This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

In a stunning new revelation about the divides in America, a poll shows that 69% of those who are the "politically obsessed elites," those who have high incomes, urban residences and postgraduate degrees – in fact, those who often sit in those high-paying government office jobs – believe the nation would be better off if only THEY made decisions.

Voted.

A report at The Daily Signal about a podcast with pollster Scott Rasmussen delivered the shocker.

"Polling from Scott Rasmussen reveals that America’s elite 1%—those with high incomes, urban residences, and postgraduate degrees—are significantly out of step with the rest of the country on a range of issues," the report said.

"It’s a troubling trend for America, and it doesn’t bode well for our future considering the elite 1% occupy many of the leadership roles in our cultural, educational, and government institutions. There’s perhaps no statistic more shocking than the 69% of politically obsessed elites who think it would be better if only people with college degrees could vote."

Rasmussen explained, "Perhaps the funniest finding of all is we ask the question, 'Do most Americans agree with you on most important issues?' Now, if we ask voters, about half say, 'Yeah, I think most people agree with me.' Among the politically obsessed elites, 82% of that group thinks that most Americans agree with them on most issues. It’s not even close to true, but they’re looking in a mirror. They see what they want to see."

In fact, that percentage, 82%, of those "elites" actually believe they are "in the mainstream" of America.

"What’s scary about that, if you think about it in context of the administrative state, if these people believe that their views are representative of America, it justifies them cheating a little bit or bending the rules because they can say, 'We’re fighting for the American people.' In fact, they’re fighting against the American people," he warned.

He pointed out how just out of touch that group of self-important people are: A large majority say voters are willing to pay $250 a year or more to fight climate change. Reality? Half say nothing and even many more say nothing more than $100.

Many of those elites, 72%, say voters trust the federal government most of the time, and 66% say voters believe their own representative is the best person for the job.

And 57% say voters want to live in communities where guns are outlawed. They also favor rules to ban the sales of gas-powered cars and think "biological males who identify as women should be allowed to compete in women's sports."

That "trust" claim "has not been true for 50 years," Rasmussen said.

And trusting rules and regulations? "Voters just aren't there," he said.

Among all voters, only 16% say the government should be allowed to censor social media posts; among "elites," it's 50%. "Fundamentally different views," Rasmussen explained.

He noted the significant acceptance by elites of the transgender ideology actually is so out of step with the country, "it is dangerous."

And those elites who have accused President Donald Trump of disrupting democracy by challenging the results of the 2020 election, on the coming 2024 count?

"If Donald Trump wins we will hear an awful lot about how he stole the election from these elites."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

One credit card company has begun promoting what it obviously hopes is the next generation in purchasing power: Its own card that links to multiple bank accounts and dispenses with NUMBERS, replacing them with biometrics.

It is a report at Winepress News that talks about using facial images, fingerprints, and such as "they key to the next generation of security in payments."

The company's plan, outlined recently, is "Visa Flexible Credential," and is promoted as a way to let companies "give their clients the ability to access different funding sources on an existing payment card."

It boasts of "one card to rule them all."

The report explains, "From line of credit or checking account, to loyalty points, prepaid debit or installments, some shoppers — and in the near future, all shoppers whose issuers enable the technology — are living in the future of payments, where one card can tap into different types of funding sources."

Visa claims a majority of card users want to access many accounts through a single piece of plastic.

"Visa will begin launching pilot programs later this year for their Flexible Credential, though the program is already up and running in some parts of the world with $3 billion already through their pilot network," the report said.

Also on the agenda is the conversion to biometrics for identification.

This will be addressed, the company said, in its "Payment Passkey Service," which purportedly will be a fraud detection system as well as AI that will "learn to recognize the customer's purchase history."

That means if you buy something out of the ordinary, the AI running the system could deny your purchase.

But the AI will allow you to "pay with a smile."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe Biden recently expanded his long list of verbal gaffes and blunders by citing the "erectionists," or "irrectionists" if you tolerate alternate spellings, who support President Donald Trump.

Actually, during that recent speech, he made nine flubs and blunders.

The White House staff, of course, protects him by correcting what he says when the official transcript of his comments is released.

Now there's a satire video, posted on Rumble, that purports to reveal the frustrations of "Joe's Comms Team."

Among the fixes was that Biden was happy to receive an "award," not an "organization" as he said.

And he wasn't really meaning to crack down on landlords "who keep rent down."

And his speech was to address bloodbath, not bloodshed.

And he was supposed to boast of saving families $800. Actually, he claimed it was $800,000.

And multiple others.

Prominent was his claim to condemn "erectionists," almost as good as when he wondered aloud how long it would take for voters to figure out they couldn't trust him.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The federal government is being taken to court for calling a Catholic Mass a "demonstration" and banning it from a national cemetery on Memorial Day.

The fight is over the request from the Knights of Columbus to hold a Memorial Day event in Poplar Grove National Cemetery as they have since the 1960s.

The National Park Service refused permission, insisting that the events planned by the community service organization constituted a "demonstration."

The status now is that First Liberty Institute and the law team at McGuireWoods have filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against the NPS in Petersburg, Virginia, that would allow the event to move forward.

"The policy and the decision blocking the Knights of Columbus from continuing their long-standing religious tradition is a blatant violation of the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act," said John Moran, partner at McGuireWoods. "We urge the court to grant our restraining order and allow the Knights to hold their service this Memorial Day."

Roger Byron, of First Liberty, said, "The National Park Service is way out of line. This is the kind of unlawful discrimination and censorship RFRA and the First Amendment were enacted to prevent. Hopefully, the court will grant the Knights the relief they need to keep this honorable tradition alive."

The lawyers explained, "One long-standing way the Knights have lived out their faith and their patriotism is by holding Memorial Day Masses to honor and pray for the nation’s fallen soldiers. Until last year, the Knights had always held a Memorial Day Mass within the Poplar Grove National Cemetery, and the Mass (or a prayer service when a priest was not available) had been celebrated there every year without incident since at least the 1960s.

"But last year, for the first time, the NPS denied the Knights a permit to hold the service in the cemetery, citing a new policy that designates 'religious services' as prohibited 'demonstrations.' Under the new policy, the Knights longstanding memorial service now must be held somewhere outside the cemetery grounds even though other events may be held in the cemetery."

The legal filing states, "The case for preliminary relief is simple: The Knights are likely to succeed on their claims that defendants’ application of their policies to bar the Knights from conducting a 'religious service' in the National Cemetery—as they had previously done for generations—violates their right to religious free exercise under the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The court should therefore grant the motion and enter an immediate temporary restraining order or issue a preliminary injunction allowing the Knights to continue their decades-long tradition of hosting a Memorial Day Mass inside the Poplar Grove National Cemetery."

The Knights had tried to resolve the dispute without resorting to a court action.

WND reported when the lawyers for the Knights wrote to the NPS asking for the dispute to be resolved in favor of the constitutional freedoms.

The sudden change came about under the Joe Biden administration, which abruptly imposed a ban on what its officials consider "religious."

The initial letter making the request for a resolution said, "The NPS’s prohibition of the Knights’ Memorial Day service due to its religious nature is not merely unlawful content-based discrimination on speech—it is textbook viewpoint discrimination, which is per se unconstitutional."

The new motion asking for court intervention points out that the NPS insists that the memorial event be held in a small, designated "First Amendment" zone.

"By prohibiting the Knights from exercising their religious convictions and expressing their patriotism by praying for and honoring the fallen through a Catholic mass held inside the cemetery, NPS is misapplying its own regulations, unlawfully infringing on the Knights’ First Amendment rights and violating the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. And this treatment is causing irreparable harm to the Knights and those who wish to participate in their annual Memorial Day Mass," the brief supporting the request states.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Democrats repeatedly have threatened Americans that a second term for President Donald Trump would mean a "weaponized" government pursuing its political enemies.

"One can only hope," according to Julie Kelly, an investigative reporter who repeatedly has uncovered Joe Biden's misbehaviors and shared those activities with the American voters.

She wrote a column at the Florida Capital Star raising the issue of the double standards used by the Biden administration.

And specifically the two standards Attorney General Merrick Garland has adopted for his campaign to attack conservatives and protect leftists.

That evidence comes from the DOJ itself, she explained.

"The DOJ bragged in the press release about the government’s scalp count for its unprecedented prosecution of Jan 6 protesters. 'More than 1,424 individuals have been charged in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol,' Matthew Graves, the Joe Biden-appointed U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, boasted. The investigation into the four-hour disturbance, Graves warned, is 'ongoing.'"

Graves, in fact, wants the caseload to total at least 2,000.

"At the same time, the DOJ refuses to bring federal charges against pro-Palestinian demonstrators who in many instances engaged in similar if not worse conduct inside congressional buildings over the past six months," Kelly pointed out.

For those defendants, the cases are being handled locally.

"In other words, no federal obstruction of an official proceeding indictments against those who repeatedly interrupted Senate and House hearings to protest against the Israel-Gaza war. No federal 'parading' charges for demonstrators who unlawfully occupied government buildings in Washington on multiple occasions. Even demonstrators who assaulted Capitol police outside the DNC headquarters last November do not face federal charges — a shocking double-standard since hundreds of J6ers have been federally charged with assault on police, even for minor confrontations, often resulting in lengthy prison sentences and pretrial detention in several cases."

That all makes Garland's recent comments "outrageous – and demonstrably false," she said.

"Before two House committees voted Thursday to advance contempt of Congress against Garland for defying a congressional subpoena demanding the audio recording of Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur last year, Garland mustered his most sanctimonious self to explain how House Republicans, not him, threaten the legitimacy of the DOJ — a 'fundamental institution of our democracy,' Garland claimed. (Garland advised Biden to invoke executive privilege to prevent producing the tapes to Congress; Biden only too happily accepted his counsel.)"

Kelly noted Garland "audaciously claimed politics plays no role" in the DOJ decisions.

Kelly charged:

If the country had a real news media instead of boot-lickers who ask Garland about his hurt feelings when people criticize the DOJ, at least one reporter would have confronted Garland about the ongoing prosecution of J6ers while letting Hamas insurrectionists off the hook.

A reporter would have asked Garland how many times the DOJ seeks pretrial detention for political protesters accused of assaulting police, as the DOJ has done in dozens of J6 cases.

A reporter would have asked Garland how often the FBI conducts armed raids of Americans accused of nonviolent offenses, as the FBI has done in hundreds of J6 cases and continues to do.

A reporter would have asked Garland about the possibility the Supreme Court will reverse how his DOJ has applied a post-Enron statute against 350 or so J6ers, turning many otherwise nonviolent protesters into convicted felons.

A reporter also would have asked Garland about two recent D.C. appellate court decisions that overturned excessive sentencing requests made by the DOJ.

A reporter would have asked Garland why he authorized an armed FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago to search for classified documents but didn’t do the same for Joe Biden or Mike Pence.

A reporter would have asked Garland why he should not be held in contempt of Congress for defying a House subpoena while his prosecutors indicted both Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro — who is currently doing time in a Miami prison — for contempt after they defied subpoenas by the January 6 Select Committee.

A reporter would have asked Garland why his office just boasted about imprisoning several individuals including two women in their 70s for protesting outside a D.C. abortion clinic in 2020 while nearly all federal charges against 2020 BLM rioters have been dropped.

She opined, "You get the drift."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

JERUSALEM – Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Sunday called for Israel to give Hezbollah a final ultimatum to vacate the border area in southern Lebanon – or face the prospect of IDF invasion to remove them by force.

Smotrich, who is also chairman of the Religious Zionism party, made his statement while visiting party colleagues in the country's north. At the meeting, he also called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to make a clear announcement on Israel's long-term security policy – including a plan to deal with Hezbollah, arguing that, if necessary, military action would have to be taken to drive the terrorists deeper into Lebanon.

The finance minister was speaking as some 70,000 Israelis in the north of the country remain internally displaced, after they were advised to leave their homes following Hamas' invasion of southern communities on Oct. 7 and Hezbollah's constant – and daily – rocket attacks since Oct. 8.

"The way to bring the [evacuated Israeli] residents home in the north is through a military decision with a devastating assault on Hezbollah, its infrastructure and the destruction of its power," Smotrich said.

According to U.N. Resolution 1701, which brought an end to the hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah in the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Iran's Shiite proxy terrorist group is not permitted south of the Litani River – approximately 18 miles north of the Israel-Lebanon border.

That resolution – ratified in both Jerusalem and Beirut – also called for Hezbollah's disarmament. Instead, it has amassed one of the most fearsome missile arsenals – many of the precision-guided munitions – in the entire Middle East.

In a wide-ranging speech, Smotrich – who takes a maximalist approach to the borders of the state of Israel and who has advocated for reestablishing Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip – called on Israel's cabinet to agree to the permanent imposition of the IDF's full control over the entire Gaza Strip – north, center, and south, including Rafah.

In light of the discovery of dozens of smuggling tunnels that traverse the Egypt-Gaza border, Smotrich urged a military operation along the length of the Philadelphi corridor and total occupation of the city of Rafah, to prevent the scale of smuggling currently occurring.

In recent weeks, Hezbollah has ratcheted up its rate of fire against Israel, part of a concerted effort to try and exhaust its foe.

Military and political analysts in Israel have for some time argued that the issue of a Third Lebanon War is not a question of "if" but "when."

Having stockpiled such an arsenal of weapons, it seems unthinkable – given Iran's bellicosity – that it will not give Hezbollah the green light to unleash it against Israel.

For its part, Israel must decide whether to pre-emptively strike against its enemy – or respond to initial strikes.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Republican members of Congress are suggesting there could be consequences for the World Health Organization should that international body of bureaucrats move forward with plans to grant special privileges to an abortion industry player.

In fact, the plan would be the withholding of all U.S. funding for that group that apparently allowed China to conceal the source and threat of the COVID-19 pandemic when it first developed.

It is a report from the Washington Stand that details the Republicans' concerns.

That is over WHO plans to recognize enhanced "official relations" with the Center for Reproductive Rights, an American organization that "attempts to override pro-life laws at the state, national, and international level," according to the report.

That decision, coming from the WHO executive board, is expected at its meetings next month.

The result could be, the report said, a "plan for collaboration" with the abortion promoters.

The new letter, from 26 members of Congress, said, 'The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) is a radical organization that manipulates international mechanisms to impose abortion on countries."

And it pointed out, "There is no internationally recognized human rights obligation with regard to abortion either by treaty or customary international law."

The Stand noted its own reporting on the conclusions of two international conferences on the issue, in Cairo in 1994 and in Beijing in 1995, that said, "In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning."

The coalition including Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Chip Roy of Texas, Bob Good on Virginia, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Mary Miller of Illinois and Harriet Hageman of Wyoming noted the goal of the abortion organization is to "impose abortion on all countries."

The Stand pointed out in America the organization has pushed to defeat pro-life ballot issues, persuaded activist judges to insert abortion "rights" into state constitutions, sued to overturn legitimate constitutional rights such as conscience protections for Christian doctors and more.

The organization donates exclusively to Democrats, who are pro-abortion up and down their party line.

Worldwide, it lobbies governing bodies like the U.N. to eliminate any limits on abortion.

Groups including the Family Research Council have noted that CRR sometimes clouds the facts in order to push abortion.

The members of Congress did note that the U.S. turns over some $700 million a year to WHO, a money pot that could go away.

The WHO also is in the news for another reason, its attempt to take over decision-making from all nations should another pandemic occur.

Already, attorneys general from 21 states have instructed Joe Biden to avoid the legally flawed plan.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Joe and Jill Biden, after he ended his term at Barack Obama's vice, saw their income explode.

From under $400,000 the last year, he was in office to more than $16 million for the next few years. Most of that, some $15 million plus, was from the books they wrote, including his "Promises to Keep" and "Promise Me, Dad." Her project was "Where the Light Enters."

But that income is no more.

"No one is buying the president's books," said the Daily Mail, which cited details from the Bidens' submissions to the Office of Government Ethics.

"In his form, President Biden reveals he has had no royalties from his two books: 'Promises to Keep' and 'Promise Me, Dad' this year. Jill Biden reported no royalties for her memoir 'Where the Light Enters' but did note she received royalties of up to $1,000 for her two children's books: 'Don't Forget: God Bless Our Troops' and 'JOEY: The Story of Joe Biden,'" the report said.

The report noted, too, that despite their millions and millions in income after he left office, they are carrying "a personal debt of up to $815,000."

"In total, the Bidens reported assets between roughly $1 million and $2.6 million and liabilities between roughly $350,000 and $850,000," the report said.

It said Biden's liabilities include a mortgage on one of his homes, between $250,000 and $500,000, and a home-equity loan that was in the $15,000-$50,000 range before and now is $100,000-$250,000.

Biden also has less money in his accounts, the report said.

"One of his bank accounts showed a cash total of $50,000 to $100,000 from $250,000 to $500,000 last year. Another account showed $50,000 to $100,000 in cash, a drop from $100,000 to $250,000 a year earlier," the report said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have some fairly strong protections when they are in the House, debating legislation.

The Constitution's debate clause outlines how they are "privileged from arrest" for all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace during their time there.

"And in going to and from the same."

But they are not exempt from ethics complaints.

As members of the Democrat party are finding out.

The issue, according to the Washington Examiner, is that they turned the House into a political rally for Ukraine, waving that nation's flags, when the body voted for a billion dollar American tax dollar handout to that nation.

It is the Heritage Foundation that is demanding accountability.

"The only flags that belong on the floor of the U.S. House are American flags," explained Mike Howell, of Heritage's Oversight Project, in the report.

"It shouldn’t take an ethics complaint from the Oversight Project to instigate consequences for this flagrant violation of the rules."

The project has sent a letter to the House Ethics Committee calling for a review of the actions of 28 House Democrats who flaunted the foreign country's flag in the House chamber.

The letter charges multiple violations, including their defiance of House rules requirement members to "behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House."

"The conduct of waving the flag impugns the reputation of the House because foreign flags dilute the primacy and importance of deep American traditions, American lives sacrificed, and the land that the American flag represents," the letter said. "Not only do these flagrant displays of foreign capitulation disrespect our American heritage and the American way of life, but it also directly insults the American people."

A second violation could be made from the rule banning members from participating in "disorderly or disruptive conduct."

Already, some House members have proposed legislation that would ban the display of any foreign flag on the House floor, ever.

The letter specifically names Reps. Seth Magaziner of Rhode Island, Bill Pascrell Jr. of New Jersey and Diana DeGette of Colorado.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

It was a Chinese-owned newspaper that was registered as a foreign agent, and Rep. Tom Suozzi, a New York Democrat, paid thousands of dollars for "advertising."

And now the congressman is claiming ignorance about the ownership and allegiances of the publication.

The Washington Examiner reported Suozzi now is backtracking on his connections to a subsidiary of Sing Tao U.S., to which his campaign delivered $7,200.

"If they are in any way affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party, they’ll never get anything from us again," he claimed in the report. "The CCP has tentacles trying to influence the distribution of information and disinformation throughout our society. There are lesser-known examples like this, and [China] has a very sophisticated effort."

Actually, Suozzi is on a congressional caucus that now is raising concerns over China's persecution of religious minorities, the Uyghur ethnic minority specifically.

The Examiner had asked him about the money paid to the Chinese group that previously was forced to register as a foreign agent for its "political activity," the report said.

"The newspaper also reportedly shares ties to the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department, which, according to the U.S. government, coordinates the party’s intelligence gathering and influence operations overseas," the Examiner reported.

He's claimed the United States has a duty to counter Beijing’s efforts to grow its influence, but reached by the Examiner, he said he didn't know about the connections involving Sing Tao.

"If I’m a congressman and I didn’t know about it, think about what’s happening to regular citizens on a regular basis,” he said.

Suozzi's actions now, however, warrant review, according to Mike LiPetri, the Republican nominee expected to oppose Suozzi in New York's 3rd District this fall.

"NY-03 deserves a congressman who will stand up to China and its human rights violations, not line their communist pockets with cash that fuels their infiltration and influence-peddling schemes," LiPetri said in a statement to the publication.

The report said the connections of Sing Tao are bad: "Sing Tao U.S. is affiliated with a Hong Kong-based outlet said to have maintained leaders on China’s National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a top CCP advisory body. Over half of Sing Tao’s content in 2021 was purchased by a company in southeastern China, DOJ filings show."

The report noted that the Suozzi campaign deals with Sing Tao weren't the only similar payments.

The report noted that document revealed a few months ago showed eight other lawmakers paid $41,500 to Sing Tao, including payments from Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y.

Richard Goldberg, of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, said that American campaigns would be wise to address such entities, and "“understand the risks associated with subsidizing or otherwise partnering with foreign government-controlled entities."

© 2024 - Patriot News Alerts