Courts, Issues, Politics

Christian Baker Jack Phillips Under Attack Again

Christian baker Jack Phillips continues to be under the same relentless attack by transgender radicals and rabid Left wing lawyers as the last time around concerning “discrimination” allegations. This latest suit claims Phillips discriminated against would-be customers trying to order an X-rated “transition” celebration cake complete with adult toy decorations. Though this is far from surprising, it does beg the question when harassment of an individual over his or her religious beliefs becomes discrimination or even a hate crime. Read more…

Here’s more from PJ Media…

Remember Jack Phillips, the Christian baker from Colorado who was sued for refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding? He’s being sued again, for the third time, by the same lawyer who tried and failed to take him down last time.

CBS Denver:

Attorneys for a Denver woman greased the pan for yet another legal battle against a Lakewood bakery already burned around the edges from a series of heated civil rights fights. Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop, refused in 2012 to bake a wedding cake for Charlie Craig and David Mullins, a same-sex couple from Denver, on the basis of his religious beliefs…

The latest lawsuit was filed Wednesday in Denver District Court on behalf of Autumn Scardina by attorneys Paula Greisen and John McHugh…

The newest lawsuit claims Phillips discriminated against Scardina and used deceptive and unfair trade practices.

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

Mueller Turns Justice System on Its Head

Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be censured, if not disbarred, for violating Department of Justice rules and turning the legal system upside down for political purposes — to “get Trump.”

His malpractice was on full display this week with his unnecessary press conference to smear the president’s character and reputation by inferring he committed crimes — without bringing charges.
Our legal system doesn’t work that way.

The accused is either innocent or guilty based on factual evidence — not nuance or smoke and mirrors. If prosecutors have insufficient evidence and can’t bring charges against someone, the case is dropped. And prosecutors aren’t supposed to damage a person’s reputation for spite.

But that’s exactly what Mueller did in violating Department of Justice rules and protocols.
In the U.S. justice system, Americans are afforded the presumption of innocence, and the burden to proof is on law enforcement — not the defendant. But Mueller took a sledgehammer to that foundational principle during his partisan press conference by saying, “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. … We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

Seriously, folks? Mueller and his rabid team of partisan lawyers just completed a 22-month exhaustive special counsel investigation into all things Donald Trump at an estimated cost of $35 million. With unlimited resources — and the president’s full cooperation — Mueller and his cabal of pro-Hillary Clinton lawyers interviewed hundreds of witnesses including top White House officials, campaign associates and family members. They reviewed 1.4 million documents provided by the White House and conducted an over-the-top raid of the president’s former lawyer Michael Cohen’s home, forever damaging attorney-client privilege. They raided Roger Stone’s private home — in a heavy-handed, embarrassing spectacle — using helicopters, amphibious vehicles and a dozen heavily armed law enforcement agents to pull the old man out of bed in a pre-dawn arrest.

If that wasn’t enough, the special counsel used strongman tactics to inflict cruel and unusual punishment against Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, putting him in solitary confinement for white-collar crimes from years ago — that had nothing to do with the president, or Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

If, after all that, Mueller and 19 high-priced lawyers couldn’t find sufficient evidence a crime was committed and bring indictments against the president, it’s because it didn’t happen.

It was all a hoax, stemming from a discredited dossier and massive disinformation campaign waged by Trump’s political enemies.

But that fact didn’t stop Mueller during his media spectacle from kicking the president in the shins on his way out the door. He implied that just because he didn’t charge Trump due to Office of Legal Counsel rules that state he can’t indict a sitting president, that doesn’t mean Trump is exonerated. This wrongfully put the burden of proof upon the accused, forcing Trump to prove his innocence.

Turning our system of justice upside down.

Adding to it, Mueller put out a dog whistle to Democratic lawmakers who’ve wanted to impeach the president from day one, encouraging them to “go for it.” He deliberately threw a shiny object to media, whipping up an impeachment frenzy for the next 18 months, during a presidential election cycle, to harm Trump politically. Mueller dishonestly created an innuendo that Trump committed crimes despite Mueller’s office being unable to prove it.

Make no mistake; the special counsel didn’t bring charges solely on the rules that restrict indictment of a sitting president. Attorney General Barr recently testified before Congress saying Mueller told him multiple times — with witnesses present — that he was unable to bring charges against the president irrespective of the Office of Legal Counsel rules.

Here’s the deal: It’s well known that Attorney General Bill Barr has opened a DOJ investigation into the origins of the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation and illicit spying operation of Trump and his 2016 campaign. Mueller knows full well that the evidence that’ll be uncovered will be damning.

Hence the real purpose of the Mueller’s presser: He deliberately distracted the media’s attention away from the DOJ investigation and got the punditry talking nonstop about impeaching the president instead.
It’s a politically fueled chess move for all to see.

Adriana Cohen is a syndicated columnist with the Boston Herald. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16. To find out more about Adriana Cohen and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

Read More...

Abortion, Courts, Politics

Sanders Pledges Pro-Abortion Justices For SCOTUS

Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on NBC’s “Meet the Press” said he would defend Roe v. Wade if elected President by only nominating pro-abortion Supreme Court justices. “If you’re asking me would I ever appoint a Supreme Court justice who does not believe in defending Roe vs. Wade, who does not believe that a woman has the right to control her own body, I will never do that,” Sanders said. Similarly, in the wake of the new Alabama law defending life, Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) both told the media they would only support pro-abortion justices. Read more…

Here’s more from The Hill…

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) joined other 2020 Democratic hopefuls on Sunday in pledging to only nominate Supreme Court justices that support the Roe v. Wade decision protecting abortion rights.

“If you’re asking me would I ever appoint a Supreme Court justice who does not believe in defending Roe vs. Wade, who does not believe that a woman has the right to control her own body, I will never do that,” Sanders said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

He also condemned a new Alabama law that will ban abortion except when there is a threat to the mother’s life.

“What they did in Alabama was unbelievable,” he said. “The idea that women in this country should not be able to control their own bodies is beyond belief.”

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

Bill Barr the Boogeyman — or So Democrats Would Have Us Think

Now that Democrats didn’t get the results they wanted from the Mueller report, which, to their disappointment, found the president did not collude with Russia or obstruct justice — or commit any other crime — they’re trying to discredit Attorney General Bill Barr.

It’s the ol’ shoot-the-messenger trick to achieve several tactical goals, the first being to distract the public’s attention away from the misleading allegations and flat-out conspiracy theories California Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, and scores of other Democratic lawmakers, trafficked in media relentlessly the past few years, insisting the president and his campaign associates colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Given the special counsel found no such crimes were committed, despite an exhaustive 22-month investigation that included the White House submitting over one million pages of documents, complying with hundreds of hours of interviews and not impeding the investigation whatsoever, Democrats are now scrambling to save face by changing the subject.

It’s no longer about Russian collusion; it’s about making the attorney general out to be the new Boogeyman — in yet another shameless attempt to try and delegitimize the Trump administration and fuel calls for impeachment.
Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Mazie Hirono and others are calling for Barr’s immediate resignation while scores of liberal lawmakers are smearing Barr’s integrity, despite his decades of exemplary public service at the Department of Justice that earned him wide bipartisan respect. The left is accusing Attorney General Barr of mischaracterizing the special counsel’s findings and acting as the president’s “personal attorney” to protect him.

Of course, Democrats made no such accusations against former Attorney General Eric Holder, even when he bragged he was then-President Obama’s “wingman.” Or when he referred to Obama as “my boy.” During a 2013 radio interview on the Tom Joyner show, Holder said, “I’m still enjoying what I’m doing. There’s still work to be done. I’m still the president’s wingman, so I’m there with my boy.”
Was that not partisan?

Then there was Obama’s subsequent attorney general, Loretta Lynch, who ran defense for her former boss and Hillary Clinton on numerous occasions, including when she instructed then-FBI Director James Comey to refer to his criminal investigation into Clinton’s renegade emails housed in an unauthorized server in her Chappaqua, New York, home not as an “investigation” but as a “matter.”

Was that not spinning the truth for political purposes to protect fellow Democrats during a hotly contested presidential campaign where Hillary Clinton was the frontrunner?

And no one will forget Lynch’s infamous 2016 tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton days before the FBI was to interview his wife for mishandling classified information while secretary of state during the Obama administration.
Of course, those instances of partisanship didn’t faze Democrats back then, or now. But today, they’re insisting Trump’s attorney general must step down for alleged partisanship. Go figure.

The second reason Democrats are creating all this political noise involving Bill Barr’s handling of the Mueller report is to distract from President Trump’s significant achievements since occupying the White House including a robust economy, higher wages and historically low unemployment.

Democrats are also greatly concerned that Barr indicated during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday he’s investigating the Russian Collusion Hoax fueled by a cabal of deceptive Deep State actors within the highest echelons of our government. The left is taking the “best defense is the best offense” strategy before the shoe drops. And with the inspector general’s report expected to drop any time now, along with declassified FISA documents the president will release among other relevant materials involving the attempted coup d’etat against his administration, Democrats are running scared.

As they should be. The truth is coming out, and Attorney General Barr won’t allow America’s justice system to be weaponized for political purposes. That’s something all Americans should stand shoulder to shoulder on because if one political party in power can abuse our justice system for political purposes, so can the next.
The hunter will become the hunted — all it takes is an election.
It’s a perilous scenario for all Americans.

Adriana Cohen is a syndicated columnist with the Boston Herald. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16. To find out more about Adriana Cohen and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

AG Barr Refuses to Stop Using the “S” Word

Attorney General Bill Barr doubled down on his use of the word “spying” to describe the Obama administration’s actions against the Trump campaign during a tense exchange with Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) on Wednesday. During testimony before the House Appropriations Committee in April, Barr alleged that “spying did occur,” sending the Left into a tizzy. Whitehouse claimed Barr could not use the term because it was “authorized” activity. “I’m not going to abjure the use of the word ‘spying,'” Barr said. “My first job was in [the] CIA. I don’t think the word ‘spying’ has any pejorative connotation at all.” Read more…

Here’s more from The Daily Caller…

Attorney General Bill Barr sparred with Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse Wednesday over the AG’s use of the word “spying” to describe the actions the FBI took against the Trump campaign.

Barr alleged during his testimony to the House Appropriations Committee in April that “spying did occur” against the Trump campaign as the FBI investigated alleged ties to Russia.

In addition to conducting surveillance on former Trump campaign official Carter Page, the FBI used informant Stefan Halper to make contact with three Trump campaign advisers.

Whitehouse grilled Barr about his use of the term “spying” in relation to those efforts, suggesting that the term was not accurate because the activities of the DOJ were “authorized.”

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Issues, Politics

Father Guilty of “Violence” for Rejecting Child’s Transgender Pronoun

Canadian Justice Francesca Marzari just found the father of a 14-year-old girl guilty of “family violence” after he refused to refer to his daughter as “he.” Upon issuing an order of protection, Marzari stated that the father could be arrested “immediately” and “without warrant” if he calls his daughter by her birth name, refers to her “as a girl or with female pronouns” directly or to third parties,” or suggests that his daughter is actually a girl and should “abandon treatment.” According to the report, the teen’s school counselor encouraged her to identify as a boy while in the seventh grade, and a doctor in turn encouraged hormone disruption. Read more…

Here’s more from Breitbart…

A British Columbia (BC) Supreme Court judge has found the father of a 14-year-old girl claiming to be transgender guilty of “family violence” because he continued to refer to his daughter as “she.”

An order of protection issued by Justice Francesca Marzari states the father, known as “Clark,” is subject to arrest if he attempts to “persuade” his daughter, known as “Maxine,” to “abandon treatment for gender dysphoria,” to call her by her birth name, or to refer to her “as a girl or with female pronouns,” either “directly or to third parties.”

The court order states the father’s arrest may occur “immediately” and “without warrant” by a police officer “who has reasonable and probable grounds” to enforce the order.

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

SCOTUS To Hear Critical LGBT vs. Christians Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court will be taking on three significant cases in its next term, all concerning where LGBT rights begin and those of Christians end. According to the Wall Street Journal: “The court’s calendar all but ensures decisions will come in the late spring or early summer of 2020, injecting a significant social issue-and the court’s role in resolving it-into the presidential election season.” Already, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh are regarded as a key swing bloc in what will be the first gay rights cases since Justice Kennedy’s retirement in the wake of the 2015 opinion legalizing same-sex marriage. Read more…

Here’s more from The Daily Wire…

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court added three key cases to its docket for next term — all of them impacting the intersection of religious liberty and gay and transgender employment protection.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

The Supreme Court will hear three cases concerning whether gay and transgender people are protected from discrimination on the job, marking the first major LGBT rights issue to reach the court since its 2015 opinion legalizing same-sex marriage.

Lower courts have differed sharply on whether the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination, necessarily covers sexual orientation or gender identity. Congress, unlike some two dozen states, hasn’t explicitly added those classifications to federal antidiscrimination laws.

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

Trump: Time to “Investigate the Investigators”

President Trump is doubling down on his call for an investigation of the Russia collusion witchhunt against his campaign that lasted for more than two years during his White House tenure. The president tweeted early Monday: “Mueller, and the A.G. based on Mueller findings (and great intelligence), have already ruled No Collusion, No Obstruction. These were crimes committed by Crooked Hillary, the DNC, Dirty Cops and others! INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS!” President Trump’s tweet follows Attorney General Barr’s testimony that “spying did occur” on the Trump 2016 campaign, which the Left blasted as “peddling conspiracy theories.” Read more…

Here’s more from Fox News…

President Trump on Monday said it was time to “investigate the investigators,” doubling down on Attorney General Bill Barr’s summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings in the Russia investigation.

“Mueller, and the A.G. based on Mueller findings (and great intelligence), have already ruled No Collusion, No Obstruction. These were crimes committed by Crooked Hillary, the DNC, Dirty Cops and others! INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATORS!” Trump tweeted early Monday.

The president’s tweet comes following a week of mounting scrutiny on the attorney general for his testimony that “spying did occur” on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.

Democrats blasted Barr, and accused him of “peddling conspiracy theories.”

But despite the backlash from Democrats over his use of the term, Barr’s testimony appeared to refer to intelligence collection that already has been widely reported and confirmed.

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Politics

Transparency for Thee But Not for Me

That’s Democrats’ modus operandi in Washington these days — especially when it comes to their unrestrained mission to “Get Trump.”

Take the latest special counsel report that, after a 22-month, $30 million investigation into the 2016 presidential election, found no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Nor did Bob Mueller or his team of aggressive lawyers find any other alleged crimes by the president, blowing a seismic hole in House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and fellow Democrats’ credibility. After all, these are the politicians who told the American people for the past two years the president colluded with Russia to affect the outcome of the 2016 election — a lie.

Desperate Democrats scrambling to save face are now working overtime, launching an additional never-ending investigation into virtually every aspect of the president’s life including his vast business empire and shuttered foundation. But that’s not all. The House Judiciary Committee issued an unnecessary subpoena to the attorney general this week that demands a full unredacted copy of the special counsel report, and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal is demanding the IRS release six years of the president’s personal tax returns, and those of some of his businesses.

This out-of-control fishing expedition on the backs of taxpayers goes well beyond presidential harassment; it’s a full-blown Inquisition, waged by a hateful cabal of rabid Democrats weaponizing government agencies to target political opponents.

“This was not a transparency subpoena. This was a 2020 subpoena,” said House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, in an interview on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom.” “It’s all political theater. It has nothing to do with really getting to the truth.”

Of course, Trump’s enemies in Washington claim they’re just fulfilling their congressional oversight duties and seeking “transparency.” That’s quite laughable given these are the same Democrats who aren’t the slightest bit interested in oversight or transparency when it comes to their own party’s dirty deeds or illicit actions by the deep state agents who spied on the 2016 Trump campaign using deceptive and misleading FISA warrants.
Not to mention other pernicious actions to remove a duly elected president.

Once such example is Rep. Schiff’s attempt to block Congress from accessing the bank records of Fusion GPS to shield Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee, which paid millions to the slimy opposition research firm for the infamous “dirty dossier” used by the FBI to spur the special counsel investigation. Then there’s House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler who, during the 1998 Bill Clinton investigation conducted by independent counsel Kenneth Starr, was against the public release of details contained in the report. Back then, he sought to protect grand jury testimony.

All of this illustrates that when it comes to government oversight and “transparency,” Democrats have a distinct set of rules: One for thee, and none for me.

Adriana Cohen is a syndicated columnist with the Boston Herald. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16. To find out more about Adriana Cohen and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

Read More...

Abortion, Big govt, Courts, Politics

SCOTUS Refuses to Toss Planned Parenthood Lawsuit Against Pro-Life Group

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to scrap a request by the Center for Medical Progress to throw out Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against the group for allegedly illegally secretly recording employees discussing selling aborted baby body parts. The recordings caused a tidal wave of negative publicity for Planned Parenthood, America’s #1 abortion provider, because selling aborted fetal tissue for profit is illegal as is altering abortion protocols to maximize profit with more “intact” specimens. For now, the ruling from the 9th Circuit allowing the lawsuit to proceed remains in effect despite the Center for Medical Progress’ arguments that it was exercising its First Amendment rights. Read more…

Here’s more from Washington Examiner…

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress’ request to throw out a lawsuit from Planned Parenthood alleging that the group broke the law by secretly taping its employees discussing reimbursement for fetal tissue.

The Center for Medical Progress argued that the Planned Parenthood lawsuits interfered with the organization’s right to free speech and that it violated a law in California meant to protect citizen journalists. Because the Supreme Court will not take up the case, the ruling from the 9th Circuit permitting the lawsuit to proceed remains in place.

The case did not receive the support of at least four justices, which is the threshold all cases must meet in order to receive a hearing in the Supreme Court. The justices have appeared reluctant to take up controversial topics, including those linked to abortion, after the bruising confirmation battle Justice Brett Kavanaugh faced in the Senate.

Read More...