Bernie Sanders supporters aren’t the only ones frustrated with the DNC. So is the press. After a single day on the ground, the Left’s cheerleaders are already fed up with the horrible conditions at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. And they aren’t just talking about the gender-free bathroom (although that’s gotten its own share of complaints). The event is so disorganized that people like Yahoo News’s editor-in-chief took to Twitter to complain. “To be totally objective and nonpartisan: the logistics at DNC are appalling. Squalid hotels, sweltering workspace, no directions. Chaos.”

From The New York Times to CNN, reporters everywhere are exasperated, railing against the distance between venues, lack of air conditioning, late busses, and security lines. It makes you wonder: If the Democrats can’t run a convention, how could they possibly run a country? Inside Wells Fargo Arena, the party has been rocked by the email scandal, which pulled back the curtain on the DNC’s vicious attack politics.

Making matters worse, another terrorist attack in France came just hours after the DNC wrapped up Day 1. Yet even after the string of violence across Europe these last two weeks, not one of the Democrats’ 61 speakers even mentioned the word terrorism from the stage. Politifact confirmed the glaring omission [Tuesday] morning, noting that, “Based on our searches of C-SPAN closed-captioning text, Congressional Quarterly transcripts and other video archiving services, we couldn’t find any speaker who mentioned ‘ISIS,’ ‘Islamic’ ‘terror,’ ‘terrorist,’ or ‘terrorism’ during the first day of the convention.”

Could there be any clearer contrast between the two parties? The evidence isn’t just obvious in their event planning, but their platforms, their procedures (the DNC debating its platform in secret, while the RNC broadcast theirs on TV) their presenters, and even their protesters — which, for the DNC, are its own people! The Democrats are in trouble, and frankly, that’s a good sign. It means that there’s hope for stopping what would essentially be Act III of Barack Obama’s big government, anti-faith, and anti-family agenda, which continues to bankrupt our country financially and morally.

I know there are a number of conservative Christians who are wrestling with what to do in this election. I understand completely, because I’ve had to wrestle with the same. I did my very best to try and secure an outcome in the primary that, based on my knowledge and understanding, would have provided the best possible future for our nation. I did not succeed in that effort. Instead, set before every American are two candidates: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. The idea of a third-party candidate riding onto the scene on a white horse isn’t going to happen (short of the rapture).

So we have two choices. There isn’t any question in my mind as to what Hillary Clinton would do as president. First, she would appoint liberal activist justices to the Supreme Court, as well as to the lower courts. Need we be reminded that it was the Court that paved the way for the deaths of over 50 million unborn babies with its activist decision in 1973? Under Clinton’s nominees, there will be more Obergefell-like decisions that defy science, history, and truth well into the next generation. As if that weren’t enough, her track record as secretary of state made it clear she had absolutely zero concern for religious liberty when she strong-armed country after country to adopt pro-LBGT laws.

Will Donald Trump be a champion of conservatism? I doubt it. There are no guarantees as to what kind of president he will be. But in my opinion, it is worth the risk for the following reasons. First, the only other option is Clinton, which — for all of the reasons stated above — is not an option. Trump has shown that he’s listening and cares about gaining conservative support. Many people may not realize it, but Donald Trump is the first candidate to ever release a list of potential court picks, all of whom are solidly conservative.

As I’ve previously mentioned, as a part of the Republican Platform Committee, I also witnessed the Trump campaign break the pattern of campaigns bullying delegates to ensure that the platform isn’t “too conservative.” Thanks to its hands-off approach in 2016, the GOP now has the most conservative platform in its history. Trump also chose a known conservative as his running mate. If you’ve read this Update or listened to me on “Washington Watch” over the last year, you know I’ve been profoundly disappointed in Indiana Governor Mike Pence for lacking the courage to stand up for religious freedom against the big corporate bullies who have allowed themselves to become puppets for LGBT activists. However, by selecting Mike, Donald Trump was making clear that he is trying to connect with conservatives. I give him credit for his efforts.

As someone who’s been in politics for two decades, I’ve actually seen a more legitimate effort to work with evangelicals on behalf of the Trump campaign than I’ve personally witnessed from the last three Republican presidential campaigns. I cannot guarantee that we will be elated with a Trump presidency. In my view, conservatives who are supporting Trump are taking a calculated, but informed risk — but they do so knowing what the alternative is.

Originally published here.

Daleiden’s Problems Finally Absolved!

[…] Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards […] and the rest of the country got some surprising news: the criminal charges against David Daleiden, the mastermind of the undercover videos exposing her organization, were dropped! After months of a political and legal smear campaign by liberals in Texas, District Judge Brock Thomas finished the work that Judge Diane Bull started and dismissed the second of two felony charges brought against David by Harris County District Attorney (and pro-abortion donor) Devon Anderson.

The court rejected the County’s argument that Daleiden and his coworker had tampered with government documents by using a fake ID and cleared the Center for Medical Progress’s duo of all guilt. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Planned Parenthood, which takes the stage at the Democratic National Convention still under congressional investigation for selling baby body parts and potentially violating late-term abortion bans. Still, the DNC could not be prouder to feature the scandal-ridden group, which Hillary Clinton continues to run toward while states run away.

In a statement, CMP knows where the real outrage should be directed: “A year after the release of the undercover videos, the ongoing nationwide investigation of Planned Parenthood by the House Select Investigative Panel makes clear that Planned Parenthood is the guilty party in the harvesting and trafficking of baby body parts for profit.” What’s more, he went on, “The dismissal of the bogus, politically motivated charges against [Center for Medical Progress] project lead David Daleiden and investigator Sandra Merritt is a resounding vindication of the First Amendment rights of all citizen journalists, and also a clear warning to any of Planned Parenthood’s political cronies who would attack whistleblowers to protect Planned Parenthood from scrutiny.” We celebrate with David that the Left’s best efforts at legal sabotage didn’t succeed and look forward to a day when the real culprits are brought to justice.

Originally published here.

DNC Emails: An Optical Collusion?

For years, it’s felt like the mainstream press was just a satellite office of the DNC — and in light of the 20,000 emails leaked this week, we know why. The intimate relationship between the Democratic Party and the media isn’t just a conspiracy theory dreamed up by paranoid conservatives. Turns out, there’s more bias in some newsrooms than there is at a Lois Lerner auditing party. From reporters giving party officials a chance to edit or comment on their stories to outright dictating what questions Democratic officials will be asked on air, the collusion uncovered in the pages of messages is astounding — even for the most cynical media critic.

Heritage’s Daily Signal breaks down some of the most egregious examples, including the night-and-day treatment objective outlets like the Washington Examiner received for inquiries compared to the liberal press. When the Examiner asked a question about delegates to the DNC, a communications official coached his employees to ignore it and offered to tell state leaders the same. “I can send an alert to the state parties not to respond to this inquiry. Examiner is a right wing rag,” he wrote.

When a Fred Lucas, who worked for Fox News at the time, asked a DNC official about Bill Clinton’s prior indiscretions, he wrote to his team, “Is there a f— you emoji?” The conservative name-calling was a common theme throughout the emails, as was the press’s obvious political agenda. “A senior Politico reporter, Ken Vogel, sent an unflattering article about presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to DNC officials on April 30 for review before publication,” the Signal points out. “‘Per agreement… any thoughts appreciated,’ Vogel wrote in the subject line.” It was a mistake, Vogel admitted this week — but not an accident.

In our story yesterday, we pointed out the DNC’s hardball strategy in North Carolina. One staffer asks if anyone has “relevant information for crafting a decent hit piece on the pro-prejudice backwater of the NC statehouse, but if you do, feel free to Slack it to me!” Slack, for those of you who don’t know, is an app that lets you create groups for collaborating and file-sharing. Obviously, by telling members of the press to “slack” it to him, the DNC is actually forming groups to pass documents back and forth with the media.

The Left must know that it can’t win the war of ideas on a level playing field, so it resorts to lying, slander, and outright distortion — in many cases, with the liberal media’s help. Of course, the people most hurt by the press’s bias aren’t conservatives — they’re the American people, who never really get to know the truth about their candidates. Now that the WikiLeaks has uncovered the media’s agenda, it’s time to make real headlines by doing something about it.

Originally published here.