Walkout fallout: School districts hit with backlash over political activism

The gun control movement notched a public relations coup with last week’s massive school walkouts, but now school districts that pitched in to ensure the protest’s success are stuck with the rising political and legal fallout. A week after the March 14 walkout, school officials are grappling with complaints from parents outraged by the specter of their kids engaged in political protesting on school time, as well as reports of criminal mischief committed by teens who treated the event as a get-out-of-class-free card. What’s more, the students get to do it all again next month. A substantially identical event, also called the National School Walkout, is scheduled for April 20, the 19th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre. Chris Cleveland, chairman of the Chicago Republican Party, said he worried that the walkouts, aimed at pushing for tougher gun restrictions in the wake of the deadly Parkland shooting, have provided the template for advocacy groups eager to co-opt the public schools for progressive activism. “If they get away with this, they’ll be free to engage in any kind of political activity in the schools that they wish,” said Mr. Cleveland, who has a third-grader in the Chicago Public Schools. The party is moving to avert that scenario by preparing a lawsuit against the school system, arguing that the district violated state and federal law as well as its own policies by organizing a political demonstration — and pressuring students to attend — on the taxpayers’ dime. The district has yet to comment, but it has other problems. About 60 students from Simeon Career Academy trashed a Walmart “while they were supposed to be protesting guns,” an incident under investigation by police, according to Fox32 in Chicago. The school system issued a statement saying it was reviewing the incident, but Mr. Cleveland said he has yet to receive a response to a letter from the party’s attorney demanding “that they comply with the law.” “There will always be a few kids who don’t behave,” said Mr. Cleveland. “I’m a lot more concerned about the behavior of the adults.” He is not alone. Connecticut lawyer Deborah G. Stevenson said she has fielded calls from parents and others across the nation, including California, Illinois, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, after reports about her clash with the New Milford Public Schools. She urged the district last week on behalf of several parents to cancel the high school walkout, arguing that the schools had “condoned, facilitated, and supported an event that clearly advocates for students to be part of a partisan political ‘movement,’” but the district refused. Ms. Stevenson said her clients plan to pursue further action before the April 20 walkout. “Parents are very, very upset about this entire situation,” said Ms. Stevenson. “The ones that have contacted us are trying to determine what the proper legal steps would be here. Everybody’s trying to make that determination of how and when and where to take the next step.”

We don’t blame these parents one bit!  For more, click on the text above.

Arnold Schwarzenegger Promotes Gas Guzzling Helicopter Ride over L.A. While Suing Oil Companies for ‘Murder’

Actor and environmental activist Arnold Schwarzenegger is gassing up the chopper for a gas-burning helicopter joy ride for some lucky contestant, even after he said that he would sue oil companies for killing people with fossil fuels. “I don’t think there’s any difference: If you walk into a room and you know you’re going to kill someone, it’s first-degree murder; I think it’s the same thing with the oil companies,” Schwarzenegger said, announcing his upcoming lawsuit at the South By Southwest tech conference. “Every gas station on it, every car should have a warning label on it, every product that has fossil fuels should have a warning label on it.” But that will not stop the former California governor from burning off gallons of fuel in a helicopter for charity. Schwarzenegger is offering a “helicopter ride over Los Angeles” as part of a fundraiser, from LA-based non-profit After-School All-Stars, which includes lunch and cigars with the Terminator star turned activist. LAST CHANCE to get to the choppa! Join me for a helicopter ride, lunch at my favorite spot and I’ll even give you a little life advice,” Schwarzenegger wrote on Facebook, adding that “Flights and hotel are on me, so enter NOW!” “Join Arnold for lunch and cigars, where you can pick his brain about his ridiculously awesome journey from Mr. Olympia to movie star to Governor of California and beyond,” reads the After-School All-Stars sweepstakes page. “And after you feel sufficiently motivated to be your best self, you’ll really start soaring. Because you’ll join Arnold for a helicopter ride over Los Angeles! If you don’t have him say, ‘Get to the choppa,’ then that’s a real missed opportunity. Flights and hotel included.” Again, just a week ago, the Hollywood star said, “[I]t’s absolutely irresponsible to know that your product is killing people and not have a warning label on it, like tobacco.”

This is such brazen hypocrisy.  Someone oughtta ask Arnold if he’s traded in his Hummer for a Prius.  Typical HollyWEIRD self-righteous, sanctimonious, liberal elite hypocrisy.  Unreal..

