Democratic Senator Tries To Corner
Neil Gorsuch On Dark Money Interests, Fails Miserably (And The NYT Wasn't Much
Matt Vespa, March 23, 2017
Senate Democrats are trying to grill Supreme
Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch, but it’s been a rather embarrassing spectacle.
they’ve got, the might as well call it a night
and accept reality: Gorsuch will be confirmed. But they won’t do that because
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) needs to know if Gorsuch knows the dynamics of
the dark and surreptitious ad campaign being waged in support of his nomination.
News bulletin, Senator: organizations can do this—and it’s not like it’s a
secret that conservatives like Gorsuch and want him on the Court.
do you know about it?” asked Whitehouse. Gorsuch said that all he knows is what
he’s read in the news. It’s the typical dark money in politics narrative that
liberals are obsessed with, which circles us back to the Citizens United
decision; a ruling that the Left is fighting to overturn. The Supreme Court
nominee also said that both sides are spending money in this effort. Whitehouse
Whitehouse tried to used dark money to attack
Gorsuch, which is quite interesting since
worked with left wing groups
who do pretty much what the Right does
concerning their issues. And yes, there are lefty groups, like
for the American Way,
who are working to derail Gorsuch’s nomination.
The New York Times
tried to smear Gorsuch on dark money, saying
the jurist had ties to a billionaire energy executive Philip F. Anschutz.
Gorsuch acted as a lawyer for Anschutz in a series of lawsuits while acting as a
private attorney. In 2006, Anschutz wrote a letter to then-President Bush
recommending him for a federal judgeship. Gasp! Collusion! Well, like Alex
Griswold of the Washington Free Beacon wrote, Gorsuch was never a direct
employee of Anschutz, but Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) was the managing director
of Anschutz Investment Co. for years. So, this whole line of attack is dotted
with hypocrisy and friendly fire (via
Washington Free Beacon):
The New York Times published a
front-page story Wednesday on President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Neil Gorsuch and his ties to a "secretive billionaire," despite never
devoting equal coverage on a Democratic senator who had even more direct
ties to the same tycoon.
The billionaire is Philip F.
Anschutz, who built an empire out of an oil and gas firm. Anschutz and
Gorsuch both share Colorado as a home state, and Gorsuch, whose father was a
well-known Colorado Republican, was "drawn into [Anschutz's] orbit,"
according to the Times.
The Times reports that Gorsuch
represented Anschutz in several federal court cases while working for a
private law firm in Washington, D.C. starting in 2004. In 2006, Anschutz
sent a letter to the Bush administration recommending Gorsuch–who was then
in the Justice Department–for an open federal judgeship. Gorsuch also
co-owns a log cabin retreat with two Anschutz executives.
But Gorsuch was never a direct
employee of Anschutz or a key executive in his empire, unlike Democratic
Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet. From 1997 to 2003, Bennet served as managing
director of Anschutz Investment Co.
Freeing Religion from Government’s
Robert Knight, March, 23, 2017
On Feb. 2, at
the National Prayer Breakfast, President Trump said, “My administration will do
everything in its power to defend and protect religious liberty.”
Right now, he has a golden opportunity.
He can sign an executive order that has been on his desk since early February
that would halt some of the ongoing attacks on religious conscience all over the
The directive, reportedly called
“Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom,” would
protect religious organizations’ right to their mission and beliefs when
contracting with government, provide conscience protection from the Obamacare
abortifacient and contraceptive mandate, and protect from penalties or coercion
anyone who believes marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
You’ve probably heard about the Christian
bakers, photographers, florists and wedding planners who have been fined heavily
or put out of business for declining to service same-sex ceremonies. And the
Little Sisters of the Poor, who have been threatened with ruin for declining to
pay for abortions.
But did you hear about the law signed on
September 30th by California Gov. Jerry Brown that singles out religious
colleges? They have to jump through hoops that other institutions are spared,
simply because their beliefs are suspect in the eyes of the government.
An earlier draft would have victimized
mostly minority students by barring Cal Grants to schools that failed to fly the
flag of sexual anarchy. Public outrage killed this provision, but the law is
still abhorrent – and unconstitutional.
