News & Politics

Terrorism expert Dr. Harvey Kushner is dismissing the reactions of President Obama and Hillary Clinton to the terrorist attacks in New York, New Jersey and Minnesota as politically correct spin and says the U.S. must get much more aggressive against those who seek to harm the United States.

On Saturday, an explosion rocked the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan, injuring 29 people.  A second device was later discovered before it detonated.  Those acts of terrorism took place after a pipe bomb blew up in New Jersey, along the course of a race designed to help the families of military service members.  A second, intact device was also found in New Jersey and all of the news came on the same day a terrorist stabbed eight people at the Mall of America in Minnesota.

On Monday morning, just hours after authorities put out word that Ahmad Khan Rahami was a suspect in the bombings, he was shot and taken into custody by police in New Jersey.

In his first comments since Saturday’s attacks, President Obama Monday assured Americans that the terrorist threat is waning because ISIS is losing territory in Iraq and Syria.

Kushner is not at all convinced by that logic.

“I doubt that very much,” said Kushner.  “Recruiting is not just because of a geographical area.  It’s on the web and there are so many people here that have allegiance to ISIS inside the United States.”

And Kushner says the Obama administration is failing to take proper diligence in screening who enters the country, particularly when it comes to refugees.

“We have a refugee problem which, in my book, needs to be looked at in a different light.  How do you vet so many people coming in from an area of the world that carries such political baggage,” said Kushner.

He also believes Obama’s assurances are falling on deaf ears.

“He’s going to put his spin on things because we have an election upcoming.  But the public is smarter.  I think they understand that this is an issue,” said Kushner.

Kushner was also disappointed in Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton blaming Donald Trump’s rhetoric for helping ISIS recruit and giving “aid and comfort” to the enemy.  Kushner says that might make for an interesting intellectual debate, but the stark realities of our enemies don’t back up Clinton’s claims.

“The overwhelming idea that that is a contributing factor is insulting.  Those in law enforcement and intelligence gathering and the general public know better than this,” said Kushner.

“I might not agree with Donald Trump’s approach and I certainly don’t agree with Hillary’s approach, but that’s using a bad situation to feather one’s own bed during a political campaign,” said Kushner.

Instead of pointing the finger at political adversaries, Kushner says the United State must get much more serious about defeating radical Islamic terrorism.

“We have to be very aggressive in a world in which there are many jihadis out there, ranging from Al Qaeda to ISIS to individuals who want to do us harm.  We need to identify who the enemy is .  The American public is not fooled by this.  I think they’re understanding now the political correctness has run amok to the detriment of the safety of our public,” said Kushner, noting that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said Saturday night there was no reason to suspect terrorism, while New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo called it terrorism at the same press conference.

Kushner says one avenue to get a better lock on terrorists is through data.

“We need to be much more aggressive in terms of looking at what’s available out there by public data.  I’m not saying to get inside somebody’s own personal life but there’s so much public data that advertising agencies use to market their products.  We have to be much more sophisticated in doing this in trying to get a handle on who out there wants to do us harm,” said Kushner.

Kushner says the available evidence on the weekend bombings leads him to suspect Rahami was part of a cell and not a lone wolf.  He’s also glad Rahani was taken alive and hopes helpful information can be extracted.

“It’s my experience from looking at this for many years that individuals of this type, when they’re captured this way, generally talk.  That might be of interest.  It could lead to other cells.  Is there a connection outside the country?  Where has he traveled?  There are a lot of questions that need to be answered here,” said Kushner.

In the wake of such chaos on Saturday, Kushner says the speed at which law enforcement zeroed in on suspects is impressive.

“The speed with which law enforcement in the New York metropolitan area were able to apprehend this person is quite remarkable,” said Kushner.

Kushner’s advice going forward for all Americans is to live your lives while keeping your eyes open, nothing the woman who stumbled across the second bomb in New York City and contacted police.

“If you see something, say something, but you know what?  The streets are yours.  This is our country, which prides itself on total freedom.  You can’t let the terrorists win and I would go about your daily activities,” said Kushner.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America lament multiple terrorist attacks over the weekend and the renewed concern that the U.S. is not keeping up with the threat.  They also express their thankfulness that no one was killed and praise the FBI for swiftly zeroing in on those responsible and nabbing them.  And they unload on CNN for editing Hillary Clinton’s reference to the “bombing” so they can keep hammering Trump for doing the very same thing.

A leading advocate for protecting children from obscene internet content says President Obama has been absent in the fight and she is urging Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton to play a leading role in fight against child exploitation, child pornography and other obscene material.

Donna Rice Hughes is president and CEO of Enough Is Enough, an organization committed to “making the internet safer for women and children.”  The group is sent out letters to both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, asking them to be aggressive in enforcing existing laws against obscenity, exploitation and trafficking.

Rice Hughes says the commitment is needed because there has been no leadership on this issue for the past eight years.

“The issue, by and large, has been bipartisan in Congress, but I would say we’ve seen more aggressiveness by the Departments of Justice under (George W.) Bush as opposed to Clinton.  And Obama, I don’t know what he’s doing,” said Rice Hughes.

She says Obama’s record on this issue is appalling, far worse than simply not making it a priority.

“In fact they had a few obscenity prosecutors in DOJ.  They only had three in the entire department, when you’ve got a multi-billion dollar industry.  They told me when (Obama) came in, they were told not to prosecute obscenity anymore,” said Rice Hughes.

That’s why Enough Is Enough is demanding promises from Trump and Clinton to be out front in protecting kids from online predators and obscenity.

“What we’re asking the candidates to do is to agree, before they’re elected, to enforce all the laws on the books that are in place currently designed to prevent the sexual exploitation of children online.  Those laws are, specifically, the federal obscenity laws, the child pornography laws, the sexual predation laws and the sex trafficking laws,” said Rice Hughes.

In addition, the group is demanding the next president nominate an attorney general who will make this issue a priority and aggressively prosecute those committing crimes against children online.

The pledge also asks the candidates to consider creating a special presidential commission to help tackle the problem.  It also wants more resources devoted to hunting down these criminals.

“Law enforcement simply doesn’t have the resources and the tools to really get on top of that.  The bad guys are many, many steps in front of law enforcement.  And like I said with respect to obscenity laws, they haven’t even been touched by the Obama administration,”said Rice Hughes.

The pledges went out earlier this year.  Rice Hughes says the GOP nominee responded right away.

“Donald Trump’s campaign sent back the signed pledge immediately,” she said.

Rice Hughes says the Clinton campaign has voiced strong support for the pledge but did not sign it.

“We did receive a note back from Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager that they had a policy against signing pledges but that she supported the pledge,” said Rice Hughes.

She says the campaign director later called her to say Clinton really wanted to sign the pledge but had already rejected many other groups because of their policy.

Rice Hughes says parents are overwhelmed by the flood of horrific images that are just a click away for their kids, noting alarming statistics such as a 774 percent rise in the amount of child pornography online between 2005-2011.  Searches for teen sex tripled from 2005-2013.  The data show 83 percent of boys and 57 percent of girls have seen group sex online.  Thirty-two percent of boys and 18 percent of girls have even viewed scenes of bestiality.

She says strong evidence exists that hardcore pornography is a major reason for the rise in juvenile sex offenders, why children as young as five years old are acting in increasingly sexualized ways.  And she points out that the demand for more graphic like group sex and bestiality content leads to increased trafficking of women and girls to perform in the films.

Rice Hughes stresses the effort to crack down on obscenity is not in conflict with the first amendment.

“People need to realize that just because this content it out there doesn’t mean that it’s protected under the first amendment.  It is not.  It is there because it hasn’t been enforced.  Those laws against it have not been enforced,” she said.

“This is about the children but let’s recognize that this is about much more.  This is about the public health and safety of our children, our women and even our men,” said Rice Hughes.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America enjoy watching Hillary Clinton scramble as her support among millennials remains low.  They also marvel as Donald Trump renounces birtherism in just a few seconds but gets the media to cover his whole event in which military veterans heap praise upon him.  And we laugh as former MSNBC bomb-thrower Ed Schultz is now speaking highly of Trump as part of the Kremlin-funded Russia Today television channel.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss a new Gallup survey showing only 32 percent of Americans trust the mainstream media.  They also sigh as Rush Limbaugh asks whether the fight for small government really exists anymore.  And they react to the more surprising Colin Powell emails.

House conservatives are making the case for the impeachment of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen ahead of Thursday’s debate, and one of them is also blasting Republican leaders for failing to hold Obama administration official accountable for anything and even being “afraid” of the administration.

On Tuesday, Reps. John Fleming, R-Louisiana, and Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas, introduced a privileged resolution on the impeachment of Koskinen.  A privileged resolution requires a floor vote and is not subject to the scheduling priorities of House leaders.

Huelskamp says the case for Koskinen’s ouster is open and shut.

“Back in 2012, the IRS was misused, particularly by Lois Lerner and perhaps others above her.  They targeted political opponents and targeted them  through misuse of the IRS.  In response to that, the president appointed a new commissioner who promised to clean up the mess but he made it worse,” said Huelskamp.

“Mr. Koskinen came in and then covered up the mess, hindered the investigation.  He oversaw the the deletion of perhaps thousands of emails, perjured himself, lied to Congress and the American public.  At the end of the day, I believe these are reasons he should lose his job.  If we’re going to get the federal government under control, no one should be above the law, particularly the IRS commissioner,” said Huelskamp.

Furthermore, Huelskamp says the average U.S. citizen could not get away with breaking the law, destroying evidence and refusing to appear before government officials without penalty and neither should Koskinen.

“Someone in the administration came and lied to Congress and covered up the investigation that was going on internally in the IRS and oversaw the deletion of 422 tapes, up to 24,000 emails.  As George Will pointed out, if Congress doesn’t take this head-on, they are becoming obsolete,” said Huelskamp.

Huelskamp suspects Republicans leaders are cool to this idea because they don’t want to create any red meat issues just prior to election day, but the congressman says not supporting the impeachment leaves members with tough questions to answer back home.

“I think it will be very difficult, particularly for Republican members of Congress, to go home and tell their constituents that, ‘Yeah, you can lie to Congress.  It’s okay.  You can delete 24,000 emails.  That’s okay.’  I think that’s a pretty hollow argument to go home to,” said Huelskamp.

“If they vote against it, they’ll probably go home and say, ‘Well, we voted to censure the guy but it’s okay.  He’s going to get off scot-free,” said Huelskamp.

Huelskamp does expect GOP leaders to make some parliamentary maneuvers in order to prevent passage of the impeachment articles but approve something that gives members cover back home.

“Our leadership might try some funny stuff on the floor trying to get away from a straight up-or-down vote,” said Huelskamp.

In speaking with different members, Huelskamp admits it will tough to find a majority to back impeachment.  He says the vast majority of Democrats will defend the administration and many Republicans outside of leadership would rather not deal with this.

“Many of them are secretly asking leadership to table the motion or somehow create an alternative vote that somehow gives them a screen.  At the end of the day, we should have a straight up-or-down vote and you’re either for the IRS or you’re for the American people,” said Huelskamp.

Huelskamp says GOP leaders have not stated why they don’t want this resolution to go forward, but he says six years of observing his own party’s leadership leads him to some conclusions.

“Typical Republicans in Washington, and leadership in particular, are just afraid to take on the administration, afraid to take on the issues of the day.  They’d much rather get home to campaign than actually tackle the tough issues,” said Huelskamp.

He says the disinterest in holding Koskinen accountable is similar to leaders doing nothing about alleged perjury before Congress by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert McDonald and others.

“Time and time and time again, for seven-and-a-half years, Republicans have pointed out what they thought was corruption in the Obama administration and have done little or nothing about it,” said Huelskamp.

