CNN panelist calls out VP Harris over ‘completely made up’ Florida slavery curriculum claim.
CNN political commentator Scott Jennings called out Vice President Harris on Sunday over her claim that Florida’s middle school curriculum included lessons on how enslaved people “benefited from slavery.”
CNN “State of the Union” host Dana Bash asked the panelists about how Democrats have been calling for Harris to “get out there more.”
“What is amazing to me [is] that how little Kamala Harris apparently has to do that she can read something on Twitter one day and be on the airplane the next to make something literally out of nothing. This is a completely made-up deal. I looked at the standards, I even looked at an analysis of the standards, in every instance where the word slavery or slave was used, I even read the statement of the African-American scholars that wrote the standards – not [Florida Gov.] Ron DeSantis, but the scholars,” he said.
“Everybody involved in this says this is completely a fabricated issue and yet look at how quickly Kamala Harris jumped on it. So, the fact that this is her best moment, a fabricated matter, is pretty ridiculous,” Jennings continued.
Kennedy shaming Progressives. Credit: John Kennedy Twitter screenshot
Winning. Senator Kennedy shames Democrats.
The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) did a markup on “ethics” legislation Thursday targeting conservative Supreme Court Justices.
While the Democrats managed to pass out of this sick bill out of committee on a party-line vote, they got humiliated by Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) in the process over a simple amendment condemning racism.
Kennedy is a straight-shooting national treasure complete with an incisive wit and dry sense of humor. He has displayed these talents throughout his time in the Senate whether by stumping unqualified Biden nominees or in interviews with reporters.
As Townhall reported, he put his remarkable skills once again to the test and went scorched earth on the Democrats for refusing to pass his amendment calling out the evil, racist attacks against the great Clarence Thomas. After an epic tour de force and a bit of help from Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), he got them to do exactly what he wanted in the first place.
Democrats started of by making excuses for why the amendment was unworkable and tried to convince Kennedy to back off. The Louisiana Senator, however, let loose in his trademark colorful fashion:
I don’t understand the reluctance to accept the fact that Justice Clarence Thomas, who happens to be a black man, has been the butt of a lot of racist statements. And I don’t understand reluctance to condemn those. And that’s what my amendment does.
I don’t want it watered down, I don’t want to bubble wrap it, I don’t want to sugar coat it, I want to say, big as Dallas, the United States Senate condemns all these racist things that have been said against Justice Clarence Thomas.
Kennedy also noted that if another senator put forth another amendment “to condemn every racist thing that has ever been said in the history of ever” which he would be thrilled vote for it.
WATCH:
You either condemn the racist attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas, or you don’t.
After a long discussion today, my Democrat colleagues on the Judiciary Committee finally agreed to condemn the disgusting racism that many have aimed at Justice Thomas. pic.twitter.com/tBptrybb0q
Undeterred, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) spoke up and tried to convince his colleagues to excuse the racism against Thomas.
I consider this to be not relevant to the matter at hand, and further it specifically requests the Biden administration to inject itself politically into a law enforcement decision that the Biden administration, I think quite properly, has avoided getting involved with.
But Kennedy was not having any of this BS and blistered Whitehouse and his cronies in return.
I mean does anybody here support that kind of rhetoric? I don’t! I don’t think you do! And this kind of rhetoric hasn’t been directed toward John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch, it’s been directed towards Clarence Thomas! And it’s un-American, it’s unconscionable, and I can’t believe we wouldn’t condemn it!
I don’t care how many lawyers can dance on the head of a pin. Don’t try to pretend that this is a technical mistake in this amendment. It’s not complicated! You don’t have to be a senior at Cal Tech to figure it out!
It says all of this stuff about Clarence Thomas, calling him a house slave, and all other racist, disgusting statements, we condemn! Now you either condemn it, or you don’t. And that’s all this amendment does
Whitehouse responded by saying he condemned the racism but still demanded his colleagues to vote no. He reiterated he wanted the Biden regime off the hook when it came to defending Supreme Court Justices.
Like a bulldog, Kennedy once again refused to let go:
It’s a real simple amendment. If you support the racist things that have been said against Clarence Thomas, then vote against this amendment. If you think the things that have been said about Clarence Thomas are racist to the marrow and you condemn them, then vote for this amendment.
Not to be outdone, Cruz next took control and laid into the vile Democrats as well:
The part that is offensive of this is that it calls on the Department of Justice to enforce the law. Just stop and repeat that to yourself again. So now it is the position of Democrats that it is unacceptable for the Department of Justice to enforce the law!”
At the end, the Democrats were so cowed and shamed by Kennedy that they voted for his amendment.
🔥 Robert F. Kennedy Jr Fires Back at the 'Defamations' Stacey Plaskett Asserted About Him
"Virtually every statement that you just made about me is inaccurate...These are defamations and malignancies that are used to censor me to prevent people from listening to the actual… pic.twitter.com/fhGkFa6hvX
Megyn and Donald make up. That’s what GP is reporting.
The former Fox News host said she and Trump met up over the weekend at Turning Point Action’s West Palm Beach convention “for the first time in years,” and it was “frankly great to see him.”
“All that nonsense between us is… under the bridge,” Kelly said during an episode of “The Megyn Kelly Show” on YouTube. “And he could not have been more magnanimous.”
Moms for Liberty are home grown American Patriots that scare leftists. Beside doing great Casseroles, ( unlike someone who mixes Ragu with can spaghetti or doesn’t know what Orzo Salad is. ) these gals know how to win elections.
Last year they entered 500 school board races and won over half of them. This year they won almost a third of the races in Wisconsin. Now at times some say some stupid things, but hopefully they learned.
They ran into a situation where in 2022 Facebook shut down 22 of their websites. Based on lies from the NEA. But they contacted Facebook and the next day were back.
Since starting in Florida in 2021, Moms for Liberty has set up a national network, today claiming 285 chapters in 45 states.
Looking back at the CNN town hall with Trump. It was the right thing to do. The noise has settled down since the far left and MSM got all upset that Trump did a town hall with CNN.
The Democrats and Independents got to see and hear Trump give his side, and it worked. Trumps ratings went up with Democrats, Independents, but also with women. Mission accomplished.
Opening comments to the general public to ask a question, in sincerity: what changed the minds of society’s former First Amendment advocates?
Wednesday a House Committee — Republican-led, but still — released a series of documents showing without a doubt that the FBI has been forwarding thousands of content moderation “requests” to Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube on behalf of the SBU, Ukraine’s Security Agency.
The documents not only contain incontrovertible evidence that our own FBI pressures tech companies to censor material, but that the Bureau is outsourcing such work to a foreign government, in this case Ukraine. This passage below for instance reads “The SBU requested for your review and if appropriate deletion/suspension of these accounts.”
There can’t possibly be controversy at this point as to whether or not this censorship program is going on. Whether it’s the FBI forwarding the SBU asking for the removal of Aaron Maté, or the Global Engagement Center recommending action on the Canadian site GlobalResearch.Ca, or the White House demanding the takedown of figures like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the same types of behavior have now been captured over and over.
In light of this, I have to ask: where are the rest of the “card-carrying” liberals from the seventies, eighties, and nineties — people like me, who always reflexively opposed restrictions on speech?
Is your argument that private companies can do what they want? Then why did you think otherwise in 1985, when Tipper Gore’s Parents Music Resource Center suggested record companies “voluntarily” label as dirty songs like “Darling Nikki,” and call them McCarthyites when they compiled a list of the “Filthy Fifteen” albums? Does that not sound suspiciously like the “Disinformation Dozen”? Why were you on Frank Zappa’s side then, but with blacklisters now?
Do you now think it’s not really censorship if the FBI merely makes its opinion known about content, and doesn’t order takedowns? Did you think the same when the FBI sent a letter to Priority Records complaining about NWA’s “Fuck the Police”? Did you agree then with the ACLU, whose Southern California chairman responded to the FBI’s letter by saying, “It is completely inappropriate for any government agency to try to influence what artists do. It is completely against the American traditions of free speech”?
