Trump To Head To Alaska To Stump For Palin And Tshibaka, Could Add To Endorsed Candidate Wins

Former President Donald Trump will head to Alaska on July 9 to headline a campaign rally that Saturday afternoon for former Alaska Gov. and congressional candidate Sarah Palin, current Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and Senate candidate Kelly Tshibaka.

Tshibaka is running against incumbent Republican Lisa Murkowski, who made Trump’s target list when she joined Democrats in voting to convict him in his impeachment trial over the Capitol riot. 

RELATED: Dr. Ben Carson Defends Clarence Thomas From Attacks By Hillary: For Liberals ‘Only Thing worse Than Satan Is A Black Conservative’

Special Election

Palin and a whopping 48 other candidates were in the original running for Alaska’s lone House seat, which was left vacant by the death in March of Rep. Don Young (R-AK), who held the seat for 49 years.

Palin, as a former Governor, has of course already won a statewide election in Alaska, and has the star power and name recognition of having been the Republican Party’s candidate for Vice President in 2008.

The top four finishers from the special primary election will now go on to the special election on August 16. The winner will serve out the rest of Young’s term. 

Murkowski has accused the Trump-endorsed Tshibaka of being a “rubber-stamp Republican,” and seemingly does not regret her impeachment vote. She said of Tshibaka:

“I may be the last man standing. I may not be reelected. It may be that Alaskans say, ‘Nope, we want to go with an absolute, down-the-line, always, always, 100-percent, never-question, rubber-stamp Republican.”

RELATED: Willful Blindness: Feds Ignore Massive Illegal Alien ID Theft Plaguing Americans As U.S. Coffers Fill

Racking Up Wins

Establishment and never-Trump Republicans wish the former President would just go away, but that is not what candidates who are vying for his endorsement seem to be saying. Trump-endorsed candidates have been racking up primary wins all over the country, and this past Tuesday’s slate of primaries was no exception.

In Colorado, Lauren Boebert won with 65% of the vote. In Illinois, State Senator Darren Bailey won and will go up against incumbent Gov. J.B. Pritzker and the Democrat machine there.

Also in Illinois, Reps. Mary Miller (R-IL) and Rodney Davis (R-IL) went up against each other for a redrawn district. Trump-endorsed Miller emerged the winner in that race.

In Oklahoma, Gov. Kevin Stitt won with 69% of the vote. and in Utah, Sen. Mike Lee and Rep. Burgess Owens both won primaries each garnering 61% of the vote in their respective races.

So far, 30 Trump endorsed candidates have won their primaries. Others do not take place until August.

RELATED: Biden On How Long Americans Can Expect To Pay High Gas Prices – ‘As Long As It Takes’

Many Who Voted To Impeach Won’t Be Back

Three of the ten House members who voted to impeach Donald Trump are not running for reelection in 2022. Rep. Tom Rice (R-NC) recently lost his primary race to Trump-backed challenger Russell Fry. House Select Committee member Adam Kinzinger’s district will disappear due to redistricting

Perhaps the most-watched of those upcoming primaries will be in Wyoming, where Liz Cheney is being challenged by attorney Harriet Hageman, who was endorsed by Trump.

Currently, Hageman is ahead in the polls over Cheney by 30 points. CNN recently gave Cheney a 10% chance of winning reelection.

Doors open at 11 a.m. (AKDT) on rally day. Trump is scheduled to speak at 4 p.m. (AKDT).

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Trump To Head To Alaska To Stump For Palin And Tshibaka, Could Add To Endorsed Candidate Wins appeared first on The Political Insider.

Supreme Court Rules To Protect Religious Expression For Praying Football Coach

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of Joe Kennedy, the high school football coach who was fired in 2015 for visibly praying on the field after games.

Justice Gorsuch affirmed the coach’s First Amendment rights in the majority opinion of Kennedy vs. Bremerton School District saying that, “[r]espect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic.”

The decision was heralded as a “tremendous victory for Coach Kennedy and religious liberty for all Americans” by Kennedy’s legal team, First Liberty.

Many conservatives are hailing the ruling as a first step towards restoring religious liberty in America, including Ted Cruz who tweeted, “I’m thankful the Supreme Court fully enforced the First Amendment—in a major victory for religious liberty—and upheld our God-given right to practice our faith.”

The President of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins, tweeted that, “The Court has taken a significant step in repairing America’s foundation of religious freedom, which has been under relentless assault over the last 60 yrs.”

RELATED: Reports: Clarence Thomas Interested In Revisiting Ruling To Make It Easier To Sue The Media

Kennedy Wrongly Fired

Kennedy served as an assistant coach for the Bremerton School District in Bremerton, Washington. During his tenure as coach he had a post-game tradition of kneeling for prayer at the 50-yard line. Sometimes students and other coaches voluntarily joined him in this tradition. 

Justice Gorsuch explains in the majority opinion, which was signed by Justices Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh and Barrett, and Chief Justice Roberts, that coach Kennedy was wrongly fired for his visible prayers. The controversy in this case hinged on the fact that Kennedy was serving in an official school capacity when he prayed, and the School District sought to prove that his prayers were coercing students into his religion, which could be a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Justice Gorsuch takes several pages to explain why this specific case does not violate the Establishment Clause and concludes that:

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a personal religious observance, based on a mistaken view that it has a duty to suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his religious exercise and free speech claims.”

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Left Claims “Free Speech is Dead”

Unsurprisingly, the left is outraged by the decision.

In response to the ruling Representative Illhan Omar (D-MN) tweeted that, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

However, Kennedy’s lawyer, Kelly Shackelford, explained that, far from any coercion, two students who did not join the prayers were even promoted to team captain.

Gorsuch also explained in the opinion that, “The First Amendment’s protections extend to ‘teachers and students,’ neither of whom ‘shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.’ It is not dispositive that Coach Kennedy served as a role model and remained on duty after games. To hold otherwise is to posit an ‘excessively broad job descriptio[n]’ by treating everything teachers and coaches say in the workplace as government speech subject to government control.”

Slate news, however, went with the provocative and patently false headline, “Supreme Court Lets Public Schools Coerce Students Into Practicing Christianity.

Christianity Singled Out?

Would Slate news write headlines like this if the coach in question were Muslim or Jewish? This is exactly what an Amicus brief filed in the case by the Shaffer-Jaff law firm posited. 

“Such religious expression does not suddenly become government speech just because it occurs at a place of public employment,” the brief stated. “Because of the well-understood personal and individual nature of expressions of faith, it would be wrong as a factual matter to strip such expressions of their individual significance by attributing them to a person’s employer. No one, for example, would ever view an Abercrombie employee’s decision to wear a headscarf at work as Abercrombie’s endorsement of Islam.”

“A Jewish person who teaches public school students while wearing a yarmulke is doing nothing different in kind than a teacher or a coach privately praying in the view of his students or others.”

Justice Sotomayor refutes this idea in her dissent which was signed also by Justices Bryer and Kagan. Sotomayor sides with the school district stating that, “the District has a strong argument that Kennedy’s speech, formally integrated into the center of a District event, was speech in his official capacity as an employee that is not entitled to First Amendment protections at all.”

“His right to pray at any time and in any manner he wishes while exercising his professional duties is not absolute.”

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Supreme Court Rules To Protect Religious Expression For Praying Football Coach appeared first on The Political Insider.

Journalists On Left-Wing Networks Say ‘Fairness Is Overrated’

Most Americans who were alive remember where they were when President John F. Kennedy was shot. Even if you were very young, you remember watching a visibly shaken and emotional Walter Cronkite struggle to hold back tears as he remained the professional that he was, and delivered the devastating news of Kennedy’s death.

Have we ever wondered aloud, how the events of that tragic day would play out in today’s media landscape with today’s “journalists?” It’s a pretty sure bet the coverage would be wildly different.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

No More Hiding

In Walter Cronkite’s day, you practiced the “5 W’s of journalism.” A reporter’s job was to report the who, what, where, when, why, and perhaps a how of the story. They did not offer up and unwanted opinion for viewers, and more importantly, you didn’t know Walter Cronkite was a liberal until long after he retired, happily ensconced on his boat.

Those days are definitely over. It is not clear what exactly the impetus was, the election of Donald Trump, the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, or something else entirely, but those who call themselves journalists on networks like CNN, MSNBC, and NBC have decided all bets are off, and have declared that well, Republicans and conservatives just don’t merit equal and fair coverage with their Democrat counterparts.