1146 puts government in charge of religion, judging what is sin, love, moral,
biblical, or proper,” says Randy Thomasson, president of SaveCalifornia.com, a
pro-religious liberty group. “[It] begins the process of government taking over
religion, a very dangerous precedent in a free society.”
Government red tape is already a
nightmare for businesses and schools, but SB 1146 puts the religious-based
institutions in the sixth circle of the bureaucrats’ version of Dante’s Inferno.
That’s the place reserved for heretics, and, make no mistake, that’s how
progressives in California see Bible-believing Christians.
The law’s anti-privacy provisions “would
force California’s religiously-affiliated colleges and universities to report
four times a year on every expulsion and suspension of a student, and the
reasons for the discipline,” according to the Becket Fund.
The law also requires “religious colleges
to use government-dictated language to communicate their religious beliefs to
their students, faculty, and communities,” Becket warns.
If that sounds more like North Korea than
sunny California, it should. This is communist in spirit and substance.
In Madison, Wis., a city ordinance forces
creative professionals to promote beliefs with which they disagree or face
penalties. On March 7, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) sued the city on behalf
of photographer/blogger Amy Lynn, who says she conducts her business only in
ways that glorify God. This means she thinks that marriage is the union of the
two sexes and that abortions take human lives, and she reflects this in her blog
posts and her provision of client services.
ADF attorneys note that the law is so
broad and absurd that a Madison-based speechwriter who opposes President Trump
could be punished for refusing to write a speech for him.
In Phoenix, Joanna Duka and Breanna
Koski, who met at a Bible study, decided in January 2015 to open Brush & Nib
Studio, creating hand-drawn art for weddings and businesses. Six months later,
the Supreme Court legalized same-sex “marriage,” unleashing an avalanche of
legal tools to crush Christian businesses under the heel of “tolerance.”
A Phoenix ordinance could require Brush &
Nib to create invitations and other art for same-sex ceremonies. The law forbids
them from explaining to customers and the public why they choose not to create
art that violates their beliefs. If charged, for every day they defy the law,
they’d be fined $2,500 and face six months in jail.
In March 2015, the Wyoming Commission on
Judicial Conduct and Ethics accused Ruth Neely, a municipal judge and part-time
circuit court magistrate, of judicial misconduct and recommended sacking her
from both positions. Her crime? She told a reporter that she believes in
traditional marriage and so she could not preside over same-sex ceremonies.
As the ADF, which represents her, points
out, “Judge Neely has never been asked to solemnize a same-sex marriage, no law
requires magistrates to serve as a celebrant for any marriage, magistrates may
decline to perform weddings for a host of secular reasons, and Judge Neely has
an unblemished record of integrity, impartiality, and scrupulous compliance with
the law in her more than 21 years of judicial service.”
Meanwhile, Liberty Counsel, a Christian
civil liberties group, has represented Christian “Good News Clubs” at public
schools and has defended public officials against the ACLU’s attacks on Ten
There are many more incidents of
harassment against people of faith, including several cases in the armed forces,
which still harbor leftover Obama apparatchiks intent on weeding out Christians.
But let’s move on to solutions. President
Trump should sign the executive order guaranteeing religious freedom. He should
also overturn Mr. Obama’s order that discriminates against federal contractors
who won’t bow to sexual anarchy. And, his new Defense Secretary, James Mattis,
should issue a directive stopping cold the persecution of chaplains and others
who are trying to live out their faith.
Given Mr. Trump’s own declarations and
the support he received from evangelical Christians, 80 percent of whom voted
for him, plus a majority of Catholics, none of this should be considered heavy
Besides, putting bullies in their place
(Hollywood, the media) is actually quite freeing.
media is not going to let up on bending the
truth, they can't afford too. Their readership and viewership would dry up
in their eyes. Remember these media bases are based in the liberal left
populated areas of this country. To keep the revenue flowing you print
and say what they the liberal left wants to see and hear. There are cracks
in their influence to script their world as they want it played out. The
Internet with its independent minded thinkers are ripping away at the lies the
mainstream media tries to foster on the American public. Everyday the
strangle hold lessens and more and more truth is brought forth.