Friday Top News Executive Summary

Media Editors: Government & Politics

ACOSTA RESIGNS: “Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta resigned Friday amid growing backlash over his handling of the 2008 sex abuse prosecution of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein,” according to National Review. Because the whole power of the Leftmedia propagandists is focused on the Trump administration, there has to be a lot of “falling on swords.”

NEW CENSUS GAME PLAN: “President Donald Trump announced Thursday he is backing down from his effort to include a citizenship question on the 2020 census, and will instead take executive action that instructs the Commerce Department to obtain an estimate of U.S. citizenship through other means.” (ABC News)

CANARIES IN A COAL MINE: “Speaker liar-Nancy Pulosi on Thursday offered advice to illegal immigrants seeking to avoid arrest and deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers,” reports National Review. This is akin to Sen. scumbag liar-Cory Booker illicitly escorting migrant women across the border.

CAT’S OUT OF THE BAG: “The chief of staff for Rep. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that her signature Green New Deal was not really about saving the planet after all,” reveals the Washington Examiner. “In a report by the Washington Post, Saikat Chakrabarti revealed that ‘it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all … we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.’” Of course, we at The Patriot Post have long made that case.

WITCH-HUNT SUBPOENAS: “The House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines Thursday to authorize subpoenas for documents and testimony from a dozen current and former Trump administration officials and associates related to the panel’s investigation into alleged obstruction of justice by President Trump. The committee also voted to authorize subpoenas for documents and testimony related to the Trump administration’s immigration policies, amid massive outrage by Democrats over conditions in detention facilities at the southern border.” (The Hill)

AN UGLY MILESTONE: “The federal government spent a record $3,355,970,000,000 in the first nine months of fiscal 2019 (October through June), according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released today. Prior to this fiscal year, the most the federal government had ever spent in the October-through-June period was in fiscal 2018, when the Treasury doled out $3,199,795,700,000 in constant June 2019 dollars.” (

NO BACKBONE AFTER ALL: As reported by The Hill, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey made a u-turn yesterday “a little more than a week after pulling state incentives from Nike following its decision to pull its Betsy Ross Flag shoes after former NFL star sicko-Colin Kaepernick raised issues around them.” Ducey remarked that “Arizona is open for business, and we welcome @Nike to our state.” We suppose money talks.

Other Notables

LOUISIANA PREPARES: “Wind and rain started to lash Louisiana’s Gulf Coast early Friday as residents prepare for what’s expected to be the area’s first hurricane of the season. … The storm’s rains are expected to pose a severe test of New Orleans’ improved post-Katrina flood defenses. Barry is forecast to bring more than a foot and a half of rain to parts of the state as it moves slowly inland. National Hurricane Center Director Ken Graham said pockets of Louisiana could have as much as 25 inches of rain.” (Fox News)

MUELLER DELAYED: “A House Judiciary Committee hearing with former special counsel Robert Mueller, who investigated possible obstruction of justice by President Trump, has been delayed by a week until July 24, according to a person familiar with the matter. … The two hours of time originally allotted for questioning had become a point of contention within the Democratic caucus because it risked preventing some Democratic members from asking questions.” (The Wall Street Journal)

TURKEY FLOUTS WARNING: “A shipment of a Russian-made missile system arrived in Ankara, Turkey, on Friday, which could cause tensions with the U.S. after the Defense Department said that sanctions could be issued if they accepted the weapons shipment.” (The Hill)

Closing Arguments

POLICY: Collective guilt for slavery doesn’t heal, it divides (Washington Examiner)

POLICY: The “blue dog” solution to the debt crisis (The Heartland Institute)

HUMOR: It’s time to admit that climate change is solely caused by Trump’s tax cuts for the super wealthy (NPC Daily)

