TIME TO 'NUKE' THE PROGRESSIVE AGENDA, AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

By Jonathan E.P. Moore, and Friends of America!
TIME TO 'NUKE' THE PROGRESSIVE AGENDA, AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
When you peel away all the layers of this Progressive stinking onion, the facts and truth have nothing to do with their narrative, values, and priorities that would help make America great again, and has nothing to do with just following the rule of law! Agenda journalism is backing up all of what’s plainly not that important to the American people and the future of America! Where is the outrage about the fact that Evelyn Farkas, a former Obama intel lap dog, gave up Obama’s shadow governments coup against, not only President Trump, but the ‘Will’ of the American people?

Where is the ‘Paid to Report’ Media when Obama’s own intelligence exposes the Obama Administration surveilling Trump’s campaign before Trump even threw his hat in the ring, and before he was nominated to be the candidate to Represent the Republican Party in the 2016 election?

I’ve been on the earth for quite a while now, and still can’t believe that none of the top 3 mainstream networks reported on the unmasking of America citizens who were not yet in Trump’s cabinet or office, and now being traced back to the higher levels of the Obama’s administration’s Intel community, but doesn’t deserve or even given a 1 out of 10 on the crickets’ scale!

What’s really important here is that the “Will’ of the American people, and not the ‘Will’ of the ‘Swamp,’ is what all Americans, meaning Democrats, Republican, and Independent, should be focused on, and if the message we send, through elections, is not heeded by our elected officials, then we need to make the correction through the ballot box, and if there is a threat to that process through the continued  attempts to defraud this same process, then we have to be diligent in draining the Swamp, and assist in the effort to make America great again!

It’s not about blaming the Republicans or Democrats for what’s wrong with America’s Healthcare system today, but that the ‘Swamp’ is responsible ‘together’ for the lack of desire to even care about the American people's wellbeing and safety before engaging in their own personal political pissing contests. The Russians are being the Russians as they have always been for years, and they will continue to do whatever it takes to disrupt any and every countries election, and with today’s technology and cyber weaponry, it will continue into the future, so we better just get used to it! Feckless Progressive leadership have decided that taking precautions to protect their own intelligence could not have been the problem when Wikileaks disclosed the facts and truth behind the plot against Bernie Sanders, America’s Top Secrets, and the corruption and deception of Hillary’s past criminal activities, but the Russians are, and with the help of the ‘Paid to Report’ Media's narrative, no matter what the facts and truth, will be hidden away behind the 'Swamp' curtain, while the attack on our sovereignty, our borders, our military, and our Constitution continues!

This week on the Hill we’ll watch the attack on the most mainstream Supreme Court Nominee in decades, and we’ll watch the system fail the American people again like it did when Harry Reid changed the rules passing Obamacare, and then again when appointing lower court justices that would follow the progressive agenda! These Progressive Judges will, like Obama and Holder, use interpretation and intent, to bypass our rule of law and constitution which became the norm under the Obama Administration for the last 8 years while he attempted to adjust the way Americans think, and in the same way done in Socialist 3^rd world countries!

We’re witnessing the effect of these Obama appointed justices in action as they bypass the Constitution and the President, and governments, sole role in deciding the course of action needed to be taken to protect and keep the American people safe, and when Hawaiian US district Judge Derrick Watson used candidate Trump’s rhetoric from the primary process over rule of law and Constitution to block an Executive Order, you have to wonder what else has been going on behind and under those robes of justice when it comes to not following the rule of law or Constitution?

It’s time for the Republican leadership to take a page out of Harry Reid’s book of tactics, and use the ‘Nuclear Option,’ not only for the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, but for Healthcare, tax reform, Voter ID Laws, Term limits, and anything else that will put America back on the same path that our founding fathers put us on back some 240 years ago!

It's time for all loyal American politicians who believe in our Constitutional Republic to fall on their swords, throw caution to the wind, and not worrying about the results when coming out on the other side of what's right, and not sitting on the fence in the hopes of securing their position in the ‘Swamp,’ and being reelected!

