NFL will remove White Progressive Supremacist Slogan in the End Zone.
NBC News ihttps://www.nbcnews.com/sports/nfl/nfl-will-remove-end-racism-end-zones-ahead-super-bowl-rcna190686?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-uss announcing that finally the idiotic statement in the end zone will be removed. Good move NFL. Should be replaced with White and Black Progressives are racists.They need to stop posting DEI slogans in sports.
Shumer under investigation?
The Tampa Free Press is reporting that Interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin has launched a preliminary investigation into Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) over threatening remarks he made toward Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch in 2020. Below from Microsoft AI.
Yes, the Department of Justice has launched an investigation into Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. The probe is led by interim D.C. U.S. Attorney Edward R. Martin, Jr., and it focuses on Schumer’s past comments directed at Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.
By Elizabeth Elkind for Fox News
The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would penalize doctors who do not provide life-saving care to infants born alive after an abortion attempt.
All but one Democrat voted against the bill, which passed 217 to 204, with all Republicans in favor. One Democrat, Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, D-Texas, voted “present.”
The bill directs health care practitioners to operate with the “same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence” for a baby born with a heartbeat after an abortion as during a normal birth. Doctors who run afoul of the rule would be fined or given up to five years behind bars.
House GOP leaders lauded the bill, with Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., telling Fox News Digital, “Requiring medical care for babies born alive after a failed abortion isn’t controversial, it’s common sense.”
“The fact that Democrats would rather support infanticide than vote in favor of this bill shows how extreme and out-of-touch their party has become,” Emmer said.
Democrats have argued that the bill is redundant, given existing laws against infanticide and murder, and could imperil the lives of women seeking late-term abortions due to medical emergencies while unfairly penalizing doctors.
“No one goes through pregnancy and all that comes with it…and then after eight or nine months of that is like ‘nah, I don’t want to do this,’” Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., said during debate on the bill, adding that late-term operations made up about 1% of abortions. “It is because of a serious fetal abnormality or the health of the mother.”
She said the bill was “not based on science or reality.”
(Yet Dims claim that the ACTUAL birth rate of “intersex” babies of 0.018% means that the mental cases that declare they are not their biological sex must be kowtowed to. Sounds like their claim that we should “follow the science” about Covid-19 doesn’t it? – TPR )
Several Democrats who spoke out against the bill themselves went through emergency abortion procedures with a nonviable pregnancy.
Among them was Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez, D-N.M., who said the bill would allow women to “die on the operating table because doctors are scared of going to jail.”
(Q: If the doctors are “scared of going to jail” as this Dimwit stupidly suggests, how could women “die on the operating table” ????? – TPR)
Republicans, meanwhile, argued the bill would stop babies from being “left to die in a closet, alone and discarded like medical waste,” as Rep. Michelle Fischbach, R-Minn., said during debate.
“These precious babies, fellow Americans, deserve protection because they are alive,” said Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas.
The vote comes after Democrats tanked the bill in the Senate earlier this week. The legislation failed to pass a procedural hurdle that needed 60 votes to allow for debate on its final passage.
Karma’s a B*tch, Ain’t It, Fani?
A Georgia appeals court has disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from her election-related criminal case against President-elect Donald Trump, although the indictment still stands.
Willis’s office charged Trump and his codefendants in 2023 for what they alleged was a scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Georgia illegally. They pleaded not guilty.
However, Willis’s case hit a snag in early 2024 after it was revealed that she had a romantic relationship with the case’s then-special prosecutor, Nathan Wade. A Fulton County judge in March ruled that Willis could remain as prosecutor if Wade resigned, which he later did.
Trump and multiple codefendants appealed the judge’s decision to the Georgia Court of Appeals, which rendered its decision on Willis Thursday morning.
The court added that a “remedy crafted by the trial court to prevent an ongoing appearance of impropriety did nothing to address the appearance of impropriety that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring.”
Earlier this year, Trump codefendant Michael Roman alleged in court papers that Willis and Wade were in a romantic relationship.
During a court hearing weeks later, both Wade and Willis admitted to being romantically involved, although the pair denied allegations that either of them benefited financially from the arrangement. They also disputed claims that their relationship started after Wade was hired as a special prosecutor and ended in the summer of 2023.
