Nancy Pelosi took advantage of the 5 Republicans in coronavirus self-quarantine to push a partisan Christmas list chocked full of far-left goodies for unions, green groups, and other liberal allies. Republicans are rightly calling Dems out on this. 1/ pjmedia.com/trending/despi…
.@senatemajldr slammed Democrats for deciding their "eleventh-hour demands" are "more important than Americans’ paychecks and the personal safety of doctors and nurses." 2/ pjmedia.com/trending/dems-…
"Don’t treat this bill like a partisan Christmas list," @tedcruz declared. "What the hell do the emissions standards on airplanes have to do with thousands of people dying and millions of people out of work in the coronavirus epidemic?!" 3/ pjmedia.com/trending/dems-…
"We've got families that are suffering," @BenSasse declared. "We've got small businesses ... closing. We have doctors fighting to prevent their hospitals from being overwhelmed. And what does Speaker Pelosi try to do? She's trying to take hostages about her dream legislation. 4/
"Families & businesses need help now to survive the China virus pandemic," @SenTomCotton declared. "But @SpeakerPelosi walked away from negotiations to write her own bill, full of absurd provisions completely unrelated to the crisis at hand." 5/ pjmedia.com/trending/dems-…
"Democrats can’t claim to be the party of workers when they advocate for policies that make businesses fail. Businesses employ workers. You can’t have one without the other," @DanCrenshawTX warned. 6/ pjmedia.com/trending/dems-…
My favorite quote comes from @SteveScalise: "Throw this bill in the trash that Pelosi filed and get back to work for the American people that are literally facing losing everything if this game goes on longer." Amen! 7/7 pjmedia.com/trending/dems-…
One more thing: Trump wants to #ReopenAmerica by Easter, a great goal and a good thing to hope for, but we obviously need to see how far along our health care response to coronavirus is before making that decision. pjmedia.com/trending/great…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The EEOC under Biden tried to rewrite federal law to force gender ideology on state and local governments—and on every company that hires at least 15 people.
@KenPaxtonTX and @Heritage sued.
This week, a judge threw out the EEOC guidance.
🧵1/12
Bear with me: the case is complicated but as I lay it out, you'll see just how outrageous it is.
Also, please bookmark the first post in this 🧵, so you can go back to it. I'll walk you through how Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk just eviscerated the Left's false narrative.
Colorado LGBTQ groups pushed for HB25-1312, a bill that would define "misgendering" and "deadnaming" as "coercive control" and mandate custody courts consider them.
Democrats excluded parental rights groups from discussion, comparing them to the KKK.
🧵2/10
The bill passed the Colorado House, 36 in favor, 20 against, and 9 absent in a largely party-line vote.
The Colorado House has 43 Dems and 22 Republicans. The Colorado Senate has 23 Dems and 12 Republicans.
Who are the Biden political appointees who "burrowed in" to the federal bureaucracy?🤔
The list includes a former White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council member, former USAID staff, and immigration lawyers.
I'll explain "burrowing in," then get to the names.
🧵1/15
First, what is "burrowing in?" @hughhewitt gave a good concise definition in an interview with me at @JobCreatorsUSA's Freedom Fighters Summit
Presidents appoint more than 3K people for "political" positions, but there are at least 2.3M federal workers. Most are in ostensibly non-political "career" positions.
Burrowing in involves switching from a "political" to a "career" position.
🧵2/15
Why is this a problem?
“The biggest challenge that every single new Cabinet secretary and their subordinates will face is the entrenched bureaucrat,” @TheFGA's @stew_whitson told me.
He described both overt opposition to the president and “quiet insubordination.”
The SPLC released its hate map for 2018, and Nessel responded by pledging, "Hate cannot continue to flourish in our state."
"I have seen the appalling, often fatal, results of hate when it is acted upon," she added. "That is why I am establishing a hate-crimes unit in my office—to fight against hate crimes and the many hate groups which have been allowed to proliferate in our state."
That may sound noble, but if you know anything about the SPLC, it should be unnerving, if not downright terrifying.
🧵2/10
You see, the SPLC is no neutral arbiter on hate.
It champions almost every leftist cause you've ever heard of, and accuses those who dare disagree of being driven by "hate."
Do you follow the traditional Jewish or Christian teachings on sexuality? You're an "anti-LGBTQ hate group."
Want our immigration laws enforced? You're an "anti-immigrant hate group"—even if you have legal immigrants on the board.
Are you concerned about radical Islam inspiring terrorism? You're an "anti-Muslim hate group."
Do you think parents should have a say in their kids' education? You're an "anti-government extremist group" and on the hate map.
Last year, the SPLC even added groups of doctors who oppose "gender-affirming care" and @againstgrmrs to the "hate map."
When the FBI was caught citing the SPLC's "hate map" in targeting "radical traditional Catholics," it was rightly a huge scandal.
A shocking new poll from @ScottWRasmussen shows just how many D.C.-based bureaucrats who voted for Kamala Harris say they plan to disobey a lawful Trump order if they consider it bad policy.
Yes, people who work for the taxpayer plan to disobey the people's elected president. This is the key definition of the deep state.
RMG Research, Rasmussen's polling firm, identifies federal government managers as federal employees in the DC region who earn at least $75K.
The firm asked this essential question:
"Suppose that President Trump gave an order that was legal but you believed was bad policy. Would you follow the president's order or do what you thought was best?"
THREE QUARTERS—75%—of DC bureaucrats who voted for Kamala Harris said they would "do what I thought was best" rather than follow Trump's order.
Only 16% said they'd do as the people's elected president ordered.😲
🧵2/10
NOTE: This isn't asking if they'd follow Trump over the law.
This is just asking if they place their own opinion of good or bad policy ahead of the person who was elected by the people to lead the executive branch.
It's also worrying that 18% of those who voted for Trump say they'd "do what I thought was best" instead of following the order. That's probably a lot lower than it would have been if the poll was conducted in 2017, however.
“It’s codifying into law that if their ideology confuses your child, and you don’t affirm that delusion, you’re committing child abuse and can lose custody of your child,” Caldwell told me.
“We have now crossed the Rubicon of parental rights with this bill,” he added.
🧵2/6
When Caldwell asked whether parental rights groups had been allowed to weigh in on the legislation, a Democrat—Rep. Yara Zokaie—mocked the very idea.
“A well-stakeholded bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups, and we don’t ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion,” she quipped last Tuesday.
Zokaie doubled down on the comparison on Friday, explicitly citing the Southern Poverty Law Center.