'willfully violating election law'

Posts shared to X claim that Pakistan threatened to launch a nuclear attack against Israel if the country attacked Pakistani territory. ?BREAKING NEWS:- ?? Pakistan says that if ?? Israel attacks its territory, ☢️ nuclear weapons will be used against them. pic.twitter.com/H3Nq3wKfnJ — Asad Nasir (@asadnasir2000) October 5, 2024 Verdict: False Pakistan has not threatened […]

'Twelve months have passed in front of our eyes'

Less than 10% of their personnel

One year after the most deadly day in Jewish history since the Holocaust, 3.5 million American Jews say they have experienced antisemitism, according to a recent study.  “One out of every five American Jewish children has experienced antisemitism since Oct. 7,” EJ Kimball, director of Christian engagement at Combat Antisemitism Movement, said during an event at The Heritage Foundation on Monday to mark the anniversary of Hamas’ terrorist attack on Israel.  Kimball, a father of two, said both his children have experienced antisemitism at school in the past year. According to the survey, which was conducted by Dr. Ira Sheskin of the University of Miami and commissioned by Combat Antisemitism Movement, 61% of American Jews report feeling less safe since the terrorist attack a year ago.  Hamas terrorists killed about 1,200 people, mostly Israelis, on Oct. 7, and another 250 were taken hostage. Today, 93 Israelis are still being held hostage in Gaza, including four Americans with dual citizenship. Kimball and several other experts in the field of combating antisemitism addressed the circumstances that led to Oct. 7 and the swift rise in anti-Jewish sentiment on college campuses during Monday’s event.  How Hamas Was Able to Carry Out Oct. 7 While Hamas carried out the deadly terrorist attack, Iran sponsored it, according to Fred Fleitz, vice chair of Center for American Security at the America First Policy Institute.  “Iran is the head of the snake,” Fleitz said during a panel discussion. “Iran is funding Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels and Shiite militias in Syria and Iraq.”   Iran had the money to fund the attack at least in part because the U.S. government gave Iran access to billions of dollars as part of a prisoner exchange and the Biden administration “ignored all the sanctions that were introduced in the previous administration, allowing [Iran to sell] oil in the market and other business activities, allowing Iran to earn another $50 to $100 billion,” according to Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America.  “The reserves went from $4 billion to $100 billion, enabling them to fund and arm Hamas and Hezbollah,” added Klein. But Iran’s financial favor was not the only circumstance that led to Oct. 7.  In 2005, all Israeli settlements in the Gaza strip were dismantled and “that was a terrible mistake,” according to Klein. In 2007, Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip.  Hamas was also able to carry out the attack a year ago because of “Biden pressuring Israel to give work permits to Gaza civilians,” Klein said.  “These innocent Gaza civilians gave Hamas the routes, maps where the kindergartens were, where the schools are, the residents in each home, so they knew exactly what they were doing,” he said.  Israel should have also created a “buffer zone” between Israel and Gaza, Klein argued, adding that Israel may have missed an opportunity to destroy Hamas in 2021 after Hamas fired missiles at Israel. The Jewish state did respond, but the U.S. encouraged Israel to limit its response, which it did.  America has also given funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, which, according to Klein, “teaches hate and violence to Arabs.”  The United States is “in part responsible for Hamas remaining strong and remaining really in existence,” Klein said.  Why Did Pro-Palestine Protests Break Out So Quickly After Oct. 7? The bodies of dead Israelis were hardly cold following the Oct. 7 attack when pro-Palestine protests broke out on college campuses in the U.S. “One day after that attack, these individuals started coming out and protesting Israel’s right to defend itself right here in the heart of America,” Jonathan Schanzer, senior vice president of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said during Monday’s event.  The individuals Schanzer is referring to are not so much the students protesting at Columbia University and other schools, but a group known as American Muslims for Palestine.  American Muslims for Palestine is “the group that incubated, funded, and directed Students for Justice in Palestine,” Schanzer said. Students for Justice in Palestine has organized many of the pro-Palestine campus protests over the past year.  “And, of course, we see people showing up at each one of these things—adults that have no business being on campus—and you’ve got to start to ask yourself, why?” Schanzer said.  Kimball says there has been a “colossal failure from leadership” on college campuses to call out antisemitism. The Combat Antisemitism Movement director contends that there should be consequences for students who participate in these “pro-genocidal protests” because “most of them have no idea what they’re even doing. They’re being used [and] manipulated.”  The post How We Got Here: Antisemitism and an Emboldened Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal.

