Roseanne Barr says friends told her 'apologizing to the Left' may have been 'fatal mistake'

If Roseanne Barr had any regret about how she handled the aftermath of her firing by ABC, it may have been “apologizing to the Left.”
“That’s what everybody said,” Barr told Rabbi Shmuley Boteach during an appearance on his podcast, Entertainment Weekly reported.
“They said, ‘You made a fatal mistake … apologizing to the Left.’ Once you apologize to them they never forgive, they just try to beat you down until you don’t exist. That’s how they do things. They don’t accept apologies.”
Barr later said that many of the people who were demanding apologies from her after a tweet about a former adviser to President Barack Obama were “a little bit ill-informed about me.”
“(T)hey would put me in the same box where they have people who call for the death of all Jews and want to enslave all black people. [The same box as] real racists that actually exist,” she said. “They put me in a box with them. And how do they think that’s gonna affect me? They don’t think. They’re under mind control.”
Meanwhile, don’t expect Barr to offer her critique after “The Conners” premieres next month.
The former star of “Roseanne” told the rabbi she’ll be in Israel when the spin-off show airs.
“I have an opportunity to go to Israel for a few months and study with my favorite teachers over there,” Barr said, according to Entertainment Weekly, adding, “I have saved a few pennies and I’m so lucky I can go.”
“The Conners” is a new series that ABC has ordered to replace “Roseanne” following Barr’s firing by the network over a Twitter message about former Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett.
The new show will star John Goodman and other “Roseanne” cast members in their same roles, with reports that the character of Roseanne Conner, played by Barr, will be killed off.

As In-N-Out boycott plan flops, Dem party chief dines alone, GOP feasts

California state Democrats are distancing themselves from the state party’s chief after he called for the boycott of a beloved burger chain after it donated cash to the state’s Republican Party.
The political feud began last week when Eric Bauman, head of the California Democratic Party, called for the boycott of California-based In-N-Out over its $25,000 donation to the GOP.
Bauman’s call soon became a headache for the party as it captured national headlines and gave ammunition to the GOP as the Democratic leader threatened to alienate the loyal customers of a wildly popular restaurant chain.
But the state Democratic Party quickly backtracked, saying Bauman’s call for a boycott was merely his “personal view” and wasn’t being considered by the state Democratic Party as a policy.
“We’re not happy that In-N-Out gave the money, but we’re not calling for an official boycott,” John Vigna, the party’s communications director, told the Los Angeles Times. “Democrats are very fired up. Chair [Bauman] is definitely giving voice to a feeling a lot of people have right now.”

"We’re not happy that In-N-Out gave the money, but we’re not calling for an official boycott."
- John Vigna, the state Democratic Party communications director

Ordinary voters, too, seemed to be against a boycott.
“Eating at In-N-Out is such a standard thing to do across California,” Anthony Grigore told the Times, dismissing the idea of a boycott as rather silly.
“The stomach overrules the mind,” Jaime Regalado, emeritus professor of political science at Cal State L.A., told the newspaper. “A cheap, good-tasting burger is hard to dismiss politically.”
But despite the damage control, Republicans seized on the opportunity to have a political feast, posting images and declarations of support for the chain.
“Enjoying our favorite fast food restaurant, In-N-Out Burger, at the Capitol today. No boycott here!” Republican state Sen. Jim Nielsen wrote on Facebook, attaching a photo of himself surrounded by multiple orders of burgers and fries.
Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox posted on Twitter a photo of himself in front an In-N-Out as well, saying “There’s nothing more Californian than In-N-Out Burger.”
Matt Fleming, a spokesman for the California Republican Party, also weighed in on the issue.
“It’s disappointing that he’s attacking a company that’s a California institution and widely regarded as a good employer,” he wrote in a tweet.
Meanwhile, In-N-Out released a statement addressing the donations to the Republican Party, claiming that the chain has made “equal contributions to both Democratic and Republican” PACs in California this year.
“For years, In-N-Out Burger has supported lawmakers who, regardless of political affiliation, promote policies that strengthen California and allow us to continue operating with the values of providing strong pay and great benefits for our associates,” Executive Vice President Arnie Wensinger said.

Florida's Gillum grateful for donations from 'everyday folks' -- and billionaires Soros and Steyer

Andrew Gillum, the Tallahassee mayor who recently won Florida's Democratic gubernatorial nomination, likes to thank "everyday folks" for donating to his campaign. On Sunday he also thanked billionaires George Soros and Tom Steyer.
“I’ll tell you, I’m obviously deeply appreciative of Mr. Soros, as well as Mr. Steyer, both men whom I’ve known for some time,” Gillum said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.

