This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The State Department's secret payments to organizations that "rate" American news sources – campaigns that have been used to stop companies from doing business with conservative publications – are the subject of a new congressional subpoena.

The Washington Examiner explains the action was triggered by State's refusal to turn over records on programs that are part of what Republicans charge is a "censorship-by-proxy" scheme that interferes with small businesses.

The subpoena is from the House Small Business Committee and is part of a year-long investigation into the Global Engagement Center in State, which gave $100,000 of tax money to the Global Disinformation Index, a London-based group that works in America to "pressure advertisers to boycott conservative media."

That funding triggered a new law just last year that bans some Pentagon money from being given to the London group. Also, the Federalist and Daily Wire have sued the Biden administration for its "egregious government operations to censor the American press."

The committee, headed by Rep. Roger Williams. R-Texas, has been trying to extract financial records from the Global Engagement Center over charges of censorship schemes.

Committee members want to see a list of recipients of GEC money.

But the State Department has refused.

The subpoena specifically asks for details on cash handed out to NewsGuard, the Global Disinformation Index, the Atlantic Council, Park Capital Investment Group, and Poynter Institute.

Williams told Anthony Blinken, Joe Biden's secretary of state, "The House Committee on Small Business is investigating the U.S. government’s censorship-by-proxy and revenue interference of American small businesses because of their lawful speech."

GEC, housed at State, was supposed to focus on propaganda abroad, but has been revealed as a leader in the domestic journalism censorship of what it calls "disinformation."

That would whatever facts do not support the leftist political and social agenda.

A key component has been GDI's insistence that mainstream news organizations are not credible if they are not leftist, and its pressure on advertisers to hurt them.

Williams said he is working on "legislative solutions to federal funds being used to demonetize, tarnish, or censor domestic small businesses on the basis of their lawful speech."

"Rather than comply with the committee’s investigation into and oversight of the GEC’s funding of third parties who engage in these activities, the State Department has, stunningly, provided only two documents totaling 12 pages, with heavy redactions, in the span of one year,” he charges.

One option the House Republicans could choose would be to defund GEC, the report said.

The legal case by the Wire, Federalist and the state of Texas charges that promoting companies that create lists of conservative news outlet targets is a violation of the First Amendment.

"All Americans deserve a fair shot to compete in the marketplace, and the government should not be tipping the scales against any business for their legal speech on the internet." Williams told the Washington Examiner. "The refusal to comply with repeated document requests is unacceptable, especially when the livelihoods of many small businesses are on the line."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Journalism in America no longer is what it once was: A reporting of the facts on an issue, including opinions from experts and those with alternative views – basically covered in the traditional "Who, What, When, Where, Why and How?"

Now those practices are described as providing a "false balance," or "bothsideism," where, one leftist online site describes, "journalists may present evidence and arguments out of proportion to the actual evidence for each side, or may omit information that would establish one side's claims as baseless." Some journalists openly have condemned including information that does not align with the politically correct position.

That ideology claims the global warming agenda has been handicapped by such thinking. Likewise the arguments that support a belief in evolution over creation. And vicious attacks on President Donald Trump when he charges that there was election misbehavior during the 2020 president race.

Leftist want Americans to believe, without hesitation, they are at fault for global warming, evolution explains everything and Joe Biden, the now feeble octogenarian who was declared "diminished" by a federal prosecutor, is as sharp as a tack and drew more votes that Trump, legally.

And it's hitting even the high-profile journalistic enterprises, like the Washington Post.

That organization, with a multiple of priority and standards changes since Amazon chief Jeff Bezos bought it years ago, now apparently has its reporters investigating their own bosses.

On top of a multitude of scandals already appearing at the publication, there's now a 3,000-word investigative story about new publisher William Lewis, and an incoming top editor.

It stunningly charges that Lewis "declined to comment through a Post spokesperson in response to a list of detailed questions" from his own reporters.

Axios reported the turmoil is atop his handling of several controversies in just the past few days.

