Israel’s Top Court Rules Ultra-Orthodox Jews Must Be Drafted Into Military, in Blow to Netanyahu

/0 Comments/in , /by

Israel’s Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the government to draft ultra-Orthodox Jews into the military, delivering a blow to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that has the potential to unravel his ruling coalition.

The court also ordered the government to withdraw funding from any religious schools, or yeshivas, whose students do not comply with draft notices.

“The government wanted to distinguish at the level of law enforcement between individuals based on their group affiliation,” the court said in its ruling. “It was determined that by doing so, the government seriously harmed the rule of law and the principle according to which all individuals are equal before the law.”

Ultra-Orthodox (or Haredi) Jews have, for all intents and purposes, been exempt from national mandatory military service since Israel’s founding (Palestinian citizens of Israel are also exempt.) Ultra-Orthodox men spend much of their early lives out of the workforce, entirely devoted to religious study. They view yeshivas as fundamental to the preservation of Judaism, as important to Israel’s defense as the military.

Most Israelis believe ultra-Orthodox men should serve in the military, according to recent polls, but Haredi parties have been staunchly opposed to efforts to rescind the draft exemption. Netanyahu’s fragile government coalition relies on two Haredi parties – United Torah Judaism and Shas – to govern. He has for weeks been trying to advance legislation through Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, that would enshrine in law a draft exemption for Haredi men. (Read more from “Israel’s Top Court Rules Ultra-Orthodox Jews Must Be Drafted Into Military, in Blow to Netanyahu” HERE)

Establishment Media Fumbles Supreme Court’s Decision on Idaho Abortion Law

/1 Comment/in , /by

The establishment media prematurely reported a Supreme Court order dismissing a crucial case involving Idaho’s pro-life law and the Biden administration’s controversial ER abortion mandate.

The Biden administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a regulation under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), mandating that hospitals provide abortions if deemed necessary to stabilize a pregnant woman’s medical emergency, overriding state laws. Idaho’s Defense of Life Act, a pro-life law, stood in direct opposition to this mandate.

The administration’s aggressive push led to a federal district court in Idaho issuing a preliminary injunction in favor of HHS. Idaho subsequently appealed to the Ninth Circuit. In an uncommon move, the Supreme Court granted “cert before judgment,” agreeing to review the case before the appellate court’s decision.

The decision was accompanied by several opinions, reflecting the deep divisions within the court:

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued against dismissal, advocating for the court to strike down Idaho’s pro-life law in favor of the Biden administration’s abortion mandate.

Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, expressed their intent to rule that the EMTALA regulation preempts Idaho law but agreed with the dismissal for procedural reasons.

Justice Samuel Alito, supported in part by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, opposed the dismissal, favoring Idaho’s pro-life law and criticizing the court’s reluctance to address the issue head-on.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, formed the deciding block, aligning with the dismissal but leaving the broader legal questions unresolved.

The establishment media’s premature and inaccurate reporting on the Supreme Court’s decision underscores a troubling trend of misinforming the public on crucial issues. By jumping the gun, they not only failed to provide a clear picture of the court’s decision but also contributed to the confusion surrounding an already contentious issue.

The establishment media’s premature reporting on the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Idaho’s pro-life law and the Biden administration’s abortion mandate is a glaring example of media incompetence and bias.

Congressional Report Exposes CIA’s Collusion with Biden Campaign to Discredit Hunter Biden Laptop Story

/1 Comment/in , , /by

In a bombshell revelation, a congressional report released Tuesday exposes the CIA’s interference in the 2020 election by colluding with the Biden campaign to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story.

The House Judiciary report highlights three critical points regarding the CIA’s involvement in the 2020 election. First, it reveals that high-ranking CIA officials, including then-CIA Director Gina Haspel, were aware of the statement discrediting the Hunter Biden laptop story before its publication. This awareness provided senior leadership with an opportunity to intervene and ensure the statement was properly vetted, yet they failed to do so.

Second, the report notes that some signatories of the statement, including former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell and former CIA Inspector General David Buckley, were on active contracts with the CIA at the time. Despite these officials’ claims that they did not access classified information when asserting the laptop story had “all the hallmarks” of Russian disinformation, their active roles within the CIA cast doubt on their impartiality.

Lastly, the report uncovers internal dissent within the CIA. Some employees expressed concern about the politicized nature of the statement, acknowledging it was not “helpful to the Agency in the long run.” At least one employee questioned the submission and approval process, highlighting the internal discontent with the agency’s involvement in the political narrative.

In 2020, 51 former intelligence officials signed a letter labeling the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation. This letter, coordinated by current Secretary of State Antony Blinken, was instrumental in shaping public opinion ahead of the election. CNN reporter Natasha Bertrand amplified this narrative through a Politico story, which has since been discredited.

