AG. Garland misses deadline to give Senate info on basis for school board memo

Imagine, this guy could have been a Supreme Court Justice. Thanks Mitch.

Attorney General Merrick Garland, perhaps the worst AG ever to be in office, told Senate members of the Judiciary Committee last week that the Department of Justice would provide information regarding the DOJ's intervention in matters explaining their actions and words directed toward school board officials. The promise was to be completed by November 1, but so far they failed to provide the committee with the information. It may be due to Garland's incompetence as AG, but it's more likely due to the absence of additional information.

On the day that Garland testified, a letter was sent by eight GOP committee members addressed to Garland and calling for any information that acted as a catalyst for the memo other than the letter the National School Board Association sent to the Biden administration calling for federal action to their baseless claim, as we now know it to be. Garland agreed that the letter had a big effect on the DOJ's decision, but he pretended there was more that influenced his decision and that the letter wasn't the only basis for the memo.

Garland said that the incidents cited in the NSBA letter did not provide the basis for the memo. He claimed that other evidence including "public reports of violence and threats of violence" informed his decision-making, but he did not specify which ones.

"Pursuant to this commitment," the GOP members' letter said, citing Garland's agreement to turn over information, "please provide all evidence you personally used or relied on between Wednesday, September 29, 2021, and Monday, October 4, 2021 – other than the content of the NSBA letter dated Wednesday, September 29, 2021 – that formed the basis for the memo issued by the DOJ dated Monday, October 4th that addressed '…harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff," the letter requested.

"Because you were able to distill your evidence and craft a memo that fixed the gaze of the FBI directly on concerned parents across this country in just four days, you should be able to share that evidence with us in the same period of time," the letter said.

The request was signed by Sens. Ben Sasse, (R-NE), Charles Grassley, (R-IA), Mike Lee, (R-UT), Tom Cotton, (R-AR) Thom Tillis, (R-NC) Lindsey Graham, (R-SC), Marsha Blackburn, (R-TN), and John Kennedy, (R-LA).

* * *

Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.

* * *

The senators said they specifically chose November 1 as the deadline because it was exactly five days after the hearing. There should have been no problem, no time constraint on Garland's DOJ to gather the information the committee members requested.

But they either failed, or refused to do so.

Parents not wanting their children being taught that the are bad because of their skin color and arguing with the scumcrumpets on the school boards is not violence and the parents are not terrorists.

Tweet

GOPer Sasse on POTUS pardons: "This is rotten to the core"

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) blasted President Trump Wednesday evening over the latest pardons POTUS provided for political allies Paul Manafort and Roger Stone. The senator said the pardons are "rotten to the core," and while he's the first GOP member to come down on Trump over a president's constitutional right to pardon, he will likely not be the last.

In Sasse's statement he specifically mentioned both men, saying that "felons like Manafort and Stone" . . . "had flagrantly and repeatedly violated the law and harmed Americans."

Trump also pardoned Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The elder Kushner pleaded guilty in 2004 of 16 counts of tax evasion and retaliating against a witness. He served two years in the slammer. The whereabouts of the witness is unknown.

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris "I Ate the Whole Thing" Cristy, was the prosecutor in the case of Charles Kushner. Cristy said his crimes were among the most “loathsome” he had dealt with.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the loathsome Democratic prosecutor during Trump’s impeachment trial, called Manafort’s pardon particularly outrageous and blamed Russia for influencing Trump's decision and for clogging up Schiff's toilet.

Interestingly, neither Schiff nor Sasse nor any Democratic congressperson had said anything negative about the myriad pardons of drug dealers and worse regarding the huge number of pardons by former President Obama. 

Apparently selling cocaine to kids, embezzlement, conspiracy to launder money, identity theft, conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, knowingly buying a firearm for a felon, distribution of heroin, armed bank robbery, destruction of mail matter by a postal employee [not mail-in votes this time], manslaughter, conspiracy to distribute phenylacetic acid, "devising a scheme to defraud the United States of money and property and devising a scheme to deprive the United States Bankruptcy Court and the citizens of the United States of honest services," and Bradley Manning's 35 year sentence for providing top classified military information to Wikileaks being commuted isn't as grievous as Manafort's and Stone's political hit jobs by the Left.

.Manning even tried a run for a congressional seat but thankfully lost, which disappointed Democrats and RINOs alike.

Not to mention the sentences, mostly drug and weapons-related commuted by Obama.