Harry Reid, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton, with the help of Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and the Lap Dogs of our 17 intelligence agencies thought that they had a clear path to the successful transformation of America to an open border Globalist reality, and then gleefully handing over America reigns to the Socialist New World Order on a silver platter, but what Harry Reid didn’t realize was that the Silent Majority was on to Reid, his parlor tricks, and his band of traitorous followers! President Obama was forced to back ‘crooked’ Hillary Clinton, and as more and more of Hillary high crimes and misdemeanors came to light, so was the awareness by the American people of who this woman really was and what she, like himself, represented to the future of America and America’s already ignored Constitution!

Progressives keep doubling and tripling down on the non-existing facts about the Trump collusion and connection to the Russians, but now with Schiff spending hours over at the White House viewing the same documents that Nunes did, seems to be equally disturbed by the findings, but still pushing ahead of his anti-Trump agenda anyway to save face!

At the end of the day, the Golden Rule is called the Golden Rule for a reason - do unto others as you would have done to you. In terms of commandments you could probably just do that one and you would be well off. If everybody could adhere to that one, we'd be OK, as long as a Socialist/globalist/Progressive weren’t in charge of the DOJ, Agenda Journalists, and America’s 17 intelligence agencies! ~~

Harry Reid – Nuclear Option proliferator!

If Hillary won, and Dems retook the Senate, you know the Dems would use the Nuclear Option for a Supreme Court nominee, but I guess if that doesn't happen, Republicans can't be expected to do the same......not!

Harry Reid was the first to use the Nuclear Option, on November 21, 2013, when under his direction, the bare majority of Democrats in the Senate removed the ability to filibuster for judicial nominees below the U.S. Supreme Court level, and we now know what will happen to America and the 'rule of Law' and the following of our Constitution if these judges, like Hawaiian District Judge Derrick Watson rule using progressive interpretation and intent to override those same Constitution and rule of Law! 

Harry Reid, through the use of the 'Nuclear Option,' allowed Obama to stuff the federal courts full of nominees, and alter the balance on some of the crucial federal courts of appeal, and by the time the Republicans retook the Senate, it would be to late, and those horses would have left the barn! 

That use of the Nuclear Option was predicted to be the first step, with the inevitability that if Democrats ever retook the Senate with a Democratic President in place, the Nuclear Option would be used for U.S. Supreme Court vacancies as well. Reid didn’t need to go that far in 2013, because there were no vacancies to be filled on the U.S. Supreme Court at the time.

Now there is a vacancy with the death of Antonin Scalia!

If there were any doubt that Reid took the move with the Supreme Court in mind, he just removed that doubt in an interview with Talking Points Memo, Harry Reid’s Parting Shot: Dems Will Nuke The Filibuster For SCOTUS:

“Outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said he is confident that he has laid the groundwork for Democrats to nuke the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees if they win back the Senate in November.

Envisioning Hillary Clinton in the White House and Democrats controlling the Senate, Reid warned that if a Senate Republican minority block her Supreme Court nominee, he is confident the party won’t hesitate to change the filibuster rules again.

Such a move would be an extension of what Reid did in 2013 when he was still majority leader, eliminating filibusters (with a simple majority vote) on the President’s nominees. There was only one exception: the Supreme Court. As it stands now, Democrats still need 60 votes to move forward with a Supreme Court nominee.

Reid said, "however, that could change!"

“I really do believe that I have set the Senate so when I leave, we’re going to be able to get judges done with a majority. It takes only a simple majority anymore. And, it’s clear to me that if the Republicans try to filibuster another circuit court judge, but especially a Supreme Court justice, I’ve told ’em how and I’ve done it, not just talking about it. I did it in changing the rules of the Senate. It’ll have to be done again,” Reid told TPM in a wide-ranging interview about his time in the Senate and his legacy.

If Democrats retake the Senate, majority leader Schumer will have to decide whether to go nuclear. Harry Reid gave Schumer the weapon and the justification.

