News & Politics

British voters triggered a geopolitical earthquake Thursday, as a fed up majority stunned politicians and the media by choosing to leave the European Union in a move commonly referred to as Brexit.

Meanwhile, a top U.S. economist says the move exposes the deep flaws of the EU, positions the British economy well in the near future and will likely encourage other nations to follow suit.

Polls suggested the referendum would be a close vote and Thursday’s results reflected that.  Investors clearly did not believe voters would cut ties to the EU, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average plummeted 611 points on Friday and other world markets did much the same.

While politicians and economists were wringing their hands about the economic impact on the UK and world markets over the short and long term, a top American economist believes voters did the right thing.

“The biggest loser from Brexit is not Britain.  It is the European Union.  Once Britain declares independence, then other countries are going to want to declare independence too.  They don’t like being governed by Brussels either,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former chief economist for the U.S. Department of Labor who is now a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

Brussels, Belgium, is the headquarters of the European Union.

Furchgott-Roth says the EU is a proven failure.

“I think the whole system, where you have unelected bureaucrats in Brussels controlling the individual countries, clearly is not working.  Rather than pointing just to the structure, just look at the EU growth rate.  It has some of the most educated people in the world and it is growing at about one percent,” she said.

Youth unemployment is especially bad, with some nations seeing rates as high as 50 percxent.  Furchtgott-Roth says the EU is in rough shape.

“By many, many measures it is worse off than the United States or other countries or even Britain,” said Furchgott-Roth.

She says the EU started off fine but eventually began imposing far too much on member nations.

“It started off as a free trade zone.  I think that was fine.  When it gets into regulatory harmonization and tax harmonization, countries think that is too invasive.  It really needs to rethink how it operates in order to make itself more attractive to it’s members,” said Furchtgott-Roth.

Economics wasn’t the only issue.  Legislation passed by member nations has to receive approval from the EU before taking effect, which many see as an erosion to national sovereignty.  There are also major concerns in Britain and beyond about the EU’s ability to put forth a counter-terrorism strategy or stem the tide of Middle East refugees.

Many liberals see the Brexit as especially damaging to British trade.  Furchgott-Roth says it’s exactly the opposite.

“China is apparently very happy with Brexit.  They want to sign deals with the United Kingdom.  Different former commonwealth countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada, also want to be signing deals.  People are going to be waiting in line.  They are waiting in line to sign trade deals – to have the advantage of Britain as a market for their products,” said Furchtgott-Roth.

If this is so good, why did the markets recoil in horror on Friday?  Furchtgott-Roth says the reaction of investors was expected because the election results were not.

“Investors don’t like uncertainty.  They didn’t see this coming.  They were brainwashed by the more socialist elements in Europe and in Britain, saying that this could not occur and that the British would vote to stay in the EU.  Now they’re surprised.  No one likes uncertainty or surprises.  Hence, the falling market,” said Furchtgott-Roth.

She adds that the biggest mistake Britain can make now is waiting for new leadership elections before embarking on new trade deals, believing the sooner those are established the better so certainty can emerge again.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Ian Tuttle of National Review cheer the British people ripping their sovereignty back from the European Union.  They also marvel at the depth of Hillary Clinton’s efforts to avoid accountability as she hides more information from investigators.  And they shake their heads as CNN hires former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, even though Lewandowski has a non-disclosure agreement with Trump.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review celebrate a divided SCOTUS blocking Obama’s executive amnesty. They poke fun at Florida Rep. and U.S. Senate hopeful Patrick Murphy, who got caught lying about the two things, he said, best qualified him for office. And they applaud Donald Trump for his blistering criticism of Hillary.

House Republicans are cheering a federal court judge appointed by President Obama after a ruling that not only concluded the federal government cannot regulate hydraulic fracturing but cannot regulate anything without the legislative permission of Congress.

The decision from Judge Scott Skavdahl comes in a case brought by the states of Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota and Utah plus two energy companies against Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.  Instead of ruling strictly on the merits of the case, Skavdahl vigorously argued for the respective branches to honor their limitations as outlined in the Constitution.

“The issue before this Court is not whether hydraulic fracturing is good or bad for the environment or the citizens of the United States,” he wrote. The question, instead, is “whether Congress has delegated to the Department of Interior legal authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing. It has not.”

