Donald Trump: Rupert Murdoch Directing Fox News To Destroy Me, Help Marco Rubio

Before going after Pope Francis today, Donald Trump set his sights on Rupert Murdoch, alleging that the media mogul is using Fox News and the Wall Street Journal to derail his presidential campaign.

While speaking earlier today with Breitbart News Daily, Trump criticized a Wall Street Journal poll showing him slightly trailing Ted Cruz among Republican voters nationwide as “a fix” and “a phony poll.”

“It was a Rupert Murdoch hit,” he said, expressing disbelief that the Texas senator would poll ahead of him since “Cruz couldn’t get elected dog catcher.”

Trump said that News Corp-run outlets like Fox News and the Wall Street Journal are biased against him because “they’re in love with [Marco] Rubio,” unlike CNN and the MSNBC program “Morning Joe.”

“The worst treatment I get is from Fox,” Trump said, particularly from the “moron” Karl Rove. “Roger Ailes won’t lift his finger to help me,” he added, referring to the Fox News CEO.

Update: Murdoch has responded:

Ben Carson Furious The Media Pointed Out His Fake Stalin Quote, Egyptian Pyramid Grain Theory

In an interview on Monday with conservative talk show host Sam Malone, Ben Carson lashed out at the media for pointing out that he used a fake Joseph Stalin quote at the most recent presidential debate and that he believes that the ancient Egyptians built pyramids to store grain.

Carson kicked off his rant about the media by urging Senate Republicans to follow his example in withstanding media pressure to consider President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, claiming that the founders never intended for a president to nominate “ideologues” to the court. He joked that he can provide a model for Senate Republicans because the media has been trying to “kill” him.

“I’ve been withstanding continued attacks from the mainstream media since I threw my hat in the ring,” he said. “Even before that, they’ve been trying to kill me and I’m still here.”

“They have been trying to kill you,” Malone agreed. “It’s like they don’t want you to exist.”

“That’s right,” Carson said. “They never talk about any of the good things that I talk about. From the debate, all they can talk about, they say, ‘He got this false Stalin quote.’ The fact of the matter is, the quote is very close to the thing that he said, and if you go and find the actual quote, which is findable, you’ll see that I am completely dead on target for what he was talking about. But you know they try to ridicule and say, ‘He doesn’t know what he’s talking about,’ because they obviously are terrified of me.”

Carson’s campaign has not said which Stalin quote the candidate was referring to; the fabricated quote he cited in the debate first appeared in a 1983 letter to the editor in a Kansas newspaper decades after the Soviet dictator’s death and has since become a popular conservative meme on social media.

The GOP presidential candidate then said that the “mainstream media” would try to control social media “if they could” because “they’re so used to being able to dictate who our candidates are, dictate what our lifestyle should be, and when someone comes along who is not going to play ball with them, they become very concerned. God willing, we are never going to play ball with them and we’re going to get the country back.”

Carson went on to discuss his chances in the upcoming Texas primary, lamenting that “Texas is being infiltrated by a lot of people from California,” before he returned to attacking the media for mentioning his claim that the pyramids of Egypt were built as grain storage facilities.

He claimed that the controversy over his pyramid statement amounted to a media “smear,” complaining that he was simply talking about “things in the Bible” and “they tried to make it seem like that’s a major tenet of who I am, grain in pyramids, just silliness, those are smear tactics.”

As further proof of such media hostility, Carson claimed that he is “the only person in history to have four separate segments on Saturday Night Live.”

Donald Trump: Pope Francis Is 'Disgraceful' And 'A Pawn' Of Mexico

Donald Trump is going to war with Pope Francis, who recently held a prayer service at the U.S.-Mexico border and criticized the proposal to build a massive wall alongside it as unchristian.

In return, Trump released a statement blasting Francis:

If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened. ISIS would have been eradicated unlike what is happening now with our all talk, no action politicians.

The Mexican government and its leadership has made many disparaging remarks about me to the Pope, because they want to continue to rip off the United States, both on trade and at the border, and they understand I am totally wise to them. The Pope only heard one side of the story - he didn’t see the crime, the drug trafficking and the negative economic impact the current policies have on the United States. He doesn’t see how Mexican leadership is outsmarting President Obama and our leadership in every aspect of negotiation.

For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful. I am proud to be a Christian and as President I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened, unlike what is happening now, with our current President. No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith. [Mexican leaders] are using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant.

Trump’s statement seems to conflict with his own past of questioning the religious faith of rivals Ted Cruz and Ben Carson. He has also suggested in the past that President Obama isn’t a Christian but a Muslim:

"He doesn't have a birth certificate. He may have one, but there's something on that, maybe religion, maybe it says he is a Muslim," Trump told Fox News in 2011. "I don't know. Maybe he doesn't want that."

In an interview earlier today on Breitbart News Daily, Trump said, “I love the pope,” but added that he thinks the pontiff is being played by Mexican officials who don’t want him to see how they are sending criminals into the U.S.

Ted Nugent: Young People Back Bernie Sanders' 'Potentially Deadly' Policies Because They've Been Brainwashed

In his weekly column for WorldNetDaily yesterday, NRA board member and far-right activist Ted Nugent explained why Bernie Sanders has won a huge following among young people: public school brainwashing.

“After being indoctrinated by our public schools that capitalism is corrupt, that America is a racist country and that more government will make things fair, it is no surprise Millennials have gravitated to Sanders’ socialism like stinky hippies to a free concert,” he said, criticizing the “embarrassing, clueless young people” who back Sanders’ policies even though they have “historically proven to be dangerous, beyond dumb and potentially even deadly.”

“Crazy Bernie is peddling some nasty, toxic snake oil to children,” he continued. “You youngsters might want to do a little research beyond your social engineering classes at NumbNut University.”

A word to the embarrassing, clueless young people who believe Sen. Sanders is their ticket to prosperity: There is no free lunch.

Old Bernie is scamming young people with his “democratic socialism” and politically correct, fantasy-driven, feel-good “fairness” tripe. Regretfully, too few of our young people have the worldly know-how or basic economic smarts to see that his dusty ideas are historically proven to be dangerous, beyond dumb and potentially even deadly.

Young people have every right to feel disenfranchised, angry and dissatisfied, I’ll give you that. With the country lurching toward $20 trillion in debt and racing maniacally toward the $30 trillion mark, Fedzilla has literally robbed Millennials of their future. The American dream may very well be something the Millennials read about instead of something they achieve. Sorry, folks, but like Sen. Sanders, bad news does not get better with age.

Sanders’ brand of big-government socialism essentially calls for plundering the wealth of billionaires (of which there are less than 600 in America) and redistributing that wealth to others who will receive the so-called “free stuff” such as a college education, womb-to-tomb health care, vacations and assorted goodies and bonuses we used to earn for ourselves.

What is not-so-amazing is how and why Millennials believe Sen. Sanders’ big-government socialism ideas are flush with prosperity. After being indoctrinated by our public schools that capitalism is corrupt, that America is a racist country and that more government will make things fair, it is no surprise Millennials have gravitated to Sanders’ socialism like stinky hippies to a free concert.

Cruz: 'Disastrous' Marriage Equality Ruling Led To 'Persecution' That's 'Unprecedented'

In an interview yesterday with conservative Christian broadcaster Janet Mefferd, Sen. Ted Cruz once again touted his support from anti-gay leaders including the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and the National Organization for Marriage, saying that anti-gay conservatives support him because he knows that the Supreme Court’s “disastrous” and “fundamentally illegitimate” marriage equality decision has led to “unprecedented” persecution.

Cruz told Mefferd that “we are seeing an assault on religious liberty from Washington that is unprecedented,” citing a number of his favorite cases of people supposedly being persecuted by running afoul of state or local nondiscrimination policies, almost none of which have stemmed from the federal government.

Claiming that “these threats are growing and growing,” Cruz said that “much of this persecution is the fruit of the Supreme Court’s disastrous gay marriage ruling last year” — never mind that every single one of the incidents he referenced happened before the ruling and were in no way connected to it.

Cruz declared that it was “very sad” that some of his rivals for the GOP presidential nomination called the Obergefell ruling “settled law,” which is, he said, why anti-gay leaders have flocked to endorse him.

“I believe that decision was fundamentally illegitimate, it was lawless, it was unconstitutional and it will not stand,” he said. “And I would note, that is precisely why Dr. James Dobson has endorsed me in this campaign, it is why Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has endorsed me in this campaign, it’s why the National Organization on Marriage [sic] has endorsed me on this campaign and has said it cannot support Donald Trump or Marco Rubio because if we’re not willing to defend marriage, we are giving up the foundational building blocks of the family, we’re giving up the Judeo-Christian values that built this great nation.”

Martin Sheen Calls Out Ron Johnson For Putting Partisanship Ahead of the Constitution

In a robocall released today by People For the American Way, Wisconsinites are hearing from Martin Sheen about Senator Ron Johnson’s obstruction of President Obama’s judicial nominees. The recording, which is being delivered to activists in Wisconsin, asks voters to contact Senator Johnson and demand that he fulfill his constitutional duty to give fair consideration to President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court.

“There’s no question that Senator Johnson is putting partisanship above the Constitution,” said Marge Baker, Executive Vice President at People For the American Way. “The Supreme Court shouldn’t be held hostage to the same partisan gridlock that’s brought Congress to a halt. Ron Johnson should stop playing politics with the law and make clear that he’ll push for the Senate to give fair consideration to President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee. We’re thrilled that Martin Sheen is willing to lend his voice to this campaign, and we’re looking forward to working with our activists to hold GOP senators accountable for their obstruction.”

You can listen to the call here:

A transcript of the recording reads:

Hi, I’m Martin Sheen, calling on behalf of People For the American Way.

Our Constitution is very clear about what happens when a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court. It says the President shall nominate a new judge, and that the Senate will give that nominee fair consideration.

As you’ve heard, Republicans are playing politics with our Constitution and with the Supreme Court. Senator Ron Johnson has said he doesn’t think that Congress should even give a fair hearing to anyone nominated by President Obama.

That’s irresponsible, and it puts partisanship above the law.

Call Senator Johnson at (202) 224-5323, and tell him you expect him to put his Constitutional duties first—and give fair consideration to President Obama’s nominee.

People For the American Way is a progressive advocacy organization founded to fight right-wing extremism and defend constitutional values including free expression, religious liberty, equal justice under the law, and the right to meaningfully participate in our democracy.


Heritage Demands SCOTUS Blockade As Part of Scorched-Earth Obstructionism

As the New York Times explained earlier this week, the Senate GOP’s promises to block anyone who President Obama nominates to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court amounts to a ratcheting up of a campaign of obstruction on nominees that has lasted throughout Obama’s time in office.

This is in part thanks to the lobbying of conservative groups who, even before Scalia’s death, were urging Senate Republicans to block nearly every Obama nominee in his final year in office.

A particularly influential force behind this effort has been the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that has in recent years become a bludgeoning arm for the Tea Party as it pressures GOP lawmakers away from allowing the government to function in any sort of bipartisan manner.

Heritage, under the leadership of former Sen. Jim DeMint, and its more explicitly political arm Heritage Action, headed up by Michael Needham, have worked to pressure the GOP to be an immovable agent of obstruction in a divided government. One House Republican accused Heritage Action last year of insisting on “an unachievable standard” of conservativism that actually “hurts” the party’s goals by preventing reasonable action and compromise.

Heritage Action’s version of conservativism is so far out of the mainstream that even Senate Republicans score an average of just 60 percent on its legislative scorecard. The two senators who have perfect scores from group are Sen. Mike Lee and Sen. Ted Cruz, who has been boasting of his bridge-burning obstructionism as he runs for the Republican presidential nomination. (Sen. Marco Rubio, a supposedly mainstream rival to Cruz, ranks an impressive fourth in Heritage’s ranking of senators.)

Heritage Action’s single-minded focus on attacking the Affordable Care Act infamously helped lead to the 2013 government shutdown. One fellow ACA opponent slammed Heritage and Cruz for the ordeal, writing that the “entire affair was bungled by a few narcissistic conservative groups and senators” and ended up actually hurting the cause they were claiming to support.

Heritage and Heritage Action have applied the same scorched-earth tactics to Obama judicial nominations, urging the GOP to shut down all executive branch and judicial confirmations even before the death of Scalia.

Politico reported in January that in advance of a GOP retreat in Baltimore, Heritage Action circulated a document among lawmakers declaring, “Given the Obama administration’s disregard for Congress’s role in our constitutional system of government, the Senate should refuse to confirm the president’s nominees unless those nominees are directly related to our national security.” This echoed previous calls from Heritage’s favorite senators, Lee and Cruz, to completely shut down the judicial confirmation process.

Later that month, Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky and American Family Association governmental affairs director Sandy Rios agreed that Republicans should oppose all future Obama judicial nominees because, in von Spakovsky’s words, they would all share Obama’s “radical left-wing views.”

On January 26, Heritage Action announced that it would “continue to oppose all judicial nominees and reserve the right to key vote against any and all judicial nominees retroactively,” meaning that it would count support for any Obama judicial nominee against members of Congress in its scorecards — even, apparently, in votes that had already taken place. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid specifically called out Heritage Action for pressuring GOP senators against action on judicial nominees.

Unsurprisingly, Heritage Action and the Heritage Foundation are now pressuring GOP senators to hold Justice Scalia’s seat open until the next president takes office. Heritage Foundation president Jim DeMint, who, as a Republican senator, built a reputation as a “warrior for purity” within the party, wrote on Tuesday that the Senate “can and should withhold its consent” from any Obama nominee.

In another interview with Rios on Monday, von Spakovsky offered a barely veiled threat to Republican senators contemplating considering an Obama nominee.

“I think they understand that if they were to confirm a liberal Obama nominee this year, it would be an absolute election disaster,” he said. “I mean, I’ve already heard from folks in the conservative community saying that if any Republican senator works to confirm an Obama nominee, they’re going to be a massive target of people trying to get them out of office because they’ll be so upset about that.”

Now that a Supreme Court seat is at stake, the conservative movement is converging on this line of thinking, inventing bogus new “traditions” in an attempt to justify keeping a Supreme Court seat open for more than a year.

There are plenty of conservative groups that are promising an all-out campaign to keep an Obama Supreme Court nominee off the bench — the Times says that the American Center for Law and Justice, the right-wing legal group founded by Pat Robertson, started opposition research on potential nominees “moments” after Scalia’s death was announced. But Heritage’s commitment to keeping any Obama nominees off the federal bench speaks to the real motivations behind the effort to stop any Supreme Court nominee: turning the Congress into a force of obstruction, not of governing.

Donald Trump: 'Trust Me' To Overturn The 'Shocking' Gay Marriage Decision

In an interview with Pat Robertson’s television network yesterday, Donald Trump insisted that anti-gay conservatives can rest assured knowing that he is committed to overturning the Supreme Court’s landmark decision striking down state bans on same-sex marriage.

When the Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody asked the GOP presidential frontrunner what he thought of the Log Cabin Republicans calling him “one of the best, if not the best, pro-gay Republican candidates to ever run for the presidency,” Trump said he hadn’t heard the remarks and criticized the “shocking” and “massive” Obergefell ruling.

Trump also vowed to defund Planned Parenthood unless the group stops performing abortions.

He then told Brody that he would appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, hoping that the ruling gets “unpassed.”

Five Bogus Right-Wing Excuses For Obstructing Obama's SCOTUS Nominee

It didn’t take long for Republicans to admit that their purportedly principled vow to block anyone President Obama nominates to the Supreme Court to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia is all about politics.

Just minutes after the news broke of Scalia’s death, many Republican politicians and conservative activists said that the Senate should refuse to hold any hearings or votes on whomever Obama nominates to replace him because it is an election year.

Donald Trump and Ben Carson have both admitted that if they or another Republican were in the White House, they would have no problem with filling the vacancy. Different rules, it seems, apply to President Obama.

This admission undermines the GOP’s entire argument that they are simply abiding by a nonpartisan tradition of refusing judicial confirmations in election years, an assertion also contradicted by past statements from Senate Republicans such as Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who said in 2008 that “the reality is that the Senate has never stopped confirming judicial nominees during the last few months of a president’s term.”

Before the president has even hinted at his choice to replace Scalia on the court, Republicans have been busy concocting bogus “traditions” and other excuses for obstruction — all in an effort to hide the partisan motivations behind keeping Scalia’s seat open.

5) It’s A Tradition!

Several conservatives have been pushing the easily debunked claim that the Senate never confirms a nominee to the Supreme Court during an election year.

Marco Rubio said on Meet the Press that “it’s not just for the Supreme Court, even for appellate courts, both parties have followed this precedent. There comes a point in the last year of the president, especially in their second term, where you stop nominating, or you stop the advice and consent process.”

Rubio’s claim was demonstrably false, but he wasn’t alone in making it.

During Saturday’s GOP presidential debate, moderator John Dickerson called out Ted Cruz for saying that “we have 80 years of precedent for not confirming a Supreme Court justice in an election year,” noting that Justice Anthony Kennedy was in fact confirmed in 1988, Ronald Reagan’s final year in office. Cruz responded that “Kennedy was confirmed in ’87,” which is simply untrue. (The audience booed Dickerson for saying he “wanted to get the facts straight for the audience.”)

Cruz’s father, Rafael, took it one step further, telling Pat Robertson that “if the Democrats want to appoint somebody, let them win the election,” seeming to forget that President Obama was elected for a full term in 2012 and that the drafters of the Constitution didn’t want Supreme Court appointments put up to a popular vote.

4) Chuck Schumer Said…

Conservative activists have seized on remarks that Sen. Chuck Schumer made in 2007, which they claim prove that the New York Democrat favored blocking any Supreme Court justice nominated by George W. Bush in case of a vacancy in his last year in office.

However, this line of attack conveniently ignores a key part of Schumer’s speech, where he said that Democrats would only oppose a far-right judicial nominee, explaining that “they must prove by actions not words that they are in the mainstream rather than we have to prove that they are not.”

Josh Marshall of TPM notes that conservatives are misreporting the content of Schumer’s speech:

Schumer quite explicitly never said that the Bush shouldn’t get any more nominations. He also didn’t say that any nominee should be rejected. He said they should insist on proof based on judicial history, rather than just promises that they were mainstream conservatives rather than conservative activists, which both have proven to be. But again, set all this aside. He clearly spoke of holding hearings and being willing to confirm Bush nominees if they met reasonable criteria.

3) What About Robert Bork?

In defense of their stance that Republicans should refuse to consider any Obama Supreme Court nominee, some conservatives have cited the 1987 fight over Robert Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court, which they offer as proof that Democrats have done the same thing in the past.

This is an odd case to bring up, seeing that Bork did in fact receive a fair hearing and a vote on the Senate floor, two things many Republicans today say should not be given to a future Obama pick.

Bork was voted down by a bipartisan majority of senators due to his extremist views, particularly his hostility to civil rights laws, which is a completely different matter than flatly refusing to hold committee hearings or a vote on a nominee.

2) Obama Is Packing The Court!

Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative group that, ironically, was previously named the Judicial Confirmation Network, told the Washington Post on Monday that “if the president tries to pack the court, as it is apparent he may, then JCN will be leading the charge to delay a Senate vote until the American people decide the next president.”

“Obama doesn’t give a crap about the Constitution…he sees an opportunity to pack the court,” conservative radio host Mark Levin said. “Obama wants to pack the court. That’s what he wants to do on the way out the door and he must be prevented.”

Simply fulfilling his constitutional duties to fill a vacancy in the court following a jurist’s death is not an attempt to “pack” the court. Court packing is when an official tries to expand the current size of the court or create new courts in order to appoint new judges without waiting for vacancies.

1) Obama Has A ‘Conflict Of Interest’

Sen. Rand Paul, who styles himself as a constitutional scholar, said he is uncomfortable with President Obama appointing anyone to the bench because the Supreme Court is considering cases involving Obama’s executive orders on issues like immigration and environmental regulation.

Therefore, Paul concludes, Obama “has a conflict of interest here in appointing somebody” to the court.

The Kentucky Republican’s logic that a president shouldn’t be allowed to make judicial nominations because they may have to rule on actions of the executive branch is absurd on its face. The Constitution provides the president the power to do just that and, if Paul’s logic were to be applied, no president would be able to make any nominations at any time in office.

According to this argument, senators would similarly have a “conflict of interest” in voting to confirm Supreme Court justices since a future justice would likely decide on the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress.

Paul’s bizarre assertion that presidents shouldn’t be allowed to appoint justices due to a possible “conflict of interest” merely speaks to how desperate the GOP has become in trying to come up with dubious arguments that will make their proposed blockade seem like a principled stance, rather than what it really is: a brazenly partisan endeavor that will allow them to shirk their constitutional responsibilities.

Surprise! Tony Perkins Lies About Obama's Response To Scalia's Death

On Saturday, about an hour after officials confirmed the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that he would try to block the confirmation of any person President Obama nominated to replace Scalia on the Supreme Court. One White House aide told Politico that although the administration wasn’t surprised by McConnell’s commitment to obstruction, the speed with which he vowed a fight after Scalia’s death was a “real shocker.”

Some of McConnell’s fellow senators and conservative pressure groups — including the Family Research Council — quickly echoed his call to obstruction.

Later on Saturday evening, President Obama delivered short remarks commemorating Scalia and responding directly to McConnell’s threat by saying that he planned to nominate a new Supreme Court justice in “due time” and called on the Senate “to fulfill its responsibility to give that person a fair hearing and a timely vote.”

But in the world of Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, what really happened was that President Obama politicized the justice’s death, forcing McConnell and his fellow senators to “fire back.”

In an email to supporters yesterday, Perkins accused Obama of violating a nonexistent “80-year tradition of leaving an election-year vacancy to the next president,” prompting noble GOP senators to contradict him:

There are dozens of high-profile cases pending before the Court -- including the key conservative battles over the Texas abortion law and the conscience rights of Little Sisters of the Poor. While the Court copes with Scalia's absence, the White House seems intent on nominating his replacement, despite the 80-year tradition of leaving an election-year vacancy to the next president. Invoking the Constitution he has selective use for, President Obama told reporters it was his "duty" to submit a name to the U.S. Senate for confirmation. Of course, the greatest insult to Justice Scalia's memory would be to appoint a replacement in the mold of Obama, who's spent seven years trampling on the Constitution on the way to his own personal policy goals.

Almost immediately, Senate leaders fired back, insisting that voters were less than nine months away from selecting a new president -- and, following eight decades of tradition, Scalia's replacement should be left to that person. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) joined Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others in insisting there would be no confirmation "The fact of the matter is that it's been standard practice over the last nearly 80 years that Supreme Court nominees are not nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year," Mr. Grassley said. "Given the huge divide in the country, and the fact that this president, above all others, has made no bones about his goal to use the courts to circumvent Congress and push through his own agenda, it only makes sense that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court justice."

Far-Right Pundit: Obama To 'Starve Americans Into FEMA Camps' After Murdering Scalia

On Monday, right-wing radio host Rick Wiles spoke with a fellow apocalyptic pundit, Steve Quayle, about his theory that President Obama murdered Justice Antonin Scalia as a human sacrifice to Satan.

After Quayle, the host of the “Coast to Coast” End Times-themed radio program, agreed that Scalia’s death was part of an occult ritual, the two addressed what they think will happen in the U.S. following this alleged murder.

I think the starvation, the plan to starve Americans into the FEMA camps” will soon be unveiled, Quayle said, arguing that Scalia’s death foretells the death of the Constitution.

“When you kill off the oldest guy who is foundationally sound — I would say this, Judge Scalia’s murder is equal to, if you will, the last pillar holding up what was left of the Constitution. I believe, and somebody’s already put it out on the internet, if you believe in the Constitution, you will be a criminal,” he said.

Wiles added that the supposed murder of Scalia proves the U.S. has become “a banana republic,” while Quayle said that he heard that Donald Trump “sent a private letter” to Vladimir Putin warning him that “this administration is resorting to murder.”

Quayle then predicted that the U.S. government will soon complete its transform into Nazi Germany and engage in the “mass murder” of Americans.

“I find it interesting that Justice Scalia died on the 44th day of the year and Obama is the 44th president of the United States and here, once again, we have an unusual news event in which numerology appears,” Wiles said. “Are these people that are running this country sick, Luciferian, devil-worshiping, Satanists?”

“Absolutely,” Quayle replied.

Ted Nugent Touts Donald Trump: 'At Least He'll Be A Liar Of A Different Color'

Despite Ted Cruz’s best efforts to court NRA board member Ted Nugent, the far-right activist posted on his Facebook page yesterday a note from a friend touting Donald Trump.

Pat Robertson: Quit Your Job To Avoid Voodoo Doll Key Chains

Today, after blasting Bernie Sanders’ fans as “ignorant sheep,” Pat Robertson fielded questions from “700 Club” viewers, including one from “a 60-year-old widow” who wondered if she should leave her job as a store clerk because it sells “voodoo doll keychains.”

Robertson did indeed urge her to quit: “God can give you another job.” The televangelist warned that the voodoo doll keychains are a stepping stone further into the occult.

“You don’t want to give your heart over to voodoo or magic arts,” he said. “If they’re doing a voodoo doll, the next thing you know they’ll be having little dollies you put pins in and can bring down curses on them.”

Pat Robertson: Bernie Sanders Voters Are 'A Bunch Of Ignorant Sheep'

While criticizing the “so-called millenniums” today, Pat Robertson skewered Bernie Sanders supporters as “a bunch of ignorant sheep” who are “cheering a man who wants to take away all our money.”

The “700 Club” host made the remarks while chatting with Joshua Charles, an author and Tea Party activist who previously co-authored a book with Glenn Beck, about his new WorldNetDaily-published book “Liberty’s Secrets.”

When Robertson said that “there are forces that wish to destroy” the founding fathers’ vision for America, Charles warned that young people want to make a difference but don’t know the truth about our nation’s history.

Ted Cruz 'Enthusiastically' Backs Radical Anti-Abortion, Anti-Contraception Personhood Proposal

In a video message released ahead of the South Carolina presidential primary yesterday, Sen. Ted Cruz repeated his support for radical fetal “personhood” measures that would criminalize all abortions and even threaten some forms of birth control by granting full constitutional rights to zygotes.

Cruz has previously pledged to back personhood measures, even going so far as to claim that legal personhood for fetuses could “absolutely” be established without a constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

In his video message, Cruz praised South Carolina Republicans for passing a nonbinding resolution in support of a state constitutional amendment to institute fetal personhood.

“I enthusiastically support that resolution,” he said, “and, as president of the United States, I pledge to you that I will do everything within my power to end the scourge of abortion once and for all, that I will use the full constitutional power and the bully pulpit of the presidency to promote a culture of life, that I will sign any legislation put on my desk to defend the least of these, including legislation that defends the right of all persons, without exception other than the life of the mother from conception to natural death.”

Cruz also vowed to defund and investigate Planned Parenthood and appoint Supreme Court justices who would be “the critical deciding votes to finally overturn Roe v. Wade.”

In the video, the Texas Republican senator also tried to link the issue of abortion rights to other matters that are important to GOP voters, claiming that any candidate who supports abortion rights doesn’t believe in God and thus will also raise taxes.

“If a politician will rob a fellow person of their right to life, rest assured they’ll rob you of your private property rights, religious liberty, and look for new taxes and regulations to rob you of your hard-earned money as well,” he said.

“Liberty isn’t safe in the hands of a politician who doesn’t hold all life sacred,” he warned. “For anyone that doesn’t hold life sacred can’t possibly know what true liberty is or where true liberty comes from. Because the spirit of true American liberty comes from the Creator, in whose image we are fearfully and wonderfully made.”

James Dobson: Only Ted Cruz Can Overturn Gay Marriage

In a video message today, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson once again urged conservatives to back Ted Cruz over Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, warning that the Texas senator’s rivals can’t be trusted to overturn the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.

Cruz, who has vowed to defy the Obergefell decision if elected president, has attacked Trump and Rubio for not being as vocal in their opposition to same-sex marriage.

Dobson also touted Heidi Cruz as potentially being the country’s “very first pro-life first lady.”

Alberto Gonzales: No 'Standard Practice' Of Blocking Justices In Election Year

Alberto Gonzales, who served as White House counsel and attorney general under George W. Bush, is one of the handful of Republicans who has broken ranks to say that President Obama does indeed have the right to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

In an interview with Newsmax TV yesterday, Gonzales repeated his argument and skewered the claim from Sen. Chuck Grassley , chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that it is the Senate’s “standard practice” not to confirm Supreme Court justices during a presidential election year.

“If there is such a standard practice within the Senate, it’s one that I’m not aware of and I was not made aware of when I was White House counsel or as attorney general,” Gonzales told Newsmax’s Ed Berliner. “Again, not having served in the Senate, I can’t speak with authority as to what is standard practice, but certainly if that is the standard practice, that was never communicated to the Bush White House or the Bush administration.”

Trump Says His SCOTUS Nominees Would Be 'As Close To Scalia As You Could Find'

Donald Trump doubled down on his promise to appoint extremely conservative Supreme Court justices on Monday, telling conservative talk radio host Mike Gallagher that, if he were to become president, his court picks would be “as close to Scalia as you could find.”

In the same interview, as Media Matters noted yesterday, Trump entertained conspiracy theories about Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, calling them “big stuff.” Trump made similar comments to conservative radio host Michael Savage on Tuesday.

“Should the Senate absolutely make every effort to block a liberal justice appointee from President Obama?” Gallagher asked Trump.

“I think absolutely,” Trump responded. “I mean, why shouldn’t we? They can do it easily. The time, fortunately, is not that long, and it seldom happened where they appointed in that last year. No, we have to do that, we have to do that.”

He added that if the Senate fails to block an Obama nominee, it will become “even easier” for him to win the GOP presidential nomination by capitalizing on conservative backlash.

When Gallagher asked what kind of justices he would put on the Supreme Court, Trump repeated the name of George W. Bush appeals court nominee Diane Sykes , adding, “I’ll tell you, honestly, as close to Scalia as you could find would be the best way to describe it, that’s what I would want.”

Rick Wiles: Obama Killed Scalia As A Pagan Human Sacrifice

Yesterday on “Trunews,” End Times radio host Rick Wiles discussed “the possible occult connections” to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, whom he concluded was murdered by President Obama and was a human sacrifice to mark the pagan festival of Lupercalia.

Wiles explained that the “Luciferian” “devil-worshipers” who control the government are out for blood, noting that Lupercalia is observed between February 13 and 15. Scalia’s body was discovered on the 13th. “There’s always human sacrifice involved,” he said, claiming that Scalia was “killed” to mark the beginning of pagan fascism ruling over the U.S. 

“The 13th was the 44th day of 2016, Obama is the 44th president of the United States,” Wiles said, “so you have this numerology thing taking place.”

Wiles said that the assassins who killed the conservative justice “deliberately left the pillow on his face as a message to everybody else: ‘Don’t mess with us, we can murder a justice and get away with it.’ And I assure you, there’s a lot of frightened officials in Washington today, deep down they know, the regime murdered a justice…. This is the way a dictatorial, fascist, police state regime takes control of a nation.”

“The day the justice died, the day justice in America died,” he continued, “they got away with it.”

Wiles, declaring that he has “a pretty good sniffer for finding crimes” based on gut feelings, said that the “murder” of Scalia proves that “we’re being sucked into a police state where anybody who opposes this regime will be at risk of extermination.”

He also speculated that Scalia’s purported assassins put chloroform on the pillow and burned all of the evidence in his hotel room.

“Like the Soviet Union in Stalin’s day, it’s like any police state and now we’re in it,” Wiles said. He then speculated that he might be the next victim of Stalinist pagan assassination: “It was a message to everybody out there: ‘Don’t mess with us.’ That’s the message. And it’s a message to people like me.”

Mark Levin: 'God Save Us From What Obama Must Do' To The Supreme Court

Conservative talk radio host Mark Levin joined the chorus of conservative activists urging Senate Republicans to block any nominee President Obama puts forward to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, telling Stephen Bannon of “Breitbart News Daily” over the weekend that people criticizing this strategy of obstructionism just don’t “care about the nation” the way conservatives do.

“It is a terrible day when a nation loses a man like this, and God save us from what Obama must do,” Levin said. “And we must insist that the Republican Senate must stand up and give him no quarter, they must stand up and block anyone or anything Obama tries to do.”

“I don’t think we should ram through an Obama appointee in a Republican Senate, for God’s sakes,” he said. “I mean, I’m sitting here thinking about it, you’re going to hear people say, ‘Well, this is unprecedented if we do this, and the Republicans…’ These aren’t people who really care about the nation the way I do or you do or our audiences do. No, they like the direction of the country, they just don’t think we’re going fast enough or hard enough radical left.”

Levin also issued a warning to Senate Republicans who might consider voting on an Obama nominee, calling them a “Fifth Column” and warning that the Supreme Court fight is “a litmus test for the survival of the Republican Party.”

“If a Republican majority in the United States Senate confirms a nominee by the most radical president certainly in modern history, if ever, who has stated his goal of fundamentally transforming America,” he said, “if a Republican majority confirms one of his nominees, at least in my mind, it’s over.”

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious