Saturday PM ~ TheFrontPageCover

~ Featuring ~
Putting Prayer Back in Schools
Arnold Ahlert  
Trump Lawyer: House Dems Have ‘Opened 
the Door’ to loose lips liar-Biden Subpoenas
by Ben Sellers
{ } ~ Senate leaders from both sides sought to re-calibrate their stances regarding new witnesses after House impeachment managers on Thursday appeared to bolster Republicans’ argument... that former Vice President loose lips liar-Joe Biden and his son Hunter should be subpoenaed. “What I don’t understand is for the last five hours it’s been a lot about loose lips liar-Joe Biden and Burisma. They kind of opened the door,” said Trump co-counsel Jay Sekulow on Thursday, following a lengthy presentation on the Ukraine scandal by Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas. Despite insisting that there was not a “scintilla” of evidence implicating the loose lips liar-Bidens in any wrongdoing, Garcia’s argument left several holes unaddressed. Central to Trump’s likely defense—set to begin Saturday—is the contention that he was justified in asking newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, during a July 25 phone call, to resume the “dormant” Burisma probes. According to Breitbart, Garcia’s very use of the word “dormant” marked a concession from Democrats, who previously had maintained, falsely, that the loose lips liar-Bidens had been exonerated by the Ukrainian investigations. Former Ukrainian prosecutor–general Viktor Shokin has affirmed under sworn affidavit that he was pressured by the Petro Poroshenko administration in Ukraine and the scumbag/liar-nObama administration in the U.S.  to drop the Burisma investigations. Some reports also have indicated that Shokin had recently conducted a series of raids on Burisma-related properties immediately prior to a lobbying campaign by well-connected Burisma “consultants”—Hunter Biden among them—to solicit the U.S. State Department’s support against the investigations. A month later, in April 2016, loose lips liar-Joe Biden visited the country and threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee if Shokin wasn’t fired. He admitted to the quid-pro-quo extortion in a 2018 panel discussion with the Council on Foreign Relations...
ICE Chief Threatens Sanctuary City Officials with 
Jail Time if They Don't Comply with Subpoenas
By Andrew J. Sciascia 
{ } ~ Denver and New York City officials are on thin ice with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement this week as a result of their widely publicized unwillingness to comply with federal immigration law... According to the  Washington Examiner, acting ICE Director Matt Albence told reporters Thursday in Washington that local officials who refuse to cooperate, releasing criminal illegal immigrants back into the population rather than handing them or their personal information over to the agency, should be prepared to “show up to court with a toothbrush.” The agency is now willing to use its full authority under the U.S. legal code to prevent so-called “sanctuary city” policies from hindering immigration enforcement, even if that means having the officials responsible for those policies jailed. “We expect them to comply” with subpoenas, Albence said. “If they don’t comply, we’ll be working with the Department of Justice to go to district court to force them to comply with the requirements.” “The individuals that fail to comply can be held in contempt,” Albence continued. “They can show up to court with a toothbrush because they might not be going home that night. Because they could be jailed for failure to comply with a lawful order from a judge.” “That’s the route we’re going,” the ICE chief added. Going to court, however, is not ICE’s preferred route. Instead, Albence told reporters, it is a “last resort.” “Hopefully, when some of these other jurisdictions that don’t want to cooperate see that we’re taking this seriously, maybe they’ll come around and try to help us help their own communities,” he said. Under President Donald Trump, the agency has repeatedly sought cooperation with sanctuary cities, counties and states, reaching out when illegal immigrants are arrested for crimes and requesting that the alleged perpetrators be held until they can be  transferred into ICE custody for federal processing. This decades-old process has been ignored and undermined nationwide. In locations that endorse such policies, compliance with ICE is no longer the norm. And there have been numerous cases of alleged criminal immigrants being released back into the general public following arraignment or a decision not to prosecute, as is typical in many criminal cases involving U.S. citizens...