Trump cutting Obama-era refugee admissions 77%

The Trump administration, which has proposed a massive 60 percent reduction in refugee admissions from the Obama-era high of 110,000, is expected to cut that number even deeper. according to preliminary estimates. Experts evaluating the administration’s latest refugee totals now predict a slash of over 77 percent, to 25,000 refugees a year. “The national quota was lowered drastically by the Trump administration from 2018. His quota is, like, 45,000. Likely by the end of the year the number will be substantially less than even that,” according to Don Barnett, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies and widely published on refugee resettlement and asylum issues. At a Tuesday conference, he added that Trump could “zero out” refugees, because it is up to the president to set levels. Based on current refugee statistics, he said that the administration will likely allow in far less than the proposed ceiling of 45,000. “I personally think it will come in at half that. I think it will come in at 25,000 or so,” said Barnett. “It’s not going to come anywhere near 45,000,” he added. Obama averaged 75,000 refugee admissions every year, he said. Refugees have become controversial around the nation as more have poured in. State and local communities have balked at the costs, about $3,000 each, and the right they have to welfare and medical help. In Minnesota, it’s become an election issue. At the Tuesday conference hosted by the Center for Immigration Studies, Jeff Johnson, a St. Cloud, Minn., city councilman said local taxpayers are outraged at the number of refugees pouring in. “This could be the number one issue” in the state and local elections this year, he said.

That would hardly be a surprise..  Under Obama’s foolish policies, we have become overrun by largely unvetted refugees from predominantly Muslim countries that our infrastructure simply cannot accommodate.  So, kudos to President Trump for cutting back on that nonsense.

Opinion: Andrew McCabe’s firing was justified and the right thing to do

After reading a detailed and damning recommendation by the Justice Department’s non-partisan inspector general that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe be immediately fired for integrity reasons, Attorney General Jeff Sessions followed the recommendation Friday night. McCabe’s firing was legally and morally appropriate and was necessary. Sessions said in a statement: “Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.” McCabe understandably feels aggrieved – if he had not been fired he would have qualified for full lifetime pension benefits Sunday. Perhaps he is even sorry for his missteps. Politics aside, here is why that decision was right, why McCabe will not win his full pension back on appeal, and why his indignant, self-serving and political reaction is dead wrong. McCabe is an attorney who joined the FBI in 1996. At that time, he took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” vowed to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same,” and to “well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office,” ending “so help me God.” When he rose to deputy director of the FBI, under then-Director James Comey, McCabe took the oath again. He briefly served as acting director of the bureau after Comey was fired and before Chris Wray became director. As deputy director and acting director, McCabe failed miserably. According to the inspector general, congressional investigators and Attorney General Sessions, McCabe effectively breached his oath. McCabe became deputy director of the FBI in February 2016. He seemed destined for greatness, and perhaps inclined toward the Clintons. An Obama appointee, he had promising political ties and nowhere to go but up. McCabe’s wife, Jill, was politically disposed, a vocal Democrat who ran unsuccessfully for a Virginia state Senate seat just three months before her husband became FBI deputy director. She raised $1.6 million for her race – twice her opponent’s war chest – including $780,000 that came from political sources, some closely tied to the Clintons. Then came the series of integrity missteps by Andrew McCabe, which would likely have gone undiscovered, or perhaps simply covered up, had Hillary Clinton been elected president in 2016. First, McCabe did not recuse himself from the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server. Call that bad judgement, but he may have wanted to guard the process, protecting the likely future president, who might have rewarded him once in the Oval Office. The obvious conflict of interest, and blatant perception of one, was simply ignored, with McCabe claiming he did not oversee public corruption cases in Virginia nor undertake his role in the investigating the Clinton emails until his wife’s campaign was finished. Then, with McCabe handling the Clinton investigation, a pall of silence fell during the critical 2016 election year over the whole process. One can, to a degree and with a straight face, claim that standard and ongoing investigations deserve silence. But the Clinton email investigation was not standard, and the internal process that intimately involving McCabe and Comey was also not standard. Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch privately and shockingly talked with the investigation target’s husband, former President Clinton, and then told Comey not to publicly call this investigation an investigation, but only a “matter.” McCabe played along. Then in in September 2016 a bombshell was discovered. On the computer of top Clinton aide Human Abedin’s husband – disgraced former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, under investigation for other illegal activity – investigators found hundreds of thousands of emails tied to Hillary Clinton. The emails were voluminous and damning. What did McCabe do? He did not tell tell his boss, James Comey. This was a hot a potato coming two months before the presidential election, and McCabe dropped it. In what might make a good opening paragraph for Hillary Clinton’s next book, “What Happened, Version II,” McCabe made a fatal mistake, assuming his goal was to protect Hillary Clinton. Getting the critical information on the Clinton emails in September 2016, McCabe did not reveal it to FBI Director Comey until Oct. 27, forcing Comey on national television to raise questions about Clinton’s integrity days before the general election. Ironies are seldom so clean, and violations of duty seldom so clear. In an apparent effort to shield a previous and potentially future political patron, McCabe badly bobbled the ball, actually adding to her peril. But that is not the main point. The main point is – as the inspector general congressional investigators and others have noted – McCabe shaded the truth repeatedly.