One is a "phone-hacking scandal" that happened in Britain's Fleet Street in the 2000s, and apparently involved Lewis.

The New York Times was joining in with the Post's investigation of the Post. And it charges two decades ago Lewis "used fraudulently obtained phone and company records in newspaper articles," and the Post explores the ethics of Robert Winnett, a London editor who is moving to the Post's office.

The Post even conceded former senior managing editor Cameron Barr, who left last year, will oversee the paper's coverage of Lewis.

A report at Mediaite headlined its charges, "Scathing Washington Post Expose alleges incoming editor used 'thief' to aid reporting."

It described the work of the Post reporters as a "bombshell" that uncovered the past for Winnett.

"The exposé, which relies on unpublished book drafts and documents from self-proclaimed 'thief' John Ford, reportedly claims he used deceitful methods to aid Winnett’s reporting at the Sunday Times in London," the report explained.

It notes Ford was arrested in 2010 for trying to steal former Prime Minister Tony Blair's memoir.

Winnett now is at the Telegraph, and "allegedly reassured Ford during his arrest and arranged legal assistance, emphasizing the 'remarkable omerta' within British journalism."

The story charges Ford's drafts, seen by the Post, cover his "his involvement in obtaining confidential details about Britain’s elite through unethical means, with many stories seemingly aligning with Winnett’s published work."

The dispute is compounded by the information about Lewis, who at the Sunday Times in 2004 linked to stories allegedly based on hacked phones.

The Times explained the published account suggests Lewis and Winnett used fraudulently obtained phone and company records in their publication.

"The use of deception, hacking and fraud is at the heart of a long-running British newspaper scandal, one that toppled a major tabloid in 2010 and led to years of lawsuits by celebrities who said that reporters improperly obtained their personal documents and voice mail messages," the report noted.

The report charged articles published were from material obtained surreptitiously by a private detective.

Other Post upheavals have included Sally Buzbee's abrupt departure, and reports that Lewis had objected to coverage of a new story in which he was involved.

Further, according to the report, "Lewis repeatedly offered an exclusive interview to an NPR reporter if the reporter agreed not to write about allegations against him in a British phone-hacking scandal, according to an account by that reporter."

Explained NPR in its comments about the disputes.

"A vast chasm divides common practices in the fiercely competitive confines of British journalism, where Lewis and Winnett made their mark, and what passes muster in the American news media. In several instances, their alleged conduct would raise red flags at major U.S. outlets, including The Washington Post."

Those issues include "a six-figure payment for a major scoop; planting a junior reporter in a government job to secure secret documents; and relying on a private investigator who used subterfuge to secure private documents from their computers and phones. The investigator was later arrested."

It noted, "The stakes are high. Post journalists ask what values Lewis and Winnett will import to the paper, renowned for its coverage of the Nixon-era Watergate scandals and for holding the most powerful figures in American life to account in the generations since."

The Post lost $77 million last year and about half of its digital audience since 2020.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

There are key individuals in America's history who sometimes do not get a lot of recognition, despite the critical roles they played.

Such as Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, who drilled a group of farmers and tradesmen into a Continental Army that, despite the odds, beat the British redcoats.

And then there's Capt. Peter Humrickhouse, who crossed the Delaware and wintered with Gen. George Washington at Valley Forge. He also delivered the ammunition that saved Yorktown.

And the group, individual names relatively obscure, who saved the Liberty Bell from invaders.

And the Zengers, Peter Zenger, the imprisoned newspaper editor and later, his widow, Anna Catherina, who carried on his fights.

And others, who all shared a common allegiance, in addition to their support for the fledgling America.

It's their participation in what then was the German Reformed Church in America, now known as the Reformed Church in the United States.

An organization that, stunningly, predates almost every other organization in the U.S., and is set to celebrate its Tricentennial in just one year, on June 12, 2025.

