Let the Freedom of Speech Reign

By: Gabriel E. Miller

During the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) President Donald Trump said, “Today I am proud to announce that I will be personally signing an executive order requiring colleges and universities to support free speech…”

President Trump continued to say, “If they want our dollars, and we give it to them by the billions, they’ve got to allow people like Hayden and many other great young people and old people to speak.”

President Trump referred to the recent attack on a young conservative activist, Hayden Williams, at the highly regarded University of California, Berkeley.

The video showed two men come into close contact with Williams, one of them smacked his phone away when Williams started to record them because he felt endangered by them. After the other assailant, Zachary Greenburg began pushing Williams and threatened to “shoot his ass”, a different phone recorded another angle of the event and it caught him punch Williams in the face.

In response to the violence, UC Berkeley released an official statement.

“UC Berkely strongly condemns violence and harassment of any sort, for any reason. That sort of behavior is reprehensible and intolerable and has no place here. Our commitment to freedom of Expression and belief is unwavering. A message was sent by our police force to the campus community with a picture of the suspect, and a request that anyone with information about the incident come forward and report what they know in support of our investigation. We intent to identify anf bring the perpretrators to justice.”

Dan Mogulf, Assistant Vice Chancellor Office of Communications and Public Affairs UC Berkeley

The president also joked about the incident by saying, “Ladies and gentlemen, he took a hard punch in the face for all of us.”

When Williams was invited to the stage, President Trump urged him to sue the university due to the altercation. Williams was very thankful for the recognition and appreciated the president for his support in him as well as other young conservatives.

This isn’t the first time that UC Berkeley opposed opposing viewpoints.

In 2017 former Breitbart editor, Milo Yiannopoulos was invited to speak at a conservative event at the university where, according to NPR, 1,500 liberal protestors turned violent. They threw barricades, smashed windows, and shot fireworks at police to name a few incidents.

Greenburg is now in police custody with a $30,000 bail. He has an appearance in court this upcoming Monday.

‘MAGA’ & The Intolerant Left

As American citizens, we are all granted basic human rights and are all protected by The United States Bill of Rights. Inside that glorious document we have something so precious called the First Amendment; The first Amendment protects the freedom of speech, religion and the press. Tolerance and Free speech only applies to those who publicly hate the current administration and The main stream media only reports whats within their agenda. Unfortunately democratic politicians and The Left wing media, decide to forget the First Amendment as soon as they find out a person supports our President, Donald J Trump.

Woman Assaults Man For Wearing MAGA Hat: 23 year old Bryton Turner was assaulted by a woman at a Mexican restaurant in Cape Cod, Massachusetts for wearing his “Make America Great Again” hat. Rosiane Santos, 41, of Falmouth an immigrant from Brazil was charged with disorderly conduct, assault, and battery after the disruptive confrontation at Casa Vallerta Mexican restaurant. The woman was upset that Turner had the audacity to wear the controversial red hat at a Mexican eatery. He told the police officer that he was minding his own business, when Santos began yelling at him because of his ‘MAGA’ hat. Annoyed about the woman’s outrageous behavior he pulled out his phone and recorded the altercation.

“That’s the problem -the problem with Americans, people are just ignorant, they want to lash out on people who are educated”, Turner stated during the incident.

Geo Macarao, a bartender at the restaurant told Boston25 News that Turner just walked in and ordered his food when suddenly Santos began her attack. “I couldn’t imagine somebody just coming up and hitting them when there’s cops everywhere”, Macarao said. “She just tried to grab my hat in front of four officers, not smart,” Turner then responded.

Rosiane Santos later told police that Turner should not be allowed to eat at a Mexican restaurant because of his support for Donald Trump.

High School Student Banned From Wearing MAGA Hat: Maddie Mueller, a senior at Clovis North High School was banned from wearing her “Make America Great Again” hat because it violated school dress code. “How does being a Patriot in trying to show pride in your country, how is that inappropriate?” Mueller stated. Mueller is a member of the conservative activist group at her school, Valley Patriots. The Valley Patriots decided to participate together in wearing their ‘MAGA’ hats on Campus but school officials denied to give them permission.

The District’s dress code spokesperson Kelly Avants stated, “our dress code is really about allowing our kids to come to school, to feel safe at school, to feel supported at school and to be free of distractions so they can focus on learning”. Former federal district Judge, Oliver Wager states that the student’s first Amendment right is being stripped from her but, the district may have the right to do so.

Mueller stated that she has been dress coded before for wearing T-shirt’s that say “build the wall”. Mueller has also said she has received multiple social media threats but it will not stop her from fulfilling her dream of becoming a congresswoman. “I don’t care if I offend anybody I’m showing support for the president and what I believe” stated Maddie.

Vans Employee Curses Out Teen For Wearing MAGA Hat: A Vans employee recently cursed out a 14 year old customer while shopping with his family in Overland Park, KS. The Employee went up to the kid and said, F*** Y** for wearing a ‘MAGA” hat. The young boys mother then confronted the employee saying “He did nothing to you- what did you say to my son? To my 14 year old son?”.

The worker didn’t deny the vulgar comment and said, “I’m sure he’s heard it before”. The Daily Caller first reported that the employee was fired, sharing the video that was posted to Twitter by Ryan Fournier, chairman of the Students For Trump coalition. “My son walked into this store. That gentleman (points at the employee) cursed and told him, ‘Take off your hat,'” the mother told another Vans employee. Vans confirmed to Fox News that the employee involved in the interaction “is no longer with the company”. They also added that the company’s “primary focus is to provide the best customer service.”

Many Americans believe that the ‘MAGA’ slogan represents racism, segregation and violence but in reality it represents Unity, Patriotism, The American People and peace. President Donald Trump as our President shows time and time again, that he will go above and beyond to make this amazing nation great for all Americans! He wants to reassure the American people that he is putting our country first and The American people First once again, that includes everyone. No matter the skin color, religion, race, age, or sex if you are American you are included in the slogan ‘MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN’. Donald J Trump has his focus set on our well being socially, economically and politically ; you can see this is true by looking over his policies and what his administration has accomplished not only for ‘White America’ but African Americans, Latinos, and Americans in general.

The mainstream media has done its best to hide Trumps Administrations achievements and accomplishments, while at the same time promoting violence and intolerance. Ironically this hypocrisy comes from the same group that incites these injustices against those that support trump. A great example is Maxine Waters and what she tells her base to go out and do to those who support Donald Trump. Once again I’ll mention how ironic, if we recall the very suspicious packages that were sent to High level -Democratic figures late 2018 which included Maxine Waters. Donald Trump was one of the very First, if not First to condemn the attack and stand on the side of those like Maxine Waters, who tells her fan base to create crowds and tell Trump supporters they’re not welcomed wherever you see one. The Recent Jussie Smollet story should show you how bias and how quickly the media will jump to push out any story that can demonize Donald Trump or those who support him. Unlike the Fake Jussie Smollet story, there’s dozens of real attacks against Trump supporters but you’ll never see it get as big as a Jussie Smollet ‘This is Maga Country’ story.

  Written by Jazmin Minier

The “Regressive” Military?

By: Gabriel E. Miller

On Tuesday the U.S. Supreme Court in a five to four decision ruled in favor of President Trump’s transgender military ban. For any sort of new policy change to go in effect the federal injunction case in Maryland must be resolved.

According to CNN, LGBT activists call this ban “cruel and irrational”.

Former U.S. Navy SEAL Chris, now Kristin, Beck called the decision “bullsh*t” tweeting that the Supreme Court was wrong. Beck also explained that she was pretty lethal. While that was never any question, Beck doesn’t mention that her transition happened after she retired from the military. Meaning that she was touting her prowess from when she was still a man.

U.S. Army Staff Sergeant (SSG) Patricia King spoke with NPR about her thoughts on the decision of the Supreme Court, as she transitioned from male to female in 2014. She said, “This decision and this policy give a false sense of credibility to the inaccurate notion that transgender people are somehow less or less capable than our peers.”

Retired U.S. Air Force Major General Charles Dunlap wrote and posted an article on Duke University explaining the objective reasoning behind why it isn’t a good idea to integrate transgender troops, his main concern being possible readiness concerns. He wrote:

“Transgender people are not medically similarly-situated.  For an armed force that needs its members to deploy on short notice anywhere in the world (the U.S. has 800 bases abroad, including places where medical support may be at best rudimentary) that’s a real concern.  No one debates that transgender people as a group have unique medical needs, and while experts may differ on the scope, cost, and implications of those needs, I think it is unlikely the courts (and especially the Supreme Court) will second guess judgments about medical fitness made by military authorities, to include the President as Commander-in-Chief.”


According to Mr. Dunlap 71% of all Americans in the 17-24 age group (34 million Americans), are not fit to serve. This ranges from multiple tests on the applicant’s mental, physical, educational, and mental health. This percentage does not even include cosmetic or tattoo issues.

This also brings another serious question into light, mental health. In a study conducted by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and the Williams institute, 41% of people who identify as transgender have tried to kill themselves. Non-transgender individuals, the general population, shows that that only 4.6% tried to commit suicide.

Mental health is extremely important, especially when put in a military environment. This isn’t just about the safety of the individual in question, but also the individuals around them with whom they fight with, to the death if need be. The role of the military is to destroy the enemy, not to create a social experiment where someone or others may get hurt, unit cohesiveness is essential.

According to the official study by the Department of Defense, titled “MILITARY SERVICE BY TRANSGENDER PERSONS” conducted in February of 2018:

” Transgender persons with gender dysphoria suffer from high rates of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders.60 High rates of suicide ideation, attempts, and completion among people who are transgender are also well documented in the medical literature, with lifetime rates of suicide attempts reported to be as high as 41 % (compared to 4.6% for the general population).61 According to a 20 I 5 survey, the rate skyrockets to 57% for transgender individuals without a supportive family . The Department is concerned that the stresses of military life, including basic training, frequent moves, deployment to war zones and austere environments, and the relentless physical demands, will be additional contributors to suicide behavior in people with gender dysphoria. In fact, there is recent evidence that military service can be a contributor to suicidal thoughts.

Preliminary data of Service members with gender dysphoria reflect similar trends. A review of the administrative data indicates that Service members with gender dysphoria are eight times more likely to attempt suicide than Service members as a whole (12% versus 1.5%).”


It is important to note that transgenders themselves are not being excluded, as per the document, but those who identify with having the mental disorder, gender dysphoria.

The study also reports the estimated time for recovery from a transitioning procedure may take up to one year. This also includes hormonal treatment therapy.

On March 2018 review, the enlistment policy requires transgenders to serve in their biological sex and mustn’t transition.

According to the Military Times, transgender service members may continue to serve if they relied on the Obama administration’s rules on beginning the process of changing their gender.
They also note that 900 men and women have done so.

Justice Department Declares Obamacare Individual Mandate Unconstitutional

Written by: Stefan M. Kløvning – Twitter: @MisesRevived

Washington D.C., USA – Obama’s signature legislation Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (colloquially known as Obamacare), has been put under tough pressure by the Trump administration once again as the Justice Department on Thursday declared that the requirement to buy healthcare would be unconstitutional after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act comes into effect in 2019, which will reduce the individual mandate tax penalty to $0.00.

Trump has made it clear since his election campaign that an important goal for his presidency is to repeal and replace Obamacare, which his administration has failed multiple times to do. The tax reform seems to have been a calculated move by the Trump administration to justify the recent decision by the Justice Department as Trump exclaimed after the bill had passed that ‘we have essentially repealed Obamacare.’

Even then, the bill in itself wasn’t enough to declare Obamacare unconstitutional. The decision was made in light of the lawsuit by a coalition of 20 Republican states against the federal government arguing that since the tax reform bill would make the individual mandate penalty void and that the rest of the law should be invalidated because it hinges on that very mandate. Many of these states took the same position in the Supreme Court in 2012. According to Politico, conservatives were stunned when Chief Justice John Roberts argued that Obamacare wasn’t valid under the Commerce Clause, but rather because the penalty was a tax. Without there being any government revenue by the individual mandate penalty anymore, the conservatives argue that the nullification of the justification makes the individual mandate unconstitutional.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote to House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan defending his decision:

After careful consideration, and with the approval of the President of the United States, I have determined that, in Texas v. United States, the department will not defend the constitutionality of [the individual mandate], and will argue that certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are inseverable from that provision.

The Attorney General did not indicate in this letter that the entirety of Obamacare doesn’t pass the requirements for being declared constitutional. The ‘certain provisions’ they won’t defend refer mostly to the pre-existing conditions provision, and one forbidding insurers from charging people in the same community different rates based on gender, age, health status, and other factors.

The Justice Department has received a lot of backlash for the decision, as would be expected. Emeritus professor at Washington & Lee University Timothy Jost argued that nothing would happen based on the decision yet, but if the judge buys the argument of the administration and the ruling is upheld on appeal, ‘52 million Americans with preexisting conditions could face denial of coverage or higher premiums. The administration’s argument would also allow insurers to charge women, older people, and people in certain occupations higher premiums.’ Additionally, he proclaims that it would not only ‘jeopardize’ the coverage for consumers in the individual market, but that those with pre-existing conditions who have employer-sponsored coverage may not be able to get individual market coverage if they lost or left their jobs.

Trump declared Obamacare as ‘dead’ in April. Although it still persists attacks from the Republicans, one may wonder if this calculated move by the Trump administration will ultimately lead to the actual ‘death’ of Obamacare, and what may come in its place.



AG Sessions’ DoJ Overturns Obama’s Mixed-Sex Prison Policy

Image: Left-to-right. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, male-to-female Donna (Peter) Langan and Lindsay Saunders-Velez.

By Stefan M. Kløvning

Washington, Justice System – As one of the last policy decisions of former President Barack Obama, male prisoners were permitted to move to women’s prisons if they claimed to sexually identify as a female from January 17, 2017. This decision has been overturned in a recent revision of the legislation by the U.S. Department of Justice, called the Transgender Offender Manual. The revision paper, which builds on the earlier version and highlights the edits, can be read here.

The decision that transgenders were allowed to change prison on grounds of sexual identification wasn’t the only – or primary – matter of the legislation, but it still had important implications. The specific wording was ‘[t]he TEC will recommend housing by gender identity when appropriate,’ and was replaced by a list of bullet points of factors important to consider when determining the housing of inmates. The main change was biological sex now being determined as the main factor in the placement of prisoner, though other factors would also be considered, such as the health and safety of the individual and his/her adequacy for the specific housing.

Obama got a round of backlash from critics after implementing the new legislation, primarily for giving men with criminal background the ability to transfer to women prisons just because he suddenly claims to ‘feel’ to be of the opposite gender. Though the probability of males faking it only to get into the female’s prisons is debatable, the possibility highlights a risk factor for the female prison population. In other words, as many people who claim to sexually identify as the other gender hasn’t undergone genetically cosmetic surgery, those with a criminal background who transfers could be prone to sexually assault the female prisoners there. As there unfortunately is a plethora of rape cases in all-male prisons, the danger could be even worse when among those of the opposite sex. Another argument is that it could pressure biological women who sexually identify as men to transfer to men’s prisons, which would pose an even bigger danger on them.

In the few months of experience with this legislation, what empirical evidence have we gathered to test the validity of these arguments? According to DallasNews, there are 473 federal inmates in the U.S. who are transgender. The small quantity makes the probability of such cases being actualized rather small, but still there have been instances both talking in favor and against the DoJ’s decision to alter the legislation.

Many women prisoners seems to have a problem with male-to-female prisoners transferring to their prison. Three women in FMS Carswell, for instance, demanded the Bureau of Prisons to remove all transgender inmates from the facility. Plaintiff Rhonda Flemming, who once went on a hunger strike for the facility to remove the transgenders inmates there for ‘political reasons’, claimed that ‘My bodily rights are being violated by the Defendants housing men in the prison. I am being humiliated and degraded every day so that men that identify as women can be comfortable.’ Later in 2017 she reasoned further that she doesn’t hate transgender people, but only that she has a ‘preference for the safety of women in prison.’

A different case, however, shows another side of the story. Twenty-year-old male-to-female transgender Lindsay Saunders-Velez was raped after being housed in a ‘disciplinary pod occupied by men who had previously prepositioned her or threatened to rape her,’ the Denver Post reports. This happened hours after a federal judge failed denied her request to stop the Calorado prison from housing her there. Saunders-Velez’ attorney, Paula Griesen, was furious, exclaiming that ‘they threw a 20-year-old kid in the shark tank knowing what would happen. This is outrageous.’

With these different stories highlighted, we get a perspective of how difficult the situation regarding transgender inmates can be. Should Saunders-Velez have been allowed to transfer to an all-female prison? Some would advocate that, but a better question is perhaps whether the changes made by AG Sessions’ D.o.J. will make such occurrences more common. If the bullet points are followed accurately, it’s more likely that it wouldn’t. The second point states explicitly that ‘The TEC will consider the health and safety of the transgender inmate, exploring appropriate options available to assist with mitigating risk to the transgender offender, to include but not limited to cell and/or unit assignments, application of management variables, programming missions of the facility, etc.’ The federal judge who denied her request not to be thrown into the ‘shark tank’ didn’t seem to consider her health and safety when making the decision, but would likely (and hopefully) have made a different decision if he did.





Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton Appointed National Security Advisor

By Stefan M. Kløvning

Washington, Politics – Former UN Ambassador John Bolton was appointed as the new national security advisor by President Donald Trump on Thursday, replacing H.R. McMaster, who has served Trump in the position since February 2017.

Mr. Bolton is also said to have been considered for Secretary of State in the end of 2016, but was eliminated from the running because Trump didn’t like his mustache. ‘Donald was not going to like that mustache. I can’t think of anyone that’s really close to Donald that has a beard that he likes,’ a Trump associate told the Washington Post.

That objection seems now to have been resolved, perhaps due to John Bolton having a similar nationalist attitude to Trump, having a strong focus on putting America first both economically and politically, for instance regarding the threat of trade war and shutting off the nuclear deal with Iran. In 2000, he published an essay called ‘Should We Take Global Governance Seriously,’ where he categorized the American people into two groups: Americanists and Globalists. He claims that the latter is getting increasing control in American politics, and goes on to criticize nearly every single multinational convention.

The decision to appoint him has turned out to be quite controversial. According to Politico, Bolton is a ‘unilateralist ideologue who has spent his career spitting in the face of global cooperation.’ He has also been called ‘one of the most radically hawkish voices in American foreign policy,’ having proposed a first-strike military procedure on both North-Korea and Iran, and has also been accused of manipulating U.S. intelligence to favor his own ideological policies. One of the accussations come from congressional sources claiming that Bolton had ‘sought to punish two State Department officials for disagreeing with him on nonproliferation issues.’ Even during his time as an ambassador for the UN, he publically despised international law, telling the World Federalist Organization that ‘There’s no such thing as the UN. If the U.N. Secretariat building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit difference,’ and later declared that

It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law even when it may seem in our short-term interest to do so—because, over the long term, the goal of those who think that international law really means anything are those who want to constrain the United States.

He has been severely criticized for what he has done in the past, and many are concerned he will continue this behavior as a National Security Advisor. One notable critique is by Senator Bernie Sanders, who spoke strongly against his interventionist ideology:

Another critic is Professor Richard Gowan of Columbia University, who has studies Bolton’s career. He claims that Bolton ‘hates the State Department,’ ‘portrays US diplomats as closet Democrat appeasers,’ and ‘raised hell at the UN.’

Vox has called Bolton ‘the Fox News-ification of foreign policy,’ as he became an influential figure and writer on the newssite following his resignation as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations in December 2016. He became so popular there, they exclaim, that he considered running for president in 2012 and 2016.

How will John Bolton do as a national security advisor forward? His history provides some clues, and suggests that the war-mongering, interventionist and protectionistic ideology of Bolton will be anything but a positive influence on U.S. foreign policy and the president. Both libertarians and left-wingers seem to think so. Christopher Preble, the vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute said that ‘I operate on the assumption that John Bolton should be kept as far away from the levers of foreign policy as possible. I think I would rest easy if he was dog catcher in Stone Mountain, Georgia. But maybe not.’ Mieke Eoyong, the vice president for foreign policy at the center-left think tank Third Way, agrees, exclaiming that ‘Bolton is so much of an ideologue, that I don’t think he would accurately portray consequences [of policy options] to the president.’ She added that ‘The United States has not hit rock bottom in our international relations,’ but with Bolton as National Security Advisor, ‘we could go lower.’