Connect with us

Politics

Biden’s Title IX Rule Guarantees Discrimination, Censorship, And The End Of Parents’ Rights

Published

on

In a call with reporters last week, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona disingenuously claimed that the Biden administration’s sweeping new Title IX rule makes “crystal clear that everyone can access schools that are safe, welcoming and that respect their rights.” Actually, the new Title IX regulations socially engineer every component of the educational environment to create dangerous and unwelcoming schools for girls and young women, while also undermining parents who affirm biological reality.

Despite the common misconception that Title IX simply protects women’s collegiate sports, it is a robust anti-discrimination mandate that prohibits federally funded educational institutions — early childhood, K-12, educational programs, and higher education — from discriminating “on the basis of sex.” Title IX, which was enacted as part of the Education Amendments of 1972, states: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, [emphasis added] be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

The Biden administration’s recently finalized 1,577-page regulations dramatically expand Title IX’s statutory protections for sex discrimination by redefining “sex” to include so-called gender identity, sex stereotypes, sexual orientation, pregnancy, and sex characteristics. But, as the vast majority of Americans know, “sex” (sometimes incorrectly referred to as gender) is not the same as “gender identity.” As The Washington Post acknowledged last year, polling reveals, “Most Americans don’t believe it’s even possible to be a gender that differs from that assigned at birth.”

Ending Free Speech

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Politics

Exclusive: Wisconsin Judge Stops Elections Commission From ‘Fomenting Election Fraud’

Published

on

A Marinette County judge on Friday slapped a temporary restraining order on the Wisconsin Elections Commission in a lawsuit alleging the election regulator puts Badger State voters in the untenable position of committing election fraud or opting not to cast an absentee ballot. 

The litigation is the latest in a long line of complaints against a dysfunctional elections commission and its embattled administrator, an agency that has had trouble following Wisconsin election law over its tumultuous existence. WEC’s latest controversial decision could prove costly to voters and taxpayers alike.  

Judge James Morrison issued the temporary restraining order, enjoining WEC from requiring that Wisconsin’s approximately 1,900 local election clerks use suspect absentee ballot envelopes while the court deliberates on the merits of the complaint. 

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of a Wisconsin voter by Attorneys Kevin Scott and Daniel Eastman. 

The complaint alleges that in approving new ballot envelopes recommended by WEC staff, the commission violated Wisconsin election law. If used, the envelopes “would cause voters to falsely certify that the ballot envelope itself is an original or a copy of the ballot request generated through MyVote when it is not in any way.”

“By forcing people to falsely certify that the return envelope itself is a copy of a completely different document, WEC created a situation where people who requested absentee ballots through MyVote were either committing election fraud by making a false statement in conjunction with voting a ballot, or were forced to not vote absentee —

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

Former NIH Director Admits Government Was Top Source Of Covid Misinformation

Published

on

Four years ago, U.S. state, local, and federal goverments pushed “social-distancing” policies separating Americans six feet away from other people everywhere they went. Now former National Institute of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins has admitted no “science or evidence” ever backed these heavy-handed, comprehensive restrictions — another key proof the left’s war on so-called “disinformation” is so dangerous.

A memo National Review obtained, from the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, details Collins’ closed-door testimony earlier this year. It reveals that Collins had not seen evidence on March 22, 2020, to support the widely obeyed federal policy when the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) instituted six-foot social distancing rules.

“Do you recall science or evidence that supported the six-foot distance?” Collins was asked.

“I do not,” Collins said. “I did not see evidence, but I’m not sure I would have been shown evidence at that point.”

“Have you seen any evidence since then supporting six feet?”

“No,” Collins responded.

So Collins admits the federal government lacked any scientific basis for this massive social policy it pushed on Americans, including by colluding with Big Tech to shut down public debate about Covid-19 responses. Such debate could have revealed that many Covid policies weren’t backed by good research. Instead, numerous federal officials pressed Google, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to shut down skepticism and contrary information it falsely labeled “misinformation” and “disinformation,” including articles from The Federalist.

This censorship effort effectively secured an information monopoly for federal agencies, including the

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

This Week In Lawfare Land: Bragg’s ‘Star Witness’ Blows Up His Own Credibility

Published

on

With the criminal cases in Georgia, Florida, and Washington D.C. slowing to a halt, New York is the only place where the lawfare show — or perhaps circus — has proceeded in any meaningful way. And it was on full display. 

In Manhattan criminal court, the jury heard testimony from the prosecution’s star witness (and admitted liar) Michael Cohen. Cohen’s testimony was so damaging to the prosecution that even CNN’s Anderson Cooper remarked, “If I was a juror in this case watching that, I would think, ‘This guy’s making this up as he’s going along.’” 

As the other criminal cases are stalled, it appears nearly certain that President Trump will not face any additional criminal trials before the November election. And in the meantime, the partisan nature of this lawfare becomes more obvious by the day as President Joe Biden taunts and fundraises off of President Trump’s legal prosecutions

Here’s the latest information you need to know about each case.

Read our previous installments here.

Manhattan, New York: Prosecution by DA Alvin Bragg for NDA Payment

How we got here: In this New York state criminal case, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg — who The New York Times acknowledged had “campaigned as the best candidate to go after the former president” — charged former President Donald Trump in April 2023 with 34 felony charges for alleged falsification of business records. Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen paid pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 presidential election as part of a nondisclosure agreement

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Trending