• The Andrew Klavan Show: Does the Left Like ANYTHING About America?

    No wonder they don’t want a wall. Why should they protect a culture they despise?

    To watch the full show live, become a premium subscriber. Join the team! https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe

    Like this video? For more Ben Shapiro and Daily Wire content, subscribe to this channel and the Ben Shapiro YouTube channel youtube.com/c/benshapiro and ring the bell for notifications so you never miss a story!

    source

  • Another Big Nation Moving Embassy To Jerusalem

    Another Big Nation Moving Embassy To Jerusalem

    Brazilian President-elect Jair Bolsonaro will move his country’s embassy to Jerusalem, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Sunday during a meeting with Jewish leaders in Rio de Janeiro.

    Netanyahu explained, “Mr. Bolsonaro said, ‘I will move the embassy to Jerusalem. It’s not a question of if, just a question of when,’” according to a press release issued by the prime minister’s office.

    The Israeli leader added, “President Trump said the same thing. He moved the embassy. And President Bolsonaro will move the embassy as well. He accepted my invitation to visit Israel in the coming months and he’s going to do it, he says, by March. And I look forward to receiving him with the same spirit and the same brotherhood that he received me and that you are receiving us.”

    Netanyahu will attend Bolsonaro’s inauguration ceremony on Jan. 1.

    When Brazil moves its embassy, it will join the United States and Guatemala.

    In addition to these embassy moves, a number of nations have recognized Jerusalem, or portions thereof, as Israel’s capital, including Russia and Australia, among others.

    Source link

  • Google Blocks Gateway Pundit From News Search Results

    Google Blocks Gateway Pundit From News Search Results

    (BREITBART) — Google has rejected an application from conservative website The Gateway Pundit to appear in Google News search results.

    In an email to the Gateway Pundit, Google claimed that it could not provide specific reasons why the site had been rejected. Instead, the tech giant provided two “common reasons for rejection,” although it would not say if they were the actual reasons the conservative website was rejected.

    Per Google’s rules, publishers must submit an application to have their site appear in Google News search results. Once rejected, a publisher must wait 60 days before applying again.

    Source link

  • Franklin Graham: Facebook Ban A 'Personal Attack Toward Me'

    Franklin Graham: Facebook Ban A ‘Personal Attack Toward Me’

    (THE HILL) — Evangelist Franklin Graham on Sunday accused Facebook of personally attacking him after the company banned him from the platform for 24 hours over a post he published in 2016.

    “Why are they going back to 2016,” Graham, the president of the evangelism organization Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, said on Fox News after discussing how the social media platform moderates content on a day-to-day basis.

    “I think it was just really a personal attack towards me.”

    Source link

  • The Andrew Klavan Show: More Sex = No Sex; No Hate = Hate

    The left gets everything backwards. Plus the mailbag – all your problems are tickety-boo.

    To watch the full show live, become a premium subscriber. Join the team! https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe

    Like this video? Subscribe to our YT channel and leave a comment below!

    source

  • University Sued For Being 'Assembly Line For One Type Of Thought'

    University Sued For Being ‘Assembly Line For One Type Of Thought’

    The University of Florida is being sued for favoring some speech, giving liberal students generous budgets to promote their ideology on campus but restricting the 1st Amendment for conservatives.

    The complaint was filed by the Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of the non-partisan Young Americans for Freedom.

    The issue is that the school arbitrarily gives a budget to some student groups, but not others.

    “State universities are uniquely expected to be a free marketplace of ideas, not an assembly line for one type of thought,” said ADF Legal Counsel Blake Meadows. “University of Florida administrators are limiting YAF members’ First Amendment freedoms by forcing them to pay into a system that funds opposing viewpoints.

    “Worse yet, the university forces YAF to play an arbitrary, complex game of Chutes and Ladders, in the funding process, wherein the student group can continually be sent back to the beginning of the game at the sole discretion of the student government. The university also changed its rules to apparently single out and disqualify the conservative group from receiving funding for speakers’ fees and honoraria – making it even more difficult for the group to express its viewpoint on campus.”