~The Patriot Post


3 Reasons You Won’t Keep Your Doctor Under Single Payer

By Christopher Jacobs

{} ~ Over Fourth of July week, liberal activists took solace in the results of a poll that they said demonstrates the popularity of a single-payer health system… The survey showed diminished support for a “‘Medicare for All’ system if it diminished the role of private insurers.” However, support rose by nearly ten points if pollsters described single payer as a system that “diminished the role of private insurers but allowed you to keep your preferred doctor and hospital.” Staff for Sen. commie-Bernie Sanders (I-VT) claimed the survey showed single payer “is wildly popular when you tell people what it would actually do.” That claim misses the mark on several levels. First, most individuals wouldn’t consider a 55 percent approval rating—the level of support for a single-payer plan that allows patients to keep their doctors—as evidence of a “wildly popular,” as opposed to mildly popular, policy. Second, the survey described the plan as “Medicare for All.” In reality, however, commie-Sanders’ bill would abolish the existing Medicare program entirely, making it “Medicare for None.” In repeating the left’s false claims about single payer, the pollsters biased the survey in favor of commie-Sanders’ proposal, not against it. More fundamentally, though, single payer has precious little to do with keeping one’s doctor: For at least three reasons, many patients will lose access to their preferred physicians and hospitals under a single-payer system. ‘Free Care’ Means People Will Demand More…More Work, Less Pay…More Soul-Crushing Regulations Here’s hoping that the American people never get an opportunity to discover the fanciful nature of commie-Sanders’s promise that you can keep your doctor and hospital under single payer….


Who Really Speaks for Gazans?

By Muhammad AlZanati and Muhammad AlBuhaisi

{ } ~ Why Is nobody listening to the voice of Gazans? As the prospect of Middle East peace phases in and out, one has to realize that it’s been a long and nasty 13 years since Hamas… ruthlessly took over Gaza in a coup disguised as an election. The ups and down experienced by Gaza’s citizens have netted not just 2 wars, but economic problem after economic problem. As complaints have risen, a variety of spokespeople have stepped forward. They represent 2 specific types of representations. The first comes from the “Government”, and in all cases such as Jordan, Qatar, and others, these are either Kings or Dictators, or both. The second comes from groups like the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. What ties these groups together is a series of anomalies, all of which raise two very important questions: “How can they speak for Palestinians?” And, “If not them, then who?” The Hashemite King of Jordan claims to speak for the Gazans, but how can he when he has a country’s needs to represent? He openly states that he is the sole “moderate” negotiator between the Palestinians and Israel and the West, but under Abdullah’s 20-year reign, what has he negotiated? All he has done is line his pockets at the expense of Palestinians. The Muslim Brotherhood claims to represent us, but how? As far as we know, this terrorist organization is so destructive that most Islamic countries do not allow them to operate. They are classified as terrorists. But apparently their best friend is the King of Jordan because he allows them to operate. The Palestinian Authority (PA) – the recognized governing body – represents no one except the needs of Abbas and his leaders, who live in luxury both in and out of the country. They are impudent, and quite frankly, no one pays attention to them. For example, Gaza is being strangled by Hamas, who is supposed to take orders from the PA, yet they don’t. Hamas is a political party that thrives on dictatorship, crushing the people, and lying to the world. Now is the perfect time for the Palestinian populace to stand up and follow new leaders, and I propose that an organization be created entitled something like the Palestinian Organization Coalition…


How Government-Inflated Housing Costs Contribute To Social Security’s Collapse

By Alex Muresianu

{} ~ If the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) new report is right, by 2049, the national debt will equal 144 percent of gross domestic product, or the total of all goods and services working Americans produce in an entire year… It’s the highest national debt projection in history—largely thanks to Social Security and Medicare spending. It’s a big cost, and young people of today and the future will be left to pick up the tab. Paying interest on the national debt in the future isn’t the only economic burden young Americans face. Politicians and commentators often point to the immense hurdles we encounter in student loan debt, slow wage growth, and the high cost of living. Those problems tend to be considered separately from the national debt, but high housing prices—driven by zoning regulations—also grow the future cost of Social Security. Older generations, particularly the boomers, have predominantly relied upon spending on homeownership as a reliable way to build wealth and savings over time. That’s exactly why they tend to support public policies that inflate home prices. And it’s part of the reason why many young people can’t afford to buy a home. Because their net worth is so tied up in the worth of their house, older homeowners tend to push for regulations that make it even harder for younger people to get a house of our own. This includes zoning regulations that prevent the construction of new, tall apartment buildings and housing units. By restricting the housing supply like this, zoning laws artificially increase home values and the net worth of homeowners, often pricing out tenants and potential new residents. It’s contributing to why millennials are often found living with their parents long after they received their college diplomas. Older homeowners reap the benefits of those heavy regulations, and young people suffer. Sky-high rents make it harder for young workers to move to cities with better-paying, higher-productivity jobs, and makes having kids even more expensive. We see reduced birth rates among people who would like to have children if they could afford to. Homelessness rates, too, are driven by these strangling housing restrictions…


