Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., are moving to expunge both the first and second impeachments of former President Donald Trump, respectively.
Greene’s resolution seeks to expunge Trump’s first impeachment, which came from an accusation that he had attempted to coerce Ukraine into announcing an investigation into the Biden family. It points to a recently revealed FD-1023, which includes confidential human source information accusing both Joe and Hunter Biden of being involved in an alleged bribery scheme, wherein a Ukrainian businessperson paid $5 million to Hunter Biden and another $5 million to Joe Biden in exchange for getting a prosecutor investigating his company fired.
“Resolved, That the December 18, 2019, impeachment of President Donald John Trump is expunged, as if such Articles had never passed the full House of Representatives, as the facts and circumstances upon which such Articles were based did not meet the burden of proving the commission of ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors’, as set forth in section 4 of article II of the Constitution,” the resolution reads.
In a statement, Greene said, “The first impeachment of President Trump was a politically motivated sham. The Democrats, led by Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff, weaponized a perfect phone call with Ukraine to interfere with the 2020 election. Meanwhile, the FBI had credible evidence of Joe and Hunter Biden’s corrupt dealings, confirming their involvement in a foreign bribery pay-to-play scheme and receipt of over $5 million each. All of this information was revealed to Congress by the FD-1023 form from the FBI’s most credible informant. The form vindicates President Trump and exposes the crimes of the Biden family. It’s clear that President Trump’s impeachment was nothing more than a witch hunt that needs to be expunged from our history. I’m proud to work with Chairwoman Elise Stefanik on our joint resolutions to correct the record and clear President Trump’s good name.”
Stefanik’s resolution seeks to expunge the second impeachment, which was related to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. It reads, “Resolved, That the January 13, 2021, impeachment of President Donald John Trump is expunged, as if such Article had never passed the full House of Representatives, as the facts and circumstances upon which such Article was based met the burden of proving neither that President Trump committed ‘high Crimes and Misdemeanors’, as set forth in section 4 of article II of the Constitution, nor that President Trump engaged in ‘insurrection or rebellion against the United States’, such that he is forever precluded from ‘hold[ing] any office … under the United States’ pursuant to section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.”
Stefanik released a statement saying, “The American people know Democrats weaponized the power of impeachment against President Donald Trump to advance their own extreme political agenda. From the beginning of this sham process, I stood up against Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff’s blatant attempt to shred the Constitution as House Democrats ignored the Constitution and failed to follow the legislative process. President Donald Trump was rightfully acquitted, and it is past time to expunge Democrats’ sham smear against not only President Trump’s name, but against millions of patriots across the country.”
Below are links to two other stories that would be related to this one. If Trump does end up winning in 2024 and if the Democrats do take the House, they will try a third time to Impeach Trump. Hate is part of the lefts playbook. So hang on cause the next elections will be historic.
Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was fired from her position as a pastoral assistant at the Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, England in 2019 after raising concerns on her private Facebook page about sex education for children. (Christian Concern)
Views: 16
Looking. A U.K. woman fired for speaking out against transgender and sex education lessons taught at her son’s Church of England primary school won an appeal Friday after a judge overturned a previous ruling upholding her dismissal.
Kristie Higgs said she was initially fired from her role as a teaching assistant at the Farmor’s School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, England, after an anonymous person noticed her Facebook posts speaking out against her son’s school’s plan to introduce books containing transgender ideology and reported the posts to the head teacher.
Though the school says otherwise, she maintains the firing was an attack on her Christian faith.
Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was fired from her position as a pastoral assistant at the Farmor’s School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, England in 2019 after raising concerns on her private Facebook page about sex education for children. (Christian Concern)
“From the beginning, despite the many attempts by the school to suggest otherwise, this has always been about my Christian beliefs and me being discriminated against for expressing them in my own time,” she said, according to BBC News.
Higgs also gathered signatures from her family members and friends, challenging plans to implement the curriculum by sharing an online petition on Facebook.