McAfee also admonished Willis for the “unprofessional manner” in how she conducted herself during the evidentiary hearing and showed a “lapse in judgment.” He also chided her for what he described as racially charged statements she made at a church in Atlanta after Roman made the allegations against her.
However, the judge said he was not able to conclusively establish that there was a conflict of interest.
Throughout the court battle, Willis has defended her own conduct and Wade’s qualifications. During a CNN interview earlier this year, Willis said she believes the appeals court proceedings were only an attempt to slow down the case.
“I do think that there are efforts to slow down the train, but the train is coming,” Willis said at the time, adding that she does not believe her relationship with Wade impacted the case.
The case against Trump and the others, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, had been stalled for months as the appeals court considered the Willis removal petition.
The ruling Thursday now means that the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia will have to find another prosecutor to take over the case and decide whether to pursue it, though that could be delayed if Willis appeals to higher courts.
It appears unlikely that prosecution against Trump will continue as he prepares to be president for the next four years. But 14 other defendants still face charges.
Meanwhile, a judge in New York has said he would not throw out Trump’s conviction in May on the case alleging 34 counts of falsifying business records, though the future of that case is uncertain.
Sore Losers: Senate Dems want to Eliminate the Electoral College Via Constitutional Amendment.
Senate Democrats, having failed to defeat President-elect Donald Trump in the 2024 election, want to change the rules.
Ironically, however, those same Senate Democrats do not seem to understand that their arguments for destroying a core principle of our federal republic would also justify eliminating the Senate itself.
Monday on the social media platform X, the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, announced a “bill to abolish the Electoral College, restoring democracy by allowing the direct election of presidents through popular vote alone.”
Durbin, who has also proposed arming illegal immigrants, joined two of his colleagues, Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Democratic Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont, in introducing a proposed constitutional amendment that, if adopted, would abolish the Electoral College.
“In 2000, before the general election, I introduced a bipartisan resolution to amend the Constitution and abolish the Electoral College. I still believe today that it’s time to retire this 18th century invention,” Durbin said.
Fortunately, the authors of the Constitution understood the tyrannical threat posed by people like Durbin.
Hence, an amendment is required to eliminate something as fundamental to our federal republic as the Electoral College, which appears in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.
Under Article V, two thirds of both houses of Congress, plus three fourths of the states, must approve said amendment.
In other words, Senate Democrats have no chance of abolishing the Electoral College, that perennial object of their unhinged fixation.
Still, their behavior requires explanation. And voters need to understand why they must never allow Democrats to succeed in their sinister quest.
First, the reason for Monday’s announcement seems obvious. Senate Democrats hope to change the narrative surrounding Trump’s victory.
According to the Associated Press, with all states finally having counted at least 99 percent of votes from the 2024 election, Trump will win the national popular vote by more than two million votes. Thus, Senate Democrats’ constitutional amendment would not have changed the outcome.
Still, Trump has generated significant momentum and stands poised to reenter the White House as popular as ever. Senate Democrats, therefore, needed to rally their own voters around their shopworn lie of defending “democracy.”
Moreover, recent history has proven that Democrats prosper amid the electoral chaos they create. And eliminating the Electoral College would sow unfathomable chaos.
Imagine how presidential elections would unfold if determined by the national popular vote. Imagine waiting on California, for instance, to finish counting its votes more than a month after Election Day.
As it stands, California awards 54 electoral votes — no more, no less. So we know in advance exactly the degree to which Californians will influence the election’s outcome.
But what if California Democrats had an incentive to find as many votes as possible? Would any Republican trust the outcome of elections conducted in that manner?
Second — one marvels at the irony — Senate Democrats’ argument for abolishing the Electoral College also applies to the Senate.
“I’m excited to partner with my friends and colleagues Senator Schatz and Chair Durbin on this important constitutional amendment, which will help empower every voter in every state,” Welch said, per The Hill.
But the Senate itself does not reflect the will of “every voter in every state” — far from it.
In fact, the Electoral College, which awards electoral votes based on a state’s population, comes exponentially closer to reflecting the will of “every voter in every state” than the Senate ever has or ever will.
