Univ. of Texas panel OKs guns in classrooms ahead of 'mock shooting' protest

Days before a planned 'mock shooting' demonstration just outside the campus of the University of Texas in Austin, a panel on Thursday recommended policies that would allow concealed handguns in classrooms. 
UT President Greg Fenves will review the recommendations before a final vote of approval by university regents. Concealed weapons would be mostly barred from university dormitories.
Texas state lawmakers are requiring public universities to allow concealed handgun license holders to bring weapons on campus starting Aug. 1, 2016. Universities were told to draw campus gun-zone maps, with the provision they not try to ban weapons from most of campus.
Texas students and faculty have vigorously protested allowing guns in classrooms. The panel that developed the recommendations says its members don't want guns in classrooms, but a ban would violate Texas law.
The groups Come and Take It Texas and Dontcomply.com announced plans for the Saturday demonstration that would include cardboard guns and fake blood, in an effort to support gun rights.
The Austin campus is the site of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history: sniper Charles Whitman killed 16 people in 1966, shooting dozens of victims from a perch atop the central clock tower.

Syria's Assad buying 'a great deal' of ISIS oil, US official says

The ISIS terror group and the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad have engaged in "millions and millions of dollars of trade" despite being at war with each other, a top U.S. Treasury official said Thursday. 
Adam Szubin, the Treasury's acting under secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, said that while some of the oil produced in ISIS-held areas was able to make its way to Kurdish-held areas and Turkey, the "far greater amount" ended up in areas under Assad's control.
Szubin did not estimate the monetary value of the oil trade between ISIS and Assad. However, in remarks prepared for delivery at the Chatham House international affairs think tank in London, Szubin noted that ISIS was selling as much as $40 million in oil per month and had made more than $500 million in black market sales.
"Our sense is that ISIL is taking its profits basically at the wellhead," Szubin said, using another acronym for the terror group, "and so while you do have ISIL oil ending up in a variety of different places that's not really the pressure we want when it comes to stemming the flow of funding - it really comes down to taking down their infrastructure."
Szubin also said ISIS has seized between $500 million and $1 million from bank vaults captured during its spread across Iraq and Syria last year.
The official's remarks came days after Turkey and Russia had traded accusations over the acquisition of oil from the terror group after Turkey shot down a Russian warplane last month.
Earlier this month, Russia's deputy defense minister accused Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his family of personally profiting from the oil trade with ISIS militants. The allegations were rejected by Erdogan, who vowed to resign if Moscow could prove its accusations, and the U.S. government.
"We never said oil smuggling from ISIL is not a problem," State Department spokesman Mark Toner said at the time. "[But] there is no Turkish government complicity in some operation to buy illegal oil from ISIL. We just don't believe that to be true in any way, shape or form."
Russia has been carrying out its air campaign in Syria since Sept. 30, using warplanes at an air base in Syria's coastal province of Latakia, as well as navy ships and long-range bombers flying from their bases in Russia. While Moscow said its action has been focused on ISIS, the U.S. and its allies have criticized Moscow for also striking moderate rebel groups opposed to Assad, whom Russia staunchly supports.

Tom Brokaw Cartoon

Federal judge rejects Texas effort to block resettlement of Syrian refugees

U.S. District Judge David Godbey

AUSTIN, Texas –  A federal judge knocked Texas for offering "largely speculative hearsay" about extremists possibly infiltrating Syrian refugees seeking to resettle in the state, rejecting another attempt by Republican leaders to keep out families fleeing the war-torn country.

U.S. District Judge David Godbey's Wednesday ruling cleared the way for the last of 21 Syrian refugees, many of whom are children under the age of 15, to resettle in Houston on Thursday.

The first dozen arrived earlier this week despite Texas mounting the most aggressive campaign of nearly 30 states that have vowed to ban Syrian refugees following the Paris attacks. Texas is the only state that has taken the U.S. government to court in an effort to block resettlements, but Godbey signaled skepticism about the lawsuit filed last week.

"The fact that this Court is required to assess the risk posed by a group of Syrian refugees illustrates one of the problems with this case," Godbey wrote in a three-page order. "The Court has no institutional competency in assessing the risk posed by refugees."
Godbey, who was appointed to the Dallas court by former President George W. Bush, added that such questions are generally left to the discretion of the federal government.

The Obama administration says refugee vetting is rigorous and can take up to two years. The Justice Department first responded to the lawsuit by telling the court that states can't block resettlements, after which Texas abruptly dropped a request to halt the first wave of refugees from coming to Dallas.

But the second try from Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed Wednesday, said there was new "evidence" that refugees pose potential danger. He cited public comments this week from Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, who said federal counterterrorism officials have indicated that individuals with terrorist ties have attempted infiltrating the U.S. refugee program. McCaul did not go into detail.

Paxton also argued that Texas law enforcement officials have concerns about refugee vetting. Godbey said that although the court recognizes the risks of terrorism, the state had failed to show "competent evidence" that the latest arrivals have intent to cause harm.

Texas "argues that terrorists could have infiltrated the Syrian refugees and could commit acts of terrorism in Texas. The court finds that the evidence before it is largely speculative hearsay," Godbey wrote.

Paxton spokeswoman Cynthia Meyer said the "safety and security of Texans is our utmost priority" and that the office will continue seeking information about arriving refugees.

Despite the ruling, Texas' lawsuit over refugee resettlements is not over. A hearing is likely to come in January, said ACLU attorney Rebecca Robertson, who is representing a resettlement nonprofit that Texas also sued.

Even as governors in some states say Syrian refugees aren't welcome, resettlement agencies and volunteer groups with refugees continue welcoming them. In Indiana, a couple and their two young children arrived at the invitation of the Roman Catholic archdiocese in Indianapolis, which went on with plans to resettle them despite calls from Gov. Mike Pence not to do so.

Pence and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott were among more than two dozen Republican governors who said they would refuse any new Syrian refugees following the deadly Nov. 13 Paris attacks, which have been linked to the Islamic State group operating in Syria.

