Home Blog Page 3550

Pro-Life Billboard Removed After Just One Day Due to Death Threats

A group of pro-life Christians commissioned a billboard in rural Texas calling on locals to “ignore” the Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling on Roe v. Wade, which gave legal cover to abortion. After just one day, though, the banner was removed because the landowner received death threats.

The group, Abolish Abortion Texas (AATX), designed the billboard, which promoted the website, “IgnoreRoe.com,” under the phrase, “62 million dead and counting.” The link directs visitors to the AATX website, which states, “We should abolish abortion in Texas, regardless of what the Supreme Court says we can do.” 

The billboard, located outside Boyd, Texas, contained no graphic imagery.

In a press release about the sign’s removal, the pro-life organization said the billboard was taken down after the landowner received “complaints” and “death threats,” which “forced the advertising company to remove” it.

The fund coordinator for the campaign, Jon Speed, who serves as pastor of missions and evangelism for First Baptist Church of Briar, said the ordeal is evidence of “how intolerant Texas has become.”

“There are no graphic images on the billboard, not even a strong statement,” he said in a press release shared with Faithwire. “It’s just a website that seeks to abolish abortion in Texas. The fact that this happened in rural Texas is not only surprising in a self-professed pro-life state, it indicates how weak that commitment is.”

Speed, who earned national attention in 2019, when he decided to shutter his New York bookstore and move to Texas as a result of the “tyranny” he experienced in the Empire State, cast doubt on Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s commitment to the pro-life cause.

Last month, Abbott signed a so-called “trigger bill” that would allow Texas strongly limit or entirely outlaw abortion, should the Supreme Court overturn its ruling on Roe v. Wade.

The rural Texas preacher, however, isn’t convinced Abbott — or other conservative lawmakers — will stand by his pro-life bonafides.

“The conservative nature of Texas is really an illusion when you can have people that call in and make those kinds of complaints and have a billboard taken down,” he said in a YouTube video. “Don’t be deceived by big splashes in the media about what Texas is going to say they’re going to do, because if you can’t even get this to stand in Texas, I don’t believe it.”

It’s not clear how many threats and complaints the landowner received.

Senate Democrats Admit Defunding the Police Is a Bad Idea

Senate Democrats overnight appeared to have realized defunding police departments in the aftermath of last year’s riots and amid this year’s crime wave is not a good thing after voting in favor of amendments for the fiscal year 2022 budget resolution.

In a vote of 99-0, the Senate voted in favor of Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-AL) amendment “that would reduce or eliminate federal funding to local governments that defund law enforcement departments.”

“If local leaders in Minneapolis or Portland are so beholden to the radical Left that they cut financial support for their law enforcement, there is no reason federal taxpayers in Alabama or any other state should have to pick up the tab,” Tuberville said in a statement. “My amendment is simple: if a city council believes the ‘woke’ thing to do is to cancel the police department, then they shouldn’t expect the federal government to bail them out.”

It was not the only pro-police amendment the Senate passed last night. Sen. Josh Hawley’s (R-MO) amendment that would seek to hire 100,000 more police officers across the country to deal with the rise in violent crime passed with only one Democrat voting against it.

While the votes are non-binding it is telling so many Democrats in the Senate would put their names behind such measures, given the fact many high-profile and outspoken Democrats, like Reps. Cori Bush (D-MO) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN), have called for the defunding of police departments.

Biden’s Mental Decline on Full Display In Latest Gaffe

William Lane Craig debates Ben Shapiro about Jesus…

Tucker Carlson Joins the Show

The Texas Dems’ Lawsuit Sounds Like a Stand-Up Comedy Routine

Catholic clergyman killed in France, suspect reportedly under police supervision for arson of cathedral

A Catholic priest has been killed in Saint-Laurent-sur-Sevre, a commune in the Vendee, by a man who had reportedly been placed under police supervision, having set fire to a cathedral in Nantes in 2020.

On Monday, a Catholic clergyman was found dead in the town of Saint-Laurent-sur-Sevre. The French regional deputy prosecutor, Yannick Le Goater, confirmed that the suspect – a Rwandan national – had been arrested, following earlier reports that he had handed himself in.

Police have said they are not currently treating the incident as an act of terrorism.

In a tweet, Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin confirmed the horrific incident and announced that he would travel to the scene of the crime. “[I offer] all my support for the Catholics of our country after the dramatic assassination of a priest in Vendee.”

The victim has been identified as Father Olivier Maire by Bruno Retailleau, senator of the Vendée, who described in a tweet the clergyman’s death as “a great loss.”

Retailleau stated that Maire had been hosting the perpetrator at the time. “His death testifies to the kindness of this priest whom I knew well and whose depth of faith I had been able to appreciate,” he added.

Sources told BFM TV that the suspect had already served prison time for his role in a fire at Nantes Cathedral in 2020 and was under police supervision.

The suspect is a Rwandan national and a voluntary sacristan (church assistant). Having confessed to being the cause of the Nantes fire, he was imprisoned for several months and had been released pending trial.

As part of his supervision, he had been hosted for several months by the community of Montfortians. Maire was reportedly the chair of the community.

The Rwandan national was ordered to leave the country back in 2019 by immigration authorities, but did not do so. Le Goater said that the Rwandan national had to remain in the country for the duration of the investigation into the Nantes cathedral fire.

GOP Rep Will File Articles of Impeachment Against Major Biden Admin Official

During former President Donald Trump’s administration, Democrats did not hesitate to conjure up impeachment charges against him that were questionable, at best.

Now, the Biden administration has already acted against the Constitution multiple times, and one Republican congressman is ready to hold the Democrats to the very standard they created.

Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs said Friday he intends to file articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his handling of the southern border crisis, according to Fox News.

“Secretary Mayorkas is a threat to the sovereignty and security of our nation,” Biggs said in a statement. “As a result of his actions and policies, America is more in danger today than when he began serving as Secretary.”

This statement is absolutely true, as Mayorkas has played a large role in furthering the Biden administration’s senseless immigration policies, which have largely fueled the raging crisis.

In July, U.S. immigration officials apprehended approximately 210,000 illegal immigrants at the southern border, The Associated Press reported. That is an increase of over 20,000 apprehensions from the month of June, according to the AP, during which illegal immigration was already reaching record-breaking highs.

“Secretary Mayorkas is failing to faithfully uphold his oath of office and is presiding over a reckless abandonment of border security and immigration enforcement, at the expense of the U.S. Constitution and the security of the United States,” Biggs said in the statement.

Though the Biden administration does not want to admit it, the truth is that this influx of illegal immigrants has posed many health and safety threats to American citizens. Chief among those is an increased risk of COVID-19 exposure.

Last week, the city of McAllen, Texas announced it had set up temporary shelters to house COVID-positive illegal immigrants whom the Biden administration admitted into the country.  That’s how serious the problem has become.

“Under [Mayorkas’] direction, DHS is systematically releasing COVID-19 positive aliens into our communities, subjecting the American people to unnecessary and avoidable risks,” Biggs said in the statement.

According to Fox News, Biggs is not the only congressional Republican who has called for Mayorkas to be impeached. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas has stated his feeling that both Mayorkas and Biden should be impeached over the border crisis.

“Over the past several months, President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas have blatantly and consistently refused to do their constitutional duty to take care that the immigration laws be faithfully executed, as required by Article II, endangering countless American and foreign lives in the process,” he told Fox last week.

It is unlikely that calls for Mayorkas’ impeachment will gain any significant traction in a Democrat-controlled House. However, midterm elections are less than 15 months away now, and the move from Biggs shows he is not afraid to send a message to the Biden administration.

Both times Trump was impeached, Democrats filed weak charges against him that were virtually impossible to disprove based on their nature.

For example, the charge of “incitement of insurrection” against Trump related to the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion was absurd, but Democrats impeached him anyway.

In the first impeachment trial a year earlier, Democrats relied on a “quid pro quo” argument that boiled down to a question of subjective interpretation of a presidential phone call with the president of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. (Zalensky himself denied there was a “quid pro quo” involved.)

The grounds for filing impeachment charges against Mayorkas and Biden are just as good, if not better. The Biden administration’s decisions to halt construction of the border wall and narrow the power of Immigration and Customs Enforcement has most certainly contributed to this crisis.

Toward the beginning of the Biden administration, officials were trying to downplay the significance of the surge at the border. Although they have now somewhat changed their rhetoric, the problems they created remain.

Mayorkas and Biden will more than likely remain in their positions without any real threat of losing them. At the very least, though, Republicans are sending a signal of what could face the Biden administration if the GOP takes back control of Congress in the 2022 elections.

Court Rules Against Bayer in Roundup Cancer Trial Appeal, Cites Monsanto’s ‘Willful’ Disregard for Safety

The appeals court said Monsanto had not shown that federal law preempted claims made by plaintiffs Alva and Alberta Pilliod, who in 2019 were awarded a combined $87 million after lawyers argued years of using Roundup weedkiller caused them both to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Monsanto owner Bayer AG has lost another appeals court decision in the sweeping U.S. Roundup litigation, continuing to struggle to find a way out from under the crush of tens of thousands of claims alleging that Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicides cause cancer.

In a decision handed down on Monday, the 1st Appellate District in the Court of Appeal for California rejected Monsanto’s bid to overturn the trial loss in a case brought by husband-and-wife plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod.

“We find that substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdicts,” the court stated. “Monsanto’s conduct evidenced reckless disregard of the health and safety of the multitude of unsuspecting consumers it kept in the dark. This was not an isolated incident; Monsanto’s conduct involved repeated actions over a period of many years motivated by the desire for sales and profit.”

The court specifically rejected the argument that federal law preempts such claims, an argument Bayer has told investors offers a potential path out of the litigation. Bayer has said it hopes it can get the U.S. Supreme  Court to agree with its preemption argument.

In May 2019 a jury awarded the Pilliods more than $2 billion in punitive and compensatory damages after lawyers for the couple argued they both developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma caused by their many years of using Roundup products.

The trial judge lowered the combined award to $87 million.

In appealing the loss, Monsanto argued not only that the Pilliod claims were preempted by federal law, but also that the jury’s causation findings were flawed, the trial court should not have admitted certain evidence, and that “the verdict is the product of attorney misconduct.” Monsanto also wanted the damage awards further slashed.

Court slams company

In the appeals court decision, the court left the award unchanged, and said that Monsanto had not shown that federal law did preempt such claims as those made by the Pilliods. The court also said there was substantial evidence that Monsanto acted with a “willful and conscious disregard for the safety of others,” supporting the awarding of punitive damages.

The evidence showed that Monsanto “failed to conduct adequate studies on glyphosate and Roundup, thus impeding discouraging or distorting scientific inquiry concerning glyphosate and Roundup,” the court said.

The court also chastised Monsanto for not accurately presenting “all of the record evidence” in making its appeal: “But rather than fairly stating all the relevant evidence, Monsanto has made a lopsided presentation that relies primarily on the evidence in its favor. This type of presentation may work for a jury, but it will not work for the Court of Appeal.”

The court added: “The trial described in Monsanto’s opening brief bears little resemblance to the trial reflected in the record.”

“Summed up, the evidence shows Monsanto’s intransigent unwillingness to inform the public about the carcinogenic dangers of a product it made abundantly available at hardware stores and garden shops across the country,” the court said.

Another trial underway now

The Pilliod trial was the third against Monsanto. In the first trial, a unanimous jury awarded plaintiff Dewayne Johnson $289 million;  the plaintiff in the second trial was awarded $80 million.

The fourth trial began last week. A jury of seven men and five women on Monday were hearing testimony in the case of Donnetta Stephens v. Monsanto in the Superior Court of San Bernardino County in California.

Retired U.S. government scientist Christopher Portier, who has been an expert witness for the plaintiffs in prior Roundup trials, testified at length on Monday, reiterating previous testimony that there is clear scientific evidence showing glyphosate and glyphosate-based formulations such as Roundup can cause cancer.

Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, has settled several other cases that were scheduled to go to trial over the last two years. And in 2020, the company said it would pay roughly $11 billion to settle about 100,0000 existing Roundup cancer claims. Late last month, Bayer said it would set aside another $4.5 billion toward Roundup litigation liability.

Bayer also announced it would stop selling Roundup, and other herbicides made with the active ingredient glyphosate, to U.S. consumers by 2023. But the company continues to sell the products for use by farmers and commercial applicators.

Senate Votes to Begin Debate on Democrats’ $3.5 Trillion Package

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) moved quickly on Tuesday to advance Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget resolution bill, coming soon after the Senate voted to pass a $1.2 trillion infrastructure measure.

No GOP senators voted in favor of the budget measure, although 19 of them voted for the infrastructure measure.

Ahead of the second vote, Schumer attempted to assuage left-wing Democrat Congress members, saying the budget would meet their requirements.

“To my colleagues who are concerned that this does not do enough on climate, for families and making corporations and the rich pay their fair share: we are moving on to a second track which will make generational transformation in these areas,” he said on the floor.

Democrats on Monday, including Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said they would attempt to pass the massive spending package via budget reconciliation, which only requires a simple majority. The Senate Parliamentarian’s office has not issued a statement on whether certain provisions can be included.

Some centrist Democrats, including Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), may not support the measure. With no GOP support, Democrats can’t lose a single member of their caucus.

“I have also made clear that while I will support beginning this process, I do not support a bill that costs $3.5 trillion–and in the coming months, I will work in good faith to develop this legislation with my colleagues and the administration to strengthen Arizona’s economy and help Arizona’s everyday families get ahead,” Sinema said in a statement.

Manchin, meanwhile, said he’s concerned the $3.5 trillion measure would add too much to the national deficit amid fears of rising inflation. The senator, whose home state of West Virginia relies heavily on energy production and mining, told The Associated Press that he isn’t “making any promises” about whether he’ll back the bill.

The legislation’s climate-related provisions would have to move through the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which Manchin chairs, he noted to AP.

From across the ideological divide of the Democrat Party, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told CNN on Aug. 1 that there will be “more than enough” votes to block the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill until left-wing members of the House get investments they want via the $3.5 trillion package.

On Monday, according to Sanders’ office, the budget bill would create free pre-Kindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds and two years of free community college, extending tax breaks for children and some low-income workers, and establishing paid family and sick leave. Medicare coverage would be expanded to cover dental, hearing, and vision benefits. Spending would increase for housing, home health care, and job training, and new resources would go toward efforts encouraging a faster transition to green energy.