The congressional report underscores the inappropriate involvement of CIA contractors in the political process. As Morell himself acknowledged during the investigation, “It’s inappropriate for a currently serving staff officer or contractor to be involved in the political process.” This admission reflects the serious ethical breach that occurred.

The report also highlights the role of former Senior Intelligence Service Officer Marc Polymeropoulos, who co-authored the statement. Internal communications reveal that Polymeropoulos’s talking points contained classified information, which had to be removed before publication.

One CIA official noted, “It appears [Polymeropoulos] is actively involved in a pro-Biden campaign and may be disclosing classified information in his efforts.”

WATCH: CNN Host Gets Schooled on What Voters Really Think of Trump

/1 Comment/in , , /by

The political “pundits” just don’t get it when it comes to what American voters really think about former Donald Trump.

That according to pollster Frank Luntz, who told CNN host Kate Bolduan on Tuesday that many of the so-called experts have been mistaken about the Republican.

As an example, Luntz discussed the 2016 presidential debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton, as Trump suggested the Democratic nominee would “be in jail” if he were president.

Bolduan played a clip of the debate, and Luntz indicated that while “pundits really condemned him,” voters actually were thrilled by the remark. . .

“And the pundits really condemned him [for] doing it. And our voters said, ‘Wait a minute. He’s holding her accountable. It’s about time that politicians are held accountable.’ That’s one of the great frustrations in America. That’s why we’re so angry because when you think politicians will say and do anything, and then actually do exactly the opposite of what they promise.” (Read more from “WATCH: CNN Host Gets Schooled on What Voters Really Think of Trump” HERE)

Yikes! Look Who Tells Joe Biden How to Debate President Trump

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Hillary Clinton was the loser in the 2016 presidential election to President Donald Trump. In fact, she became a two-time loser in that race, having lost out on the Democratic nomination years earlier to Barack Obama, and repeatedly has claimed the 2016 election was stolen from her.

But her experiences are giving her the confidence to tell Joe Biden how to debate 2024 opponent President Donald Trump in a CNN event that is scheduled Thursday. . .

Explained The Patriotic News, in a headline: “Woman who will always be remembered for losing to Donald Trump has advice for Joe Biden.”

The report noted that as it’s an election year, “it is naturally time for Hillary Clinton to brush off the cobwebs and say a bunch of words about taking on Donald Trump and saving the country from a man she lost to in 2016.”

The report explained, “The former First Lady and Secretary of State is largely responsible for us becoming a country whose history books can say ‘President Donald Trump’ in future editions. But, that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have advice for Joe Biden, who is taking on Trump for the second time this year. She is releasing a book soon, and she is also writing op-eds in the New York Times, giving advice to Joe Biden.” (Read more from “Yikes! Look Who Tells Joe Biden How to Debate President Trump” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Is Axios Serious With This Story About Trump?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

There is no pandemic from which to take cover this election season. Only Joe Biden and his remarkable short list of accomplishments have brought economic torpor at home and total chaos abroad. Biden decided to leave Afghanistan, only to become ensnared by another ‘endless war’ after the gaze of a Ukrainian dictator took him in. Now, Biden is speaking out of both sides of his mouth on Israel, claiming ironclad US support for their war in Gaza but also cutting off arms shipments to appease the antisemitic segments of the Democratic Party base. So, what can the liberal media do to prop up this senile old man? Warn voters that—get this—inflation will spike if Trump is elected president again (via Axios):

Sixteen Nobel prize-winning economists are jumping into the presidential campaign with a stark warning: Former President Trump’s plans would reignite inflation and cause lasting harm to the global economy if he wins in November.

Why it matters: The Nobel laureates are lending their academic prestige to a political argument the Biden administration has been making for weeks: Inflation would be worse under Trump.

“While each of us has different views on the particulars of various economic policies, we all agree that Joe Biden’s economic agenda is vastly superior to Donald Trump,” the 16 economists write in a letter, first obtained by Axios.

I’m rolling at this piece since most of it confirms that inflation right now is too high, which in turn kills American working families. The inflation spike has already arrived, thanks to Biden’s domestic agenda. Even if we accept the Chinese math on the job figures, which are always revised down, it doesn’t matter if everyone’s wallet is getting torched. We’re a part-time economy since that’s where most of Joe Biden’s job creation comes from—foreign workers are very much replacing American citizens in the workforce. (Read more from “Is Axios Serious With This Story About Trump?” HERE)

Trans HHS Secretary Rachel Levine Opposed Age Limits for Transgender Treatment

/1 Comment/in , /by

Transgender advocate and Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine pushed to remove age limits from the draft guidelines for medical treatment of people who say they are transgender.

A document called, “Appendix A to Supplemental Expert Report of James Cantonr, PH.D” was released as part of a lawsuit, Boe v. Marshall, according to Jesse Signal, a left-wing critic of transgender ideology. Cantor is described as being a “Canadian sex researcher” and “critic of youth gender medicine, and frequent expert witness on behalf of those attempting to ban” or restrict youth gender health care.

Cantor writes in the document that, Levine “attempted to and did influence the substantive content of” the Standards of Care Rules, version 8 (SOC-8), “based on political goals rather than science.”

The SOC-8 rules are guidelines that help medical professionals provide safe gender-affirming care to people who say they are transgender.

“Specifically, Assistant Secretary Levine through a staff member, pressured WPATH [World Professional Association for Transgender Health] to remove recommended minimum ages for medical transition treatments from SOC-8,” Cantor writes. (Read more from “Trans HHS Secretary Rachel Levine Opposed Age Limits for Transgender Treatment” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

There’s No Way to Read This Other Than Biden is Losing the Election Right Now

/0 Comments/in , /by

From swing state surveys to who’s better at handling the critical issues in the 2024 election, it’s Donald Trump’s election to lose. After three years of economic misery, chaos abroad, and a rapidly deteriorating president, Americans are looking for change. Biden never had the chops to be president, only squeaking by, thanks to unilateral changes made by Democratic secretaries of states—moves that the courts retroactively ruled to be illegal, but it was too late.

CNN elections analyst Harry Enten analyzed the top issues heading into Thursday’s debate, where Trump has the high ground. On the economy and inflation, voters trust Trump over Biden by double-digits: 13 and 18 points more, respectively. The only area where Biden has the edge is on the state of democracy, though it’s only by seven points. Will it matter? We don’t know since this question has never been asked before—2024 is the first time:

(Read more from “There’s No Way to Read This Other Than Biden is Losing the Election Right Now” HERE)

The Fight Against Child Mutilation Makes It to the Supreme Court

/1 Comment/in , /by

Maybe you’ve heard the saying, “The purpose of a system is what it does.” It’s a phrase that was coined by a professor named Stafford Beer as a way of helping people understand complex systems. It was originally about cybernetics, but it’s increasingly being used in the context of American politics.

That’s because you’ll often hear convoluted explanations to justify various policies, when all you really have to do is look at the end result that those policies are producing. The benefit of Beer’s approach is that, at the risk of maybe oversimplifying some things, it short-circuits all the rationalization and B.S. that we’re all used to hearing. And if there’s one skill that the politicians and academics have perfected — whether they’re talking about immigration or criminal justice reform or anything else — it’s drowning us in doublespeak so that we don’t look at the obviously evil and destructive results of their policies. Sometimes things really aren’t that complicated. Sometimes you don’t need experts and studies to decide on a course of action.

That’s especially true in the case of so-called “transgender medical care” for children, which really means injecting children with sterilizing cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers that can cause early-onset osteoporosis. In some cases, it also means amputating body parts from children — so-called “top surgery” for minors is legal in many states, and used to be legal in many more. No other civilization throughout human history has done anything like this, and for good reason. There’s no need to analyze the “intent” of people who promote a practice like this. The purpose of a system is what it does. The end result of their policy is that children are being mutilated. No further discussion is necessary.

Of course, this isn’t how our courts work. They generally take their time when it comes to ruling on major policy issues — if they ever decide to weigh in all. But eventually, on the most important issues, things come to a head. The various appellate courts disagree, creating a “circuit split,” and ultimately the Supreme Court feels compelled to step in. That’s happening now in the area of so-called “trans medicine.” And it brings us to what could very well be the most significant Supreme Court case since Dobbs. This could be a long overdue decision — and it’s worth a close look, especially since the ruling could come down in a matter of months.

(Read more from “The Fight Against Child Mutilation Makes It to the Supreme Court” HERE)

Trans Person Shot, Killed by Officers After ‘Aggressively’ Wielding 7-Inch Knife

/0 Comments/in , /by

The knife-wielding individual who was fatally shot by Denver police on June 16 was a biological man who identified as a woman, police have confirmed.

The fatal incident occurred as officers responded to reports of a knife-wielding individual standing in an intersection of downtown Denver, Colorado.

Officers confronted the man — who was originally reported to be a woman — asking him to drop the knife. However, he refused to do so and reportedly advanced aggressively toward the officers, despite them first using non-lethal means — tasering — to stop him.

The man proceeded to approach the officers, prompting them to open fire. Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas said at the time, “My belief is that the officers perceived a significant threat and responded to that threat.”

The individual, now deceased, has been identified as 52-year-old Miguel Tapia, and the police chief has confirmed that he was transgender.

(Read more from “Trans Person Shot, Killed by Officers After ‘Aggressively’ Wielding 7-Inch Knife” HERE)