From Brokaw to Buzzfeed, the media's war on Trump goes nuclear

Donald Trump is throwing out all the rules in this presidential campaign. But some journalists are doing the same thing.
Leave aside the volume of Trump coverage, which drowns out most of the other candidates. Leave aside the pundits on the right and left who regularly pound Trump and spent months mocking and minimizing his chances.
What’s remarkable is the way that self-described straight journalists have concluded that Trump is such a menace to society that they must abandon their ordinary practices and call him out.
Now I understand that emotions are running high in the wake of the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino. And that Trump ratcheted things up by proposing to bar all Muslims from entering the country for some unspecified period of time. And that this has been a political earthquake, uniting Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton in harsh criticism of the Republican front-runner and even drawing condemnation from some European leaders.
But when we have Tom Brokaw stepping out of his anchor emeritus role to rip Trump, something has changed.
On “NBC Nightly News,” Brokaw compared Trump to such demagogues of the past as Joe McCarthy—precisely as a New York Times news story did in analyzing Trump’s “dark” language about terrorism.
“Trump’s statement, even in this season of extremes, is a dangerous proposal that overrides history, the law and the foundation of America itself,” Brokaw said. He added that “defeating ISIS will be long, hard and expensive, perhaps even more so now because ISIS is likely to use Donald Trump’s statements as a recruiting tool.”
Brokaw is entitled to say what he wants at this point in his career—but he must have really felt that he was taking on a mission by stepping out of his nonpartisan role.
The same goes for NBC’s Richard Engel, whose Middle East expertise is such that George W. Bush once privately sought his advice on Iraq. And yet Engel, talking to liberal host Rachel Maddow, called Trump’s proposal “a black spot on our collective foreign policy and our conscience” that “just feeds into the ISIS narrative.” He called it “demagoguery” and “really not the country that I know.”
Now comes Buzzfeed Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith, with a memo to his staff about Trump. Smith is a former Politico reporter and not a partisan guy.
He told his staff in a memo that the popular website’s policy is to ask staffers not to be “political partisans” in social media.
But when it comes to Trump, Smith said, it is “entirely fair to call him a mendacious racist, as the politics team and others here have reported clearly and aggressively: He’s out there saying things that are false, and running an overtly anti-Muslim campaign. BuzzFeed News’s reporting is rooted in facts, not opinion; these are facts.”
Trump’s a racist: that’s a fact. Not that people have accused him of being racist, not that his comments about Muslims appear racist. That is the mindset of much of today’s media.
Smith did add that it’s not fair to tar all Republicans with the same brush, as some have disagreed with Trump.
His memo reminded me of the Daily Beast’s executive editor, who tweeted that Trump is a racist and neo-fascist and called on people to boycott his businesses for that reason. His boss had no problem with that.
In the opinionated precincts of the media, Trump is Public Enemy No. 1. We see this in the New York Daily News cover depicting him as chopping off the Statue of Liberty’s head.
The Washington Post opinion pages have launched a multi-pronged attack. Columnist Ruth Marcus:
“Donald Trump has crossed an uncrossable line of bigotry and xenophobia. The Republican front-runner presents a clearer, more present danger to U.S. interests than the supposedly threatening Muslims he seeks to exclude.”
Columnist Dana Milbank compared Trump to Mussolini.
From the right, columnist Kathleen Parker called Trump “the most dangerous person to emerge on the U.S. political scene in decades. As president, he would be the most dangerous man on the planet.”
And the Post’s editorial page said he “gains traction by spewing hatred, bigotry and rage. Criticizing Mr. Trump is no longer sufficient. It is time to say clearly he is anathema to the Republican Party, and to the nation.”
These are people paid for their views, and Trump isn’t reticent about hitting back against media outlets that slam him. Still, I would say the media’s war on Trump has now gone nuclear. His detractors would undoubtedly say that he went nuclear first.
But if even some of its straightforward practitioners are trying to stop Trump from winning the Republican nomination, the news business could also wind up as collateral damage.

Trump says vow to bar Muslims 'is about security...not religion'

Donald Trump refused to back down Wednesday on his calls to place a temporary ban on Muslims from entering the United States telling Fox News “maybe it’s not politically correct…but somebody had to bring it up.”
Trump told Bill O’Reilly on “The O’Reilly Factor” that his plan, which has sparked a political firestorm, “is about security, it’s not about religion.”
“It’s a temporary ban on not everybody, but many,” the GOP presidential frontrunner said. “I would set up a system to see who qualifies to come in, who doesn’t.”
When O’Reilly asked Trump whether he thinks the U.S. needs Muslim nations to fight jihad, the billionaire businessman said, “No I don’t, but I do think it’d be very helpful.”
“I have many good friends who are Muslim, they’re terrific people and they’re…thanking me for bringing up this point,” Trump told O’Reilly.
Trump’s remarks come a week after a radical Muslim couple killed 14 people and injured 21 at a holiday office party in San Bernardino, Calif., and as President Obama is seeking to resettle thousands of Syrian refugees in the U.S. Critics have questioned whether the refugees can be effectively screened, but none have gone so far as to call for a ban on all Muslims.
Obama, in a televised address to the nation Sunday night, called on Americans to reject discrimination, saying, "Muslim Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co-workers, our sports heroes."
“It was a total disgrace,” Trump said. “We have a president that doesn’t have a clue, he doesn’t know what’s going on.”
Trump received criticism from both Democrats and Republicans over his plan, including Former Vice President Dick Cheney who called Trump an "extremist."
“I am not an extremist, I’m the opposite. I’m someone who understands what’s going on.”
Despite his provacitive remarks, Trump continues to be the GOP frontrunner.
“What’s important is that we get the word out, that we make America great again and that we have security for our country.”