As Fox details, MSNBC Host Joy Reid discussed the coverage of Republicans with her guest, fellow lefty traveller Matthew Dowd. The two came to the conclusion that their job was warn that Republicans are a “threat to freedom.” (Since when do leftists care about freedom, anyway?)

But CNN’s Don Lemon beat Joy to the punch. The week before, he promptly dismissed the idea of objectivity, ironically arguing that the media no longer operate in a “Walter Cronkite society.” 

In March, NBC’s Lester Holt said this about “truth”:

Geez Lester, wouldn’t be easier to just volunteer to organize the next book burning?

RELATED: Bitter Hillary Clinton Blasts Justice Clarence Thomas As ‘Angry’ Person ‘Of Grievance’ 

Justifiable Homicide Of Journalism

In August of 2016, New York Times media columnist Jim Rutenberg gave his fellow journalists license to break any journalistic rule they pleased. Perhaps Rutenberg was prophetic, and saw what could happen in just three short months, even when no one else did?

Did he see that it just might be possible for Donald Trump to be elected president over their precious Hillary, and therefore, the rules had to change? In his column, he implored his fellow writers to “to throw out the textbook of American journalism,” for a more “oppositional” approach when covering then-candidate Trump.

So Republicans and conservatives, we were duly warned what was coming our way. Oh sure, it didn’t just start with Jim Rutenberg and the rest of his friends at the New York Times. We have seen this coming down the pike. Donald Trump just gave them license to do it.

And rest assured, it will not get any better. The midterm election and 2024 are not looking good for them. But keep it up. Keep calling them on it. They are scared. 

Imagine, being scared of a different point of view. 

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Journalists On Left-Wing Networks Say ‘Fairness Is Overrated’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Bitter Hillary Clinton Blasts Justice Clarence Thomas As ‘Angry’ Person ‘Of Grievance’

Hillary Clinton launched a personal attack against Justice Clarence Thomas, the only black man sitting on the Supreme Court, saying she has always known him to be an “angry” man and a “person of grievance.”

Clinton’s comments came about during an interview Tuesday on “CBS Mornings.”

“He’s been a person of grievance for as long as I’ve known him,” she said, telling host Gayle King that she went to law school with Thomas.

“Resentment, grievance, anger. And he has signaled in the past to lower courts, to state legislatures, find cases, pass laws, get them up,” continued Clinton. “I may not win the first, the second, or the third time, but we’re going to keep at it.”

Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion regarding the case that overturned Roe v. Wade last week that other cases using similar legal bases, such as the decision affirming the right to same-sex marriage, should come under review.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

Hillary Clinton Hits Clarence Thomas With Racist Tropes

Hillary Clinton’s comments about Clarence Thomas being angry and aggrieved show she clearly lacks self-awareness. Has there been anybody in politics more bitter and petty than she has been since her embarrassing loss in 2016?

This is a woman who spent years angrily blaming everybody under the sun for her election loss in 2016 – Comey, Putin, Obama, the media, deplorables … you name it.

And honestly, who looks more like a ‘person of grievance’ – Thomas, the longest-serving Supreme Court justice, or his former law school colleague who is best known for having lost an election she had a 90+% chance of winning?

Hillary Clinton’s comments about Clarence Thomas would never be an acceptable form of criticism afforded Republicans of a black jurist or lawmaker.

CNN, when Barack Obama was President, published a column explaining that the ‘angry black man’ is a racist stereotype.

Certainly, they’ll point out that Clinton’s comments are exactly the same thing, right?

But then, what did you expect from the mouth of a Clinton?

This is, after all, a woman who once called black youth “superpredators” that we “must bring … to heel.”

A woman who said “they all look alike” when confusing Eric Holder and Cory Booker.

Clinton once told an African-American radio host that she always carries “hot sauce” in her bag.

Then there were a number of comments from both Bill and Hillary Clinton that the nation’s first black President was not qualified for the job.

“A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee,” husband Bill Clinton famously told the late Senator Ted Kennedy in trying to prop up Hillary.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Claims Women Are Going to Die

Aside from her outrageous comments about Clarence Thomas, Hillary Clinton responded to the overturning of Roe v. Wade with an analysis that is nearly indistinguishable from that of the Kardashian of Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“There are so many things about it that are deeply distressing, but women are going to die, Gayle,” she told the CBS host. “Women are going to die.”

In fact, those are AOC’s very sentiments when she opined on the Supreme Court’s decision.

“This decision and this policy will kill people no matter what their spin and what their talking points are,” Representative Ocasio-Cortez said.

Contrary to Hillary’s belief that Thomas is an angry man full of grievance all his life, the conservative Supreme Court justice consistently flashes a rapier wit and sense of humor when speaking.

He recently quipped that he’d be willing to leave his seat on the court when his job performance was as bad as the media’s.

Now, I don’t care who you are. That’s funny right there.

In 2018, he mocked Senator Cory Booker for his infamous staged ‘Spartacus’ moment.

“Honorable – if we could use that word about more people who are in public life, people who actually ask the questions at confirmation hearings, instead of ‘Spartacus,'” Thomas chided.

A YouGov poll in 2021 shows Americans have the most favorable opinion of Thomas amongst all Supreme Court justices, with 37% approving of his performance, 33% not sure, and 30% disapproving.

Several left-wing pundits have speculated that the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling could catapult Clinton into the 2024 presidential race.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Bitter Hillary Clinton Blasts Justice Clarence Thomas As ‘Angry’ Person ‘Of Grievance’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Any Institution The Left Doesn’t Control They Seek To Destroy

By Jarrett Stepman for The Daily Signal

From overturning Roe v. Wade to supporting the Second Amendment and maintaining religious liberty, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions have put the left in a sour mood.

The left certainly hasn’t taken the news well.

Despite the left’s obsession with the notion that the right is all about “undermining democracy,” the left has shown little trepidation in demanding we lay waste to republican institutions that stand in opposition to its agenda.

Pleas for “court packing” from Democrats have been building for a while. Undoubtedly, those calls will become louder now, despite caution from the Biden administration. The latter hasn’t stopped plenty of prominent Democrats from acceding to the calls of activists to “burn it down”—figuratively and perhaps even literally. 

They’ve both demanded court-packing with liberal justices and called into question the Supreme Court’s legitimacy.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

It’s become a full-blown tantrum from people used to getting their way.

“This court has lost legitimacy. They have burned whatever legitimacy they may still have had after their gun decision, after their voting decision, after their union decision,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., on ABC’s “This Week.”

“They just took the last of it and set a torch to it,” Warren said. “I believe we need to get some confidence back in our court, and that means we need more justices on the United States Supreme Court.”

Following the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y., marched with protesters in front of the Supreme Court and joined in chants of “illegitimate.”

She later said that “impeachment” was on the table for Supreme Court justices, who she insinuated had lied under oath at their Senate confirmation hearings. As Tim Carney wrote in the Washington Examiner, the idea that Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch promised to uphold Roe v. Wade is completely false.

Not to be outdone, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., went off the deep end in front of the Supreme Court. “Women are going to control their bodies, no matter how they try and stop us,” Waters said. “The hell with the Supreme Court. We will defy them.”

It appears that, for the left, liberalism is the standard by which something has “legitimacy.” Any institution they don’t immediately control they seek to destroy.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Part of this might be fueled by their typically overwhelming institutional control, which until very recently included the Supreme Court. For half a century, the court had delivered wins for the left on numerous policy and cultural issues, even when those issues weren’t popular—or in the case of Roe v. Wade and other decisions, weren’t based on particularly sound legal reasoning.

The court could be relied upon to be the left’s sort of deus ex machina, as liberal Bloomberg columnist Noah Smith admitted.

Now, there’s certainly a case to be made that the American political system has become too reliant on courts, rather than on the democratic process, to resolve divisive legal and moral issues. That was one of the problems with Roe v. Wade. By effectively declaring that having an abortion is a “right,” the issue was taken off the table for Americans.

That issue is now going back to the American people and their local elected officials. And that’s really where it should be decided. 

Again, it’s really something to hear the left rage against unelected judges “imposing” their ideas on the country. That’s effectively what Roe v. Wade did, except without supportive language in the Constitution, like the clear text of the Second Amendment, which the justices relied on in their ruling against a New York gun law the day before they overturned Roe. 

When conservatives faced significant legal setbacks in past decades, they didn’t attempt to blow up the court or pack it with additional justices to get their way. Instead, the right worked hard to build a serious institutional and legal infrastructure in opposition, with the Federalist Society being perhaps the most noteworthy example.

With the election of President Donald Trump—who appointed three Supreme Court justices—that generational work came to fruition.

The right worked within the system to create serious and lasting change. Liberals of this generation, it seems, failed the marshmallow experiment on delayed gratification.

RELATED: Progressives Want ‘Term Limits’ For Supreme Court Justices

The left certainly didn’t learn anything from then-Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. The then-Senate majority leader used the “nuclear option” to end the Republicans’ Senate filibuster of judicial nominations in 2013, which cleared the way for Trump and Senate Republicans later getting three justices on the Supreme Court.

Oops.

It’s perhaps a lesson for conservatives today.

 If we really want to overcome the great “awokening,” we need to consider long-term plans to recapture institutions or build new ones in opposition. It’s not enough to just attack them. Short-term victory without a longer-term strategy can easily backfire.

Syndicated with permission from The Daily Signal.

The post Any Institution The Left Doesn’t Control They Seek To Destroy appeared first on The Political Insider.

Clarence Thomas, Consistent Target Of The Left, Explains ‘Right Is Still Right Even If You Stand By Yourself’

Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving justice and just the second black justice to serve on the Supreme Court, is a consistent target of criticism from the left.

A recently surfaced video of Thomas’ remarks to the Heritage Foundation’s 2007 President’s Club Meeting provides insight into how he weathers the constant attacks and stands on his own morals and principles.

The conservative Justice credits “an abiding faith” and a “litany of humility” as a means to remain steady in public life.

He then provides the following incredible clip about standing for what you believe in regardless of what others may be saying or doing.

RELATED: AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

‘Right is Still Right’

Clarence Thomas’s speeches are always a source of inspiration as he is a gifted orator. But his words ring especially true as the Supreme Court receives consistent threats from the political left in the wake of Roe v. Wade being overturned.

A majority of Americans disapprove of the decision. That doesn’t mean the Court should cower in fear and make decisions based on public opinion rather than the rule of law.

“Whether people are mad at you has nothing to do with whether you’re right,” said Thomas during the 2007 speech.

“You know, you can be in the middle of a hurricane, or you can be on a calm day. North is still north,” he continued. “You could be in a thunderstorm. North is still north. People can yell at you. North is still north.”

“It doesn’t change fundamental things. And in this business, right is still right, even if you stand by yourself.”

It is a remarkable clip about having courage in your convictions. Perhaps Chief Justice John Roberts, who frequently sides with liberals on the court for the sole purpose of maintaining integrity with the public, should take some notes.

The entire speech can be seen below.

‘F*** Clarence Thomas’

The excerpt from Clarence Thomas’s speech is especially poignant in light of recent vile attacks against him and his character.

Far-left Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has repeatedly called to impeach him.

She believes his wife’s actions, emailing White House aides about election fraud concerns during the Capitol riot, are grounds for his impeachment.

Actor Samuel L. Jackson used a racist trope in his criticism of the Roe v. Wade ruling, calling Thomas ‘Uncle Clarence’ and wondering about his thoughts on the Loving v. Virginia civil rights case on interracial marriage.

Thomas’s wife is white.

Then there is Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot, who launched a profane attack on Clarence Thomas last week during a Pride event in the city.

“F*** Clarence Thomas,” she yelled.

Lightfoot wouldn’t be put anywhere near a mayor’s office in any sane city in America, but thrives in a liberal cesspool like Chicago.

Prior to that, she issued a “call to arms,” claiming that the Court will be “coming for us next,” even as violent threats and assassination concerns were prevalent.

Thomas recently received an assist from Justice Sonia Sotomayor – who is the exact opposite of him politically – when she offered praise for her colleague, stating he is a very personable individual who “cares deeply” about the integrity of the court.

Sotomayor said despite their differences of opinion on how to help people, she and Clarence Thomas maintain a friendship because she knows he is a “man who cares deeply about the court as an institution … about the people who work here.”

Perhaps even more important than caring, Thomas understands that “north is north” and “right is still right” no matter who stands against you.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Clarence Thomas, Consistent Target Of The Left, Explains ‘Right Is Still Right Even If You Stand By Yourself’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Democrat Rep. Speier Wants States Banning Abortions To Force ‘Impregnator’ To Pay $350,000 ‘Bond’

Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA), in an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, condemned the Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and suggested that states banning abortion should force the “impregnator” to post a $350,000 “bond” to help take care of the child.

Speier, who shared her personal story of abortion on the House floor in a 2011 speech, was shown a clip of that moment during an interview with Acosta on Sunday.

“I realize the luxury, frankly, that I had,” to have an abortion at the time she explained, noting that luxury was “taken away from women today across this country.”

Speier went on to express agreement with fellow Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who suggested Supreme Court Justices need to be impeached because they “lied under oath.”

“There’s no question they lied and they did that under oath. So there should be consequences,” she concurred.

That’s when things turned very, very strange.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

Jackie Speier: Force ‘Impregnator’ to Pay a Bond

In one of the more absurd responses to the abortion ruling by the Supreme Court, Representative Jackie Speier tossed out a suggestion that state legislatures take up bills that would force the “impregnator” to post a $350,000 bond to help care for the child.

“For all those states now saying a woman can’t get an abortion, I’d suggest their legislatures require the impregnators to put up a $350,000 bond so a mother can take care of that child,” she told Acosta.

Speier appears to, like many in her party, struggle to understand how sex works and that it takes two people to create life through pregnancy. She also seems to be a bit ignorant on the state of the economy and the number of people who have $350,000 in their bank accounts.

According to Open Secrets, Speier has a net worth of over $11 million. 

Speier has made past arguments in which she focuses on the “impregnator” when it comes to abortion.

She warned in December as the case was being heard in the Supreme Court, “I think the country hasn’t seen the rage of women speaking out.”

She said pro-life laws are “intended to be misogynistic” and say nothing about the “responsibility of the impregnator.”

RELATED: Gun Rights Victory: Supreme Court Tosses New York Law Restricting Concealed Carry

Made the Argument Before

Just last month, Jackie Speier said the ‘impregnator’ should post a $300,000 bond and cited mask mandates when arguing the government shouldn’t have control of women’s bodies.

“He should be subject to a DNA test [and] required to post a $300,000 bond for the child,” she tweeted, suggesting the Supreme Court believes pregnancies are a result of “immaculate conception.”

“The same people who don’t want mask mandates imposed on their bodies are ready to take control of our uteruses,” she added.

Speier’s reaction to the abortion case is similar to that of Representative Cori Bush, who likewise wanted to focus on the ‘impregnator.’

 

In that case, Bush (D-MO) wanted to know why Congress hadn’t been taking up “sperm regulation legislation.”

“You know, there’s a reason why we don’t see sperm regulation legislation,” Bush said in an interview with MSNBC’s Joy Reid. “There’s a reason why we don’t see mandated vasectomies.”

“You know, the very idea that we would take away men’s bodily autonomy is outrageous, like, it’s unfathomable,” she added.

“But truthfully sperm are busy. It’s busy. Who is regulating that? Who is saying something about it? … Where is that legislation?”

Speier, meanwhile, has argued that abortion is such a ‘luxury’ in today’s world that it amounts to little more than one having their wisdom teeth extracted.

“Abortions are one of the safest procedures you could do on an outpatient basis, safer than doing an endoscopy or doing a wisdom teeth extraction,” said Speier.

Of course, that’s not true. It only applies if you’re willing to completely overlook the fact that neither an endoscopy nor wisdom teeth extraction involves the death of a baby.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Democrat Rep. Speier Wants States Banning Abortions To Force ‘Impregnator’ To Pay $350,000 ‘Bond’ appeared first on The Political Insider.

Colorado Pregnancy Center Set On Fire, Vandalized Hours After Roe v. Wade Decision

A pregnancy center in Longmont, Colorado was vandalized with spray paint and set on fire early Saturday morning, just hours after the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade

According to authorities, fire broke out around 3 a.m. Officials also said that the building sustained fire damage.

RELATED: Cameras Capture Biden’s Cheat Sheet Showing Hilarious Instructions: ‘YOU Take YOUR Seat’

Other Damage And Who Might Have Caused It

In addition to the fire, which authorities are investigating as arson, the front entrance to the building had been vandalized with black spray paint with symbols often used by Antifa, and a statement reading, “if abortions aren’t safe neither are you.”

That phrase has been found at the scene of other attacks, like the firebombing in Buffalo, New York.

Radical pro-abortion activists groups like “Jane’s Revenge” and “Ruth Sent Us” have taken credit for some of the attacks.

Protests and violence broke out in several cities over the weekend following the new landmark Supreme Court decision.

RELATED: Biden State Dept. Refusing To Cooperate With Afghanistan Inspector General Review

Ramping Up Violence

The violent rhetoric and protests by leftists pro-abortion activists has been escalating since a draft of the decision was leaked in May. While speculation abounds as to who might have leaked the document, there has been no recent information on the incident.

Earlier this month, an assassination attempt on Justice Brett Kavanugh was thwarted when a California man was arrested near Kavanaugh’s home in Maryland carrying such items as knives, a pistol, ammunition, pepper spray, and zip ties.

Since then, there have been attacks on crisis pregnancy centers and churches in at least 20 states and Washington D.C. The attacks have ranged from graffiti on the walls of centers and churches in Washington state and in the south, Molotov cocktails hurled at the pro-life Wisconsin Family Action Center, and a firebombing previous to the one in Colorado taking place in Buffalo, New York.

Abortion protesters also essentially held Arizona lawmakers hostage Friday night as they attempted to breach the State capitol building. Elected officials were told not to exit the building and tear gas was used to disperse the crowd.

Other Supreme Court Justices have had protests take place outside their homes. 

RELATED: CNN’s Ana Navarro Uses Relatives With Down Syndrome, Autism To Defend Right To Have Abortions 

When Rhetoric Meets Reality

Back in 2020, then Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) appeared to threaten Justices Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch should any abortion laws be rolled back.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

After the decision on Friday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) called the Court “illegitimate” and encouraged pro-abortion activists to go “into the streets” to fight the ruling.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), also previously known for encouraging confrontation after former President Donald Trump’s election, also joined protesters outside the Supreme Court building,

“The hell with the Supreme Court—we will defy them. Women will be in control of their bodies.” Then, referencing the crowd, said to reporters,”You see this out here? You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

The FBI is assisting in the investigation in Colorado.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Colorado Pregnancy Center Set On Fire, Vandalized Hours After Roe v. Wade Decision appeared first on The Political Insider.

AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas

Far-left Democrat Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) is calling for there to be “consequences” for Supreme Court Justices she claims “lied under oath” and suggested they need to face impeachment.

The Supreme Court on Friday overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion at the federal level.

Some Senators have claimed that by stating during their Senate confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was “settled” – which it was at the time they went through the nomination process – Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh “lied under oath.”

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), for example, released a statement indicating he “trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed” the landmark ruling was “settled legal precedent.”

“What I believe that the President and the Democratic Party needs to come to terms with is that this is not just a crisis of Roe, this is a crisis of our democracy,” AOC said in an interview with Chuck Todd on Sunday.

The congresswoman was then asked about investigations being launched as a means to remedy the left’s perceived grievance.

RELATED: Justice Alito’s Opinion Doesn’t Just Overturn Roe v. Wade, It Shreds It to Pieces

AOC Calls for Impeachment of Supreme Court Justices

Being a day that ends in ‘Y,’ AOC explained to Todd that investigations and possibly impeachment were the way to go following the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Todd asked her if she thinks “the House Judiciary Committee should begin the process of an investigation” into Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. 

“If we allow Supreme Court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments … we must see that through,” she said of possible investigations.

“There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and hostile takeover of our democratic institutions,” AOC hyperventilated. “This is a crisis of legitimacy.”

AOC then focused her ire toward justice Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving justice, the second black justice, and the most conservative member currently serving on the Supreme Court.

“We have a Supreme Court Justice whose wife participated in January 6th,” AOC said failing to discern between those who wanted election fraud investigated and those who took part in the Capitol riot.

AOC has targeted Thomas for impeachment for some time, following reports that Thomas’ wife, Virginia Thomas, exchanged text messages with Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows about alleged election fraud.

“Clarence Thomas should resign,” she has tweeted.

RELATED: AOC Calls To Impeach Clarence Thomas, The Only Black Supreme Court Justice

Ocasio-Cortez Calls Court ‘Illegitimate’

Kavanaugh has also been the subject of smears from the New York socialist, having been maligned by AOC for being “credibly” accused of sexual assault.

“Reminder that Brett Kavanaugh *still* remains credibly accused of sexual assault on multiple accounts [with] corroborated details [and] this year the FBI admitted it never fully investigated,” she tweeted in December.

“Yet the court is letting him decide on whether to legalize forced birth in the US,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

In reality, a Senate Judiciary report from 2018 which investigated the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh showed there was “no evidence” to support any of the claims that were made against him – including the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford.

After the Supreme Court’s ruling, AOC joined protesters outside the building in chanting that the Court itself is “illegitimate,” even as Kavanaugh was the victim of an assassination attempt and there have been nearly 50 attacks on pro-life centers across the country.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post AOC Wants ‘Consequences’ For Supreme Court Justices, Impeachment For Clarence Thomas appeared first on The Political Insider.

Democrats Support School Choice, But Only For Themselves, Not For You

The COVID-19 pandemic was a horrific thing. Millions died, businesses were shut down, many of them closed for good, and because of those lockdowns of society, American children lost precious education time.

But one good thing that came from the pandemic was the ability of parents to look over their kids’ shoulders to see what was going on in the classroom.

They got a first hand look at what was being taught, but also, what was not being taught.

RELATED: Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor Defends Clarence Thomas Amid Calls For Impeachment: ‘Cares Deeply About The Court’

Private vs. Public Schools

Proponents of school choice say that things like school vouchers level the playing field and give children the opportunity to go to a better school.

Ideally, dollars can be used for charter schools, homeschooling, and other alternatives to public schools.

Opponents like the ACLU and teachers unions, which heavily donate to the Democrat Party, argue that taxpayer dollars should not go to funding private schools. Most Democrats are largely opposed to school choice.

But as is so often the case, what they say and what they do are two very different things. While Democrat elected officials deny low-income kids a chance at a better education, the nation’s pricy private schools are filled with the children of those officials.  

RELATED: Chinese Report About Discovery Of Alien Life Mysteriously Deleted; Politics, Jumping The Gun, Or Real?

OK For Me But Not For Thee

So who are these politicians that feel their children are entitled to a better education than yours just because they have “Rep.,” Senator,” or even “President” in front of their name and more zeroes in their bank account? Well, they are exactly who you might think they are.

Bill and Hillary Clinton sent daughter Chelsea to the exclusive and pricy Sidwell Friends school. Hillary flip-flopped on school choice.

Malia and Sasha Obama also attended school at Sidwell, while their father, President Barack Obama, opposed school choice.

President Joe Biden attended the also-exclusive Catholic prep school Archmere Academy in Delaware, and also sent sons Beau and Hunter there. Tuition runs in the $30,000 range.

Biden has expressly attacked the notion of school choice:

Vice President Kamala Harris’ stepchildren attended Wildwood School, also very private and very elite. Tuition fees there will set parents back roughly $44,000. As a Senator, Harris voted against Trump Education Secretary Betsy Devos’ confirmation as Secretary specifically because she supported school vouchers.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attended an all-girls private Catholic high school growing up in Baltimore, and sent her son Paul to Episcopal High School in Virginia, a boarding school that runs almost $65,000 in tuition a year.

Pelosi voted against the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Reauthorization Act in 2015.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren sent her son to a private school beginning when he was in the fifth grade. In 2019, she released an education plan that was staunchly anti-school choice, including ending school choice programs that largely assist low-income families.

RELATED: Biden Tries To Pass The Buck On The Inflation Blame-Game

Fighting Back

Some parents, with the help of Republican Governors like Ron DeSantis of Florida, are fighting back against the elite hypocrisy. In May of 2021, DeSantis signed HB 7045. The bill makes more children eligible for school choice scholarships.

Once again, almost on cue, Florida Senate Democrats opposed the bill. In a statement, they stated, “By signing this bill into law, Gov. DeSantis is taking Floridians’ hard-earned tax dollars and diverting them out of public schools.” 

Well, yes, that’s the idea.

DeSantis responded saying the funds are “not going to any institution, it’s going to the parents, to give them the ability to make decisions about their children’s education.”

Parents will get to make a statement in November about what they think about Democrats who vote to deny their children the same education Democrats insist upon for theirs. 

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Democrats Support School Choice, But Only For Themselves, Not For You appeared first on The Political Insider.