Trump a rock star among black voters

Trump supporters at a rally in Council Bluffs, Iowa (Gateway Pundit)

Trump supporters at a rally in Council Bluffs, Iowa (Gateway Pundit)

President Trump’s approval among black voters hit a record-high 40 percent a week ahead of the midterm elections, according to a Rasmussen survey.

Typically, the Gateway Pundit pointed out, Democrats need about 85 percent of the African-American vote to win national elections.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen found President Trump’s approval rating hit 50 percent on Monday, 6 points higher than Barack Obama at the same time in his presidency. It was down to 49 percent on Wednesday, according to the daily tracking poll.

Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight.com forecasts the Democrats have an 85 percent chance of winning control of the House and a 14 percent chance of retaking the Senate.

Many Republicans, however, are recalling that Silver and nearly every other political prognosticator got it wrong in 2016. Political consultant Anthony Scaramucci, who briefly worked in the Trump White House, is one who believes Democrats once again are “driving away” the blue collar voters that put Trump over the top two years ago.

He wrote in a Washington Times op-ed Tuesday that in midterm races across the country, the Democrats “are back calling Trump voters racists, this time for their stance of strong border security.”

“As the caravan of 7,000 migrants moves ever closer to an illegal border crossing into our southern states, dog whistles have become blatant slurs,” he wrote, calling “this slanderous language” an “insult to the ‘blue collar’ voters around the country.”

“And once again, Democratic candidates are driving away the very people who were once the lifeblood of their party,” he said.

Scaramucci conceded that Democrats could regain control of the House, but he said “it seems clear now that the media-made narrative of a ‘blue wave’ is largely a myth; and, if enough Republican incumbents can hold on and the party manages to retain control of the House, Americans may yet be in for a repeat of President Trump’s historic and shocking victory in 2016.”

On Wednesday, President Trump launched an eight-state campaign blitz to support Republicans in key Senate battles in Indiana, Missouri and Florida and candidates for governor in Georgia and Ohio.

‘Misreading’ electorate?

Republicans hold a 23-seat majority in the 435-seat House and a two-seat majority in the 100-seat Senate. But the GOP is more vulnerable in the House, where its candidates are defending 41 seats without an incumbent on the ballot, the most since 1930, Reuters points out.

In the Senate, Democrats, who are focusing their messaging on protecting Obamacare and maintaining coverage of pre-existing conditions, are defending 10 seats in states that Trump won in 2016.

Republicans, in an election in which the party in the White House usually loses ground, have seen strong turnout across the nation, boosted in part by Democrats’ treatment of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and immigration issues.

Marc Lotter, a former top aide to Vice President Mike Pence, told Reuters he believes Democrats are misreading the electorate in many areas, especially in Senate races.

“You have seen a big shift toward Republicans in many states that the president carried,” he said.

Democrats are focused on protecting seats in West Virginia, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana and Missouri.

The Los Angeles Times said Democrats are “pinning their hopes on white, educated, independent or Republican-leaning women who have turned on Trump and could be encouraged to vote for a Democratic congressional candidate this year.”

In Florida, Democrats have pulled ahead in the state’s U.S. Senate and governor races, a new Reuters opinion poll showed on Wednesday.

Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson is leading Florida Republican Gov. Rick Scott by 5 percentage points among likely voters, according to the Reuters/Ipsos/UVA Center for Politics poll.

Democrat Andrew Gillum, the Tallahassee mayor, who could become Florida’s first black governor had the support of 50 percent of likely voters in a poll last month, compared to 44 percent for Republican Rep. Ron DeSantis.

In Texas, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz leads challenger Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-El Paso, by just 3.6 percentage points among likely voters, according to a University of Texas at Tyler poll released Wednesday.

A number of polls show Cruz’s lead over O’Rourke narrowing.

In Minnesota, a Somali refugee running as a Democrat is heavily favored to defeat her Republican opponent for the Minnesota House seat held by Rep. Keith Ellison, Reuters reported.

