Fighting the Right

Rick Joyner: 'There Is Much More Freedom Of Religion In Russia Than There Is In America'

On a recent episode of his "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events" program, Rick Joyner declared that America is now one of the least religiously free nations in the entire world, thanks to President Obama, and that there is now more religious freedom in Russia than in the United States.

"We no longer have freedom of religion in America," Joyner stated. "We no longer have freedom of speech in America."

The fact that Joyner was openly hosting a Christian television program while saying this would seem to rather undermine both his claim that there is neither freedom of religion nor freedom of speech in America, but Joyner didn't see it that way, declaring that "there is much more freedom of religion in Russia than there is in America."

That must come as news to the people in Russia, since the government enacted a new law back in July that drastically restricts that ability of non-government-approved churches to engage in evangelism and which the the National Religious Broadcasters decried in a press release:

Despite pleas from religious organizations, business leaders, and human rights activists, Russian President Vladimir Putin this week signed legislation that includes heavy-handed requirements for speech on electronic media and restrictions on religious freedom. Indeed, Russia’s own Presidential Council on Civil Society and Human Rights called for the law’s rejection because of its “unconstitutionality.”

The new law is especially harmful to those who wish to preach and teach the Gospel. Government permits through registered religious groups will be required for evangelism. Moreover, such outreach efforts will essentially be restricted to church building sites.

Dr. Hannu Haukka, President  of Great Commission Media Ministries, which is actively engaged in Russia, said, “This new situation resembles the Soviet Union in 1929. At that time confession of faith was permitted only in church. Practically speaking, we are back in the same situation. These anti-terrorist laws are some of the most restrictive laws in post-Soviet history.”

Similarly, Dr. Jerry A. Johnson, President & CEO of National Religious Broadcasters, stated, “The enactment of a law restricting the free exercise of religion by any nation should be a matter of grave concern and prayerful action by Christians of all nations. Following a pattern of other human rights abuses, Vladimir Putin’s Russia is criminalizing a central duty for all followers of Christ – sharing our faith. “

Dr. Johnson added, “In keeping with the Apostle Peter’s declaration, ‘We must obey God rather than men’ (Acts 5:29), I commend the faithfulness of Russia's evangelical Christians and urge believers across the world earnestly to seek God’s protection for all those who are being faithful in their witness. I also commend NRB members who are seeking to share the Good News in Russia.”

In a speech last week decrying the law and Russia’s trajectory on the world stage, U.S. Senator Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) noted, “We need to begin telling the truth about an increasingly aggressive actor in global affairs.” He added that the new law is “an affront to free people everywhere.”

In a similar vein, NRB President Dr. Jerry A. Johnson declared, “The United States government and all other nations that profess a commitment to religious freedom should urge Russia to repeal this unjust law. Let’s pray this new iron curtain of Christian persecution in Russia will be lifted quickly and without harm to our brothers and sisters in Christ.”

Ted Nugent: Obama 'Is The Biggest Racist In America'

Last week, NRA board member and musician Ted Nugent attacked President Obama for saying that NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick is “exercising his constitutional right” not to stand for the National Anthem, calling it a sign of Obama’s racism.

Nugent, who has threatened to kill Obama, referred to the president as a “chimpanzee” and “subhuman mongrel,” and claimed he’d be “dead or in jail” by 2013 if the president was re-elected, told radio host Joe Pags that Obama “is the biggest racist in America.”

“No one is oppressed in America unless you choose to be oppressed,” he added.

Later in the interview, Nugent said that there is a “triad of evil”—government, media and academia—bent on destroying America, and “if Hillary Clinton becomes elected, we are done.”

Conservative Groups Urge Maximum Obstruction Of Hillary Clinton's Judicial Nominees

At a Values Voter Summit panel this weekend, top conservative legal groups promised that if Hillary Clinton becomes president, they will pressure GOP senators to obstruct her judicial nominees to the greatest extent possible, including attempting to prevent her from replacing the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court.

Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network, Phillip Jauregui of the Judicial Action Group, and David Christensen and Mandi Ancalle of the Family Research Council discussed what they would urge the president and the Senate to do in the first 100 days of the next presidency. In the case of a Clinton presidency and a Republican-controlled Senate, they promised maximum obstruction of judicial nominees.