Huelskamp has clashed with Republican leaders for most of his six years in Washington, to the point of being stripped from a seat on the House Agriculture Committee and seeing GOP-aligned special interests spend two million to defeat him last month in his congressional primary.

As he prepares to leave Washington, Huelskamp says the Republican Party was in position to accomplish major priorities over the past six years and failed to do much.

“Looking back, I believe the Republican establishment , particularly John Boehner and perhaps the current speaker (Paul Ryan), squandered an opportunity to turn this nation around,” said Huelskamp, referring to an ever-growing federal debt and America’s looking weaker on the world stage.  He says voter frustration with GOP leaders in Washington is a critical reason for the rise of Donald Trump as the party’s 2016 nominee.

While the GOP may have succeeded in beating him at the ballot box, Huelskamp says it’s up to the American people to regain control of their government.

“It’s time we turn Washington back over to the control of the American people.  Right now, it’s insiders of both parties.  The Democrat and Republican establishment have a stranglehold on our nation.  It’s time to shake them off and get back to our founding fathers and our Constitution,” said Huelskamp.

 

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America marvel at the 17-point lead Ohio Sen. Rob Portman is amassing in his re-election bid.  They also shake their heads as Donald Trump promises a medical report on Dr. Oz and then abruptly changes course.  And they react to Colin Powell’s hacked emails that include frustration he was denied a speech at a university because of the criticism the school received for paying Hillary Clinton a huge sum.

Colorado voters will be asked whether they want to legalize doctor-assisted suicide in November, and while opponents admit they have an uphill fight, they’re passionately fighting against ushering in what one leading activist calls “a whole parade of terribles.”

On November 8, ballots across Colorado will include Proposition 106, which would legally permit doctors to prescribe drugs that terminally ill patients could take to end their lives.  The full text is here.

Jeff Hunt is director of the Centennial Institute at Colorado Christian University.  He says, on the surface, the case for approving doctor-assisted suicide seems strong by allowing people to decide for themselves when and how to end their lives or at least leave that option open to their neighbors.

But Hunt says the reality of doctor-assisted suicide is much darker than its proponents would have you believe.

“Doctor-assisted suicide is a very, very, very bad deal for Colorado.  In almost every case, where doctor-assisted suicide is legal, it moves from what is generally called a right to die to a duty to die,” said Hunt.

He says former Gov. Richard Lamm, who served from 1975-1987, made that very argument in stark terms three decades ago.

“Our former governor, Dick Lamm, said back in the ’80’s people need to understand they’re no longer worthy to be in this world, that they’re worthless and they need to go and that they have a duty to die.  That is terrifying,” said Hunt.

While assisted-suicide advocates paint the practice as the ultimate act of personal liberty, the reality gets far more complicated.

“They think it’s a personal decision but in every case where this is legalized, you are inviting government and you’re inviting insurance companies to get involved in this decision and that is a very, very bad deal,” said Hunt.

Hunt says that is not theory but proven fact.  Oregon is one of a few states that allow doctor-assisted suicide.  He says the realities there are very troubling.

“What we’ve seen happen in Oregon is the state-based medicaid system get involved with end-of-life decisions.  They would send letters to terminally ill cancer patients and saying, ‘We’re not going to pay the $4,000 per month required for you to stay alive, but we’ll pay the $100 for you to kill yourself,” said Hunt.

Another argument in favor of doctor-assisted suicide is that it mainly happens at the very end of life when the pain becomes unbearable.  Hunt says the facts simply don’t bear that out.

“What the research actually shows is that most people that choose doctor-assisted suicide do it out of depression or they’re afraid because of their lack of mobility, their quality of life,” said Hunt.

Hunt says in places like the Netherlands, physically healthy young people access doctor-assisted suicide over relationships gone bad or the loss of a job.  Proposition 106 specifically requires a patients to be given six months or less to live, but Hunt says that’s a problem too.

“That’s problematic in itself because Harvard has found that about 20 percent of those diagnoses are wrong.  One in five people will outlive that six months,” said Hunt.

He says the push for doctor-assisted suicide is especially horrifying for the disabled and those with special needs.

“If you look at the organizations that are trying to stop this, it is primarily led by the disabled community.  They understand what this is creating in the law.  This is creating an entire classification of people that can be killed or choose to be killed,” said Hunt.

Hunt admits Colorado’s libertarian streak that legalized recreational marijuana in recent years makes this a tough ballot initiative to fight but he says it is essential voters learn the truth at votenoprop106.org and elsewhere.

“We should be investing in great palliative care and  good hospice care because doctor-assisted suicide brings with it a whole parade of terribles that we do not want in our society,” said Hunt.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome a new Marist poll showing Republicans doing very well in Senate races where Democrats hoped to make strong challenges.  They also sigh at reports that a foundation run by John Kerry’s daughter has received over nine million dollars in no-competition spending from the State Department through the Peace Corps.  And we discuss the litany of spinning, lying and insanity on all sides of the Hillary Clinton health saga.

The Obama is moving forward with plans to relinquish U.S. control over internet domains, but a number of conservatives are demanding the president not change what is working fine by ceding control to other countries, which could then limit the content their own citizens can see.

The old contract by which the United States controlled internet domain aspects since 1987 first expired at the end of September 2015.  Since then, the Obama administration has been trying to build a framework to transition the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, to a “multi-stakeholder” system.  As more of those details get ironed out, the end of American control draws nearer.  Extended U.S. control is slated to end later this month.

Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., is among those who believe this is a big mistake.

“Is this move going to strengthen America or is this move going to weaken it?  I think it’s very clear that if we do what President Obama wants to do, it’ll weaken America’s stance again,” said Yoho, who is a strong supporter of the DOTCOM Act.

That bill passed the House of Representatives overwhelmingly last year but the Senate has yet to take it up.  It would give Congress oversight of any transfer of internet domain control and give lawmakers the power to kill or modify the plan.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is spearheading the effort in the Senate to keep the internet in U.S. hands.

Yoho says his approach is simple.  The current system isn’t broken, so why radically change it?

“The U.S. has been in control of the domain names of the internet since its inception.  If we relinquish this control, it goes possibly to the UN.  Then you have countries like Russia, China, and Iran and any other country that wants to play, and determine how to regulate those domain names within their countries,” said Yoho.

He says giving authoritarian leaders control over what their people can access only means bad results.

“I think you’re going to see a decrease in access to the internet, a decrease of freedom over the internet to an extent we have never experienced before,” said Yoho.

Yoho says those nations would not be in position to block what Americans can see online, but they could restrict anything they wanted for their own populations.

“They can block any country’s intellectual property or content from being accessed by somebody in Russia or China or Iran.  You’re starting to limit people,” said Yoho.

“If you look at one of the basic underlying tenets of liberty, it’s freedom of speech, freedom of expression freedom to access of information.  If we start sequestering that and blocking it off, you’re going to have pockets around the world that are going to become more and more isolated,” said Yoho.

He says the past 29 years prove the U.S. is best at guaranteeing people around the world have access to all available information in order to learn and better their lives.

“One of the things that made the internet so explosive and such an economic and intellectual force is because of the free market enterprise in a country like the U.S. controlling access to it,” said Yoho.

Yoho sees two other dangers of relinquishing total control of internet domains.  First is the additional risks to our already vulnerable cyber defenses.

“If they take over the domain names and things like that, who knows what they’ll plan as far as malware or some type of cyber bug that’ll get into everybody’s computer.  So this is a misstep by this administration,” said Yoho.

He says the Obama administration is also breaking the law by pushing this plan forward without congressional authorization.

“It’s a violation of federal law for an officer or an employee of the United States government to make or authorize an expenditure or obligation exceeding the amount we’ve appropriated.  By doing what they want to do, it’s against the law,” said Yoho.  “That doesn’t seem to be a concern for this administration and we aim to stop it.”