Shocker: Liberal Graduation Speakers Outnumber Conservatives 4-to-1

Liberal bias? What liberal bias?

According to Campus Reform, out of the top 100 universities, 40 of them are featuring explicitly liberal speakers at their commencement ceremonies. Only 10 are hosting speakers who are either openly conservative or who have donated to conservative/Republican politicians. (Several schools have not yet announced their commencement speakers or have speakers who are apolitical.)

Overall, Campus Reform found that 40 of this year’s commencement speakers espouse liberal philosophies. Only ten, however, champion conservative ideologies, meaning this year’s liberal speakers will outnumber conservatives at a rate of 4 to 1. A majority of America’s top schools, though, have either not announced a speaker or are hosting a speaker whose public political views do not strongly correlate with one political party.

Notably, not a single active conservative politician was invited to speak at one of the nation’s top schools. However, seven active members of President Obama’s administration will deliver commencement addresses this year, including Obama himself, who will speak to three graduating classes.

It's no wonder why colleges are churning out special snowflakes who are completely unprepared for the real world.

New: Ryan Tells CNN He's 'Not Ready to Support' Trump

House Speaker Paul Ryan joined Jake Tapper on CNN Thursday to discuss whether or not he’ll endorse Donald Trump in the 2016 election, now that he’s the presumptive GOP nominee. Mitt Romney, who chose Ryan as his running mate in 2012, has already indicated he won’t support Trump, opting to skip this year’s RNC convention. 

What about Ryan?

“To be perfectly candid, I’m not ready to support” Trump at this point, Ryan told Tapper.

“I don’t want to underplay what he accomplished,” Ryan continued. But, to unify the party, we need to do more than say it, we need to actually "advance our conservative principles," he insisted. 

As of now, he's not sure Trump can do that.

Ryan’s comments perhaps come as no surprise, considering he has repeatedly denounced Trump’s campaign behavior since assuming the speakership. For instance, although he says he didn’t want to weigh in on the primary, Ryan made an exception in March after Trump proposed to ban Muslims from entering the country. That plan, Ryan said, “is not conservatism.”

Ryan noted he didn't think he'd have to make a decision so soon, expecting the race to at least last until June. As the chair of the GOP convention, Ryan hopes Trump will have proved by then he can unify the party.

"I hope to support his candidacy fully," he said.

Rolling Stones Tell Trump To Stop Playing Their Songs At Rallies

The Rolling Stones aren't supporters of Donald Trump, and they don't even want to be peripherally associated with the candidate. The group recently ordered Trump to stop playing their songs at various campaign events, saying that they had never granted the candidate permission to use them.

The legendary British rockers have "never given permission to the Trump campaign to use their songs and have requested that they cease all use immediately," a spokesperson said in a statement obtained by NBC News.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee has been soundtracking his events with at least two Stones songs — "You Can't Always Get What You Want" and "Start Me Up" — since launching his White House bid almost a year ago.

"Start Me Up" was most recently played on Tuesday night, when Trump celebrated his Indiana primary win at Trump Tower in New York City.

Aerosmith has also asked Trump to refrain from using their songs at rallies.

Personally, I think this is a bit dumb. Music is music--it's not an endorsement unless the artist says so.

Backlash: Khloe Kardashian Goes to Cuba, Poses Under "Fidel"

Khloe Kardashian, sister of the famous Kardashain clan, recently took a trip to Cuba with her sisters Kim, Khloe and a friend. 

Yesterday, Khloe shared a photo on her Instagram and Twitter pages posing under "Fidel", which is etched under a quote on the wall. Fidel, of course, is the iron fisted dictator who has ruled over Cuba for decades. He is the same dictator who, along with his brother Raul, throws political dissidents into prison, including a man who dared to wave an American flag as the first cruise arrived on the island this week. He is responsible for the murders and deaths of ten-of-thousands of Cubans. 

Havana ????

A photo posted by Khloé (@khloekardashian) on

The outrage was swift, with many of Khloe's fans educating her about who Fidel Castro is and what he did to their families.

"Wow. Really?! Posing with Fidel....I used to adore you. I am Cuban and my family has known people who were MURDERED by this man. Disgusting!" one fan wrote. 

"Fidel?!!!! Wtf really? As much as I like you I think this is disgusting!!! Cuban American over here," another said in outrage. 

"Posing with that pig's name over you is disgusting. I had to leave my beautiful country of Cuba when I was two years old because of political reasons and that was 36 years ago. That pig ripped families apart, including mine," another detailed.

No word on whether the Castro regime allowed Khloe and her pals use the internet to post their photos while they were in Cuba, or if they had to return to the U.S. to log back on.

Here's Donald Trump's Cinco De Mayo Greeting

Presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump issued a Cinco de Mayo greeting on Twitter today, boasting that the best taco bowls in the world are made at Trump Tower. Trump also said that he loves Hispanics.

Reactions to the tweet were varied:

While Trump claims to love Hispanics, they're not really returning the favor. Over three out of four Hispanics have an unfavorable view of the candidate.

UPDATE: The plot...thickens?

UPDATE II: Judd Legum of ThinkProgress has found the taco bowl/salad. They're apparently a seasonal item at Trump Café.

This post has been updated.

Mitt Romney Is Skipping the RNC

This July, hundreds of prominent Republicans will descend upon Cleveland for the Republican National Convention. Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee for president, will not be among them. A Romney spokesperson confirmed that the former Massachusetts governor does not plan to attend the convention.

Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, plans to skip this summer's Republican National Convention in Cleveland where Donald Trump will be officially nominated — an unusual move that underscores the deep unease many Republican leaders have about the brash celebrity mogul as their standard bearer.

A Romney aide told The Washington Post on Thursday morning, "Governor Romney has no plans to attend convention."

Romney has been one of Trump's chief critics this spring. He delivered a searing, point-by-point indictment of Trump in March — from his business record to his character to his divisive campaign-trail rhetoric.

Donald Trump endorsed Romney in 2012, but it's pretty clear the love isn't flowing both ways.

The RNC is scheduled to take place from July 18-21.

2016 RACE ROUNDUP: Trump Mulls VP Pick, Mocks Hillary for Not 'Putting Away' Sanders

Now that Donald Trump is the last Republican candidate standing and the eventual nominee, the media is starting to guess who he will choose as his running mate. Meanwhile, Trump’s all but securing the nomination is bad optics for Hillary Clinton, who still hasn’t managed to put away democratic socialist Bernie Sanders. That doesn’t mean she isn’t setting her sights on the general, however, attacking Trump repeatedly in her media appearances on Wednesday.

Republican Primary

Trump Fallout: Now that Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee, angry "Never Trump" Republicans have been burning their registration cards and vowing to vote third party. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) even dropped hints he may run as the alternative nominee. Or, will libertarian candidate Gary Johnson siphon those lost Republican votes?

Then, on Thursday, Mitt Romney, who already told us how he feels about Trump, noted he will not be going to the convention. It seems there’s no love lost, if Trump’s interview with The Washington Post last month is any indication.

“I don’t care,” Trump said. “He can be there if he wants.”

How many Republicans will take Romney’s lead and refuse to support Trump?

Ready to Take on Hillary?: In a conversation with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday, the businessman noted how embarrassing it is for Clinton to still be battling for the Democratic nomination. He compared it to a football team that couldn’t get the football over the end zone. He has also slammed her for using the “woman card.” If she wasn’t a woman, he said, she would be nowhere near the presidency. His rhetoric indicates he’s more than ready to take on the struggling female candidate.

VP Rumors: Sen. Marco Rubio? Gov. Susana Martinez? Both names have been thrown around by pundits. Could the Texas senator, however, accept the title, after being dismissed by Trump as “Little Rubio” on the campaign trail? Why not? Ben Carson is now a Trump surrogate even after the business mogul mocked his violent childhood. As for New Mexico Gov. Martinez, the media notes she could help his image both with women and Latinos. Other names that are surfacing include Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee and John Kasich, the last of whom Trump said he’d be “interested” in vetting.

We don’t know who Trump will choose as his running mate, but we do know who’s going to help vet the candidates. Dr. Carson will be on the vice presidential selection committee.

Democratic Primary

Hillary Clinton: Clinton called Trump a “loose cannon” a handful of times during her interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday. Electing him, she said, would pose a danger to the country. She also had some criticism for the media, whom she said has failed to ask Trump any tough questions. 

Bernie Sanders: Several Thursday headlines feature the word “why” in reference to Sanders’ never-ending campaign. Yet, despite his superdelegate deficit, Sanders is not quitting. He told CNN he will continue his “uphill” battle against the establishment candidate. 

Primary Schedule

Saturday, May 7 - Democratic caucus in Guam

Precious Snowflakes Targeted Black Cartoonist For Criticizing Black Lives Matter

Oh, here we go again. Precious snowflakes in college griping about how they’re offended and expect the school’s administration to do something about it because they’re ignorant of free speech. It’s a typical tale, and this one from Wesley College in Dove, Delaware isn’t any different. In this case, a black cartoonist criticized Black Lives Matter (oh yeah, the kid went for the gold on this one), which initiated a cupcake nation alert that led to the illustrator being labeled a…racist. So, progressive softies tried to make the case that a black person is racist for going against the grain and offering some criticism of the Black Lives Matter movement—sadly, this seems in keeping with their authoritarian mindset (via Campus Reform):

Bryheim Muse, a black student, published two cartoons in the Whetstone, one critical of what he calls the Black Lives Matter movement’s hypocrisy on abortion, and one of a black man making a comment on attire.

“I was trying to make a point, showing the hypocrisy behind the Black Lives Matter,” Muse told WDEL, explaining that “in one way we’re saying ‘Black Lives Matter, but in another way, we’re aborting our children and we’re saying it’s okay.”

The other cartoon, he says, was based off a Biblical scripture about being known by your clothes.

“I was making a point that the way you dress defines who you are,” he stated.

His main point is that “Black Lives Matter is not the solution to our problems, protesting, begging other people to fix our problems, the solution to our problem is keeping God’s commandments. Black-on-black crime, if we kept the law on ‘love thy neighbor as thyself,’ we wouldn’t have that.”

Senior Tiffany Griffin disagreed, saying that BLM and abortion are two separate issues.

Griffin alleges that there is a strong racial divide on campus, citing an incident in which separate cookouts for white and black students were allegedly held by the college. Muse disagrees and says there is no racial divide.

Following the release of the cartoons, the college held an open discussion forum.

Muse feels he was targeted at the event, saying that the students were there to just talk about how they hated the cartoon, and they only showed up to argue.

[…]

“We have worked hard, especially black women, to defy and break down all of the stereotypes that were thrown at us,” Shaylynn Bivens told HuffPost. “It is humiliating to know that we were dehumanized by a fellow African-American male. He essentially gave the white students a reason to disrespect and think less of us. That comic promotes hate speech.”

Reform added that Griffin and a few other snowflakes demanded that first-year president Richard Clarke II condemn the cartoon, which he did, and increase the percentage of black staff and faculty at the school by 10 percent. Right, because that will totally make everything better. There’s no issue here. None. Zip. A kid drew a cartoon he didn’t like—get over it. This is in no way similar to the “slap a Jap” posters drawn during World War II. That was legitimate racism. Regardless, the fact that the cupcake legions used this to push a diversity initiative says all there is about campus progressives. Demonize conservatives, blame the administration for allowing them to exercise their right to free speech, complain, and then demand the administration increase the level of diversity within the faculty. Some schools, like Mizzou, even have required “diversity intensive” courses that are needed to graduate. I say well done, Mr. Muse for challenging the vicious nature of American progressivism, and that of the Black Lives Matter movement. You had an opinion, you put that to paper, and the pitchforks came out. That means you have to draw another one soon. Don’t let these snowflakes scare you; for God’s sake your classmate thinks that black deaths by abortion isn’t as big an issue (certainly not on the same level, which is sad) as a death at the hands of law enforcement. For liberals, the latter is just a much more juicier fruit to sink your teeth into than abortion.

Muy Malo: Outrage Over "Insensitive" Language Used in Cinco De Mayo DUI Memo, Cops Apologize

Today is Cinco de Mayo, the day that marks the 1862 Battle of Puebla. It is not Mexican Independence Day. It's become a holiday celebrated heavily in America, not in Mexico, and used as an excuse to party. It's on par with St. Patrick's Day in terms of cultural authenticity. People of all ethnic backgrounds tend to make poor choices on Cinco de Mayo...like drinking and driving. As a result, police all over the country set up additional DUI checkpoints to keep drunk people from hurting or killing others. They also send out notices to the community as a warning.

Cue the outrage. 

The Oakland Police Department has issued a retraction and apology after announcing additional DUI checkpoints would be set up around the city because it's Cinco de Mayo. They used Spanish in the release, which apparently was a mistake. Some took this as "insensitive" and "racist" toward Mexicans.

First, part of the original press release

“Community: Cinco de Mayo: Fiesta Time or Jail Time? Buzzed Driving Is Drunk Driving - ¡Manejar Entonado Es Manejar Borracho!

“In the United States, Cinco de Mayo has become synonymous with festive fiestas and salty margaritas. Historically, the fifth of May commemorates Mexico’s 1862 victory over France at the Battle of Puebla during the Franco-Mexican War, but present-day celebrations often lead to drunk driving—and there’s no victory in that.

“If you are planning to party this Cinco de Mayo, keep this number in mind: nationwide, 343 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes over the Cinco de Mayo holiday weekend in 2014. And drunk driving was the cause of 116 (34%) of these fatalities. Furthermore, many of the drivers in those crashes weren’t just a little drunk. Sadly, almost one out of five (17%) of all the drivers in fatal crashes that weekend had blood alcohol concentrations of 0.15% or higher—almost two times the legal limit in every state.

“The Oakland Police Department is continuing its ongoing efforts to stop and arrest impaired drivers, deploying extra officers on DUI saturation patrols May 5 to lower deaths and injuries. The DUI operation will be operational from 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. this coming Thursday.

“In the rush of party preparations and getting dressed up for a night out, it’s easy to forget the most important Cinco de Mayo plan of all: designating a sober driver. Some fiesta-goers think they can play it by ear and wait until after the party has started to decide whether they’re ‘okay to drive.’ By this point, it’s too late. Going out for a night of drinking without a plan to get home safely is a recipe for disaster.

And the apology after outrage: 

The Oakland Police Department apologized Tuesday and retracted a community message they acknowledged used “insensitive” language regarding DUI saturation patrols for the upcoming Cinco de Mayo holiday.

“The Oakland Police Department would like to apologize for the recent press release addressing traffic safety enforcement during the Cinco de Mayo holiday,” the department said in a statement. “We acknowledge that the language in the message sent was completely insensitive to the cultural holiday.”

It was unclear how many people had contacted the department about the message, but on social media some groups were clearly not happy.

“Oakland Police has posted on their Twitter account they’re going to put out Extra Patrols for you drunk Mexicans on Cinco de Mayo,” someone wrote on the Facebook page Oakland Latinos United. “How does it feel. As a Mexican Chicano I wonder if OPD will be posting DUI PSAs for every ethnic & culturally based holiday?”

For the record, police set up extra DUI checkpoints during every major celebration throughout the year including: July 4, Christmas, Thanksgiving, St. Patrick's Day, college graduation, after concerts, after football games, etc. Keeping drunk drivers off the road isn't about race, it's about safety. And by the way, the cops are doing the community a favor by warning partiers ahead of time that they will be arrested and jailed if they make bad decisions.

This gringa is headed for a margarita after work and will be taking a cab home. Hopefully I won't get accused of cultural appropriation at the bar.

H/T Jon Justice

FDA Drops the Hammer: Now Regulates All Tobacco Products, E-Cigarettes, and Cigars

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it will regulate all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, cigars, hookah tobacco and pipe tobacco, among others.  Until now, the FDA could only regulate cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.

In addition to ending sales of tobacco products and e-cigarettes to people under age 18, the FDA will impose other restrictions, including:

  • A prohibition on distribution of free samples
  • A ban on selling e-cigarettes in vending machines unless they are in secure places that never admit young people
  • A requirement that e-cigarettes carry warnings that they contain nicotine, which is addictive

The FDA attempted to ban the sale of e-cigarettes following a 2009 study that found detectable levels of carcinogens and toxic chemicals in e-cigarette samples. But a court ruled in 2010 that the FDA had not cited evidence of harm.

"This action is a milestone in consumer protection -- going forward, the FDA will be able to review new tobacco products not yet on the market, help prevent misleading claims by tobacco product manufacturers, evaluate the ingredients of tobacco products and how they are made, and communicate the potential risks of tobacco products," the FDA said in announcing the changes.

It is amazing how far we have declined as a free society.  Advertisement for the product that put this country on its feet is now banned, barred, and expunged like most of our rich history.  It was only a short time ago that we as a free people were allowed to advertise our tobacco products. But our parental government has outlawed those harmful activities and has therefore outlawed vast majorities of America.  

 

The White House is Lying About U.S. Troops in Combat and This Video Proves It

Since 2014, three U.S. service members have been killed in the war against ISIS in Iraq. Earlier this week, the Pentagon confirmed Navy SEAL Charles Keating IV was killed during operations with peshmerga fighters. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter specifically referred to the loss of life as a combat death. 

Despite Americans being killed on the battlefield with ISIS, the White House has maintained U.S. troops are simply acting as advisors in a dangerous region but are not involved in combat. 

"What I think is true is that Iraq and Syria are dangerous places and our men and women in uniform, who are engaged in a mission to offer training, advice and assistance to Iraqi forces that are fighting for their own country, are doing dangerous work. They are taking grave risks to protect our country. We owe them a deep debt of gratitude. Today's incident is a vivid reminder of the risks our service members are taking and some of them, three of them now, have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country," Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday. "But the President has been clear, time and time again, exactly what their mission is. That mission is to support Iraqi forces on the ground who are taking the fight to ISIL on the front lines." 

But new video obtained by The Guardian proves U.S. troops are in fact engaged in heavy combat on the front lines with ISIS, where Keating was killed.

Video footage obtained by the Guardian shows the grueling firefight between US special forces, Kurdish commandoes and Islamic State fighters this week, in which a US Navy Seal was killed.

The footage – filmed on a cellphone during the battle, which lasted more than half a day – reveals the extent to which the US military is once again engaged in intense combat in Iraq.

Provided to the Guardian by the lieutenant of an elite Kurdish peshmerga unit, the video shows a convoy of four by four vehicles coming under fire near Tel Osqof, a Christian town about 30km north of Mosul.

Amid the crackle of gunfire, peshmerga fighters and at least six US troops take cover behind an unarmored pickup truck on an arterial road leading into the town. 

The embed for the video isn't available, but you can click the image below to watch. 

U.S. troops are engaged in combat in Iraq and they're dying. The commander-in-chief and his administration are lying about it for political purposes.

NYT: Obama Misled Public on Iranian ‘Moderation’ to Pass Nuclear Deal

A new piece in The New York Times Magazine reveals confirms that the Obama administration knowingly misled the public to pass the Iranian nuclear deal. Our president knew full well that Iranian leadership had not adopted “moderate” policies, but the notion was a politically useful one.

When Hassan Rouhani was selected as the new president of Iran, he was heralded as a more tolerant kind of leader. TIME magazine referred to him as a “moderate politician” when he was voted runner up for 2015’s Person of the Year. (This is why that title deserves to be in quotes.) 

Yet, as the NYT piece notes, the Obama administration’s negotiations with Iran began well before President Rouhani and his advisors assumed leadership. 

National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes knew the narrative was more important than the truth. The NYT describes how this “storyteller” flowered the facts to gain public support.

The idea that there was a new reality in Iran was politically useful to the Obama administration. By obtaining broad public currency for the thought there was a significant split in the regime, and that the administration was reaching out to moderate-minded Iranians who wanted peaceful relations with their neighbors and with America, Obama was able to evade what might have otherwise been a divisive but clarifying debate over the actual policy choices that his administration was making.

The administration’s presentation of the Iran deal, the Times concludes, was largely “manufactured” for the purpose of selling the deal.

In other words: 

Exactly. President Obama and his advisors ignored the warnings of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and foreign policy experts when pushing through his nuclear agreement. Iran has no interest in playing by the rules, they argued. Since the deal has been signed, we've had plenty of proof. In February, Iranians took 10 American sailors hostage and paraded their capture. Then, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini denounced the U.S. for being too hostile and for trying to halt Iran's missile production, which he argued they use for defense purposes. So much for the peaceful relationship Obama promised the deal would produce.

In case you were surprised by The New York Times exposing the administration for deceiving Americans, their liberal bias came through when they referred to the White House's strategy of passing the nuclear deal as “innovative.”

Romanian Hacker: Yes, I Penetrated Hillary's Emails, And It Was Pretty Easy, Too

The Romanian hacker known as "Guccifer" who was extradited to the United States, apparently in connection to the FBI's criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's national security-compromising email scheme, tells Fox News that he accessed the former Secretary of State's email server on multiple occasions. Clinton's unsecure server contained more than 2,000 classified emails, including at least 22 that contained sensitive information at the level of "top secret" and above:

The infamous Romanian hacker known as “Guccifer,” speaking exclusively with Fox News, claimed he easily – and repeatedly – breached former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal email server in early 2013. "For me, it was easy ... easy for me, for everybody," Marcel Lehel Lazar, who goes by the moniker "Guccifer," told Fox News from a Virginia jail where he is being held. Guccifer’s potential role in the Clinton email investigation was first reported by Fox News last month. The hacker subsequently claimed he was able to access the server – and provided extensive details about how he did it and what he found – over the course of a half-hour jailhouse interview and a series of recorded phone calls with Fox News...

Lazar emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used. In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server. "As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said. With no formal computer training, he did most of his hacking from a small Romanian village. Lazar said he chose to use "proxy servers in Russia," describing them as the best, providing anonymity. Cyber experts who spoke with Fox News said the process Lazar described is plausible.

This experienced hacker says his relatively rudimentary methods were sufficient to penetrate Clinton's emails -- and claims that "up to 10" IP addresses had accessed her system.  Data security experts told Fox that Guccifer's account of how he went about breaking into the unsecure emails of America's top diplomat checks out; this isn't forensic confirmation that he's telling the truth, but it's plausible on a technological level.  It is confirmed, however, that Guccifer did illegally access unofficial Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal's private emails, which is how the public discovered that she withheld official emails from public scrutiny.  That hack exposed two lies: That Clinton had turned over every single work-related message on her server (she hadn't), and that Blumenthal had not acted an adviser to the Secretary of State in any capacity (he had).  Clinton and her team have repeatedly asserted that her emails were not hacked.  If the Romanian's story is confirmed, this will be yet another lie, of which there have been many over the course of this scandal.  They're denying it:

In response to Lazar’s claims, the Clinton campaign issued a statement Wednesday night saying, "There is absolutely no basis to believe the claims made by this criminal from his prison cell. In addition to the fact he offers no proof to support his claims, his descriptions of Secretary Clinton's server are inaccurate. It is unfathomable that he would have gained access to her emails and not leaked them the way he did to his other victims.”

Several former Obama administration officials, including the CIA's deputy director and the Secretary of Defense have stated that it's very likely that hostile foreign powers -- such as Russia, China and Iran -- were able to access Clinton's classified emails.  Clinton was personally and specifically warned by State Department security that her set-up wasn't secure and could put national security secrets at risk.  She acknowledged the memo, then carried on with her risky conduct anyway.

Army Captain Sues Obama: No Authority to Fight ISIS

Capt. Nathan Michael Smith of the U.S. Army sued Barack Obama in district court on Wednesday, on grounds that that he does not have the proper congressional authority to wage war against Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria.

This news comes only one day after a Navy SEAL was killed in combat in Iraq, the third since a U.S.-led coalition launched its campaign against the Islamic State in the summer of 2014.

Smith wants the court to tell Obama that he needs to ask Congress for a new authorization for the use of military force.

Obama has been relying on congressional authorizations given to President George W. Bush for the war on terrorism passed in 2001. Yet, some say the White House's use of 9/11 congressional authorizations is a legal stretch at best.

