light Sales Plummet For Fifth Straight Week Since Promoting Trans Influencer

By The Geller Report

I like it. Punish those who are destroying the country.

Earlier this month, Bud Light announced it be partnering with transgender TikTok-er Dylan Mulvaney. Bud Light and its parent company Anheuser-Busch ‘celebrated’ Mulvaney’s “365 Days of Girlhood,” with Mulvaney custom-made cans featuring the influencer’s face. Mulvaney said the cans were her “most prized possession” on Instagram with a post featuring “#budlightpartner.”

Bud Light sales continue to plunge with 24% drop in latest week since Dylan Mulvaney disaster

By

Bud Light suffered its fifth straight week of worsening sales drops since the Dylan Mulvaney controversy began — stoking doubts about whether the mega-brand can recover as the crucial summer beer-drinking season begins.

Nationwide retail sales of Bud Light sales dropped 23.6% versus a year ago during the week ended May 6 — slightly worse than the 23.3% decline for the week ended April 29, according to data from Bump Williams Consulting and NielsenIQ data.

Sales of other Anheuser-Busch brands also continued to drop, albeit at a slower rate than the week before. Those included Budweiser, down 9.7% versus an 11.4% drop a week earlier; Michelob Ultra, down 2.9% versus 4.3%; and Natural Light, down 2.5% versus 5.2% the previous week.

“This seems to be where the brand’s weekly declines have started to settle, falling in that -20% range over the past few weeks,” said Bump Williams, chief executive of the consultancy, said of Bud Light. “I wonder if this going to be

Read more.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bud Light To Woo Customers With Camouflage Bottles After Mulvaney Backlash: REPORT

Anheuser-Busch Loses $5 Billion Since Announcing Sponsorship of Trans Influencer

RELATED TWEET:

The Bud Light marketing team must still be all women if they think a coupon will get a man’s attention pic.twitter.com/ZsQiy2vung

— Ashley St. Clair (@stclairashley) May 14, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Obama ‘Most Worried’ About ‘Divided Media’: We Have Different Realities thumbnail

Obama ‘Most Worried’ About ‘Divided Media’: We Have Different Realities

By Discover The Networks

Tuesday on CBS Mornings, former President Barack Obama said that the “divided media” was his biggest concern for the future of the United States.

Host Nate Burelson asked, “Post-presidency, what about this country keeps you up at night?”

Obama said, “The thing that I’m most worried about is the degree to which we’ve now had a divided conversation, in part because we have a divided media.”

He continued, “When I was coming up, you had three TV stations. And people were getting a similar sense of what is true and what isn’t, what was real and what was not. Today, what I’m most concerned about is the fact that because of the splintering of the media, we almost occupy different realities.”

He added, “In the past everybody could say all right, we may disagree on how to solve it, but at least we all agree that that’s an issue. Now, people will say, well that didn’t happen or I don’t believe that. And one of the goals of the Obama Foundation and one of the goals of my post-presidency is, how do we return to that common conversation? How can we have a common set of facts. We may disagree on gun violence in terms of what the best prescriptions are, but we can’t deny the data that says the United States has levels of gun violence that are five, ten, fifteen times more than other countries.”

Obama concluded, “So if we say it’s just a mental health problem, it’s not like there aren’t people with mental health problems in those other countries. What’s the difference. This is probably the difference. Now we can have a debate, but at least we’ve agreed on some facts.”

What really worries Obama is that not every single outlet in the news media is a slavish mouthpiece for the State yet — almost, but for holdouts like Breitbart News, Newsmax, and independent journalists. He won’t be happy until there is absolute conformity in terms of disseminating State-approved information.


Barack Hussein Obama

266 Known Connections

Characterizing Republicans As “Racist,” “Sexist,” & “Angry”

In the summer of 2022, Obama said: “Sometimes it just turns out they’re mean, they’re racist, they’re sexist, they’re angry. And your job is then to just beat them because they’re not persuadable.”

To learn more about Barack Obama, click here.

RELALATED ARTICLES:

The Washington Post Relies on Journalists Who Turn Out to Be Terror-Linked

CNN International Host Isa Soares Blames Israel For Human Shields

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Weaponized IRS Removes Entire Team Investigating Hunter Biden thumbnail

Weaponized IRS Removes Entire Team Investigating Hunter Biden

By The Geller Report

The more the Democrat party is exposed for their criminal, treasonous actions, the more brazen and emboldened they get. How long does America sit by and watch while the greatest nation on earth is set ablaze?

IRS removes investigative team from Hunter Biden probe in move whistleblower calls ‘clearly retaliatory’

By Steven Nelson, NY Post, May 15, 2023:

WASHINGTON — The IRS on Monday removed the “entire investigative team” from its long-running tax fraud probe of first son Hunter Biden in alleged retaliation against the whistleblower who recently contacted Congress to allege a cover-up in the case, The Post has learned.

The purge allegedly was done on the orders of the Justice Department, the whistleblower’s attorneys informed congressional leaders in a letter.

“Today the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Supervisory Special Agent we represent was informed that he and his entire investigative team are being removed from the ongoing and sensitive investigation of the high-profile, controversial subject about which our client sought to make whistleblower disclosures to Congress. He was informed the change was at the request of the Department of Justice,” Mark Lytle and Tristan Leavitt wrote.

The whistleblower, who supervised the Hunter Biden probe since early 2020, hasn’t publicly identified the first son as the subject of the case that he says is being brushed under the rug, but congressional sources confirmed it.

“On April 27, 2023, IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel appeared before the House Committee on Ways and Means. He testified: ‘I can say without any hesitation there will be no retaliation for anyone making an allegation or a call to a whistleblower hotline.’ However, this move is clearly retaliatory and may also constitute obstruction of a congressional inquiry,” the lawyers went on.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTCLES:

‘That’s Election Interference’: Musk Rips Suppression Of Hunter Biden Laptop

The FBI is the Most Dangerous Domestic Terror Organization in America

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Would you buy a used Tesla from Elon Musk? thumbnail

Would you buy a used Tesla from Elon Musk?

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

More to the point, would you buy its used battery?


My father was a loan officer who specialized in auto loans. In that position, he had to be a good judge of character. I seem to remember one day he was talking about a fellow he knew and said something like the following: “He’s stayed out of jail, but I wouldn’t buy a used car from him.”

More and more used-car buyers are going to face something like the headline’s question as used electric vehicles (EVs), predominantly but not exclusively Teslas, hit the used-car market. A recent article by Jamie L. LaReau of the Detroit Free Press, and republished by papers in the USA Today network, describes the challenges consumers face in buying a used EV.

As you probably know, the single most expensive component in an EV is the battery. A complete replacement of the entire battery can cost about half the price of the car (e.g. US$15,000 for a $30,000 used car). The difficulty in buying a used EV is to figure out the condition of the battery—what its current range is and how long it will be before it has to be replaced. Currently, there is no good way to do this.

LaReau recommends taking the prospective purchase for a long test drive, preferably a couple of days, and running it on the kind of commuting route you expect to use it for. If the battery runs precariously low in such a situation, the car may not be for you. Some types of EVs allow the owner to replace individual faulty cells in the battery, thus avoiding an expensive replacement of the entire battery. I would imagine that the diagnostics for such a replacement might not be straightforward, and only dealers for that particular model could do such a check. Other types of EVs make their batteries as a unitary packaged structure that has to be replaced all at once. So when the battery’s performance falls below what is required, there’s really no other option but to replace the whole thing.

Dave Sargent, whose title is Vice President of Connected Vehicles at the consumer-analytics organization J. D. Power, is quoted as saying that mileage as reported by the odometer is not a good guide to battery condition. More important is the way the car was driven—highway versus city streets—what the average temperature of its surroundings were (Phoenix or Bangor is bad, Atlanta is good) and how it was charged. Fast charging, for example, is harder on batteries than the slower overnight charging that most consumers are able to do in their garages. Also, if the battery was frequently allowed to discharge lower than 20% capacity, that tends to age it faster than otherwise.

In principle, all this data could be (and maybe is) stored somewhere, either on the car’s computer or the manufacturer’s remotely gathered database on the vehicle. If somebody hasn’t done this already, it shouldn’t be hard to write software that can take such data and make an educated guess as to the overall condition of the battery at the time of sale. At this time, however, such software doesn’t seem to be generally available.

Some dealers will test the battery for a fee of about $150, but that only tells you what condition it is in now, not what it’s going to do in the future. A Federal government mandate to guarantee the battery in a new EV for eight years or 100,000 miles is worth something, but it is not clear if that warranty is always transferable to a used-car buyer. On the lender CapitalOne’s website, an article warns that some manufacturers won’t replace a battery under the federal warranty until it is totally non-functional. So even if the car would just get out of your driveway and then die, you’d be stuck with it until it wouldn’t even do that. And sometimes the warranty won’t transfer to subsequent owners.

All in all, anyone buying a used EV is taking a chance that the battery will not do what they want in a time sooner than they’d like. Of course, used cars in general are a somewhat risky purchase, but as a purchaser of used cars most of my life (I’m driving the first new car I ever bought, and that was only three years ago), there are ways to tell if you’re getting a lemon or not, and state-mandated “lemon laws” allow consumers to return vehicles that were sold under clearly fraudulent conditions.

But the lack of expertise on the ground who can make a reliable prediction as to when an EV’s battery will degrade below an acceptable level of performance is a novelty that most buyers would rather not deal with.

On the other hand, the reasons why people buy electric cars are not your usual reasons. Currently, none of the EVs available, used or new, sell for prices that would attract what you might call the typical buyer. LaReau cites statistics that say the current average price of a new EV is about $58,000 and for a used EV, you’ll pay an average of $41,000. So we are talking high-end if not luxury vehicles, and buyers for whom price is not the main consideration.

I think one of the main motivations for people who buy EVs is a politico-aesthetic one: they think they are helping to avert global warming. Whether buying and using an EV really does this, considering all the manufacturing steps, the mining of lithium and other metals under less-than-ideal circumstances, and the source of electric power used to charge the thing, is a question for another time. Whether or not one really does affect global warming with an EV purchase, lots of people feel like they do, and that’s what counts in marketing.

As with any used-car purchase, the old Latin motto caveat emptor (“let the buyer beware”) applies in spades to buying a used EV. If the car’s battery performance turns out to be a disappointment, maybe the purchaser can just look upon it as one more sacrifice made in the cause of fighting global warming. But your typical car buyer is likely to be unmoved by such sentiments, and so things will have to become a lot more transparent before used EVs become just as easy to sell as conventional gas guzzlers.

This article has been republished from the author’s blog, Engineering Ethics, with permission.

AUTHOR

Karl D. Stephan received the B. S. in Engineering from the California Institute of Technology in 1976. Following a year of graduate study at Cornell, he received the Master of Engineering degree in 1977… More by Karl D. Stephan.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

As AI Developers Try To Sell Senate Hearing On The Technology’s Safety, Violent Extremists Are Planning To ‘Wreak Havoc’ With It thumbnail

As AI Developers Try To Sell Senate Hearing On The Technology’s Safety, Violent Extremists Are Planning To ‘Wreak Havoc’ With It

By Middle East Media Research Institute

Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and antigovernment groups – racially/ethnically motivated violent extremists, aka REMVE – are discussing and posting about AI use on the main social media platforms that they favor. Privately and openly, they are talking about and testing and using AI, in addition to developing their own versions and recruiting engineers and teams for special projects, including for breaking into banks.

The most troubling examples found by the MEMRI Domestic Terrorism Threat Monitor (DTTM) research team in its work studying this topic involve extremists actually discussing the use of AI for planning terror attacks, including making weapons of mass destruction. One accelerationist group which seeks to bring about the total collapse of society recently conducted, in a Facebook group, a conversation about trying to trick an AI chat bot into providing details for making mustard gas and napalm. These and other examples are detailed in a new MEMRI DTTM report to be released later this month.

Also in the report is the leader of a designated terrorist entity – a former U.S. government contractor who frequently calls for attacks inside the U.S. from his safe haven in Russia – who published suggestions generated by ChatGPT for engaging in guerilla warfare and about critical infrastructure in the U.S. that would be most vulnerable to attack. ChatGPT said that the most vulnerable U.S. infrastructure was “the electrical grid.”

Others are talking about using AI to plan armed uprisings to overthrow the current U.S. governmental system, and sharing their AI-created versions of U.S. flags, military uniforms, and graphic designs of the White House. They also discuss AI’s use for recruitment and for spreading their ideology and propaganda online, including with videos they create. Deepfake videos showing Hitler delivering a speech in English and Harry Potter actress Emma Watson reading Hitler’s Mein Kampf aloud have gone viral on their platforms.

MEMRI research has already found jihadi terrorists talking about using AI for developing weapons systems, including drones and self-driving car bombs. As I wrote in Newsweek in March, a popular user on an ISIS-operated Rocket.Chat server revealed in December 2021 that he had asked ChatGPT for advice on supporting the caliphate, and shared the results. In late March, ISIS supporters discussed using ChatGPT for coding and building software for hacking and encryption, concluding that “2023 will be a very special year for hackers, thanks to chatbots and AI programs.”

As early as March 2016, Microsoft released the AI chatbot Tay, but shut it down within 24 hours after it was manipulated into tweeting pro-Hitler messages. Nevertheless, seven years later, the danger posed by neo-Nazi and white supremacist use of AI has only increased. On the Hello History chat app, released in early January 2023 and downloaded over 10,000 times on Google Play alone, users can chat with simulated versions of historical figures, including Adolf Hitler and Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

As AI technology races ahead – total global corporate investments in AI reached nearly $94 billion in 2021 – many companies involved in its development are laying off their ethicists, who examine algorithms to prevent the type of extremism on the platforms that are cited in this article.

The news of these firings comes as over 2,000 tech leaders and researchers demanded safety protocols and called on the industry to “immediately pause for at least six months” the training of ever more advanced AI systems, citing “profound risks to society and humanity.” To top this off, on May 1, artificial intelligence pioneer and “godfather” Geoffrey Hinton quit Google, where he had become one of the most respected voices in the field, so he could freely speak out about the dangers of AI.

In response to the ongoing backlash, Sam Altman, CEO of ChatGPT creator OpenAI, explained in an interview that “time” is needed “to see how [the technology is] used,” that “we’re monitoring [it] very closely,” and that “we can take it back” and “turn things off.” Altman’s claims serve the AI industry.

Nevertheless, at his testimony today before the Senate subcommittee hearing about oversight of AI, Altman stressed the need for regulation and said that the industry wanted to work with governments – but how exactly that would happen was not clear. Prior to the hearing, Altman had private meetings with key lawmakers following the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, and this evening he is scheduled to attend a dinner with members of Congress.

The neo-Nazi and white supremacist focus on AI, here in the U.S. and worldwide, is a national security threat that is not even mentioned in recent warnings about AI. While extremists hope AI will help “wreak havoc” – per a recent post in an accelerationist chat – it is not known whether U.S. and Western counterterrorism agencies have even begun to address this threat.

The closest acknowledgement to recognizing the danger came in the first week of May when President Biden brought together tech leaders involved in AI who were warning of the potential “enormous danger” it poses, while promising to invest millions on advancing research about it.

Earlier, in April, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency director Jen Easterly warned, in a panel discussion, about the dangers of this technology and of access to it: “We are hurtling forward in a way that I think is not the right level of responsibility, implementing AI capabilities in production, without any legal barriers, without any regulation.” And Senator Chris Murphy recently warned about AI: “We made a mistake by trusting the technology industry to self-police social media… I just can’t believe that we are on the precipice of making the same mistake.”

Whether the call to halt AI development has come in time remains to be seen. But regardless, this private industry should not be operating without government oversight. It is clear is that the industry needs to follow standards and create guidelines to examine issues like this – moves that have still not been made for terrorist use of social media. While the National Institute of Standards and Technology has reportedly developed frameworks for responsibility in AI use, no one seems to know about them.

AUTHOR

Steven Stalinsky, Ph.D.

Steven Stalinsky, Ph.D., is Executive Director of MEMRI.


PLEASE SUPPORT MEMRI’s 2023 SPRING CAMPAIGN


EDITORS NOTE: This MEMRI column is republished with permission. ©All rights Reserved.

Reza Pahlavi: People’s Prince thumbnail

Reza Pahlavi: People’s Prince

By Amil Imani

The streets of Tehran were awash with people, their chants and slogans echoing across the city. “Reza Reza Pahlavi! Reza Reza Pahlavi!” they shouted, as they marched towards the parliament building.

Among the crowd were three friends, Payam, Zohreh, and Zubin. They had grown up together, gone to school together, and now, they were protesting together. As they walked, they discussed the events of the day, their hopes, and their fears.

“What do you think will happen?” asked Zohreh, a young woman with dark curly hair and piercing green eyes.

“I don’t know,” replied Zubin, a tall, lanky man with a beard. “But I do know that we can’t keep living like this. Something has to change.”

Payam, a stocky man with a bald head, nodded in agreement. “It’s time for a new leader, someone who can unite the people and bring real change to Iran.”

As they neared the parliament building, the crowd grew more intense. Suddenly, the sound of gunshots rang out, and chaos erupted. People began to scatter, running in all directions.

Payam, Zohreh, and Zubin ran for cover, but as they turned a corner, they came face to face with a group of Disciplinary Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran (FARAJA). They were trapped.

“Get down on the ground!” shouted one of the officers, pointing his gun at them.

Zohreh raised her hands, trying to look non-threatening. “Please, we’re just peaceful protesters,” she said, her voice shaking.

The officer sneered. “That’s what they all say. You’re all the same, trying to overthrow our government.”

Zubin stepped forward, trying to reason with the officer. “We don’t want to overthrow anyone. We just want a better future for our country.”

