Biden Can't Get out of Dodge on Courts

Biden Can't Get out of Dodge on Courts

October 9, 2020

If it was attention Joe Biden was trying to avoid, he failed. "You'll know my opinion on court packing when the election is over," the former vice president said, standing in an airplane hanger with his running-mate. "You know the moment I answer that question, the headline in every one of your papers will be about that." Turns out, they were all about that anyway, because his massive dodge is making the American people worry a lot more about what Joe Biden isn't saying than what he is.

"I'll be happy to lay down in detail what I'm going to do after [the election]." In other words, when it's too late. Sort of like the 2020 version of "you have to vote for it to find out what's in it." But on something as fundamental as burning down our co-equal branches of government and rebooting America as an activist oligarchy, even Democratic voters aren't going to be quite so enthusiastic In a pair of new polls, most people are not only against expanding the number of justices, they also think Amy Coney Barrett should be confirmed! In a sure sign that the Left is losing the messaging war, Morning Consult warns, support for the president's nominee jumped 10 points among Democrats over the last week -- and nine points total.

Just as significant, at least to people who care about the last 240 years of constitutional governance, is Biden's refusal to be forthcoming on his stand on the Senate filibuster. That too, the presidential candidate said, would "depend." Every position he's taken over the past 47 years now seems to "depend." In this case, Andrew McCarthy warns, the filibuster, we're talking about wiping every minority party power of objection. "If that were done, the entire Democratic Party agenda could be imposed with the signature of the new Democratic administration." This is the minefield Biden is walking with the radical Left. They aren't interested in a "timid" agenda, Michael Daughtery points out. "The Left wants de-Trumpification, and they will steal Joe Biden's electoral mandate for themselves."

In the case of one of America's most important (and volatile) institutions -- the Supreme Court -- that's a dangerous proposition. "Their message is shameless," Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebr.) insists. "'Give us what we want, or we'll blow up the court!' This is the ugly consequence," he said, "of politicians treating the Supreme Court like a Super-Congress instead of a fair and dispassionate court." Even the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose death the Left is supposedly attempting to avenge, was clear in 2019 that neither side should try to change the status quo. "Nine seems to be a good number. It's been that way for a long time. I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to pack the court."

And yet, Sasse shakes his head, this is how "in line" Harris is, in particular, with the woke Left. They want "to make the Supreme Court 13 or 15 people to import some of the craziest radical ideas... into our jurisprudence," he argued on "Washington Watch." We're talking about a full-scale war on "the First Amendment, on religious liberty, on free speech and free assembly. And I think that's the number one issue on the ballot November 3rd. And it's why maintaining a majority in the U.S. Senate [makes this] the most important election before us."

At the end of the day, no matter how many times Joe Biden assures Americans otherwise, this would be Kamala Harris's administration. They've both said as much -- accidentally or not. So while he may play coy with the "suburban wine moms," as Doughterty calls them, she feels no such compulsion. "In the primaries," he reminds everyone, "Biden ran against constitutional extremism. During the debates, Kamala Harris laughed in his face when he cited the constitutional limits on the executive branch. He said during the primary that Democrats would 'rue the day' they packed Supreme Court." If they are elected, she will laugh in the face of our separation of powers, our Constitution, our very rule of law.

"Court packing would douse these last rule-of-law embers. It would be an unambiguous, despotic act of directing the judiciary to decide cases politically -- and, naturally, in accordance with the political preferences of the radicals who expanded the bench for that explicit purpose. And that would just be the start of the radical coup, not the end. That's the agenda Joe Biden and Kamala Harris avoid talking about..."

But it's an agenda that the American people deserve to know. And if they won't explain it, we will. Take the time to read through FRC Action's "What Biden and Harris Would Do on Our Issues." Then, check out Ken Blackwell's new column in the American Thinker, "C'mon, Man: Biden Must Answer Court-Packing Question."

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

Declassified Docs: She Had High Hoax

October 9, 2020

Vice President Mike Pence had a lot of great moments in the debate on Wednesday night, but one of his strongest was when he was asked whether President Trump would commit himself "to a peaceful transfer of power if he lost." Pence, calmly reiterated that they expected to win the election, then turned his head, looked Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) in the eye and said, "When you talk about accepting the outcome of the election, I must tell you, senator, your party has spent the last three and a half years trying to overturn the results of the last election." If Americans need reassurance from anyone, it's the Democratic Party.

Especially, the vice president said, with the blockbuster documents declassified this week that show Hillary Clinton at the helm of an enormous scheme to link then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia in 2016 -- a bogus claim that President Barack Obama almost certainly knew about. The smoking gun, which has been universally ignored by the mainstream media (unsurprisingly), is a slew of papers from former CIA Director John Brennan, who briefed Obama on Clinton's plan -- which was to distract from her email server scandal by launching this Russian hoax. His handwritten notes are plain as day. "We're getting additional insight into Russian activities from [REDACTED]. CITE [summarizing] alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service."

In other words, Hillary cooked up this collusion conspiracy to cover her tracks -- and embroiled the entire country in an unnecessary, fictional controversy in the process. If it's true, and it certainly seems to be, this is criminal. And just as criminal is the media's silence, since all of America was dragged through this sham for years -- only to find out it's based on an elaborate lie. People from top to bottom need to be held accountable for the deception that undermined our election and tore this nation apart.

So far, the usual suspects have been anything but cooperative. When the Senate Judiciary Committee brought former FBI Director James Comey in to testify, he said the investigative referral didn't "ring any bells." Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) couldn't believe his ears. "That's a pretty stunning thing that it doesn't ring a bell," he blasted back. "You get this inquiry from the intelligence community to look at the Clinton campaign trying to create a distraction, accusing Trump of being a Russian agent or a Russian stooge... How far-fetched is that?"

The American people deserve to know who broke the law and whether they'll be held accountable. They've spent the last several years watching the credibility of the intelligence community disintegrate from internal, toxic, anti-Trump bias. But this -- this is mind-boggling. Obama, Clinton, and most likely, Biden, knew about the effort to frame Trump, and none of them said a word during the witch hunt. Is it any wonder the media and political establishment oppose Trump? They want people to believe it's his abrasive personality or Twitter antics, but in reality it's about their power -- and his policies that threaten that power.

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

Doctors Warn against Deadly Strain of Overreaction

October 9, 2020

President Trump got plenty of flak when he left the hospital and urged the nation, "Don't be afraid of COVID. Don't let it dominate your life." The liberal media called it insensitive and irresponsible, but a growing chorus of scientists and doctors say he's right. The worst thing we can do as a nation is to hide out in fear of the pandemic.

As many as 15,000 experts from countries all over the world are taking the message that the international media won't share directly to the people in a new document called The Great Barrington Declaration. Together, doctors from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford Universities are leading the charge to break through the press's noise and tell the people the truth about the disastrous consequences of government lockdown policies. It's time, experts on the Right and Left argue, for more people to "live their lives normally [and] build up immunity through natural infection."

"The fear that has gripped our society has everybody in hiding," Dr. Andrew Bostom from Brown University said on "Washington Watch" Thursday. All of this, he says, is "counter to traditional epidemiologic understandings." When doctors tackled smallpox, doing their best to eradicate it everywhere, they were very opposed to lockdowns and coercive masking. Why? "Because [the lead physician in particular, D.A. Henderson] just felt they did not work."

Obviously, it's a whole different ballgame if and when there's a vaccine. But until then, whatever benefits there are from hiding out in our caves is far outweighed by the physical, economic, and health harms. In the end, Dr. Bostom explained, they don't reduce the overall number of infections. "And by delaying the ability of these less vulnerable segment of the population to develop herd immunity, it makes them more dangerous to the truly vulnerable. See, the beauty of herd immunity is that once a person develops herd immunity, obviously they're immune to reinfection themselves or if they get reinfected, it's a very mild infection. But they're much less likely to transmit the disease."

We've already witnessed some of the negative effects of these policies, the Declaration points out, from the lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings, and deteriorating mental health -- which all lead to greater mortality in years to come. Now, it's important to note that these doctors do recognize that there are segments of the population who are at a higher risk -- and we do need to take action to protect them. But everyone else who is in a less susceptible category should take the necessary precautions but go about life as normally as they can. Too many people, Dr. Bostom says, have been listening to the media and fear-mongering models at the very beginning of this crisis, especially. "These cataclysmic scenarios just got too much attention."

And look at what's happened since some of these vital institutions -- like churches -- have been shuttered. There's social instability, lawlessness on our streets, civil unrest -- and I would argue that there's a connection to that. It's part of the reason that we're hosting Freedom Sunday 2020 this coming Sunday at California's Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills. We want to address this, along with faith leaders like John MacArthur, Dr. Albert Mohler, Eric Metaxas, Rob McCoy and several others. It's important to make the case for why churches need to meet. And not only does scripture demand it, we now have the social and medical sciences supporting it. America is fraying at the edges, and part of the reason is because churches haven't been meeting.

As FRC's David Closson explained on Thursday's show, 99.9 percent of churches were told to cease in-person gatherings at the beginning of this pandemic. And they did. But now, as other things start to reopen -- the liquor stores, casinos, abortion clinics -- local authorities are still barring people from the sanctuary door. Here we are, filling airplanes with people sitting elbow-to-elbow for hours, but we won't let Christians sit distanced in a church for 90 minutes. The hypocrisy and double standards are maddening.

Amazingly, Scripture speaks to all of this. Not only does it address diseases and quarantining, but the Bible is clear that we are supposed to gather, as David said, "for preaching and teaching and the ordinances. And when someone tells congregations that they can't meet, that's not only unfair and unconstitutional -- it's unbiblical." That's what we'll be underscoring this coming Sunday, October 11, and we encourage you to tune in and watch at 8pm (ET)/5pm (PT).

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