Does The Corruption In Lee County Florida 
Go Straight To The Top In The State?
by Tim Brown
{ } ~ The Florida Department of Law Enforcement has once again failed to hold Lee County Sheriff Carmine Marceno accountable not only to their own standards of ethics, but the standard of the law... That’s not all. An elected representative, Spencer Roach, has targeted a citizen because that citizen was exposing him. Florida resident and founder of the Facebook group People Of SWFL Randy Scott, who is going to serve a lawsuit against Roach for violating Scott’s free speech and then acting as though he were the victim, joins me in this episode to talk about what is going on in Southwest Florida.  
The future of AI in warfare
and counterterrorism
{ } ~ It was 1983 and the world almost ended. Not since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 had the US and the Soviet Union come so close to all-out global nuclear war... Only one officer, Russian Col. Stanislav Petrov, who decided to exercise his human judgment and overrule the sensors of the early warning center he commanded – which was warning that a US nuclear strike on the USSR was in progress – saved the world from an apocalyptic ending. Fast-forward 37 years into 2020 and the same situation may soon involve artificial intelligence technology, which moves so fast that no Petrov or anyone else would be able to intervene in time to stop a nuclear war based on a false alarm or computer error. Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping every area of our lives, but two areas where its impact has massive potential paradoxical upsides and downsides are warfare and counterterrorism. In fairness, the above scenario is the worst-case potential usage of AI; it has not happened yet, and there are a variety of extremely positive potential uses of AI in warfare and in counterterrorism. IN A recent Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya conference on AI and warfare, Dr. Daphné Richemond-Barak discussed AI’s ability to increase conventional battle speed and accuracy. While this means that armies could be more lethal against adversaries, it also means they could be less likely to make mistakes, such as hitting civilian targets. Richemond-Barak also discussed how AI can be used to assign specific military units more appropriately to specific duties in real time to avoid waste and mismatches which are routine in the fog of war. All of this is based on the idea that AI capabilities collect far more intelligence, accurately, in real time, and get it much faster to decision-makers. Another issue discussed by Richemond-Barak was the possibility of AI-enhanced soldiers. At least some soldiers are expected in the future to be given suits and gear that can help them withstand blood loss, extreme fatigue and extreme temperatures. AI in war can also be used to help civilians directly...
Designated Terror Group CAIR Launches 
2020 “Muslims Vote” Campaign In US –
 Look At Their Questionnaire
by Tim Brown
{ } ~ Designated Islamic terror group Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has announced that it is launching its 2020 “Muslims Vote” campaign that seeks to empower antichrist  Muslims in America... by “increasing their political capacity and presence in the 2020 General Election.” So, how are they kicking things off? First of all, they have provided a “Sample Questions for Candidates and Government Officials” toolkit. Notice, that they do not correctly refer to our representatives as representatives nor senators nor a president, but “government officials.” Keep that in mind because not only does CAIR represent antichrist Islam, but they also represent Islamic Sharia as well. Does the questionaire ask any relevant constitutional stances of these people who are asking for their vote?  Not really. The final few questions beginning at the Trust Act, except for those about voter discrimination, which is not discrimination at all, and the right to boycott countries if one desires to do so are the only things I see in there that appear to be a serious consideration of unconstitutionality.  However, the First Amendment, contrary to popular opinion, was never designed to protect the public practice of Islam in the US...  
Putting Prayer Back in Schools
Arnold Ahlert:  On January 15, known as National Religious Freedom Day, President Donald Trump  announced that his administration would update federal guidance on prayer in public schools. “On Religious Freedom Day, we honor the foundational link between freedom and faith in our country and reaffirm our commitment to safeguarding the religious liberty of all Americans,” he stated.

Such reaffirmation is a welcome sign. Three Supreme Court decisions — Engel v. Vitale (1962), Murray v. Curlett (1963), and Abington Township School District v. Schempp (1963) — fundamentally changed the way the First Amendment’s religious protections had been previously understood. In short, a Supreme Court that leaned decidedly left during the 1960s appeared more determined to endorse freedom from religion than freedom of religion.

In Engel, the Court ruled 6-1 that a prayer written by New York state’s Board of Regents and said before classes each day was “wholly inconsistent with the Establishment Clause,” according to Justice Hugo Black writing for the majority.

In Abington Township, which also involved the Murray  ruling, the Court determined 8–1 that school-sponsored Bible reading in public schools was also unconstitutional. “The reading of the verses, even without comment, possesses a devotional and religious character and constitutes in effect a religious observance,” the Court  insisted. Moreover, the Court also asserted the fact that “some pupils, or theoretically all pupils, might be excused from attendance at the exercises does not mitigate the obligatory nature of the ceremony.”

That the Board of Regents prayer was voluntary and that a religious observance with attendance of zero could still be construed as obligatory is indicative of a Court likely influenced by the tenor of the times. The American Left still reveres the social revolution of the ‘60s, and while there were welcome advances in personal freedom and proper challenges to the racial status quo, the rebellion against traditional views of sex and the wholesale advancement of Secular Humanism gave us a society in which sex became exponentially more hedonistic, morality became “relative,” and the societal bedrocks of marriage and the nuclear family began unraveling.

Ironically, in Torcaso v. Watkins, SCOTUS referred to Secular Humanism as a religion “which [does] not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God.” Justice Black stated, “We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person 'to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.’ Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against nonbelievers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.”

What about the other way around? Justice Potter Stewart, the lone dissenting vote in Abington Township, had a prescient take on exactly that. He asserted that the removal of prayer from schools “led not to true neutrality with respect to religion, but to the establishment of a religion of secularism.”

Was Stewart right? Over the ensuing decades, several states have passed laws either permanently enjoining parental notification, no law at all, or judicial bypass of parents with regard to a minor getting an abortion. If there is another surgical procedure that can be administered to a child absent parent notification, much less permission, one is hard-pressed to know what it is.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In American schools today, a fear-based global-warming agenda is  disseminated with impunity, and math is taught from a “social justice” perspective. A radical leftist teacher-training program known as “Deep Equity” addresses the “dynamics of privilege and power [that] must be confronted to impact real change,” and indoctrination  exemplified by a “privilege scorecard” given to students at at Saratoga Springs High School has become routine. Furthermore, several schools teach the transgender agenda to children beginning in kindergarten, and many of the states in which that agenda is disseminated have no opt-out clause.

Thus, in stark contrast to the Supreme Court’s take on religion in schools, nothing is voluntary, the attendance will never be zero, and the ongoing dissemination of Secular Humanism, a.k.a. progressive ideology, in America’s classrooms leaves little doubt that Stewart was right on the money.

The Trump administration has released updated guidance on religious prayer in public elementary and secondary schools that will reaffirm the right that students are allowed to pray alone or in groups. Nine federal agencies, including the Justice Department, Health and Human Services, and the Department Education, will be involved in making the changes.

The original guidance on school prayer was issued in 2003. And while this order is similar, it establishes a state-mandated filing process for complaints against local schools and school districts. It requires those states to provide the federal government with an annual list of local public schools and districts with “a policy that prevents, or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer.” States must also report local schools that fail to certify they don’t have unconstitutional prayer policies.

Trump pulled no punches with regard to the motivation behind the change. “You have things happening today that 10 or 15 years ago would have been unthinkable,” he stated in response to a question about his views on the culture wars. “Taking the word God down, taking the word Christmas out. I think we’ve turned that one around very good. I think we’ve turned both of them around very good.”

The order itself is equally straightforward. It explains that “teachers and other public school officials, acting in their official capacities, may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities,” while making it clear that “students and teachers do not ‘shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Unsurprisingly, there was blowback from the usual precincts. “These rules undermine the civil rights and religious freedom of millions of our most vulnerable Americans who rely on social services — with particularly dire consequences for LGBTQ people and religious minorities,” said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Nonsense. What they do is provide students with something leftists fear the most: a counter-argument that cannot be silenced by judicial fiat. If leftists were truly convinced they own the franchise on “enlightened” thinking, they would welcome a robust debate between themselves and people of faith.

That they don’t speaks volumes.

Moreover, they have more to worry about. SCOTUS will soon rule on a case determining whether state laws excluding religious organizations from government funding available to others is constitutional. If not, school choice would also include funding for religious schools that many American prefer, especially when the alternative choice is a union-centric public school system with a 50-year track record of failure.

“If we win this case, it will be the U.S. Supreme Court once again saying that school choice is fully constitutional and it’s a good thing and it’s something parents should have,” said Erica Smith, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs.

In an age where the totally bankrupt assertion of “my truth” resonates, it’s not a good thing — it’s a great thing.   ~The Patriot Post  

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center