Mid-Day Digest

Mar. 20, 2018


  • An armed school resource officer stopped a would-be mass killer today.
  • Trump outlines a three-pronged approach to fighting the opioid epidemic.
  • Louis Farrakhan continues to be embraced by Democrats.
  • No, abortion is not “safe.” Here’s why.
  • Are there Fourth Amendment protections at the border?
  • Plus our Daily Features: Top Headlines, Memes, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.


“The Constitution ought to be the standard of construction for the laws, and that wherever there is an evident opposition, the laws ought to give place to the Constitution.” —Alexander Hamilton (1788)


An Officer With a Gun Saved Students’ Lives Today

A student opened fire this morning at Great Mills High School in St. Mary’s County, Maryland. (Caveat — details on these things are always sketchy this early.) Fortunately, before he did more than wound two fellow students, including the female he was specifically targeting, the school resource officer fired back and stopped the threat, killing the assailant. Obviously, having an armed officer on campus saved lives today — but only because he was willing to respond, unlike the Parkland, Florida, deputy.

Following the adolescent Second Amendment puppet protests last week, and ahead of this weekend’s March for Our Lives, it’s worth noting that the demands of these students/leftist political props include two policies they oppose. One of them is this: “Any legislation that would aim to fortify our schools with more guns.” Again, many students are alive today because the Maryland school was fortified with a gun. Food for thought for any teens honest about saving lives instead of serving as pawns for the Left.

Comment | Share

Trump Touts Plan to Combat Opioid Epidemic

By Thomas Gallatin

President Donald Trump on Monday announced his plan for fighting the nation’s growing opioid epidemic. Speaking in Manchester, New Hampshire, a state plagued with the second highest rate of opioid overdose deaths, Trump declared, “This scourge of drug addiction in America will stop. It will stop. Every day, 116 Americans die from an opioid-related overdose. Failure is not an option. Addiction is not our future. … I want to win this battle. I don’t want to leave at the end of seven years and still have this problem.”

Trump’s plan entails a three-pronged approach that seeks to address the illegal selling and distribution of opioids, further expand addiction recovery programs and focus on safer medical prescription practices along with the development of newer pain-relief drugs that don’t hold the same addictive potential as opioids. The plan would also work for prison reform, focusing on rehab programs for individuals whose drug addiction led to their imprisonment, while at the same time punishing more severely those responsible for dealing drugs.

Hudson Institute Senior Fellow David Murray welcomed the plan, saying, “In many respects, the plan is not novel. It’s a restoration. This used to be the boundaries and pillars of standard American drug policy, what they’ve brought back together in this statement and plan.” Murray criticized Barack Obama’s federal drug policy as unbalanced. But he said that Trump’s plan is a return to a policy that “was a balanced strategy, that wove together the strengths of prevention, treatment, supply reduction, organizational attacks with the criminal justice system, and international partnerships.”

Regardless of the merits of Trump’s policy plan, the mainstream media fixated on what amounts to a typical Trumpian hyperbolic comment. In touting the part of his policy that seeks to get tough on drug trafficking, Trump said that he was in favor of the “death penalty for drug dealers.” While much of the MSM is wringing their hands over this, the actually policy plan does not call for any changes to the nation’s current legal system. This is another classic example of Trump identifying the problem and letting Americans know that he is serious about dealing with it. His rhetorical tool connects with people quickly on an emotive basis, and it effectively calls attention to a pressing issue. Now if we can all get serious about the actual problem…

Comment | Share

Dems Defend Rather Than Denounce Farrakhan

By Nate Jackson

Louis Farrakhan, leader of the famously anti-Semitic Nation of Islam, is a repulsive figure on the fringes of American politics. But he’s not as much on the fringes as he should be. Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN) introduced a resolution in the House formally condemning Farrakhan for “promoting ideas that create animosity and anger” aimed at Jewish Americans and Judaism, and condemning “all manifestations of expressions of racism, anti-Semitism, and ethnic or religious intolerance.” It was a politically shrewd move, because so many Democrats just can’t bring themselves to denounce Farrakhan. Indeed, as our Arnold Ahlert wrote last week, the entire Democrat Party is slouching towards anti-Semitism.

That became even more clear Monday when Black Lives Matter, the New Black Panther Party and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network led a lobbying effort on Capitol Hill not about denouncing Farrakhan’s racism but to block Rokita’s resolution condemning it. Instead, these rabble-rousers want a resolution condemning President Donald Trump for his perceived racism.

Gary Bauer noted the sad truth in the form of some questions: “Did they lobby for criminal justice reform? Better school safety measures in the inner cities? Expanding enterprise zones to boost economic opportunity in black communities? Sadly, their presence on Capitol Hill had nothing to do with any of those causes.” Instead, they’re defending a reprehensible man.

Several Democrats have met with Farrakhan, including perhaps most prominently DNC Deputy Chair Rep. Keith Ellison, but also Representatives Maxine Waters (CA), Barbara Lee (CA), Danny Davis (IL), Andre Carson (IN), Gregory Meeks (NY) and and Al Green (TX). Ellison in particular has sought to dismiss those connections, but he’s been caught in the lie. Even The Washington Post gave him “Four Pinocchios.” In a blog post this past Sunday, Ellison continued to protest too much, and Davis recently defended Farrakhan as “an outstanding human being.”

Also recently, a 2005 photo surfaced of an up-and-coming Barack Obama smiling next to Farrakhan. If only he had been vetted sooner.

To sum it up, the fundamental problem is that elected Democrats are either unconvincingly distancing themselves from a racist reprobate or they’re utterly embracing him and calling him good. And they want us to trust them with governing.

Comment | Share

Top Headlines

  • U.S. expected to impose up to $60 billion in China tariffs by Friday (Reuters)

  • Facebook plunges as pressure mounts on Zuckerberg over data (Bloomberg)

  • Supreme Court rejects attempts to restrict, ban death penalty (NBC News)

  • Supreme Court bars Arizona from denying DREAMers driver’s licenses (National Review)

  • Trump’s lawyers turn over documents to Mueller with hope of limiting interview scope (The Washington Post)

  • Comey’s book plays second fiddle to story about a gay rabbit (The Daily Caller)

  • Mississippi becomes the first state to ban abortion after 15 weeks (National Review)

  • Fifth package bomb goes off in Texas (Reuters)

  • Poll: 53% of Democrats NOW say it’s not acceptable to vote for a candidate who’s done immoral things in his private life (Hot Air)

  • Humor: Vladimir Putin narrowly defeats opposing candidate Vladimir Putin in Russian presidential election (The Babylon Bee)

  • Policy: Facing the facts about violence and the mentally ill (Manhattan Institute)

  • Policy: Vladimir Putin’s ominous “re-election” (American Enterprise Institute)

For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report.

Comment | Share



For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.



For more of today’s top cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.

Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Check out Ratchet Identification Guide.

If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.



For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.


Gary Bauer: “Left-wing commentators insisted that Donald Trump was responsible for McCabe’s firing. That is beyond fake news. It is a lie. Andrew McCabe is responsible for the firing of Andrew McCabe. The independent Office of Professional Responsibility determined that McCabe ‘lacked candor’ during testimony before Congress and during interviews with the inspector general’s office. That is ‘Deep State’ speak for ‘he lied.’ … Another argument being made is how dirty it was for McCabe to be fired just days before he qualified for a full, generous federal pension … at the age of 50. The average American would love to be able to retire at the age of 50. Numerous sources over the weekend reported that McCabe may be worth as much as $11 million on his $162,000 salary. McCabe may have done well in the stock market. I am not going to shed any tears for him. I am sure his book deal will be announced shortly. This may be a good time to remember that Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who has not been charged with colluding with Russia, was also charged with a ‘lack of candor’ when he was interviewed by the FBI. His legal fees have broken him and his family. … Multiple liberal members of Congress have offered to hire McCabe so he can get a few more days to qualify for his pension. Can you imagine what the media reaction would be if conservative members of Congress had offered to hire Flynn so he could save his home and return to a secure financial footing?”


For the record: “Donald Trump … has reoriented politics around himself. To some degree, every president manages to do that; it’s in the nature of the bully pulpit. But opinions on the president are usually proxies for positions on larger issues that matter, such as taxes or social welfare spending. With Trump, it often comes down to what you think of the man himself. He is the center of gravity around which politics orbits in 2018.” —Jay Cost

Observations: “[Andrew] McCabe defenders may argue that any other FBI official would have reached the same conclusions about the Clinton investigation that McCabe did. But if that really is the case, that just strengthens the argument that someone else should have handled it. … If you allow the FBI to cut corners or tread into gray areas when investigating political figures you don’t like, at some point, they’re going to cut corners or tread into gray areas when investigating political figures you do like.” —Jim Geraghty

Friendly fire blitz:

“I don’t think that’s the way you should talk about any voter, especially ones in my state.” —Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) on Hillary Clinton’s attack on women voters

“[Hillary] should go away. … She is not helping the Democratic Party.” —former Obama State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf

“Look, this was bad. I can’t sugarcoat it.” —Clinton’s 2008 campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle

“I have all the respect in the world for her, but … [the] rest of us are gonna focus on the future.” —Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager Robby Mook

And last… “In 1992, when Bill Clinton was running for president, he went on ‘60 Minutes’ to answer allegations of extramarital wrongdoing. His wife appeared with him and backed him up. ‘I’m not sitting here some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette,’ Hillary Clinton said that day. ‘I’m sitting here because I love him and I respect him.’ She resented the insinuation that she lacked the agency to make a political decision in her own best interest. Women who voted for Trump resent it when Clinton makes the same insinuation about them.” —Jeff Jacoby

Comment | Share

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. We also humbly ask prayer for your Patriot team, that our mission would seed and encourage the spirit of Liberty in the hearts and minds of our countrymen.

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

Nate Jackson, Managing Editor
Mark Alexander, Publisher

Subscribe! It's Right. It's Free.