“Congress’ inability or unwillingness to pass a law desired by the executive branch does not default authority to the executive branch to act independently, regardless of whether hydraulic fracturing is good or bad for the environment or the Citizens of the United States,” added Skavdahl.  “‘[The Supreme] Court consistently has given voice to, and has reaffirmed, the central judgment of the Framers of the Constitution that, within our political scheme, the separation of governmental powers into three coordinate Branches is essential to the preservation of liberty.'” Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361, 380 (1989).’

For lawmakers concerned about the Obama administration’s effort to rein in the fracking boom, Judge Skavdahl’s opinion came as a pleasantly stunning surprise.

“He sets up the restatement of our founding principles that there’s got to be a balance of powers and that some powers are given to the administrative branch of government, i.e. the agencies, and some powers aren’t.  Unless it’s specifically in the Constitution, which obviously this is not, then it has to come directly from Congress,” said Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va, who represents coal country in southwestern Virginia and is a member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee.

As thrilled as Griffith is with the ruling, he’s especially encouraged by who rendered it.

“I think momentum is starting to head back in the direction of the legislative branch.  We’re seeing more judges pushing back on agencies that take on powers that they don’t have.  I think it’s important to note that this particular judge is an Obama appointee.  It’s not just former Bush appointees making these decisions,” said Griffith.

Of course a district court judge will most likely not have the final say on this matter or on the larger battle between the executive and legislative branches.  Griffith hopes other courts follow the Constitution like Skavdahl did.

“I hope that the other courts will agree with this judge and understand that this is a debate for Congress to have,” said Griffith.

But while Griffith like’s the court decision, he says Congress must do more to stand up for itself.

“I think we have to be more aggressive on the funding side,” he said, alluding to Congress having the power to withhold funding from any area where it believes the executive branch has exceeding it’s authority.  “I think we have to hope that the judiciary will recognize that the executive is getting too powerful and overstepping its bounds, gettin’ too big for its britches as my mama would say.”

Outside of the separation of powers issue, Griffith is also pleased at the impact this ruling will have on American energy exploration.

“Fracking does give us more natural gas.  It gives us the ability to get more oil.  I think it’s huge for the American domestic supply.  We don’t want to be dependent for our energy on foreign sources.  I think this is a huge issue,” said Griffith.

He says fracking and unleashing other traditional energy sources is the only plan that accepts reality.

 

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review have mixed feelings on Marco Rubio deciding to run for his Senate seat again but agree that he gives Republicans the best chance to hold the seat.  They also slam Attorney General Loretta Lynch for claiming she still doesn’t know the motive behind the Orlando attack, for admitting she doesn’t know where the terrorist’s wife is, and for saying America should respond to terrorism with love and compassion.  And they shake their heads as Donald Trump has evangelical leaders swooning and even has one posing in front of the cover of his Playboy interview.

Donald Trump reached out to a large group of evangelical figures on Tuesday, vowing to be a voice for their concerns if elected president, but one of the leaders at the front lines of the culture wars says Trump needs to demonstrate a pattern of consistency if he hopes to win the vast majority of Christian conservatives to his side in November.

The meeting in New York City Tuesday drew the likes of former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., Liberty University President Jerry Falwell, Dr. James Dobson and dozens more figures ranging from traditional Christian pastors to political activists to prosperity gospel proponents.

While the early reviews from those in attendance appear to be very positive, Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver says it’s only one step.

“At the end of the day, it’s not one meeting.  It’s a pattern of activity in which you develop a trust or you develop a suspicion on how a particular candidate is going to act,” said Staver.  “The main problem with Donald Trump is nobody really, really knows what he is going to do.”

Staver says Trump needs to starting winning the confidence of social conservatives now.

“After the primary season has completed, is he going to gave a more consistent message?  I think that’s going to be very critical as we move into the general election, that he has a very consistent message that resonates with the people and that gives a level of confidence among Christians and other conservative voters,” said Staver.

According to Staver it is up to Trump to prove he is someone evangelicals and other cultural conservatives can count on, not the other way around.

“Is he going to be able to be consistent enough to win over some of the skeptical people, me included, with regards to where he stands on these very critical issues,” said Staver.

Perhaps the most telling moment for Trump will be his choice of a running mate.  He says a good pick will greatly boost Trump.

“That’s a good sign for the future.  but if he doesn’t bring the right people around him, then those individuals will be in the White House and they’ll lead us in a direction we don’t want to go,” said Staver.

One thing that is perfectly clear to Staver is where Hillary Clinton stands on all the major social issues, such as abortion, marriage and religious liberty.

“What we do know is what Hillary Clinton said she was going to do.  Everything she says she’s going to do is contrary to our values with regards to marriage and issues such as abortion,” said Staver, who also says Clinton is a lock to make the wrong decision on foreign policy and in confronting radical Islam.

He also worries about Trump in foreign affairs, after the presumptive nominee said he would be completely neutral between Israel and the Palestinians and would shake things up at NATO.

However, one area that encourages Staver is Trump’s increasingly conservative position on the type of judges he would nominate for the Supreme Court, an issue taking on huge import after the death of Justice Scalia and the possible retirement of anywhere from two to four other justices in the coming years.

“At least on that matter he seems to have gotten some consistency over the past several months.  I think that is a big factor weighing among social conservatives and other religious leaders,” said Staver.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are pleased to see the Justice Department forced to release unredacted transcripts of the Orlando 911 calls. They are stunned that the media ignore an attempted assassination on a presidential candidate’s life. And they’re stunned at Donald Trump’s pathetic FEC report.

Terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel is blasting the Obama administration after the FBI released partial transcripts of the Orlando terrorist’s 911 calls, transcripts that swap out ‘Allah’ for God and leave out his pledge of allegiance to ISIS.

Multiple times in the transcript, terrorist Omar Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS.  For example:

Orlando Police Dispatcher (OD) Shooter (OM)

OD: Emergency 911, this is being recorded.

OM: In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficial [in Arabic]

OD: What?

OM: Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of God [in Arabic]. I let you know, I’m in Orlando and I did the shootings.

OD: What’s your name?

OM: My name is I pledge of allegiance to [omitted].

OD: Ok, What’s your name?

OM: I pledge allegiance to [omitted] may God protect him [in Arabic], on behalf of [omitted].

Furthermore, Mateen did not say “God” in those quotations.  He said “Allah,” but the transcripts were changed.

Act for America founder Brigitte Gabriel, who survived Islamic terrorism in her native Lebanon, says the conduct of the Obama administration is maddening.

“They thought that if they can erase the most important part, which is his pledge to ISIS, that that will somehow make the Islamic problem disappear,” said Gabriel.

She says America’s unwillingness to see the problem for what it is has hamstrung the U.S. since 9/11.

“Under President Bush, they refused to acknowledge the problem – that Islam has anything to do with it.  Under President Obama it has gotten even worse,” said Gabriel.

Gabriel believes this latest attempt to lead the public astray is the worst possible way to approach the threat.

“It is shameful that our administration would delete an important part of the language, thinking that the problem is going to disappear.  That’s exactly why we’re losing this war,” said Gabriel.

Even more mystifying to Gabriel is why the government went to such lengths when the remaining transcripts make Mateen motivation perfectly clear.

“Even with all the purging they have done of the phone call, the transcript reads like an Islamic prayer.  The guy started the call by saying, ‘In the name of Allah the merciful, the beneficial,’which is like the opening prayer for Islamic prayer.  Every other word had to do with Allah,” said Gabriel.

She was also struck by what was not in the transcripts.

“Through the whole transcript, Omar Mateen never once refers to his hatred of gays, that he’s attacking the club because of his gay bashing or disapproving of their lifestyle.  Not once,” said Gabriel.

On Sunday’s “Meet the Press,” Attorney General Loretta Lynch explained by the references to ISIS were redacted.

“What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this individual’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups and further his propaganda,” said Lynch to NBC’s Chuck Todd.

That rationale leaves Gabriel almost speechless.

“They are a little too late about that.  ISIS already took credit.  ISIS has been bragging about it on their social media and on the internet.  ISIS is already proud of what he did.  Those who are attracted to the ISIS message already know what this guy did.  It’s been all over television worldwide,” said Gabriel.

“So who are they exactly trying to fool?  They live in a bubble, this administration and all his advisers.  They are living in a bubble and they don’t realize that our enemy and their sympathizers know exactly what is happening.  Except in our own country, our government is trying to deceive its own people,” said Gabriel.

Greg Corombos of Radio America and Ian Tuttle of National Review welcome Donald Trump’s firing of campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.  They slam Attorney General Loretta Lynch for removing references to the Orlando terrorist pledging allegiance to ISIS in his 911 calls during the shooting.  And they are not fans of Marco Rubio’s silent flirtation with another U.S. Senate bid.