Severino, who once called Judge Merrick Garland “the best scenario we could hope for” in an Obama Supreme Court nominee and said that “of those the president could nominate, we could do a lot worse” than Garland, predictably changed her tune once Obama actually did nominate Garland to replace Scalia on the Supreme Court. At the Values Voter Summit, Severino insisted that senators would “effectively nullify their oath to uphold the Constitution” by voting to confirm Garland.

“Say you’re in a state where there’s no chance on who’s going to win on the president’s side, it’s so important to remember how significant these senatorial races are, because the senators also had an oath to the Constitution,” she said. “They have to uphold and defend the Constitution. That means, when it comes to a vote for a nominee, so even if it is someone who is absolutely not going to uphold the Constitution as it is written, like Merrick Garland even, even if he does come to a vote—and I suspect that if he remains the nominee into the next presidency, he probably would come up for hearings and a vote at some point—our senators simply cannot be voting for someone that would effectively nullify their oath to uphold the Constitution. So I think we have to remember to remind our senators of that.”

Severino dismissed the idea of the Republican Senate confirming Garland in a lame duck session if Clinton wins the election, saying that if Clinton becomes president and renominates Garland or picks someone “more radical” for the court, GOP senators could stall proceedings and “maybe we'll have eight justices for awhile.” When asked how long she thought it would be realistic for a GOP senate to block a Clinton nominee to the court, she said, “I think the court could really function as long as it needed to with eight justices.”

She said that the “best case scenario” under a Clinton presidency would be if Clinton worked with Republicans in the Senate to pick a nominee who “did actually have a record of upholding the Constitution”; it’s unclear who she thinks such a nominee could be, since she previously called Garland the “best scenario” for a Democratic Supreme Court nominee.

Severino’s message that the Senate should obstruct just about any Hillary Clinton nominee contradicts the claims made by her group and others that they are merely blocking President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee because the decision on who to appoint to the Supreme Court should be left to the next president. (In the words of a Judicial Crisis Network ad: “This isn’t about Republicans or Democrats. It’s about your voice. You choose the next president, the next president chooses the next justice.”)

The Judicial Action Group’s Jauregui impressed upon the activists in the room that they would also have to be prepared to “fight vigorously” on nominations to the lower federal courts under the next president, including closely monitoring a President Trump’s nominations. He praised the effort of Texas Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz to prevent President Obama’s filling of judicial vacancies in their home state by refusing to turn in “blue slips” giving the go-ahead for hearings on nominees, hinting at an obstruction strategy conservative groups might urge GOP senators to use under a Clinton presidency.

Jauregui urged the current Republican Senate to vow now to keep the current rules barring filibusters of lower-court judicial nominees if they stay in power, no matter who becomes president, saying it would be “foolish to say the best” to do otherwise.

Severino agreed that it would be “just as well” to see the judicial filibuster abolished for good after Senate Democrats invoked the so-called “nuclear option” in the face of entrenched GOP obstruction in 2013. She said that eliminating the filibuster on judicial nominees would probably help conservatives in the long run.

“If you’re not using a weapon, you might as well not have it anyway,” she said. “So now I say, move on, I think we’re living in a world, unfortunately, a post-nuclear world where 51 votes is all you need for a nominee, and that in the long term may actually help in terms of getting some of these constitutionally sound judges on the court.”

Michele Bachmann: Obama Is Scheming To Steal The Election For Hillary

On Thursday, Michele Bachmann told “Washington Watch” host Tony Perkins that President Obama is planning to steal the election for Hillary Clinton, pointing to recent comments by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson about how his department can work with states “on how best to secure online data and protect individual polling places from the potential threat of hackers.”

The former Minnesota congresswoman told Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council, that “every one of your listeners should worry that this administration could possibly not only seek to federalize these elections but also be aiding and abetting what effectively is stealing an election to ensure the right outcome so that in their minds Hillary Clinton wins the presidency.”

If a federal takeover of the election process occurs, Bachmann said, “we should be screaming from the housetops that the administration is trying to steal this election and put the fix in.”

Bachmann also urged members of Congress to impeach Johnson and other officials who are bent on “nationalizing these local and state elections.”

Congress should even consider shutting down the government over the matter, she said, and should explain to voters “that the president is trying to fix the outcome of this election.”

“Otherwise, why are we bothering to go through these primaries and this huge, long process of electing a president only to have it undermined by having the president steal the election by having the federal government, in an unprecedented, first-ever time, of taking over the state and local duty of running elections?” she asked.

Glenn Beck Will Not Vote For Trump So There Will Remain A Righteous Remnant Whom God Can Bless In America

On Thursday, Glenn Beck told his studio audience that he cannot vote for Donald Trump in November because only if he and others refuse to vote for Trump will there will remain a righteous "remnant" in America whom God can continue to bless. 

"We're the dumbest people alive," he said. "We are the people that we used to make fun of when we read the Bible" because we are openly and willfully violating God's laws but cannot understand why we are under His judgment.

"We're those people," Beck said, "but the good news is, this time, I think [there is] a remnant and this is one of the reasons why I cannot vote for Donald Trump" since voting for the "lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil and God cannot bless a nation that chooses evil. 

"Have more faith in God," Beck told his television audience, "that a righteous people will select something else and God will make up for the difference and, if it doesn't work out, He will protect a righteous people. I can't vote for evil, what I think is evil, or the lesser of two evils; I can't vote for the destruction of freedom and I do believe that's what we would be voting for. And so, I trust in the Almighty, I trust in the protection of divine providence, but the only way we get divine providence is if you deserve it."

FRC's Agenda For President Trump's First 100 Days: Roll Back LGBT & Reproductive Rights

At a panel at this weekend’s Values Voter Summit, activists representing the event’s organizer, the Family Research Council, and other conservative groups laid out what they will press Republican lawmakers to do in the first 100 days of the next presidency.

Under a Hillary Clinton administration, the conservative activists said, Republicans in the Senate should do as much as they can to obstruct her nominees to the judicial and executive branch. If Donald Trump is elected, they had a wish list of priorities for his administration, focusing on rolling back advances to LGBT and reproductive rights that have taken place during the Obama administration.

Mandi Ancalle, the FRC’s general counsel for government affairs, reminded the audience that FRC had helped to shape the Republican Party’s ultraconservative platform at the GOP convention in Cleveland and was hopeful that a Republican president—i.e. Trump—would help to make much of it law.

Ancalle said that the FRC is “working to generate a comprehensive list” for the Trump administration of executive orders, executive guidance and administrative regulations that a President Trump should rescind soon after taking office, and of Bush-era policies that he should reinstate. She said that the group was working with contacts on Trump’s transition team to get their wish list into the GOP nominee’s hands.

Among the priorities that she said FRC is pushing for in the first 100 days of a Trump administration:

  • Rescind the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s guidance assuring that federally funded emergency shelters house transgender people according to the sex with which they identify.
  • Reinstate the Mexico City Policy, which bars U.S. foreign aid from going to groups that provide abortion-related services or advocate for abortion rights abroad, even when those services are not paid for by U.S. government funding. This so-called “ global gag rule” was rescinded by President Obama.
  • Reinstate a rule instituted by President George W. Bush that provided broad “conscience protections” for health care workers refusing to participate in care for religious reasons. According to the Washington Post, the rule “was widely interpreted as shielding workers who refuse to participate in a range of medical services, such as providing birth control pills, caring for gay men with AIDS and performing in-vitro fertilization for lesbians or single women.” In 2011, the Obama administration rescinded much of the Bush-era regulation but maintained conscience protections for health care providers who do not want to perform abortions. Ancalle noted that the FRC wants to make sure that new regulations allow physicians not to care for transgender patients by providing hormone therapy and other treatment.
  • Rescind President Obama’s executive order banning federal contractors from engaging in anti-LGBT discrimination.

Although Ancalle did not explicitly name them among FRC’s first-100-days priorities, she also criticized the Department of Education’s guidance on access for transgender students in public schools; the Department of Health and Human Services' contraception mandate; the “completely lawless” Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance on access for transgender people in the workplace; and President Obama’s executive actions on immigration.

She also indicated that the FRC would urge a President Trump to undo the Obama administration’s work pushing LGBT and reproductive rights abroad, saying that the administration has “in some ways become a lobbying organization” and that “ambassadors that are appointed and sent overseas to represent American values have not only kind of flipped on their head what Americans stand for, what you and I stand for, but have really begun to lobby governments in attempting to accept same-sex marriage, in attempting to accept this gender identity dysphoria and attempting to push abortion acceptance and pro-abortion legislation in those different governments.”

She reminded the activists in the room that executive branch nominees—including nominees for ambassador—can be confirmed or blocked by the Senate, and urged the Senate to broadly exercise its power to block these nominees, whoever becomes president.

“It’s important that as we maintain a majority in the Senate that we’re encouraging our senators to not defer to what the president—honestly, whether it’s a Trump or a Hillary Clinton presidency—not to just defer to the president,” she said. “We’ve heard some senators say ‘elections have consequences’ and just put their stamp of approval on any secretary, on any nominee, and it’s really important that senators are out here in Washington, D.C., representing you all as you’re back at home, and representing your views on who those heads of these very authoritative departments and agencies are.”

Phil Robertson Offers To Baptize Trump On TV So 'We Would Know We Have God On Our Side'

In a speech to the Values Voter Summit on Saturday, reality TV star Phil Robertson recounted a meeting with Donald Trump in which he told the GOP presidential nominee that he would baptize him on camera to get “God on our side.”

“If you really want to see something wild, film it, Donald, film me baptizing you,” the Duck Dynasty patriarch recalled telling Trump. “The left-wingers will literally go crazy and the evangelicals will swarm you like a mighty thrall because then we would know we have God on our side.”

Robertson also told attendees to “read the Old Testament and see how many different people God worked through to accomplish His purpose.”

“Better a man who sticks his foot in his mouth every once in a while than a woman who pours out lies,” he said.

KY Gov. Matt Bevin: Election Of Hillary Clinton May Call For Shedding Blood Of 'Tyrants' And 'Patriots'

Numerous speakers at last weekend’s Values Voter Summit suggested that the American republic might not survive a Hillary Clinton presidency. During the Obama administration it has become almost routine to hear far-right leaders talk about the possibility of armed revolution against the federal government. But it was still jarring to hear a sitting governor suggest that America might only survive the election of Hillary Clinton through bloodshed.

Matt Bevin, who was elected governor of Kentucky last year after expressing “absolute” support for marriage-refusing county clerk Kim Davis, received the Distinguished Christian Statesman award from the D. James Kennedy Center for Christian Statesmanship on Friday night. Speaking on Saturday, he told VVS attendees that the country is facing a fork in the road: “We don’t have multiple options; we’re going one way or we’re going the other way, politically, spiritually, morally, economically, from a liberty standpoint. We’re going one way or we’re going the other way.”

Bevin recounted a story from his college days about how he confronted a professor who he said mocked Christianity, the way liberals always do: “They try to silence us. They try to get us to shut our mouths. They try to embarrass us. Don’t be embarrassed. We were not redeemed to have a spirit of timidity.” He urged young people, “Be bold. There’s enough Neville Chamberlains in the world. Be a Winston Churchill…There are quite enough sheep already. Be a shepherd.”

American freedom, Bevin said, was “purchased at an extraordinary price,” saying that one and a half million Americans have given their lives in uniform. “America is worth fighting for. America is worth fighting for, ideologically.”

“I want us to be able to fight ideologically, mentally, spiritually, economically, so that we don’t have to do it physically,” said Bevin. “But that may in fact be the case.” He explained that it might take the shedding of the blood of tyrants and patriots for America to survive a Hillary Clinton presidency:

Somebody asked me yesterday, I did an interview and they said, “Do you think it’s possible, if Hillary Clinton were to win the election, do you think it’s possible that we’ll be able to survive? That we would ever be able to recover as a nation? And while there are people who have stood on this stage and said we would not, I would beg to differ. But I will tell you this: I do think it would be possible, but at what price? At what price? The roots of the tree of liberty are watered by what? The blood, of who? The tyrants to be sure, but who else? The patriots. Whose blood will be shed? It may be that of those in this room. It might be that of our children and grandchildren. I have nine children. It breaks my heart to think that it might be their blood that is needed to redeem something, to reclaim something, that we through our apathy and our indifference have given away.


Trump and the So-Called ‘Values Voters’

This piece originally appeared in the Huffington Post.

Countless articles have been written on Donald Trump’s relationship with the Religious Right, often by those who argue that his rise reveals the movement’s increasing irrelevance. After all, how could social conservatives ever get behind a thrice-married failed casino mogul who is more comfortable at the Playboy Mansion than at church? He has bragged that he has never asked God for forgiveness, insisted that Jesus Christ had a massive ego (in an interview with Playboy) and, in an episode that carries obvious symbolism, threw cash on the communion plate in an Iowa church. 

It’s almost as if the Religious Right cares more about gaining political power than defending Christian teachings. 

Trump is slated to make an appearance today at the Values Voter Summit, the annual Washington, D.C., convention organized by the Family Research Council that’s the marquis event on the Religious Right’s calendar. Trump’s appearance at the summit isn’t discordant; as his campaign has progressed, it has become clear why the movement has rallied behind him and why he has relied on its support.

Trump once told a crowd at a Christian university not to forgive their enemies but to “get even.” The leaders of today’s Religious Right have been preaching that message for years, treating politics as a no-holds-barred battle against opponents who they regard not just as people with different points of view, but as spiritual enemies.

For instance, Tony Perkins, the president of Family Research Council (FRC), has described supporters of LGBT rights as pawns of Satan

Just as Trump championed the birther movement, arguing that President Obama is neither an American nor a Christian, Perkins has suggested that Obama is not a true Christian (and is most likely a Muslim) and raised questions about his birthplace. Obama supporters, according to Perkins, must repent for voting for him. One past Values Voter Summit speaker even told the crowd that Obama would shut down all of the country’s churches before leaving office.

Trump’s demagogic, hateful rhetoric has nothing on the Religious Right, whose leaders have been belittling and denigrating LGBT people, religious minorities and Christians who don’t agree with their right-wing political ideology for years. 

It wasn’t surprising that most Religious Right leaders who talk a big game on religious liberty either stayed silent or were openly supportive when Trump called for a ban on Muslims entering the country. A spokesman for the American Family Association, a cosponsor of the Values Voter Summit, had called for a Muslim ban long before Trump ever did.

While many evangelicals, along with Roman Catholics and mainline Protestants, have worked tirelessly to reform the country’s immigration system, conservative Religious Right groups like the FRC and the AFA have denounced immigration reform. 

Trump and Religious Right groups have also joined together in portraying American Christians as a marginalized group under constant persecution thanks to the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits houses of worship and other nonprofits from explicitly endorsing candidates if they want to maintain their tax exempt status, and injustices like the “War on Christmas,” with Trump even claiming that he was personally a victim of anti-Christian persecution because he was subject to a routine IRS audit. 

And above all, the movement’s leaders are thrilled that Trump has promised to give them the Supreme Court of their dreams, even letting conservative activists hand-pick his nominees. 

The Religious Right, with its constant talk of the country’s imminent undoing by evil anti-American actors, promotion of conspiracy theories and patently hateful rhetoric, paved the way for Trump’s success in the GOP primaries. Now, Trump needs the movement to help put him over the top in November, and will be more than happy to further its agenda if he makes it into the White House. 

At the Values Voter Summit, Trump will surely pander to the Religious Right. But he should also thank them.


Trump: 'This Will Be The Last Election If I Don't Win'

In an interview with David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network today, Donald Trump warned that there will be no more competitive elections if he is defeated in November because under a Clinton presidency, “you’re going to have illegal immigrants coming in and they’re going to be legalized and they’re going to be able to vote and once that all happens you can forget it.”

“You’re not going to have one Republican vote,” he said. “And it’s already a hard number. Already the path is much more difficult for the Republicans. You just have to look at the maps.”

Trump: I think it’s going to be the last election that the Republicans can win. If we don’t win this election, you’ll never see another Republican and you’ll have a whole different church structure. You’re going to have a whole different Supreme Court structure. That has to do a lot with what we’re doing because the Supreme Court, as you know with Justice Scalia gone, I think you could probably have four to five judges picked by the next president. Probably a record number, David, probably a record number of judges. If they pick the super-liberals, probably to a certain extent, people that would make Bernie Sanders happy, you will never have a Supreme Court, we’re going to end up with another Venezuela, large scale version. It would be a disaster for the country.

Brody: Just so I understand, when you say last election are you referring to what Michele Bachmann was talking about with citizenship because Hillary is talking about potentially providing citizenship for many of these illegals. Florida and Texas could be gone.

Trump: I think this will be the last election if I don’t win. I think this will be the last election that the Republicans have a chance of winning because you’re going to have people flowing across the borders, you’re going to have illegal immigrants coming in and they’re going to be legalized and they’re going to be able to vote and once that all happens you can forget it. I guarantee you, you’re not going to have one Republican vote. And it’s already a very hard number. Already the path is much more difficult for the Republicans. You just have to look at the maps and the path is much more difficult.

Trump: Scalia Will Be 'The Ultimate Example' Of My Supreme Court Picks

In a speech today to the Values Voter Summit, Donald Trump reiterated his promise to give the Religious Right the Supreme Court of their dreams while warning that if Hillary Clinton appoints new justices to the bench, “you have a country that is no longer your country, it will be a disaster.”

“Maybe we use Judge Scalia as the ultimate example of what we’re looking for, okay?” Trump continued.

Trump has often pointed to his commitment to put Scalia clones on the court as a way to shore up support from Religious Right activists.

“This will determine whether or not we remain a constitutional republic,” he said. “Frankly, that’s what’s going to happen. I have pledged to appoint judges who will uphold the constitution, to protect your religious liberty and to apply the law as written. We reject judges who rewrite the constitution to impose their own personal views on 300-million-plus Americans, not gonna have that.” (Ironically, Trump once said that as president he would order the military to follow his personal views rather than the law).

Clinton’s “extremist judges,” he said, “would allow her to completely take over the American health care, the American economy, the Americans’ religious liberty, not to mention your Second Amendment, which is on very thin ice right now, as you know, because of the fact that we’re at 4-4. If they even pick one judge who’s wrong, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye.”

Donald Trump Imagines An America Where Everyone Lives 'Under One God'

Donald Trump closed out his remarks at the Values Voter Summit today by once again doing his best imitation of a pious and committed Christian in an effort to appeal to the Religious Right activists who had gathered for the conference.

After heaping praise upon the late Phyllis Schlafly, whose last name he mispronounced as "Chafly," Trump really started to pour on the God talk.

"We're all equal and we all come from same Creator," Trump said. "There's a biblical verse that I've often read and I want to repeat it again because I think it is so important to what we're trying to achieve right now for our country. It's from 1 John: 4: No one has ever seen God, but if we love one another, God lives in us and His love is made complete in us."

"So true," Trump said. "So True."

"Imagine what our country could accomplish if we started working together as one people, under one God, saluting one flag," Trump concluded, apparently anticipating a future in which every American, regardless of religion, is required to worship Jesus Christ. 

Sandy Rios Warns Of Unimaginable Threats To Freedom Under Hillary Clinton Presidency

American Family Association radio host and government affairs director Sandy Rios was one of the speakers at a Friday luncheon at the Values Voter Summit. Like other speakers, she took an apocalyptic tone about this year’s elections.

Rios told attendees she doesn’t think Americans understand how much is at stake in this election, recounting harrowing stories of a woman who had told her about the persecution and lack of freedom she had experienced under communist rule in Romania.

To those who suggest that if Trump loses, “next time we’ll get our guy in,” Rios said, “I am just here to tell you, as a Watchman on the Wall, that is not likely to happen” unless God intervenes “miraculously.”

What was more likely, she suggested, was a loss of freedom under a Hillary Clinton presidency. America is at a crossroads, she said, suggesting that freedom would be threatened under a Clinton presidency. “We have a candidate who said deeply held religious beliefs will have to be changed,” she said.

Without naming Clinton, Rios cited other reasons people should fear her as president. “We can’t even comprehend what life might be like even in a year if we don’t take an active part in this election.”

“Those of you that name the name of Christ will have trouble finding jobs,” she said, and kids won’t be able to get into college without having the “right” opinions.

“There’s going to be trouble,” she warned, including a “totally unleashed” Internal Revenue Service.

“I don’t think people have stopped to think about the price we will pay if we don’t do what we can do,” she said. “It’s an imperfect solution, no doubt, but we cannot stand by.”

She also urged participants to support people working on the culture war’s front lines. “I’m begging you,” she said, “do not desert them.”

Jon Voight: God Wants Trump To Be President So He Can 'Lift The Dark Cloud That Hovers Over Us Now'

Actor Jon Voight was given the "honor" of introducing Donald Trump at the Values Voter Summit today, which he did by declaring that "if God allows truth to be said and heard," then Trump will be elected president.

"My heart aches watching Donald Trump, day after day, pouring his heart out telling the American people what he wants to do to save the nation," Voight said. "How can anyone doubt his sincerity? I can only feel if God allows truth to be said and heard that we will see Donald Trump as the next president of this great America and he will lift the dark cloud that hovers over us now."

Louie Gohmert: I Was Right That Hate Crimes Law Would Be 'Used Against Christians' (He Wasn't)

In a speech today to the Values Voter Summit, after diagnosing Hillary Clinton as “mentally impaired,” Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, insisted that he was right to predict that the 2009 Matthew Shepard hate crimes act would lead to the persecution of Christians.

Gohmert warned before the passage of the hate crimes bill that it would turn the U.S. into Nazi Germany and lead the way to the legalization of pedophilia, bestiality and necrophilia.

In his Values Voter speech, Gohmert conveniently failed to mention a single example of the 2009 law being “used against Christians” or of the law making it legal for people to have sex with children, animals or the deceased, but that didn’t stop him from boasting that he was right all along.

Gohmert also bizarrely claimed that the Supreme Court has established secular humanism as the official government religion and that Hillary Clinton is bent on “taking away your freedom of speech and allowing that part of the Muslim Brotherhood plan” of “subjugating the U.S. Constitution to Sharia law.”

“Your religious freedom will be gone, your freedom of speech will be gone” under a Clinton presidency, he said. “Freedom of the press, well, that’s not officially gone, it’s just if you express truth in the press, the rest of the press makes fun of you.”

Jerry Boykin: God Used The Iran Hostage Crisis To Bring Us Ronald Reagan

Family Research Council official Jerry Boykin was previously a lieutenant general in the Army, where in 1980 he participated in the disastrous attempt to rescue 52 Americans held hostage in Iran, which ended in failure and the deaths of eight service members.

In an interview this morning with the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios at his group’s annual Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C., Boykin explained that while the failed rescue mission was “tragic” and “the most devastating thing in my life,” it did have a “real positive” in that it “brought down Jimmy Carter” and helped lead to the election of Ronald Reagan.

Rios asked Boykin if the next president will be able to undo the “decimation” of the military under President Obama, like she said George W. Bush was able to do after Bill Clinton’s presidency.

“That’s a good example,” Boykin replied, “but you know what’s a better example, at the end of Jimmy Carter’s presidency, Ronald Reagan came in. Look, I was part of the failed rescue attempt in 1980 where we were trying to go into Iran and rescue 52 Americans that were being held in the embassy there. I was part of that operation. I watched eight good men die in the desert 100 miles from Iran and it was the most devastating thing in my life.”

“But you know what?” he said. “Two things that came out of that. Number one, it brought down Jimmy Carter and that was a real positive. Number two, it brought in Ronald Reagan. So even in that kind of tragic situation, there is something positive, God uses those things for good. And we brought in Ronald Reagan and his focus was to restore our military and think of what he did. I mean, he went on a determined campaign to make sure that did not happen again. And what we have today is an incredible military, particularly special operations, that is now in decline again because of the Obama administration and the next president is going to have to come in and do exactly what Ronald Reagan did.”

Boykin also warned that if Hillary Clinton were to become president, she would implement unconstitutional hate speech prohibitions.

He told Rios that at a strategic planning meeting more than a year ago, the FRC had decided to spend “50 percent of our time on religious liberty” and warned that “times are going to be even more difficult for Christians” if Clinton is elected.

He pointed to the United States’ support for a UN resolution on “religious tolerance” while Clinton was secretary of state as evidence that Clinton supports imposing blasphemy laws and speech restrictions in the U.S. In fact, Clinton worked to remove support for blasphemy laws from the resolution, although some critics say that the resolution’s wording on the subject still left too much wiggle room for governments wishing to impose speech restrictions.

Boykin told Rios that the “biggest thing that Americans need to be concerned” with a Clinton presidency “is the First Amendment.”

“You just said it, hate speech,” she said. “She has, in fact, agreed to UN Resolution 16/18 which says that if you say anything disparaging about Islam or the Prophet Muhammad, you can be taken to jail. And by the way, that’s happening in Europe right now. People are being arrested for what is considered hate speech because they are speaking out against what’s happening there, they’re speaking out against the rapes and the murders and the pillaging of the cities there and the terrorist attacks and some of them have been arrested for hate speech. That’s coming to America if Hillary Clinton is the next president.”

Trump's Campaign Claims He Isn't A Birther, His Own Twitter Feed Proves Otherwise

Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, and Rudy Giuliani, one of his main campaign surrogates, have both claimed that Trump believes President Obama was born in the U.S.

Giuliani, bizarrely, has even claimed that Trump came out and said he believes that Obama was born in the U.S. “two years ago, three years ago.”

That would be remarkable since as recently as earlier this year Trump vowed to write a “very successful” book outlining his birther conspiracy theory.

Indeed, Trump calls himself a “proud” birther and has regularly promoted the birther conspiracy theory on his Twitter feed, even implying that Obama had a government official killed as part of a cover-up of his supposedly fake birth certificate.

Trump has also embraced the advanced birther theory that Obama neither attended Columbia University nor authored “Dreams From My Father”:

David Barton: Trump 'Doesn't Have To Be Deep On The Issues' Because He's a Businessman

Religious Right activist and Republican operative David Barton offered an interesting argument to Christian conservatives who are reluctant to vote for Donald Trump today, explaining in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody today that Trump “doesn’t have to be deep on the issues because he uses a CEO model, not a governmental model.”

Barton pointed to Trump’s many business failures, which he said the GOP candidate was able to bounce back from because “he keeps taking the best people and putting them over those endeavors.”

Trump provides a paradigm that Christians are not used to. We’re so used to having government leaders, we think in terms of governmental leaders. With a business leader, you do things totally different. It’s not how much he knows, it’s the people he puts around him. So Trump has lost his fortune several times, but how come he keeps rebuilding it back to a billionaire level? Because he keeps taking the best people and putting them over those endeavors. So as far as Trump’s concerned, he doesn’t have to be deep on the issues because he uses a CEO model, not a governmental model. It’s about who he chooses.

Of course, Barton's absurd rationale doesn't explain why, if Trump "keeps taking the best people" and putting them in charge of his various endeavors, he has managed to lose his fortune several times in the first place.

Gary Bauer: 'This Is A Flight 93 Election'

Gary Bauer of American Values, which is one of the co-sponsors of the 2016 Values Voter Summit, closed out his speech at the event today by literally comparing the upcoming presidential election to Flight 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11 after passengers fought back against the terrorists who had hijacked it.

"This country is the equivalent of that plane right now," Bauer said, citing a recent column posted on the Claremont Institute website. "We're heading for a disaster unless we can get control of the cockpit again and then maybe, just maybe, we'll have a chance."

The passengers on that plane "took the only shot they had," Bauer stated. "Ladies and gentlemen, this is a Flight 93 election. This may be out last shot. It's time to roll. It's time to run down the aisle and save Western civilization."

Andy McCarthy Wants Congress To Preemptively Impeach Clinton

Andy McCarthy, a conservative pundit who served as a national security adviser to Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign, is urging Congress to preemptively impeach Hillary Clinton in order to prevent her from becoming president.

McCarthy wrote in the National Review on Tuesday that Congress could launch proceedings for “an impeachment [of Clinton] based on her abuses of power as secretary of state, which would have the constitutional effect of disqualifying her for the presidency”:

For months, I have been arguing that Hillary Clinton should be impeached. It is all well and good to prosecute a former government official for any crimes she has committed. Indeed, the Constitution expressly provides for criminal prosecution in addition to impeachment. Nevertheless, for the Framers — and, if we had common sense, for us — the imperative was to deprive a corrupt person of any further opportunity to abuse government power. Whether the official should also be convicted and sent to prison was not unimportant but, in the greater scheme of things, decidedly secondary.

Interestingly, the main pushback I received upon positing this argument was not that Mrs. Clinton is undeserving of impeachment…

No, the main objection to impeachment is the claim that, because the former secretary of state does not currently hold public office, there is nothing from which to remove her. Hence, as a non-incumbent who merely seeks the nation’s highest office — after proving herself manifestly unfit in a subordinate office — she is said to be immune from impeachment. How could she be impeached from the presidency, the question is posed, if she is not president? How could she be removed from an office she does not hold based on offenses not committed while wielding presidential power?

These questions and the non-incumbency theory behind them fundamentally misconstrue the constitutional remedy of impeachment, which is not limited to removal from power but includes disqualification from future office. Moreover, their premise is wrong: The proceeding against Clinton would not be a presidential impeachment; it would be an impeachment based on her abuses of power as secretary of state, which would have the constitutional effect of disqualifying her for the presidency.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious