$13.5 million to Democrats

'What a lovely guy'

'They view this as a family matter and wish to resolve it as a family'

All it takes is two secret ingredients: a Russian connection and a fantastic level of incredulity

A federal judge dismissed claims against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis brought by attorneys representing illegal aliens that the Republican governor had flown to Martha’s Vineyard‚ Massachusetts‚ in 2022. District Judge Allison Burroughs ruled Friday that illegal immigrants could sue the charter flight company Vertol Systems‚ which contracted with Florida to transport them in September 2022. But Burroughs dismissed other claims brought against DeSantis and state defendants‚ finding that the court lacked jurisdiction‚ while leaving open the possibility of future legal action. “On the present record‚ the court cannot ascertain what actions were undertaken by whom and therefore cannot determine which‚ if any‚ of the individual defendants transacted business or caused injury here‚ leaving it no choice but to find that‚ at least on this record‚ personal jurisdiction has not been established‚” Burroughs wrote in her 77-page ruling. However‚ the judge wrote that the facts “support an inference that Vertol and the other defendants specifically targeted plaintiffs because they were Latinx immigrants.” “The court finds that‚ for purposes of a motion to dismiss‚ the allegations that Latinx individuals were (1) specifically targeted‚ (2) the only ones approached‚ and (3) the only ones on the flight … allow for the inference that Vertol and the other defendants invidiously discriminated against plaintiffs because of their race‚” Burroughs held. The judge wrote that “no reasonable person should have to endure the anxiety that comes with being unwillingly inserted into a divisive national debate.” The organization Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston filed the class action lawsuit in September 2022 on behalf of the nearly 50 illegal aliens transported from San Antonio‚ Texas‚ to Martha’s Vineyard. Julia Friedland‚ deputy press secretary for DeSantis‚ told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the flights “were conducted lawfully and authorized by the Florida Legislature.” “We look forward to Florida’s next illegal immigrant relocation flight‚ and we are glad to bring national attention to the crisis at the southern border‚” Friedland said. In a written statement‚ Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston called the ruling a “major victory.” “The favorable ruling is a major victory in the Martha’s Vineyard case‚ and it sends a crucial message: Private companies can—and will—be held accountable for helping rogue state actors violate the rights of vulnerable immigrants through illegal and fraudulent schemes‚” the group said. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation The post Judge Hands DeSantis Legal Win in Lawsuit Over Flying Illegal Aliens to Martha’s Vineyard appeared first on The Daily Signal.

California Democrats’ incorrigible obsession with racial preferences is the definition of insanity: They keep trying and failing to legalize racial preferences‚ and yet‚ they expect a different outcome each time. When will they learn from their failures? Not any time soon. Their futile cycle has restarted with another effort to legalize racial preferences. The California state Assembly passed a proposed constitutional amendment‚ ACA 7‚ that would effectively nullify a provision of the California Constitution that prohibits the state from “discriminating against‚ or granting preferential treatment to‚ any individual or group on the basis of race‚ sex‚ color‚ ethnicity‚ or national origin.” That anti-discrimination provision‚ known as Proposition 209‚ affirms the constitutional right to equal protection under the law for all individuals‚ regardless of race. Left-wing politicians and activist groups have assailed it relentlessly and continuously since its adoption in 1996. They want to reinstate racial preferences within California’s institutions‚ but they have failed every time. Before ACA 7‚ California legislators had attempted to overturn the anti-discrimination provision in a measure known as Proposition 16‚ which was decisively rejected by California voters in the November 2020 general election. A comfortable majority of voters voted “No” on the measure‚ despite the “Yes” proponents outspending the opposition by more than 19 to 1. Although California voters emphatically rejected racial preferences in education and hiring‚ the supporters of racial preferences still have not taken “No” for an answer. This time‚ they’re hoping to trick the people into changing their minds. Whereas Prop 16 was open and honest about abolishing racial neutrality‚ ACA 7 is much more deceptive. Rather than repeal race neutrality‚ ACA 7 creates “exceptions” that look modest‚ but which would effectively nullify the rule. Assemblyman Corey Jackson introduced the bill to create a procedure for agencies to appeal to the governor for “exceptions” to Prop 209. The amendment would give the governor power to approve exceptions if a state-funded‚ “research-informed” program that uses racial preferences “increases the life expectancy of‚ improves educational outcomes for‚ or lifts out of poverty specific groups based on race‚ color‚ ethnicity‚ national origin‚ sex‚ or sexual orientation.” In other words‚ this bill is just an attempt to restore racial discrimination under the guise of science. Find some ideologically driven‚ low-quality research that appears to support a program that allegedly “increases the life expectancy” or “educational outcomes” of any minority group‚ and voila‚ racial discrimination is lawful again. Jackson insists that Prop 209 is an “unjust law” and a “barrier.” Yes‚ it’s unjust‚ he says‚ not to discriminate on the basis of race. He’s wrong about that‚ but he’s right about Prop 209 being a barrier. Prop 209 bars the state government from racially discriminating against the state’s residents.It guarantees one of the fundamental tenets of justice; namely‚ that all are equal before the law. Jackson is happy to sacrifice equal justice to “rectify the enduring disparities that have afflicted California for far too long.” But even assuming that racial discrimination would rectify disparities and would do so without causing even worse problems (both faulty assumptions)‚ that doesn’t change the fact that racial discrimination is unjust and immoral. Most Californians know this. So‚ thankfully‚ there’s still hope in the fight against racial preferences. The resounding defeat of Prop 16 in 2020 pointed to the reality that California voters‚ despite their infamously deep-blue political leanings‚ are not in favor of considering race in education or hiring decisions. According to Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies’ post-2020 election survey of Californians‚ although 56% of African American voters supported Proposition 16‚ only 30 percent of Latinos and just 35 percent of Asians did. If ACA 7 passes the California state Senate‚ it will appear on the November ballot. If past is prologue‚ California voters will demonstrate—as if twice wasn’t enough—that racial discrimination is not tolerated in California‚ no “exceptions.” The post Some in California Want to Legalize Racial Discrimination—Yet Again appeared first on The Daily Signal.

When Did America Become a State Sponsor of Terror?

Imagine a colossal yet tender presence‚ quietly making its way closer to the smallest member of the family‚ setting the stage for a heartwarming interaction. This gentle giant‚ Phil‚ a magnificent dog‚ finds his world revolving around the newest‚ tiny human in the house. Every movement he makes‚ though subtle‚ is infused with the purest... The post Dog falls in love with new baby brother and quickly becomes obsessed appeared first on Animal Channel.

Imagine a colossal yet tender presence‚ quietly making its way closer to the smallest member of the family‚ setting the stage for a heartwarming interaction. This gentle giant‚ Phil‚ a magnificent dog‚ finds his world revolving around the newest‚ tiny human in the house. Every movement he makes‚ though subtle‚ is infused with the purest... The post Dog meets new baby brother and his response is beyond heart-melting appeared first on Animal Channel.

"I personally think it's good for them." Kate Bedingfield couldn't possibly have meant what that sounded like‚ even though she's a communications professional--Biden's former communications director. Surely she's not so heartless as to describe the deaths of seven World Central Kitchen aid workers in Gaza in an Israeli strike as being "good for" the Biden administration. But however she meant her shocking line‚ one thing was clear: Bedingfield did see the tragedy as a good opportunity for the Biden administration [read‚ campaign] to distance itself from Bibi Netanyahu and his policies. As Bedingfield put it in an appearance on Tuesday's CNN This Morning: "Every instance of horror like this gives the Biden administration more opening to put clear contrast between what they're trying to do‚ what they would argue they're trying to do responsibly in the region‚ and what Netanyahu has been unwilling to do.  I‚ I personally think it's good for them." Even seen in the most forgiving light‚ that is some stone-cold realpolitik. Could the vulture not have waited a bit longer before swooping down to exploit the tragedy for its maximum political benefit for her former boss?  Far from pushing back on Bedingfield's callous take‚ Hunt accused Israel of "starv[ing]" Gaza's population. Panelist Jonah Goldberg refuted Hunt's accusation‚ saying‚ "It's very difficult to feed a population that is being used as essentially human shields by a terrorist organization‚" and that "there's this expectation that Israel should be actually carrying more about Palestinians than the supposed leadership of Gaza. And that expectation puts Israel in an impossible situation."  Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 4/2/24 6:14 am EDT IDF SPOKESMAN DANIEL HAGARI: The work of WCK is critical. They are the front lines of humanity. We will get to the bottom of this‚ and we will share our findings transparently. KASIE HUNT: Well‚ the IDF launching an investigation into the death of seven aid workers from José Andrés' World Central Kitchen. They were killed in an Israeli air strike‚ in an Israeli strike‚ excuse me‚ in central Gaza. The organization says that they had coordinated their movements with the IDF‚ and that they were in marked vehicles with their logo on them.  World Central Kitchen is one of the few aid organizations providing desperately needed food to those in Gaza. The organization now pausing operations there. The White House this morning calling this tragedy deeply troubling. . . .  Kate Bedingfield‚ I want to start with you‚ because look‚ this‚ the World Central Kitchen‚ José Andrés' operation‚ has become world renowned for showing up in the moments when humanity is having some of its toughest experiences‚ and helping people. They are known throughout the country in this way it‚ it's clear from that video that we showed at the top‚ the IDF just put that out as this is unfolding‚ that they understand just how horrible this is. And certainly just how horrible also that it looks.  KATE BEDINGFIELD: Oh yeah. HUNT: What is the impact here for the Biden administration? Because the politics of this are already so tough for them. BEDINGFIELD: Yeah‚ well look‚ obviously this is a horrific tragedy‚ a true humanitarian disaster‚ I mean‚ it's fair to say. You know‚ for the Biden administration‚ obviously‚ this is an incredibly fraught issue. I think the more space they can continue to draw between themselves and Bibi Netanyahu‚ and Netanhyahu's government‚ the better for them politically. From a policy perspective‚ I think they've been trying to drive toward a longstanding‚ sort of post-conflict plan. I think Bibi's own domestic politics have made it so that he is unwilling to engage in that in a serious way. And so every instance of horror like this gives the Biden administration more opening to put clear contrast between what they're trying to do‚ what they would argue they're trying to do responsibly in the region‚ and what Netanyahu has been unwilling to do. I‚ I personally think it's good for them. So‚ I think they need to be clear that this was unacceptable. It was horrific. They need to move to support Israel's investigation into what happened happened‚ and to take a very tough line on this. And I think this is a moment for them to do that.