BLACK REPUBLICAN BLOG -
The Republican Party is the party of civil rights and the four F’s: faith, family, freedom and fairness.
The Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and socialism (Quote By Author Michael Scheuer).
Fox News anchor Adam Housley has obtained some new
information in regards to who unmasked the names of U.S. officials like former
National Security Adviser Michael Flynn in the ongoing Russia investigation.
For starters, Housley's sources have revealed that the
surveillance of Trump started before he was even the GOP nominee, he said
during the broadcast of "Outnumbered" on Friday.
Our sources: This
surveillance that led to the unmasking of private names of American citizens
started before Trump was the GOP nominee.
These sources, who Housley says are "not Trump
people," also claim to know the name of at least one person who was
leaking the names.
The person who did the unmasking is a “very senior” and
“very well known” person in the intelligence community, Housley said, adding
that he or she is not in the FBI.
It seems the spreading of names was done for “political
purposes that have nothing to do with national security,” or foreign
intelligence, but hurting Trump’s team, Housley noted.
"It had everything to do with hurting and
embarrassing Trump and his team," according to his sources.
Flynn, who was forced to resign as national security
advisor after reports revealed he misled the White House in terms of his conversations
with Russia, has asked the Senate Intelligence Committee for immunity in the
Meet Evelyn Farkas, an advisor to the Clinton campaign
and the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under Obama.
On MSNBC she confessed
1.She helped spy on Trump for Obama before
he left the White House.
2.Trump, not Russians, were the targets of
3.She was concerned about hiding their
methods from Trump.
4.She encouraged leaks because she was
“worried” about Russians.
5.“People on the Hill” (Congress) knew
about Obama’s spy plot.
an interview that has received zero mainstream media attention, former
Department of Defense Deputy Assistant and MSNBC commentator Evelyn Farkas may
have spilled the beans about the Obama administration’s widespread surveillance
and intelligence gathering on President Trump while he was a candidate and
during the transition.
DOD Deputy Assistant Farkas appeared on MSNBC’s Morning
Joe, and you have never seen co-host Mika Brzezinski so quiet in all your
Farkas spoke openly about the type of intelligence that had been gathered
before Obama left office and about urging her former colleagues to gather all
the intelligence they could before the Trump administration took over.
is a transcript of Farkas’ interview with Mika Brzezinski who sat stunned
barely speaking a word throughout Farkas’ story:
“I was urging my former colleagues and frankly speaking the people on the
[Capitol] Hill…it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people to get as
much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can before
President Obama leaves the administration because I had a fear that somehow
that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left, so it
would be hidden away in the bureaucracy.
“I feared if they [Trump team] found out how we knew what we knew about
the Trump’s staff dealing with Russians that they would try to compromise
those sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that
“So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the
open, and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on
Russia. So then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I
knew that they were also trying to help get information to the [Capitol]
A lot going on today…
“That’s why you have the leaking.”
of Liberty Writers, see the revealing interview by clicking below.
Yesterday the Washington
Post published a story about Vice President Mike Pence and his
relationship with his wife, Karen Pence. The big headline? He won't eat alone
with women who aren't his wife and will not attend parties serving alcohol
"In 2002, Mike
Pence told the Hill that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife
and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side,
either," the Post reported.
Cue the meltdown.
somehow, has been twisted as "extreme," with some on the left
comparing his actions to Sharia Law.
In actuality Pence is smart and does a
service not only to his wife, but to professional women working inside the
His decision to err on the side of respect has certainly paid
Before becoming the
governor Indiana in 2013, Mike Pence served as a U.S. Congressman for over a
decade. With his wife by his side and a clean personal record, his career has
taken him all the way to the White House.
Washington D.C. is often
a sleazy, filthy town.
The stories you hear about smoky backrooms are true.
to any D.C. restaurant at happy hour and you'll see scores of married men
surrounded by and engaged inappropriately with younger women who are not their
This city is a place where a small, but vicious and significant
population of men and women crave power.
They will stop at almost nothing to
get it, which includes breaking up marriages.
There are 50,000 Ashley
Madison accounts with a D.C. address, making the nation's capitol number
four in the country for infidelity.
Right across the river and bordering D.C.
is Arlington, Virginia, which comes in at number five.
In 2001 Vanity Fair
published a piece called Meanwhile
on Capitol Hill, detailing this behavior from women and their male
enablers on Capitol Hill.
In the wake of the Clinton and Condit intern scandals,
you’d think Washington men would be wary of chasing young women, even ones as
charming and alluring as Diana. You’d be wrong.
The Capitol buildings ooze sexual tension. The excitement
begins once you pass the security guards. The windowless white marble corridors
are a labyrinth in which you are isolated from the outside world. A “bubble” is
how Diana puts it.
In the corridors you can hear little pump heels
tap-tapping for miles, so predators know when the prey is coming; suddenly a
congressman swings out from his office, dressed and groomed like a James Bond
villain, usually flanked by an assortment of aides, all clutching files with
the congressional logos firmly facing out, to remind you you’re in the presence
of power. The congressman stops and stares up, down. He takes his time.
“Hey,” he says in a soft drawl.
This happens again and again, even on the second floor of
the Rayburn building, where Gary Condit’s office is located, a chair and a
handful of media outside. But the office sits sepulchral and empty, its
occupant has long since been moved to a secret location.
Diana gets checked out all the time. “It’s just blatant.
They don’t make any effort about hiding it,” she says. “They’ll start out
conversations in elevators in the morning: ‘How are you? Who do you work for?
Oh, you’re new around here. What are you doing for lunch?’ It’s just
very bizarre and very forward.”
Nationally, black junior high and high school students are suspended at a rate
more than three times as often as their white peers, twice as often as their
Latino peers and more than 10 times as often as their Asian peers.
former Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan, the "huge disparity
is not caused by differences in children; it's caused by differences in
training, professional development, and discipline policies. It is adult
behavior that needs to change."
In other words, the Education Department
sees no difference between the behavior of black students and white, Latino and
Asian students. It's just that black students are singled out for
Driven by Obama administration pressures, school
districts revised their discipline procedures by cutting the number of black
Max Eden, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has
written a report, "School Discipline Reform and Disorder: Evidence from
New York City Public Schools, 2012-16."
The new discipline imposed on
public schools is called restorative justice.
Rather than punish a student
through exclusion (suspension), restorative justice encourages the student who
has misbehaved to reflect on his behavior, take responsibility and resolve to
behave better in the future.
The results of this new policy are: increased
violence, drug use and gang activity.
Max Eden examines the NYC School Survey
of teachers and students and finds that violence increased in 50 percent of
schools and decreased in 14 percent. Gang activity increased in 39 percent of
schools and decreased in 11 percent.
For drug and alcohol use, there was a 37
percent increase while only 7 percent of schools improved.
It's not just New York City where discipline is worse
under the Obama administration's policy.
Max Eden reports: "One Chicago
teacher told the Chicago Tribune that her district's new discipline policy led
to 'a totally lawless few months' at her school.
One Denver teacher told
Chalkbeat that, under the new discipline policy, students had threatened to
harm or kill teachers, 'with no meaningful consequences.' ...
City Public Schools revised its discipline policies in response to federal
pressure, one teacher told the Oklahoman that '[w]e were told that referrals
would not require suspension unless there was blood.'"
Max Eden reports that in Oklahoma City a teacher said
that: "Students are yelling, cursing, hitting and screaming at teachers
and nothing is being done but teachers are being told to teach and ignore the
behaviors. These students know there is nothing a teacher can do. Good students
are now suffering because of the abuse and issues plaguing these
In Buffalo, a teacher who was kicked in the head by a student
said: "We have fights here almost every day. The kids walk around and say,
'We can't get suspended -- we don't care what you say.'"
attorney John Choi of St. Paul, Minnesota, described how the number of assaults
against teachers doubled from 2014 to 2015 and called the situation a
"public health crisis."
Testifying before the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights, a former Philadelphia teacher said that a student told him,
"I'm going to torture you. I'm doing this because I can't be removed."
Eden's report cites similar school horror stories in other cities.
Since most of the school violence and discipline problems
rest with black students, there are a few questions that black parents,
politicians, academics and civil rights advocates should ponder.
achievement among blacks so high that black people can afford to allow
miscreants and thugs to sabotage the education process?
For those pushing the
Obama administration's harebrained restorative justice policy, can blacks
afford for anything to interfere with the acquisition of academic excellence?
Finally, how does the Obama restorative justice policy differ from a Ku Klux
Klan policy that would seek to sabotage black education by making it impossible
for schools to rid themselves of students who make education impossible for
If you're unfamiliar
with the partisan landscape of state legislatures across the country in recent
years, here's a quick primer: With precious few, deep blue exceptions,
During the Obama era, the GOP gained hundreds upon hundreds of
seats in state-level governing bodies; they currently control 68 of 99 chambers
The popular backlash to Obamaism was swift, deep, and now complete:
The Republican Party now rules DC, too -- even if they seem
incapable of taking advantage of this rare opportunity at unified
But now that Trump is president, the roles could well reverse.
the GOP in 2009, Democrats find themselves staggering about in the
and with a base fanatically committed to maximum "resistance" against
the new administration.
They've aired their intense opposition through the
(largely sympathetic, if not outright allied) mainstream media, staged mass
demonstrations, and leveraged every social media platform under the sun to
fight Trump and the Republicans.
The political momentum, and the gravitational
pull toward an ideological pendulum swing, appears to be on the Left's side.
And yet, here's what we relayed a few weeks ago regarding some early
electoral outcomes that have occurred since Trump's November
The Democrat resistance may be generating a lot of noise
in Washington, D.C., but so far in 2017, it has shown little impact on
elections in the states.Even with hefty financial investments and high
profile Democrats lending star power to state-level candidates, Republicans won
control of every district they previously held across multiple states that
Democrats have won in the last three or more presidential elections,
including as recently as yesterday in Connecticut.
Democrats sought to flip
partisan control of four Republican-held seats in a quartet of blue state
legislatures -- with liberal advocates showering national
attention and money upon several of the races.
pick-ups. In spite of major intensity and financial gaps fueled by The
Resistance, the GOP held serve in all four contests.
For months, Democrats have bragged about state-level,
special election strength and victories, while conveniently glossing over one
very important detail: they weren’t actually winning any new seats. But on
Saturday, the seat count finally changed… and not in their direction. Republican
John Stefanski this weekend flipped Louisiana House District 42 – a seat held
by Democrats since at least 1972 – after Democrats failed to even file a
candidate in the race. Additionally, Republicans retained House District 92
on Saturday with a win by Joe Stagni. So for those of you keeping score, Democrats
in state legislatures – despite massive interest and spending – have still
flipped zero seats and hold even less than they did at the beginning of 2017.
So much for refocused and rebuilding. ICYMI earlier this month, RSLC Political
Director Justin Richards released a 2017 special elections update memo noting
that despite major investments and major party surrogates’ engagement,
Democrats hadn’t actually netted any new seats in state legislative chambers.
The RSLC surveys the state of play since Trump's resistance-sparking win last
- Republicans in January retained a seat in the Virginia
House and Virginia Senate by very comfortable margins, despite big investments
by Democrats led by Governor Terry McAuliffe.
- Republicans in February retained a Minnesota House seat which gave them their
largest House majority ever post-presidential election, despite major Democrat
Party surrogates campaigning for their candidate.
- Also in February, Republicans by 12 points retained a critical Senate seat in
Connecticut to maintain a chamber tie first secured on Election Day 2016,
despite Democrats investing heavily to flip the seat and win back an outright
Now add a red state GOP gain
to the roster, following a race in which Democrats couldn't even get a
candidate on the ballot to replace their outgoing member.
emphasized in my previous post, this is not cause for conservatives to
adopt a posture of smugness or complacency.
Yes, regaining the US
Senate is going to be a very tough task for Democrats due to the nature
2018 map, but they will have a great many opportunities to make
other significant gains at the state legislative, gubernatorial and
federal level next year.
It’s fine for Democrats
to be upset that Donald Trump schlonged Hillary Clinton, but the reality is
that they spent the entirety of the Obama years getting their brains beaten in.
When Obama first took office, they held the House and 60 seats in the Senate
and controlled the majority of governorships and state legislatures.
GOP has a large majority in the House, 52 seats in the Senate, and the majority
of state legislatures and governorships.
Democrats went from
thinking they were on the verge of a permanent political ascendancy to the
worst political bloodbath in American history.
Put another way, Democrats are
the George Armstrong Custer of political parties, and yet that doesn’t seem to
have inspired any soul searching at all.
So here are some questions Democrats
should be asking themselves right now:
1) Hillary Clinton?
Hillary had a potential
FBI indictment hanging over her head even as Democrats nominated her.
unlikable, not particularly accomplished for a presidential candidate,
campaigned on a radically liberal agenda, has corruption issues, and her
campaign pitch could be boiled down to “Vote For Me Because I’m A Woman.”
top of that, she was already so widely despised that she turned out
You could make a decent argument that she’s the single worst
presidential candidate of all time, yet she won anyway.
Of course, you could
make the argument that a radical socialist like Bernie Sanders would have been
worse, but even if so, why do the Democrats have so few quality candidates?
Where are the blue chip candidates?
2) Do Democrats Really
Want To Be The “One Size Of Liberalism Fits All” Party?
We’re in an age where people have almost infinite choice
when it comes to TV, music, clothing, groceries, websites and just about
Yet, the standard Democratic position is that the federal
government needs to be in charge of everything so San Francisco values can be
forced on everyone.
Don’t like gay marriage in your state? Too bad.
Obamacare? Too bad. You are going to get it – and LIKE IT.
Democrats are so
proud that they believe in “choice” when it comes to abortion - even though the
father and the baby have no choice.
So why not allow other people to live like
3) Do Democrats Really
Want To Be The Intolerant Fun Police?
Over the last few years, Democrats have turned into sour, anger puritans
shaking their fingers at everyone who steps outside their extremely narrowly
approved set of liberal values.
We’ve actually gotten to the point where
Democrats can’t even tolerate OTHER PEOPLE listening to non-liberal viewpoints
Whatever happened to being open-minded?
Whatever happened to
tolerating other viewpoints?
Don’t Democrats need to learn how to do that
4) Do Democrats
Represent Anyone Other Than The Most Liberal Americans?
If you’re a man, Democrats accuse you of perpetuating
If you’re white, they accuse you of being privileged.
If you’re a
Christian, they accuse you of being as bad as radical Islamists.
If you’re a
non-liberal woman, you’re constantly told that women who hold you in contempt
and don’t represent your views speak for you.
If you’re moderate, for all
intents and purposes, they tell you to shut your mouth and do as you’re told.
Democrats would rather offend a million Americans in flyover country than hack
off a liberal college professor.
At some point, if you want to represent
people, you have to at least make an attempt to address issues they care about
in a way that they appreciate.
Democrats have abandoned this idea and have
started explaining to Americans that they’re too stupid to know what’s good for
That’s not how you make friends and influence people.
5) Has The Democratic
Party Gotten Too Extreme?
from the Clinton years would think today’s Democrats are nuts and Democrats
from, say, 40 years ago would vote Republican before they’d vote for the
radicalism that has been embraced by today’s Democrat Party.
Gay marriage, men
in the women’s restrooms, detaching gender from genitalia, trigger warnings,
safe spaces, cultural appropriation, white privilege, open borders – these are
radical shifts for the Democrat Party that have happened in a relatively short
period of time.
At what point do you start to wonder if your party has moved
too far, too fast?
6) Can The Democratic
Party Continue To Advocate For More Spending?
Democrats seem to start every discussion with the
assumption that there’s an infinite amount of money for them to divvy out to
liberal interest groups and for votes.
Meanwhile, we’re almost 20 trillion
dollars in debt and adding more to that amount every year - and we are now
reliant on nations like China and Saudi Arabia to keep loaning us money so we
can pay Social Security and Medicare.
This is an unsustainable situation and,
whether by choice or necessity, the amount of money the federal government
spends must drop substantially in the next decade or two.
Can the Democrat
Party continue to function without being able to give away taxpayer dollars?
On November 8th, the American People voted for historic change and
By delivering the House, the Senate, and the White House, the American people
gave Washington clear instructions: It’s time to get busy, get to work, and to get
the job done.
President Trump is keeping his promises and continues to Make America Great
Read about the President’s week below.
The Movement Continues In Kentucky
President Trump held a rally in Louisville, KY on Monday. He made it clear that
standing together as Americans, we are going to deliver amazing things for the
citizens of Kentucky and the United States. We are going to take power back
from the political class in Washington, and return that power to the American
people. It’s happening, and it all started on November 8th.
No One Knows America Like Truckers
No one knows America like truckers know America. All across America every day,
they see every hill, valley, and pothole in our roads that have to be redone in
every town and forest from border to border and ocean to ocean.
America depends on truck drivers. They work very hard for every citizen of our
country. That’s why President Trump held a meeting with truckers this week to
address the many issues facing their industry.
Bipartisan Support For Supreme Court Nominee Judge Grosuch
Judge Neil Gorsuch began confirmation hearings at the United States Senate this
week. President Trump has nominated the most qualified, principled, and
strongest defender of the Constitution possible as his choice for Supreme Court
Justice. It comes as no surprise that Judge Gorsuch is being lauded as a
brilliant judge who rules based on the Constitution rather than his own
opinions. You can support
Judge Gorsuch by clicking here and signing the petition.
Paying Back Our Veterans
President Trump held a listening session with Veteran Affairs Secretary David
Shulkin and veterans. As Commander-in-Chief, President Trump will not accept
sub-standard service for our great Veterans. Every member of our government
must do their utmost to ensure our Veterans have the care that they earned. That's
the way they’re going to be treated.
Imagining A Better Future In Space
For almost six decades, NASA’s work has inspired millions of Americans to
imagine distant worlds and a better future right here on Earth. President Trump
signed Senate Bill 442 to reaffirm our Nation's commitment to NASA's core
mission: human space exploration, space science, and technology. With this
legislation, we support NASA’s scientists, engineers, astronauts and their
pursuit of discovery.
We are one people. Whether we are black, brown or white, we all salute the same
great American flag.
As long we remember these truths, we will not fail. No one can beat us. We are
Americans, and the future belongs to us.
This is your moment. This is your time. And this, the United States of America,
is your country again.
We're in this together and we can't thank you enough for your continued
As the hearing for Judge Neil Gorsuch wrapped up on
Thursday, one theme stood out strongest: Gorsuch is not even the main
actor. Rather, the starring role was shared by those in the Democratic
Party, who, put simply, do not understand originalism – nor, quite possibly,
even the Constitution.
It is not likely that the Democrats were looking to
showcase their woeful ignorance of a judicial philosophy. Then again,
this is a party in deep trouble, though you wouldn't know that by asking its
members. There is perhaps no one who better illustrates this than
Edward-Isaac Dovere in "Democrats
in the Wilderness," written for Politico.
With all their failings, the Democrats are looking to
play the political game – that is, they want to make Gorsuch, who was confirmed
to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals by a unanimous voice vote, look bad at all
costs. This involved reminding him that he's not Judge Merrick Garland,
as if Gorsuch didn't already know that and could do anything about it. To
his credit, Gorsuch thinks "the world of Merrick Garland" and he is
"an outstanding judge."
Almost just as petty, Democrats jumped at the opportunity
to ask Gorsuch about his views, as if being an originalist meant he would be
against the LGBT community. The clear winner with this technique was
Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.) – and fittingly so, considering his role as an
Not only did Gorsuch not take the bait, including and
especially from Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), but he showed off the fitting nominee
he is: one who has a healthy grasp on how it is not so much his personal
beliefs that matter, but his judicial philosophy that guides his
decisions. What Democrats did do well is demonstrate that they can't
fathom having to separate the two.
On the first day, ranking member Senator Dianne Feinstein
(D-Calif.) lambasted the originalist view, admitting that her beef was
"personal." She finds such a "judicial philosophy"
"really troubling." She described how "it means in essence
that judges and courts should evaluate our constitutional rights and privileges
as they were understood in 1789." To prove her point, Feinstein
referenced enslaved African-Americans and women.
She claimed that this view would "ignore the intent
of the Framers, that the Constitution would be a framework on which to
build," and that "it severely limits the genius of what our
Feinstein's examples would prove the flaws of originalism
if only she had not left out a glaring omission: the constitutional amendment
process. One could find perhaps no better originalist than the late,
great Justice Antonin Scalia, as President Donald Trump likes to call
Scalia was a promoter of the constitutional amendment
process, which has acknowledged and enshrined the rights of women and black
What is Feinstein's alternative? "I firmly
believe that the American Constitution is a living document, intended to evolve
as our country evolves," she said. One can only surmise that it is
up to judges to decide not merely what the law says, but, if they don't like
it, what the law ought to say.
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) could also not help
showing off her gross misunderstanding.
Gorsuch not only sailed through such questioning, but
cleared up for Klobuchar that he is "not looking to take us back to quill
pens and horse and buggies." She had asked:
So when the Constitution refers 30-some times
to 'his' or 'he' when describing the president of the United States, you would
see that as, 'Well back then they actually thought a woman could be president
even through women couldn't vote?'
A Supreme Court nominee should not have to defend how he
believes that women can be president. In the end, it worked to Gorsuch's
advantage, as it showcased his likability. "Of course women can be
president of the United States," he said. That wasn't even the best
part. "I'm a father of two daughters, and I hope one of them turns out to
be president of the United States."
Being an originalist does not require an insistence that
the Constitution is not open to change, but rather an insistence that changes
be done through the proper process.
What it does mean is that judges do just that: they
judge. What they don't do is use their own political beliefs to change
the law to fit their view of what the law should be.
It is not exaggeration to warn that doing so
threatens the very framework of the separation of powers, as unelected judges
insert themselves into roles designed exclusively for the legislative branch.
It is telling for Democrats to have exposed themselves in
such a way. It could spell doom for the Democratic Party and its future,
at least with their influence on the judiciary. There is another worse
option, however, for generations to come, if decisions are made by activist judges
who will interpret and evolve the Constitution for their own political and
personal gains. In other words, a Democrat's dream.
Rebecca Downs has had her writing published
at several outlets, mostly pro-life. You can find her on Facebook.
WHAT THEY ARE SAYING ABOUT JUDGE GORSUCH’S CONFIRMATION
Praise For Judge Gorsuch’s Performance At His Confirmation
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “Senate Democrats Have Scores Of Legitimate Political Fights In Front Of Them. Judge Gorsuch Is Not One. He Should Be Confirmed.” (Joe Scarborough, Twitter Feed, 3/21/17)
The Washington Post: “Gorsuch Presented Himself As The Picture Of A
Cool, Calm, Self-Assured Justice.” “Gorsuch presented himself as the picture of a cool, calm,
self-assured justice.” (Amber Phillips, “4 Takeaways From Neil Gorsuch’s Highly
Politicized Confirmation Hearing,” The Washington
The Washington Examiner Headline: “Gorsuch Crushes Durbin’s Weak Line
Of Questioning On Student Letter.” (Emily Jashinsky, “Gorsuch Crushes Durbin's Weak Line Of
Questioning On Student Letter,” The Washington
CNBC’s John Harwood:
“There Is No Chance Under The Sun That Democrats Defeat Gorsuch Nomination. He
Makes Extremely Strong Case For Himself.”(John Harwood, Twitter Feed, 3/21/17)
CNN’s Gloria Berger: “Judge
Gorsuch Is Qualified And Everybody Knows It.” (CNN’s “Newsroom,” 3/21/17)
Fox Business’ Janie
Nitze:Gorsuch’s “Personality, His Kindness, His Wittiness, His Humor” Are All
“Shining Through.” “And one thing I’ve
been actually pleased about in watching the hearing is that the warrant of his
personality, his kindness, his wittiness, his humor, all of it is shining
through, and I think he has built a great persona on all sides of the aisle
here.” (Fox Business Network’s “Closing Bell,” 3/21/17)
Fox News’ Laura
Ingraham: “I Think He Comes Across As A Man Who's Very Poised, Very Learned.”(Fox News’ “Special Report With Bret Baier,”
MSNBC's Chris Jansing:
Gorsuch Delivered An “Impressively Disciplined Performance.” (MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” 3/21/17)
Law Professor Randy
Barnett: “Gorsuch Made Effective Response To Dem Cherry-Picking His Record With
Lots Of Other Cases That Went Other Way.”(Randy Barnett, Twitter Feed, 3/21/17)