Thursday, July 19, 2018

Sec. of State Mike Pompeo Joins Tony Perkins on the Radio to Preview the First-Ever 'Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom'

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 19, 2018 -- Today, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo appeared on Washington Watch with Tony Perkins, a national radio show which airs on more than 240 stations across the country. On the show, Secretary Pompeo shared about the State Department hosting the first-ever "Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom" next week. The event will be held July 24 -- 26, bringing together government officials, representatives of international organizations, religious leaders, rights advocates, and members of civil society organizations from around the world.

Secretary Pompeo commented, "There are many countries in which religious freedom is not available. And we believe that by gathering citizens from around the world -- we'll have over 80 delegations from different countries, 40 plus of my counterparts at the foreign minister level will be in attendance, and religious leaders like yourself -- all brought together to highlight the central nature of religious freedom and its importance to individuals and countries." Pompeo continued, "We expect for this to be far more than just talk... We'll be laying out a path where we're hopeful that the State Department here in the United States can lead a process where religious freedom is raised as a priority for the citizens of eveaders, rights advocates, and members of civil society organizations from around the world.

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, and host of Washington Watch, added, "This is the first ever [Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom], and I don't want this to be lost on our listeners. This issue of religious freedom, both domestically and from a foreign policy standpoint, is a priority for this administration. This is much more than lip service. This administration takes this seriously."

To listen to the full interview, click this link:

The Left's New Leader, About That Meddling, Prayers For Pastor Brunson

Thursday, July 19, 2018
By Gary Bauer

The Left's New Leader

Pop quiz:  Name the leader of the political left today.

If you said Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, you'd be wrong.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer or House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi? Nope.

No, the leader in the sense of setting the "tone" of the political left is a 28 year-old socialist from the Bronx, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

As we have noted, she burst onto the political scene just a few weeks ago after defeating a member of Nancy Pelosi's leadership team by running on a platform of free health care, free college, opposition to Israel, calls for widespread civil disobedience, and demands that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) be abolished.

Just to be clear, abolishing ICE means letting violent criminals roam our streets.  According to the Pew Research Center, "Immigrants with past criminal convictions accounted for 74% of all arrests made by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in fiscal 2017."

We're talking about more than 100,000 illegal immigrants with DUIs, drug charges, sexual assaults and even homicides.

After her victory, many prominent progressive politicians jumped on the "abolish ICE" bandwagon.  And Ocasio-Cortez's influence was on full display yesterday in the House of Representatives.

House conservatives called for a vote on a resolution expressing support for "the officers and personnel who carry out" ICE's important mission.  All Republicans but one (Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan) voted to express their support for the brave men and women of ICE who put their lives on the line to protect us.

Incredibly, only 18 Democrats voted for the resolution.

Following the lead of socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 34 progressives voted against it, while 133 voted "present."

The American people are not on board with the left's lawless, radical agenda.  A recent Politico poll found that only 25% of voters support abolishing ICE.

By the way, a new Gallup poll finds that immigration is the top concern among voters.  Gee, I wonder why?!

About That Meddling. . .

I was on Capitol Hill this week, and I had a fascinating conversation with Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas.

As you may know, he aggressively confronted renegade FBI operative Peter Strzok, who was once chief of the FBI's Counterespionage Section.  There were several significant revelations from that hearing, which the media largely ignored.

Rep. Gohmert filled me in on some of the details of his exchange with Strzok, and this is something that really can't be ignored.

Strzok told the committee that he was concerned about foreign influence in the 2016 election.  Rep. Gohmert asked how serious his concern really was because key officials in the intelligence community had briefed Strzok about an "anomaly" they found on Hillary Clinton's email server, and he did nothing.

They discovered during a forensic analysis that essentially everything Hillary sent on her server had been redirected to a hostile foreign power that was not Russia.  Strzok told Gohmert that he could not recall this briefing.

Really?  He could not recall being told that 30,000 emails from the secretary of state had been contemporaneously redirected to an enemy?

It seems that the Obama Administration was compromised by a foreign enemy because of the stupidity of the secretary of state and the malfeasance of the FBI's counterespionage division, which was distracted by its efforts to take down the Republican presidential nominee.

In what world is this not a HUGE story?

If we had a truly non-partisan, unbiased free press, this would be banner headlines.  But the entire media complex is instead talking about the Trump/Putin press conference.

Wray Said What?

There has been a lot of talk about Russia lately.  Democrats are accusing President Trump of treason.

Even some Republicans, like Bob Corker, Jeff Flake and John McCain, are accusing the president of being weak when it comes to confronting Vladimir Putin.  But what really gets them mad is when he imposes tariffs against China.

Well, guess what FBI Director Christopher Wray said yesterday?  He told NBC News that China's spying and meddling was "the broadest, most challenging, most significant threat we face as a country."  Wow!

Where are all the China hawks now?
Prayers For Pastor Brunson

As one of President Trump's appointees to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the plight of Pastor Andrew Brunson is a top priority for me, for the Commission and for the Trump/Pence Administration.

Pastor Brunson has been unjustly imprisoned since 2016 by the Islamist government of Turkey.  Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is holding Brunson as a hostage.  He is demanding we hand over Fethullah Gulen, an opponent of the Edogan regime who lives in Pennsylvania.

One of my fellow commissioners, Kristina Arriaga, traveled to Turkey this week to be in the courtroom for Pastor Brunson's latest hearing.  Sadly, it was a kangaroo court that once again denied his release and ordered him to be detained for another three months.

Reacting to this outrage, President Trump tweeted:
"A total disgrace that Turkey will not release a respected U.S. Pastor, Andrew Brunson, from prison.  He has been held hostage far too long.  Erdogan should do something to free this wonderful Christian husband & father.  He has done nothing wrong, and his family needs him!"

To all our pastors and prayer partners, please urge your churches to pray for Pastor Brunson's safety, and for his family.



Meet Denver Riggleman at the Fair this Friday

Join Denver 
at the 
Madison County Fair
around 5-ish 

Because You Love God, Please Do This for Him

Because you love God, please defend His holy plan for marriage at Rivier University 


Corey Stewart for U.S. Senate!

Saturday, July 14, 2018

AFP Foundation Speaker this Tuesday in Charlottesville

You’re welcome to attend a great lecture on the institutions of our society coming up this Tuesday.  We’ll discuss how government, education, business, and community influence our Constitutional freedom.  We are excited to have our Senior Education Director from AFP Foundation headquarters delivering the presentation.

NEW!  Grassroots Leadership Academy Presentation
Lecture topic: Framework for American Freedom - Institutions of Freedom
Tuesday, July 17th 6:30-8:30pm
AFP Charlottesville Office @ 375 Greenbrier Drive

Enjoy a complimentary dinner provided by AFP Foundation. 

Please register soon!  Contact Flint Engleman @ (540)226-4591 

Our Annual Regional Event!
Third Annual AFP Barbecue for Freedom
Tuesday, July 31st 6:30pm
AFP Charlottesville Office @ 375 Greenbrier Drive

Our fun annual Skyline Region event!  Enjoy a featured speaker, patriotic theme & music, and complimentary barbecue dinner from Mission BBQ compliments of AFP.
Please let us know you are coming!  Contact Flint Engleman @ (540)226-4591

T-Shirt of the Day

Get it now

Best News of the Day for Liberals

President Trump's Tweet of the Day

Image may contain: 2 people, text

Facebook Pics of the Day

Image may contain: 1 person, meme and text 


Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text

Tweet of the Day

Image may contain: 1 person, text

Save the Date: Saturday, August 4th

No automatic alt text available.

Quote of the Day

"You know, CNN and MSNBC’s ratings are below the the Food Network and HGTV last week? MSNBC and CNN’s ratings are below the Food Network and HGTV. You know what HGTV is? You don’t know what HGTV is? What? One at a time. Right. Home and Garden TV. It’s a home improvement network, where you can also buy little trinkets and stuff. And MSNBC and CNN ended up trailing that!"

Rush Limbaugh

Smirks, Smugness & Strzok

July 13, 2018

By Gary Bauer

Yesterday's congressional hearing featuring FBI agent Peter Strzok was one of the most bizarre episodes I have witnessed in Washington in a long time.  The display of arrogance by Peter Strzok was just breathtaking.

Keep in mind, my friends, that this is a discredited man.  This is not the kind of person we want in the upper echelons of the FBI.  He belittled and mocked half of the American people.  He was kicked off the Mueller investigation for his bias and demoted.  He was escorted out of the FBI's headquarters "amid an ongoing disciplinary process."

In his opening statement, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte said it best when he implored fellow members of Congress to consider the implications of Strzok's bias on our system of justice.  He said:

"For those who think we are wasting time in this committee, suppose all of this had been said about candidate Obama before he was elected or even more topical, about Hillary Clinton. . .  Would we be where we are today?  The only honest answer is an absolute affirmative, yes.

"Of course we would be here, because every single Democrat would be protesting bias and discrimination . . . by an out of control FBI and DOJ.

"So please stop saying this doesn't matter. . .  Instead, the American people hope you will understand that this investigation goes to the very heart of our system of justice, one that is supposed to be fair and treat everyone equally under the law."

Sadly, liberal politicians defended Strzok tooth-and-nail.  They praised him.  One progressive even said Strzok deserved a medal . . . the Purple Heart.

While insulting to our real heroes in uniform, there is some logic to that twisted suggestion.  Clearly many on the left see this biased deep state agent as a foot solider fighting for the progressive cause, doing his best to take down Donald Trump.

And that is exactly what Chairman Goodlatte is worried about.

Dems Have a Meltdown over ICE

Tony Perkins' Washington Update

July 13, 2018

Sometimes, the stories out of D.C. just write themselves. After making the entire summer about ending immigration enforcement, Democrats finally have the chance to vote on it. There's just one problem: they don't want to. When Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) agreed to put their bill closing the office of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on the floor, liberals panicked. About that whole "abolishing ICE" thing, their messaging seemed to say, just kidding.

The headlines only made a bad PR situation worse. "Dems Say They'll Vote No on Their 'Abolish ICE' legislation," the Hill reported. For the GOP, it's a perfect opportunity to expose the other side's insincerity on the border crisis. When push comes to shove, even they don't believe in the immigration "solutions" they're offering. "Democrats have been trying to make July... about abolishing ICE, which is a radical, extreme position that would lead to open borders and undermine America's national security," House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) said. That may explain why, when the time has come to defend their legislation, they can't.

Speaker Ryan, who still plans on calling the Left's bluff with a vote on ICE, could only shake his head. "It's the craziest position I've ever seen," he said. "They're just tripping over themselves to move too far to the Left. They are out of the mainstream of America..." And, maybe more importantly, out of the mainstream of their own party. According to Politico, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is "fuming over the liberal move to eliminate the agency," arguing that it distracts from the real solutions Americans are looking for.

Despite all of the backlash, the bill's sponsors -- Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) -- are still trying to convince people that their bill wasn't a political stunt (a tall task since they all "plan to vote no"). In one of the more hilarious soundbites of the day, the trio said, "We look forward to the day that we have meaningful action on the issues covered by our bill." What do they think a vote on their legislation is? It doesn't get more "meaningful" than that.

But for a party desperate to win back congressional control, fanning the flames of its radical wing are one thing – winning elections with fruitcake policies is another. Based on the latest polling, these Democrats are risking plenty with a rallying cry at odds with the majority of voters. It's pretty obvious why the party doesn't want a vote on their bill. While it's been a great stunt that's kept their agitators employed, according to Politico, only 25 percent of Americans side with the call to end ICE. Inside the party, their idea is just as unpopular. "I think you're assuming the Democratic Caucus isn't together on this," Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) argued with reporters. They'd be assuming right. Sixty percent of Democrats (and three-in-four swing voters) agree that we should keep ICE. Even Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Democrats' ranking member of the U.S. Senate, isn't on board. "No American likes the separation of children... but ICE does do some things that are very important."

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) spelled out some of them. "Think about what ICE is able to do. Just in the last year, more than 900 children were saved from human trafficking. Think of the thousands of pounds of drugs [that's been stopped]..." And ICE's importance isn't limited to immigration. It's also the main law enforcement agency focusing on terrorism, as Heritage's David Inserra points out. Do we really want America overrun with drugs, rapists, traffickers, and gangs like the MS-13 factions that are ripping apart public high schools?

To understand where a world without ICE would lead, read this column from the Washington Post about an area school where kids are so terrified to go to school that they bring their parents in with them. A world where teenagers come home with warning bullets in their hoodies. Or where a trip to the bathroom could mean a trip to the hospital because you've been beaten almost to death. Or where the path home takes you past trees blackened by fire or gashed from knife practice. Where girls are raped by gangs, but afraid they'll be killed if they report it. In other words, a ticking time-bomb.

The other side is playing politics while a very real crisis explodes. We don't need grandstanding, we need solutions. And how serious is the other side about finding them? Based on this bill, not very.

Tony Perkins' Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

Dems Have a Meltdown over ICE

Friday, July 13, 2018

By Craig Rucker

Is there a more self-contradictory term than "settled science?" 

Science should always be open to challenge and investigation. The scientific method demands that conclusions must follow facts.  We must never adjust the facts to suit a conclusion. 
Sadly, this is not always the case.

We posted an article at which highlights how "Stanford University medical professor John Ioannidis, in an interview with Agence France Presse (AFP), blew the lid off the trustworthiness of the peer-review process." 
[W]hen studies are replicated, they rarely come up with the same results. Only a third of the 100 studies published in three top psychology journals could be successfully replicated in a large 2015 test,” AFP reported, summarizing Ioannidis’ findings...
According to Ioannidis, the peer-review process guarantees little in terms of trustworthiness even before political agendas compromise the issue.
When only a third of peer-reviewed studies reach the same results when they are replicated by outside authors, this is a serious problem. Regarding climate change papers, the peer-reviewed papers are likely even less reliable – before even considering the inescapably political nature of the topic – because many papers address predictions and models for which it is impossible to test the paper’s conclusions against objective evidence. For example, when a scientist invents a climate model predicting rapid global warming or seriously negative future climate impacts, and when a paper summarizing the results of his or her model appears in a peer-reviewed journal, there is no way at the time of publication to compare the climate predictions against real-world observations. This adds an additional level of doubt to the accuracy of global warming predictions published in peer-reviewed science journals. And this is before taking into consideration the inherently political nature of the global warming debate and the political agendas of journal editors and their carefully selected article reviewers. 

When science is sound its results hold up.  Repeated experiments reach the same conclusions.  There must be no “politicized” or "secret science."  Data must be made available for all to scrutinize and there should be no coercion in terms of outcome.  The scientific method must never be compromised. 
Politics and rent-seeking greed have sadly infected the scientific process, particularly on the issue of climate.  Global warming campaigners have treated peer-reviewed academic literature like sacred texts.  However, the Climategate scandal revealed warming researchers were working diligently to exclude any science that contradicted their carefully honed, alarmist narrative from the literature.   

We should expect more from the scientific community.

Science is too important to accept less.