sentenced to death

'we could have prevented the Covid pandemic'

'Who is protecting our students?'

'Secure elections are a key cornerstone'

'I don't have a lot of interaction with him'

The Republican-controlled House voted 221-198 Wednesday to require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE Act, would amend the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, known as the “motor voter law,” to require that states obtain documentary proof of U.S. citizenship from someone before he or she may register to vote. Five Democrats voted for the legislation, but 198 Democrats voted against it. President Joe Biden opposes the legislation and it’s not likely to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate, where Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, sponsored a companion bill. “Over the past four years, Joe Biden has welcomed millions upon millions of illegals into the country knowing that noncitizens only have to check a box to vote in a federal election,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a public statement. “We have long known this was an intentional effort to turn them into voters, and now the American people know where every member of Congress stands on this critically important issue.” My statement on the passage of the SAVE Act: pic.twitter.com/Id1v9zEDqz— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) July 10, 2024 The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, also would require states to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls. ?“I dare [Democrats] to vote no against a bill that says that only citizens – AMERICAN CITIZENS – should vote in American elections.”#SAVEAct pic.twitter.com/Rz7LuOvftQ— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) July 10, 2024 “I kind of dare them to vote no on a bill supported by 81% to 87% of the American people,” Roy said Wednesday on the House floor, referring to Democrats. “I dare them to vote no on a bill that says only American citizens should vote in American elections. I dare them to go ahead and follow a president who has put out a policy against a bill, the purpose of which is to guarantee citizens are the ones who get to vote in American elections.” The House bill also would empower U.S. citizens to bring civil suits against election officials who don’t uphold proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections. It also allows for integrating existing databases at the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to expedite the requirement for states to remove noncitizens from voter rolls.  Although it’s already illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, there is no mechanism to ensure that only those registering or voting are actually citizens, Johnson has said. Johnson, R-La., noted that Virginia last year removed 1,500 registrants from the voter rolls who were noncitizens, and 22% had cast ballots. The states of Massachusetts and Ohio removed noncitizens from voter rolls in recent years. Georgia found that 1,600 noncitizens attempted to vote.  “American citizens will be protected and in no way harmed by this bill,” Johnson said Wednesday on the House floor. “There is not a conceivable argument that the Democrats can make to oppose the commonsense measures that we’re putting before them today. Nothing changes the voter registration process in the states.” “The only people who will face hurdles here are those who are trying to break our federal laws,” the House speaker said. “And that’s why it’s patently absurd that the White House issued a veto threat. They issued a veto threat.” In 2017, Pennsylvania Secretary of State Pedro Cortes resigned after the state admitted to registering illegal immigrants for several years.  More than 10 million illegal immigrants and millions more paroled aliens have entered the country since Biden took office in January 2021. The Biden administration has released at least 4.6 million illegal aliens into the United States in addition to 1.8 million known “gotaways,” according to Roy’s office. This is a breaking news story and may be updated. The post House Passes Measure to Stop Noncitizen Voting in Federal Elections appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Chuck Todd Spills the Beans About Biden: He's a Bad Man

EVidently Lousy EV Demand Is EViscerating EVeryone's Prior Plans

The Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro took discredited leftist website ratings firm NewsGuard to task during his explosive testimony against advertiser group collusion. On July 10, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), a World Federation of Advertisers initiative, which allegedly exploited its control of 90% of world advertising dollars to starve conservative websites of ads. Shapiro, whose publication has frequently faced demonetization and censorship on social media, testified against GARM. The Daily Wire editor and GOP members of the committee bashed GARM for allegedly violating antitrust laws and showing flagrant bias against right-leaning voices. They also shed light on bias at NewsGuard, the discredited source GARM uses for identifying sources of misinformation.  “GARM and other organizations like it have worked in conjunction with [the Global Disinformation Index] and NewsGuard to set standards and again those standards are purportedly objective, in practice they rarely are, and so NewsGuard for example has penalized us openly for being a conservative site,” Shapiro said. When Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL) asked Shapiro about how GARM’s “misinformation” sources— namely NewsGuard and GDI—have impacted The Daily Wire, Shapiro said that they used their unclear standards to harm the reputation of conservative publications.  “The lack of transparency in the standards is actually a weapon that's used against one side of the political aisle and I keep asking the question over and over and over again: Can NewsGuard name a major right-wing outlet or conservative outlet that it deems brand safe? Can GARM do the same?”  Shapiro went on to argue that NewsGuard and GARM had let The New York Times and CNN off the hook for misinformation. Shapiro agreed that right-leaning and leftist publications received wildly different treatment before declaring that, “a huge percentage of those ad dollars are still going to purportedly objective or leftwing outlets and virtually none are going to right-wing outlets.” Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ) also bashed NewsGuard, citing a 2023 study by MRC Free Speech America Associate Editor Joseph Vazquez to prove NewsGuard bias. Specifically, he said, “NewsGuard ranked leftist media organizations on average a 91 on a zero to 100 scale, right-leaning organizations a 66.” NewsGuard grew even more biased later in 2023, as this 25-point difference grew to a 26-point difference.  Drew asked Shapiro to provide examples of the absurdity of NewsGuard’s refusal to hold the left accountable while demonizing the right. “The list is extraordinarily long,” Shapiro told him before listing off the media attacks on the Covington Catholic kids at the March for Life; covering for President Joe Biden by calling embarrassing videos of him “cheap fakes” and the ravings of MSNBC host Joy Reid. Shapiro added legacy media’s rhetoric accusing former President Trump of Russian Collusion Shapiro summed it up brutally, “The list is endless which is precisely why, if you look at the Gallop polls and levels of trust in media, levels of trust in media right now are at all-time lows. They were at about 50% back in, say, 2005 and today they're south of 30%. There's a reason for that they've blown out their credibility but that doesn't seem to blow out their credibility with GARM or NewsGuard.” Conservatives are under attack! Conservatives are under attack! Contact your representatives and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency on WEF partnerships, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

When it rains, it pours for the liberal media. While CNN is facing a $1 billion defamation suit for allegedly slandering a security contractor, MSNBC was on the receiving end of a $30 million defamation suit for allegedly doing the same to a Georgia gynecologist who was seeing illegal immigrants at the direction of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). And in this instance too, the judge found that a jury could potentially find “actual malice” on MSNBC’s part. According to Judge Lisa Godbey Wood’s order for the case to go to trial (no trial date has been set yet), plaintiff Dr. Mahendra Amin “has presented sufficient evidence that could enable a jury to find actual malice” because of extensive internal communications and notes from MSNBC  hosts,  producers, reporters, and Standards and Practices folks questioning the report even before going to air. “A jury could also conclude that NBC did not act with actual malice given the evidence that it published opposing information. This duel of conflicting evidence must be resolved by a jury,” Wood added. The suit stems from a series of on-air reports conducted between September 15 and 17 of 2020. In their reports, MSNBC reporters Julia Ainsley and Jacob Soboroff and hosts Nicolle Wallace, Chris Hayes, and Rachel Maddow parroted a letter of unverified whistleblower claims that Amin was abusing female illegal immigrants he was seeing as patients, performing unnecessary hysterectomies, and that he was known as the “uterus collector.” But while they took that reporting to literal prime time, internal discussions at the network showed skepticism of what they were saying. In an email to Soboroff and Ainsley, the senior deputy of NBCUniversal’s Standards and Practices, Chris Scholl had deep concerns about the validity of the report, evening noting that all the information they had came from one source he admitted had “an agenda”: As I’ve been mulling, my concern is all we have is a public whistleblower complaint in which she provides no evidence to back up her claims. ICE makes essentially the same point, and it appears a valid one. She has no direct knowledge of what she’s claiming, is unable to name the doctor involved (if I understood correctly), and we are unable to verify any of it or determine whether there really is a story here. Essentially, it boils down to a single source—with an agenda—telling us things we have no basis to believe are true. At the least, we would have to note all of that in our reporting, but then it’s worth asking why we are reporting it in the first place. I think we need more of our own independent reporting before going with this. ICE’s statement alone doesn’t get us there. In a conversation that included Hayes, Scholl admitted: “We don’t know if [Amin] did anything wrong here . . . . In fact, the guy has a pretty clean record.” Adding: “And the whistleblower has no direct knowledge of this stuff . . . . [S]he kind of has a beef, right? She’s got a whole separate agenda here.” Hayes said the quiet part out loud in that “the reason it went viral” was because it “conjured the worst kind of like Third Reich, . . . sort of . . . Jim Crow, Mississippi Hospital history.” Essentially, it fit perfectly into the narrative they had painted about the Trump administration and it’s immigration policies. Hayes admitted all of that, “is not the case here.” Maddow also had expressed concerns about the story in a production meeting and was unsure they should give it airtime on her show: In a preproduction meeting, a producer for the show said that the “hysterectomy part [of the whistleblower letter] is largely based on [Wooten] and anon[ymous] accounts.” Id. at 3. Maddow commented that there was “a lot of jumping to conclusions around the complaint . . . I don’t want to assume it’s true[,] but if it is we should definitely do it. Unsure if we should leave room in the show or not.” It’s worth noting that this case exposed how things run behind the scenes at the sister networks. Despite NBCUniversal’s outward façade that MSNBC and NBC News were separate opinion and news divisions, it was all a charade as reporters and executives moved effortlessly between the two. [H/T The Washington Free Beacon]