Tucker Carlson vs. Professor who says Trump is WhitePowah…

Academics are taught about evidence, what it is and what it isn’t, and yet our universities have become so politically radicalized that all of that training is tossed out the window.  For the far left, truth simply isn’t a value and as we have written about several times, they say as much in their own writings repeatedly.

This is the kind of person that your children are exposed to on campus every day. SUNY Geneseo Professor Tony Macula:

Election Denier Chuck Todd Melting Down in NBC Interview /w Reince Priebus (video)

Everything that Reince Priebus says in here is absolutely true. What CIA assessment? Two newspapers who have been caught lying and spreading fake news against Donald Trump now say that there is an unnamed source in the CIA that says that there is an assessment that falsely claims that the RNC was hacked by the Russians and that the Russians were the cause of Trump winning the election because the Clinton Campaign and the DNC emails were released.

WikiLeaks says that they did not get the email from the Russians and the so called “17 agencies” mentioned by Chuck Todd said that their results were inconclusive but that some of the the hacking attempts detected were consistent with methods used by some Russian hackers. Of course, if the Clinton’s were not contemptuous of digital security protocols in the first place……

Keep in mind that the crimes, dirty tricks and corruption revealed in those emails were true. There was no serious attempt at refutation of them as many of the emails were DKIM authenticated making the spoofing of them near impossible.

That said, the CIA has engaged in partisan hit jobs before such as the faux Valerie Plame scandal and the infamous Iran Memo when President Bush was in office.

The FBI has investigated and said on the record that there is no connection between the Trump Campaign and the Russians.

Enjoy the meltdown.

O’Keefe: The Media is dead – we killed it.

Legendary under cover journalist James O’Keefe exposed on video the Clinton Campaign hiring of thugs to create violence at Trump events, mass vote fraud, bussing in of people to claim they are citizens in order to vote for them etc.

O’Keefe spoke at David Horowitz’ “Restoration Weekend” and this is very much worth your time:

Bernstein: Democrats’ Supreme Court Arguments Cost them the Presidency and the Court.

Religious people and many who tend to skip elections turned out huge for Donald Trump, a non-denominational Christian with three divorces under his belt. Why?

Prof. Bernstien argues that the Democrats own arguments in front of the Supreme Court energized churches and talk radio like never before.

Aside from Hobby Lobby and the gay marriage arguments mentioned by Prof. Bernstein.  I would also add the arguments Democrats made in Citizens United v. FEC.

In Citizens United, President Obama’s Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart, said in oral arguments that any book, movie, film, video, on paper, digital or otherwise covering politics could be banned by the government if a corporation was involved in its production or distribution.

Think about that for a moment, all book stores are corporations as are most internet providers. Want to post to Facebook or your blog – sorry a corporation. Banks who provide loans are corporations, companies who provide paper are corporations.  In short, the Obama Administration argued for the virtual repeal of part of the 1st Amendment by judicial fiat.

So upset were Democrats when the Supreme Court ruled against the government that President Obama dressed down the Supreme Court during a State of the Union speech and Democrats in the Senate even voted unanimously for a constitutional amendment resolution repealing many of the political speech protections of the 1st Amendment.

Prof. Bernstien:

To what can we attribute Trump’s success? The most logical answer is that religious traditionalists felt that their religious liberty was under assault from liberals, and they therefore had to hold their noses and vote for Trump. As Sean Trende of RealClear Politics noted, since 2012:

Democrats and liberals have: booed the inclusion of God in their platform at the 2012 convention (this is disputed, but it is the perception); endorsed a regulation that would allow transgendered students to use the bathroom and locker room corresponding to their identity; attempted to force small businesses to cover drugs they believe induce abortions; attempted to force nuns to provide contraceptive coverage; forced Brendan Eich to step down as chief executive officer of Mozilla due to his opposition to marriage equality; fined a small Christian bakery over $140,000 for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding; vigorously opposed a law in Indiana that would provide protections against similar regulations – despite having overwhelmingly supported similar laws when they protected Native American religious rights – and then scoured the Indiana countryside trying to find a business that would be affected by the law before settling upon a small pizza place in the middle of nowhere and harassing the owners. In 2015, the United States solicitor general suggested that churches might lose their tax exempt status if they refused to perform same-sex marriages. In 2016, the Democratic nominee endorsed repealing the Hyde Amendment, thereby endorsing federal funding for elective abortions.

Megan McArdle of Bloomberg similarly pointed out, “Over the last few years, as controversies have erupted over the rights of cake bakers and pizza places to refuse to cater gay weddings, the rights of nuns to refuse to provide insurance that covers birth control, the rights of Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions, and the rights of Christian schools to teach (and require students and teachers to practice) traditional Christian morality, some Christians have begun to feel that their communities are under existential threat.”

….

In short, many religious Christians of a traditionalist bent believed that liberals not only reduce their deeply held beliefs to bigotry, but want to run them out of their jobs, close down their stores and undermine their institutions. When I first posted about this on Facebook, I wrote that I hope liberals really enjoyed running Brendan Eich out of his job and closing down the Sweet Cakes bakery, because it cost them the Supreme Court. I’ll add now that I hope Verrilli enjoyed putting the fear of government into the God-fearing because it cost his party the election.

UPDATE: As co-blogger Todd Zywicki wrote to me on Facebook, “When you find yourself in the Supreme Court adverse to the Little Sisters of the Poor you might consider whether maybe you have pushed a little too far.”