"I’ll tell you, I’m obviously deeply appreciative of Mr. Soros, as well as Mr. Steyer, both men whom I’ve known for some time."
- Florida gubernatorial nominee Andrew Gillum

In fact, the 39-year-old Gillum received an outpouring of support from liberal megadonors and groups associated with their vast network of affiliates, helping him emerge from a crowded Democratic field last Tuesday.
In April, his campaign raised $450,000, with more than half of that coming from Soros in the form of a contribution to Forward Florida, a political action committee focused on getting Gillum elected, the Tampa Bay Times reported.
Both Soros and Steyer, who’s been leading an effort to impeach President Trump, also directed $650,000 in the final two weeks of primary campaigning toward the same political group, according to Politico.
Before the last-minute cash infusion, Steyer reportedly had already donated $500,000 to groups supporting Gillum, while Soros’ total contributions to the pro-Gillum group stood at $1 million.
Despite the donations and criticism that the billionaires may have undue influence in politics, Gillum brushed off suggestions that his candidacy was bankrolled by billionaires, saying the campaign was led by donations from “everyday folks.”
“[O]ur campaign was really propped up by a lot of small contributions, including my mother, who was on auto-deduct of $20 a month into our campaign,” Gillum said on the show. “In the first two days of this general election, our campaign has been buoyed this first week, raising over $2 million by everyday folks, not big contributions, but everyday folks sowing a seed into our race.”
Gillum will face Republican U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis in November.

Brett Kavanaugh prepares for Senate panel's deep dive into his career as DC insider

Judge Brett Kavanaugh goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday for confirmation hearings with what supporters call the longest paper trail – practically a superhighway – of any federal judicial nominee, a testament to his enviable insider status in public and private corridors of Washington power.
That impressive resume has created both political opportunity and peril, as Senate Democrats have demanded a go-slow approach so that Kavanaugh's records as a federal judge, White House staffer and lawyer for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr can be thoroughly scoured.
"We don't know if there's some sort of revelatory bombshell," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said.
But Republicans are confident the 53-year-old judge will be on the bench when the Supreme Court begins its new term Oct. 1.
"Watching this confirmation unfold is like watching the tortured last moments of a blowout basketball game," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Democrats are down thirty with ten seconds left, but they keep fouling to stop the shot clock in an attempt to avoid their inevitable defeat."

"Democrats are down thirty with ten seconds left, but they keep fouling to stop the shot clock in an attempt to avoid their inevitable defeat."
- U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah

An extensive Fox News analysis of Kavanaugh's record on and off the bench — more than a million pages of speeches, memos, and rulings — reveals a solid, predictable conservative record.
The National Archives, working with the George W. Bush Presidential Library, began releasing tens of thousands of pages of Kavanaugh's past record every few days this month. But officials admit they will not be able to produce all the documentation until late October, weeks after the nominee's Senate hearings, floor vote and potential swearing-in as the 114th justice.
Some Senate progressives had initially declared a boycott -- refusing to meet personally with the nominee before the hearings -- as a protest over access to his papers. But that solidarity collapsed, and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer has shifted strategy, warning, "We stand ready to sue the National Archives for Judge Kavanaugh’s full records if necessary."
Republicans say the judge's views are being distorted and his record has earned bipartisan praise.
But it is a long, dense record, including:

• Private legal work on the case of Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez
• Three years on the Starr staff, including writing major portions of the so-called "Starr Report" to Congress outlining grounds for impeachment against then-President Bill Clinton
• Preparing legal appeals during the 2000 Bush v. Gore presidential election dispute
• Five years as a top Bush White House lawyer
• 12 years as a federal appeals court judge

"There has been quite an extensive record," said Jennifer Mascott, Kavanaugh's first law clerk hire and now a professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School. "But if someone is really looking for what will give us the best sense of how Judge Kavanaugh will rule were he to be confirmed, it would be looking at his opinions.”
The Gatekeeper
Despite clerking for his mentor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Kavanaugh sees his five years as a White House aide to President George W. Bush from 2001-2006, as the ideal training ground for his judicial job.
Much of that time he was staff secretary, the person who manages the daily paper and policy flow to the president, including documents circulated among senior staff for comment. It is a crucial, if largely thankless, job.
"It was important that I maintain strict neutrality and impartiality in that role, so that the president and his policy staff would have confidence that their concern would be presented to the president fairly," he has said, adding that the experience "helped make me a better student of the administrative process, a better interpreter of statutes."
He was in that role for a range of major events and debates, from Hurricane Katrina to moves to expand Medicare.
Most controversial, at least for Kavanaugh's future endeavors, was the internal debate over the administration’s initial endorsement of "enhanced interrogation" of suspected terrorists held overseas.
"I was not involved and am not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants," he testified at his 2006 confirmation hearing for his current seat on the D.C.-based U.S. Court of Appeals.
But newly released emails from his White House service include a Nov. 19, 2001 memo, cryptically suggesting he would be "happy to help" prepare then-Attorney General John Ashcroft explain post-9/11 policy allowing secret surveillance of contacts between some terrorist suspects and their defense lawyers, without any court order.
Democrats will want to know the extent of Kavanaugh's involvement in, or understanding of, the administration's evolving anti-terror policies. But his backers note this particular email came before the detention policies at Guantanamo were imposed.
The Investigator
Before his job as staff secretary, Kavanaugh was associate counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel during the Clinton probe, and Starr told Fox News his protégé served as a trusted adviser.
At the time, the investigation had advanced far beyond its initial look at Arkansas real estate deals. But Kavanaugh recognized that the president, in his view, had broken the law by committing perjury.
An August 1998 email titled "Slack for the President?" was written just two days before Clinton would give grand jury testimony about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
"The president has disgraced his Office, the legal system, and the American people by having sex with a 22-year-old intern and turning her life into a shambles," he wrote, accusing the White House of "a sustained propaganda campaign that would make [former president] Nixon blush."
The then 33-year-old lawyer said while he respected the office of the president and tried to be fair, he could offer no defense for Clinton’s public and private behavior, and now "the Congress can decide whether the interests of the Presidency would be best served by having a new President."
Less than a month after that memo, the "Starr report" would form the investigative basis of the GOP-controlled House of Representatives' impeachment of the president, a national drama that ended with the Senate's acquittal.
The episode is likely to be revisited at the confirmation hearings, but the nominee has long defended his then-boss, and the investigation itself.
But a 2008 lecture, which he wrote while a judge, suggested -- as a policy, not legal matter -- sitting presidents should be immune from congressional investigations and prosecution while in office and "should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office." He added, "A President who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as President."
Some Hillary Clinton supporters have privately lamented the irony: a lawyer who helped aggressively investigate her husband two decades ago is now poised to sit on the Supreme Court, a nomination she would have made if the 2016 election had turned out differently.
Getting Ready
In an isolated area of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in the White House complex, Kavanaugh has spent the past few days being put through the rhetorical ringer. For hours on end, he sits alone at a table, peppered with questions about his personal and professional record, all in an effort to see if he will crack under the pressure.
The informal, but intrusive prep sessions are known as "murder boards," for their intensity, designed to simulate what the 53-year-old nominee to the Supreme Court will face this week in his Senate confirmation hearings. Democrats hope any public mistakes can pay political dividends in coming weeks.
"If you’re in the Democrats' position, you have no ammunition except obstruction," said Edward Whelan, president of the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center. "Maybe they hope they win control of the Senate in November, and are able to keep things from happening until January. From their perspective, obstruction is all upside."

"If you’re in the Democrats' position, you have no ammunition except obstruction. Maybe they hope they win control of the Senate in November, and are able to keep things from happening until January. From their perspective, obstruction is all upside."
- Edward Whelan, president, Ethics and Public Policy Center

Sources say the mock questions have focused equally on his work in the judicial and executive branches.
The stakes are enormous, not only for the nominee but also for the man who selected him from an evolving list of 25 possibles first announced during the presidential campaign. Aides say President Trump hopes a successful confirmation will build momentum for his separate midterm political agenda, and bring a measure of stability and public confidence to what has been a challenging 20 months in office.
In the broader realm, filling the seat left by the retirement of Kennedy would solidify the high court's current, shaky right-leaning majority. Having that fifth reliable conservative vote would help guide the administration as it makes strategic decisions about which high-profile issues to pursue in court -- like immigration, the environment, transgender rights and expanded executive authority.
"It's important Democrats and Republicans not roll over on this pick," said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the left-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center. "The American people want their justices to be an independent check even to the president nominating you, to follow the Constitution, not their own political values."
But liberal advocacy groups have all but abandoned efforts to defeat Kavanaugh through public opinion, with scant paid issue advertising. Many progressives lament Democratic senators have been distracted by other ideological fights as the midterm election approaches, with most of the rhetorical fire aimed at Trump himself.
But the hearings could still be dramatic.
Senate sources say Democrats will focus much of their attention on seeking Kavanaugh's views on presidential power, with the possibility he could decide any challenges to the ongoing special counsel probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
"Look, it is not a done deal," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., vowing to continue opposing Kavanaugh. "Donald Trump has made his nomination. And he picks somebody off a list that has been prescreened, prescreened by not one but two right-wing extremist groups."
Along with his courtesy visits to 65 senators of the Senate who will decide his fate, Kavanaugh has prepared for the spotlight by reviewing his own record, and enduring those closely guarded mock hearings.
The private rehearsals are coordinated by the White House Counsel's Office and include more than a dozen participants -- government lawyers, conservative academics, some of his former law clerks, even four senators. The goal is to anticipate every possible line of questioning and danger zone -- to give measured answers but not reveal too much.
Sources say Kavanaugh has settled in being himself, avoiding unscripted responses that might provide the televised "soundbite" to derail what has so far been a flawless confirmation journey. Administration officials are privately confident he will shine in the hearings.
Supporters point to his smooth handling in the face of withering Democratic opposition when he was nominated for his current seat on the Washington-based federal appeals court.

Labor Day Weekend Cartoons

Anna Kooiman: Labor Day brings back patriotic memories of proud Americans

What are you doing this Labor Day? Enjoying a few final dips in the neighborhood pool? Grilling out with friends? Similar to Memorial Day, many folks have associations with the holiday that are lovely, but may or may not resemble the holiday’s initial intended purpose.
Memorial Day has become the unofficial kickoff for summer, but was created to honor those who served and made the ultimate sacrifice in our armed forces. Labor Day honors American workers and their contributions to the U.S. economy. It dates back to the late 19th century and was initially celebrated with a parade in New York City involving the first unions.
Since Labor Day marks the end of summer in the U.S., I can’t help but think about my favorite summer memory, hosting the Fox News 2018 “Proud American” programming. I spent the week leading up to Independence Day asking folks what makes them proud to be an American. It was part of my assignment while gathering taped stories to air during our broadcast.
I chatted with veterans, active duty military members, and civilians alike. I spoke with parents, children, shop owners, and even our very own Fox News crew. Their answers varied greatly but I’ll bet several will resonate with you as much as they do with my own life experiences. Many of the answers had to do with the American Dream, working hard and getting ahead.

Our first broadcast location was Doumar’s, a Norfolk, Virginia restaurant that was once featured on “Diners, Drive-In’s, and Dives.” It is the home of the world’s first ice cream cone. The owner told me about how his great uncle came up with the dessert concept while at the World’s Fair in 1904.
The ice cream vendor had run out of cups and there was a waffle vendor next door. Mr. Doumar got creative – combined the two – and badda-bing-badda-boom: Look what we have now! Americans (and the rest of the world) are eating ice cream cones like it’s going out of style!
While conversing over ice cream cones and coffee (yes the two go together when you’re on morning TV) I spoke with two young sisters excited about their July 4th festivities, which would include a pool party and watching the fireworks with family. One of the girls was about to start her first job teaching swim lessons. She said she was proud to be an American because she was proud to be able to work and help others.
Our conversation reminded me of my first jobs at age 14 and 15 – ironically, scooping ice cream and teaching swim lessons. I thought about the work ethic my parents instilled in me from a young age.
“You work hard, you get ahead,” my parents told me. I still try to live by those words and it sounds like that young girl will too.
Fox News producers arranged for about 10 classic cars to be on location at the drive-in for our live shots. Most of the cars were owned by veterans. I spoke with male and female vets of all ages from the Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard. I enjoyed hearing them share their tough war stories while also reminiscing over fond memories made with their comrades.
When asking them what made them proud to be an American, one female classic car owner said simply, “the right to drive.” She went on to say that in some countries women are treated as second- or third-class citizens. Not here.
That woman’s answer may sound basic to some. Almost not even worth mentioning. But can you imagine what life would be like in countries, for example, that denied women are basic rights? We are blessed to be Americans.
The next day our crew was broadcasting live from Colonial Williamsburg. Our crew brushed up on our Founding Fathers’ history while I learned to shoot a musket, made a kitchen utensil with the local blacksmith, got fitted for an 18th century dress, and whipped up some colonial culinary delights.
One of the most memorable moments was when a man portraying Thomas Jefferson read the entire Declaration of Independence during a Facebook Live segment. In light of some current events, I brought up the ugliness we sometimes see from charged up individuals on both the left and right.
What would our Founding Fathers think about the way we live today? The actor portraying Thomas Jefferson reminded us of his tension-filled relationship with Alexander Hamilton. I think today we can look at history and remember that debate is healthy. But we shouldn’t let the level of discourse get so vicious and spiteful.
Particularly on patriotic holidays like Independence Day, my hope is that we can all be proud of our history – and proud of what our country aspires to achieve.
The big day of our “Proud American” coverage, July 4th, was so memorable. The majority of our live shots were from the USS Monterey, an active duty missile cruiser. It’s the ship that launched tomahawk missiles into Syria back in April, after dictator Bashar Assad used chemical weapons on his own people.
I spoke with some of the USS Monterey’s 350 sailors about what made them proud to be Americans. They told me they were proud to be part of world history and proud to be part of the fight for human rights around the world.
Another takeaway from my chats onboard the USS Monterey was that many of the young sailors in particular expressed how much it meant to them that their parents were pleased with their career choice to serve in the Navy. They also told me they felt like their service is something they will be proud to tell their kids about. I loved meeting so many sailors that day was sure to thank each and every one of them.
During one of our Facebook Live segments I was able to interview my parents (while holding my 5-month-old son) about what made them Proud Americans. My dad talked a bit about how privileged we are to have been born in America and it’s no wonder people spend their lives trying to get here. It’s the land of opportunity.
My mom talked a lot about the beauty and culture the U.S. has to offer. She and my dad recently retired and have been taking a lot of road trips. She said lyrics from “America the Beautiful” like “amber waves of grain and purple mountain majesties” are descriptions that ring very true.
Finally, I spoke with a few of our crew members about working on Independence Day. It can be tough on anyone to work holidays while family and friends are kicking it at the beach. But I heard the same sentiment from those crew members that I was feeling myself. We were enjoying our time so much that in many ways, it didn’t even feel like work.
Fox News does patriotic holidays right. I have a feeling you know exactly what I mean. We always find ways to tip our hats to military members, remember our nation’s history, and look toward a bright American future.
This Labor Day, I hope you are spending time with family and friends, relishing the summer memories you’ve made over the last few months, and are also taking a moment to think about how lucky we are as Americans. If we are willing to work hard, we can get ahead.
Anna Kooiman moved to Sydney, Australia in Septemer of 2016 to be with her Aussie husband's family. She is a freelance host on several nationally broadcast Australian TV networks. Kooiman also launched a lifestyle, travel, and fitness website in December of 2016. Follow her on Twitter @annakooiman, Instagram @annakooiman, and Facebook @AnnaKooimanTV. Visit her website www.annakooiman.com.

Media pounce on conservatives and weaponize bias against Trump

Anti-Trump news organizations continued to attack the president this past week on many fronts, including for what CNN Senior Political Analyst John Avlon called “a real culture of corruption.” In reality, Avlon should have been describing the state of journalism.
CNN, that stalwart of James Earl Jones voiceovers, has no room to point fingers. It got caught believing another phony story about President Trump and is too stubborn and woke to admit it. (Sort of like when three CNN investigative journalists had to resign in 2017, except then the network admitted they were wrong.)
Meanwhile, NBC is facing allegations from a former top producer that executives actively interfered in reporting on allegations of sexual misconduct against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. And The New York Times has become increasingly obvious about the word play it injects into news stories, so its left-wing agenda remains intact.
There are far too many failure points in the media to fit easily into one column – journalists ignoring Texas Democratic Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke’s past DUI arrest; hypocritical outlets that claim to love Republicans only after they pass away; and repeated defenses of Antifa.
If Avlon wanted to find his culture of corruption, he might start at NBC. The peacock network used to employ Ronan Farrow, who was digging into the Weinstein story. Only, as he got close, the bosses shut him down. He was forced to publish his investigative report and won a Pulitzer Prize.
Turns out it was deliberate. Both The New York Times and Daily Beast had scoops out this week showing how NBC executives tried to silence the Weinstein story. (Just don’t call this media bias!)
Former NBC investigative producer Rich McHugh told The Times that “the network’s handling of the matter ‘a massive breach of journalistic integrity.’” McHugh said he and Farrow were ordered to “stand down” three days before interviewing “a woman with a credible rape allegation against Harvey Weinstein.”
The Daily Beast piled on, writing: “Sources: NBC Threatened Ronan Farrow if He Kept Reporting on Harvey Weinstein.” The Beast explained: “According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, NBC News General Counsel Susan Weiner made a series of phone calls to Farrow, threatening to smear him if he continued to report on Weinstein.”
Farrow said he suspected NBC News President Noah Oppenheim “who moonlighted as a Hollywood screenwriter – was potentially communicating with Weinstein directly about the story, according to the sources.”
NBC went on to have its own internal #MeToo problem with “Today” anchor Matt Lauer, who was forced out in a huge sexual misconduct scandal.
NBC is still playing games on air – in the very same “Today” show. Friday, it spent just one minute and eight seconds on a report and 43 seconds of that time defending NBC.
“Meet The Press Daily” host Chuck Todd on MSNBC blundered into this fiasco by leveraging another story to pretend media bias doesn’t exist.
Todd said: “One of the mistakes we in the mainstream media made during when these false allegations against us for being biased for 40 years happened is we started believing, ‘Oh, maybe we are biased.’ ‘Oh, wait, we can’t look biased.’ So, then, we created a lot of false equivalency issues.”
Sure, Chuck. Sure.
2. Speaking of Blunders: Most journalists know that a too-good-to-be-true scoop seldom is. But they keep falling for them to aid the Resistance.
That hasn’t stopped CNN, as the network refuses to admit it ran another bogus story about President Trump. Here’s AP’s David Bauder describing the problem: “Despite a key source backing off his assertion, CNN is sticking by a story casting doubt on President Donald Trump’s claim that he did not have prior knowledge of a June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer to get damaging information on Hillary Clinton.” Broadcast networks went bonkers after the original report, devoting more than 39 minutes to it during morning and evening newscasts in the last week of July.
The key source is Lanny Davis, the lawyer for Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen. Davis now says he was wrong when he gave CNN the information. CNN’s reporting team, including former Washington Post Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein, said on the July 26 broadcast of “Cuomo Prime Time” that Cohen would rat out Trump. He was supposed to tell investigators “Mr. Trump knew in advance about a now infamous June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower in which Russians were expected to offer damaging information on Hillary Clinton,” the New York Times reported.
Davis first denied on air at CNN that he was the source for this story. Then he fessed up, firing a torpedo at the network’s “scoop.” Yet it took the broadcast networks about a week to carefully distance themselves from this disaster. But CNN has held on for dear life.
The Washington Post published a long article dissecting CNN’s weird sourcing of the story, where Davis provided information on background but was then cited as declining to comment. The Post made it clear that “critics say the practice is murky at best and ethically dubious at worst.”
The result is even fellow liberal outlets have distanced themselves from CNN. Newsweek wrote: “CNN REFUSES TO BACK DOWN FROM COHEN, TRUMP TOWER STORY DESPITE LANNY DAVIS SAYING INFO MAY BE WRONG.” And Politico gutted CNN’s source as well, “Lanny Davis burns reporters. Should they still give him a megaphone?” (Hint: No!)
Trump has accused CNN of a “major lie” and called it “FAKE NEWS,” of course. CNN hasn’t given up … yet. The Daily Caller described its defense as “CNN QUADRUPLES DOWN ON DUBIOUS TRUMP STORY.” Next headline is quintuples.
3. Weaponizing Journalism: It wasn’t enough for The New York Times to claim conservatives had “Weaponized the First Amendment.” How dare those right-wingers expect equal treatment under the law? Now they’re accused of using the Catholic Church’s sex scandal in a similar manner.
The ridiculously biased piece was headlined: “Vatican Power Struggle Bursts Into Open as Conservatives Pounce.” (Note how conservatives “pounce!”) Poor Pope Francis is faced with a crisis because “an ideologically motivated opposition has weaponized the church’s sex abuse crisis to threaten not only Francis’ agenda but his entire papacy.”
This was a common theme in media as major outlets like The Times and Washington Post targeted conservative Catholic media to defend the pope’s liberal social agenda.
The Times’ weaponization of journalism doesn’t just stick to social issues. It has even warned how the Internal Revenue Service “could be weaponized for political purposes.” That’s apparently only a problem when Republicans do it, not Democrats.
4. Graphic Objection: Sometimes media bias is so bad, it takes a lawyer to object. Kudos to the lawyer in question, Ted Frank, director of litigation for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Frank spotted a horribly screwed-up New York Times graphic about the number of appellate judges confirmed during a president’s first congressional session.
The chart ranged from 15 (Obama) to 24 (Trump), yet Trump’s gavel was, well, huge. “Today, the New York Times taught me that 24 is over ten times larger than 15,” wrote Frank. He was right. It was the kind of graphic you could only make if you are trying to make Trump’s 60-percent increase appear like a judicial apocalypse.

Trump issues 4-word reply after criticism at McCain, Franklin funerals

In this Sep. 1, 2018 photo, Meghan McCain speaks at a memorial service for her father, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., at Washington National Cathedral in Washington.  (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

President Trump issued a four-word reply Saturday after several speakers at weekend funerals for singer Aretha Franklin and U.S. Sen. John McCain made him a focus of their remarks.
“MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” the president tweeted around 7 p.m. ET.
Earlier Saturday, Meghan McCain, daughter of the late Arizona Republican, had alluded to Trump's slogan during her eulogy for her father, who died of brain cancer at age 81 on Aug. 25.
“The America of John McCain has no need to be made great again because America was always great,” McCain said at a memorial service at the National Cathedral in Washington.

“The America of John McCain has no need to be made great again because America was always great.”
- Meghan McCain, daughter of the late U.S. Sen. John McCain

The audience, which included a who’s who of Washington elites, applauded the comment, the Arizona Republic reported.
The late senator, a fervent critic of the president, had requested that Trump not be invited to his funeral. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner, however, were in attendance.
Much of the animus between Trump and McCain can be traced to a remark Trump made in July 2015, at an event in Ames, Iowa.
“He’s not a war hero,” Trump said of McCain, a Navy veteran who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”
While mourners attended McCain's memorial service, the president was playing golf at the Trump National Golf Club in Loudoun County, Va.
On Friday in Detroit, singer Stevie Wonder also made reference to Trump's slogan during his tribute to Franklin, the legendary recording artist who died of pancreatic cancer at age 76 on Aug. 16.

Stevie Wonder was just one of several speakers in Detroit who, directly or indirectly, took verbal shots at Trump.  (Associated Press)

“What needs to happen today, not only in this nation but throughout the world, is that we need to make love great again,” Wonder said, according to the Hill.

“What needs to happen today, not only in this nation but throughout the world, is that we need to make love great again.”
- Stevie Wonder, speaking at a memorial service for Aretha Franklin

Wonder was just one of several speakers in Detroit who, directly or indirectly, took verbal shots at Trump. Other critics of the president included Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson, the Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jesse Jackson.
Meanwhile, Katrina Pierson, an adviser to Trump’s campaign, came to the president's defense following the weekend of insults.
“(Donald Trump) ran for @POTUS ONE time and WON! Some people will never recover from that. #SorryNotSorry Yes, #MAGA,” Pierson tweeted.

Trump taking 'hard look' at pay-freeze plan for federal workers following pushback

President Trump's proposal to halt pay raises for federal workers drew pushback from Virginia Republicans Corey Stewart, left, a U.S. Senate candidate, and U.S. Rep. Barbara Comstock, who is up for reelection.

President Trump on Saturday evening appeared to signal that he may be rethinking a plan he announced last week to cancel a proposed 2.1 percent pay raise for federal workers.
The president retweeted a Twitter message posted earlier Saturday by Republican U.S. Senate candidate Corey Stewart of Virginia, in which Stewart wrote that federal workers had endured "8 years of hell under Obama, with several rounds of pay freezes and benefit cuts."
Trump "can fix this, and I trust that he will," Stewart wrote.
Just one day earlier, Stewart -- typically a staunch Trump supporter -- had emailed a statement criticizing the pay-freeze plan that Trump disclosed Thursday.

"Federal workers endured 8 years of hell under Obama, with several rounds of pay freezes and benefit cuts ... [President Trump] can fix this, and I trust that he will."
- Corey Stewart, Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Virginia

“I almost never differ with President Trump, but in this case I do,” Stewart said in the statement, according to the Washington Post.
“Federal employees in Virginia wake up early, face punishing traffic and work hard to serve their nation and support their families,” the statement continued. “These workers need and deserve a pay raise.”
Another Virginia Republican, U.S. Rep. Barbara Comstock, also spoke out against Trump's plan.
"We cannot balance the budget on the backs of our federal employees and I will work with my House and Senate colleagues to keep the pay increase in our appropriations measures that we vote on in September,” Comstock said last week, according to the Hill.

"We cannot balance the budget on the backs of our federal employees and I will work with my House and Senate colleagues to keep the pay increase in our appropriations measures that we vote on in September.”
- U.S. Rep. Barbara Comstock, R-Va.

The Democratic National Committee also derided Trump’s proposed pay freeze as “another slap in the face to American workers.”
At a Friday appearance in North Carolina, it appeared that Trump may have given the comments some consideration.
“I’m going to be doing a little work over the [Labor Day] weekend,” Trump said, according to a White House transcript cited by the Hill. “I’m going to be studying, you know, the federal workers in Washington that you’ve been reading so much about. People don’t want to give them any increase. They haven’t had one in a long time.

“I’m going to be doing a little work over the [Labor Day] weekend. I’m going to be studying, you know, the federal workers in Washington that you’ve been reading so much about. People don’t want to give them any increase. They haven’t had one in a long time."
- President Trump

"I said, I’m going to study that over the weekend. It’s a good time to study it -- Labor Day. Let’s see how they do next week. But a lot of people were against it. I’m going to take a good hard look over the weekend."
In a letter Thursday to House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Senate president pro tempore Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Trump had said that current agency budgets could not sustain additional pay for federal employees.
“We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course,” Trump wrote, explaining his opposition to raising salaries.
“[B]oth across-the-board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero,” for 2019, the president wrote. He added that “Federal employee pay must be performance-based, and aligned strategically toward recruiting, retaining, and rewarding high-performing Federal employees and those with critical skill sets.” 
But by Saturday it seemed the president may soon alter the plan he proposed Thursday.
Stewart on Nov. 6 is looking to defeat incumbent U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat who was Hillary Clinton's running mate in the 2016 presidential election. But Kaine has a 23-point lead in a Virginia Commonwealth University poll, the Hill reported.
Comstock, meanwhile, is facing a tough challenge from state Sen. Jennifer Wexton, a Loudon County Democrat, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.

Democrat Crying Cartoons

Arming teachers a decision for states, local districts, DeVos says

President Trump's education secretary said Friday that she has "no intention" of taking action regarding any possible use of federal funds to arm teachers.
"Congress did not authorize me or the Department to make those decisions" about arming teachers or training them on the use of firearms, Betsy DeVos said.
"I will not take any action that would expand or restrict the responsibilities and flexibilities granted to state and local education agencies by Congress," DeVos wrote in a letter to U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia, the top Democrat on the House committee overseeing education.
DeVos' comments came after a top official in her department, when asked about arming teachers, said states and local jurisdictions always "had the flexibility" to decide how to use federal education funds.
Frank Brogan, assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education, said arming educators "is a good example of a profoundly personal decision on the part of a school or a school district or even a state."
Democrats and education groups have argued, however, that the funds are intended for academics, not guns, adding that arming teachers is dangerous and could make schools feel like prisons.
It would be up to Congress, not the U.S. Department of Education, to place any restrictions or barriers to use those funds for purposes not currently in the law, a department spokeswoman said.

Frank Brogan, assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education, speaks in his office in Washington, Aug. 30, 2018.  (Associated Press)

The debate arose earlier this month after a small rural school district in Oklahoma and the state of Texas asked the department to clarify what the funds can be used for.
"The position is: You have the language ... the language was written specifically to and always interpreted to mean 'This is your money,'" Brogan said.
Democratic lawmakers and teachers blasted the idea, accusing the Trump administration of acting in the interests of the National Rifle Association, and several Congress members called for legislation that would prohibit the use of those funds for guns.
Debate over whether teachers should be allowed to carry weapons intensified after President Trump voiced support for the idea following a massacre at a high school in Parkland, Fla., on Feb. 14 that left 17 people dead.
In the months since the shootings, DeVos has headed a panel on school safety that is supposed to issue a list of recommendations later this year, Politico reported.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Senator Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate commission overseeing education, said on Twitter that she was "extremely disappointed that (DeVos) is moving forward with this awful plan to allow federal funds to be used to arm teachers."
"I hope she reconsiders and we need to keep pressure on her until she does," Murray added.

Yes, the Trump recovery really can keep going

President Trump’s opponents may not like his philandering past and midnight tweets but on the economy, only cynics can argue with the results.
The economy accomplished 4.2 percent growth in the second quarter and appears headed for an overall score of 3 percent for the entire year. A tight job market is finally rewarding workers with better treatment from employers, and low wage workers are receiving bigger pay boosts.
That’s a lot better than the less than 2 percent average growth and stagnant living standards recorded by Presidents Bush and Obama.
The big challenge for Mr. Trump and the Republicans in Congress—should they hold on in the midterms—is sustaining the pace. With unemployment already at 3.9 percent, most economists are pessimistic about continued 3 percent growth in 2019 and beyond.
I take exception!
The labor market still has lots of excess capacity among young people stuck in low level jobs in restaurants and other service businesses. Many of those positions hardly require the skills of a college education or provide high school graduates with a decent career track.
Now, expanding sales opportunities and a tight labor market are forcing employers to get more realistic and practical when hiring for better paying positions. Recruiters are abandoning requirements for specific technical degrees and specialized job experience. That’s helping self-taught software engineers get placed at Intel and high school graduates land entry level managerial positions at Bank of America.
To keep growth in high gear, businesses have to follow through by adding to training budgets and the many private apprenticeship programs that the Department of Labor certifies and helps young folks identify. The latter are not just in traditional building trades but also in technology, manufacturing and business services. Many pay about $15 an hour during training and average starting salaries of $60,000 for those who successfully complete programs.
President Trump is establishing an advisory council comprised of corporate, nonprofit, state government and educational leaders that will work to implement results-oriented job training programs in classrooms and workplaces.
Too many high schools dropped traditional vocational programs in recent decades under pressures from tight budgets and to channel students to college. Mostly that resulted in lots of young people who dropped out after a year or two or graduated from a degree program that did not adequately prepare them for the jobs market. The resulting burden of debt, especially for minorities, too often is overwhelming.
Job one for the president’s council should be getting more young people steered from college track and into vo-tech and apprenticeships, and incentivizing states to redirect funds now going to useless university programs back into those areas.
Finally, regulation has to make sense—not just for America but for the broader world.
Suspending disbelief about the missions of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the World Trade Organization, the bottom line is that American compliance doesn’t mean much if other nations are permitted to violate the rules or intent of those agreements.
Handcuffing American industry does little good if Chinese emissions are growing in leaps and bounds and India and other developing nations are simply not adhering to the same standards as western economies. Until they are, more sensible regulations for U.S. auto efficiency and overall emissions standards are in order.
President Obama rushed through higher gas mileage standards after to his horrors Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election to Mr. Trump. Consequently, freezing CAFE standards at their target for 2020—fleet averages at about 37 MPG—instead of going all the way to 50 MPG in 2025 would be prudent, and Mr. Trump has initiated the necessary public comment processes.
High tariffs on trade with China should not be our end goal but we simply can’t go on destroying millions of jobs and permitting Beijing’s bureaucrats to coerce American companies to transfer valuable technology in frontier areas like artificial intelligence and robotics.
If China can’t play by the rules of civilized nations, then trade with China must be managed outside the WTO so that we may preserve the global body for trade among western nations.
These are radical changes in policy that will reach deeply into our schools and affect relations with partners abroad but are necessary to provide Americans with a secure and prosperous future.
Peter Morici is an economist and business professor at the University of Maryland, and a national columnist.

Request to end DACA from multiple states denied by federal judge

Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina and West Virginia have filed a lawsuit against the federal government over DACA program; Heritage Foundation's Mike Gonzalez has insight.
Seven states that sued to block the DACA program couldn’t demonstrate that permitting it to continue was causing irreparable harm, a federal judge said on Friday, declining to halt the Obama-era policy that protects young illegal immigrants from deportation.
U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, who has previously ruled against DACA-related programs, argued that the states waited too long to seek a preliminary injunction.
"Here, the egg has been scrambled,” Hanen wrote in his ruling. “To try to put it back in the shell with only a preliminary injunction record, and perhaps at great risk to many, does not make sense nor serve the best interests of this country.”
Still, Hanen said that he thinks the program, which stands for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, is unconstitutional. "If the nation truly wants to have a DACA program, it is up to Congress to say so," Hanen wrote.
"As the Justice Department has consistently argued, DACA is an unlawful attempt to circumvent Congress, and we are pleased the court agreed today," Justice Department spokesman Devin O'Malley said.
On Friday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was confident the courts would ultimately find DACA unconstitutional. He said an injunction was denied only because the states waited too long to request it.
Texas was joined in filing the lawsuit by Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina and West Virginia. The states argued that former President Barack Obama never had the authority to create a program like DACA because it circumvented Congress.
WHAT IS DACA AND WHAT DOES THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WANT TO DO WITH IT?
The states filed the lawsuit in Texas, hoping Hanen would stop DACA recipients from continuing to renew their enrollment. That would have triggered a conflict with three federal orders that have required the U.S. government to keep accepting DACA renewals, even after President Trump tried to end the program last year.
The DACA program was formed through executive action by Obama in 2012 and allowed certain people who came to the U.S. illegally as minors to be protected from immediate deportation. Recipients, called Dreamers, were able to request “consideration of deferred action” for a period of two years, which was subject to renewal.