The post read in part, “THEY ARE BRAINWASHING OUR CHILDREN!” adding that, with the new curriculum in place, “Children will be taught that all relationships are equally valid and ‘normal’, so that same-sex marriage is exactly the same as traditional marriage, and that gender is a matter of choice, not biology, so that it’s up to them what sex they are.”
Kristie Higgs lost her job as a pastoral assistant at a Church of England primary school after an anonymous person complained about her Facebook post. (Christian Concern)
President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal in London Jennifer Eady ruled in Higgs’ favor Friday, arguing that “the freedom to manifest belief (religious or otherwise) and to express views relating to that belief are essential rights in any democracy.”
She added that the right to manifest the beliefs, no matter who they might offend, is protected without limits.
Eady previously dismissed two members of the appeal panel for perceived bias, particularly two who had historically advocated for LGBTQ rights.
Higg’s appeal came after an employment tribunal ruled in October 2020 that she did not suffer discrimination or harassment due to the firing.
A protester voices support for the promotion of transgender ideology in schools during a pro-transgender march in October 2022. (Mark Kerrison/In Pictures via Getty Images)
According to the BBC, Higgs’ case will now head back for a fresh tribunal.
“I am pleased that the courts have overturned the previous judgment, but I am frustrated by the further delays to receiving justice,” she said of the decision.
“I was, and still am, appalled by the sexual ideology that was being introduced to my son’s Church of England primary school… Since I lost the job I loved, there has been so many disturbing revelations about transgender ideology in schools and children being taught inappropriate sex education. I feel so justified and vindicated for sharing and expressing the concerns that I did.”
Hopefully the school drops this and allows this person back. If not, then it’s back to the next court. Is this what the school wants? Let’s stay on top of this.
It’s a known fact that if the name were to be revealed, the Democrats would reveal it and that person would not be long for this world. What will be telling is what will the media say when this is revealed.
FBI officials confirmed Monday that the unclassified FBI-generated record “has not been disproven and is currently being used in an ongoing investigation by a confidential human source who provided information about the vice president by being involved in a criminal bribery scheme is a trusted, highly credible informant who has been used by the FBI for over ten years and has been paid over 6 figures.”
Remember Congressman Raskin denied that this was revealed to him. Denied it even though the FBI told him that four times.
Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., appeared on ABC's "The View" on Monday and called out the hosts for their "offensive, disgusting" comments about race. (Screenshot/ABC)
Views: 21
What race baiters like Sunny Hostin and white progressives don’t get about people like Senator Scott, Justice Thomas, and other successful Conservative Blacks about being exceptional.
Folks who think like Hostin think that just because a person of color is successful that has to be a rare occasion. They think that the only way for a person of color to make it is to just rely on the government for help.
Sadly white progressive Democrats think that besides the government, a person of color has to also rely on a white person to get ahead. They have thought like that since the days of slavery.
White folks don’t have a free pass to being exceptional. Everyone who puts their own best effort can make it. It’s just harder when you expect someone else to do the lifting.
Why Trump shouldn’t be charged. And if he is, he walks. Pence who didn’t have the power to declassify wasn’t charged. Biden will not be charged, so Trump who had the power (and did) declassify should not be charged. And that phony obstruction charge? If Trump declassified the documents, he was correct in saying he had no classified documents.
Parlatore said that even if the report is true that there is a tape where Trump acknowledges the existence of a classified document in his possession connected to Iran and that it reveals the former president knew the material was classified and that he was not permitted to share it, prosecuting Trump might not be the best decision “because there are all of these other problems. Classification is not binding on the jury. You have to actually take these documents, show them to the jury, and then prove to them that it constitutes national defense information.” Former Trump attorney said.
A press conference was held at the SCV Pregnancy Center in Santa Clarita on Wednesday, May 24, 2023 to voice opposition to legislative attempts to regulate the controversial centers, which are protected by the first amendment.(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
Views: 19
At Sierra Pregnancy and Health, Executive Director Cary Wilcox beams with pride holding a plastic model of what will soon be a new mobile clinic thanks to a flood of donations after its “biggest year ever.”
