Barr vs. The Secular Left
With everything that happened late last week, Attorney General William Barr's speech at Notre Dame did not get the attention it deserved. It was, however, roundly condemned by the left. Left-wing columnist Paul Krugman attacked Barr's speech as a "witch hunt/pogrom type speech."
What did Barr say to trigger so much outrage? He dared to state the obvious -- that for decades the left has been waging war against religion, and that men and women of faith are having secularism forced on them by the popular culture, and in some cases by the government.
Barr linked the war on faith to an explosion of social ills -- drug use, suicide, the breakdown of the family, declining birth rates. I would add growing corruption in the corporate world and within government.
If a company instituted a new policy that turned out be an utter disaster (think New Coke), it would quickly change course and correct the decision. But nobody on the secular left is doing any soul searching or expressing any regret about the constant attack against religious liberty that is resulting is so much suffering.
No, the left is doubling down. It is becoming even more aggressive, as we saw with last week's call to strip churches of their tax-exempt status unless they preach from the Gospel of Progressivism.
The left is all in on a society where the faithful have zero influence. Never mind that our country, founded on the principle that only a moral people could remain free, is today littered with casualties from the left's war on faith. How much more wreckage in our families, in our communities and in our culture must we endure?
Interestingly, no one on the left is demanding the opportunity to debate the attorney general. No, they simply want to shut him up, and to silence anyone else who might dare defend faith in the public square. A debate on the rise of radical secularism and its impact would be the worst possible outcome for the left.
Schiff's Grand Jury
The fake impeachment process continues. There were depositions taken yesterday and more scheduled this week. But because these proceedings are being managed like a grand jury and in secret, nothing is being released to the public. Yet, somehow the New York Times is still running stories with all kinds of details from the proceedings that are damaging to the president.
Every rule that the American people associate with a fair legal process is being violated.
- The president has not been allowed to confront his accusers.
- His words have been deliberately distorted by sitting members of Congress.
- People who could never serve on a jury because of their bias against the defendant are the ones conducting this proceeding.
- And it's being conducted by the wrong committee -- Adam Schiff's Intelligence Committee is taking the lead rather than Jerry Nadler's Judiciary Committee.
Yesterday, Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican member of the Judiciary Committee, showed up for the deposition of Fiona Hill, a former member of the National Security Council. He was kicked out of the room and not permitted to participate or even observe Hill's questioning.
Here's my recommendation: The next time Schiff's Star Chamber meets, all 17 Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee should show up and dare Schiff's staff to block them all.
By the way, Rep. Rashida Tlaib says that House progressives are now debating about how they can arrest Trump cabinet members. "So they're trying to figure out, no joke, is it the D.C. police that goes and gets them? We don't know. Where do we hold them?" Tlaib said at a recent town hall meeting.
Not surprisingly, left-wing law professors are encouraging congressional liberals to follow through on their threats to arrest the president's defenders.
The modern day version of "Where's Waldo" was solved this morning when Hunter Biden turned up for an interview with ABC News. Biden announced that he is resigning from the board of a Chinese-backed private equity firm. He also vowed not to work for any foreign-owned companies if his father is elected president.
When asked by ABC whether he would have been hired by the Ukrainian natural gas company if his last name wasn't Biden, Hunter conceded, "Probably not."
Biden and his defenders keep insisting that there is no evidence of wrongdoing or illegality. But the acceptance of the job is the wrongdoing. When you get a job at a foreign company simply because your father is vice president, that is corruption.
It's like the Clinton family collecting hundreds of millions of dollars in donations from countries that have business in America while Hillary served as Secretary of State. Yes, the donations to the Clinton Foundation may have been legal, but notice that the foundation isn't doing so well now that Clinton is no longer able to capitalize on her government position.
There's another Democrat debate tonight at 8:00 PM ET on CNN, featuring 12 candidates. Tonight's debate involves a number of firsts:
- It's the first debate appearance for billionaire Tom Steyer.
- It's the first debate since Bernie Sanders' heart attack.
- It's the first debate since Elizabeth Warren's surge in the polls.
- It's the first debate since Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched her fake impeachment proceedings.
- It's the first debate since Hunter Biden's public defense of his business dealings. And I suspect that the first question at tonight's debate will involve Hunter Biden.