Planning already has begun for the events which will include a special celebration at the famed Mount Rushmore monument in South Dakota, according to Wayne Johnson, chair of the Tricentennial Celebration of the German Reformed Church in America.

Some of the members of that organization actually were the soldiers who were recruited to be Washington's personal guard, event organizers confirm.

The celebratory event will be co-hosted by the Mount Rushmore Society, the regional DAR, Daughters of the American Revolution, and others.

Plans already are being outlined online.

Organizers are explaining that the Mount Rushmore event is focus on patriotism, and its community-wide appeal.

The website includes a number of relatively unknown historical incidents, including the one about the Liberty Bell:

In 1777, England made its second greatest effort of the war. British General Howe left a garrison in New York and took 13,000 troops to capture Philadelphia. Washington rose to defend the capital, but on September 11 was outflanked and although defeated at Brandywine Creek, his army was not destroyed. Washington retreated to Chester, PA. Several days later the Americans suffered another defeat at Paoli, PA. Several hundred Americans were killed under a British bayonet attack. The American Congress fled from Philadelphia to York, PA, and Howe entered Philadelphia without opposition in late September.

Howe quartered a part of his army at nearby Germantown. On October 4, the Americans attacked this garrison and seemed to have won a victory until the British made a determined stand in the Chew house. British reinforcements came up from Philadelphia while the besieged house still held out, and Washington’s little army retreated. The Americans then took up their miserable winter quarters at Valley Forge.

Fearing the possibility of capture by the enemy, on June 16, 1777, the Assembly of Pennsylvania meeting in the State House at Philadelphia voted to authorize the removal of all bells belonging to several churches and other public buildings and all copper and brass to a place of safety. The Continental Congress, meeting in Independence Hall, on September 14, 1777 (three days after the Battle of Brandywine) resolved that all public bells in Philadelphia be removed to a place of security upon a near approach of the enemy to the city.

The order to remove the bells was passed along to Colonel Benjamin Flower, and his instructions read: “Ordered: that Colonel Flower employ James Worrell, Francis Allison and Mr. Evans, Carpenters, or such other workmen as he may think proper to employ, to take down the Bells of all the public Buildings in this city and convey them to safety.” They had their work cut out for them. Not only did they have to get the bells down, but also to convey them to safety. Eleven bells in all had to be removed. Most had to be taken from fairly high steeples, loaded aboard wagons, and spirited out of the city, all under the cover of night.

Once they were down, Colonel Flowers had to decide whether or not to move them by Army transport wagons leaving the area with increasing frequency. If they were to be overtaken by the British, they would certainly end up as shot designed for Americans. His reasoning might then have led him to seek out farmers bringing produce into the city from the area where the bells were destined to go, Allentown (then Northampton Town). Traditionally, these Pennsylvania German farmers brought their wares into Philadelphia and re-turned to their farms north of the city with empty wagons. A few of these wagons, with the bells secreted in them and covered with hay or straw, might be a better device. Should the British pass such a convoy, there would be a slightly lesser chance that they would be searched.

There are two stories recorded about whose wagon was used to haul the Liberty Bell out of Philadelphia. One states that the man chosen was one John Jacob Mickley. The exact date of the bells’ departure is unknown, perhaps a tribute to the extent of Flowers’ well-kept secret. Some historians give the date as September 16 or 17 when the bells were taken down. Whatever the date, Howe marched into Philadelphia on September 27 but did not send a patrol in pursuit of the fleeing wagon train, undoubtedly because he needed all of his men to secure the city and to repulse Washington’s counterattack at Germantown on October 4.

The bells were taken via Bethlehem to Allentown. At some point along the way, the bell wagons joined an Army convoy of some 700 other wagons, and they rattled into Bethlehem. As the wagon bearing the heavy Great Bell reached the center of town on September 24, the great weight broke the wagon. As the first story goes, the Bell was transferred to a wagon owned and driven by Frederick Loeser, who then carted the Bell on to Allentown.

The Bell’s hiding place until 1778 was in the basement of the Zion High German Reformed Church of Allentown, where it arrived early on the morning of September 25. Other bells were hidden in the same basement and the Church above them served as a military hospital until the British evacuated Philadelphia.

John Jacob Mickley and Frederick Loeser both have commemorative tablets in Pennsylvania which honor the parts they played in the saving of the Bell. The Loeser tablet stands at Loeser Lake just off Route 143 near Jacksonville, Pennsylvania in upper Lehigh County, not far from Frederick’s farm land. The tablet dedicated to Mickley is outside the entrance to the Liberty Bell Shrine located at the Zion Church in Allen-town, and also mentions Frederick’s role in the transport of the Bell. The shrine is housed in the same basement where the Bell was harbored during its year-long stay in Allentown.

When the British completed their evacuation of Philadelphia on June 18, 1777, the bells at Allentown were free to leave their refuge, and they lost no time in doing so. It is recorded that they departed on June 27, and on August 22, the Pennsylvania Packet stated that the bells had been returned safe and hung again.

The organization also notes the participation of Theodore Roosevelt in the church.

"Roosevelt originally belonged to the Reformed Church in America (RCA), a Dutch-American group. As a private person, Roosevelt attended religious services wherever he was. He preferred the Reformed Church if one were available to attend and is reported to have said, 'I take a sentimental satisfaction in worshiping in the Church of my fathers.'"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The civilized world was horrified last Oct. 7, and after, when Hamas terrorists invaded Israeli territory and butchered some 1,200 civilians, often by horrific methods such as burning whole families alive.

Not, apparently, Palestinians, though.

In fact, a poll cited by Palestinian Media Watch reveals that only 9% of Palestinians think Hamas committed war crimes.

And 67% support the atrocities that happened that day.

The numbers come from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. Palestinians were questioned between May 26 and June 1, 2024. The poll includes Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The PMW report explained, "For those who still delude themselves into thinking that Palestinians are moderate, think again. For president, Palestinians overwhelmingly prefer the Hamas leader (46%) over the PA/Fatah leader (5%). Fatah is only preferred when their candidate is the terrorist Marwan Barghouti, a convicted murderer, who is serving 5 life sentences."

The report continued, "This must be an eye-opener for Americans and Europeans who are pressuring Israel to accept the Palestinian Authority as a peace partner. The PA represents no one. The Palestinian population is not interested in peace. Mahmoud Abbas only represents himself. And if they ever have a future election, they are certain to elect a terrorist as president and Hamas to rule the parliament."

The numbers show 67% say the Oct. 7 offensive was correct, 64% are "satisfied" with Hamas' work in the war and while 9% said Hamas committed war crimes, 97% said the same of the victim, Israel.

Further, 67% of respondents said Hamas will win the war against Israel.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A constitutional expert is warning that Democrats are "bingeing" on their lawfare campaigns against President Donald Trump, like drunks on alcohol.

The comparison isn't a good look for Democrats, but Jonathan Turley, a longtime liberal and professor at George Washington University, charged, "Lawfare is nothing if not intoxicating for Democratic politicians."

The comments were triggered a decision by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin to join the "lawfare frenzy."

"The conviction of Trump on 34 felonies has either thrilled or repelled citizens. For many of us, it is a sign of the degradation of our legal system. Even the chief CNN legal analyst has acknowledged that Bragg contorted the law to bring the recent case against former President Donald Trump in an unprecedented prosecution," explained Turley, who has testified before Congress as an expert on the Constitution.

"Yet, the use of the legal system for political purposes is clearly popular in New York where people were literally dancing in the street outside of the courthouse after the recent verdict against Trump. Now Platkin’s office has announced that it is 'reviewing' whether to pull the liquor licenses for Trump golf clubs since he is now convicted of felonies in New York."

Trump's conviction in a court run by Juan Merchan, who insisted on keeping the case even though his daughter was fundraising off her father's courtroom decisions as the case developed, is under appeal. Further, there are unresolved allegations of juror misconduct, based on a social media statement from someone who said a "cousin" had confirmed the conviction before it happened.

Turley noted, "Many of us have expressed alarm at the politicization of the criminal justice system in New York by figures such as Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg."

He explained the New Jersey Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control was looking at Merchan's court result regarding Trump's liquor licenses for the Trump National Golf Club in Colts Neck, Lamington Farm Club, and Trump National Golf Club Philadelphia in Pine Hill.

That review is based on the vague and dated law governing crimes of "moral turpitude."

He noted, "Even the New Jersey Alcoholic Beverage Control handbook notes that in 'some instances, it may be unclear whether a conviction involves an element of moral turpitude.' Yet, Trump has a way to bringing clarity for his critics whenever they must chose between politics and principle."

He said for Democrats, "it seems that any act by Trump is by definition base, vile, and depraved."

"The piling on of investigations and charges by Democratic officials has reinforced Trump’s long narrative of a weaponization of the legal system against him and his supporters. Polling shows that most citizens view some of these cases as political prosecutions and that they are having diminishing impact on voter preferences. Yet, they remain thrilling for Democratic voters who lionize prosecutors who come up with novel or unprecedented avenues to hammer Trump or hit his businesses. It does not seem to matter that removing the liquor licenses of these clubs can endanger thousands of jobs of citizens or chill other businesses in considering investments in New York or New Jersey."

Other Democrat lawfare activists have brought other cases against Trump over his business operations, his business records, his presidential papers, even  his comments about the 2020 election, all in what appears to be an effort to defeat Trump before the 2024 election, so he cannot be in a position to take Joe Biden out of the White House and disrupt Democrat control of the American government, economy and more.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The right to free speech also applies to physicians in America.

That's the result of a recent decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in pending litigation.

"AAPS can now pursue its claim against censorship by the Biden administration," explained Jane Orient, M.D., the executive director for the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons.

The AAPS had sued three medical specialty boards after they threatened to take action against the board certifications of several physicians – solely for speaking out on medical controversies.

The threats, if carried out, could injure those physicians, as they need the certifications in order to practice their specialties.

But the punishments were over the physicians' opinions on controversial issues, the organization reported.

Defendants in the case are the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Family Medicine, and the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology.

Additionally, Joe Biden's homeland security secretary, is a defendant because of the government's participation in the alleged censorship.

It was the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that recently issued a decision that means the AAPS case can move forward.

"This influential court established the right to object in court to censorship of physicians' speech on topics ranging from government COVID policies to abortion," explained AAPS lawyer Andrew Schlafly.

The ruling held there is a constitutional "right to hear" that allows a sponsor of conferences, such as the AAPS Education Foundation to challenge censorship that chills presentations.

"This landmark ruling will be cited nationwide for decades to come," Schlafly explained.

AAPS sued three boards for their "threatened actions against the board certifications of physicians because of speaking out on medical controversies."

The Biden administration and its appointees, the pharmaceutical industry and the medical establishment long has promoted abortion as "health care," when it in fact is the one medical procedure that is intended to destroy one of every two patients involved.

Further, the same interests promoted the experimental COVID shots mandated by both government and industry during the pandemic, shots that actually now have been proven to result in side effects up to and including death.

The ruling included a majority ruling from the 5th Circuit, plus a special concurrence from Judge James Ho, who explained the Constitution's speech rights to those who insist on censoring those with views that differ from theirs.

"In America, we don't fear disagreement – we embrace it. We persuade – we don't punish. We engage in conversation – not cancellation," he explained.

"We know how to disagree with one another without destroying one another. Or at least that's how it's supposed to work."

Schlafly said, "With this landmark ruling in favor of the First Amendment, our country can end improper censorship of viewpoints," Schlafly said.

Peter McCullough, M.D., a medical expert on the issue, explained, "Several medical credentialing boards instituted a COVID-19 Misinformation Policies in September of 2021 and have used them to censor and retaliate against academic and practicing physicians who performed research, clinical care, and presented their findings on the early treatment of acute COVID-19 and vaccine safety. The boards’ position is that they and the government agencies they agree with, hold agency over the truth. By establishing that power dynamic, member who disagree with them are spreading misinformation and can be convicted in closed panel meetings without the member being allowed to present their views based upon the data and evidence at hand."

McCullough is an internist, cardiologist and epidemiologist holding degrees from Baylor University, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, University of Michigan, and Southern Methodist University.

He manages common infectious diseases as well as the cardiovascular complications of both the viral infection and the injuries developing after the COVID-19 vaccine in Dallas, Texas.

He's been published in more than 1,000 publications and has nearly 700 citations in the National Library of Medicine.

And he's testified multiple times in the U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives and other legislative bodies.

In a column online, he explained the court ruling "also invalidated Galveston Local Rule 6, by which that federal district court has infringed on plaintiffs' right to amend their lawsuits. The 5th Circuit agreed with AAPS that this district court rule is contrary to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and thus must be voided."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Muslims in America are "on the road" to running the government of the United States. At least, that was the clarion message of Osama Siblani, editor and publisher of the Arab American News, speaking at the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, Michigan, last month.

Siblani's comments can be seen in a video posted to X by the Middle East Media Research Institute, or MEMRI:

"We have the best that we can offer to the United States of America," Siblani said. "Not only in Michigan, but across the country. And we offered our best. The best is yet to come. I can be very confident to tell you that we are on the road to the White House, to Congress, to the decision-making everywhere in the United States!"

Siblani added, triumphantly: "Forty years ago, we had a mayor for this town who talked about 'the Arab problem.' Guess what? The Arabs are [now] ruling Dearborn, Dearborn Heights and Hamtramck! So, brothers and sisters, we are on the road!" he concluded.

WND spoke to one person aspiring to the halls of Congress, but who is the diametric opposite of a Muslim radical, about the prospect of Islamic influence in the U.S. government expanding dramatically. Jerrod Sessler, candidate for the Republican seat in central Washington's 4th congressional district, is a Christian and decorated military veteran endorsed by President Donald Trump, Gen. Michael Flynn and the House Freedom Caucus.

Commenting generally on the world's religions, Sessler told WND, "There’s almost always an underlying tension between good and evil." And as Muslims continue to run for office in America, he said, "the tension here is between Christianity and Islam."

"A violent radicalism is evident within Islam – often referred to as Sharia law – but the population, at the leading of mass media, generally separates them from the average mosque attendee," Sessler explained. Yet, he contends, "Muslims cannot run from the radical faction within their faith, and there is no violent counterpart within Christianity."

Sessler acknowledges that there are non-violent Muslims living in America and around the world. Yet, he tells WND, "they do not have freedom to speak against the radical faction within Islam without drawing the ire of those very radicals."

Referring to his own Christian faith, Sessler shares unapologetically: "The God of the Bible offers grace through His Son Jesus' sacrifice." He adds, "We generally ignore the unhinged parts of Islam, but that only highlights the fact that it is wildly different than the grace afforded by God’s Son Jesus who offers redemption and full forgiveness through His sacrifice." Notes Sessler, starkly: "These two faith options could not be further apart."

Considering the God-given natural rights codified in the Constitution, Sessler suggests that "Americans should see statements about Islamic rule as a threat to freedom."

While he wishes to avoid expressing any negative sentiment towards any particular Muslim, Sessler concedes that their beliefs are essentially incompatible with the Judeo-Christian beliefs and values upon which America was founded. For him, "Islam is the underlying threat to our way of life in America." The idea that an Islamist would seek political office in the U.S. is a peculiar one, he argues, as "[he or she] can't actually fulfill the oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution."

For this, Sessler notes ironically, "I applaud them because many are doing the impossible." But on the other hand, he tells WND, "The people who elect them are either ignorant or motivated by something that may not be good for Americans."

"Think of how extreme it would be to give the majority of control in Congress to Islamic-leaning people. Would they preserve and protect the Constitution, or would they dismantle it and install something that aligns with the radical faction [and] with their belief system?"

Sessler is not surprised by the push for Islamists in the U.S. government. "They want to see their team win as much as Christians, but if we allow them that opportunity, then we will eventually lose the fundamentals of what it means to be a free American. Just imagine living in a situation where you cannot criticize your elected leaders for their poor or corrupt choices."

According to Sessler, "America is a Christian nation, so we should be able to handle some influx of migration from Islamic folks, but we also hope that they see Christians are actually working to show them a better way of living, believing and existing together."

The GOP congressional candidate ended with this warning: "Weak faith, distractions and social pressure to accept people, even those that threaten us, all contribute to the unsafe America that we find ourselves living in today."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A public interest organization, the Goldwater Institute, is taking issue with a "$140,000" college education in which students are told to "live like a bug."

But they are not taught the Constitution, the Civil War, or landmark Supreme Court cases.

It's part of colleges' abandonment of core educational missions in favor of indoctrination into "diversity, equity, and inclusion" discrimination programs.

"The situation is particularly grim at the University of Arizona, where a real assignment in a course that fulfills the 'Diversity and Equity' (D&E) core curriculum requirement instructs students to 'live like a bug' by 'walking around with tissue paper 'wings'' so they can better understand the experience of 'marginalized' groups," the institute explains.

The organization recently completed a report on the ideological agenda being pushed in schools.

It revealed students are being required to believe "racism is deeply embedded in U.S. history, society, and institutions," and that "white people hold unearned privilege while people of color have not had equal access to the 'American Dream.'"

And, students are told to apologize if they say something and someone else objects.

"Resist the temptation to become defensive. Instead, apologize, self-reflect, learn, and do better next time," they are told.

"A course on the science of bugs that fulfills the D&E requirement requires students to experiment with 'living like a bug'—including by 'walking around with tissue paper 'wings''—in order to understand the experience of immigrants, people of a different social class, and other 'marginalized' groups," the report found.

Goldwater explained, "For years, leftists have plotted to turn colleges into breeding grounds for activists by infusing the poisonous ideas of DEI into every aspect of campus life, from admissions to faculty hiring to classroom indoctrination.

"In recent weeks, the consequences of this scheme became all too clear. College campuses turned into hotbeds for mob violence, unprovoked assaults, and anti-Semitic calls for terrorism and genocide—all while Jewish students were forced to live in fear as their schools refuse to protect their rights. Sadly, it should come as no surprise that the same intolerant campus leftists who can’t stomach conservative speakers have decided Jewish students are 'oppressors' who deserve to be harassed, or worse."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

There's been no small content of lies among the statements Joe Biden has delivered: He claimed inflation was 9% when it took office; it was 1.4%. He claimed he knew absolutely nothing about son Hunter Biden's international business deals; evidence shows he met with principals. He claimed he's talked with international leaders – after they were dead.

Now his campaign has joined, apparently.

It was called out as a "blatant lie" a news reporter's statement that actually was the truth.

Social media statements document the sequence:

"Fox News reporter John Robert catches Biden campaign in a lie and brings all the receipts," charged the Gateway Pundit.

Not willing to let the Biden campaign get by with its latest falsehood, that a $35 cap on insulin for patients was due to Joe Biden, not President Donald Trump, Roberts responded:

"Yesterday, coming out of a segment in which the $35 insulin co-pay under the Inflation Reduction Act was mentioned, I remarked that I recalled back in May of 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that stated President Trump had a plan to lower insulin co-pays to $35. The Biden campaign’s rapid response issued a post on X saying the following: 'Fox host tries to claim Trump, not President Biden capped insulin at $35 a month. Fact-check: This is a blatant lie.' But there are receipts to dispute the Biden campaign’s claim about what I said."