Indeed..  For more of this outstanding op/ed by former naval intelligence officer and assistant secretary of state Robert Charles, click on the text above.

St. Catherine’s University Cancels Conference Because Too Many Speakers Were White

St. Catherine’s University in St. Paul, Minnesota, canceled a leadership conference last fall because too many of the scheduled speakers were white. According to a report from the Star Tribune, details are emerging on why St. Catherine’s University canceled a leadership conference that was scheduled to take place last fall. The university published a statement last week acknowledging that the conference was canceled because the speaker list was not sufficiently diverse. “We did not feel the list [of speakers] adequately represented the St. Kate’s community or fulfilled the objective of lifting up the voices of all women,” the statement read. “While this was a tough decision, we believe it was an important one.” St. Catherine’s President, Becky Roloff, acknowledged that the decision was made due to the lack of diversity in an email that was sent to the campus community back in December. “We did not set a goal to secure a diverse panel of presenters,” Roloff wrote. “Because of this, the racial and ethnic diversity of women in leadership positions was not reflected in the conference …” She did not state what the racial breakdown was, but she expressed her “sincere apology for injuries caused.” Karen Pavlicin-Fragnito, a Minnesota area author and publisher, said that she was disappointed that the event was canceled for diversity reasons. “I was disappointed that it was canceled because I was excited to be a part of it,” she said. “When I submit something to a conference as a speaker, I have the understanding that they’re going to choose me on what I’m going to present and the value of that to their audience. I’m not expecting that they’re going to choose me on the basis of the color of my skin.” Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) attorney Ari Cohn said that the solution to the event’s diversity issues should have been to add speakers. “Event organizers are free to shape their events in the way they deem fit,” Cohn said. “However, if diversity is the issue, the more proper solution would seem to be to add to the event rather than cancel it entirely, which prevents any voice from being heard.” John Hinderaker, president of the Minneapolis-based Center of the American Experiment, blasted St. Catherine’s for the decision, specifically pointing out that canceling the event hurts the students that the event was designed to help. “It’s really almost comical that they’re forced to admit that they did this strictly on the basis of merit and they characterize this as a mistake,” Hinderaker said. The losers, he notes, are the very people they set out to help. “Instead of providing the benefit to the [participants] that they intended to provide, they’d rather do nothing apparently,” he added. “It’s really kind of a classic story of how everything gets sacrificed in the name of diversity.”

…and political correctness.  This is just another example of how bending over and grabbing our collective ankles in the name of diversity and political correctness is crushing our country.  Unreal..

Russiagate Collusion Theory Takes Blow as House Intelligence Committee Probe Ends

The “Russiagate” collusion theory took a huge blow this week, as the House Intelligence Committee’s probe into Russia meddling came to an end. While the special counsel probe continues, the House Intelligence Committee’s conclusion of “no collusion” underscored the lack of any evidence to date of any such activities. “The collusion conspiracy theory is breaking down. There is no evidence of collusion at this point after year-plus investigations in the House and Senate. [Rep. Adam Schiff] claimed a year ago he had more than circumstantial evidence of collusion, but he still can’t produce it,” said a source involved in Congress’s Russia investigations. “And we’ve seen nothing on collusion from [special counsel Robert] Mueller. In addition, everyone now knows the Steele dossier is a fraud, and that the FBI was using it anyway. So the only thing sustaining the collusion narrative now is the media’s complicity in it.” Democrats on the committee complained they just were not allowed to dig deep enough — after more than a year of investigating and 73 witness interviews. They have vowed to keep investigating, although without the power to compel witnesses or documents, it is hard to imagine they will make much progress. And they continue to argue that disparate incidents amounted to collusion — a London professor telling Trump volunteer campaign aide George Papadopoulos that the Russians had thousands of emails that were embarrassing to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Jr. showing receptivity by accepting a meeting with a Russian lawyer who purportedly had dirt on Clinton. But the lead Republican on the House Intelligence Committee’s Russia probe, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX), dismissed that idea, telling reporters after the committee’s conclusion was announced: ” Only Tom Clancy or Vince Flynn or someone else like that could take this series of inadvertent contacts with each other, or meetings, whatever, and weave that into some sort of a fictional page-turner spy thriller. But we’re not dealing with fiction, we’re dealing with facts. And we found no evidence of any collusion, of anything that people were actually doing, other than taking a meeting they shouldn’t have taken or inadvertently being in the same building.” Perhaps the biggest blow to Democrats is the loss of the probe as a political vehicle ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. The House Intelligence Committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), had become a cable news fixture talking about Russia collusion and suspected leaker to CNN about the probe. The RNC tracked Schiff’s TV interviews in the last 13 months about the probe at 227. “It’s not shocking that the person most upset by the outcome had used the investigation to launch his TV career,” Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Ahrens told the Washington Examiner. Schiff also tried to fundraise off of the Russia probe…