ObamaCare to reduce workforce by 2 million jobs' worth of hours, CBO says

How ObamaCare is hurting the economy

ObamaCare will reduce work hours equivalent to 2 million jobs in the next decade amid a host of incentives not to work or to work less, a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report says -- the latest blow to President Obama’s signature health insurance plan.
The report estimates the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, will make the labor supply shrink by 0.86 percent in 2025. This amounts to a shrinkage equivalent to approximately 2 million full-time workers.
The nonpartisan CBO estimates that the decline will come primarily due to workers responding to changes made by the law to federal programs and tax policy. The agency points to the introduction of health care subsidies tied to income as a key factor -- which in turn raises effective tax rates as someone’s earnings rise, therefore reducing the amount of work Americans choose to do.
“Subsidies decline as income increases, reducing the return on earning additional income,” the report says. “That decline is effectively an increase in recipients’ effective marginal tax rate, so it generally reduces their work incentives through the substitution effect.”
Since the subsidies also reduce the burdens attached to unemployment, the CBO predicts that the law will create additional “work disincentives” for those who are unemployed for part of the year. It concludes that the exchange subsidies will contribute to half of the overall reduction of the labor supply.
The report also points to direct taxes, such as ACA’s hike of the payroll tax on high earners for Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Program, as a reason for discouraging some from working. Another pressure on wages will come from the employer mandate, which imposes a penalty on employers if they have more than 50 employees and do not provide insurance. The CBO predicts that within a few years this charge will be passed on to employees in the form of lower wages.
In what will be seen as a positive by ObamaCare’s supporters, the CBO predicts that a contributing factor to the shrinkage in the labor force will be the consequence of insurance subsidies that will make it easier for some people to stop working, or work less, without losing health insurance.
“Some people would choose to work fewer hours; others would leave the labor force entirely or remain unemployed for longer than they otherwise would,” the report says.
Republicans hailed the report as yet more proof the controversial law is not working.
“When the President’s health law hurts the labor force at the same time it increases health care premiums and taxes, it’s clear the law is not working for the American people,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said in a statement.
“The CBO’s latest report confirms yet another broken promise and negative consequence stemming from ObamaCare,” Hatch said. Unfortunately, until Democrats and the president are willing to address these failures, the American people will be left to stomach the devastating side effects of this ill-advised health law.”
The report comes at an awkward time for the Obama administration: just days after the Senate passed a bill that would repeal key parts of the law. The White House has said that President Obama will veto the legislation.

Iran Missile Cartoon

'Spinning up as we speak': Email shows Pentagon was ready to roll as Benghazi attack occurred

Smoking Gun?

As the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was unfolding, a high-ranking Pentagon official urgently messaged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top deputies to offer military help, according to an email obtained by Judicial Watch.
The revelation appears to contradict testimony Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave lawmakers in 2013, when he said there was no time to get forces to the scene in Libya, where four Americans were killed, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens.
“I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton],” reads the email, from Panetta’s chief of staff Jeremy Bash. “After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.”

" ... we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.”
- Jeremy Bash, Pentagon chief of staff

The email was sent out at 7:19 p.m. ET on Sept. 11, 2012, in the early stages of the eight-hour siege that also claimed the lives of Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith and two former Navy SEALs, Ty Woods and Glen Doherty, private CIA contractors who raced to the aid of embattled State Department workers.
Although the email came after the first wave of the attack at the consulate, it occurred before a mortar strike on the CIA annex killed Woods and Doherty.

Related Image

Expand / Contract

Glen Doherty, (l.1), and Ty Woods, (r.), were ex-Navy SEALs and CIA contractors who rushed to help when the Benghazi attacks began.

“This leaves no doubt military assets were offered and ready to go, and awaiting State Department signoff, which did not come,” Judicial Watch, a nonprofit government watchdog said in a statement.
Parts of the email from Bash were redacted before release, including details on what military forces were available.
In defending the Obama administration’s lack of a military response to the attack, Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee nearly two years ago that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

Related Image

Expand / Contract

Sept. 11, 2012: A protester reacts as the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is seen in flames. (Reuters)

The first assault occurred at the consulate at 3:40 p.m. ET. The second attack on the CIA annex a little over a mile away began three hours later. Bash’s email was sent approximately 40 minutes after that attack began.
Bash’s email, which bore the subject line “Libya,” was sent to Clinton’s then-deputy chief of staff Jacob Sullivan, Deputy Secretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman and Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Thomas Nides.
The attack came in three waves at two locations. It began when a handful of attackers scaled the wall of the diplomatic post at dusk and opened a gate, allowing dozens of armed men inside who then set the building on fire. Stevens and Smith died after breathing in smoke while hiding in a safe room, and later died.
Hours later, a nearby CIA annex was attacked twice. Woods and Doherty died there while defending the annex from the rooftop. A team of six security officials summoned from Tripoli and a Libyan military unit helped evacuate the remaining U.S. personnel who were taken to an airport and flown out of Benghazi.
The Obama administration later falsely claimed that the attack was triggered by an Internet video that insulted Islam.
Lawmakers investigating the events surrounding Benghazi already had acquired the e-mail, along with tens of thousands of others related to the probe, according to Matt Wolking, spokesman for the House Select Committee on Benghazi.
“The Select Committee has obtained and reviewed tens of thousands of documents in the course of its thorough, fact-centered investigation into the Benghazi terrorist attacks, and this information will be detailed in the final report the Committee hopes to release within the next few months," Wolking told FoxNews.com. "While the Committee does not rush to release or comment on every document it uncovers, I can confirm that we obtained the unredacted version of this email last year, in addition to Jake Sullivan’s response."

FOX Business Network to Host Additional GOP Presidential Primary Debate

FOX Business Network will host its second Republican presidential primary debate on Thursday, January 14 at the North Charleston Coliseum and Performing Arts Center in North Charleston, South Carolina. The debate, which has been sanctioned by the Republican National Committee, will be held two days after the State of the Union address.
FBN’s first debate in November drew 13.5 million viewers, smashing network ratings records. More information on the debate including moderators, entry criteria and the line-up will be released closer to the air date.
FOX Business Network is a financial news channel owned by 21st Century Fox (FOXA). Headquartered in New York, FBN launched in October 2007 and is available in more than 80 million homes in major markets across the United States and on FOXBusiness.com.