Of course, that works in both directions, something I pointed out after Reid nuked the judicial filibuster:

“Decades of negative and destructive policies can be reversed with a bare majority. Obamacare can be repealed with a bare majority. True Conservative Judges will not be banished due to a filibuster threat.

Yes, it’s true that the absence of a filibuster could accelerate the destructive policies. That fear is justified, particularly as to the judiciary. But face it, we were headed there anyway unless drastic action was taken.

That drastic action took place. By Democrats!

Now at least we have a chance to achieve previously unimaginable progress in a single presidential term if we also have bare majorities in Congress and a President with the willpower. It will take only one such term.

The ratchet has been broken. And opportunity created, even if dependent upon future electoral success.

It’s now up to us to seize the opportunity!!

Of course, for Republicans to use the Nuclear Option as to the Supreme Court would take three things: (1) Trump winning the presidency, (2) Republicans holding the Senate, and (3) Republican Senators being willing to play smash mouth as aggressively as Harry Reid and Democrats do.

No. 1 happened: No. 2 happened; No. 3 probably will not happen, as the Republican Senate would probably wimp out. ~~by William A. Jacobson, a Friend of America! 

OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION USED OUR INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS TO SPY ON HIS AND HILLARY'S POLITICAL OPPONENTS!

If you’re stressed out about this whole Russian nonsense, relax – Donald Trump didn't do anything wrong, and he's not going be impeached, arrested, or ritually disemboweled. When the truth comes out and it explodes in the Democrats’ soft, girlish hands, we’ll all be laughing and toasting their humiliation with Stoli shots.

How do I know this with utter certainty? Because it's all so glaringly obvious, and it’s the only scenario that fits the facts. As Hugh Hewitt says, this scandal has three silos. The first silo is the question of whether the Russians somehow “hacked our election.” The second silo is whether any Trump people “colluded” with the Russians. The third silo, the one patriots care most about since it’s the one that isn’t a ridiculous fantasy, is whether anyone in Obama's administration used our intelligence apparatus to spy on his and Hillary’s political opponents. The answers are “No,” “No,” and “Yes.” The end results are going to be a stronger Trump, weaker Democrats, and various Obama minions exploring new career opportunities in the exciting fields of license plate-making, large-to-small rock transformation, and artisanal pruno distilling.

Russians didn’t hack the election. Liberals use the word “hacked” because they can claim they only mean “influenced” while implying to stupid people inclined to believe their conspiracy theories that the Russians broke into computers and changed votes from Hillary to Donald. Of course, they forgot to also change the Senate votes to the Dems, but whatever.

Even James Comey agrees that never happened, so now the Democrats are claiming that Russian social media bots used fake news to trick the previously Hillary-inclined electorate into voting against her. Basically, they’re saying Hillary’s supporters were easily duped idiots. Now, dummies have always been a key Democrat demographic. She clearly has a unique appeal to the stupid, the gullible, and the readily confused, making the voters she was counting on especially vulnerable to those cunning Russian clickbaiters operating from secret Macedonian villages.

“Well, I was exploring the shocking real reason CHiPS went off the air, which was going to stun me, when I saw a story on OMG Links that Hillary Clinton had an alien baby. Why, then I knew I had to vote for Donald Trump because I hate aliens. We got to build us a wall around space and make them Space Mexicans pay for it!”

“I was using my portable computer machine to internet, and I was about to have my jaw dropped by what Joyce Dewitt of Three’s Company looks like today, when I saw the link to proof that Hillary and Bill Clinton are gun-grabbing devil worshipers. So, I had to vote for Trump, because I cling to my guns and my religion and my other guns.”

Their alternate version of You Stole My Morons! is that the release of the damning facts contained in John Podesta and Felonia von Pantsuit’s emails made people think she was terrible. People thought that because those emails showed, beyond any doubt, that she is terrible, and that her Democrat Party is less a political organization than a disorganized crime ring. Remember that when the media gets angry about the emails, the reason is that you got accurate information about the media’s partisan pals that the media wanted hidden from you. Democracy dies in darkness all right; the media is trying to strangle it in an unlit alley.

The Trump campaign never colluded with the Russians. This is true even though the definition of “colluding” has been expanded to include pretty much any interaction with anyone or anything Russian. If they found out Reince Preibus had an old DVD of Rush Hour, Adam Schiff would be in front of a mic with CNN cutting in live. The whole stupid collusion thing has become a weird, Beautiful Mind-esque conspiracy theory with scores of Trumpaphobic loonies out there sharing their bizarre spider webs of intrigue via Twitter memes. Does Gorky Park have a grassy knoll?

Regardless, it’s safe to say that there was absolutely no collusion of any kind between Team Trump and anyone Russian. None. How do I know this to a near certainty? Because we haven't seen anybody leak any evidence of any in the EIGHT-plus months that they've been pushing this nonsense.

Nothing.

But…but…but Ivan Ivanosky’s airplane was in Utah once and Utah has the Great Salt Lake and Trump put salt on his taco and ALL THE PIECES FIT!

Nothing.

You think the geniuses leading our intelligence community – not the brave and dedicated folks in the trenches but the clowns and political suck-ups lording over them – could have or would have kept real collusion secret? Do you think if Trump was cavorting with the former commies we wouldn’t have heard about it from the NYT, the WaPo and the rest of the Democrat steno pool about a week before November 8th?

Get. Real.

And that brings us to the third silo, because the Democrat heads of our intelligence community desperately wanted to leak anything that might remotely embarrass Trump. In fact, my money has always been on the person who leaked the classified Flynn info being a name we’ll all recognize, a suspicion Fox’s Adam Housley’s reporting backs up. Hell yes, Donald Trump was "wiretapped.” So were you, by the way. And me. From open source information shared by defectors the intelligence community was too incompetent to keep from defecting, we know that every single electronic communication we send is collected in the NSA mainframes. Every single one. And the NSA has algorithms they can use to search it. You don’t go plant a bug in Trump Tower. You wiretap the opposition party’s nominee for president by running a search through the communications that the government “incidentally” collected. And if you find something juicy, then you call up your buddy at the Post and hand it over.

If. Does anyone here think for a millisecond that the Obama-appointed leadership in the intelligence community, whose loyalty is to their own political class and not to the country, would hesitate for a microsecond before leaking something they thought would hurt Trump? We know they wouldn’t hesitate because they didn't hesitate – they feloniously released a classified transcript involving Mike Flynn just to shaft him and the Administration. Flynn did not do anything illegal in that illegally released transcript; he misled the Veep about the topics he (legally and properly) discussed, and for that he got canned. So why is his lawyer demanding immunity? Because his lawyer isn’t a drooling moron working rear-ender soft tissue cases out of a van down by the river; no quarter-competent lawyer is going to let his client walk into a Democrat witch hunt without either ironclad immunity or the words “I take the Fifth” on his lips – you know, just like all of Hillary’s people did.

The only crime we know about for sure – the only one – is that some senior member of Obama’s intelligence community committed a felony by leaking classified information regarding Mike Flynn's intercepted communications. That's it. And that’s why the Democrats would rather talk about anything else. Understand that everything the Democrats say is a lie. Every single word, plus the punctuation. They’re dumb, but they're not so stupid as not to realize that this Putin nonsense, manufactured as a pathetic excuse for their utter humiliation in November, is falling apart. With the help of their media minions, they hope if they keep shouting “Look, Russians!” we’ll grow so bored we’ll just tune out. It’s their only hope for keeping Obama’s buddies off the chopping block. They all thought Hillary was going to win and that there would be no accountability, so they were safe using the government systems they had been entrusted to manage to spy on their incoming boss’s political opponents. Oops.

Look, I have friends who think differently, and I’ve carefully considered their views because some are serious people. They really believe that there is something out there. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it was Russian-inspired clickbait stories on Facebook that magically converted hundreds of thousands of dedicated “I’m with her” Hillary fans in the Rust Belt into #MAGA hat-wearing Trumpmaniacs. Maybe liberal Washington D.C. establishment types had the honor and patriotism required to keep a juicy tidbit like Trump playing footsie with the Russians under wraps for better than half a year. And maybe Lena Dunham will get put on the cover of the next Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition.Yeah, no. I'm not wrong. This is all going to blow up in the Democrats’ faces, and when it does I'm going to laugh and raise my vodka glass in a joyous toast to their latest and greatest failure. ??????????! ~~By Kurt Schlichter, a Friend of America!

Don't forget to follow the Friends Of Liberty on Facebook and our Page also Pinterest , Twitter , Tumblr and Google Plus PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.
Friends of Liberty is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights. Support the Trump Presidency and help us fight Liberal Media Bias. Please LIKE and SHARE this story on Facebook or Twitter.

WE THE PEOPLE

TOGETHER WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!  

IT'S TIME FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO GET SOME BALLS, AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

By Jonathan E.P. Moore, and Friends of America!  

IT'S TIME FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY TO GET SOME BALLS, AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND, BUT WILL MITCH MCCONNELL, LIKE HARRY REID DID TO PASS OBAMACARE, HAVE THE BALLS TO USE THE ‘NUCLEAR OPTION’ TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN?

Harry Reid tabled some 360 passed legislation from the House of Representatives that dealt with every unconstitutional Executive Orders and Presidential Memorandums that Obama blamed the ‘Do nothing Congress’ for and forcing his hand and actions to get things done! Did the ‘Paid to

Report’ Media tell you that Harry Reid’s right to hold back passed house legislation to make it appear that the ‘do nothing Congress, was doing nothing was the excuse that Obama needed to use his ‘Pen and Phone’ to bypass the Constitution and the ‘Will’ of the American people, ‘NO!’

SO HOW DID OBAMACARE BECOME A LAW?

If you recall, the Democrats in the House could pass their version of a Healthcare law. Because all revenue bills must originate in the House of Representatives, the Senate found a bill that met those qualifications: HR3590, a military housing bill. They took out essentially all the wording of it, and turned it into the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Obamacare. It gets better. The Senate at that time had 60 Democrats, just enough to pass Obamacare.

After the bill passed the Senate, the Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy died. In his place, Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown. That meant that, if the House made any changes

to the bill, the Senate wouldn’t have the necessary number of votes to pass the corrected bill, since they knew no Republicans would vote for Obamacare. So, they made a deal with the Democrat‐controlled House of Representatives: The House would pass the Senate bill without any changes, IF the Senate agreed to pass a separate bill by the House that made changes to the Senate version of Obamacare. This second bill was called the Reconciliation Act of 2010.

It made a bunch of detail changes, and added some things. So, the House passed PPACA, the Senate bill, as well as their Reconciliation Act. So now PPACA was ready for the President to sign, but the Senate still needed to pass the Reconciliation Act from the House. Confused yet?

Now, remember that the Senate only had 59 votes to pass the Reconciliation Act since Republican Scott Brown replaced Democrat Ted Kennedy. To pass the Reconciliation Act, therefore, the Democrats in the Senate DECIDED TO CHANGE THE RULES!

They declared that they could use the “Reconciliation Rule”—this is a different “reconciliation” than the House bill now. This rule was only used for budget item approval, so that budget items could be passed with only 51 votes in the Senate, not the usual 60. This rule was never intended to be used for legislation of the magnitude of Obamacare.

Too bad… they used it anyway. So, then both “Acts” passed both

houses of Congress and were then signed by President Obama.

EVERYTHING DONE BY DEMOCRATS WITHOUT A SINGLE REPUBLICAN VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT. TO QUOTE DEMOCRAT REP. ALCEE HASTINGS OF THE HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE DURING THE BILL PROCESS: “WE’RE MAKING UP THE RULES AS WE GO ALONG” THEY CERTAINLY COULDN’T HAVE MADE THIS LAW WITHOUT IT.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT?

I’VE BEEN ASKING MYSELF, NOW THAT THE ELECTION IS OVER, WILL MITCH MCCONNELL TAKE A PAGE OUT OF HARRY REIDS PLAYBOOK, AND USE THE NUCLEAR OPTION TO GET VOTER ID PASSED?

I don’t know about you, but when Obama got on Public TV and asked those some 13 million unvetted illegal refugees and immigrants to go out and vote during this past election cycle with no repercussions, and then claim that the ‘Electoral College’ was fixed because Hillary won the

popular vote! Now you must know it’s time to pass a comprehensive voter ID Law, and with the GOP owning the majorities in both the House and Senate, you know that using the ‘Nuclear Option,’ like Harry Reid did, maybe the last chance America will be able to determine its own future!

Click here>  OBAMA TELLING ILLEGALS VOTERS TO VOTE!!

WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WENT WITH THE ‘ELECTORAL COLLEGE’ INSTEAD OF THE ‘POPULAR VOTE TO DECIDE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!

The Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.

The first reason that the founders created the Electoral College is hard to understand today. The founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power.

Hamilton and the other founders believed that the electors would be able to ensure that only a qualified person becomes President. They believed that with the Electoral College no one would be able to manipulate the citizenry. It would act as check on an electorate that might be duped. Hamilton and the other founders did not trust the population to make the right choice. The founders also believed that the Electoral College had the

advantage of being a group that met only once and thus could not be manipulated over time by foreign governments or others.

The electoral college is also part of compromises made at the convention to satisfy the small states. Under the system of the Electoral College each state had the same number of electoral votes as they have representative in Congress, thus no state could have less than 3. The result of this system is that in this election the state of Wyoming cast about 210,000 votes, and thus each elector represented 70,000 votes, while in California approximately 9,700,000 votes were cast for 54 votes, thus representing 179,000 votes per electorate. Obviously, this creates an unfair advantage to voters in the small states whose votes count more than those people living in medium and large states.

One aspect of the electoral system that is not mandated in the constitution is the fact that the winner takes all the votes in the state. Therefore, it makes no difference if you win a state by 50.1% or by 80% of the vote you receive the same number of electoral votes. This can be a recipe

for one individual to win some states by large pluralities and lose others by small number of votes, and thus this is an easy scenario for one candidate winning the popular vote while another winning the electoral vote. This winner take all methods used in picking electors has been decided by the states themselves. This trend took place over the course of the 19th century.

While there are clear problems with the Electoral College and there are some advantages to it, changing it is very unlikely. It would take a constitutional amendment ratified by 3/4 of states to change the system. It is hard to imagine the smaller states agreeing. One way of modifying the system s to eliminate the winner take all part of it. The method that the states vote for the electoral college is not mandated by the constitution but is decided by the states. Two states do not use the winner take all system, Maine and Nebraska. It would be difficult but not impossible to get other states to change their systems, unfortunately the party that has the advantage in the state is unlikely to agree to a unilateral change.

ACCIDENTS DO HAPPEN, AND FOR MITCH MCONNELL, AT LEAST FOR THIS ONE TIME, LUCK WAS ON HIS SIDE!

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can do a victory lap now for his success in keeping President Barack Obama from shifting the ideological balance of the Supreme Court.

Democrats, meanwhile, must ask whether Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland, a 63-year-old moderate, was a mistake. Some progressives hoped for a younger candidate, with a more diverse background, might have better excited liberals.

It was McConnell who seized the moment after the death of Scalia last February to announce

there would be no confirmation hearings until after the election. "The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country," he said at the time.

There's no way of knowing if McConnell was certain a Republican would win. But it was worth a shot for the veteran senator. He held to his promise and denied Obama's pick, federal appeals court Judge Merrick Garland, a hearing or vote. And now, he has likely ensured a conservative majority on the Supreme Court for years to come.

JUDGE GARLAND AND THE LEFT’S DISDAIN FOR THE TRUTH!

By their own accounts, the liberal media lied in describing Garland as a centrist.

And the more research one does, the bigger this lie appears.

The mainstream media — that is, the liberal media — share all the views and characteristics of the left. Among these is the left’s view of truth. There are honest individuals with left-wing views, and dishonest individuals on the right. But truth is not a leftist

value. Everything the left believes in is more important than truth: social justice, economic equality, reducing carbon emissions, expanding the power of the state, battling sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, racism, and above these, destroying its conservative opposition.

The media’s coverage of President Barack Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court should serve as one of the most blatant examples of both the left-wing orientation of the news media and their willingness to play with truth.

On March 16, the day after Garland’s nomination, every major mainstream news outlet, both print and electronic, depicted the judge as a centrist.

The first sentence of The New York Times front page read: “WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick B. Garland to be the nation’s 113th Supreme Court justice, choosing a centrist appellate judge.”

Similarly, the Los Angeles Times front-page headline said: “Obama’s choice of popular centrist Merrick Garland for Supreme Court puts GOP to the test.”

Another headline, seen in the Washington Post, read: “Merrick Garland’s instinct for the middle could put him in the court’s most influential spot.” That same day, the Post published a second

article mentioning how “Garland’s deep resume and centrist reputation appear to have positioned him well to earn the president’s nod.”

Two days later, the Los Angeles Times featured a news analysis on its front page, in which a reporter wrote that Garland may be “the most moderate Supreme Court nominee anyone could expect from a Democratic president.” The reporter also calls Garland “a superbly qualified judge with a cautious, centrist record.”

There is no truth to any of these reports — something easily proved by both Judge Garland’s decisions and, amazingly, by the newspapers’ reports themselves.

Take the Los Angeles Times’ front-page “news analysis,” for example. After describing the judge as a moderate and centrist, the LA Times reporter writes:

“If the late Justice Antonin Scalia, a staunch conservative, is replaced by a moderate-to-liberal Justice Garland, the court

would tip to the left on several key issues, like abortion, affirmative action, the death penalty, gun control, campaign spending, immigration and environmental protection.”

In other words, the very same author who describes Garland as a centrist believes that Garland votes left on essentially every major issue confronting the nation and the Supreme Court.

Additionally, that very same day The New York Times headlined that Garland is a centrist, it published an article on the nomination noting that “If Judge Garland is confirmed, he could tip the ideological balance to create the most liberal Supreme Court in 50 years.”

In reviewing Garland’s decisions, this Times piece placed Judge Garland to the left of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, way to

the left of Justice Stephen Breyer and minimally to the right of Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg.

By their own accounts, the liberal media lied in describing Garland as a centrist.

And the more research one does, the bigger this lie appears.

In a column in The Wall Street Journal, Juanita Duggan, President and CEO of the National Federation of Independent Business, wrote that Garland is so anti-small business and so pro-big labor, that “This is the first time in the NFIB’s 73-year-history that we will weigh in on a Supreme Court nominee.”

What worries the NFIB, she explains, is that “in 16 major labor decisions of Judge Garland’s that we examined, he ruled 16-0 in favor of the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board).”

Elsewhere in the Journal, the editorial board wrote that they can’t think of a single issue on which Garland would vote differently from the four liberal Justices that already sit on the bench.

Tom Goldstein wrote in the SCOTUSblog that Garland favors deferring to the decision-makers in agencies. “In a dozen close

cases in which the court divided, he sided with the agency every time.”

Another source reads that “Judge Garland would be a reliable fifth vote on these legal issues.”

Those are all the fundamental issues that divide the left from the right.

So, the entire left is lying about Judge Garland, who, for the record, seems like a truly decent man who possesses a first-class mind. They do so because getting a fifth left-wing vote and weakening the Republicans is far more important than truth.

And believe it or not, there is an even worse lesson here, namely the media’s effectiveness in saturating society with its mendacious version of reality. Unless an American makes the effort to

study the issue — and most do not — they take the news media’s version as truth. The terrible lesson, which has been affirmed time and time again since the 1960s, is that a free society can experience brainwashing as effectively as a totalitarian state.

With the current threat of Facebook's feckless ability to be bipartisan feel free to befriend me at 'Jonathan E P Moore' to get direct and instant access, or follow 'While You Were Sleeping' at www.whileyouweredozing.blogspot.com
Don't forget to follow the Friends Of Liberty on Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, and Google Plus PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

Friends Of Liberty is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights.