TECH COMPANIES CLAIM THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO COMBAT SCREEN ADDICTION

By DANIEL SONNINSHINE

With a growing body of research about negative effects of too much screen time in children and adults alike, big tech companies such as Apple and Google claim they are attempting to develop and implement measures in their devices and platforms to decrease the mindless scrolling, the endless social media-checking, and the overall dependence on devices.

Tech insiders, such as former Google designer Tristan Harris, note that the overall goal of device and app developers was to hook the user into continuously checking his/her device and interacting with the content.  Features such as push notifications, Snapchat streaks, and viral videos that appear in news feeds persuade the user to keep using the device. Harris now leads a nonprofit called The Center for Humane Technology, and he also is credited with spearheading the “Time Well Spent” movement. The movement’s aim is to make time spent with technology productive, not mind-numbing.

Besides an overall awareness of the addictive power of tech devices and social media, some changes to the device-dependent culture may come through new apps that monitor device and app usage. For instance, Apple’s Screen Time app monitors how many times a device is picked up, how many push notifications come through, and how many times a particular app is accessed. Google is developing a similar app called Digital Wellbeing. These are particularly helpful for parents, who can even set limits for their children and have their phones lock after the limit is reached. Additionally, Google’s Wind Down feature allows its user to do just that by not showing push notifications, removing color from the screen, and putting the phone into Do Not Disturb mode. With no push notifications coming through and a lack of color, the user is less enticed to engage with the phone. And Marc Zuckerberg claims that Facebook has changed its algorithm so that users see more posts from their friends and less sponsored posts.

Are these changes for real? Will they turn the tide of tech addiction? Maybe big tech will truly work to reduce the persuasive power of their products by taking bigger steps and making greater changes to platforms, social media in particular. Maybe the novelty of a sophisticated device, instant access to information, and the immediate gratification of social media will wear off. Or maybe people will simply become more mindful of the pros and cons of technology and make the personal choice to cut down and use it wisely.

Daniel Sonninshine is an Empire State News staff writer, who is in search of greatness. A 20-something smart fellow, he is now lifting weights in an effort to obtain more power. If that doesn’t work, he will ask to write more editorials for Empire State News and less fact articles.

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

SAN FRANCISCO SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT DUMPS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO PROTEST TRUMP

By CANDY STALLWORTH

Patriotism is under attack—again. This time, it’s the Pledge of Allegiance. No, it’s not an evil atheist who refuses to acknowledge that America is, in fact, one nation under God. Rather it’s the new San Francisco school board president, Stevon Cook. At the start of his first meeting, instead of reciting the pledge of allegiance, he chose to quote poet Maya Angelou with these words: “When you learn, teach. When you get, give.” He has said that he plans to continue this practice in future meetings, reciting quotes that, in his opinion, speak to social justice. Citing, for example, writer Toni Morrison and gay rights activist Harvey Milk, Cook claimed, “I really think that these people are a great testament to our values and who we should aspire to be as Americans.”

Cook expounded upon his reasoning for nixing the pledge. He claimed that the Trump administration is “attacking our liberties” and has made the political climate divisive. Furthermore, he noted that people do not even know anything about the pledge and merely recite it as a formality. He stated, “If you ask 10 Americans who wrote it, or when it was implemented, or why it is how we start our meetings, a lot of us would be hard pressed (to answer).” While it is reality that most people do not know the history of the pledge of allegiance, or the national anthem or God Bless America or America the Beautiful or anything patriotic for that matter, lack of knowledge does not override most patriotic, rationally thinking people’s desire to stand, sing/say the words, and show respect for their country and flag. Cook has a pretty lame line of reasoning, especially coming from an education leader (or politician in disguise?).

In contrast to another San Francisco left-wing kook, Colin Kaepernick, who infamously takes a knee for the national anthem, Cook pointed out that he stands for the pledge, but does not recite it. Using logic that only a liberal would spew (or understand), he stated, “We should stand for (the pledge) because those ideals are important to me,” he said. “To speak them is another thing.”

In the land of Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein, it comes as no surprise that at least one board member voiced support for Cook’s plan to start meetings with quotes. Rachel Norton said, “It feels respectful and it feels thoughtful…Maya Angelou is an alumnus of (San Francisco’s) Washington High School, so what better way to start a new tradition.”

As libs jump on the anti-patriotic bandwagon and attempt to coast toward their utopia of social justice, those who want to show respect and love for their country need to stand strong, stick to their principles, and see through the left-wing nonsense that seems to hang around like San Francisco fog. And, like the fog, hopefully ideas like Cook’s will dissipate.

Candy Stallworth, an Empire State News staff writer, whipped her way through a doctoral education at the finest of American higher ed institutions, noting how unoriginal, inept, and annoying many of the schools’ professors were in their robotic attempts to maintain a politically correct narrative. BTW: she hates words like “narrative”, “optics”, and “gaffe.” Other than that, her turn-offs include non-masculine men, women who hate men, men who hate men, phonies, disloyal people, and overflowing garbage cans. She likes New England clam chowder better than Manhattan clam chowder, but prefers Manhattan to New England.

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

TRUMP, COOL CUSTOMER, TELLS CHINA ‘NO DEAL’ ON TRADE

By ROBERT ROMANO

“Now look, China wants to make a deal, and I say they’re not ready yet. I just say they’re not ready yet. And we’ve canceled a couple of meetings because I say they’re not ready to make a deal. We can’t have a one-way street. It’s got to be a two-way street. It’s been a one-way street for 25 years. We gotta make it a two-way street. We’ve got to benefit also.”

That was President Donald Trump’s declaration to China on Oct. 9 that there won’t be a deal on trade anytime soon.

Not while the U.S. is running a $375 billion trade in goods deficit every year.

So far, Trump is levying 10 percent tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods shipped to the U.S., rising to 25 percent in Jan. 2019. That came atop a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion of goods from China.

And Trump did warn that if China retaliates, another $267 billion of tariffs would follow.

Well, so far, China has retaliated with tariffs on $60 billion of goods including agricultural products soybeans and pork.

In one gambit, China tried to exact a political toll by taking out a 4-page ad in the Des Moines Register to try and rattle agriculture states like Iowa that tend to vote Republican. Nice try.

Trump responded to the tariffs with disbursing $6 billion of trade relief for farmersfrom monies already appropriated by Congress, with another $6 billion in reserve if things get dicey.

On currency, China has devalued the yuan almost 9 percent the beginning of the year.

Overall, the U.S. only exports $135 billion of goods to China. Once they’ve slapped tariffs on the other $75 billion what else can it really do to retaliate? They’re running out of bullets.

In the meantime, Trump has concluded major trade deals with South Korea, Mexico and Canada, with more on the way from Europe and Japan. China is becoming isolated globally.

Which is why Trump won’t do a deal right now. They’re not offering anything we want. In May, the Trump administration asked China to cut the trade deficit by $200 billion by 2020 as part of a trade agreement. They said no.

And that’s why the $200 billion tariff was levied.

While some economists have worried about consumer inflation, so far, it hasn’t been found. Consumer prices are relatively stable, with a 2.2 percent increase the last year less food and energy.

So, it remains to be seen what price China will be able to exact from the U.S. So far, it’s been a paper tiger. Round one goes to Trump.

Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.  You can read more of his articles at www.dailytorch.com. 

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

AMERICANS, IN GREAT MAJORITY, FAVOR KAVANAUGH CONFIRMATION AND ARE NOT FOOLED BY FAR LEFT FRAUDSTERS & FAKE NEWS ZEALOTS

By TEMPLE LI

On Monday, Brett Kavanaugh had his first day in the job at the U.S. Supreme Court. He received a friendly welcome from the eight justices who serve as his colleagues. John Roberts, the court’s chief justice, inspirationally greeted him with words of encouragement that bestowed upon Kavanaugh a wish for the new justice to enjoy his many years on the bench to come. Elena Kagan, a liberal Democrat and former dean of Harvard Law school, cheerily chatted with the court’s newbie while he sat directly to the right of her. Kagan notably had hired Kavanaugh as a Harvard Law professor.

Kavanaugh’s first day as a U.S. Supreme Court justice was unremarkable, at least in the courtroom. While hearing a criminal case that involved a stiffer sentence of incarceration than normally would have been delivered (the defendant was given additional prison time because of a prior violent offense), Kavanaugh began peppering both sides with questions about 20 minutes into the oral argument. His judicial conduct was identical to most others who have sat this highest bench in that he didn’t appear to take a side in his questioning. One obvious distinction: Kavanaugh piped up less than 30 minutes from taking his seat on the court, while it took Clarence Thomas 17 years to ask his first question.

Outside the Supreme Court, something else unremarkable was occurring. Approximately 20 idiotic, ultra-liberal mental midgets were performing some kind of ritualistic protest regarding Kavanaugh’s appointment to the court. Mostly women (and probably paid), they donned bizarre, cult-like outfits. These approximately 20 canoodlers were chanting, almost in tongues. That’s 20 people – yes, 20. That’s less than a half of a bus full of people. Saying that it’s less than .000000000000000001 percent of the U.S. population is being generous to these nutcases. In other words, almost no REAL people are truly upset that Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed to the US Supreme Court. More people, from a singular town, show up to a local Board of Education meeting to protest a minor spike in their property taxes.

But the phony fake news mainstream media would have you thinking that there is some kind of national outcry against Kavanaugh’s appointment. From Kavanaugh’s first day on the bench through this date, they are still portraying the farce that Americans en masse are wholly heated about Kavanaugh’s ascension to the Supreme Court. They reference fictitious polls and serve up silly pundit after pundit to explain the supposed atrocity of Brett Kavanaugh becoming a Supreme Court justice. In similar fashion, many of the Democrat elected members of the U.S. Senate and House are dribbling fraudulent nonsense about Kavanaugh’s appointment.

Why the so clearly fake news sham?

Because the far left (which is now basically the entire Democratic party) knew that they blew it with their relentless and disgustingly unjust attacks upon Kavanaugh and, thus, the man’s wife and children. As previously reported in another Empire State News article, SATAN’S PAWNS IN U.S. SENATE FALSELY ACCUSE BRETT KAVANAUGH, BUT THEIR EVIL MAY CHANGE AMERICA FOR THE GOOD:

“While keeping in mind that it is possible that Ford is telling truth, it is so unlikely that she is earnest in her condemnation of Kavanaugh that the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee should have dismissed her account, with lightning speed, after reviewing it. Ford’s allegation was initiated with a huge credibility albatross around its neck: it originated as a he-said, she-said case, where, at best, there is 50% chance that it is true. One can never know who is telling the truth in a he-said, she-said case. That, alone, should have stopped Senate Dems from going forward with an inquisition against Kavanaugh; a person’s reputation and career should never be destroyed simply based upon the accusation of one, singular person.

But Satan’s pawns plowed forward. As they raced, barefoot, through the hot coals of hell, however, they learned that this was not really a he-said, she-said case; they learned it was worse. Ford’s memory of the alleged Kavanaugh-perpetrated sexual misdeed was not an actual memory. It was a retrieved memory. Which means Ford somehow “found” this “memory” in the annals of her mind years after the incident supposedly occurred.

It is uniformly agreed among medical experts that a retrieved memory has significantly less reliability than a regular, ole’ memory. But the psychologist Ford, well, her retrieved memory was given substantial weight by Satan’s pawns. To the majority of the rest of the world, however, it caused the 50% he-said, she-said case to significantly dip below that already-low 50-50 margin. But things get even worse.

Ford conveniently cannot remember key components of her purported attack. Such as where it occurred, and when it occurred. Most people probably do not understand that there is actually a major benefit in Ford not recalling the date of her alleged assault. But, indeed, there is such a benefit – and Satan’s pawns certainly understood it. So what’s the benefit of Ford being unable to remember when the supposed assault happened?

It took away the ability of an alibi. If Ford had named the date of the alleged incident, Kavanaugh may have been able to prove that he was at a different location and, therefore, case – and Satan’s game – over. However, whether Ford, on her own, developed the date amnesia, or she was coached into it by Satan’s pawns, she nonetheless cannot name the happening time. And this further destructs her credibility. As does the following:

All four people she asserted were at the party, where the sexual assault allegedly took place, have affirmatively stated that they never attended such a party. The woman has no corroborating evidence. Put another way, Kavanaugh has multiple people corroborating that the illicit act did not occur.

All of these above factors riddle Ford’s story with credibility tank holes. Her 50-50 he-said, she-said case (which, as aforesaid, already was inadequate to destroy Kavanaugh’s life), thus has plummeted to less than a one percent chance of being a true account. But Satan’s pawns steamed on. Not only via their use of Ford, but with the propagation of the Ramirez and Swetnick allegations, which said allegations are even more incredible than Ford’s troubled account.

In the lead up to her uncorroborated mudsling, Ramirez was actually calling up friends from Yale, asking if they remembered the penis-in-the-face incident she touted (because she was uncertain about whether Kavanaugh was involved, due to her own inebriation). Ramirez’s claim was so awfully weak that the New York Times refused to report it; after a week of searching, and interviewing a bevy of witnesses, the esteemed liberal publication could not find a single person to corrobor   ate Ramirez’s accusation.

Swetnick’s story is so ludicrous that it’s not worth giving it any mention, other than to note that her advocate is Stormy Daniels’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti. He’s that awkward, angry, hairless, talentless goofball who is constantly on CNN and MSNBC making wild claims, in a desperate effort to get himself attention. Certain pundits and anchors froth at the mouth during his appearances, allowing Avenatti to dribble on about political and legal matters that he clearly misunderstands and/or misrepresents. But when he’s challenged by intelligent news studs, such as Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson, Avenatti goes down in flames. He may enjoy that, though, as he is an active player with Satan’s pawns, the latter even making Avenatti think he is viable 2020 Democratic candidate for president.”

The Democrat politicians and their cheerleading cronies in the media and special interest groups (or vice versa, as it actually may be) are extremely concerned that the great majority of Americans have actually sided with Justice Kavanaugh and, accordingly, those Republicans who so faithfully and fairly secured his appointment to the bench. These Democrats are so fearful not just because public opinion, in reality, is, by the great majority, so against them, given Americans’ thirst for justice and its guiding principles of “innocence until proven guilty” and “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” But because they are well aware that their evil efforts have backfired so badly that they are going to lose their dream of recapturing the House and Senate in November. Accordingly, they surely will be continuing their media et al facade. These aren’t just evil people; they are desperate evil people. And that is a truly frightening concoction, one that so sadly has existed for quite some time – but they are unlikely to succeed in their fake news endeavors this time. And that’s because they overplayed their Grim Reaper hand, and the substantial majority of Americans know it and will back it up at the ballot box.

Temple Li is the news editor for Empire State News, where she frequently authors her own editorials (just because she feels like it). She graduated at the top of her class at a mediocre college, infuriating her professors with her conservative wit and sultry charm. Empire State News allows Ms. Li to make a living, and to have a platform to tell people what she thinks. What could be better than that?

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

SENATOR HIRONO: A MAN-HATER AND HYPOCRITE

By TEMPLE LI

Not to be rude, but…

Isn’t that U.S. Senator from Hawaii, Mazie Hirono, a complete idiot? A moron? An evildoer? An angry male-hater? A phony? A hypocrite?

This woman has told men to “just shut up!”

Why? So people can listen to her babble and dribble. She has nothing substantive to offer – on any topic. But she does demand that you MUST believe all women accusers.

Even when the accusations come from just one person.

Even when there is no evidence to support that the accusations leveled are true.

Even when there is evidence that shows that the singular accusation is false.

Why does this woman hate men so much? Why would any man ever vote for her? Why would any woman who loves men ever vote for her? Why would anyone ever vote for her?

Hirono has eliminated the phrase “due process” from her dictionary. She has set aflame the constitution. She has initiated a witch hunt-tirade against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, with her MUST believe mantra, in the most ludicrous of accusations. But is it simply because she hates men?

Part of it MUST be.

But part of MUST ne something else. Like money, maybe?

Hirono-Zero has been fundraising off the back of the man she has castigated and helped destroy.

Is Hirono-Zero a full-fledged, lunatic, male-hating demagogue? It appears so. But she’s also a hypocrite.

When her mentor, former Hawaii Senator Daniel Inouye was accused of rape by and other sexual misdeeds by several women, Hirono-zero stood by his side – and said nothing. There was no statement of the women MUST be believed. There was no attacks growled by her upon Senator Inouye. There was no condemnation of her mentor at all.

Now, perhaps this was the just and fair thing for Hirono-zero to have done. Perhaps the evidence against Senator Inouye was weak. In any case, her actions then, make Hirono-zero a flip-flopping, idiot, evildoer now. More so, she’s an evildoer no matter what now, and that’s because she’s been a large match starting the fire in the wrongful witch hunt against Judge Kavanaugh. It’s always wrong to assert that a person is guilty when a singular accusation has been made, with no evidence behind it. Just like in Senator Inouye’s matter, Hirono-zero should have stayed silent, waiting to see if there was evidence, before she condemned Judge Kavanaugh.

Temple Li is the news editor for Empire State News, where she frequently authors her own editorials (just because she feels like it). She graduated at the top of her class at a mediocre college, infuriating her professors with her conservative wit and sultry charm. Empire State News allows Ms. Li to make a living, and to have a platform to tell people what she thinks. What could be better than that?

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

 

AFTER SCREAMING FOR FBI INVESTIGATION INTO KAVANAUGH ALLEGATIONS, DEMS NOW WHINING BECAUSE THEY DON’T LIKE RESULTS

By CANDY STALLWORTH

It was a mere week ago that America witnessed the debacle/travesty of justice that was the Brett Kavanaugh hearing in response to Christine Blasey Ford’s out-of-nowhere, uncorroborated sexual misconduct allegations. During that hearing, Democratic senators repeatedly insisted that an FBI investigation was a necessity.  In their usual overdramatic fashion, several senators asked Kavanaugh to request the FBI investigation into himself.

Well, they got an FBI investigation. President Trump requested it last week. And now, the investigation is complete and the report is in.

As should be no surprise to rationally thinking, justice-minded people, the FBI found absolutely no corroboration for Ford’s claims. No one that was interviewed provided any corroborating evidence whatsoever, and thus, anyone who was foolish enough to believe Ford is now slapped with the harsh reality that her allegations are indeed false.

So the Democrats have now resorted to criticizing the investigation. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D – California) called the report  “a product of an incomplete investigation that was limited, perhaps by the White House.” Similarly, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D – Connecticut) claimed the White House “straitjacketed the investigation.” These comments are not at all surprising, given that Dems blame Trump for anything and everything.

On the other side, Republicans recognized that the investigation confirmed what they already knew: the allegations that have been levied at Kavanaugh are false. As Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) noted,  “There’s nothing in it that we didn’t already know. These uncorroborated accusations have been unequivocally and repeatedly rejected by Judge Kavanaugh, and neither the Judiciary Committee nor the FBI could locate any third parties who can attest to any of the allegations.”

Even those who are considered the swing votes for Kavanaugh’s confirmation accepted the report and its conclusion. Sen. Jeff Flake (R – Arizona) noted “we’ve seen no additional corroborating information” for Ford’s baseless allegations. And Susan Collins (R – Maine) remarked that the investigation seemed “very thorough.”

The Democrats just do not like the results. They demanded an investigation, got an investigation, and cannot accept the results. Once again, they emerge as whiners and sore losers. Sound familiar?

Candy Stallworth, an Empire State News staff writer, whipped her way through a doctoral education at the finest of American higher ed institutions, noting how unoriginal, inept, and annoying many of the schools’ professors were in their robotic attempts to maintain a politically correct narrative. BTW: she hates words like “narrative”, “optics”, and “gaffe.” Other than that, her turn-offs include non-masculine men, women who hate men, men who hate men, phonies, disloyal people, and overflowing garbage cans. She likes New England clam chowder better than Manhattan clam chowder, but prefers Manhattan to New England.

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

RED STATE DEMS MANCHIN, MCCASKILL, HEITKAMP AND DONNELLY CAN REPRESENT THEIR STATES, OR THEY CAN DEFEAT BRETT KAVANAUGH, BUT THEY CANNOT DO BOTH

By Robert Romano

As recently as Sept. 11, the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court was not a battleground state issue in the Congressional midterm elections. That was the finding of a YouGov/Demand Justice poll, which found that the confirmation vote was a non-factor.

And then the allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford emerged beginning on Sept. 14, first with the letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) leaking, and then with the front-and-center additional hearing where Ford and Kavanaugh both testified.

Suddenly, the issue has become the pivotal element of the midterm elections, especially in the Senate. Since then, the allegations have remained uncorroborated, including by those Ford had cited as witnesses, and Ford could not remember the date or location of the alleged attack.

In a new poll from Remington conducted Sept. 26 to Sept. 27, in Missouri, 49 percent of voters say the process has made them less likely to vote to reelect Sen. Clair McCaskill (D-Mo.), with only 42 percent saying it made them more likely.

Critically, that includes 46 percent of independents who said they were now less likely to vote for McCaskill as a result, with just 39 percent who said they were now more likely.

In West Virginia, a Public Opinion Strategies/Judicial Crisis Network poll conducted Sept. 27 found 58 percent of voters support confirming Kavanaugh, including 42 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of Independents. Unsurprisingly, 81 percent of Republicans support confirmation.

In North Dakota, the issue’s not helping Sen. Heidi Heitkamp at all. There, according to an Strategic Research Associates/NBC Valley News poll conducted Sept. 17 through Sept. 27, 60 percent of those polled said they support Kavanaugh with only 27 percent opposed and now Heitkamp is trailing her opponent Kevin Cramer by 10 points, 51 percent to 41 percent.

In Indiana, the only polling available was from prior to the allegations surfacing, a Fox News poll from Sept. 8 through Sept. 11, but even that found that among likely voters, a vote against Kavanaugh by Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) would make them less likely to vote for Donnelly, 29 percent to 21 percent. In that poll, Donnelly trailed his opponent Mike Braun 45 percent to 43 percent.

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has slammed his Senate Democrat colleagues for how they’ve handled this process in the Senate Judiciary Committee, told the Atlantic on Oct. 3 that he thought the issue was helping Republicans in the midterms: “I have never seen the Republican Party so unified as I do right now. Republicans across the board — country club, Tea Party — believe this was way over the top.”

In other words, the anti-Kavanaugh mob is turning Republicans and Independents across the board against these Democrat senators in states that President Donald Trump carried heavily in 2016, leaving Manchin, McCaskill, Heitkamp and Donnelly with a major dilemma.

Vote for Kavanaugh, and perhaps save their own skins. Or vote against him, siding with mob rule, and face the wrath of their states’ voters come November who still believe that in America, you’re innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

In a statement, Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning blasted the red state Democrat senators, saying, “These red state Democrats pretend to be bipartisans who reach across the aisle, but the last few weeks have proven that nothing could be further from the truth. Their silence in the midst of an angry mob encouraged by Senate Democrat leadership is unforgivable. The failure of these senators to even recognize the inherent unfairness of Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein’s deliberate mishandling of the uncorroborated charges of Christine Blasey Ford clearly shows that partisanship trumps the common sense the American people expect from their senators.”

What’s clearly at stake here are the constitutional rights of the accused and what sort of country we want to live in. Yes, victims of sexual assault should come forward to be heard, but at the same time, we still have a system of laws. No reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Kavanagh under these circumstances when the date and location of the attack is unknown and no witnesses corroborate the event.

The presumption of innocence must prevail. Kavanaugh is otherwise a qualified jurist for the nation’s highest court who will interpret the law as written, and that’s good enough for the people of West Virginia, Missouri, North Dakota and Indiana.

Meaning, for Senators Manchin, McCaskill, Heitkamp and Donnelly, they can represent their states, or they can vote to defeat Judge Kavanaugh — but they cannot do both.

Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.   You can read more of his articles at www.dailytorch.com. 

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

RONN TOROSSIAN AND 5W PUBLIC RELATIONS AGENCY PUT THEIR CLIENTS IN THE SPOTLIGHT THROUGH INNOVATIVE, BIG THINKING

By DANIEL SONNINSHINE

One of the nation’s most respected PR firms for businesses and brands, 5W Public Relations Agency (“5W”), is a 150-person, full service marketing and public relations company. Founded in 2003 and led by President/CEO Ronn Torossian, 5W has been routinely ranked as a “Top 10 Independent PR Firm” by industry leaders such as O’Dwyers and The Trade Desk. 5W was also named Agency of the Year by the American Business Awards three years in a row.

Called “One of the U.S.’s busiest, most effective PR companies” by Business Insider, 5W specializes in several key areas including:

(1) B2C (Beauty & Fashion, Consumer Brands, Entertainment, Food & Beverage, Health & Wellness, Technology, Travel & Hospitality);

(2) B2B (Corporate Communications, Reputation Management, CSR, Sustainability Communications);

(3) Digital Media (Social Media, Influencer Marketing, SEO & Graphic Design),

(4) Public Affairs;

(5) Government Relations; and

(6) Crisis Communications.

Known as an innovative, resourceful, and client-dedicated PR firm, 5W employees pride themselves in thinking big. They know it’s critical to produce successful results for their clients, and they actively work to deliver “needle-moving” public relations programs. 5W champions a novel approach, with creative thinking, in order to effectuate those game-changing PR campaigns required for their clients’ successes.

At 5W, they believe there is no one-size-fits-all approach. The firm explains on their website:

“Each client’s needs are assessed individually and then team members devise smart, proactive public relations, digital media and influencer campaigns that exceed expectations. In a constantly shifting digital world, where people are bombarded with information and news travels in seconds, 5W helps clients navigate ever-changing media, business, and consumer landscapes.”

Businesses who have experienced great successes through 5W’s efforts include: Krups, Diono, Coleman’s Mustard, Camp Bow Wow, SpringOwl Asset Management, Walgreens, Sharestates, Zeta, Storyblocks, Payoneer, Servcorp, Medifast, Rainbow Light, CheapOair, JetSmarter, Reservations.com, Sparkling ICE, Santa Margherita, Anheuser-Busch, Explore Cuisine, Paintzen, T-fal, Ashley Stewart, Nobis, Chuda, DECLEOR, Wendy, edressme, Gulliver’s Gate, The Westminster Kennel Club, Allergy & Asthma Network, and the Jackie Robinson Foundation.

With over 20 years of experience formulating powerful public relations campaigns for his clients, 5W’s top executive, Ronn Torossian, has emerged as one of the nation’s most respected PR professionals. Under Torossian’s leadership, 5W has developed a strong team of professionals to work alongside him in creating the innovative, big thinking public relations efforts that have become the firm’s signature accomplishments. Staff bios are saliently present on the company website, displaying a broad range of marketing and PR acumen among the firm’s top tier staff, including: Matthew Caiola (Executive Vice President, Corporate & Technology Practices), Dara A. Busch (Executive Vice President, Consumer Practices), Angelo Sposato (Senior Vice President, Human Resources), Shane Russell   (Senior Vice President, Technology), Ilisa Wirgin (Senior Vice President, Beauty, Health & Wellness), Chloe Gallo (Senior Vice President, Lifestyle), Jocelyn Kahn (Senior Vice President, Consumer Products & Brands), Annette Banca (Senior Vice President, Health & Wellness), Robert Ford (Senior Vice President, Corporate), Suejin Kim (Senior Vice President, Food & Beverage), and Greg Menken (Senior Vice President, Corporate).

Daniel Sonninshine is an Empire State News staff writer, who is in search of greatness. A 20-something smart fellow, he is now lifting weights in an effort to obtain more power. If that doesn’t work, he will ask to write more editorials for Empire State News and less fact articles.

COMMENTS DISABLED BY SITE.

YOU MAY, HOWEVER, COMMENT THROUGH FACEBOOK.

THE SENATE, NOT THE FBI, CONFIRMS SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

By Robert Romano

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution states that “The president shall… nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the senate, shall appoint… judges of the supreme court…”

Those are the simple words that outline the process prescribed by the U.S. Constitution for confirming Supreme Court justices. The President nominates a justice, in the current case Judge Brett Kavanaugh, and the Senate advises and then either consents or not to the nomination.

Not the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is not even in the Constitution.

It seems that Senate Democrats were more interested in asking Judge Kavanaugh what he thought the appropriate process for hearing the allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford was than to ask him about those allegations.

To his credit, Kavanaugh did not give the committee Democrats what they wanted, which was a sound bite calling for an FBI investigation into himself.

What a preposterous line of questioning.

The FBI cannot even bring a charge of sexual assault against Kavanaugh or anyone else. As it is, Kavanaugh has already been subject to six FBI background checks throughout his career, which is really all that would happen here.

A statement by the White House noted the shortcomings of an FBI-led process: “The FBI does not make a credibility assessment of any information it receives with respect to a nominee. The FBI provides notes from interviews that are conducted in relation to the nominee’s background. Those notes contain no editorializing or opinions on candor, body language, or credibility of those interviewed and any statements made during the interview.”

In 1991 during the Clarence Thomas confirmation, then Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Joe Biden said, “The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report, you wouldn’t like it if we did, because it is inconclusive…They say he said, she said, and they said. Period. So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand, they do not … reach conclusions. They do not make… recommendations.”

Democrats were looking for a sound bite, not an investigation. The FBI has no authority to conduct a criminal investigation against Kavanaugh on this particular allegation.

Now, Montgomery County police can investigate any and all crimes in its jurisdiction. There is no statute of limitations on sexual assault in the state of Maryland. It still could if there was probable cause. Then, a proper venue first and foremost would have been a court of law in the state of Maryland, where Kavanaugh went to high school.

As it is, Dr. Ford in her testimony still could not provide a specific date and location for the alleged crime, and eyewitnesses have submitted sworn statements contradicting her testimony. That’s not something that can be prosecuted, nor should it, let alone lead to a conviction.

According to Politico’s Burgess Everett and John Bresnahan, “Rachel Mitchell, a lawyer who was retained by the Senate GOP to question Ford, broke down her analysis of the testimony to Republicans, but did not advise them how to vote. She told them that as a prosecutor she would not charge Kavanaugh or even pursue a search warrant…”

So, we are left with the Senate Judiciary Committee, which can hear sworn testimony and receive sworn affidavits, which it has done.

And then the “ultimate fact finder,” in Kavanaugh’s words, decides. That is, the U.S. Senate, which oversees Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

The FBI can provide background checks on nominees, as is routine. It could append the record again, as it has already, and could include the sworn statements and testimony that have now been provided to the committee. It could take more statements, for sure. But it’s not likely to tell us anything we don’t already know that’s been put into the public record.

The Senate has the constitutional power to conduct its own investigations and question witnesses as a part of the advice and consent process.

The only true goal here is to delay this process and kick out this open Supreme Court seat past the 2020 election. The Senate Judiciary Committee should just go ahead and vote, and then so should the U.S. Senate.

Judge Kavanaugh, a qualified jurist who interprets the law as written — a constitutionalist — should be confirmed.

As for the Senators who want to defer their constitutional responsibility to the FBI to confirm or not confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, they should just do everyone a favor and resign. It is they who are not fit to serve.

Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government. You can read more of his articles at www.dailytorch.com. 

SATAN’S PAWNS IN U.S. SENATE FALSELY ACCUSE BRETT KAVANAUGH, BUT THEIR EVIL MAY CHANGE AMERICA FOR THE GOOD

By Temple Li

What positive results may the Kavanaugh/Ford hearings yield for America?

Brett Kavanaugh has been dragged through the mud, strung out through a torture chamber, and dumped into the fiery pits of hell. But he beat the devil back, and he has shown the world what a true survivor of a false allegation looks like:

One rightfully pissed off, indignant guy.

And how did that one pissed off dude get here?

The Democrats on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee played the role of Satan’s pawns. They withheld a specious claim, knowing that they would use it at a later, dubious time. Translation? Diane Feinstein and her cronies had captured Christine Blasey Ford’s uncorroborated account of a supposed sexual assault conducted by Judge Kavanaugh. Instead of immediately delivering it to the balance of the Judiciary Committee, they sat on it with their bloated, weathered, and odor-doused rectums, and released it like a BOOF months after receiving it.

They did this not for the protection of Ford, but as a political act. More so, as part of an orchestrated conspiracy, where Ford’s unverifiable allegation was just the first in a line of cruddy claims to be strutted out to the public in the weeks after Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing had supposedly ended. The plan, which has been carried out – and is likely still in progress – was to stagger nonsensical, evidentiary-unsupported claims into the media and the public purviewc. So, after Ford’s account, came Ramirez’s, and then Swetnick’s (the patently absurd gang rape assertion).

Satan’s pawns acted as if they were championing Ford, but they were so obviously using her. Very possibly, she was using them as well. If she’s not a victim of a sexual assault of Brett Kavanaugh – which is what the evidence very clearly indicates – then she is not a victim at all. The narrative that Ford probably had a sexual assault levied upon her, but it just wasn’t by Kavanaugh, is a wispy, politically correct approach taken by establishment Republicans who are too afraid to tackle Ford head-on. In other words, Satan’s pawns (i.e. – the Democrats in the Judiciary Committee and other donkey senators and house reps) utilized Ford as their launching pad of false allegations, but she very likely utilized them for her own motivations. What may they be?

Potential multi-million dollar settlements.

Fifteen minutes of fame – and lot more.

Being considered a courageous hero by both the evil left and the unthinking left (two separate groups that applaud any woman who makes a claim of sexual assault, no matter how unsupported and/or ridiculous it is).

Ford, like all of America, has watched the evolvement/devolvement of the #MeToo Movement. She has witnessed a voluminous cascade of women come out of the woodwork and make allegations of sexual assault. These allegations have been lobbed years, and many times decades, after incidents supposedly occurred. Some of the accusations are, undoubtedly, true. But many are false. Almost all of them are unproveable.

What’s also unproveable, in nearly all of them, is that the alleged victim fabricated the charges. Why? For the same reason that the allegations cannot be proven against the purported assailants: because the accusations are too old, and they are uncorroborated by any evidence. Accordingly, a woman falsifying a claim has a near absolute chance of never being held accountable for a contrived story of sexual assault. Instead, she faces the reality of obtaining a large cash settlement, becoming a cause célèbre, and being hailed a hero by crazed feminist groups and frightened men. After all, America has watched this happen for one woman after another, with the media coverage monumental. So, could Ford have a motive to lie?

Uhhh – YES.

While keeping in mind that it is possible that Ford is telling truth, it is so unlikely that she is earnest in her condemnation of Kavanaugh that the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee should have dismissed her account, with lightning speed, after reviewing it. Ford’s allegation was initiated with a huge credibility albatross around its neck: it originated as a he-said, she-said case, where, at best, there is 50% chance that it is true. One can never know who is telling the truth in a he-said, she-said case. That, alone, should have stopped Senate Dems from going forward with an inquisition against Kavanaugh; a person’s reputation and career should never be destroyed simply based upon the accusation of one, singular person.

But Satan’s pawns plowed forward. As they raced, barefoot, through the hot coals of hell, however, they learned that this was not really a he-said, she-said case; they learned it was worse. Ford’s memory of the alleged Kavanaugh-perpetrated sexual misdeed was not an actual memory. It was a retrieved memory. Which means Ford somehow “found” this “memory” in the annals of her mind years after the incident supposedly occurred.

It is uniformly agreed among medical experts that a retrieved memory has significantly less reliability than a regular, ole’ memory. But the psychologist Ford, well, her retrieved memory was given substantial weight by Satan’s pawns. To the majority of the rest of the world, however, it caused the 50% he-said, she-said case to significantly dip below that already-low 50-50 margin. But things get even worse.

Ford conveniently cannot remember key components of her purported attack. Such as where it occurred, and when it occurred. Most people probably do not understand that there is actually a major benefit in Ford not recalling the date of her alleged assault. But, indeed, there is such a benefit – and Satan’s pawns certainly understood it. So what’s the benefit of Ford being unable to remember when the supposed assault happened?

It took away the ability of an alibi. If Ford had named the date of the alleged incident, Kavanaugh may have been able to prove that he was at a different location and, therefore, case – and Satan’s game – over. However, whether Ford, on her own, developed the date amnesia, or she was coached into it by Satan’s pawns, she nonetheless cannot name the happening time. And this further destructs her credibility. As does the following:

All four people she asserted were at the party, where the sexual assault allegedly took place, have affirmatively stated that they never attended such a party. The woman has no corroborating evidence. Put another way, Kavanaugh has multiple people corroborating that the illicit act did not occur.

All of these above factors riddle Ford’s story with credibility tank holes. Her 50-50 he-said, she-said case (which, as aforesaid, already was inadequate to destroy Kavanaugh’s life), thus has plummeted to less than a one percent chance of being a true account. But Satan’s pawns steamed on. Not only via their use of Ford, but with the propagation of the Ramirez and Swetnick allegations, which said allegations are even more incredible than Ford’s troubled account.

In the lead up to her uncorroborated mudsling, Ramirez was actually calling up friends from Yale, asking if they remembered the penis-in-the-face incident she touted (because she was uncertain about whether Kavanaugh was involved, due to her own inebriation). Ramirez’s claim was so awfully weak that the New York Times refused to report it; after a week of searching, and interviewing a bevy of witnesses, the esteemed liberal publication could not find a single person to corroborate Ramirez’s accusation.

Swetnick’s story is so ludicrous that it’s not worth giving it any mention, other than to note that her advocate is Stormy Daniels’s lawyer, Michael Avenatti. He’s that awkward, angry, hairless, talentless goofball who is constantly on CNN and MSNBC making wild claims, in a desperate effort to get himself attention. Certain pundits and anchors froth at the mouth during his appearances, allowing Avenatti to dribble on about political and legal matters that he clearly misunderstands and/or misrepresents. But when he’s challenged by intelligent news studs, such as Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson, Avenatti goes down in flames. He may enjoy that, though, as he is an active player with Satan’s pawns, the latter even making Avenatti think he is viable 2020 Democratic candidate for president.

All of this miscreant behavior by Satan’s pawns (reminder – they are the Democrat senators and their ilk) fruited to the extra-innings Kavanaugh hearing with Ford. Which led to the emergence of that one pissed-off, indignant dude. And what great and moral things can come from this rightfully pissed-off guy (other than Roe v. Wade being overturned)?

There’s a reasonable possibility that America will see a wholly – and holy – overhaul of its criminal justice system.

Judge Kavanaugh has been wrongfully accused in the most brutal of settings. A man of astounding accomplishments and impeccable credentials has had his reputation maligned, in the most heinous manner, by Satan’s pawns. He has been publicly humiliated. Worse, his family has been attacked.

Judge Kavanaugh will NEVER forget this. And he should never forgive it. But he should use it for good – for greatness.

The man assuredly will ascend to the nation’s highest bench, given his genuine performance at this horrendous hearing (and the ultra-powerful and moving words of U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham). As a Supreme Court justice, Kavanaugh may have the ability to rule on the constitutionality of a state and/or federal statute that makes it illegal to prosecute people for charges based solely upon one person’s word, where there is zero corroborating evidence. If afforded that opportunity, Justice Kavanaugh very likely will use this terribly unfortunate personal disaster to help others falsely accused. Joining another wrongfully accused jurist, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas – and three other rational, justice-seeking judges – Justice Kavanaugh can affirm the constitutionality of such a law. If so, Americans will live in a much better, fairer world than the one Kavanaugh – and many others – have suffered under, through the treachery of Satan’s Democrat pawns (and all those, regardless of party affiliation, who have prosecuted people in he-said, she-said cases).

Temple Li is the news editor for Empire State News, where she frequently authors her own editorials (just because she feels like it). She graduated at the top of her class at a mediocre college, infuriating her professors with her conservative wit and sultry charm. Empire State News allows Ms. Li to make a living, and to have a platform to tell people what she thinks. What could be better than that?