Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are pleased to see an FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server. We also shake our heads as more Democrats line up in support of the Iran nuclear deal. And we enjoy the liberal food fight that ensured after Kelly Osbourne suggested that Latinos are here illegally and all they do is clean toilets. We also have some fun stereotyping our own nationalities.
New Abortion Horrors Unveiled
A leading pro-life activist says the fifth undercover video depicting Planned Parenthood’s alleged profiting off the sale of aborted baby parts is the clearest evidence yet of criminal activity, and she says also says it’s possible that abortion providers are delivering babies alive and killing them outside the womb to preserve the value of their parts for sale.
Jill Stanek is National Campaign Chairwoman for the Susan B. Anthony List. She is a former registered nurse who confronted then-State Sen. Barack Obama over his refusal to support legislation requiring life-saving measures to be directed to babies who survive abortions. Stanek was also one of the leaders of the sit-ins at the office of House Speaker John Boehner this year to demand a vote on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
On Tuesday, the Center for Medical Progress released the fifth in a series of undercover videos. This one prominently featured conversations with Melissa Farrell, director of research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast. Farrell and the investigators hold lengthy discussions about obtaining intact fetus cadavers for research and how to word the transaction on any forms.
“If we alter our process, and we are able to obtain intact fetal cadavers, we can make it part of the budget that any dissections are this, and splitting the specimens into different shipments is this. It’s all just a matter of line items,” says Farrell in the video.
She also refers to creative billing for research firms for “additional time, cost (and) administrative burden.”
“This is the clearest video to date demonstrating that not only is Planned Parenthood involved in illegal baby parts trafficking for profit but also, to do that, they clearly often manipulate abortions, which is also illegal, to get baby parts in the most intact position that they can get them,” said Stanek.
Another critical moment in the video is when Farrell shows investigators a massive online order for intact cadavers.
“She read an order on camera that had just come in for 120 intact fetal cadavers and she accepted the premise of that order without even blinking,” said Stanek, who says that story gets even more disturbing.
“It didn’t make the final video cut, but in the full length transcript, when she’s talking about this buyer that wants 120 fetal cadaver specimens, it’s for a project to humanize mice, putting human cells into mice,: she said.
One of Planned Parenthood’s common defenses in recent weeks is to claim that any money it receives from companies is simply reimbursement for tissue procurement and shipping. Stanek says that’s bogus.
“The buyers, like from Stem Express, send their people to these Planned Parenthoods to find the body parts they want for these orders that they’ve been given, package the body parts themselves and ship themselves,” said Stanek.
“So all of the costs and all of the personnel involved in baby parts buying and selling is incurred on the part of the buyer. Planned Parenthood doesn’t do anything to warrant even five dollars,” she added, noting that intact cadavers are worth hundreds and hundreds in payment to Planned Parenthood because of all the body parts that are valued by researchers.
“These videos are actually giving us a glimpse into the abortion world and the callous treatment for profit motive they have on committing abortions but then making as much as money off the victims of abortion that they can, which is something even the Nazis didn’t think of,” said Stanek.
The Center for Medical Progress promises more shoes will drop in future video releases. While Stanek has no advanced knowledge of those she believes a case is building that babies are being murdered outside the womb as part of Planned Parenthood’s efforts to profit off of body parts.
“[They are] even potentially committing live-birth abortions because they don’t kill these babies ahead of time because that would poison the organs and not make them fit for sale,” said Stanek. “There’s prima facie evidence that there may be born-alive abortions going on.”
Slate of TV Shows Push Transgender Agenda
Three new cable television shows portraying transgenders in a positive light debuted this summer and a leading cultural expert says this is clearly the latest step in convincing people, especially children, to approve of the lifestyle.
The most highly promoted program is E!’s “I Am Cait,” tracking the life of former Olympic decathlon champion Bruce Jenner as he now identifies as a woman named Caitlyn. In addition, TLC recently launched “I Am Jazz,” featuring a a 14-year-old biological male who lives as a girl named Jazz Jennings. In June, “Becoming Us” premiered on ABC Family. Produced by Ryan Seacrest, the program centers on to boys coming to grips that both of their fathers are transitioning to women.
The transgender debate has exploded in recent months, particularly after Jenner went public. Family Research Council Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg says the timing of these shows is no accident.
“I think the sensational aspect of it is something they think will bring them ratings, but I think there is an ideological aspect too, where they think they can transform society and transform social attitudes,” said Sprigg.
“I Am Jazz” and “Becoming Us” both focus on children. Sprigg says that is also intentional because that is the target audience for this movement.
“Certainly that is part of the agenda in terms of creating sympathy. There’s going to be more sympathy for a child as a character in one of these shows than perhaps than there is for an adult. If you are trying to change attitudes then it’s the attitudes of children that you want to change,” said Sprigg.
While “I Am Cait,” is the only program of the three that does not center on kids, Sprigg says Jenner’s interactions with his children suggest young people struggle mightily when their parents make such a radical change.
“People would say, ‘Oh, is family is very supportive of him.’ But if you actually watch the show, you would find that his daughters and his step-daughters seem to me to be devastated by the whole situation. I think what we see in reality may be something that doesn’t necessarily serve the transgender movement,” he said.
The ratings for these programs can be interpreted two very different ways. “I Am Cait” debuted to one of the largest cable audiences of the year, with 2.7 million viewers in the initial broadcast. “I Am Jazz” burst on to the scene as the tenth most watched show in all of cable on it’s first night, suggesting considerable demand for this genre.
However, in it’s second episode, “I Am Cait” drew less than half of the audience it attracted the first week. “I Am Jazz” dropped from tenth to twentieth to twenty-fifth in it’s first three weeks. “Becoming Us” premiered only in 81st place and for the past two weeks hasn’t even registered in the top 100 cable programs on the evening it airs.
Sprigg chalks up the strong early ratings to “curiosity” and “novelty”. He also believes having multiple shows focusing on transgenders makes each of them less intriguing.
“This is the irony. When you’re the first transgender reality show, there’ll be a lot of curiosity. When you get to the point where there’s a half a dozen of them, it’s like, ‘Ho hum, another transgender show,'” said Sprigg.
Sprigg says the onset of these programs is another reason for parents to maintain vigilance over what their kids see on TV, including the use of filters. However, he encourages parents to be ready to address transgender issues and to be up front about it.
“I think we have to be honest that there are some people who want to be or feel like they are the opposite sex from their biological sex but we shouldn’t assume that that’s the right way for them to be. In fact, their biology, the anatomy of their body is a more clear indication of their sex than their subjective psychology,” said Sprigg.
“While we should have compassion for these people, we shouldn’t be affirming them in this confusion. We should instead be encouraging them to find the kind of psychological counseling that might help them to become comfortable with the body that God gave them,” he added.
The transgender movement has made significant strides in recent months, with governments and school districts changing policy to accommodate adults and children who identify as the gender opposite of their biological sex. However, Sprigg is not convinced the movement will get as far as gay and lesbian activists.
“Homosexuality is basically an invisible characteristic for the most part. If you encounter someone on the street you don’t necessarily know that they’re homosexual. With the transgender issue, if someone is presenting themselves as the opposite of their biological sex, often it’s very unconvincing and disturbing to other people,” he said.
As a result, Sprigg suspects Americans will be less swift to embrace transgender accommodations.
“I think they’re going to have a much harder time getting people to accept and feel comfortable with this than they do with someone saying, ‘Just leave us alone and don’t worry about what we do in private’ because cross-dressing is inherently a public activity,” said Sprigg.
Three Martini Lunch 8/4/15
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review welcome new poll numbers showing women turning sour on the idea of a Hillary Clinton presidency. They also groan as the Senate fails to advance legislation to stop taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. And they shake their heads as two illegal immigrants are appointed to the city commission in Huntington Park, California.
Defense of Principles or Distraction?
The Republican congressman calling for the removal of House Speaker John Boehner says his efforts are not a distraction from the big issues facing lawmakers but will help focus Republicans on approaching them the right way.
Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., filed a motion to “vacate the chair” last week, catching virtually everyone in Congress by surprise since he did not do any sort of head count or consultation before taking action. In his resolution, Meadows listed multiple reasons for why Boehner ought to be removed, ranging from the consolidation of power to ceding legislative power to the executive branch and from punishing members for votes against leadership to broken promises on amending and reviewing legislation.
Boehner allies and even some of his critics wonder at the timing of this move by Meadows. They fear a focus on Boehner’s job security could distract from the GOP’s approach to key issues once Congress returns in September. Meadows says it will do exactly the opposite.
“We’ll be returning to a very busy September, with all sorts of critical issues like Iran and Planned Parenthood, funding of the government, etc. Those are critical times not that just a few voices are heard but that the vast majority of the American people are represented and that their representatives have a clear vote on all of these issues,” said Meadows, who also believes that arming military members at recruiting centers and other facilities should be another major priority after the recess.
“I think it’s really about what’s coming up more than what has happened,” he added. “All of those need to come up and so I think this puts the focus back on that and back on the legislation.”
Of all the grievances listed in the Meadows resolution, the one that likely hits closest to home is the charge of Boehner punishing those voting against the interests of GOP leaders, particularly on the rules for various debates.
Earlier this year, Meadows was stripped of his role as chairman of the House Oversight subcommittee on Government Operations. After a fierce protest from conservatives, Meadows was restored. The congressman insists his efforts to vacate the chair do not stem from that episode, but he says the punishing of him and other members is a sore spot in the House Republican Conference.
“It’s not just me, ” he said. “It’s a number of other people who vote their conscience and then are punished either in a direct or indirect way for doing so. It really thwarts their efforts to represent the people that have sent them to Washington, D.C., to vote on their behalf.”
Thus far, Boehner is giving the Meadows motion scant public attention.
“You’ve got a member here and a member there who are off the reservation. No big deal,” said Boehner at his weekly press briefing. “This is one member, alright? I’ve got broad support among my colleagues. Frankly, it isn’t even deserving of a vote.”
Meadows says Boehner is entitled to his opinion but is not honestly characterizing the extent of discontent with the speaker.
“To suggest that it’s one or two people would not be indicative of the facts on the ground,” said Meadows.
“He’s really not recognizing the depths of the issue at hand here. Really, it’s not just one or two,” he added. “There is a growing, growing concern among not just conservatives but a number of members.”
Supporters and critics of Meadows are both scratching their heads over his tactics. The motion filed by Meadows leaves the timing and rules for the vote up to leadership. Detractors say if he was really serious about removing Boehner, Meadows would have filed a privileged resolution which demands an immediate vote.
Meadows says he could still go that route at some point, but he deliberately decided against it to allow for a “conversation” within the GOP conference.
“If we can have that family discussion first and solve it, then there doesn’t need to be a need for calling it up as a privileged resolution. If not, that option was available for us a few days ago and certainly will be available to us in the future,” said Meadows.
So will this actually go anywhere? Meadows says there are two key factors that will determine if this ever comes to a vote. First, he says the American people need to let their member of Congress know if this issue is important to them. He also says leadership can play a big role in how this turns out.
“It depends on the leadership team in place right now. If they’re willing to look at changing the way that we do business, then there’s not the need for a new speaker,” said Meadows, who cautions that leadership needs to do more than simply make more promises.
“We’ve had initiatives that have started, but, indeed, if we’re going to do business as usual, then it requires a change. If not, I welcome that and look forward to having those discussions with the appropriate actions to follow up. Hopefully we’ll make sure Washington, D.C., is no longer broken,” he said.
This is the third attempt by Republicans to remove Boehner. The other two occurred in the votes for speaker at the start of a new Congress in 2013 and again earlier this year. One of the major criticisms of those efforts was that GOP dissenters failed to rally around a single candidate as an acceptable alternative to Boehner.
Meadows says the idea that a conference of 247 members can only produce one option for the top leadership position is ridiculous. He says many of his colleagues would do a good job, but did not offer any names.
“There’s been a handful of people mentioned. It’s really too early to tell who would be that person or even if there will be one. But certainly there are a number of very gifted colleagues in the House of Representatives right now,” said Meadows.
Three Martini Lunch 8/3/15
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review cheer a Quinnipiac poll showing Americans oppose the Iran nuclear deal by a 2-1 margin. They also slam Obama for unilaterally imposing major emissions restrictions on power plants. And they react to the Marist Poll removing itself from the calculation of which Republican candidates make it to the debate stage.
Senate Showdown Monday to Defund Planned Parenthood
The U.S. Senate will vote Monday evening on a bill to strip Planned Parenthood of taxpayer dollars in the wake of four undercover videos exposing the practices of the nation’s largest abortion provider, but even pro-life activists confess the effort will fall short until a pro-life president resides in the White House.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has scheduled a vote on legislation sponsored by Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa. Senate Resolution 1881 will require 60 votes to cut off debate and then a simple majority to pass the bill.
Pro-life forces say they have more momentum on this issue than ever before, even though getting to 60 votes will be a stiff challenge.
“The last time we had a vote in the Senate to defund Planned Parenthood, we only got 42 votes. This time we’re expecting to get a majority. We’re working toward getting 60 votes,” said Susan B. Anthony List Communications Director Mallory Quigley.
Right now, the group, also known as the SBA List, is fiercely urging fence-sitting senators from both parties to get behind the Ernst bill.
“We’ve been lobbying very hard swing Republicans and swing Democrats alike. There are three Republicans that are shaky on this issue and there’s a couple Democrats we’d really like to win over, people that have voted pro-life in the past,” said Quigley.
The Republican senators who have yet to commit on this issue are Lisa Murkowski, R- Alaska, Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and Susan Collins, R-Maine. The SBA List is also trying to convince Democrats Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., Joe Manchin, D-WV, Bob Casey, D-Penn., and Heidi Heitkamp, D-ND, to support the bill.
This debate has shifted seismically in the past three weeks. Quigley says the videos produced by the Center for Medical Progress have quickly and radically changed the abortion debate.
“This is the worst PR disaster that Planned Parenthood has ever experienced,” she said. “This is getting us way farther in the fight to defund Planned Parenthood than we’ve ever been before and it’s very encouraging to see so many of our pro-life leaders, particularly Joni Ernst, one of those pro-life women we helped to elect, taking the lead on this.”
There’s a harsh reality for the SBA List and others looking to end the $528 million in taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood. Even if they can finds the 60 votes to pass the bill in the Senate, they will need 67 to override a guaranteed veto from President Obama.
Quigley admits winning this fight with a Democrat in the White House is very tough.
“Planned Parenthood has an absolute stranglehold on the Democratic Party. We won’t get this done without a pro-life president. We’ve got to break that dam if we’re going to get through,” she said, saying the current president and the likely Democratic nominee in 2016 are wholly committed to the pro-choice agenda.
“The ultimate solution to this issue is electing a pro-life president. President Obama has been a longtime ally of Planned Parenthood. Hillary Clinton, who’s got a lot of support on the Democratic side for the upcoming election, she and Planned Parenthood have an incredibly cozy relationship going back decades,” said Quigley.
If a pro-life president is elected, Quigley believes they will have the support of the majority of Americans on numerous life issues.
“The people of this country are pro-life. The majority , when it gets down to brass tacks and you’re talking about actual legislation, they oppose more abortions than they support. They support these common-sense, compassionate limitations, and people don’t want to be funding abortion businesses,” said Quigley.
In addition to the effort to remove taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, Quigley says the Senate will also soon take up the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, that would ban the vast majority of abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy.
“Majority Leader McConnell has committed to that vote multiple times, so we’re expecting it sometime in the fall,” said Quigley.
Trump and Christie
Most political insiders expected New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to be the most brash of the Republican presidential candidates. But over the past few weeks, it’s possible Christie has been trumped by a certain real estate mogul. Capitol Steps star Elaina Newport joins us as Washington’s premier musical satirists take aim at Trump and Christie.
Three Martini Lunch 7/31/15
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review hail the progress of a new Ebola vaccine. They also cringe as the intelligence community braces for a huge amount of classified material exposed through Hillary Clinton’s private server. And John Kerry admits the Iran deal is not being submitted as a treaty because he knows it would never pass.
‘He Failed Every One of Those Duties’
House Republicans are calling for the ouster of IRS Commissioner John Koskinen over his failure to preserve evidence or tell the truth about the agency’s targeting of conservative organizations and their donors.
The government’s reluctance to hand over relevant materials to Congress in this case also suggests the special Benghazi committee may have trouble getting what it needs from Hillary Clinton’s emails.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is a longtime member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He says the IRS was under a preservation order from it’s own officials and a subpoena from the oversight committee to maintain critical evidence. But that’s not what happened.
“With a preservation order and a subpoena in place, the IRS destroys 422 tapes containing potentially 24,000 emails. This according to the inspector general. They destroyed them on March 4, 2014,” said Jordan.
Koskinen became commissioner in the midst of the investigation, but Jordan says his performance has been abysmal.
“Three weeks after that, John Koskinen comes before the oversight committee and testified. He’s asked repeatedly about Lois Lerner’s emails and he tells us at that hearing, ‘I will get you all of her emails.’ That’s a blatantly false statement if you’ve destroyed 422 tapes and 24,000 emails,” said Jordan.
Just as significant, says Jordan, is that Koskinen has never corrected the record. Meanwhile, the committee is still waiting for thousands of Lerner emails that were salvaged because IRS officials are taking time to make sure there are no duplicates of any emails.
Put together, Jordan says the commissioner has to go.
“When you think about the duties Mr. Koskinen had: a duty to preserve the documents, a duty to produce the documents, a duty to disclose to us when he couldn’t preserve and produce those, a duty to give accurate testimony and then, if he’s given testimony that’s inaccurate, a duty to correct the record,” said Jordan.
“He failed every one one of those duties and that’s why he needs to go,” he added.
Jordan says the GOP demand for Koskinen’s removal is not an overreaction. He says the commissioner has already received more tolerance than the government grants the average taxpayer.
“If you’re a taxpayer and you’re being audited by the Internal Revenue Service, do you get to make false statements and then not correct the record? When you are supposed to preserve things, do they cut you any slack if you wouldn’t preserve those and wouldn’t produce those and didn’t disclose to them when you destroyed those?” asked Jordan.
“There is no way a taxpayer gets that kind of courtesy or that kind of treatment, so why in the world should the agency that serves the taxpayers get some special deal?” he said.
In 2013, President Obama expressed outrage that the IRS allegedly harassed conservative groups applying for non-profit status. Last week on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” Obama had a much different appraisal of the story.
“When there was that problem with the IRS, everybody jumped, including you, ‘Look, you’ve got this back office and they’re going after the tea party.’ Well, it turned out no,” Obama told Stewart, contending that IRS operatives “poorly and stupidly” implemented a confusing law.
“The truth of the matter is there was not some big conspiracy there,” Obama insisted.
Jordan says that’s simply untrue.
“The IRS was targeting people based on their political beliefs and they targeted conservatives. It’s a fact. The inspector general did the investigation and that’s what he determined. Now the inspector general has further investigated and determined that they destroyed 422 tapes containing potentially 24,000 emails,” said Jordan.
Jordan’s frustration extends beyond Koskinen to the commissioner’s former chief counsel, Kate Duval.
“One month before those tapes were destroyed, she was on notice that there were problems back in 2011 with Lois Lerner’s emails and that the emails they were trying to recover foe congressional investigation, there were gaps in those emails,” said Jordan. “So she learns that in February 2014 and doesn’t disclose that. In fact a month later they destroy the tapes,” said Jordan.
Duval is no longer at the IRS, but Jordan fears her new job could hamstring another critical probe.
“Guess where she’s at today? She’s over at the State Department. She’s left the IRS. She’s now at the State Department. She’s in charge of document production about Hillary Clinton’s emails for the Benghazi select committee,” said Jordan, who is a member of the Benghazi panel. “Sometimes fact is stranger than fiction.”
House Republicans are demanding President Obama fire Koskinen as head of the IRS but that is very unlikely to happen. Jordan says lawmakers will pursue impeachment if necessary, although he admits that could be a lengthy road.
“We’re looking at how that has to unfold. You may have to look at a contempt (of Congress) issue before you go to impeachment. You have to work with the House Judiciary Committee. So we are doing the due diligence, the hard work that has to be done to be ready for that,” he said.
Jordan says Obama and other Democrats are eager to move on from the IRS investigation but he says Republicans will keep demanding accountability in order to defend the most constitutional rights.
“Remember what they did. They attacked our most fundamental liberty. Under the first amendment, we have a right to speak in a political nature against the policies of our government and not be harassed for doing so,” said Jordan.
“They systematically, and for a sustained period of time, harassed people for speaking out. They violated people’s first amendment free speech rights and now they think they can have this cavalier attitude about destroying and erasing tapes and not producing the documents and not disclosing and not testifying accurately. That is flat out wrong and they should be held accountable,” he said.