US conducting 'serious review' of latest Iran missile test

For those who never knew and those who have forgotten.

Fifty-two American diplomats and citizens were held hostage for 444 days (November 4, 1979, to January 20, 1981), after a group of Iranian students, belonging to the Muslim Student Followers of the Imam's Line, who were supporting the Iranian Revolution, took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.

The U.S. is conducting a “serious review” of Iran’s second ballistic missile test in as many months in apparent violation of two U.N. Security Council resolutions, according to the State Department and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.
Fox News first reported the Iranian missile launch Monday.
The November 21 launch, Iran’s second since a nuclear accord was signed by Iran and six world powers, comes more than a month after the well-publicized first test in October.
U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power said Tuesday that if the latest missile test is deemed to be in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions, the U.S. would raise it with the Security Council’s sanctions committee.
“I don't want to get ahead of the work the U.S. government is doing,” Power told reporters outside the United Nations Tuesday. “But as happened last time, if we can confirm it, and if there is a violation of any Security Council resolution, we will come here and we will seek appropriate action.”
On Nov. 21 Iran test-fired a medium-range Ghadr-110 ballistic missile from a known test site near the port city of Chabahar in southeast Iran near the border with Pakistan in violation of two existing U.N. resolutions, a senior US official and Western intelligence sources told Fox News.
The missile has a range of 1,200 miles, which puts Tel Aviv and most of Israel within its sights, along with most U.S. military bases in the Middle East.
“We are taking the report very seriously,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said Tuesday. “If the reports are confirmed and if there is a violation of any relevant U.N. Security Council resolution, then we're going to take the appropriate actions, as we've proven that we're capable of doing in the past.”
He said those next steps could be taken by the United States alone, if necessary.
Kirby acknowledged Iran has a long history of ignoring U.N. Security Council resolutions.
“For years, Iran has serially ignored U.N. Security Council resolutions.  It's a fact,” Kirby told reporters.
After Iran conducted its first ballistic missile test in October, the U.S. issued a joint report with France, Germany and the UK condemning the incident and referred the matter to the  U.N. Security Council Iran Sanctions Committee to take action, demanding an explanation for the October launch.
That request of Iran, according to Kirby, came three days after Tehran carried out the second missile launch on Nov. 21.
It is not immediately clear if the State Dept. knew about the second Iranian missile launch at the time.
Kirby said the U.N. was still “weighing out those responses,” from the October launch.
When Fox News asked if Iran was not getting the message, Kirby responded: “I think it's been crystal clear what the message from the international community is.”
After the Oct. 10 launch, President Obama promised to raise the issue with the sanctions committee, but said that it would not derail the July nuclear agreement.
"I think what we'll be doing is we'll review, as we have in the past, any violations of U.N. resolutions, and we'll deal with them much as we have in the past,” Obama told reporters at the White House on October 16^.
The U.N.- passed resolution 2231, days after the nuclear accord was signed in July. That resolution compels Iran to refrain from any work on ballistic missiles for eight years. A separate U.N. Security Council resolution passed on 2010 bans Iran from conducting all ballistic missile tests.
On Tuesday,  Power reiterated calls for a united effort to curb Iran’s violations.
“We think it is extremely important that council resolutions be enforced,” said Power.  “We really hope the Council will come together in response to such a blatant launch as the one that occurred in October.”
Asked if Iran’s ballistic missile testing was what Secretary Kerry had hoped after the nuclear accord was struck,  the State Department spokesman said, “We never expected Iran would automatically change its behavior as a result of this deal.”
The U.N. Security Council’s Iran sanctions committee meets next Tuesday.
“I want to also underscore that we have other tools beyond the Security Council, we have our own bilateral sanctions,” Power said. “I would note as it relates to the launch in October, many of the individuals involved in the launch and the entities are already under U.S. sanctions and that is something we have already sought to neuter their ability to carry out launches like this.”
Jennifer Griffin currently serves as a national security correspondent for FOX News Channel . She joined FNC in October 1999 as a Jerusalem-based correspondent.

Trump denies trip to Jordan, defends vow to bar Muslims

Bailey Comment: The majority is sick and tire of the minority trying to rule America.

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump Tuesday denied an Associated Press report he planned to visit Jordan only hours after the wire service said he planned to go there.
The AP reported that Trump’s visit to Jordan, an overwhelmingly Muslim country, would take place during his trip to Israel, which he previously disclosed during an interview last week. It said his campaign had told U.S. government officials he wanted to meet with King Abdullah.
Hours after the report, Trump took to Twitter, saying “Despite my great respect for King Abdullah II, I will not be visiting Jordan at this time. This is in response to the false @AP report.”


The report came one day after Trump's controversial proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the United States to protect the nation from Islamic terrorism.

In an interview with ABC News on Tuesday, Trump responded to concerns raised by critics his rhetoric may help ISIS attract new recruits.

"I'm the worst thing that ever happened to ISIS. The people in my party fully understand that -- they're running against me. For the most part, they have no poll numbers. I'm leading by a lot. They get it. They're trying to get publicity for themselves," Trump told ABC’s Barbara Walters. "You know when I came out against illegal immigration, everybody said the same thing. Two weeks later, everybody was on my side, including the members of my own party."

Trump compared his plan to that of former President D. Roosevelt, which placed limits on the rights of Japanese, German, and Italian nationals following the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941.

When asked by Walters whether he regretted the proposal, Trump said: "Not at all. We have to do the right thing. Somebody in this country has to say what's right."

The real estate mogul added that he had "tremendous relationships" with people in the Muslim community, and denied that he is a bigot and said that he was thinking about the future of the U.S.

"I'm a person who has common sense. I'm a smart person. I know how to run things. I know how to make America great again. This is about making America great," he told ABC News.

IRS and Church Cartoon

Why I stand with Liberty University's Jerry Falwell, Jr. on guns

I stand with Jerry Falwell, Jr.
And like the president of Liberty University, I am proud to call myself a gun-toting, Bible-clinging American patriot. 
President Falwell is facing criticism from Democrats and jihadist sympathizers after he urged students at the nation’s largest Christian university to carry concealed weapons on campus to counter any possible armed attack from jihadists.
Click here to get Todd’s American Dispatch - a must-read for Conservatives! 

Sometimes I wonder who hates Christians more — the mainstream media or the Islamic jihadists.

“Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here,” Falwell told thousands of cheering students during convocation. 
"I've always thought if more good people had concealed carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in," Falwell said.
He told the Associated Press on Saturday he was specifically referring to Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the couple who shot and killed 14 people during a holiday party in a Southern California office building Wednesday.
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe criticized Falwell’s remarks, saying in a statement to The Washington Post those comments were “rash and repugnant.”
“My administration is committed to making Virginia an open and welcoming Commonwealth, while also ensuring the safety of all of our citizens. Mr. Falwell’s rash and repugnant comments detract from both of those crucial goals,” McAuliffe said.
Hillary Clinton went so far as to accuse Falwell of giving “aid and comfort” to the Islamic State. 
“This is the kind of deplorable not only hateful response to a legitimate security issue,” Clinton told ABC News. “But it is giving aid and comfort to ISIS and other radical jihadists.”
Get a load of the crackpot theory offered up by one left-wing newspaper: 
“Some theologians believe that Jesus would call on Christians to put down their weapons in the face of violence.”
I only wish the Washington Post had named the lunatic theologians who believe that Christians should gladly offer themselves to the Islamic radicals as sacrificial lambs.
Does the mainstream media suggest that Christians should not protect their families from harm? Do they suggest that Christians should not serve in the military or law enforcement? 
In the warped world of American journalism -- is there any instance in which people of faith would be allowed to defend themselves against the sword of the radical Muslims? 
Sometimes I wonder who hates Christians more — the mainstream media or the Islamic jihadists. 
Christians are a good-hearted people. If you are down on your luck, there’s always a church willing to lend you a helping hand.
If you get hungry, we’ll fix you a plate of chicken. If you’re thirsty, we’ll pour you a glass of tea. If you need some clothes or some gas money to get you where you’re going we’ll take care of that, too.
We rebuild homes washed away by the floods. We look after the widows and orphans. We tend to the sick and afflicted. 
We are slow to anger. 
Over the past few years we have seen the Islamic radicals wage jihad across the fruited plain. We have seen the jihadists spill American blood on American soil. They have terrorized our people -- from Boston to Fort Hood to Chattanooga to San Bernardino.
We have watched as the jihadists beheaded our brothers and sisters in foreign lands. We have watched as churches have been destroyed, parishioners crucified. 
Slow to anger, indeed. But there is anger nonetheless. 
President Falwell’s admonition was made out of prudence, not anger. The enemy is now beyond the gate. They live among us.
And should the Islamic radicals wage jihad in your town -- I suspect most Americans would want to share a foxhole with someone like Jerry Falwell, Jr. — armed with a Bible in one hand and a gun in the other.

IRS proposes churches, other nonprofits get Social Security numbers from donors

An Obama administration proposal to have some nonprofit charities report the Social Security numbers of donors giving at least $250 in one year is raising concerns about security, government overreach and another episode of IRS targeting.
“There's a big caution here. There's a big yellow light that should be flashing for a couple of reasons,” Illinois Republican Rep. Peter Roskam tells Fox News.
“Number one, the IRS has not demonstrated its capacity to hold this type of information from confidentiality and a security point of view.”
The change would impact organizations that fall into the 501 (c)(3) category, which includes churches and other religious or charitable groups.
The Internal Revenue Service states the proposed change would be optional. But skeptics question whether it will eventually become the only option.
“It's the No. 1 regulation that people are commenting upon,” attorney Cleta Mitchell recently told Fox News.
Mitchell argues that the IRS cannot be trusted and that the change could have a devastating impact on charities’ ability to collect enough money to survive.
“It would have a dramatic effect on donors' decisions on whether or not to contribute,” she said. “You'd see a lot of $249.99 contributions to every charitable organization in America. It's preposterous.”
The IRS has responded to such arguments by recently releasing a statement that attempts to clarify “major misimpressions and inaccuracies.”
The agency said the change was proposed in September in part because some taxpayers who were being audited -- or “under exam” -- say they lost their donation records and that charities also having a record would help them verify deductions.
“This project was prompted because some … organizations and donors were interested in using this option,” the agency stated. “This proposal would impose no mandatory changes to existing rules.”
Mitchell represents the conservative-leaning group TRUE the VOTE, which says it has already been harassed by the IRS, the federal government’s tax collector.
The agency admitted in 2013 that it had from roughly April 2010 to April 2012 targeted Tea Party and other conservative-leaning groups applying for tax-exempt status.
Some of those groups included those under the 501(c)(3) status.
That tax-exempt status strictly forbids them from participating in political campaigns, though they can spend a fraction of their efforts on such activities as lobbying on legislative issues and holding forums and publishing voter-registration records.
The 2013 revelation led to the firing of an IRS commissioner and probes by the Justice Department, Congress and others. However, no criminal charges were brought.
The deadline is Dec. 16 to submit public comment to the IRS on the proposed change.
Roskam also argues that the request for a full Social Security number comes at a time when banks, utilities, cable TV companies and others are asking customers for only the last four numbers, amid widespread identity theft.
“When the whole rest of the world from a technological view is moving away from using Social Security numbers, the IRS is moving toward them,” he said. “I think we ought not go that route right now.”
Roskam and others are also concerned about the nonprofit groups’ ability to protect the private information they will collect from donors.
“Charities are not well equipped to deal with this,” he said. “We've had for-profit companies -- some of the biggest companies in the world -- that have spent millions and millions and millions of dollars trying to protect their confidential data. And it's been hacked and it's been breached.”

Iran tests another mid-range ballistic missile in breach of UN resolutions

Obama was told over and over this would happen. So whats new.

Iran has carried out a new medium range ballistic missile test in breach of two United Nations Security Council resolutions, a senior U.S. official told Fox News on Monday.
Western intelligence says the test was held Nov. 21 near Chabahar, a port city in southeast Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan Province near the border with Pakistan.  The launch took place from a known missile test site along the Gulf of Oman.
The missile, known as a Ghadr-110, has a range of 1,800 – 2000 km, or 1200 miles, and is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. The missile fired in November is an improved version of the Shahab 3, and is similar to the precision guided missile tested by Iran on Oct. 10, which elicited strong condemnation from members of the U.N. Security Council.
“The United States is deeply concerned about Iran's recent ballistic missile launch," Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., said in a statement after the last Iranian ballistic missile test in October.
President Obama mentioned the Iranian missile test during a press conference on Oct. 16 and said the United States was preparing to brief the U.N. sanctions committee. He added that it would not derail the nuclear deal.
"I think what we'll be doing is we'll review, as we have in the past, any violations of U.N. resolutions, and we'll deal with them much as we have in the past," Obama said of the October incident.
A senior administration official told Fox News on Monday the White House
was "aware" of reports of the missile test, but had "no further comment
at this time."
Iran appears to be in a race against the clock to improve the accuracy of its ballistic missile arsenal in the wake of the nuclear agreement signed in July.
One day after Tehran and six world powers signed that nuclear accord, the UN passed resolution 2231, which compels Iran to refrain from any work on ballistic missiles for 8 years. UN Security Council Resolution 1929 was passed in 2010 and bans Iran from conducting ballistic missile tests.

The Security Council is still debating how to respond to Iran's last test in October.

Trump calls for 'complete shutdown' on Muslims entering US

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump defended his decision Monday to call for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” touching off an outraged response from his rivals for the nomination and Muslim groups.
“We have no idea who is coming into our country, no idea if they like us or hate us,” Trump told supporters in South Carolina. “I wrote something today that is very salient…and probably not very politically correct. But I don’t care.”
Trump added that his proposal is “common sense” and “we have no choice”.  He warned the crowd that “we can be politically correct and stupid but it’s going to get worse and worse.”
The proposed ban would stand "until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on," his campaign said in a statement earlier Monday.
The statement added that Trump's proposal comes in response to the level of hatred among "large segments of the Muslim population" toward Americans.
It also comes five days after a radical Muslim couple killed 14 people and injured 21 at a Christmas party in San Bernardino, Calif.
“Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” Trump said in a statement.
A recent Fox News poll found that both a majority of Democrats and Republicans believe at least one Syrian refugee coming into the U.S. will likely carry out an attack.
Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told the Associated Press that Trump's proposed ban would apply to "everybody," including Muslims seeking immigration visas as well as tourists seeking to enter the country.
Trump did not respond to questions about whether any ban would also include Muslims who are U.S. citizens and travel outside the country - or how a determination of someone's religion might be made by customs and border officials.
In response to a request for additional detail, Trump said via a campaign spokeswoman: "Because I am so politically correct, I would never be the one to say. You figure it out!"
Meanwhile, his rivals for the Republican nomination wasted no time weighing in.
"Donald Trump is unhinged," Jeb Bush said via Twitter. "His `policy' proposals are not serious."
Carly Fiorina said, "Trump's overreaction is as dangerous as President Obama's under-reaction."
John Kasich slammed Trump's "outrageous divisiveness," while a more measured Ted Cruz, who has always been cautious about upsetting Trump's supporters, said, "Well, that is not my policy."
Southern Baptists denounced Trump's comment.
“Anyone who cares an iota about religious liberty should denounce this reckless, demagogic rhetoric," said Ethics and Religious Liberty Commision President Russell Moore. "Make no mistake. A government that can shut down mosques simply because they are mosques can shut down Bible studies because they are Bible studies."
Muslim-American groups also expressed their outrage.
“Mr. Trump's anti-Muslim immigration proposal is disappointing, unconstitutional, and empowers extremist ideology. It has no place in civilized American discourse,” Qasim Rashid, national spokesperson for Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA told FoxNews.com.
"This type of knee jerk, if not demagogic policy stance, is unmitigated surrender to the Islamist global narrative that they, ISIS, and all the Islamist theocrats of the world own what is and is not Islam and faithful Muslim," said Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.
Trump's plan also drew criticism from the heads of the Republican Party in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, the first three states to vote in next year's presidential primaries.
New Hampshire GOP's chairwoman Jennifer Horn said the idea is "un-Republican. It is unconstitutional. And it is un-American," while South Carolina chairman Matt Moore said on Twitter, "As a conservative who truly cares about religious liberty, Donald Trump's bad idea and rhetoric send a shiver down my spine."
There are more than 5,800 servicemen and women on active U.S. military duty and in the reserves who self-identify as Muslim and could be assigned to serve overseas. Trump said in an interview Monday night on Fox News, "They'll come home." He added, "This does not apply to people living in the country, except that we have to vigilant."
It was also unclear whether Trump's ban would apply to Muslim allies in the fight against Islamic State militants. Ari Fleischer, a former aide to Republican President George W. Bush, tweeted, "Under Trump, the King Abdullah of Jordan, who is fighting ISIS, won't be allowed in the US to talk about how to fight ISIS."
But at Trump's rally in South Carolina, the proposed ban struck supporter Shelley Choquette as reasonable, because "it's not going to be forever. I think everybody needs to be checked."
Religion can factor into immigration decisions, but that typically happens when people are fleeing religious persecution. People of a particular religion may get favorable treatment by the United States, as when Russian Jews sought to leave the Soviet Union.
In the late 1800s, Congress passed legislation broadly aimed at halting Chinese immigration. But said Leti Volpp, a University of California expert on immigration law, "there is no precedent for a religious litmus test for admitting immigrants into the United States."
"Excluding almost a quarter of the world's population from setting foot in the United States based solely upon their religious identity would never pass constitutional muster," Volpp said.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest accused Trump of playing on people's fears and trying to tap into "a darker side, a darker element" of American society.
From the Democratic presidential campaign, Bernie Sanders said "Trump and others want us to hate all Muslims" and Hillary Clinton called the proposal "reprehensible, prejudiced and divisive."
On Capitol Hill, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona said, "It's just foolish."
But will it hurt Trump in the campaign? "I have no idea," McCain said. "I thought long ago that things he said would hurt his prospects, and he continues to go up."

Obama isis Cartoon

Exclusive: New Jeb Bush Super PAC ad uses Paris, San Bernardino images

Right to Rise USA, the pro-Jeb Bush super PAC will be airing a new TV ad in early voting states and the battleground state of Ohio that uses images from the Paris & San Bernardino attacks to depict President Obama as a weak president on terrorism and the former two-term Florida governor as a “tested and proven leader who won’t try to contain ISIS.” 
It is the first campaign ad to utilize the images of both Paris and San Bernardino.
“A horrific terror attack in Paris then a brutal act of terror here at home.” The 30 second ad starts off as it flashes images from both locations.
“It is time for tested and proven leader who won’t try to contain ISIS,” the announcer continues as Obama flashes on the screen.
Bush has been increasing his focus on national security and anti-terrorism positions and has been severely critical of the president’s position on threats from ISIS and other terrorist organizations.
"The threat of global terrorism is the threat for our country. And every day that the caliphate exists is another day that they win and they can recruit terrorists, “ Bush said to Special Report anchor Bret Baier on Thursday night.

Exclusive: Miami billionaire spearheads anti-Trump newspaper ads

A leaked memo by the National Republican Senatorial Committee argued earlier this week that GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump should be emulated instead of condemned, but one billionaire donor isn’t taking that route.

Mike Fernandez, a Miami health care magnate

Mike Fernandez, a Miami health care magnate and Jeb Bush donor, ran a full-page ad in McClatchy’s Miami Herald Sunday and will run the same ad on Dec. 14 in Des Moines and Las Vegas slamming Trump and calling on voters to “'see the "hater' for what he is-- insecure, narcissistic BULLYionaire with a hunger to be adored.”
Fox News exclusively obtained the ad late Saturday in which Fernandez likens Trump to “despotic leaders" like Mussolini, Hitler and Peron.
"Mr. Trump portrays himself as someone who can do no wrong, unblemished by almost any human faults--indeed, the paragon of smarted and greatest. But his worst and actions tells who is who he really is-- a destroyer,” Fernandez adds.
Fernandez, a noted Bush donor, didn’t mention him in the ad or any other candidate from either side of the aisle. Fernandez told the Miami Herald Friday he didn’t run his plan by the Bush campaign, but heard an earful when they learned of his plan.
Fernandez is the founder of MBF Healthcare Partners. He immigrated from Cuba in 1964 when he was 12. He donated $3 million to the former Florida governor earlier this year.
"In my home, my county, I cannot stand by and accept demagoguery that would separate us-rich vs. poor, minority vs. Majority, red vs. Blue. Our nation stands today more divided than ever,” Fernandez says.
"Surely, we are better people than to agree with this man's sound bites and raucous rallies and think the worst in U.S. is right for this country."

Clinton says term 'radical Islam' an injustice to vast majority of Muslims

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton declined Sunday to say that a “radical” form of Islam is behind terror attacks connected to the Islamic State and other such attacks committed by fringe members of the Muslim religion.
“I don't want to do that because, No. 1, it doesn't do justice to the vast numbers of Muslims in our own country and around the world who are peaceful people,” she told ABC’s “This Week.”
Clinton spoke four days after Muslim husband-wife couple Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik shot and killed 14 people and wounded dozens of others at an office complex in San Bernardino, Calif.
Her comments are among the latest in an intense debate on whether to call Muslims who commit terror strikes such as the recent ones in California and Paris and the one on Sept. 11, 2001, “radical Islamists” or “Islamic extremists.”
President Obama, set to make an Oval Office address to the America public Sunday night about domestic terror, has also been criticized for not using either term. He has instead used the term “violent extremists,” using an argument similar to Clinton’s.
On the 2016 presidential campaign trail, leading GOP candidate Donald Trump recently called out Obama on the issue.
“Radical Islamic terrorism,” Trump said at an event Friday. “We have a president that refuses to use the term. …There's something going on with him that we don't know about."
On Sunday, Clinton also defended saying publicly, as secretary of state, that the Benghazi terror attacks were inspired by an anti-Islamic video, blaming “the fog of war.”
Recently released emails from Clinton reveal intelligence suggested the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on a U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, were terror related.
Other emails indicate Clinton knew the attacks were terror related, then told the American public otherwise.
Four Americans were killed in the attacks.
Clinton acknowledged Sunday that the San Bernardino massacre was a “terrorist attack” and predicted that Obama will announce an "intensification" of existing strategy to fight ISIS, a move she supports.
“Nobody is arguing with that,” she said.
Still, Clinton said the recent massacre, in which the couple appeared to have used legally purchased assault-style rifles, underscores the need for tighter gun control.
“We have to take account … our gun laws and the easy access to those guns by people who shouldn't get them," she said.
She cited the mentally ill, fugitives, felons and Congress “continuing to refuse to prohibit people on the ‘no-fly’ list from getting guns, which include a lot of domestic and international terrorists.”
As Clinton has in the past, she also called for comprehensive background checks for potential gun buyers.
“We need to close the gun show loophole, close the online loophole … and end the liability for gun sellers,” she said.

Intelligence report commissioned by White House says ISIS not contained

A new intelligence report commissioned by the White House says that the ISIS terror group will grow in numbers and territory unless it suffers significant losses in Iraq and Syria.
The findings sharply contradict previous statements by President Obama and other White House officials that ISIS has been "contained" by a program of U.S.-led airstrikes and the deployment of approximately 3,500 U.S. forces to train and otherwise aid moderate Syrian rebels and Kurdish fighters.
On Sunday, a U.S. official told Fox News that ISIS has been able to effectively recruit and attract affiliates despite losses on the ground, and has now supplanted Al Qaeda as the primary global jihadist threat.The official said that going forward, the entirety of the ISIS threat must be addressed, and the group's main base of operations in Syria must be “degraded.”
The findings were first reported by The Daily Beast, which said the White House asked for the assessment prior to the Nov. 13 attacks in Paris, in which ISIS militants killed 130 people in a series of coordinated shootings and suicide bombings.
In response to the report, The Daily Beast said President Obama had directed Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford to come up with new strategies against ISIS.
One recommendation, announced by Carter Tuesday, is a special operations cell with the ability to capture senior ISIS leaders in the hope of finding out more about their networks.
However, the Daily Beast reported that Carter's announcement took military planners by surprise, since they had yet to finalize important details, including the rules of engagement under which such raids would be carried out.
The eight-page report was compiled by a team of analysts from the CIA, NSA, and other agencies, the website reported.
"This intel report didn't tell us anything we didn't already know," an official told The Daily Beast. "It was lots of great charts showing countries highlighted across the globe, with some groups having pledged allegiance to ISIS and others leaning towards it."
The report also described how the terrorist group with aspirations of founding an extremist Islamic caliphate already has a network of groups that have pledged allegiance or are vying for membership in a dozen countries.

K-1 Visa Cartoon

Before the Fact: FOX News Poll: Majorities say call it 'radical Islam,' oppose Syrian refugees

Most American voters believe Islamic terrorists will strike the U.S. soon.  A Fox News national poll released Sunday also finds Democrats and Republicans united against President Obama’s plan to accept Syrian refugees -- as most voters think at least one will be a terrorist who will launch a successful attack here. 
Here are five findings on the war against terrorism.  Voters feel:
-- The U.S. is at war with radical Islam, and Democrats who refuse to call the enemy by that name are doing the wrong thing.
-- Obama has not fought the war against ISIS aggressively enough, and that war is going badly.
-- Terrorism is now the top problem facing the country, and an attack is likely soon.
-- Bringing Syrian refugees into the U.S. is a bad idea, and a religious test would be shameful.
-- Closing Gitmo is wrong, and Obama should not side step Congress to do so.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE POLL RESULTS
Here are the details behind those findings:
Today 66 percent consider the country “at war” with radical Islam, up from 56 percent in January.
The poll asks about Democratic presidential candidates rejecting terms like radical Islam and Islamic terrorists to describe those who committed the Paris attacks. Fifty-six percent think they are doing the wrong thing by refusing to identify clearly the nature of the threat. Thirty-three percent feel Democrats are doing the right thing by being careful not to blame Muslim ideology.
More than 6 in 10 say the U.S. fight against ISIS is going badly (63 percent).  At the same time, voters continue to oppose sending a “significant” number of U.S. ground troops to fight the extremists (42 percent favor vs. 51 percent oppose).  However, opposition is decreasing; it was 37 percent in favor vs. 57 percent opposed in June.
While 26 percent think the actions of the Obama administration have been “about right” in trying to stop ISIS, most -- 65 percent -- say Obama hasn’t been aggressive enough. That includes 39 percent of Democrats, 61 percent of independents and 91 percent of Republicans.
The current situation has pushed the president’s job rating to a low point for the year. Forty percent of voters approve of the job Obama is doing, while 54 percent disapprove. It was 45-50 percent earlier this month. Some of the decline comes from Democrats: 78 percent approve now, down from 84 percent (Nov. 1-3, 2015).  Overall, Obama’s worst rating was 38 approve vs. 56 disapprove in September 2014.
In the wake of the Paris attacks, terrorism now tops the economy as the most important issue facing the country.  Twenty-four percent of voters say terrorism, up from 11 percent in August.  Currently 21 percent say the economy is the top issue, down from 30 percent this summer.  There’s a substantial gap before foreign policy (7 percent), health care (7 percent), immigration (7 percent) and the deficit (5 percent) are mentioned.  Only three percent say climate change is the priority.
Fifty-six percent think it is “very” likely Islamic terrorists will try to attack the United States soon, up from 50 percent who felt that way in January.
Two-thirds of voters -- and nearly half of Democrats -- oppose the administration’s plan for the U.S. to take in 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year, and 77 percent think it’s likely at least one of those coming in through this process will be a terrorist who will “succeed in carrying out an attack on U.S. soil.”
Obama says it’s shameful to have a religious test for bringing Syrian refugees into the country -- and 64 percent agree with him. Fewer than one in four says it makes sense to only allow Syrian refugees who are Christian to come to the U.S. (23 percent).

Views by Party
Forty-nine percent of Democrats join majorities of independents (67 percent) and Republicans (86 percent) in opposing Obama’s plan to bring Syrian refugees into the U.S.
By an overwhelming 91-8 percent margin, Republicans think it’s likely a terrorist will sneak in as a refugee and carry out an attack.  Democrats agree that’s a likely scenario -- just by a smaller 62-35 percent margin.
Republicans (37 percent) are nearly four times as likely as Democrats (10 percent) to think a religious test for Syrian refugees makes sense.  Even so, a plurality of Republicans (49 percent) agrees with the large majority of Democrats (81 percent) who feel it’s a shameful idea.

Guantanamo Bay
Two days after the Paris attacks, the White House announced the transfer of five Guantanamo Bay detainees to the government of the United Arab Emirates.  That’s part of the Obama administration’s ongoing plan to close the facility -- a plan that by a two-to-one margin voters think is the wrong course of action (59-31 percent).
Even more voters, 73 percent, oppose Obama bypassing Congress to close the detention center by executive action. That’s widely seen as the only way he could close Gitmo given lawmakers’ opposition.
While a plurality of Democrats thinks closing Gitmo is the right thing to do (48 percent), a slim majority opposes Obama going around Congress to do it (53 percent).
Most say they would not be willing to have Gitmo detainees moved to a prison in their state (68 percent), however, nearly 3 in 10 say they would be (28 percent).
The Fox News poll is based on live telephone interviews (landline and cellphone) with 1,016 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from Nov. 16-19, 2015. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.