Outside the nondescript nonprofit just 20 miles from the California capital, a sign advertises “abortion pill reversal” — a practice involving the hormone progesterone that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists deems “unethical” and “not supported by science.”
The facility is licensed by the California Department of Public Health as a community clinic but has been flagged as a “crisis pregnancy center” — an industry long accused of misleading women about their services in order to steer them away from abortion.
The Roseville-based center provides free pregnancy tests and first-trimester ultrasounds advertised as part of “pre-abortion screenings” but does not offer abortions or help women get them. Its medical staff includes unpaid retired doctors and nurses who volunteer their time, Wilcox said.
A watercolor painting of a wave hangs above a couch in the consultation room, where clients are warned of abortion-related grief and given pamphlets that ask “is God listening?” A magazine the clinic hands out cites research linking abortion to breast cancer that has been refuted by the American Cancer Society.
Wilcox said part of the clinic’s mission is to “share the love of Jesus,” but she rejects the idea that her industry exists to coerce women out of abortion.
Her clinic is a community resource, she said, pointing to 10,000 diapers and wipes given away in the last year alone and to items such as car seats and baby monitors that parents can “earn” through taking approved parenting classes.
“We don’t force births. Someone can still walk out of here and get an abortion,” she said. “We don’t judge. Our job is to help her make an informed choice.”
Sierra Pregnancy and Health in Roseville, Calif., offers “abortion pill reversal,” which is not authorized by the FDA.
(José Luis Villegas / For The Times)
Across California, where Democratic lawmakers have crafted some of the nation’s strongest abortion rights laws, antiabortion pregnancy centers appear to be untouchable despite repeated attempts to rein them in.
And some are even expanding, boosted by an influx of donations from abortion opponents who object to the enhanced protections enacted in California in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
Two state bills to limit them quietly stalled this month, even as the latest package of abortion access laws is otherwise expected to succeed.
Though the issue has become a legal minefield, California Democrats who have vowed to make the state a reproductive rights haven aren’t giving up.
Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta issued a consumer alert last year, warning of potentially misleading practices by crisis pregnancy centers, and created a new process for Californians to file complaints.
Bonta declined to comment on whether there are any ongoing investigations but said the new complaint portal has been “very helpful” and that his office is “prepared to act” on any violation of the law. That could include prohibitions against companies committing fraudulent business acts.
“We’re not just intent on protecting the reproductive freedom that we have but also expanding it, and part of that is Californians getting and having access to truthful and timely and accurate information about abortion services,” he said.
The industry has gotten harder to regulate as it has moved away from the “egregious” misrepresentations that it was built on, Bonta said.
“They’re moving into more of a gray and ambiguous space, where they’re saying things like, ‘Come in and talk to us about abortion options,’ ” Bonta said. “It’s not necessarily false, it might be misleading, but it’s not a black or white violation.”
In 2018, the Supreme Court blocked enforcement of a California law that would have required all clinics to notify patients that the state offers subsidized abortions, birth control and prenatal care. Known as the Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care and Transparency Act, the bill was sponsored by Vice President Kamala Harris, then state attorney general.
The court’s opinion was led by conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who said that the law unfairly targeted faith-based centers by forcing them to provide a “government drafted script” about services they oppose.
Former client Patti speaks about her experience with the SCV Pregnancy Center in Santa Clarita while she was pregnant with her 9-month-old son Liam at a news conference on Wednesday. The event was to voice opposition to legislative attempts to regulate the controversial centers.
(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)
Crisis pregnancy centers are central to antiabortion activists’ agenda, said Meghan McGuirk, associate director of state legislative affairs and counsel for the abortion rights organization NARAL. “The anti-choice movement is organized and they know what they’re doing. They are going to use every tool they have to try and undermine access to reproductive healthcare,” she said.
Some centers such as the Mendo Lake Women’s Clinic in Ukiah are expanding their services. The center pledges to work to “erase the need for abortion.”
The facility, licensed by the state as a free clinic, claims on its website that adoption can prevent depression “caused by abortion.” (According to the Journal of the American Medical Assn., research has failed to show abortion has a causal effect on mental health.)
There are at least 165 crisis pregnancy centers in California, and they outnumber abortion clinics, according to a report issued last year by the Alliance, a women’s advocacy collaborative.
The report found that many of those centers make “deceptive and misleading” claims, do not have a physician on staff and offer nondiagnostic ultrasounds that are not recognized as a medical service but as a “keepsake” or souvenir.
While abortion access is protected in California, that also makes the state a target for donors looking for crisis pregnancy centers to support, said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda.) She worries that more pregnancy centers will pop up in rural and low-income neighborhoods, where women may struggle to access care.
An abortion rights supporter holds a sign during a rally outside the Supreme Court in Washington in 2018, as the Supreme Court heard arguments in a free speech fight over California’s attempt to regulate anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers.
(Andrew Harnik / Associated Press)
A bill she proposed this year would have potentially opened crisis pregnancy centers up to lawsuits if they advertise using “false or misleading” statements. But the legislation failed.
“There’s no question that this should be stopped,” said Bauer-Kahan, chair of the Select Committee on Reproductive Health. “It is not just conjecture: They are focusing their energy on states like California.”
California law specifically names “alternative birth centers” as a type of specialty clinic eligible to operate in the state. That means a clinic not part of a hospital that provides “comprehensive” services for pregnant women who spend less than 24 hours at the facility, according to state safety code.
Bonta said although some centers are licensed, it doesn’t mean they are without limits. “Just because you’re licensed to do something doesn’t mean you’re licensed to do everything,” he said.
Pregnancy center leaders maintain that they are upfront about the services they do and don’t provide, but women seeking an abortion still get confused — even by clinics licensed by the state.
A young woman in the Sacramento area confirmed her pregnancy at a Planned Parenthood clinic but could not afford the $450 an abortion would cost there without insurance.
Already a mother of a 1-year-old, she found a pregnancy center online, drawn in by its promise of free medical services for women dealing with unplanned pregnancies. The website advertised a consultation that mentioned parenting, adoption and abortion as options.
A Sacramento woman felt duped and shamed by a local crisis pregnancy center when she sought an abortion.
(Jose Luis Villegas/For The Times)
But the center does not actually provide abortions or make referrals for them — which it also states on its website. The woman didn’t realize that until she was already there.
Inside, she was questioned for over an hour about her “lifestyle,” she said. With her boyfriend by her side, a staffer told them that the odds of a couple breaking up because of an abortion are 80%, and that most people regret it.
Ultimately, she miscarried and did not need any services but left feeling “embarrassed and hurt.”
“They shamed me so much in that room,” said the now 29-year-old woman, who asked not to be named for privacy reasons. “Honestly, I had no idea what I was in for. I didn’t know places like this existed. I thought it was just in movies.”
A bill introduced by Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo (D-Chatsworth) would have launched a statewide awareness campaign about any services related to pregnancy care and abortion.
Schiavo said she viewed the bill as noncontroversial and simply informational as it pertained to any relevant facility, not just crisis pregnancy centers. But she made it clear in legislative hearings that they were her top concern, calling them “extremely dangerous.”
The bill drew fierce opposition from conservative groups, including the California Family Council, which held a news conference on Wednesday outside a pregnancy center in Schiavo’s district, accusing her of defamation and of judging an entire industry based on a few bad actors.
Abortion critics, including the California Catholic Conference, said the bill was prejudiced and that the state should instead be thanking the centers for helping vulnerable women.
Schiavo called the outrage “really telling.”
“In California, this is really the only way that anti-choice extremists can promote their agenda. [Centers] can just proliferate and thrive and grow exponentially with no restrictions,” Schiavo said. “Women simply having the facts … it completely undermines their whole business model.”
The Los Angeles City Council put crisis pregnancy centers on alert last year, passing an ordinance that fines them up to $10,000 for false advertisement and allows people to sue if they have been misled.
Kelly Pfeifer, a doctor who has performedabortions for 25 years, is among those urging the state to do the same. She testified to lawmakers earlier this month that some of her patients have been given false ultrasound images by the centers to convince them they are further along in pregnancy than they actually are.
She has had patients cry, worried that they would be infertile because of false information told to them about abortion by people they believed were trustworthy health professionals, she said.
“Every day, I see people who have been harmed by these fake clinics,” Pfeifer said. “In any other part of the healthcare system, this would be inconceivable.”
Heidi Matzke has positioned herself as the face of California’s modern pregnancy center movement. She traveled to Washington, D.C., last year to testify against a federal bill aiming to crack down on the centers, and has railed against Planned Parenthood on Fox News.
Her newest pregnancy center will open soon in Sacramento and looks more like a high-end salon than a medical clinic. The 7,000-square-foot facility is stark white and filled with hot-pink furniture and gold-trimmed mirrors. Thousands of dollars have been spent on security cameras, bulletproof glass and graffiti-resistant paint.
The building alone cost $1.5 million — all from donors.
The official motto of Alternatives Pregnancy Center, which opened in 1983, is to provide women with medical care “and alternatives to abortion as we proclaim the hope of the Gospel.”
It provides gynecological care such as Pap smears and breast exams at no cost — rare for crisis pregnancy centers. But like most centers, it also offers the controversial “abortion pill reversal” and something called “abortion recovery classes.”
“If they choose life, they go through this door,” Matzke says of her clients, pointing to a room full of pristine baby clothes given away free. If they choose abortion, they’ll still be “loved on” and supported, she said.
“A woman is more than just a choice that she makes,” she said.
Matzke is a tireless debater; for every scientific study that casts doubt on her services, she holds up another more obscure study that supports them. It’s Planned Parenthood, not pregnancy centers, that are judging their patients, she insists.
“They want to choose life but they need help and they need support,” Matzke said of her clients. “And so when they find a clinic like ours to support them … then a lot of them will step up and choose life.”
California’s leading Democratic lawmakers have ignored Matzke’s invitations to visit her clinics, leery of giving a microphone to her cause. But the license granted to her from the state they represent hangs clearly in her lobby, framed with gold prongs to match her new decor.
Two things I like about the compromise. The Pipeline and no new IRS agents this year. There’s a lot that’s lacking in this so called compromise, and it’s not a sure bet to pass.
But I do like the fact that The Mountain Valley Pipeline is projected to create 2,500 construction jobs, $40 million in new tax revenue for West Virginia, $10 million in new tax revenue for Virginia and up to $250 million in royalties for West Virginia landowners.
Also it stops at least for this year no new IRS agents are to be hired. There are other small things in here that are good, but I think we get the bigger items next year.
Professor no longer in the classroom after allegedly forcing Christian students to fund Planned Parenthood
A Christian student, who sued his business professor for forcing her class to fund an entity which fundraised for Planned Parenthood and other progressive political causes, said that his Christian beliefs propelled him to fight back.
“For me, as a Christian, it’s our calling. We’re supposed to expose the bad things that happen and not just sit back and… be abused. That’s our job,” he said.
Barbieri is one of two students suing his former business marketing professor, Amy Wisner, who identifies as an “intersectional feminist.” The university told Fox News Digital that Wisner is no longer employed at the institution. Her Instagram similarly reflected that she is a “former business communication professor.”
Nathan Barbieri speaks with Fox News Digital about suing his former professor for allegedly violating his First Amendment rights. (Fox News Digital)
According to the lawsuit, the “far-left” professor compelled each of her 600 students to pay $99 for a membership, which collectively could have amounted to at most $59,400 for an entity called ‘The Rebellion Community.'”
Wisner said, “The Rebellion community is a safe place to coordinate our efforts to burn everything to the f—ing ground,” according to the lawsuit. A post of Wisner’s Facebook page said, “100% of membership fees are donated to Planned Parenthood.” Other causes it supported included those “dismantling oppressive systems.”
The university said that its business school personally refunded students for their contributions to “The Rebellion Community,” but Barbieri said it wasn’t enough.
“Intersectional feminist” Amy Wisner formerly taught business classes at Michigan State. (Fox News Digital)
“I funded that. And until that money is brought back, until it is out of [the professor’s] hands, it’s still with Planned Parenthood, or it’s still being going towards an unethical organization,” he said.
The lawsuit is seeking to bring about a policy change at the university.
ADF’s senior counsel Tyson Langhofer said, “We’re basically asking for all the money that she received to be given back to the students and then to ensure that this doesn’t happen again. Nathan has two more years at the school. He doesn’t want professors to be able to do this. So we’re asking the court to order the university not to allow this to happen in the future.”
“I hold true to my Christian beliefs,” said Barbieri. “[My faith] really pushed me to get out there and do something about it, because I knew if I didn’t, you know, and if nobody else did, what stops this from happening again and again.”
The second student who sued the professor, echoed Barbieri’s concern. “I shouldn’t have to pay for my professor’s political activism… This is a matter of free speech and I hope that the university changes its policy so that other students never have to pay expensive fees toward causes they don’t believe in,” Nolan Radomski told Fox News.
Additionally, the “Rebellion Community” is controlled by the professor herself, which raised additional ethical concerns, the lawsuit said.
“I’ve seen a lot of bad actions in my litigation, but this is definitely one of the top ones because she’s got 600 students at her mercy, and she did abuse that power,” the ADF attorney said.
Former Michigan State University professor (left) and one of the students behind lawsuit, Nathan Barbieri. (Instagram/screenshot | Fox News Digital)
“Not only was it wrong in what she was doing. I mean… you shouldn’t be taking money for political activism from your students, especially forcefully because you can’t pass the class without this. But definitely finding out, seeing Planned Parenthood and organizations like that are completely against my religious and my political beliefs really struck me,” Barbieri said.
ADF counsel explained that “professors can’t force students to fund political organizations as a requirement for an academic course.”
“What Professor Wisner did here was completely out of the ordinary. She basically fabricated a requirement, put it on the syllabus to join this website, which had nothing to do with the course, and she could have used the free platform that the university provides, which every other professor uses,” ADF counsel said. “And then to do that solely that so she could fund her own political activism. And so not only did she use this as her own ideological mechanism to force the students to listen to her activism, but then she forced them to fund her outside activism and kind of double down on that. And I think that’s a that’s a problem. And public universities just can’t allow that to happen.”
Send them back. Mayor Eric Adams. (Luiz C. Ribeiro/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)
Views: 14
Winning, Judge Blocks NYC from Pawning Off Border Crossers on Upstate Suburbs.
No Mas.
Go back home.
We are seeing more and more so called Sanctuary cities telling the undocumented No Mas. Go back home. And when the undocumented come to these Sanctuary cities, they’re being turned away.
A second judge now has told NY to stop deporting the undocumented. It’s your problem now. This from Breitbart.
A New York Supreme Court judge has blocked New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) from busing any more border crossers and illegal aliens to Orange County, New York, a decision that comes after a judge blocked the city from sending new arrivals to Rockland County, New York.
Two hundred yards downstream from the first attempt some of the migrants tried to make their way through a second location but again were unable to climb up. Breitbart Photo
Views: 9
Winning. Texas Military, Troopers Turn Back Wave of Migrants at Border River Crossing. Texas National Guardsmen and Department of Public Safety troopers set up barbed wire along the northern bank of the Rio Grande creating a barrier to physically keep migrants from climbing out of the Rio Grande. Governor Greg Abbott deployed the Texas Border Force earlier this week to help stop or deter migrant crossings as part of Operation Lone Star.We have this from Breitbart.
Breitbart Texas traveled to the border city of Matamoros, Tamaulipas, where hundreds of migrants have been trying to get across the Rio Grande. At various times, migrants took to the water and waded across the river but some were forced to turn back after Texas authorities blocked dirt paths leading north from the river.
Two hundred yards downstream from the first attempt some of the migrants tried to make their way through a second location but again were unable to climb up.
117