    The complaint in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida is on behalf of the organization as well as two members, Sarah Long and Daniel Weldon. It names as defendants the university and its trustees and officials, including Morteza Hosseini, Thomas Kuntz, David Brandon, Ian Green, James Heavener, Leonard Johnson, Daniel O’Keefe, Rahul Patel, Marsha Powers, Jason Rosenberg, Robert Stern, Katherine Vogel Anderson and Anita Zucker.

    The money allocation fight is over funding that is available from fees all students are ordered to pay.

    Those “mandatory activity and service” fees are used for student groups, but allegedly not fairly.

    “The university maintains two categories of registered student organizations – budgeted and non-budgeted. However, despite YAF being in existence for nearly two years, the university has denied YAF the right to be a budgeted organization and used the fees collected from YAF members to fund other similarly situated organizations that promote opposing viewpoints,” ADF explained.

    “The university’s current policy allows it to favor popular views and exclude or dampen unpopular views.”

    The legal action objects to the university decision to grant student government officials “free rein to allocate mandatory student fees back to certain student groups.”

    “The current policy allows fees to be distributed using undefined and subjective criteria, and it fails to provide an appeals process if the organization’s request for funding is denied. Even if the student organization meets all published criteria to become budgeted, there is no guarantee or requirement that the group actually receives money because a student body treasurer and president can disqualify the group from funding at their whim,” the ADF said.

    The money is substantial, with an excess of $1 million being handed out.

    The filing charges that “budgeted student organizations can advocate for their own viewpoints by bringing in guest speakers, but unbudgeted student organizations cannot obtain funding to similarly express themselves.”

    “Students don’t give up their constitutionally protected freedom to speak or associate when they set foot on a public college campus,” said ADF Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer, director of the ADF Center for Academic Freedom. “Today’s university students will be tomorrow’s voters and civic leaders. That’s why it’s so important that public colleges and universities exemplify the First Amendment values they are supposed to be teaching to students. All students are entitled to viewpoint-neutral access to and allocation of student activity fees – or they should get their money back.”

    Said Mark Trammell, YAF associate general counsel, “The YAF chapter deserves the same equal access to university resources as every other student organization on campus. It is completely inappropriate for the University of Florida to treat students differently because of their beliefs. The purpose of today’s lawsuit is to remedy this inequity.”

    “This action is based on the denial of plaintiffs’ fundamental rights to free speech and equal protection of the laws under the United States Constitution,” the filing said. “The polities and actions …. Are challenged on their face and as applied to plaintiffs. Defendants’ policies and actions have deprived and will continue to deprived plaintiffs of their parament rights and guarantees under the United States Constitution.”

    Source link

  • Kids Found Buried In Walmart Santa's Yard

    Kids Found Buried In Walmart Santa’s Yard

    (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION) — As expected by authorities, autopsies have confirmed the identities of two children found buried in their family’s backyard in Effingham County, though many questions remain about the deaths, coroner David Exley said Monday.

    “The cause and manner of death is still pending,” he said, adding it could take weeks.

    The trouble, he said, is partly that Mary Crocker and Elwyn Crocker Jr. had been buried so long ago — Mary for perhaps a few months, Elwyn for maybe as long as two years. The remains of the siblings, who were both 14 years old when they were last seen but hadn’t been reported missing, were discovered Thursday in the rural town of Guyton by the Effingham Sheriff’s Office.

    Source link

  • Bill Whittle: Ad Takes Sledgehammer to Trump Postal Privatization Plans

    The Constitution grants power to establish post offices and post roads to Congress, but the Trump administration leans toward privatization. The major postal workers unions — to kill that effort before it blooms — have a new ad designed to scare you about the prospects of private, corporate-controlled, mail service. Scott Ott, Bill Whittle and Stephen Green examine the potential impact to our American way of life.

    To join the team that produces these conversations, visit http://BillWhittle.com/subscribe

    source

  • U of Pittsburgh cited for trying to prevent Ben Shapiro talk

    U of Pittsburgh Cited For Trying To Prevent Ben Shapiro Talk

    The Alliance Defending Freedom is accusing the University of Pittsburgh of trying to prevent a scheduled speech by conservative commentator Ben Shapiro by charging the sponsoring organization large fees based on the possibility of “controversy” or “protests.”

    “The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear: Public universities can’t enact policies that stifle free speech simply because administrators fear protesters might show up or students might be offended,” wrote ADF Senior Counsel Jonathan Larcomb in a letter to the university.

    “The reason is simple: Speech isn’t free if the speaker can be forced to pay money simply because somebody may object. The Supreme Court has specifically stated that security fees, such as the ones Pitt has assessed, aren’t constitutionally permissible.”

    Young America’s Foundation and a student group scheduled a Nov. 14 speech by the New York Times bestselling author.

    But just two days before the event, university officials demanded more than $5,500 in “security costs” because they feared “controversy” and “protests” in opposition to Shapiro’s speech.

    The sponsors objected to the fees, and ADF’s letter to the school demands that they be rescinded.

    The students had followed the university’s process for scheduling the event, informing officials months ahead of time.

    “In addition, YAF previously signed a contract with the university on Oct. 18 on Shapiro’s behalf, stating unequivocally that the university would provide Pitt Police Security and ‘all house personnel necessary’ for the event,” ADF said.

    Nevertheless, two days before the event, “the university breached its contract with YAF and assessed an additional fee based on the anticipated content and views of Shapiro’s speech and the prediction that students would find offense and conduct protests,” ADF said.

    ADF contends that’s not allowed.

    “The Supreme Court made clear, ‘[s]peech cannot be financially burdened, any more than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob.’ Imposing security fees based on the beliefs offered by YAF, College Republicans and their speaker – Ben Shapiro – is viewpoint discrimination,” the letter said.

    “Today’s college students will be tomorrow’s legislators, judges, educators, and voters. That’s why it’s so important that public colleges and universities demonstrate the First Amendment values they are supposed to be teaching to students,” said Tyson Langhofer, director of the ADF Center for Academic Freedom. “Pitt should be modeling this for its students, and a good first step would be to end its unconstitutional policy that threatens to silence minority viewpoints.”

    The letter says the university must change its policy.

    “University guidelines allow for the assessment of fees based on the potential negative reactions of listeners. Per university guidelines, school administrators must consider ‘prior security concerns at speaker’s past presentations’ and ‘other events taking place on campus.’ Both of these factors are content-based because both require university officials to factor safety concerns created by protestors at the University of Pittsburgh and at other universities. ‘Listeners’ reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation.’ As a result, Pitt’s own policy codifies an unconstitutional heckler’s veto that stifles minority viewpoints,” it said.

    That Pitt was making judgments based on the content of the speech isn’t in doubt, since Lt. James Kenna of the university’s police department admitted in an email that the content of Shapiro’s speech contributed to the high security fee.

    “He attested that of the ‘different variables’ that he considered when calculating the security fee, ‘some sort of controversy’ was a factor. He also stated in the email that he considered ‘things like protests,’” the letter explained.

    However, university spokesman Joe Miksch insisted otherwise. In a statement to WND he claimed “the content and viewpoint of the speaker’s or performer’s message and the community’s reaction or expected reaction to the event will not be considered when determining the security fee.”

    But he conceded that “safety concerns” are taken into account.

    His statement: “Pitt Student Affairs guidelines generally require the hosting student organization to cover security costs. University Police and the Dean of Students determine security needs by evaluating factors such as anticipated audience size, location of the event, access level to the event (open to the University community, ticketed, invitation only), health and safety concerns, etc. Consistent with the First Amendment, the content and viewpoint of the speaker’s or performer’s message and the community’s reaction or expected reaction to the event will not be considered when determining the security fee to be paid by the hosting organization. We do not disclose the cost of these events to the public.”

    The university even posted on its website days before Shapiro appeared a lecture titled “Ways to respond when you disagree with a speaker.”

    The letter asks Pitt to rescind the assessment of fees and revise its guidelines.

    Source link

  • Italy adopts hardline immigration law

    Italy Adopts Hardline Immigration Law

    (Gatestone Institute) The Italian Parliament has approved a tough new immigration and security law that will make it easier to deport migrants who commit crimes and strip those convicted of terrorism of their Italian citizenship.

    Italy’s lower house of parliament, the Camera dei Deputati, voted 396 to 99 on November 28 to approve the new law, which was sponsored by Interior Minister Matteo Salvini. The law had previously been approved by the Italian Senate on November 7. The measure was promulgated by President Sergio Mattarella on December 3.

    Also known as the “Security Decree” or the “Salvini Decree,” the new law includes several key provisions:

    Source link