This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
There have been some serious questions raised about the behavior of Doug Emhoff, Kamala Harris' husband, and now even a left-leaning personality is wondering why more reporters aren't grilling him about the truth.
The Daily Mail reports Bill Maher, a Time host, raised the issue.
The publication previously reported "Emhoff impregnated the family's nanny while married to his first wife, allegedly slapped an ex-girlfriend at the Cannes Film Festival, and was 'inappropriate' and 'misogynistic' at work."
It was during a recent "Overtime" show that Maher noted the reporting.
Would the leftist media keep ignoring the issue, he wondered.
"And wouldn't that make it look worse?" Maher asked.
A statement after publication confirmed that Emhoff did have a relationship with the family nanny, which resulted in a pregnancy.
"What I'm saying is if this becomes more credible and we don't know yet. I mean, a lot of the conservative outlets still aren't reporting it, so I wouldn't go after anybody for not reporting it yet because these things have to be checked out. But if it becomes more credible, certainly on the level of Brett Kavanaugh, which was that kind of thing was reported by everybody pretty quickly," Maher said. "Does the liberal media keep ignoring it?"
WND reported after the allegations had appeared, that Emhoff was asked about the claims, and did not deny them
It was the Daily Mail that now has updated its reporting on the man, who if Kamala Harris is elected, would be in the White House for four years.
It reported, "Doug Emhoff has dismissed bombshell stories that he slapped his ex-girlfriend and had an affair during his first marriage as a 'distraction,' but didn't deny them. … Emhoff was asked by MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Friday whether the allegations about his personal life 'p—–' him off. The Morning Joe host didn't question him over the details or ask whether DailyMail.com reports about his past were true. Scarborough even reduced them to being 'tabloid' stories being pushed by Donald Trump and Republican critics. But Emhoff avoided the chance to slap them down and instead brushed them off while he insisted he was focused on his wife's presidential campaign."
The results of the Daily Mail's investigations already have been reported.
Those include that he "forcefully slapped" a former girlfriend allegedly for "flirting" with another man.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
It can be called breathtaking because it's exactly that on all levels.
Every breath you take is packing an astonishing secret for your life not only at the present moment but also for your glorious future, according to the best-selling author of a brand-new, inspiring book probing countless mysteries, including many from the Bible.
"We may not realize it, but every single breath we take should be filling us with amazement and hope because it's not merely a physical action, it's broadcasting a secret and impressive message from the Bible that few people ever consider," says Joe Kovacs, author of "REACHING GOD SPEED: Unlocking the Secret Broadcast Revealing the Mystery of Everything."
"To unlock the mystery, we have to use the divine keys that are provided in the Bible itself."
Those keys, says Kovacs, are verses broadcasting concepts that, once linked together, allow people to make the jump from the human speed of understanding to what he calls "God speed," another way of referring to the spirit level of divine wisdom.
"Here are some of the simple keys that will help unlock not only the hidden message in every breath we take but in countless other areas of life we experience daily," says Kovacs.
"The first is Romans 1:20, which explains God's invisible attributes, eternal power, and divine nature 'have been seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what he has made.' So we know just by examining anything in our created world, we can understand more about God and His Master Plan.
"Another is Isaiah 46:10, which tells us that God declares 'the end from the beginning.' What this indicates is that God is telling us the end of the story, the conclusion of all things, right from the start. So as we study not only the Bible but everything we deal with in life, we can see an obvious pattern of the outcome of events being revealed from the beginning.
"Yet another key is Matthew 13:34: 'Jesus told the crowds all these things in parables, and he did not tell them anything without a parable.' Millions already know that Jesus employed the parable teaching method, using stories and symbols to hide His message from the general populace of the world, but to reveal it to His true disciples with eyes to see and ears to hear. But what is often missed is that Jesus 'did not tell them anything without a parable.' In other words, everything is a parable. Not only is there a human, physical meaning to everything, there is an additional meaning on the spirit level of Godspeed."
Once these dots are connected, the author says, it becomes fairly simple to decode virtually anything, including the hidden message inside our human breathing.
"We already know inhaling fresh air into our lungs is what keeps us alive from moment to moment," says Kovacs. "If our breathing completely stops, we physically die rather quickly. So breathing is a natural form of life support. Why is this? Because breath itself comes from God (it's a representation of God), and He's loaning it to us temporarily in our current bodies made of dust."
"To understand this, let's go back to the beginning to be reminded of our ancient past: 'And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being' (Genesis 2:7 NKJV).
"The Book of Job also notes: 'The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life' (Job 33:4 CSB).
"Thus, breath represents the Spirit, the very presence of God, providing us life not only in the present but the future as well. It's easy to understand how breath sustains us now in our physical bodies. But if we read Genesis 2:7 again, keeping in mind how God declares the end from the beginning, we're being told the conclusion of our story."
"The verse is shouting to us our future. Because there's a resurrection coming. When we listen at God's speed, it says our Creator shall lift us out of the ground (our bodies, the dust of the earth) and breathe the breath of life back into us, raising us to life again to become a LIVING BEING. An eternally alive member of God's own family. This is the good news that millions of people don't focus on, and yet we're reminded of this magnificent future event every few seconds with every breath we take!"
This breathtaking understanding is just one of hundreds of mysteries unlocked in "Reaching God Speed," which features a myriad of stunning revelations, as the book:
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
As tensions in Asia continue to rise, China's President Xi Jinping made a rare trip to Fujian province, an outwardly facing province located across the Taiwan Strait only days after China executed a military blockade "drill" which surrounded and blocked off key ports in Taiwan.
According to the Xinhua News Agency, Xi made a visit to the province to push for modernization in the region which has become an important and robust private economy, slowly growing into a demonstration zone for integrated development within the Taiwan Strait.
"Fujian should continue to make greater progress in accelerating the development of a modern economic system," Xi said.
"Efforts must be made to accelerate the establishment of institutions and mechanisms to support all-around innovation, promote integrated reform of institutions and mechanisms pertaining to education, science and technology, and talent in a coordinated manner, and develop new quality productive forces in line with local conditions," Xi said.
On Wednesday, Reuters reported Xi said in a letter to China's annual awards dinner of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations that China would be willing to have a friendly relationship with the U.S., and noted a successful partnership between the two nations would mutually benefit both countries.
"China is willing to be a partner and friend with the United States. This will benefit not only the two countries, but the world," Xi reportedly said according to CCTV.
Xi added China has always handled the relations between China and the U.S. with mutual respect, and a belief that there could be a win-win cooperation.
However, despite Xi's assertion China wants to have peace and prosperity, escalating tensions in the South China Sea, the continuous threats made toward Taiwan, China hacking U.S. companies, and sending spies to gather intel on U.S. military bases, have done little to garner a friendly relationship between the U.S. and China.
According to a report from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: U.S.-China Relations for the 2030s: Toward a Realistic Scenario for Coexistence, the relationship between the U.S. and China looking beyond 2030 could be a constructive one, but it needs to come with a more realistic vision.
Senior Fellow and Director at the American Statecraft Program Christopher Chivvis, said in the report's introduction the relationship between China and the U.S. is crucial to keeping peace and world order.
"The tensions marking the U.S.-China relationship have generated a pessimistic, sometimes dire, vision for its future. Hostility has reached a level that makes war thinkable and perhaps even likely within the next decade. It has become difficult to imagine how Washington and Beijing might turn their relationship, which is so crucial to the future of world order, toward calmer waters. If there is to be any hope of doing so, however, policy experts need some realistic vision of what those calmer waters might look like," Chivvis said.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
It was Barack Obama who, shortly after his party's convention, appeared in a television ad promoting President Donald Trump's candidacy.
He insisted that America doesn't need "another four years" of bumbling and bluster.
Then it was Bill Clinton who appeared, explaining that the victim of a murderous illegal alien probably would be alive had not Joe Biden and Kamala Harris allowed in unvetted illegals.
Now it's Harris herself with words in support of Trump's campaign.
Only, she likely didn't mean them the way they came out:
A commentary at the Twitchy site explained the answer came from Harris while on "The View" in what was "clearly" nothing but a "softball chat and fawn-fest."
"During what was supposed to be a cake walk of a friendly chat for Harris, 'The View' co-host Sunny Hostin performed an accidental act of journalism after asking the Democrat nominee what she would have done differently from Joe Biden over these last nearly four years."
Her "awkward answer' was, "There is not a thing that comes to mind."
"And Kamala wouldn't change a thing," a narrator explains, just before she confirms that.
Clinton's comments came earlier, a harsh verdict on the Biden-Harris open borders policy allowing millions of illegal aliens simply to walk into America.
And Obama's remarks? They were at the Democrats' convention.
"We do not need four more years of bluster and bumbling and chaos," he shouted. "We have seen that movie before and we all know that the sequel us usually worse."
He seemed not to be aware of the most recent "four years" were with Biden and Harris at the steering of the nation.
The irony, of course, is that while Obama undoubtedly was trying to denigrate Trump's first term as he seeks a second, the current administration is run by Democrats Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and Obama's description easily could apply to those two.
The ad ends, as per standards, with, "I'm Donald J. Trump and I approved this message."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Two of the principal actors in the unfolding drama in the Middle East – namely Israel and Hezbollah/Iran – are facing shortfalls of a very different, but equally significant nature, as the material toll of more than a year of fighting begins to be more keenly felt.
Reports emerged Tuesday about Israel's stockpiles of Iron Dome interceptor missiles, a particularly alarming development as the country's response to Iran's most recent ballistic missile attack on Oct. 1 – in whichever form it will take, and the defense establishment has telegraphed it will be significant – and the likely retaliation from the Islamic Republic of Iran.
If it fired 181 projectiles – allegedly to avenge the twin eliminations of former Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and long-time Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah – it is likely a significant strike against its interests in Iran, will draw a greater response.
It is precisely for this reason the United States has agreed to locate Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, missile-defense systems in Israel in advance of that expected retaliatory strike.
For Israel, the year-long offensive and defensive campaign it has waged seems to be beginning to take its toll. Although the rocket fire from Gaza has almost entirely dried up, it is in the northern arena, battling Iran's Lebanese Shiite proxy Hezbollah, where the IDF has tried to counter the constant rocket barrages, in which an excess of 100 rockets and drones are launched daily.
"Israel's munitions issue is serious," said Dana Stroul, a former senior U.S. defense official with responsibility for the Middle East, according to a report in the Financial Times.
"If Iran responds to an Israel attack [with a massive air strike campaign], and Hezbollah joins in too, Israel air defenses will be stretched," she added, noting that U.S. stockpiles are not limitless.
"The U.S. can't continue supplying Ukraine and Israel at the same pace. We are reaching a tipping point."
Boaz Levy, chief executive of Israel Aerospace Industries, a state-owned company that manufactures Arrow interceptors used to shoot down ballistic missiles, said that production lines are running triple shifts to meet demand.
"Some of our lines are working 24 hours, seven days a week. Our goal is to meet all our obligations," Levy said, according to Israel HaYom, adding the time required to produce interceptor missiles is "not a matter of days."
Israel's multi-layered missile defense system has been working overtime for 12 months. The Iron Dome interceptors have successfully taken down a significant proportion of Hamas and Hezbollah's rockets, although several projectiles – including so-called suicide drones – have gotten through to devastating effect.