It has been a year since the Israel-Hamas war broke out on Oct. 7, 2023. In the early morning hours, the terrorist organization Hamas launched surprise attacks in southern Israel. The blitzkrieg proved to be the bloodiest such attack in Israel’s history. Hamas terrorists rampaged through towns and ravaged communities, killing 1,200 civilians, including 40 American citizens, while taking 251 hostages, 12 Americans among them. Israel responded swiftly and severely by invading the adjacent Gaza Strip, which is governed by Hamas. A year on, the war in the Levant is on the cusp of becoming a broader regional war—or worse, a third world war. With Gaza reduced to rubble, Hamas in shambles, Hezbollah severely diminished, continued escalation in Lebanon, and an Israeli surge into the West Bank, the path now appears cleared for direct confrontation between Israel and Iran. The United States looks on with bated breath as the Israelis reportedly plan to respond to Iran’s Oct. 1. attack on Israel, in which 180 ballistic missiles were fired but no casualties were reported. Iran’s attack appeared to be triggered by Israeli strikes on Beirut, which killed Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on Sept. 27, and Tehran, which killed Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh on July 31. The U.S. administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris has bumbled its way through the current crisis in the Middle East. The president assures that Israel has backing from the United States in one instant, then demands a cease-fire the next. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems comfortable with allowing the Biden-Harris administration to live with that apparent contradiction. Weapons continue to flow from the U.S. to Israel, and the U.S. continues to play an active role in thwarting missile attacks launched by Israel’s enemies. Without exercising any of its leverage against the Israelis, the Biden-Harris administration is unlikely to negotiate a cease-fire agreement. Whenever the administration claimed negotiations were on the brink of a breakthrough, another round of attacks from both sides would send the parties back to the drawing board. The Netanyahu government appears to think that cycle is amenable—at least until the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 5. The election seems to be a no-lose situation for Israeli interests, though one option is preferable to the other. Harris, the Democratc nominee, likely would continue the Biden policy of tough rhetoric against Israel without follow through. Israel could continue to wage its war mostly unimpeded. Given former President Donald Trump’s record with respect to Israel, the odds of a settlement that massively favors Israel would seem to skyrocket if Trump is elected to a second term. Nevertheless, the Israeli government’s vested interest in the outcome of the November election still doesn’t explain how the war got to this point. All the Israelis needed to do to undercut the Biden-Harris administration’s effort to settle the war was to maintain the status quo. Instead, Netanyahu has opted for a strategy of escalation in the past six months. Israel has widened its radius for missile strikes against enemy targets, hitting Beirut, Damascus, and Tehran. It has fully opened fronts in Lebanon against Hezbollah and in the West Bank. Although Iran’s latest attack employed 180 ballistic missiles, the Iranians are factoring in Israel and its allies’ capabilities to shoot down projectiles when carrying out these attacks. Zero Israeli casualties in exchange for missile strikes in Tehran and Beirut that took out two of the Israel-Hamas war’s major players? In that light, Iran’s barrage seems fairly deescalatory. Israel, however, likely will go forward with an attack on Iranian soil in the coming days. What assets Israel will target in that strike remains uncertain. What is certain, however, is that the Israeli government has the Biden-Harris administration’s blessing. “Make no mistake, the United States is fully, fully, fully supportive of Israel,” Biden said as Israel prepared to respond. With Israel’s successes against Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran seems more vulnerable to attack now than at any time in recent memory. Iran’s own actions betray a lack of confidence that the Islamist regime could prevail in a war against Israel if it comes to it. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, despite his jihadist rhetoric, seems to understand that his regime would become the epicenter of regional destabilization if such a war came to pass. It’s simply not in Iran’s interest to escalate in the foreseeable future. Rather, the Iranians’ best bet is to rebuild the capacity of its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, in order to keep Israel focused on them rather than Iran itself. For the U.S., the top priority remains getting home the four U.S. citizens still held hostage by Hamas in Gaza. But if the Israeli response triggers a chain of escalatory events that risks destabilizing the region, the next U.S. president might be forced to redefine the U.S.-Israel relationship. The post What’s Next for Israel and Iran in Middle East War? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

On the latest episode of “The Tony Kinnett Cast,” we observe the unusual strategy of the Harris/Walz campaign trying desperately to pad out the remainder of the election season with less than a month to go. Vice President Kamala Harris may be able to stick this tie game out, but only time and the prophetic pundits will tell! Hurricane Milton reaches Category 5, threatening the southern United States and the survivors of Hurricane Helene. The Federal Emergency Management Agency comes under fire; some of it is justified, some of it is not. Former President Trump’s “Return to Butler, PA” rally may have affected Pennsylvania more than originally thought. Either way, his opening statements were undoubtedly and unequivocally some of the best made by a presidential candidate in U.S. history, regardless of one’s political ideology. Catch the live radio show and livestream weeknights at 7 p.m. EDT on The Daily Signal’s YouTube, X, or Facebook—and subscribe to the podcast so you never miss an episode or exclusive interview! The post Harris Tries to ‘Run Out the Clock’ on a Tie Game appeared first on The Daily Signal.