Is your belief that new forms of speech constitute “harm” and “offense” to such a degree that censorship is warranted? If so, why did you once support Andres Serrano and his work Piss Christ, which Catholics insisted was an intolerable offense, and call it censorship when opponents like Al D’Amato and Jesse Helms tried to pull funding for Serrano from the National Endowment of the Arts? Wasn’t the Hustler magazine spread suggesting Jerry Falwell had sex with his mother in an outhouse offensive? Didn’t you go to The People Versus Larry Flyntanyway?
If you’re okay with the FBI collaborating on censorship with the SBU now, why oppose the original PATRIOT Act, suggesting you didn’t even want the government looking at library records in search of Islamic terrorists? Why did you support the Dixie Chicks when they were blackballed for antiwar views after the Iraq invasion? Did you cheer them when you watched Shut Up and Sing?
Weren’t those national security issues, too? That wasn’t even that long ago. Is Vladimir Putin that much more of a menace than Al-Qaeda to justify the change in heart?
The change in thinking of traditional American liberals is the only part of this censorship picture that still doesn’t quite compute for me. I’d like to hear from anyone who has an explanation, a personal testimonial, anything. Comments are open to everyone here.
There are certain groups of people that are always crying because their “right” of “free speech” was allegedly denied them.
They have no problem shouting down others whose “free speech” doesn’t agree with their speech, though. Amazing how that is, isn’t it?
There is no such thing as “free speech” without consequences. Some consequences are good. Some are neutral. And some are unpleasant – or worse, deadly. Words of “free speech” have consequences every time, feels don’t count.
To use a clichéd example, yell “Fire!” in a crowded room (or “Bomb!”) and see how your Free-speech butt lands in jail in no time flat.
I started thinking about this after witnessing a couple of obscure websites that supposedly value free speech. One has free speech only for the favored few; the other is a dumpster fire of insults, feels over facts, and NSFW (or for FB) pictures. The denizens of both sites seem to think that rules of common decency – not to mention common sense – don’t apply to them because they’re more equal than those whom they despise.
Thus, they are disingenuously surprised when they show up on someone else’s site, exercise their “right of free speech,” and after being warned, are invited to leave, sometimes forcefully.
Robert H. Heinlein stated his belief that “An armed society is a polite society.”
The reason being that people would be more cautious if they knew that they might have to back up their words with their bodies. Being on the wrong end of a loaded gun barrel does that.
But today, these snowflakes scream to high heaven about how their “free speech” is being suppressed by — whomever. They think they can say or do anything they want to without care or pushback. And the stupidest ones keep coming back to repeat what got them banned in the first place. (I’m looking at YOU, Stan.)
JOS thought that way, repeatedly doxing people, threatening to beat them up, shoot them (from behind, of course), rape, and burn them alive, etc. He lost his all Disqus sites, two or three YouTube channels, and his Rumble channel because of his “free speech.” I’ll bet his DI at Camp Pendleton had some ideas of his own about JOS’s right to “free speech.” He and Jewish Jeff might BOTH be behind bars for all we know, for their “free speech.”
‘Nuff said.
Just like haters gotta hate, idiots gotta keep being idiots.
Indigenous chief wants to take back Ben & Jerry’s HQ built on ‘stolen’ land
Ben & Jerry’s headquarters is in the western part of the historic territory of the Abenaki tribal confederacy but doesn’t sit in any current tribal lands.
Target realizes what a mistake they made. Will now carry Mark Levin’s Book. Wednesday Target said they were afraid that Democrats would be offended so they said they weren’t going to sell Levin’s new book.
Target must have realized that Democrats don’t spend their money in stores beside Walmart and local liquor stores. Thursday they changed course.
Excellent to see Target cave to conservative customers. Maybe they’re not so stupid after all! https://t.co/CU6w7lfSvI