The officer laughed. “Better future? With who? That traitor Reza Pahlavi? He’s a poppet and a coward, hiding in America while his people suffer.”

Payam’s face turned red with anger. “You don’t know anything about him! He’s the only one who can save our country from this corrupt regime.”

The officer raised his gun, his finger on the trigger. “Enough talk. You’re all under arrest.”

Just then, a voice echoed across the street. “Stop! Leave them alone!”

The officer turned to see a figure emerging from the crowd. It was Prince Reza Pahlavi himself, dressed in a suit and tie, his hair neatly combed.

The officer hesitated for a moment, then lowered his gun. “Prince Pahlavi,” he stammered. “I’m sorry, I didn’t recognize you. In fact, we didn’t expect you here on the streets of Tehran”

Reza Pahlavi walked towards the three friends, his arms outstretched. “Are you all right?” he asked, his voice calm and reassuring.

Payam, Zohreh, and Zubin looked at each other in disbelief. They had never expected to meet the prince in person and that too in Iran.

“We’re okay,” said Zohreh, her voice still trembling. “Thank you for saving us. But Sir, what are you doing here in Iran?”

Reza Pahlavi smiled. “It’s my duty to protect the people of Iran, no matter where they are or what their beliefs may be and what they might do to me.”

As they walked away from the scene, Reza Pahlavi spoke to the three friends, asking them about their lives and their aspirations. They talked about their families, their jobs, and their dreams for a better future.

“I know it’s not easy,” said Reza Pahlavi. “But I promise you, I will do everything in my power to bring real change to Iran. To make it a country where everyone has the opportunity to succeed, no matter who they are or where they come from. That’s why I am here”

As they continued to walk and talk, the three friends began to feel a sense of hope that they hadn’t felt in a long time. They had heard rumors about Reza Pahlavi’s popularity in Iran, but seeing it in person was something entirely different.

“I can’t believe we just met the prince,” said Zubin, still in shock.

Payam nodded. “I always knew he was the right person to lead us, but now I’m even more convinced. He’s the only one who can bring real change to Iran.”

Zohreh looked at Reza Pahlavi, her eyes shining with admiration. “Thank you for coming here,” she said. “It means so much to us.”

Reza Pahlavi smiled. “The people of Iran are my top priority. I will do everything I can to help you achieve your dreams.”

The three friends walked with Reza Pahlavi for a while longer, until they came to a park. There, they sat on a bench, surrounded by greenery and the sounds of nature.

“You know,” said Reza Pahlavi, ” I’m also just a person like you. I understand what it’s like to struggle, to face challenges and obstacles. But I also know that with hard work and dedication, anything is possible.”

Zohreh looked at him, her eyes filled with emotion. “We need someone like you in Iran,” she said. “Someone who understands the struggles of the people and is willing to fight for them.”

Reza Pahlavi nodded. “I’m ready to take on that fight. But I can’t do it alone. I need the support of the people, of Iranians from all walks of life, to make real change happen.”

Look., I traveled to Israel because I want the people of Israel to know that the Islamic Republic does not represent the Iranian people. The ancient bond between our people can be rekindled for the benefit of both nation.

The three friends looked at each other, a silent understanding passing between them. They knew what they had to do.

“We’re with you, Prince Pahlavi,” said Zubin, his voice firm.

Prince Pahlavi said the Islamic regime is rooted in exporting an ideology. With this regime, you cannot, you cannot have a coexistence.

Payam nodded. “We’ll do whatever it takes to help you bring change to Iran.”

Zohreh smiled. “You can count on us.”

Reza Pahlavi looked at them, his eyes filled with gratitude. “Thank you,” he said. “Together, we can make Iran a country we can all be proud of. The crown prince also said he will continue to advocate for the rights of the Iranian people and stand with them against their Islamist rulers. “Some people might have assumed that I have abandoned the fight. No, I have not,” he said. Now if you allow me to slip back into the shadows. We will meet again soon.”

Leaving the trio behind, Reza Pahlavi hurriedly made his way toward a sleek, black car parked at a distance. With a quick wave and a nod of his head, he disappeared into the vehicle, which effortlessly glided away, leaving the three friends to stand in awe of the man who they believed could change the course of their beloved country.

As they sat in the park, talking about their hopes and dreams for Iran, the three friends felt a sense of optimism they hadn’t felt in a long time. They knew that the road ahead would be difficult, but with Reza Pahlavi leading the way, they were confident that real change was possible.

©2023 Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: A February 2023 Survey by a U.S.-Based Research Institute Shows Iranians Support Reza Pahlavi