But it's only when Trump does it that it is "rotten to the core."

C'mon, man, gimme a break. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear. C'mon, check out the ads. Christmas is coming.

Tweet

O'Rourke would punish churches that don't support gay marriage

Democratic dullard Robert Francis O'Rourke [an Irishman who uses the name "Beto" to make himself sound Hispanic] has little regard for the U.S. Constitution. He admitted that he would disregard the Second Amendment and take away guns from law abiding citizens.

More recently, during a CNN LGBTQetc town hall event on Thursday, O'Rourke said that if he somehow won the cosmic lottery and won became president that he would take away tax-exempt status from churches that follow their scripture and thus refuse to support same-sex marriage.

This is an example of how progressivism is the new religion of the left and is intolerant of opposing ideologies, free speech and the right to defend oneself.

“This is from your LGBTQ plan and here’s what you write — this is a quote: ‘Freedom of religion is a fundamental right, but it should not be used to discriminate,'” CNN's cretin and gay host Don Lemon said. “Do you think religious institutions like colleges, churches, charities — should they lose their tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage?”

O’Rourke answered: “There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break for anyone or any institution, any organization in America, that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us. So as president, we’re going to make that a priority, and we are going to stop those who are infringing upon the human rights of our fellow Americans.”

Fortunately for America, O'Rourke has as much chance of winning the presidency as Rashida Tlaib has of buying Israeli savings bonds after planting a tree in Israel while denouncing Hamas.

Who the hell does O'Rourke think he is?

For him, it's okay to deny the human and civil rights of those who follow a particular religion. How quickly he is to condemn Christians while being unwilling to speak about Islam's similar and even more radical beliefs about homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

The left has lost its tongue when it comes to Islam's treatment of gays. In many Islamic countries, being gay, lesbian, queer or transgender is a death sentence if caught. But the left never seems to discuss that situation, only the fact that Christians, who would serve the LGBTQ community but would not serve for a same-sex wedding, should be punished for refusing to go against their religion.

Even the Trump-hating Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) slammed O'Rourke for his "bigoted nonsense."

“This bigoted nonsense would target a lot of sincere Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Leaders from both parties have a duty to flatly condemn this attack on very basic American freedoms,” Sasse wrote. “This extreme intolerance is un-American. The whole point of the First Amendment is that…everyone is created with dignity and we don’t use government power to decide which religious beliefs are legitimate and which aren’t.”

It's clear that if O'Rourke had his way [which is as likely as a Texan being struck by lightning three times in succession at noon in Times Square on a sunny day] there would eventually be no Christian, Jewish, Muslim or religious academic institutions left standing in America. The only "religion" would be Communism, but they probably will not call it that--they'll use a catchy term like Democratic socialism.

Professor Denny Burk wrote on Twitter: “Beto O’Rourke calls for Christian churches to lose their tax-exempt status unless they endorse gay marriage. This draconian assault on the First Amendment is now the MAINSTREAM view within the Democratic party. This could bankrupt many churches and religious institutions because it would dissuade contributions. Many churches would lose their property as a result of being unable to pay property taxes — especially in big cities. This is truly draconian and unconstitutional.”

Burk is exactly correct.

Even left-wing journalists that work for far-left publications found the cretin's comments to be repulsive, possibly because he panders to his two supporters: his dental hygienist and his barber.

Slate writer Ruth Graham tweeted: “I’m late on this, but it’s astounding, and it’s exactly where conservatives have been warning that progressives are heading.”

Many in O’Rourke’s party view him as a moron and have called him a loser publicly.

Former Chicago Democratic Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a loser of another kind, essentially said the same thing about O’Rourke last year.

“If Beto O’Rourke wants to go and run for president, God bless him,” Emanuel said. “He should put his hat in and make his case. But he lost. You don’t promote a loser to the top of the party.”

Rahm was referring to the mainstream media when discussing the idea of promoting a candidate, because real journalism has been dead and buried for years now and the media has become an extension of the Democratic Party.

Coming soon: Beto's proctology appointment on video.

Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue. And you can also see my blog on the Times of Israel.

Tweet

Dems block 'born alive' bill that would provide care to babies of failed murder attempts

I honestly don't know how some people can live with themselves. One day society is going to look back at our history and see us as savages who would murder our own children. Most animals don't do that, particularly animals with a fully developed frontal cortex, but we do. At least the far-left does.

Senate Democrats on Monday blocked a Republican bill that would have called for prison time for abortion doctors who don't attempt life saving procedures of infants born alive during failed attempts at murdering them.

How is this appealing to leftist voters?

All prominent Democratic 2020 presidential animals in the Senate voted down the measure, including socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala "I Slept My Way On Up" Harris of California, Cory "Spartacus" Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten "I Go All Ways" Gillibrand of New York, Amy "Wash This" Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth "Dances With Bull" Warren of Massachusetts. The final vote was 53-44 to end Democratic delaying tactics -- seven votes short of the 60 needed.

Three Democrats supported the Republican bill -- Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Doug Jones or Alabama. Three Republicans did not vote, due to scheduling conflicts and plane flight delays: Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Tim Scott of South Carolina.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that "any health care practitioner present" at the time of a birth "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age."

It's a baby. A child is born and you don't stand there and allow he or she to die.

President Trump tweeted:

Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth.... 

....This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.

Yes, we're talking about innocent babies. There is simply no excuse for not passing this bill. None, because it isn't tied into another bill, it stands alone.

The bill, which exempted the mother involved in the birth from prosecution, also would have required practitioners to "ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital." 

The bill prescribed a possible term of imprisonment of up to five years for violations, not including penalties for first-degree murder that could have applied.

Aside from Trump, other Republicans also couldn't believe the Democrat's refusal to agree to these terms. "I want to ask each and every one of my colleagues whether or not we're OK with infanticide," said the bill's chief sponsor, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE).

Sasse spoke to Fox News' "The Story" after the vote, saying that he was "surprised" at each vote against the bill, and charged that opponents had lied "constantly" with "blatant nonsense" about the legislation -- specifically, by claiming the bill "would end abortion" entirely.

"This is about the most simple thing you can say, which is that a baby is a baby, and they have dignity and worth," Sasse said. "And it's not because they're powerful. It's because they're babies. Today is a sad day in the United States Senate."

Sasse added, "This shouldn't be about politics. ... This should be about having heart."

A panel of people who survived abortions

This should be about having even a modicum of morality.

Other pro-life activists called on the 44 senators who voted against Sasse's bill to resign immediately.

“Senators who could not bring themselves to vote to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act should reconsider whether or not they have what it takes to serve," March for Life President Jeanne Mancini said in an understatement. 

"Senator Sasse’s common sense bill would merely require doctors assist a newborn struggling to survive after a failed attempt on her life. Anyone who lacks the basic level of human compassion needed to vote in favor of this should quickly find another job. We look forward to a vote in the House of Representatives so that Chamber can get on record as well.”

Opponents, noting the rarity of such births and citing laws already making it a crime to kill newborn babies, said the bill was unnecessary. But they still refused to sign it anyway.

They said it was part of a push by abortion opponents to curb access to the procedure and intimidate doctors who perform it, and said late-term abortions generally occur when the infant is considered incapable of surviving after birth.

“This bill is just another line of attack in the ongoing war on women’s health,” New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said on the Senate floor.

Women's health? How? That's nonsense and a lie.

Sasse introduced the legislation after Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, (D) endorsed post-birth abortions while discussing The Repeal Act, a state bill which sought to repeal restrictions on third-trimester abortions. Northam made headlines when his medical school yearbook had a photo of him in either blackface of a KKK outfit, which he apologized for then later denied.

Virginia Democratic Del. Kathy Tran, a cold blooded sponsor of that post-birth abortion bill, was asked at a hearing if a woman about to give birth and dilating could still request an abortion.

"My bill would allow that, yes,” Tran said. Northam, in a later interview with a radio station, backed up Tran. Both Northam and Tran clearly have the morals of mother crabs which eats their babies.

"When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of, obviously, the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician, by the way," Northam said, referring to abortion doctors who get paid to kill babies. "And, it's done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that's non-viable." 

Or just for the hell of it.

Northam continued: "So, in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So, I think this was really blown out of proportion."

It's so thoughtful to keep the INFANT comfortable before you kill it.

If you don't think this is evil, then I am at a loss for words.

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet

Dem. Senator blocks bill banning the killing of babies after being born

First they came for the first trimester humans. Then they came for those with birth abnormalities. Next they came for the second trimester babies and pretended they are not human yet. Now they've shown their blood-stained hands and are coming for any baby up to birth and even beyond if the mother doesn't want it to live.

It's hard to accept the evil that is coming from the Democratic Party with their lies about how it's a "woman's right to choose." It isn't anyone's right to choose to end the life of an innocent.

Senator Patty Scumwafer Murray (D-WA), blocked a Senate bill that would require doctors to provide aid to full-term babies who thankfully survived botched abortions. The un-aborted Senator objected to the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and her one vote was enough to prevent the Senate from passing the bill in a unanimous consent vote, LifeSiteNews reports.

This should make anyone with a conscience sick to their stomach.

On Thursday, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NB) requested the unanimous consent vote after Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph "KKK" Northam, a satanic former pediatric neurologist, made comments indicating he did not object to letting an infant die after its birth, unlike his parents. The scumwafer explained that a born-alive “infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.” 

Sasse had already called for a unanimous consent vote to pass a resolution defending the Knights of Columbus in mid-January. That resolution was passed unanimously.

Sasse appealed to the conscience of the entire Senate, saying, “Just a few years ago, the abortion lobby was really clear in its talk about hoping abortion would be…safe, legal, and rare. Now we’re talking about keeping the baby comfortable while the doctors have a debate about infanticide. You’re either for babies, or you’re defending infanticide…please, don’t let Governor Northam define you.”

Murray objected to the unanimous consent vote, stating, “This is a gross misinterpretation of the actual language of the bill that is being asked to be considered and, therefore, I object.”

Except Murray was wrong or she lied.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) responded to Murray’s objection by asserting:

There is nothing great, there is nothing moral, or even humane about the discussion that we have before us today. Over the past week, we have witnessed the absolutely ugly truth about the far-reaching grasp of the abortion industry and its increasingly radicalized political agenda. Politicians have not only defended aborting a child while a woman is in labor, but have gone so far as to support the termination of a child after his or her birth. A child. A baby. Rationality, decency, and basic human compassion have fallen by the wayside.”

Regarding Murray, Ernst's words fell on deaf ears.

Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, (R-KY), who will have to gauge whether to call later for a roll-call vote, said the Act was “legislation that ought to be the very definition of something that receives unanimous consent in this body. It’s harrowing that this legislation is even necessary. It was even more disturbing when last week, a Democrat Governor was unable to simply state that of course – of course – these newborn babies have human rights that must be respected.”

LifeSite News noted:

It is not likely that the House version of the bill would pass in the Democrat-controlled House, if even allowed to be voted on. This is despite the fact that the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which defines infant survivors of abortion as “human beings” entitled to all the rights in the U.S. Constitution, was passed by both Democrats and Republicans in 2002 and signed into law by then-President George W. Bush … In 2015, only five House Democrats supported the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which then-President Barack Obama said would have a “chilling effect” on “access to care.”

Perhaps this needs to be brought before the Supreme Court to decide if it's okay to kill a fully developed person. 

I am disgusted with my country . . . this is basic morality and the Democrats can't even get that right. 

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.

Tweet

Pence slams slimy NY Times

A fake news report in The New York Times claiming that Vice President Mike Pence and other Republicans are running 'shadow campaigns' to defeat President Trump in 2020 was dismissed by Pence as "disgraceful and offensive."

His White House statement said: 

"Today's article in The New York Times is disgraceful and offensive to me, my family and out entire team. The allegations in this article are categorically false and represent just the latest attempt by the media to divide this administration."

The Times, once known as "The Paper of Record," is now known as "The Canary Cage Liner," published the story on Sunday and posits that Mr. Pence and Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) and Gov. John Kasich (R-Oh.) are visiting early voting states and acting as if they're running in 2020.

Pence also said: 

"Thanks to the President's leadership, we are rebuilding the military, ISIS is on the run, and we've seen more than one million jobs created while the stock market hits all time highs.

"The American people know that I could not be more honored to be working side by side with a president who is making America great again.

"Whatever fake news may come our way, my entire team will continue to focus all our efforts to advance the President's agenda and see him re-elected in 2020. Any suggestions otherwise is both laughable and absurd." 

The Times has always been far left-leaning even going so far as to defend and lionize Alger Hiss, an alleged Communist spy for Russia. 

Now The Times is claiming that it's due to the Russia controversy regarding election meddling and the Trump administration's collusion with them, the Republicans are jumping ship on Trump. "Pence's schedule is so full of political events that Republicans joke that he is acting more like a second-term vice president hoping to clear the field than a No. 2 sworn in a little over six months ago."

It's understandable how people no longer trust the media--they make stuff up to suit their political agendas. 

Oh, my canary just gave The Times a gift.

Tweet