Ilhan Omar, who fled civil war in Somalia and spent four years in a refugee camp, said she is running for office to make sure fewer people have to struggle with the daily necessities of life.

She said that when she arrived in the United States as a refugee with her family at age 12, she did not expect “to go to school with kids who were worried about food as much as I was worried about it in a refugee camp.”

She favors universal healthcare, free college tuition and more public housing, which are popular positions in a district that has not elected a Republican to the House since 1962.

Pelosi: We’ll bring unity if we win

In an appearance on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., boasted that Democrats are the party that treats opposing ideas respectfully then proceeded to attack Trump’s border policy as “taking babies out of the arms of their moms, putting them in cages.”

Pelosi, who likely would become speaker of the House once again if Democrats regain control, was asked about “lowering the temperature of political discourse.”

“There has been a lot of talk lately about lowering the temperature of political discourse,” Colbert said. “Have you — have you seen evidence of that?”

Pelosi replied: “Well, I think when we win, you will see evidence of that. Because when we do win, we will have, as we open the new Congress, we will honor the vows of our founders. E pluribus unum, from many one.”

“It’s OK to disagree in the marketplace of ideas,” she continued. “That’s exciting. But it is also important to find solutions that unify and not divide. And that’s what makes a big difference between Democrats and what’s in the White House now.”


Associated Press snagged in anti-gun electioneering


Gun firearm

The Second Amendment Foundation says it has caught the Associated Press wire service blatantly electioneering against guns in the lead-up to the 2018 midterm elections.

Such bias “invariably seems to show up in headlines and news reports just prior to an election,” said a statement from the foundation’s headquarters in Washington state.

“We’ve got an important midterm election next week,” noted SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb, “and gun control versus gun rights is an important shadow issue because Democrats have already made it clear that guns will be on the agenda if they take control of the Congress.”

He said he was not surprised that the Associated Press circulated an article headlined “Guns send over 8,000 US kids to ER each year, analysis says.”

Gottlieb said such stories often appear right before an election.

However, he pointed out, guns “haven’t sent anybody anywhere.”

“Careless people or criminals misusing guns are responsible, but guns get the blame. The problem is that many people never read past the headline, and this sort of thing contributes to the public’s impression that bias drives such sensational headlines,” he said.

He said that in his own state there is “obvious media bias in some publications about a gun control initiative on the ballot.”

“All five major law enforcement groups in the state, representing thousands of rank-and-file lawmen and women, are opposed to the measure,” Gottlieb said, “but the media downplayed their importance, referring to them as a ‘handful of law enforcement groups,’ or ‘some law enforcement groups,’ while vastly inflating the importance of three officials, including a single county sheriff, who are supporting the initiative.”

He said the media “screams when anybody talks about ‘fake news, but this bias is exactly what people are talking about, and when it comes to gun issues, it’s blatant. News agencies refer to gun prohibition lobbying groups as ‘gun safety organizations’ to help disguise their true intent. They talk about ‘semiautomatic assault rifles,’ when there really is no such thing, since true ‘assault rifles’ are fully automatic.”

Gottlieb’s group is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Second Amendment.

“It’s all subliminal, but it is designed to create an impression about firearms, gun owners and their desire to add further restrictions on the Second Amendment,” he said. “It’s deplorable and dishonest, but it exemplifies why people no longer trust the media. The public is not as dumb as the press thinks, and the proof is shrinking newspaper circulation and declining ratings. The press needs credibility, but on the gun issue, that was sacrificed a long time ago.”


Mobs invade streets after Christian freed from death sentence

Asia Bibi

Asia Bibi

Muslims in Pakistan had warned that if the nation’s Supreme Court acquitted a Christian woman accused of blaspheming Muhammad there would be violent protests in the streets.

And there were.

Protesters in major cities such as Lahore on Wednesday shouted “blasphemers deserve death” and “prophet, we sacrifice our lives for you” after the Supreme Court of Pakistan acquitted Asia Bibi, ruling the basis of the blasphemy charge was a “concocted” story.

Supporters of the Islamic political party Tehreek-e-Labaik condemned the ruling, hurling stones at police and blocking roads in major cities, the Independent newspaper of London reported.

Bibi’s Muslim co-workers refused to drink water from a cup from which she had taken a sip and demanded she convert to Islam. Her refusal prompted a mob to later allege that she had insulted the prophet Mohammed. She was convicted in 2010 under section 295-C of Pakistan’s penal code that punishes blasphemy against Muhammad with the death penalty. She was sentenced to execution by hanging.

Bibi denied she made any derogatory remarks about Islam.

The TLP was founded from a movement supporting a bodyguard who assassinated a provincial government for advocating for Bibi in 2011. A federal official also was killed after calling for the Christian woman’s release.

At least 65 people have been murdered over blasphemy allegations since 1990.

See video posted on Twitter of protests:

Another social media chain included a video of a nuclear explosion, and yet another revealed a heavy police presence.

Protests were reported breaking out in Karachi and Islamabad, as well as LaHore.

The American Center for Law and Justice, which represented Bibi, said she “had been accused of speaking disparagingly about the prophet but her real crime was that she offered water to Muslim co-workers who believed Asia had made the water ceremonially unclean by drinking from the same cup.”

“They asked her to convert to Islam, which Asia refused. Five days after this argument between the women, a Muslim cleric lodged a complaint against Asia after a mob of Muslims beat her and forced her to confess,” ACLJ said.

The Supreme Court, however, found the confession was made under the threat of violence and that the story of her “blasphemy” was “concocted.”

The court said: “The alleged extra-judicial confession was not voluntary but rather resulted out of coercion and undue pressure as the appellant was forcibly brought before the complainant in presence of a gathering, who were threatening to kill her; as such, it cannot be made the basis of the conviction.”

Further, the ruling said there “is an inordinate delay of about five days in lodging of the [complaint] which casts a serious doubt and shadow about the probity of the witnesses, and in fact, after the deliberations, a false story was concocted by the witnesses and reported to the police.”

ACLJ cautioned, however, “the danger for this Christian mother of 5 is not over.”

“Islamabad, the seat of the highest court in Pakistan, was on high security alert today,” the legal group said. “Rangers were deployed around the court and other parts of the capital. And there are reports of mobs in the streets burning tires over the court’s decision to release her.

“While this is a day of victory and celebration for Asia Bibi, her family, and all those who have relentlessly prayed for her, Asia and Christians in Pakistan need continued prayers. Today’s verdict will not make many in Pakistan happy. The death threats that have been issued against Asia and the justices should be taken seriously.

“We urge the government of Pakistan to provide necessary security to Asia and give her a safe passage to a place of peace and security. And we ask each and every one of you to please pray for Asia Bibi’s safety as you rejoice at her release.”

The court’s ruling noted that the witnesses couldn’t even agree on the material facts of the case, such as when and where the alleged offense occurred.

The court concluded that since “the conviction as also the sentence of death awarded to the appellant is set aside, and she is acquitted of the charge. She be released from jail forthwith.”

Bibi, according to the Christian group Barnabas Fund, told her lawyer: “I can’t believe what I am hearing; will I go out now? Will they let me out, really? I just don’t know what to say, I am very happy, I can’t believe it.”

Kelsey Zorzi, director of advocacy for global religious freedom for ADF International, said blasphemy laws “criminalize the exercise of fundamental human rights, including freedom of speech and freedom of religion.”

“Blasphemy laws directly violate international law,” Zorzi said. “All people have the right to freely choose, and live out, their faith. We, therefore, urge all governments to uphold this right by ceasing enforcement and initiating repeal of their blasphemy laws.”

WND reported before the verdict hundreds of protests were being held throughout Pakistan by Muslims threatening destruction and murder if the Supreme Court doesn’t order Bibi’s execution.

Tufail Ahmad, a senior fellow for the Middle East Media Research Institute’s Islamism and Counter-Radicalization Initiative, wrote about the threats and violence from Muslims who were trying to influence their judicial system.

The protests took place in an estimated 200 towns and cities, often immediately after Friday prayers at mosques.

“Religious clerics … who addressed the rallies in these towns vowed to continue their protests until the Supreme Court delivers its judgment and to oppose any attempt to amend Pakistan’s blasphemy laws,” Ahmad wrote. “Should the court verdict be lenient against Asia Bibi, they warned of countrywide chakka jaam – laying siege to traffic, a form of protests in South Asia where protesters stop, attack and burn vehicles.”

Pakistani media reported the protest leaders also took pledges from activists and the public to offer any sacrifice of life and wealth.

Ahmad cited a report that said “the lovers of Prophet Muhammad were seen to be extremely agitated and were demanding that the blasphemer Asia be hanged.”

The protests are being led by the Islamic party Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah.

The group’s emir for the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province said: “The purpose of this protest is to raise awareness that if any such judgment is delivered in this sensitive case that grants concessions to the blasphemer Asia, then we will protest all over the country. We will jam [lay siege to traffic] the country and the entire responsibility of it will be on the government.”

ACLJ said the protesters are “enraged at the very possibility of this Christian’s life being spared.”

“They’re demanding her death and threatening consequences – even against the judges – if she’s released,” the group said.

“This is an incredibly dangerous time, not only for Asia Bibi and the justices deciding her case, but the entire Christian community,” ACLJ said. “Pakistan’s Christian community fears they will be the first target of retribution if Bibi’s life is spared. They are asking for prayer and protection.”

ACLJ said the “barbaric mob rule” cannot be tolerated.

“It is well past time for the Pakistani government to take action and start protecting its Christian citizens.”


Kavanaugh declines $600,000 raised in GoFundMe

(YAHOO) — Citing judicial ethics concerns, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh declined more than $600,000 that was donated to aid his family during the firestorm over sexual misconduct allegations that plagued his confirmation. The judge’s decision was announced on Tuesday in a message posted on the online fundraising page that gathered the funds.

John Hawkins, a veteran conservative blogger who runs a Kavanaugh-inspired “men’s website” called Brass Pills, organized the fundraising campaign. On Tuesday, Hawkins posted what he referred to as an “official statement” from Kavanaugh’s representatives distancing the justice from the effort:

“Justice Kavanaugh did not authorize the use of his name to raise funds in connection with the GoFundMe campaign. He was not able to do so for judicial ethics reasons. Judicial ethics rules caution judges against permitting the use of the prestige of judicial office for fund-raising purposes. Justice Kavanaugh will not accept any proceeds from the campaign, nor will he direct that any proceeds from the campaign be provided to any third party. Although he appreciates the sentiment, Justice Kavanaugh requests that you discontinue the use of his name for any fund-raising purpose.”


Meadows: Investigate FBI for being ‘weaponized’ by Obama

Bruce Ohr and Christopher Steele

Bruce Ohr and Christopher Steele

The term “FBI investigation” has struck terror in the heart of many a wrong-doer over the years.

Now, however, it could mean an investigation OF the FBI.

Specifically, whether its interaction with the secret court that must approve spy operations constituted illegal acts.

It is the chief of the House Freedom Caucus, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., who is asking the head of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to determine whether the FBI did things that were wrong – like lying – in order to set up spy operations on members of President Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“As the Presiding Judge of the FISC … you are privy to information which could potentially verify or contradict our understanding of abuses of the FISA process,” he wrote to Judge Rosemay Collyer, currently the chief judge in the secret court.

“Ultimately, to protect the integrity of the process, we believe such an investigation is necessary,” he said.

“We write to encourage you to investigate the possibility FISA has recently been weaponized for political means.”

The issue is not a small one.

The court repeatedly issued warrants to spy on those linked to Trump.

But it appears that much of the foundation for the FBI’s demands to do that spying rested on the so-called “dossier,” an opposition research compilation of unfounded allegations about Trump.

The dossier was created by an ex-British spy on the payroll of a company funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Meadows already is one of the lawmakers on a congressional task force investigating the FBI review of “possible collusion” between the campaign and Russia.

Russians have denied the allegations. Trump has denied the allegations. The only convictions that have come from Robert Mueller’s special counsel’s office have been procedural counts, unrelated to any purported collusion.

The report by the Daily Caller News Foundation explains Republicans “so far are focusing on the FBI’s requests for four FISA warrants against onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.”

They were issued by the FISA court from October 2016 to June 2017.

To obtain those, the report said, the FBI had to provide probable cause that the target of the warrant was acting as an agent of a foreign power.

The FBI relied on that unverified “dossier,” but Republicans say that shouldn’t have happened.

“In his letter to Collyer, Meadows said that the dossier contained ‘hearsay evidence’ that dossier author Christopher Steele gathered from intermediaries. Other Republicans have noted that much of the dossier was unverified at the time that the FBI cited it in its FISA applications,” the report said.

Steele claims Page met secretly with two sanctioned Russians in 2016, and that Page was the Trump campaign’s “back channel to the Kremlin.”

No evidence has been made public that supports those suppositions.

“Over the course of our congressional task force’s review into certain investigative and prosecutorial decisions made by the FBI and broader Department of Justice surrounding the 2016 elections, concerns have mounted related to the veracity of information presented before the FISC,” Meadows wrote.

Part of the problem is that the FBI concealed from the FISA court that the “dossier was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign.

Meadows said the obvious concern is that the court “may not have lived up to the Constitution’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.”

WND reported only months ago that Bruce Ohr, a former top Justice Department official at the center of the anti-Trump dossier scandal, confirmed the FBI was aware when it submitted the dossier as evidence to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign that the document’s author was biased against Trump and that Ohr’s wife worked for the company that produced it.

But that was withheld from the FISA court.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions already confirmed earlier this year that the DOJ was looking into whether the FBI provided all relevant facts to the FISA court.

At the time, he said, “Let me tell you, every FISA warrant based on facts submitted to that court have to be accurate.”



Feds sued over Hillary Clinton’s security clearance

Hillary Clinton at the American Federation of Teachers Union on July 13, 2018 (Video screenshot)

Hillary Clinton at the American Federation of Teachers Union on July 13, 2018 (Video screenshot)

Government watchdog Judicial Watch is suing the State Department to find out why Hillary Clinton was allowed to keep her security clearance after the FBI determined she had mishandled classified information.

The lawsuit also demands records related to the security clearances of Clinton associates Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, Jacob Sullivan and Phillipe Reines.

Judicial Watch initially asked for the information under the Freedom of Information Act in August, just days before the government announced Clinton’s clearance had been revoked.

The legal action followed the State Department’s decision not to respond to the Judicial Watch request.

President Trump made an issue of former Clinton officials holding on to their security clearances after leaving office, including former CIA Director John Brennan after he sharply criticized Trump.

Judicial Watch noted Clinton’s clearance was withdrawn at her request Aug. 30, nine days after Judicial Watch filed its FOIA request.

The legal complaint was filed in federal court in Washington.

“In a September 21 letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, Acting Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Charles S. Faulkner said that, at her request, Clinton’s security clearance was ‘administratively withdrawn’ on August 30,” Judicial Watch said.

Others were withdrawn at the time.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has been probing the mishandling of classified information through the private, unsecure email server.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the State Department “needs to provide the full truth on the security clearances of Hillary Clinton and her top aides and why the agency allowed Mrs. Clinton to keep her clearance despite her mishandling of classified information and related false statements.”

The State Department had told Grassley that the clearances were maintained after Clinton left office for “research.”

The scandal over Clinton’s use of the private email server has continued as additional classified emails from her account have been released.


Obamas get rights to make anti-Trump Netflix show

(DEADLINE) — Deadline has learned that Michael Lewis’ latest book The Fifth Risk has been acquired by Barack and Michelle Obama under their Netflix production deal for a possible series aimed to help people better understand the inner workings of the government.

We understand that the Obamas are exploring projects but nothing specifically has yet gotten a greenlight. Lewis will reveal the news about the Obamas optioning The Fifth Risk on Katie Couric’s Thursday podcast.

The Fifth Risk, which hit shelves on Oct. 2 from W.W. Norton, follows the chaos and mismanagement that ensued in the departments of Energy, Agriculture and Commerce in the handoff from President Barack Obama to President Donald Trump.


Streisand may move to Canada if GOP keeps House

Cover image released by Columbia Records for Barbra Streisand's new album "Walls."

Cover image released by Columbia Records for Barbra Streisand’s new album “Walls.”

Singer and actress Barbra Streisand, who posed the idea in 2016 of leaving the United States if Donald Trump won, now says she may move to Canada if the Democrats don’t retake the House of Representatives in the midterm elections next Tuesday.

The activist entertainer, 76, said in an interview with the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman published Tuesday that she’s been having trouble sleeping at night. And Trump’s presidency, she lamented, is making her “fat.”

But that may change if the Democrats take the House, Streisand said.

“And if they don’t?” Haberman asked.

“Don’t know. I’ve been thinking about, do I want to move to Canada? I don’t know,” Streisand replied.

“I’m just so saddened by this thing happening to our country. It’s making me fat. I hear what he said now, and I have to go eat pancakes now, and pancakes are very fattening.

“We make them with healthy flour, though — almond flour, coconut flour,” she said.

Breitbart News noted that prior to the 2016 presidential election, Streisand told the Hollywood Reporter she might flee the United States if Trump won.

“He has no facts. I don’t know, I can’t believe it. I’m either coming to your country [Australia], if you’ll let me in, or Canada,” she said at the time.

Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh reacted Wednesday to Streisand’s Times interview, noting many Democrats and progressive activists have made similar vows.

“How many Democrats have threatened to leave the United States if they lose the next election? And then when they lose, they stay!” Limbaugh told his listeners.

Promises, promises

Last spring, WND compiled a list of 23 celebrities who said they would leave the country if Trump won but haven’t followed through with their promise.

Miley Cyrus (photo by Sgt. Michael Connors - 302nd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)

Miley Cyrus (photo by Sgt. Michael Connors – 302nd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)

Among them were Miley Cyrus, who declared: I am moving if he is president. I don’t say things I don’t mean!”

Actor Samuel Jackson said, “If that motherf–—er becomes president, I’m moving my black a– to South Africa.”

And “Girls” celebrity Lena Dunham was equally adamant: “I know a lot of people have been threatening to do this, but I really will. I know a lovely place in Vancouver.”

WND noted in a report the day after the November 2016 election that Streisand had been threatening to leave the U.S. since the Bill Clinton-George H.W. Bush campaign of 1992.

Kept awake by ‘Trump’s outrages’

In the new New York Times interview, Streisand discussed the origin of her new, politically oriented album “Walls,” which includes an anti-Trump ballad titled “Don’t Lie to Me.”

Barbra Streisand

Barbra Streisand

She said “it doesn’t matter” if her music offends Trump supporters.

“I would lie awake at night with Trump’s outrages running through my head, and I had to do another album for Columbia Records, so I thought, why not make an album about what’s on my mind?” she told the Times.

She said she is speaking out as a person rather than as an artist, explaining that “me in real life is more important than me as the artist.”

“As a citizen, that’s the role,” Streisand said.

In an interview with the Guardian newspaper of London, the Hill noted, Streisand called the president a “fat egg, sitting on a wall, and one day he’s going to fall off the wall,” alluding to the Humpty Dumpty nursery rhyme.

She told the British paper she had been working with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on a fundraising campaign.

Interviewed by the Associated Press in September, Streisand said she “just can’t stand what’s going on.”

“His assault on our democracy, our institutions, our founders — I think we’re in a fight. … We’re in a war for the soul of America.”


What do Americans think of Megyn Kelly’s firing?

(HOLLYWOOD REPORTER) — It may not be much consolation to Megyn Kelly, but more Americans than not (45 percent vs. 26 percent) think that NBC’s decision to wind down the television host’s show was “too harsh” a punishment for her comments about blackface last week.

Still, despite the sympathy many Americans may have for her, only 21 percent have a favorable view of the former Fox News star. The same amount of people have a “very unfavorable” view of her. These findings come from a new Hollywood Reporter/Morning Consult survey conducted with a nationally representative sample of 2,201 adults.

Kelly is viewed far less charitably than her current (but soon-to-be former) employer, NBC, for which more than half (56 percent) of the respondents have either a somewhat or very favorably view of. Surprisingly, some 18 percent of Americans say they have never even heard of Kelly, who spent 13 years at Fox News and became a household name after Donald Trump started attacking her during his presidential campaign.


CNN anchor: Biggest terror threat in U.S. ‘is white men’

Don Lemon with CNN

Don Lemon with CNN

CNN anchor Don Lemon should perhaps read CNN a little bit more.

So concludes a commentary at the Gateway Pundit after Lemon smeared white men in America by calling that group the “biggest terror threat.”

After claiming people should not “demonize” any group or ethnicity, he did just that.

“The biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most are radicalized to the right,” he claimed.

See him:

But at Gateway was listed, from CNN itself, a long series of terror attacks.

In America.

By Muslims.

“The only attack in this list by CNN that did not involve Islamist killers is the August 2017 attack in Charlottesville where one protester was killed at a Unite the Right rally,” the report said.

“Every other terrorist attack involves radical Islam.”

“Don Lemon does not know what the hell he is talking about,” the report said. “Oh, and Don sounds like a racist.”

On the CNN list were the 1993 bombing of the 2 World Trade Center building, the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta, the 9/11 attacks, the Boston Marathon killings, the attack on a recruiting center in 2015 by Mohammad Abdulazeez, the massacre in San Bernardino by Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the gay bar killings in Florida by Omar Mateen, and more.

Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh had a comment on the characterization of white men: “Don Lemon may be one of the most mentally challenged people on television.”

He continued, “This is not a one-off. The idea that the opposition, as far as the left is concerned, is white men, predominantly white Christian men, that is right on the money.

“It is white men who created this racist, bigoted unfair country … that is what we are up against.

“This is certainly what has energized and filled women across this country with rage, leftist women.”

Lemon said, “I keep trying to point out not to demonize any one or any one ethnicity … We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right.”

And he threatened them, saying, “We have to start doing something about them.”

He said, “There is no white guy ban. So what do we do about that?”

The Daily Caller noted Lemon also complained that NOT calling President Trump a racist would violate his “journalistic integrity.”

On CNN, he credited Barack Obama with the nation’s economic gains that resulted from Trump’s economic agenda, and justified his calling Trump names, like racist.

“I don’t see where statements of fact are wrong. If you have the evidence that points to someone being a racist, everything they say and things that they do points to them being a racist, I don’t think that’s…” he said.

When someone said, “Except his actions aren’t racist. He’s given us the lowest black unemployment rate,” Lemon lashed out, “What does that have to do with anything? Thank you, President Obama. That low black unemployment rate started with President Obama.”

WND columnist Michael Massie just recently had a comment on Lemon.

“As an American who happens to be black, permit me to tell you exactly how I feel about the miserable excuses for humanity who are attacking Kanye West for meeting with President Trump. Their ideological anaplasia enslavement to abject ignorance is indefensible and worthy of the harshest scorn.

“The boorish commonality and moral opprobrium infecting many blacks has been exposed in the aftermath of Kanye West’s meeting with President Trump.

“It’s a fact that when it comes to morality CNN’s Don Lemon is definably autoecious, i.e., he is a parasite fungus that has spent his entire professional life-cycle, thus far, on a single host, and that single host is called ‘amorality,’” he wrote.

“Black people like Lemon fancy themselves clever when they behave with such a profound lack of propriety. After all, they aren’t on CNN to represent a positive portrayal of character and erudition; Lemon and his kind are on CNN to example the lowest forms of commonality, and they never fail to deliver,” he said.