Indeed, regardless of population, two senators per state hardly sounds like “democracy.”
And that is the point: America’s constitutional republic incorporates democratic principles, but it is not a democracy, and it must never become one, lest we endure the unbridled tyranny of electoral majorities.
Instead, America’s constitutional system provides for a meaningful division of power between the national and state governments. The Electoral College, by empowering the people of all the states to conduct their own elections and award their electoral votes as they see fit consistent with the Constitution, helps prevent the tyrannical consolidation of states into a single, omnipotent national government.
Thus, Democratic leadership must never succeed in eliminating the Electoral College. Should they do so, they would create a convincing argument for abolishing the Senate itself. At that point, the federal constitutional structure would have collapsed, and the Union would likely dissolve.
So, what’s left for the Progressives? Why would we care? They’ll continue their message of racism, bigotry, and hate speech. Crazy grandmothers in California will continue to mutilate their children, and nothing with them will chang.
Oh, you poor babies. MSNBC hate mongers crying the blues. Where will we go?
Comcast officially announced on Wednesday it would spin off several NBCUniversal cable networks, including MSNBC, in a move that will dramatically shake up the landscape of legacy media as the liberal cable outlet will no longer be affiliated with NBC News.
Ratings have tanked and it seems as if Comcast will no longer continue to use their billions to keep this sinking ship.
The assets set to make up SpinCo generated roughly $7 billion in revenue over the last 12 months (But what was the profit margin, if any?) and Comcast hopes to complete the spinoff project in a year. The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that Comcast is guessing NBCUniversal’s other assets in broadcast TV, sports, movies and theme parks would have higher growth potential going forward.
Yes Virginia, White (and Black) men are oppressed. But only the sissy ones.
The other day in a Congressional hearing this Black Progressive Supremacist (Congresswoman Crockett) was repeating the same old sad sack story about how she was oppressed. Why? Because Democrats brought Blacks here from Africa. Of course she doesn’t give examples of her own oppression.
The only folks oppressed are the weak White (and Black) men who refuse to stand up when Supremacists like Crockett carry on and tell lie after lie. She gets away with it because most Progressive White and Black go along with the lies. I guess they’re afraid of not getting the twice a year blow jobs.
Fact Check on the Whoopi Lie.
Below is the Breitbart correction on a lie Whoopi told on the View.
The owner of Holtermann’s Bakery in New York City is denying that comedian and The View host Whoopi Goldberg’s order was refused because they don’t like Goldberg’s left-wing politics.
On Wednesday, Goldberg claimed that a bakery — which she did not name — had denied her dessert order because they disagreed with her political proclamations, according to Entertainment Weekly.
“My birthday dessert today was one of my mom’s favorites from when she was a kid, she talked about these all the time, they’re called Charlotte Russe. It’s a sponge cake with whipped cream and a cherry on top. I should tell you, Charlotte Russe has no political leanings. The place that made these refused to make them for me,” the TV host exclaimed on Wednesday’s broadcast.
After she made that claim, cast member Sarah Haines spit out her mouthful of the dessert. But Goldberg explained.
“They said that their ovens had gone down, but folks went and got them anyway, which is why I’m not telling you who made them,” she exclaimed. “It’s not… because I’m a woman, but perhaps they did not like my politics. But, that’s okay, because you know what, listen, this is my mother’s celebration. Pick these up and celebrate with me and my mom. Thank you everyone for celebrating my birthday today.”
Despite that Goldberg didn’t name the bakery, the magazine tracked down the establishment and asked bakery owner Jill Holtermann about the accusation.
Holtermann confirmed that Goldberg had made an order two weeks ago, but denied that anyone at the establishment punished Goldberg for her political views.
“They’d asked us and we were having trouble with our boilers,” Holtermann told EW. The bakery owner added that it was known that Goldberg made her order for a November 6 and a November 13 broadcast of The View. But the orders were refused because of the technical issues and because Holtermann “didn’t want to make a commitment that I can’t carry through.”
However, she also said that her establishment was able to make 50 Charlotte Russe desserts that appeared on Wednesday morning’s episode. Holtermann also said that no one in her shop had any idea about the political leanings of those who picked up the orders.
Holtermann also pointed out that her building was built more than 100 years ago and sometimes there are mechanical problems and she was fearful that she could not take a long-term order based on the issues.
“I said to Whoopi, ‘I can’t do it right now,” Holtermann told EW. “We have so many things going on with my boiler,’ because the building is from 1930, so, when she called me, I had no idea [if we could] be baking everything.”
She firmly insisted that “it was not because of political” ideals.
Guest post By
Professors at Harvard and Princeton have canceled classes following Trump’s victory, and other units within the universities are offering “spaces” to process the election results.
At Harvard University, the courses “Sociology 1156: Statistics for Social Sciences,” “Applied Math 22a: Solving and Optimizing,” and the general education courses “The Ancient Greek Hero” and “Popular Culture and Modern China” canceled Wednesday class sessions, made attendance optional, or extended assignment deadlines, according to the student-run paper the Crimson.
An undergraduate student at Harvard told National Review that the first 30 minutes of a section meeting for the class “Gov 1790: American Foreign Policy” were dedicated to origami folding.
Harvard economics lecturer Maxim Boycko said in an email that the in-class quiz for “Economics 1010a: Intermediate Microeconomics” would be optional this week and further permitted students to “take time off,” per the Crimson.
“As we recover from the eventful election night and process the implications of Trump’s victory, please know that class will proceed as usual today, except that classroom quizzes will not be for credit,” Boycko wrote. “Feel free to take time off if needed.”
According to the Crimson, Physics professor Jennifer E. Hoffman said in an email to physics students and faculty that her office would be “a space to process the election.”
“Many in our community are sleep-deprived, again grieving for glass ceilings that weren’t shattered, fearful for the future, or embarrassed to face our international colleagues,” she wrote. “I stress-baked several pans of lemon bars to share.”
The Harvard College Democrats released a statement on Thursday expressing support for Kamala Harris and concerns about a second Trump presidency.
“The Harvard College Democrats are incredibly grateful for the leadership of Vice President Kamala Harris and the vision she presented for the future of the country in her campaign for President of the United States,” reads the statement. “We are proud to endorse a campaign that centered joy, community, and a belief in the immense potential of this great nation.”
At Princeton University, at least two classes were canceled on Wednesday: a graduate molecular-biology class, and the psychology course “Social Cognition: The Psychology of Interactive Minds.”
An undergraduate Princeton student in the course “Social Cognition: The Psychology of Interactive Minds” wrote to National Review that all precepts for the class were canceled for the week, and at the beginning of the lecture on Thursday, students were told they had the opportunity to leave if they could not emotionally handle participating. (The professor of the class, Alin Coman, did not respond to a request for comment by the time of publication.)
University Health Services at Princeton University hosted virtual and in-person “Post-Election Listening Circles” on Wednesday.
“We have been hearing about lots of anxiety from students about the election and felt like listening circles can be a helpful way to allow students to process and get support from one another,” Princeton University spokeswoman Jennifer Morrill told the student-run publication Daily Princetonian in a statement.
The Gender and Sexuality Resource Center (GSRC) at Princeton University held a “post-election discussion” on Wednesday, where students groups led conversations about “queer/trans concerns” and “misogynoir in the 2024 election.” On Thursday evening, the GSRC is sponsoring a “meditation session” with Molly Crockett, a professor of psychology at Princeton. The GSRC will also hold an “arts and crafts” session for crocheting.
The Office of Diversity and Inclusion — Campus Life at Princeton University held a “post election decompression space” on Wednesday, and the Office of Religious Life will hold an event titled “Holding Space: The Work of Active Listening and Compassion” on Thursday evening.
The Carl A. Fields Center at Princeton University is hosting a “community care dinner” on Thursday evening. “The food is seasoned,” the Carl A. Fields Center advertised. “The community care sacred.”
Sunrise Princeton, a student-run climate-activism group, held a gathering “to process the election” with craft-making on Wednesday.
“Last night was devastating to watch,” the group Sunrise Princeton wrote in an email. “Many of us are feeling frustrated, scared, uncertain — a whole mishmash of (mostly not good) emotions.”
This last picture is actually from 2016. Seems nothings changed, leftists continue to lose their shit.