The White House has claimed it has all the authority it needs to wage the war against ISIS, but says if an authorization tailored specifically for ISIS passed Congress with bipartisan support, it would send a clear signal of unity to U.S. troops and those groups they are fighting. 

Smith is asking the court to find that the war against ISIS violates the War Powers Resolution of 1973 because Congress has not declared war or given the president specific authorization to engage.

The White House has not commented on the lawsuit.  

DOJ To North Carolina: Your Bathroom Bill Violates The Civil Rights Act

Bruce Springsteen, Ringo Starr, and Pearl Jam fired the initial salvos in North Carolina’s transgender bathroom bill drama. Now, the Department of Justice has made a call too—the bill violates the Civil Rights Act (via Associated Press):

A North Carolina law limiting protections to LGBT people violates federal civil rights laws and can't be enforced, the U.S. Justice Department said Wednesday, putting the state on notice that it is in danger of being sued and losing hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding.

The law, which requires transgender people to use public bathrooms that conform to the sex on their birth certificate, has been broadly condemned by gay-rights groups, businesses and entertainers. Some have relocated offices or canceled shows in the state. Several other states have proposed similar laws in recent months limiting protections to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

In a letter to Gov. Pat McCrory, the Justice Department said federal officials view the state law as violating federal Civil Rights Act protections barring workplace discrimination based on sex. Provisions of the state law directed at transgender state employees violate their anti-discrimination protections, the letter said.

"The State is engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against transgender state employees and both you, in your official capacity, and the state are engaging in a pattern or practice of resistance" of their rights, the letter said.

I really don’t see what the problem is with this bill. It’s as if no one on the political left actually read it. It does not strip protections from anyone, businesses can adopt stricter nondiscrimination standards (or honor the ones currently on the books), and they are free to establish single use bathrooms. What about those transgender persons who have undergone a sex change? The law states that you must use the restrooms that correspond with the gender on your birth certificate, which can be changed if someone in the trans community has successfully undergone the procedure.

So, what’s the problem here? No protections are being undercut, businesses and localities are free to accept the current nondiscrimination standards on the books, or adopt new, stricter standards. This appears to be just another political stunt to satisfy the blood thirst with left-wingers on this issue.

Concerning image, it also doesn’t help that a transwoman seems to have lied about being confronted by a custodian at a Transit Center in North Carolina for using the woman’s bathroom. The transgender woman planned on taking a selfie inside. She claims to have been escorted out by security, which was a humiliating experience. The problem is that the security camera footage doesn’t show her being escorted out. When confronted, she pretty much said you just had to be there. That’s not how this works.

The possible loss of federal funds will surely hurt North Carolina’s economy, which has been the fastest growing since 2013. All of this because North Carolina decided to give their residents a sense of privacy in the restroom areas, in order to prevent some male creepers have dressed as women in order to record unsuspecting females in those facilities. Again, no rights were stripped from transgender people; the same protections that existed then, exist now. Birth certificates can be changed. Lastly, it seems progressives are all for bashing North Carolina’s law, and others that make sure people with gender-specific anatomy use the restrooms that are meant for them, until a man not wearing a wig says he’s going to use the ladies room. You see the discomfort in their faces and prolonged silence, as MRCTV’s Dan Joseph demonstrated in this video.

Poll: Dems Believe Climate Change Threatens US 'Well-Being' More than ISIS

Some people scoffed when Bernie Sanders compared climate change to terrorism at a Democratic presidential debate in November, just hours after the devastating terror attacks in Paris. Yet, a new poll from the Pew Research Center reveals that Democrats agree with him. Dangers to the environment, they suggested, deserve more attention than terrorism.

The survey, conducted April 12 to 19 among 2,008 U.S. adults, found that 77 percent of Democrats believe global climate change is a major threat to the “well-being of the United States.” Incredibly, it was one percent more than Democrats who thought the same about ISIS.

As for Republicans, they have a vastly different view about the dangers we face. An overwhelming number, 91 percent, said ISIS was a major threat. Climate change barely landed on their radar - only 26 percent said it was a threat.

Secretary of State John Kerry was one of 175 world leaders to sign a climate deal in Paris this Earth Day, an agreement intended to reduce our carbon footprint by slowing the rise of greenhouse gases, meaning we can expect a slew of environmental regulations in the coming months. Many liberals praised the agreement, but conservative lawmakers like former presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) denounced the climate deal, wondering how the White House can ignore the threat of radical terrorists in their war on greenhouse gases.

When it does come to protecting our national security, most participants in the Pew survey said the Republican Party does a better job in dealing with the terror threat at home than Democrats (46 percent to 37 percent.) 

Let’s see if this translates into the 2016 election results.

RNC: Report Staffers Were Told to Fall in Line Behind Trump or Get Out is 100 Percent False

The New York Times is reporting this morning that staffers at the RNC were told Wednesday to get behind Trump or get out. 

"Some staff members at the Republican National Committee were told Wednesday that if they were unable to get behind the nominee, they should leave by the end of the week," the Times reported.

According to the RNC, that report is not true.

"100% untrue and the New York Times knows," RNC Communications Director Sean Spicer tells Townhall.

Tuesday night, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called for unification of the Republican Party.

Will Senator Ben Sasse Run as a Third Party Conservative Against Trump and Clinton?

Since Texas Senator Ted Cruz exited the race for the White House Tuesday night, effectively conceding the GOP presidential nomination to Donald Trump, conservatives have been reeling and many pieces have been written about the true end of movement, Reagan conservatism. 

The Never Trump movement is standing its ground and Republicans are starting to panic about the consequences for Republicans down ticket with Trump as the nominee.

"How can we vote for a guy who holds none of our principles?" is the question being asked. 

Conservatives are looking for options and are even considering the possibility of a third party run. 

Enter Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, who wrote an open letter to "those who think both leading presidential candidates are dishonest and have little chance of leading America forward" after speaking with constituents. He posted the letter on his Facebook page. He argues the country's majority deserves better. 

"If you are one of those rare souls who genuinely believe Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are honorable people – if they are the role models you want for your kids – then this letter is not for you," Sasse wrote. "Instead, this letter is for the majority of Americans who wonder why the nation that put a man on the moon can’t find a healthy leader who can take us forward together."

He also took to Twitter.

So, will Sasse be the third party candidate? Time will tell.

Fears Of Terrorism And More Gun Control Fuel Another Record Month For Gun Sales

Washington D.C. is projected to open its first gun store and indoor range. Now, we have news that April was the 12th month in a row for record-breaking gun sales. As usual, fears over more gun control and terrorism have fueled Americans’ drive to exercise their Second Amendment rights (via WFB):

This April saw the most gun-related background checks of any April on record, making it the 12th month in a row to achieve a high water mark for gun sales.

The FBI ran 2,145,865 checks through the National Instant Background Check System last month, according to the agency’s records. That represents more than a 400,000 increase over the previous record set in April 2014. Though the numbers represent the best April on record, the month also saw the fewest checks of any month thus far in 2016.

The trend of record-setting months began last May.

[...]

Terror attacks on American soil and abroad may also be driving gun sales.

Gun rights advocates said calls for gun control from politicians such as Hillary Clinton have fueled the surging gun sales and believe the record levels will continue.

The pace of 2016’s gun sales thus far is on track to break 2015’s all-time record for guns sales, where over 23 million FBI background checks were conducted. Since the start of Obama’s presidency, Americans have bought over 100 million guns. As I’ve said before, Obama and the Democrats are the best gun sales team ever. And Hillary is sure to drive up sales with her anti-gun rhetoric on the 2016 trail. In fact, the spike in gun sales has led to the creation of almost 25,000 new jobs in 2015, with a nationwide total of 287,986.

Still, the thought of anti-gun Hillary in the Oval Office, possibly being able to choose two anti-gun jurists for the Supreme Court should scare the hell out of us.

In Reversal, Trump Warms to Idea of Raising Minimum Wage

Donald Trump has flip-flopped yet again, this time on the minimum wage.

The presumptive GOP nominee said in an interview on CNN that he’s open to looking at increasing the federal minimum wage because people need enough money to live on.

"I’m looking at that because I’m very different from most Republicans,” he said. “You have to have something that you can live on, but what I’m really looking to do is get people great jobs so they make much more money than that, so they make more money than the $15. If you start playing around too much with the lower level, the lower level number, you’re not going to be competitive ... I'm open to doing something with it because I don't like that. What I do like is bring our jobs back."

Labor groups have been pushing to increase the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25 to $15.

Trump said during a November GOP debate, however, that he is opposed to raising the minimum wage.

“I hate to say it, but we have to leave it the way it is,” he said at the time.

He even argued during a November interview with MSNBC that it was too high.

"We have to become competitive with the world. Our taxes are too high, our wages are too high, everything is too high,” he said. “What's going to happen is now people are going to start firing people.”

He did say during Wednesday’s interview, however, that lawmakers need to be careful about making drastic changes to the minimum wage.

“If you start playing around too much with that lower level number, you are not going to be competitive,” he explained, before again saying that he’s “open to doing something” with the federal minimum wage.

Biracial Fusion Writer Fears Her Child Might Be White, Prays That Inherited Privilege Won’t Divide Family

Liberals freak out about everything; they’re offended by everything. It seems like on a fairly regular basis it’s an almost quasi-competition to see who can be the most unhinged. Well, look at Fusion’s Xavia Dryden. She’s a half-black and half-white. Her husband is white. She’s pregnant, and freaking out that her child could be white. Oh, it gets worse. She hopes that her possibly white son’s privilege doesn’t divide the family. She also hopes that he recognizes her as his mother (via NewsBusters):

“These are the fears I harbor for the quarter of my son that is black. For the whiteness within him, and for myself, I harbor other fears—fears of erasure that fill me with shame, because while I pray that my son will not suffer the slings and injustices of American Otherness, I also pray that his privilege, should he inherit it, will not divide us.”