He then outlined the evidence to support his reporting.

On social media, Roberts obviously had won fans:

"Well done John!"

"Good for you John!"

And there was one loaded with sarcasm: "The Biden campaign lied about something?"

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

For at least the third time, the state of Colorado's anti-Christian agenda has been cited – and condemned – by the federal courts.

The latest ruling said the state broke the law by excluding Catholic preschools from a universal preschool program – solely because those schools consider religious affiliates in making enrollment decisions.

It is the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty that explained a federal court ruling cites the state's illegal exclusion of those preschools from a program that funds 15 hours per week of free preschool to more than 40,000 families.

During its first year, it benefited families with children in private, public and faith-based preschools.

But leftist activists inside the state's bureaucracy refused to authorize benefits to families who sent their children to St. Mary's and St. Bernadette's Catholic preschools because those institutions ask families to share their Catholic beliefs.

The court found, in its 101-page opinion, that the state's discrimination "created an unworkable scheme that breaches the appropriate limits on state power."

The court found the state had "no compelling interest" in its discriminatory policy.

"Last year, a different federal judge in Denver also issued a ruling against the state, in a case brought by a separate religious preschool raising similar claims," Becket reported.

"Of course a Catholic school shouldn’t be punished for caring about its students’ religion," explained Nick Reaves, a Becket lawyer. "Colorado richly deserves this injunction, as it did the earlier one."

The schools explained the state's discrimination violated the Free Exercise, Free Speech and Establishment clauses of the First Amendment.

Integral to the state's agenda is that it demands schools incorporate sexual orientation and gender identity ideologies into their programs. The state has plunged headfirst into that ideology since the election of homosexual Gov. Jared Polis.

The judge said, "The department has allowed faith-based providers to deny children and families equal opportunity based on their religious affiliation, or lack thereof, and has cited no compelling interest for permitting that discrimination while denying plaintiffs’ request for a related exemption. On that narrow basis, I conclude defendants have violated plaintiffs’ free-exercise rights and that judgment in favor of plaintiffs is warranted. I consequently grant Plaintiffs relief in the form of a limited permanent injunction, declaratory judgment, and nominal damages."

It ruled, "The court immediately and permanently enjoins defendants Lisa Roy and Dawn Odean, acting in their official capacities on behalf of the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, from requiring, as a condition for participation in the Colorado Universal Preschool Program, that the preschools operated by plaintiffs St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton and St. Bernadette Catholic Parish in Lakewood agreed to provide or provide eligible children an equal opportunity to enroll and receive preschool services regardless of religious affiliation for as long as defendants allow exceptions from the religious affiliation aspect of the equal-opportunity requirement set out in [state law] and in the Colkorado Universial Preschool Program Service Agreement.

The defendants were ordered to pay $1 nominal damages.

The total hasn't been announced, but Colorado taxpayers likely won't get off so easily in the attacks on Christianity earlier, under the administration of Polis.

It recently lost the 303 Creative case at the U.S. Supreme Court.

There, state officials demanded that a Christian web designer follow the state's anti-Christian "non-discrimination" mandate and promote events that violated the web designer's faith.

A judge recently ruled that the state – the taxpayers – must pay the costs and fees for the plaintiff in that caser.

Such cases, by the time they are all the way through the high court, can accumulate tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of dollars in lawyers' time and costs.

The leftist state's failed attack was on Lorie Smith and her 303 Creative company, through which she intended to create websites for couples being married.

However, the state demanded that should she begin that service, she also must provide the same services to same-sex duos, in violation of her Christian faith.

She sued for the First Amendment violation demanded by the state, and won.

The state earlier lost a similar battle with Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who challenged the state's "non-discrimination" plan that also would require him to promote ideologies that violate his Christian faith.

In that case, the Supreme Court specifically cited Colorado's "hostility" to Christianity under Polis.

© 2024 - Patriot News Alerts