On 10/7, CBS News Apologizes for Questioning Ta-Nehisi Coates About His One-Sided Book (Update)

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a twice-failed presidential candidate,  echoed cynical calls from Democratic politicians for regulation and censorship of social media platforms. On a Saturday interview with CNN host Michael Smerconish, Clinton railed against the First Amendment, praising New York and California for their harsh crackdown on free speech and calling for similar “national action.” She specifically beseeched, “We need to have guardrails., We need to have regulation.” Clinton expressed her fear if regulation of speech is not implemented on a national level, lamenting, “If they don’t moderate or monitor content, we lose total control.” Clinton rebuked Section 230, calling it “overly simple” and went on to demand harsher “judgment“ for content posted on social media platforms. “We should be, in my view, repealing something called Section 230, which gave platforms on the internet immunity.”  Dan Schneider, vice president of Free Speech America at MRC, responded to Clinton’s comments with dismay. “Hillary Clinton certainly understands that the current law is flawed, but her prescription is designed to silence over half of Americans, those of us who disagree with her radical views. Section 230 must be amended, but in a way that prevents the censorship of constitutionally-protected speech.”  Schneider continued, “Clinton’s ultimate problem is her hatred of democratic forms of government. She hates that the hairdresser in Topeka and the pizza delivery guy in Des Moines get as much say as she does about who the next president of the United States will be.” Clinton’s comments echo recent anti-free speech remarks made by leading Democratic and leftist figures like  Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), former Secretary of State and Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry and leftist billionaire Bill Gates calling for censorship.  ICYMI: John Kerry Rails 1st Amendment ‘Roadblock’ to Hammering Free Speech ‘Out of Existence’ Clinton’s latest complaints drew outrage from several pro-free speech individuals on X. Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Twitter Files journalist Michael Shellenberger, and former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) expressed their discontent with the recent dialogue surrounding free speech.  Hillary said it: when you allow free speech, ‘we lose total control.’ People like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris do not believe in the First Amendment because they see it as an obstacle to achieving their real goal: ‘total control,’” Kennedy Jr. responded to Clinton’s comments with an X. “Hillary Clinton is correct. They would lose total control.” Michael Shellenberger echoed Kennedy, posting on his timeline “They appear to be laying the groundwork for totalitarianism. Our democratic republic is in danger.”  Hillary said it: when you allow free speech, “we lose total control.” People like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris do not believe in the First Amendment because they see it as an obstacle to achieving their real goal: “total control.” https://t.co/euQJgAVxV4 — Tulsi Gabbard ? (@TulsiGabbard) October 5, 2024 Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representative and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable

The Trump "tell-all" books never end, and the anti-Trump media will promote every one of them. Believe it or not, former British spy Christopher Steele -- one of the original gangsters spreading unproven dirt on alleged Russian collusion with Trump -- has a new book coming out, and The Washington Post promoted it on the front page of Monday's Style section. October surprise!  The large headline under a large color photo of Steele was simple and neutral: "The author of the Steele dossier has more to say." Above the photo in much smaller type was this: "The ex-intelligence officer promises more dirt on Trump in 'Unredacted.' But will people believe him?' We can all guess who is willing to believe him: Amazon's page for his book says people who bought this also bought Hillary Clinton's latest memoir. All of these books are catnip for Democrat partisans, and we know who the typical Washington Post reader is!  Reporter Manuel Roig-Franzia described his work as Steele's "famous -- or infamous, depending on where you sit -- dossier." The Democrats think "famous." The headline on page C-2 was again neutral: "In new book, Steele unveils the fruits of fresh sleuthing."  Manuel insisted Steele "tired mightily, and with only minimal success, to get the news media to chase leads from the dossier" before the 2016 election. The real heyday for the dossier came in early 2017, but then, the reporter claimed, "The news media and eventually congressional investigators set about picking apart the dossier." That's not true, not when they pushed the spectre of Russian collusion until the Robert Mueller probe began.  The Post theory on the dossier here is that Steele got a little over his skis, that the dossier was an "intelligence report for a private client," not as reliable as something facing public scrutiny. But these people (including his funders in Hillary Clinton's campaign) forced it all into the public eye!  Steele's name became forever associated with an alleged sex tape, the dossier's most salacious allegation, which involved the Russians possibly holding blackmail video of Trump engaged in a kinky and less-than-sanitary sex act with prostitutes at a Moscow hotel." Trump "made great use of the never-proven allegation to undercut.  the credibility of the entire dossier and to distract from its core theme — later widely accepted by the news media and the U.S. intelligence community — that the Russians interfered in the election in hopes of helping Trump win. So the reporter asked Steele whether he would still put this unverified gunk in the dossier today.  “Call me a stick in the mud,” he said via Zoom from his London offices, “but probably, yes.” Steele has always displayed a hostility that neatly matches the CNN/MSNBC vibe, with all the overtones that Trump is dangerous (and maybe someone should take a potshot at him).  In the book, Steele predicts a “new world disorder” if Trump wins back the presidency in November, and portrays him as more dangerous than U.S. adversaries such as China and Iran. He calls the Republican Party and the former president who dominates it “the gravest threat to Western democracy and the rule of law … increasingly the willing handmaidens for Putin.” The appetite for "dirt on Trump" is never-ending, and the standard of proof is far below where it is for the Democrats that reporters support -- at work and at the ballot box.