“I fear that my son—insulated for nine-odd months in the warm shelter of my womb—will burst into the world and not recognize me. I fear that he will, in the midst of latching his tiny mouth around my nipple, see its darkness against his impossibly pale skin and see not his mother, but a stranger.”

Now, she also says she’s hopeful that none of this will happen. I am too. But let’s be frank—this is pretty crazy. This is what your worried about. You’re not worried about the umbilical cord possibly being wrapped around his neck, a premature birth, drops in blood pressure, or any pregnancy-related medical emergency—you’re worried about whether his white privilege might divide the household. Let’s get a grip and focus on the problems that are real.

Xavia, I hope your son is happy and healthy, and that your family lives a good life. That could become increasingly complicated if you continue to indulge in this self-inflicted misery by adhering to the ethos of political correctness.

Federal Judge Says Clinton Deposition 'May Be Necessary' in Email Case

A federal judge on Wednesday said Hillary Clinton may need to be interviewed as part of a review about her use of a personal email server while secretary of state.

Federal District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan made the observation in an order granting a plan for discovery by Judicial Watch, a Washington-based legal group seeking information about the arrangement that allowed Abedin to do outside work while she was working for Clinton at the State Department.

The question in the lawsuit is a narrow one — did the State Department do everything legally required when it searched for documents, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, about the Abedin employment arrangement?

To get the answer, Sullivan said, "questions surrounding the creation, purpose, and use of the clintonemail.com server must be explored through limited discovery," the legal term for gathering evidence in a civil lawsuit.

State, for its part, has argued that when they learned about the use of the private email account they began a new search for relevant documents among the pages Clinton had turned over. But Sullivan said State voluntarily searching through the thousands of pages already turned over by Clinton “hardly transforms the search into an adequate or reasonable one.”

Thus, Sullivan’s order gives the green light to a discovery plan drafted by both sides to interview multiple State Department officials—past and present, which could include Clinton.

“Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary,” Sullivan said in the order.

“If plaintiff believes Mrs. Clinton’s testimony is required, it will request permission from the Court at the appropriate time,” he added.

The order states that discovery must be wrapped up in two months’ time.  

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said on Wednesday that the order marks “a significant victory for transparency and accountability.”

“Judicial Watch will use this discovery to get all of the facts behind Hillary Clinton’s and the Obama State Department’s thwarting of FOIA so that the public can be sure that all of the emails from her illicit email system are reviewed and released to the public as the law requires,” he said in a statement.

Trump to Apologizing Mexican President: "Get Your Money Ready, Cause You're Going to Pay for the Wall"

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump was not fazed by former Mexican president Vincente Fox's apology which was reported Wednesday afternoon.  

In an interview with Bill O'Reilly, he was asked what he thought about the former president.

"Got any message for the former president of Mexico?" O'Reilly asked.

"Yeah, get your money ready because you're going to pay for the wall," Trump said.  "We'll get it straightened out."

The apology comes after an insulting comment made earlier this year by the former president. Fox said to Trump, "I’m not going to pay for that f***ing wall! He should pay for it. He’s got the money."

Nikki Haley: I Don't Want To Be VP

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (R) has released a statement in response to questions about being the potential running mate to presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump. According to Haley, while she's flattered by the questions, she doesn't want the job.

Haley had endorsed Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz earlier in the primary season, but will support whoever the Republican nominee is in the general.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley says she's "flattered" but "not interested" in being vice president.

Haley received questions again about the issue Wednesday, the day after Donald Trump became the presumptive nominee for president. Her name was mentioned in some media reports as a possible pick for the Trump ticket in the fall.

But Haley deflected those questions, saying, "my plate is full."

She did add that she will "support the Republican nominee for president" out of her "great respect for the will of the people," but did not mention Trump by name in a statement released from her office.

It is unknown when Trump will announce his VP pick, but he's certainly in the vetting process following his victory last night.

Watch: All The Pundits, Politicians, and Consultants Who Said Trump Wasn’t Going To Be The Republican Nominee

Ok—I’ll admit to it: I was wrong. I was wrong that Trump wouldn’t be the Republican nominee. With Cruz and Kasich knocked out of the race, Trump has a clear road to nab 1,237 delegates before the Republican Party heads into their nominating convention in July. So, I’m here to eat my words, but so do a lot of other people. Watch Mitt Romney, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Bill Kristol, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Karl Rove, and others tout that Trump will never be the Republican nominee. It’s time to acknowledge our mistakes, folks. Moreover, the anti-Trump wing of the GOP never took the billionaire seriously. That turned out to be a fatal error.

We shouldn’t dwell too much on what could have been, as the GOP primary race is over. But if there is some truth to the notion that Trump could have been rendered irrelevant if attacked sooner by his Republican opponents, then the anti-Trump wing does bear some responsibility for failing to pull the trigger. And when they did, it was obscenely too late. So, here’s to licking our wounds.