Opinion: Hillary Clinton, our leading feminist icon, still doesn’t believe women can think for themselves

Woe are the Democrats. For generations now, they’ve been telling the American people that only they, and their cohort of liberals and leftists, understand and truly value women. Because of their special understanding of women, only they can be trusted to do what’s right politically for them, they tell us. Then came Hillary Clinton pulling the curtain back on that dangerously false narrative. At a speech in Mumbai, India, the twice-failed presidential candidate blamed her loss on mindless women who do as their husbands tell them. Again contemplating why she lost the 2016 presidential race, Mrs. Clinton blamed certain women for not thinking for themselves. “We don’t do well with married, white women,” she said, because of “ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should,” Mrs. Clinton told the audience. It’s obvious from the last election that the Democrats also didn’t do well with married, white men. Yet, Mrs. Clinton doesn’t argue that it was Republican women bullying and pressuring their husbands into voting a certain way. In other words, the leading liberal feminist in the country is pushing the ironic narrative that if you’re a woman who does not conform to the liberal narrative, you have no mind of your own and are controlled by the men in your life. Yet it’s conservatives who are sexist and reliant on perpetuating gender stereotypes. Got it. Having come from the left, one of the most constant and appalling demonstrations of sexism in the feminist movement was the degrading and dehumanizing of women with whom liberal feminists disagreed. One of the most famous public illustrations of this is brought to us by Gloria Steinem, an icon of the modern feminist movement. In 1993, Ms. Steinem declared that then-Senate candidate from Texas Kay Bailey Hutchison was “a female impersonator … someone who looks like us but thinks like them,” reported the Orange County Register at the time. Publicly declared from on high by the Supreme Feminist for All Women: You are not a woman at all if you don’t think like us. When this columnist was within the feminist establishment in the 1990s, Ms. Steinem’s remarks reflected an attitude that was standard operating procedure. Heck, maybe Hillary thought she was doing women who don’t fall in line a favor by accusing them of simply being dumb pawns, instead of stripping them of their womanhood entirely. One of the biggest threats to the liberal “feminist” movement was for women to see there was a different way to think about the issues, better ways to think about policy and politics. This is why women who do not conform remain such a threat to the liberal status quo. Knowing what Mrs. Clinton exposes about the inherent sexism on the left, even her allies expressed dismay at the comments. FoxNews.com reported, “Clinton’s former 2008 presidential campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle didn’t defend her remarks. ‘Look this was bad. I can’t sugarcoat it,’ Solis Doyle said on HLN this week. ‘She was wrong and clearly it’s not helpful to Democrats going into the midterms and certainly not going into 2020.’ “ “Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who is up for re-election, come the midterms in November, in a state Trump won by 19 points, [noted], ‘Those are kind of fighting words for me, because I’m partial to Missouri voters,’ McCaskill told The Washington Post. ‘I think they were expressing their frustration with the status quo,’ ” Fox News reported. The Washington Examiner noted, “What if the notion that women’s votes somehow belong to Democrats by default was always the product of leftist self-delusion and nothing more? What if these women voted for Trump of their own accord, in part because like many of the people who actually did vote for her, they were turned off by Clinton’s obvious and easily detectable insincerity and inauthenticity?” And Liz Peek, a writer and frequent guest on Fox Business and Fox News tweeted: “Hillary is supposed to be supportive of women but secretly she thinks they are cowed by husbands & bosses — shame on her. She can’t imagine women didn’t support her — that’s the biggest sign they actually think for themselves.” Hillary Clinton is turning out to be a touchstone for our time, just not in the way she expected. She reminds us almost every day that the left exercises a sexism that this nation has rejected. It also reminds us of the importance of a genuine advocacy for women in this country that instead of punishing women for thinking for themselves, we value and elevate all women, making sure they’re free to make choices that best suit them.

Well said, Tammy!  Author Tammy Bruce is a radio talk show host and a New York Times best-selling author…and calls it exactly right here.  Hillary is a nauseating, self-righteous, entitlement-minded, whiny hypocrite.  And now, even her former supporters are running away from her because they realize just how toxic Hillary’s big mouth is.  Of course we hope she continues to keep talking.  She’s the gift that keeps on giving.    🙂