From Forbes, our image of the day captures nicely the mainstream media's credibility problem, as their…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Mainstream Media's Evaporating Credibility

From Forbes, our image of the day captures nicely the mainstream media's credibility problem, as their cries of "Wolf!" accumulate.  Simultaneously, it captures how three institutions most intertwined with conservative values - the military, small business and police - remain atop the list of public esteem.


[caption id="" align="alignleft" width="960"] Media's Evaporating Credibility[/caption]


.  …[more]

October 04, 2019 • 10:29 am

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Notable Quotes
On the Consequences of Bernie Sanders’ Plan to Cancel Student Loan Debt:

"In a weird twist on socialism, Bernie Sanders on Monday rolled out a plan to hand a $1.6 trillion gift to college-loan borrowers -- who tend to be better off than the average taxpayer.

"He'd cancel all student debt, public and private -- even for grad students and no matter the borrower's income. Another $600 billion would go to make public universities and community colleges free.

"Sanders claims a tax on Wall Street transactions can raise $2.4 trillion to pay for it. But critics say the tax would lead to fewer trades -- and generate far less revenue. Plus, many of those transactions are made on behalf of middle- and working-class people's retirement savings. ...

"This is what socialism really produces: no 'equity' or fairness -- only unintended consequences, with all but the favored few winding up worse off."

Read the entire column here.

— New York Post Editorial Board
— New York Post Editorial Board
Posted June 26, 2019 • 08:13 am
On the Fears by Democrat Brass about Their Party’s Presidential Primary:

"This week's debates will be the first time millions of Americans meet the cast of Democrats trying to take out President Donald Trump.

"That's precisely what has party brass terrified.

"Interviews with nearly 20 Democratic elected officials, party chiefs, labor leaders and operatives the past week revealed an air of foreboding verging on alarm that the debates will degenerate into a two-night, bare-knuckle brawl. With the divisive 2016 Democratic primary fresh in their minds and the current presidential candidates starting to take swipes at one another, the fear is that voters will be left with the impression of a bickering, small-minded opposition party. ...

"The first debates of the primary also come as a number of candidates are barely registering in the polls and desperate for a splashy moment. ...

"The 2016 campaign still weighs on many Democrats anxious about a slugfest in 2020. They're apprehensive of a primary that leaves its nominee too damaged and its party too divided -- and fear this week's debates could kick off that kind of race."

— Holly Otterbein, Reporter for Politico
— Holly Otterbein, Reporter for Politico
Posted June 25, 2019 • 08:03 am
On the Congressional Clash Over Funding for Border Security:

"The House and Senate are set to take up competing bills this week that would provide President Trump more than $4.5 billion in new funding tied to the U.S.-Mexico border.

"The looming clash comes as Congress is expected to leave town at the end of the week for the July 4th recess, making it unlikely they'll resolve the standoff over the bills before the break absent an 11th hour agreement.

"The House and Senate bills both provide the administration with more than $4.5 billion, including new money to help shore up a Health and Human Services (HHS) unaccompanied children program set to run out of money. But they split over the details, including money for the Pentagon, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

"Lawmakers had hoped to get a bill to Trump's desk before leaving for the break, after the funding was yanked out of the disaster aid package because of a disagreement over immigration-related provisions."

— Jordain Carney and Juliegrace Brufke, Writing for The Hill
— Jordain Carney and Juliegrace Brufke, Writing for The Hill
Posted June 24, 2019 • 08:20 am
On President Trump Invoking Executive Privilege:

"President Trump is within his rights to invoke executive privilege, including when it comes to former White House communications director Hope Hicks, according to Alan Dershowitz.

"Congressional lawmakers often claim presidents are not 'above the law' in many of these cases, but Congress itself is also not 'above the law,' Dershowitz told host Laura Ingraham on Fox News' 'The Ingraham Angle.'

"'Each branch of the government has a form of executive privilege,' Dershowitz said Wednesday night. 'The president is perfectly entitled to invoke executive privilege. If they think it goes too far ... let the courts decide.

"'As far as the current issue is concerned, all three branches of government have privilege,' he continued. 'You can't call a law clerk at the Supreme Court and ask the law clerk, "What did you discuss with the justice?" Imagine if they tried to call legislative assistants of senators or congressmen, the same congressmen who are demanding that [Hicks] speak would be up in arms.'"

— Charles Creitz, Fox News
— Charles Creitz, Fox News
Posted June 21, 2019 • 08:00 am
On Illegal Immigration and the USA's Asylum Process:

"Last month, 144,000 people were arrested at our southern border. Many of these people were not trying to escape the Border Patrol, but were turning themselves in. Why?

"Because our asylum process is laughably easy to take advantage of.

"One must be deliberately ignoring reality to pretend that our asylum process is not being abused. As it stands now, the incentives are aligned to permit illegal immigrants to cross the border with a child, knowing full well that they will be caught and released into society without the chance of deportation. We cannot pretend that this a system based on rule of law and respect for our sovereignty.

"Even worse, we cannot pretend that this is a system that rewards law-abiding legal immigration over illegal immigration. It isn't fair to our citizens, and it isn't fair to immigrants around the world who are trying to come to our country legally."

— Congressman Dan Crenshaw (R-TX)
— Congressman Dan Crenshaw (R-TX)
Posted June 20, 2019 • 08:09 am
On Electronic Data and Fourth Amendment Rights:

"Privacy expectations should not be lost just because digital and electronic information is transferred through wires or enters a remote server (the Cloud). If the government searched an individual's mail or home, it would need a warrant first. This same standard should apply to all property, including electronic data. But 48 of 50 states are failing to protect private data from government intrusion.

"It's no secret that technology develops faster than legal doctrines, statutes, and regulations. States have failed to keep up with necessary legal changes to protect citizens' rights under the Fourth Amendment. This has left other forms of electronic data, notably stored communications such as what a user might save in the Cloud or on their laptop, unprotected from government searches.

"Due to the 'third party doctrine,' state and federal governments can access electronic data without a search warrant by utilizing online platforms. The 'third party doctrine' holds that people who voluntarily give information to third parties, such as banks, phone companies, internet service providers, and email servers have 'no reasonable expectation of privacy.'

"California was the first state to protect third-party information from unwarranted government searches. Now, Utah has become the second state to pass legislation closing the third-party loophole and protecting Americans' Fourth Amendment rights.

"The Fourth Amendment ensures the right of the people to be secure in their persons, and property against unreasonable searches and seizures. This means a warrant based on probable cause must be issued before a place can be searched, or persons and things can be seized."

Read entire article here.

— Anna Parsons, ALEC Center for Innovation and Technology
— Anna Parsons, ALEC Center for Innovation and Technology
Posted June 19, 2019 • 08:00 am
On Avoiding War With Iran:

"[T]he public fretting about launching a war with Iran ignores the fact that Iran has waged its own war against the U.S. and its allies for decades. It has supplied insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan with the roadside bombs that maimed and killed U.S. soldiers. It tried to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington. More recently, Iran's diplomats and operatives were tied to terror plots in Western Europe.

"Iran's bellicosity began long before Trump's maximum pressure campaign. It has been a feature of Iranian statecraft since the 1979 revolution. If allies in Europe and Democrats in Congress are worried about war with Iran, they should start by holding the regime accountable for its actions, instead of blaming them on an administration trying to deter them."

— Eli Lake, Bloomberg Opinion National Security and Foreign Policy Correspondent
— Eli Lake, Bloomberg Opinion National Security and Foreign Policy Correspondent
Posted June 18, 2019 • 08:01 am
On President Trump's Mexico-Tariff Victory:

"President Trump's detractors are trying to play down the significance of the US-Mexico immigration deal, saying it is largely comprised of actions that Mexico had already agreed to many months ago.

"Nice try. If Mexico had truly agreed to implement many of these measures in December, then why had they not been implemented six months later? As even Mexican officials acknowledge, it was Trump's threat of tariffs that forced Mexico's hand. In announcing the deal, a relieved Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said the 'most important thing is that they didn't apply tariffs and we didn't experience an economic slowdown.'

"The fact is, Trump bucked Republicans on Capitol Hill and even many of his own advisers, and used the threat of tariffs to get Mexico to act -- and it worked.

"The measures Mexico has promised include the deployment of 6,000 national guard forces at Mexico's largely unguarded border with Guatemala, which -- according to Mexican negotiating documents -- will be 'the first time in recent history that Mexico has decided to take operational control of its southern border as a priority.'"

— Marc Thiessen, American Enterprise Institute Fellow
— Marc Thiessen, American Enterprise Institute Fellow
Posted June 17, 2019 • 08:09 am
On Congress, Air Force One and President Trump:

"And so it has come to this.

"Two oil tankers were just attacked in the Gulf of Oman, presumably by Iran. The United States and China are facing off in a confrontation that is about far more than trade. The southern border remains anarchic and uncontrolled.

"And Congress is asking: 'Can I get the icon in cornflower blue?'

"Here is the situation: The president of these United States gets from place to place in one of two Boeing jets designated 'Air Force One' when the president is aboard. Jets wear out, and the U.S. government is commissioning a couple of new ones, which will not come into use until President Ocasio-Cortez takes over in 2025. The paint scheme is going to change from its 1960s two-tone blue to a more conservative and modern look that is -- see if these colors sound familiar -- red, white, and blue. The Washington Post is on the case, and reports that the new look will end up 'featuring colors remarkably similar to his -Trump's- 'private jet.' This is true. Trump's jet, seen often during the 2016 campaign, is, going from top to bottom, blue, red, and white. The new Air Force One will be white, red, and blue. In each case, the red makes up a narrow stripe separating the two larger color fields.

"Congressional Democrats are, of course, outraged: How dare this aspiring caudillo order a vehicle belonging to the government to be painted red, white, and blue! That's . . . un-American!"

— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
— Kevin D. Williamson, National Review
Posted June 14, 2019 • 08:02 am
On Ilhan Omar's (D-MN) Tax Problems:

"Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar is under fire once again for filing joint tax returns with a man she hadn't yet married.

"Omar and her current husband, Ahmed Hirsi, filed joint tax returns in 2014 and 2015 while Omar was married to another man, according to a report published earlier this week by the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Omar didn't divorce her previous husband until 2017 and did not become married to Hirsi until 2018.

"Omar was ordered by campaign finance officials to pay a fine of $3,500 over this incident and her misuse of thousands of dollars in campaign funds between the years 2016 and 2017.

"This revelation will lead to further scrutiny of the freshman congresswoman, who has become a lightning rod since arriving in Washington, D.C., earlier this year."

Read entire article here.

— William Davis, The Daily Caller
— William Davis, The Daily Caller
Posted June 13, 2019 • 08:05 am
Question of the Week   
Which one of the following is still remembered as the most infamous incident in American industrial history?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
"Everyone who already thought the case for President Trump's impeachment was a slam-dunk went berserk Thursday, claiming that acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney had just admitted to a quid pro quo with Ukraine.Except that what Mulvaney 'admitted' is that the administration was doing what it should -- pushing a foreign government to cooperate in getting to the bottom of foreign interference…[more]
—The Editorial Board, New York Post
— The Editorial Board, New York Post
Liberty Poll   

Why do you think House Speaker Pelosi will not call a vote on formal impeachment proceedings?