The 12 children playing soccer in Majdal Shams at the end of July and the attack on the Golani infantry division training base on Sunday spring readily to mind. Meanwhile, David's Sling has downed heavier rockets from Lebanon, and the Arrow system has blocked missiles emanating from Iran.
The results of even a slight degradation of Israel's defensive capabilities can be severe, highlighted by Iran's Oct. 1 attack, wherein Israel's largely sole attempts to repel the missiles was significantly less successful than the similar strike on April 13. Nearly three dozen missiles hit Israel's Nevatim air base, according to open-source intelligence analysts.
Some Israeli defense analysts have expressed a growing concern about what a coordinated Iranian and Hezbollah attack might mean, in terms of prioritizing how the interceptors are deployed.
Meanwhile, reports have surfaced that repeated and sustained Israeli airstrikes have hit Hezbollah cash reserves, according to Voice of America.
The Iranian terrorist proxy relies on three key funding channels: Al-Qard al Hasan, or AQAH, a Hezbollah-owned quasi-bank operating without a government banking license; licensed Lebanese commercial banks; and cash from Iran, researchers told the broadcaster, according to the Jewish News Syndicate.
Israel targeted AQAH in its initial airstrikes during the current campaign in Lebanon. They hit Hezbollah's "cash storage centers, including a large part of the AQAH vaults," leaving the group in a "financial crisis," VOA reported.
Not only have Hezbollah's fighters fled from their southern Lebanon stronghold, the people and institutions upon whom they relied to pay them are having serious difficulties doing so. In addition, wealthy Hezbollah backers – according to Lebanese bankers – have fled, mainly to Europe or Gulf States, fearful the IDF might target them next, which is also drying up a source of liquidity in the terrorism pipeline.
Another source of capital has been literally plane loads of cash flying in from Tehran (a tactic that'll be familiar to many of the Obama-era apparatchiks, currently staffing the dying embers of the Biden administration). Following Israel's Sept. 27 warning it would not allow hostile flights carrying weapons to land at Beirut airport, the very next day an Iranian flight from Tehran did a U-turn over Iraqi airspace.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The American Bar Association, caught imposing racial quotas on participants of a special clerkship program that can give new lawyers a massive boost in their law careers, now is backing away from its racial agenda.
A report from the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty explains it was the Judicial Clerkship Program that abruptly was altered.
"All law students deserve an equal shot to compete for prestigious post-law school employment," explained WILL lawyer Skylar Croy. "No one should assess them based on the color of their skin – especially not the ABA and especially not judges. Instead, they should be considered based on their individual talents and knowledge of the law. We will continue to challenge race-based programs to reach WILL's goal of complete race neutrality."
"Previously, each law school was required to 'send (and underwrite the costs for) four to six law students who are from underrepresented communities of color.' Similarly, judges selected to participate were 'asked to make a commitment to strive to hire at least two minority judicial law clerks over the next five years.' Both quotas are now gone," the WILL team explained.
The ABA promotes its schemes as providing law students with access to "Article III judges" and "state supreme court justices."
Judges often hire recent law school graduates as clerks.
"These jobs are often considered a golden ticket to a successful legal career. For example, six of nine current U.S. Supreme Court justices once clerked for the court," WILL explained. "Since at least 2001, the ABA's Judicial Clerkship Program has helped some law students secure clerkships. The program is essentially a job fair where law students can meet judges, including federal judges and state supreme court justices."
"WILL initially filed a Title VI complaint against the ABA and three participating universities—South Texas College of Law Houston, the University of the Pacific, and Willamette University—all receive federal funds," the team said.
Title VI prohibits federal fund recipients from discriminating on the grounds of race, color, or national origin. WILL also filed a judicial misconduct complaint against Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, a federal judge in the District of Minnesota, for his involvement.
The ABA Journal said the ABA claimed the "description" of the program, which included the quotas, was "inaccurate."
ABA spokeswoman Annaliese Fleming said, "some language" was removed for not accurately reflecting "the operation of the program."
She said the agenda still includes "enhancing diversity."
"The new wording says law schools 'are encouraged to select a diverse group of students using criteria aligned with the ABA's Goal III objectives.' It also says judges from across the country participate in the program but says nothing about judges striving to hire at least two minority law clerks," that report said.
WILL said it would continue to monitor the situation, to make sure future actions don't violation the federal code.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Doug Emhoff, according to investigative reports from the Daily Mail, got a family nanny pregnant, later slapped a girlfriend in the face, and was a "misogynist" when he worked at California law firms.
He was asked about the claims during an interview.
And he did not deny them.
It is the Daily Mail that now has updated its reporting on the man, who if Kamala Harris is elected, would be in the White House for four years.
It reported, "Doug Emhoff has dismissed bombshell stories that he slapped his ex-girlfriend and had an affair during his first marriage as a 'distraction,' but didn't deny them. … Emhoff was asked by MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Friday whether the allegations about his personal life 'p—–' him off. The Morning Joe host didn't question him over the details or ask whether DailyMail.com reports about his past were true. Scarborough even reduced them to being 'tabloid' stories being pushed by Donald Trump and Republican critics. But Emhoff avoided the chance to slap them down and instead brushed them off while he insisting he was focused on his wife's presidential campaign."
The results of the Daily Mail's investigations already have been reported.
Those include that he "forcefully slapped" a former girlfriend allegedly for "flirting" with another man.
That report came from three "friends" who confirmed that Emhoff "assaulted his ex-girlfriend."
"The Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, 59, allegedly struck the woman in the face so hard she spun around, while waiting in a valet line late at night after a May 2012 Cannes Film Festival event in France," the report said. "One of her friends told DailyMail.com that the woman called him immediately after the incident, sobbing in her cab, and described the alleged assault."
Earlier, it was reported that "Emhoff's first marriage ended when he got his children's nanny pregnant. The woman, Najen Naylor, 47, did not deny the story when approached by DailyMail.com at her home in the New York millionaires' playground, The Hamptons," the Daily Mail documented.
At that time, Emhoff said there had been "tough times" in his first marriage, because of "my actions."
Finally, the newest report on Emhoff comes from interviews with former coworkers at California law firms where he worked.
He was considered "inappropriate" and "misogynistic" at the office, there were claims he hired an "unqualified" part-time model as legal secretary "because she was young … attractive," and that he withdrew work benefits from women who didn't flirt with him.
The Daily Mail also uncovered opinions that he was a foul-mouthed employee.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) is in contention to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the award of which will be announced in Norway's capital, Oslo, on Oct. 11. Other candidates include the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
In a year which has exemplified the moral turpitude of so much of the so-called international community, it beggars belief – although fails to reach the standard of causing actual surprise – that an honest-to-goodness terrorist-employing and -sympathizing organization would be advanced as a candidate to win the award. At least it has just been nominated for now; the reaction if it actually won would be something else altogether.
UNRWA's nomination is so controversial – and so morally inverted – because by the United Nations' own admission, at least nine UNRWA employees "may have taken part" in the Oct. 7, 2023 massacres in southern Israel. There is footage of known UNRWA employees loading a dead Israeli civilian into the back of a white jeep to be taken back as a hostage to Gaza.
According to the IDF website, recordings of UNRWA employees highlight them saying, "I'm inside, I'm inside with the Jews," "We have female hostages, I captured one." That refrain about "Jews" rather than "Israelis" was a familiar one, repeated time and again and recorded for posterity on GoPro cameras and other recording devices.
The forwarding of UNRWA as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize also comes less than a month after it was revealed the Biden-Harris Department of Justice backed a call for UNRWA employees implicated in the Oct. 7 massacres to be immune from prosecution.
In addition, there are other organizations and individuals who have not exactly covered themselves in glory over the last 12 months. In January, the ICJ issued a preliminary ruling – through the sponsorship of a case brought by South Africa – which accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. In May the court ruled Israel "must immediately halt its military offensive" in Rafah and other areas "which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part."
While the court cannot enforce its ruling, and had its authority also undermined by the heroic stance of Justice Julia Sebutinde of Uganda, who actually looked at the evidence presented, the ICJ used its global soapbox to very publicly push Hamas' narrative and agenda. The court even relied upon evidence submitted by UNRWA to reach its decision.
Secretary-General Guterres too is a highly compromised figure, and his nomination seems reward for indulging in oleaginous pandering to the League of Arab states. The citation for him notes, "is personal courage and integrity in the face of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza." It should be recalled on Oct. 9, when there were still a few Hamas terrorists roaming around southern Israel, when many of the victims of the bestial massacre two days previously, when some 250 hostages – both dead and alive – had been spirited into Gaza, and before Israel had even properly retaliated for the invasion of its borders, Guterres took it upon himself to exclaim, "Hamas' violence did not come in a vacuum."
He has consistently used his bully pulpit to excoriate Israel's actions in Gaza, claiming that the devastation and alleged loss of life is without precedent or equal. In October, Israel's Foreign Minister Israel Katz banned Guterres from entering Israel after the Portuguese failed to "unequivocally condemn" Iran's missile attack. Some peacemaker he.
The Nobel Peace Prize has for a few decades become a highly controversial award. Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat was awarded it in 1994, along with Israeli leaders Yitzhak Rabin (who would be assassinated a year later) and Shimon Peres. Arafat's commitment to peace was always tenuous at best, and the latter years of his life and career when he unleashed the murderous Second Intifada in Sept. 2000, was evidence of this.
President Barack Obama was awarded the prize in 2009, barely eight months into his presidency. While he had the good grace to seem a little sheepish to be even nominated, explaining he hadn't done anything yet, he still accepted the award.
Meanwhile, President Donald Trump, who did more to promote Middle East peace than pretty much any U.S. commander-in-chief in recent memory, and who was scandalously overlooked – as was Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – for signing the groundbreaking Abraham Accords in 2020, is nominated this year. Elon Musk, the owner of social media platform X, whose Starlink has provided millions of people with internet access is also nominated.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The state of Florida is targeting a deceptive pro-abortion ad campaign that has been launched there with cease-and-desist letters to television stations that have aired the lies.
A report from Liberty Counsel, a key legal team that has fought numerous battles against the pro-abortion ideology that has flooded America in recent years, explains it's a political ad that contains what the state Department of Health has determined is "false" information about the state's current law.
"The 30-second advertisement features a woman named Caroline who chose to have an abortion after being diagnosed with brain cancer. She suggests Florida's current six-week 'heartbeat' law would have prevented her from getting the necessary treatment to save her life and that Amendment 4 would 'protect' women like her," the report said.
The state's Amendment 4 actually would give the abortion industry literally an open door to do abortions on anyone, at anytime, anywhere.
It is the state agency's general counsel, John Wilson, who wrote in the letter that it is "categorically false" to make the claim that Florida's law, banning abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, "prohibits abortions to preserve the lives and health of pregnant women," Liberty Counsel reported.
Wilson stated, in the letter, "After six weeks, an abortion may be performed if 'two physicians certify in writing, in reasonable medical judgment, the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to save the pregnant woman's life.'"
The current law, which would make the amendment appear to be unnecessary, also states, "if preserving the life and health of the fetus conflicts with preserving the life and health of the pregnant woman, the physician must consider preserving the woman's life and health the overriding and superior concern," Liberty Counsel noted.
The ad is beyond false, but actually dangerous, the letter explained, as it could lead women "to believe that life-saving or health-preserving treatment is unavailable for pregnant women in Florida," the report said.
Some of the damages that could result from the airing of the ad, the state agency warned, would be that it possibly could "lead women to travel out of state for medical care, seek emergency care from unlicensed providers, or not seek medical care at all," the report said.
Those circumstances actually could be a threat to the lives of pregnant women, the letter said.
Liberty Counsel noted, "Wilson informed the television stations that 'any act' that threatens or impairs the life or health of an individual violates the state's 'sanitary nuisance law' and that the stations may be committing a second-degree misdemeanor by airing the advertisement."
"While your company enjoys the right to broadcast political advertisements under the First Amendment … that right does not include free rein to disseminate false advertisements which, if believed, would likely have a detrimental effect an the lives and health of pregnant women in Florida," the letter warns.
"While television stations have a First Amendment right to speak, that right does not extend to false and dangerous information about a ballot initiative designed to amend the Florida Constitution," explained Mat Staver, the chief of Liberty Counsel.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Dear Lila,
We've never personally met, but as a pro-life journalist I've appreciated your activism since way back when you were a teenager doing awesome hidden-camera sting operations with James O'Keefe. Here at WorldNetDaily we've highlighted your work for many years. My wife and I support Live Action. Enough said.
As for me, my main pro-life contribution has been exposing how legalized abortion was sold to a largely Christian America decades ago, starting with my 1991 interview with Bernard Nathanson (during which the repentant former top abortionist revealed all the lies and marketing techniques they employed), and then later in much greater detail in my book, "The Marketing of Evil."
But Lila, we need to talk.
Recently, expressing your disappointment in Donald Trump's current stance on abortion (essentially, he says each state should determine its own abortion laws, plus, whether wise or not, he has strategically moderated his prior abortion positions because he thinks it will help him win a very tight and all-important election) you declared, "I think that it's the job of the pro-life movement to demand protection for pre-born lives. It is not the job of the pro-life movement to vote for President Trump."
You added, "If the election were today, I would not vote for Harris or Trump based on their policies and their statements and their positions."
Please allow me to explain why I believe you're wrong on this point. Perhaps catastrophically wrong.
But first, let's back up for a moment. As you know, for half a century America's pro-life movement has had two major long-term goals.
First goal: Reverse Roe v. Wade. Dissenting Justice Byron White described the Supreme Court's 1973 ruling as "an exercise of raw judicial power," since there was obviously no basis in the Constitution for striking down the anti-abortion laws of all 50 states and thereby removing all legal protection from the unborn child.
Second goal, once the first goal was accomplished: Pass a Human Rights Amendment to the Constitution, explicitly enshrining within the highest law of the land the preborn child's right to life.
As president, Donald Trump did what none of his pro-life predecessors, including the great Ronald Reagan, could accomplish: While under continual heavy fire from Democrats, the media and the Deep State, who persecuted, impeached, undermined and lied about him at every turn, Trump somehow managed to appoint three pro-life, Constitution-honoring justices to the U.S. Supreme Court … and thereby threw the doors wide open to accomplishing the first of the pro-life movement's two great goals.
Of course, as the Catholic News Agency reported, Trump also "used his executive power to restrict foreign aid funding of abortion and to prevent Title X funding from going to the abortion industry. As president, Trump also signed an executive order to protect infants who were born alive after a failed abortion." And in June, "Trump said in a speech to the Faith and Freedom Coalition that, if elected, he would 'rapidly review the cases' of pro-life activists and 'every political prisoner' who has been jailed under President Joe Biden's administration and get them 'back to their families where they belong.'"
Now consider what Kamala Harris and Tim Walz will do with regard to abortion if elected next month. Both are beyond radical in their passionate love for abortion. Harris has repeatedly vowed to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law. She and Walz have absolutely no problem with performing abortions all the way through nine months of pregnancy up to the moment of birth, and in fact oppose "born-alive infant protection" laws of any sort. (In May 2023, Walz signed a bill into Minnesota law removing a requirement to try to save the life of a baby born alive after an attempted abortion.)
Considering Harris' and Walz' abortion advocacy from within a religious framework, it's clear that their giddy obsession with, and open glorification of, sacrificing beautiful unborn children can reasonably be called satanic. For America to elect Kamala Harris and Tim Walz – knowing what they stand for – would be to spit in God's face.
Please also consider a couple of unchangeable facts:
1. By all accounts, November's election will be very close, which means every vote counts.
2. If a registered voter decides not to vote, or to write in someone else's name on their ballot, he or she is voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. The math is simple and inescapable: Not voting for Trump is mathematically identical to voting for Harris when the ballots are counted. The candidate with the most votes wins and takes over the country.
And as I wrote shortly before the 2020 election: "When you vote for a president, you are not choosing only one leader and his policy agenda, but a multitude of leaders and policies in every area of life, and therefore a whole 'future' for the country, as Franklin Graham put it. Most prominently, you are choosing a vice president who may well become president (as has happened 14 times in U.S. history). You are also choosing Cabinet and department heads. And you are choosing federal judges, including Supreme Court justices with lifetime tenure who will decide issues of stupendous importance that affect every American. And you are choosing thousands of other people – about 4,000 federal government appointees in all – who will profoundly shape the nation in which your children and grandchildren will live for a long, long time – whether for good or for ill."
Yet, in every U.S. election, huge numbers of Christians fail to vote, and all for reasons they consider righteous! For some, their particular church denomination tells them they are "citizens of Heaven" and "not part of this world," and therefore don't need to vote; others believe God will determine who leads America without their help, while others believe church and state should be "separate"; some simply believe "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between the two candidates, while others insist their focus as Christians should be solely on the gospel, not "politics."
Or, in the current election, perhaps some believe they're called to make their stand for the unborn … while ironically contributing to the victory of the most rabidly pro-abortion president ever, while defeating the pro-life president who finally got Roe overturned.
With all love and respect, Lila, this is a huge mistake you are about to make. I beg you to reconsider.
One last point: These are not normal times. This is not an era when one can reasonably greet defeat by saying, "Oh well, so the Democrats won this time, that'll teach the Republicans to be more diligent in their pro-life walk the next time." There may be no next time, as many of today's best historians and analysts are currently warning. If Trump loses, this could be the last genuine election America ever has.
Also, Lila, even if – as I suspect – you regard your public statements ("If the election were today, I would not vote for Harris or Trump") as strategic, a form of leverage you hope will influence Trump to publicly adopt more purely and explicitly pro-life positions prior to the election, you're still making a huge mistake: You're an influential pro-life leader and many people will follow your lead and not vote for Donald Trump, which will constitute de facto electoral support for Kamala Harris.
I'll end with a prediction. And I say this with genuine, heartfelt love and respect for the pro-life movement, of which I have been a part for close to five decades: If you fail to vote for Trump and advocate that others do likewise, and he loses, you will come to bitterly regret it for the rest of your life. I would rather spare you that personal agony – in addition to the greater agony of unwittingly contributing to the demise (or as Obama put it, "the fundamental transformation") of the nation you obviously love.
Lila, you're all about LIFE. Innocent life. Which includes not only the lives of the preborn, but also the lives of tens of thousands of children currently being sold into sexual slavery thanks to Biden-Harris immigration policies, as well as the lives of young people killed by fentanyl poisoning (currently the biggest cause of death of young Americans 18-45), and the lives of countless children being destroyed by being seduced into transgender madness (Tim Walz last year made Minnesota into a "sanctuary state" for minors seeking mutilating transgender surgeries, even against the wishes of their own parents) and on and on. All of this madness, heartache and death will increase exponentially under a Harris/Walz administration. It cannot be otherwise.
God bless you, Lila Rose, and may He give you wisdom, humility and grace. Before it's too late, please rethink your public position on this election and voice your support for the president who, by God's grace, finally accomplished the first of the pro-life movement's two greatest goals.