Abolishing ICE Means Letting the Worst Criminals Imaginable Stay in the USA

By Hubert Collins

{ } ~ The call to abolish ICE is repeated over and over again in American politics. This mantra is likely to be repeated with even greater frequency and intensity as the race for the Democrats’ presidential nomination heats up… But what does ICE actually do? A quick look at some of their actions from the past few weeks reveals the agency to be an unambiguous force for good. Action: Over 17 Tons of Cocaine Seized from a Liberian Ship The street value of that much cocaine is north of one billion dollars. Though opioids have been getting almost all the attention whenever our country’s drug epidemic is discussed, thousands are killed by cocaine every year, too. The number is climbing as well. The Washington Post notes that, “Overdose deaths from cocaine increased by about 18 percent each year during the five-year 2011-2016 period.” Date: June 21, 2019 Action: Tunisian with Ties to Terrorist Groups Deported The man in question, Houcine Ghoul, was a strong supporter of ISIS, and believed in violently imposing Islam worldwide. In their press release on the matter, ICE gives this background to his case: The investigation into Ghoul’s conduct began in April 2014 when Ghoul posted a photo online that explicitly displayed support for the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS), a designated foreign terrorist organization. This photo displayed an individual holding a sign with the Arabic phrase, “The victory of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,” and then below in English, “ISIS,” and “N. Carolina, USA,” the state where Ghoul was then residing. The photo later appeared in an online propaganda video posted by others to display worldwide support for ISIS. Though he did not use his actual name or identity for the online accounts, Ghoul provided a self-description within the account, “Extremist, terrorist, tough, brain-washed, radical, I love explosions, booby trapping, beheading the enemy, and am among the supporters of establishing the religion with the sword.” Later, when Mr. Ghoul applied to become an American citizen, he lied and claimed to have never been affiliated with a terrorist government or advocated the overthrow of a government. Now, he’s one less threat to worry about…


French Judge Rules Murdering Terrorist Has a Right to Privacy

by Patrick Dunleavy

{ } ~ In the court of the absurd, any fool can be a judge. That appears to be the case in France, where the Versailles Administrative Court has ruled that Islamic terrorist Salah Abdeslam has the right to a private life in prison… Abdeslam, you may recall, was captured during a March 2016 shootout with Belgium counter terrorism police. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison for the Brussels gunfight. Police were searching for him after he was identified by a video taken during a wave of terror attacks that had occurred in Paris six months earlier. After his arrest and prosecution for the Brussels incident, he was transferred to a French prison where he is awaiting a separate prosecution for his role in the November 2015 Paris attacks that killed 130 people and injured 350 more. Salah’s brother, Brahim, blew himself up as police approached him during an attack in front of the Comptoir Voltaire café. Abdeslam’s attorney, Frank Berton, filed suit against prison authorities, alleging invasion of privacy because of surveillance cameras that monitored Salah’s every movement in the Fleury-Merogis prison. It is France’s largest maximum security prison and the facility where several Islamic terrorists have emerged after being radicalized there. But France reportedly has strict privacy laws, and in 2017 a court ruled the monitoring went too far, even for a convicted and unrepentant terrorist. Adding insult to injury, the court in Abdeslam’s litigation issued an award of €500 Euros – approximately $560 to Abdeslam for his pain and suffering while being monitored. We have previously written about France’s failed de-radicalization program for incarcerated people most vulnerable to Islamic radicalization. Now, in light of this ridiculous ruling, it appears that France no longer has any effective prison security measures in place to oversee the jailed terrorists…


Armed With the Truth: The Bible & the Constitution

Robin Smith: Today, we constitutional conservatives must either arm ourselves with the Truth of the battle being fought against us or lose ground daily. While the tactic employed on the political Left of framing the opposition as extremists is standard operational procedure, it results in conservatives being marginalized and polarized as “dangerous.”

So, did you read about the dangers of honoring the U.S. Constitution, which are similar to the dangers of honoring the teachings of the Bible? Leave it to an “intellectual” on the political Left to take the moral “high ground” to virtue signal that the Goldilocks approach to belief in Truth is approved. Yep, that “just-right” method based on one’s personal taste and preference, not hard facts, is sanctioned as best versus standards that transcend time, place, culture, and trends.

Last week in an NBC News piece, The Cult of the Constitution, a book written by Mary Anne Franks was promoted to be a reasonable view. Yet when distilled down to its simplest elements, Franks argues that if you believe in the fundamentals of the Constitution, just as in the fundamentals of the Bible, you’re an extremist and your radical positions don’t create a better country. In fact, contends article author Noah Berlatsky, those of us who believe in the Bible and Rule of Law as foundational to our lives “will create a worse one.”

The title of the piece clearly warns the reader: “Like the Bible, the Constitution can be a harmful document in the wrong hands.” Let’s start there. Compare that, again, the political Left takes the posture that anything in the hands of any individual that’s not government-controlled, sanctioned by the thought police of the self-described tolerant population of “progressives” or from their world of equity from redistribution and faux fairness is dangerous. A gun is dangerous. The Bible is dangerous. The Constitution is dangerous. Earned wealth is dangerous. Private property is dangerous. The pursuit of happiness is dangerous. Liberty is dangerous. To the world of the disgruntled victims, yes, most everything is dangerous — even life itself.

But ideology is especially dangerous, since it’s the fuel that runs the combustible engine of activity that separates those who are makers, capable of self-reliance, self-governance, and independence from the growing mass that ebbs and flows as one malcontented mash of dependents who take from others in their devotion to social justice that is simply prettied-up socialism. So, to make the point, Franks’s Cult of the Constitution is given a mini-review and paralleled to that other dangerous text that is treated as infallible by billions across the globe: the Bible.

A professor of law at the University of Miami, Franks writes in her tome, “The combination of reverence and ignorance is at the heart of all fundamentalism.” In the introduction to her book published by the Stanford University Press, Franks speaks of her salvation as a child, followed by experiences that produced questions leading into her pursuit of the law as a field of study, equally producing some questions. It appears that her questions on life have framed her views with a big dose of irony.

Specifically, the legal scholar observed that in both the Christian community of faith and in the legal community, the habit of selectively picking and choosing Bible Truth and constitutional rights served the religious fundamentalists and constitutional fundamentalists, respectively, in an allegedly negative and dangerous manner. The argument, it seems, should be against selective application of truths and principles, not the adherence of the same.

An excerpt of the introduction declares, “Much as the evangelical community I was raised in focused on verses about homosexuality or women’s inferiority while ignoring the Golden Rule, constitutional fundamentalists focus on individual rights of speech and bearing arms while disregarding the equal protection guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment. This is not just a tactic of conservatives, whose affinity for Christian fundamentalism is no secret, but also of self-identified liberals.”

While Franks seems to recognize selectivity as a tool used by both sides of the political aisle, she makes no effort to hide her wide embrace of societal privilege that is bestowed upon white men. She writes, “The fundamentalist reading of the Constitution, especially of the First and Second Amendments, produces the same effect. The most powerful and privileged people in America — white men — cast themselves as an underclass engaged in a protracted struggle against the women and minorities seeking to censor and disarm them.”

Both Franks and NBC’s Berlatsky tear after gun rights as an example of “constitutional fundamentalism” that is dangerous. Offering the oft-cited but erroneous belief that the Second Amendment only confers a right to have an armed “well-regulated militia,” the argument is that constitutional fundamentalists take the extreme position when defending their right to own a weapon for personal defense. To illustrate, Franks observes that gun owners declare, “I carry a gun because it’s my constitutional right, and I feel better when I have it and the fact that it makes you uncomfortable and that it objectively makes you less safe is something I just don’t care about.” Berlatsky editorializes of the premise, “This essentially selfish logic is also a hallmark of First Amendment fundamentalism.”

Further, Franks hangs her framing on the peg of the Fourteenth Amendment, which establishes equal protection of the law guaranteed for all citizens. Franks, in her own reasoning, utilizes the parallel of salvation — the belief that those who accept that Jesus Christ paid the ultimate penalty required of all sin by a righteous God live lives that are separate, distinct and are saved: “I wrote this book to advocate for the position that the only rights any of us should have are the rights that all of us should have. If only some of us are saved, all of us are lost.”

And, there it is. Equity of results. All or none. Franks misses the fact that some are saved through belief and a decision to embrace, follow, and observe through lives committed to our Christian faith, but all are given equity of opportunity. Similarly, all are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. All U.S. citizens are also given rights. However, individuals must choose to embrace these rights as gifts to employ for personal growth, existence, and authentic Liberty, not rights to be granted by a government entity in efforts to develop a permanent dependency of its population to the State.

The irony of Franks argument is that both the Bible and the Constitution are selectively harvested to apply to situations when the entirety, she says, must be embraced and applied to all. Well, that’s exactly what Constitutional Conservatives aim to do but selectivity of another flavor is applied that’s secular in theology and social in its governance by the Left.

So, arm yourselves with the Truth. The battle of ideas that create our culture rages. ~The Patriot Post  


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *