Old Guard Audio ❗
John Hames
All episodes
Best episodes
Top 10 Old Guard Audio ❗ Episodes
Goodpods has curated a list of the 10 best Old Guard Audio ❗ episodes, ranked by the number of listens and likes each episode have garnered from our listeners. If you are listening to Old Guard Audio ❗ for the first time, there's no better place to start than with one of these standout episodes. If you are a fan of the show, vote for your favorite Old Guard Audio ❗ episode by adding your comments to the episode page.
President Trump - Remarks on Las Vegas Mass Murder
Old Guard Audio ❗
10/03/17 • 5 min
Thank you.
My fellow Americans, we are joined together today in sadness, shock, and grief.
Last night a gunman opened fire on a large crowd at a country music concert in Las Vegas, Nevada. He brutally murdered more than 50 people and wounded hundreds more.
It was an act of pure evil.
The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are working closely with local authorities to assist with the investigation and they will provide updates as to the investigation and how it develops.
I want to thank the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police department and all of the first responders for their courageous efforts and for helping to save the lives of so many. The speed with which they acted is miraculous and prevented further loss of life. To have found the shooter so quickly after the first shots were fired, is something for which we will always be thankful and grateful. It shows what true professionalism is all about.
Hundreds of our fellow citizens are now mourning the sudden loss of a loved one, a parent, a child, a brother or sister. We cannot fathom their pain, we cannot imagine their loss. To the families of the victims, we are praying for you and we are here for you. And we ask God to help see you through this very dark period.
Scripture teaches us the Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit. We seek comfort in those words, for we know that God lives in the hearts of those who grieve. To the wounded who are now recovering in hospitals, we are praying for your full and speedy recovery, and pledge to you our support from this day forward.
Psalm 34:18 The Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit.In memory of the fallen, I have directed that our great flag be flown at half-staff. I will be visiting Las Vegas on Wednesday to meet with law enforcement, first responders, and the families of the victims. In moments of tragedy and horror, America comes together as one. And it always has.
We call upon the bonds that unite us, our faith, our family, and our shared values. We call upon the bonds of citizenship, the ties of community, and the comfort of our common humanity. Our unity cannot be shattered by evil, our bonds cannot be broken by violence, and though we feel such great anger, at the senseless murder of our fellow citizens, it is our love that defines us today. And always will. Forever.
In times such as these, I know we are searching for some kind of meaning in the chaos, some kind of light in the darkness. The answers do not come easy. But we can take solace knowing that even the darkest space can be brightened by a single light and even the most terrible despair can be illuminated by a single ray of hope.
Melania and I are praying for every American who has been hurt, wounded or lost the ones they loved so dearly in this terrible, terrible attack. We pray for the entire nation to find unity and peace, and we pray for the day when evil is banished and the innocent are safe from hatred and from fear.
May God bless the souls of the lives that are lost, may God give us the grace of healing and may God provide the grieving families with strength to carry on. Thank you. God bless America.
Thank you.
11/30/21 • 6 min
Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / November 29, 2021
The Heritage Foundation will "fight tooth-and-nail and send the message that our freedoms are not up for debate," Heritage President Kay C. James says. Pictured: President Joe Biden speaks Nov. 3 at the White House about authorization of a COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5 to 11. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
The Heritage Foundation is suing the Biden administration to stop its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for private employers, calling the requirement a “gross abuse of power.”
“The mandate clearly encroaches on the police power of states expressly reserved by the 10th Amendment [to the Constitution],” argues the complaint filed Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The lawsuit adds: “It also exceeds the federal government’s authority under the Commerce Clause.”
Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James and the think tank’s incoming president, Kevin Roberts, who takes office Wednesday, both issued statements on the lawsuit.
“Dr. Roberts and I, along with the Board of Trustees, unanimously agreed The Heritage Foundation has a vital role to play in the courts to protect and secure the freedom of all Americans to make medical decisions for themselves,” James said, adding:
To all of our members, to the conservative movement, and to Americans concerned by this unacceptable overreach by President [Joe] Biden and his administration, I say this—Heritage’s leadership is united behind this lawsuit, and we are going to fight tooth-and-nail and send the message that our freedoms are not up for debate.
Heritage’s court action became one of the latest challenges to the vaccine mandate, which imposes a Jan. 4. deadline for businesses and other organizations that employ 100 or more to require their employees either to be fully vaccinated or produce the results of weekly tests for the coronavirus. Heritage has about 270 employees.
The American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative legal group, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Heritage, which is the parent organization of The Daily Signal.
“The Heritage Foundation has not historically filed lawsuits,” Roberts said in his own written statement. “That we are doing so now should make clear to any observer that we view this mandate as a deadly serious threat to our individual liberty and the values that make America great. Under my predecessors, The Heritage Foundation has stood rock-solid in defense of liberty, freedom, and opportunity for all, and it will continue to do so under my leadership.”
Roberts continued:
I wish this lawsuit were unnecessary. I wish we had an administration in the White House that respected the Constitution and the rule of law.
From the unprecedented border crisis, to the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, to now this unlawful COVID vaccine mandate, it is irrevocably clear that this administration will stop at nothing—even harming Americans and our national interests—in pursuit of the most radical policy agenda in American history. Rest assured, we at Heritage are only just beginning to fight back. ...
I am so thrilled to be leading this incredible organization at this pivotal time in our nation’s history, and to be engaged in the trenches on the most important fights we’ve seen in a generation.
On Sept.9, Biden authorized the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to require employers with 100 or more workers to make sure those workers either are fully vaccinated or provide weekly test results showing that they don’t have COVID-19.
“We’re going to protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated co-workers,” Biden said in announcing the mandate.
The Biden administration contends that the mandate is necessary because too many Americans refuse to get vaccinated and that OSHA has the statutory authority to impose the mandate.
During remarks Monday at the White House about the omicron variant of COVID-19, Biden said the United States is doing its part to get its citizens vaccinated, and add...
08/09/17 • 5 min
The tolerance police at Google just struck another blow against increasing diversity in Silicon Valley by firing an employee who wrote a memo critiquing the company’s politically correct culture.
Now, let’s be clear - While the Google software engineer who authored the memo had the right to say and write what he did—it’s called free speech—Google is a private company and has every right to fire an employee it deems not in line with its mission or culture.
But it’s fair to ask why Google reacted so negatively to an employee who, in a 10-page memo, laid out a case for why Google’s diversity programs weren’t working and how it might rethink its attempt to reduce the gender gap.
Could it be that Google is feeling just a little bit paranoid?
For all the talk about inclusiveness and diversity, here’s the reality -
If you’re not white or Asian, that means there is only a 5 percent chance you’re part of Google’s leadership team.
And while 31 percent of Google’s employees are women, only 20 percent of its technical employees are—and it was primarily the memo’s focus on this gender gap that seems to have caused the recent unpleasantness in Silicon Valley.
In addition to bad PR, perhaps what the larger left-leaning community there doesn’t want to admit is that for all its diversity programs and safe spaces, and who knows how many millions of dollars spent promoting them, they have done very little to change the outcomes.
When it comes to computer and mathematical occupations, the numbers clearly show that women and men are not equally represented.
Women held 27 percent of such jobs in 1960. Thirty years later, they held 35 percent. But fast forward to 2013, and the number of women in computing and mathematical occupations had fallen back to 26 percent.
And it’s not because fewer women are going to college.
In fact, a Department of Education study from 2014 shows more women than men are attending and graduating from college, and they are receiving the majority of bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees.
But when it comes to college majors, women and men choose differently. A recent Georgetown University study showed over 80 percent of petroleum engineering majors are male. So are almost 70 percent of those majoring in mathematics and computer science.
Women, on the other hand, tend to major in what might be called more people-oriented professions, such as counseling, education, and social work.
Why men and women make such different choices is not 100 percent clear cut, but the idea that biology plays no role and it’s all because America is a sexist culture seems like an outdated and disproven theory.
And it was hiring and personnel practices based on that politically correct theory that the now-former Google employee was criticizing.
As he stated in the memo that got him fired - “If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
Apparently at Google, and much of Silicon Valley, the discussion is over.
Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber How bias clouds our thinking about diversity and inclusion go/pc-considered-harmful James Damore - damore@ July 2017 Feel free to comment (they aren’t disabled, the doc may just be overloaded). For longer form discussions see g/pc-harmful-discuss Reply to public response and misrepresentation TL;DR Background Google’s biases Possible non bias causes of the gender gap in tech Personality differences Men’s higher drive for status Non discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap The harm of Google’s biases Why we’re blind Suggestions Reply to public response and misrepresentation I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can't have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I've gotten many†personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.
Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety . This silencing h...
06/08/17 • 6 min
0-00
ladies and gentlemen I'm mark Kassovitz
0-03
president Trump's personal lawyer
0-06
contrary to numerous false press
0-09
accounts leading up to today's hearing
0-12
- Comey has now finally confirmed
0-15
publicly what he repeatedly told
0-18
President Trump privately that is that
0-22
the president was not under
0-24
investigation as part of any probe into
0-28
Russian interference the president he
0-32
- Comey also admitted that there is no
0-34
evidence that a single vote change as a
0-38
result of any Russian interference
0-40
- commies testimony also makes clear
0-44
that the president never sought to
0-47
impede the investigation into attempted
0-50
Russian interference in the 2016
0-53
election and in fact according to mr.
0-57
Comey the president told mr. Comey quote
1-00
it would be good to find out close quote
1-04
in that investigation if there was quote
1-07
some satellite Associates of his who did
1-11
something wrong
1-12
close quote and he President Trump did
1-17
not exclude anyone from that statement
1-21
consistent with that statement the
1-24
president never in form or substance
1-27
directed or suggested that mr. Comey
1-31
stop investigating anyone including the
1-36
president never suggested that mr. Comey
1-39
quote let Flynn go close quote as the
1-45
president publicly stated the next day
1-46
he did say to mr. Comey quote general
1-51
Flynn is a good guy he has been through
1-54
a lot close quote and also quote asked
1-58
how general Flynn is doing close quote
2-01
Admiral Rogers testified today that the
2-05
president never quote directed him to do
2-09
anything illegal immoral
2-13
unethical or inappropriate close quote
2-17
and never never quote pressured him to
2-22
do so
2-22
close quote director Coates said the
2-25
same thing the president likewise
2-29
never pressured mr. Comey the president
2-33
also never told mr. Comey quote I need
2-38
loyalty I expect loyalty close quote
2-41
he never said it in form and he never
2-44
said it in substance of course the
2-47
office of the president is entitled to
2-50
expect loyalty from those who are
2-52
serving the administration and from
2-55
before this president it and from before
2-58
this President took office to this day
3-01
it is overwhelmingly clear that there
3-04
have been and continue to be those in
3-07
government who are actively attempting
3-10
to undermine this administration with
3-13
selective and illegal leaks of
3-17
classified information and privileged
3-20
communications mr. Comey has now
3-23
admitted that he is one of these leakers
3-27
today mr. Comey admitted that he
3-31
unilaterally and surreptitiously made
3-35
unauthorized disclosures to the press of
3-38
privileged communications with the
3-41
president the leaks of this privileged
3-44
information began no later than March
3-47
2017 when friends of mr. Comey have
3-51
stated that he disclosed to them the
3-55
conversations that he had with the
3-57
president during their January 27th 2017
4-02
dinner and February 14th 2017 White
4-06
House meeting today mr. Comey admitted
4-10
that he leaked to friends of his
4-13
purported memos of those privileged
4-16
communications one of which he testified
4-19
was classified mr. Comey also testified
4-24
that immediately after
4-26
was terminated he authorized his friends
4-29
to leak the contents of those memos to
4-33
the press in order to in mr. commis
4-36
words quote prompt the appointment of a
4-40
special counsel close quote although mr.
4-43
Comey testified that he only leaked the
4-46
memos in response to a tweet the public
Critical Race Theory Will Destroy the Fabric of Our Military
Old Guard Audio ❗
09/15/21 • 4 min
Senior Research Fellow for Defense Policy
John “JV” Venable, a 25-year veteran of the U.S. Air Force is a senior research fellow for defense policy at Heritage. KEY TAKEAWAYSThe U.S. military has mastered the process that develops unity by compelling recruits to let go of their individualism for the sake of the team.
Critical race theory divides organizations against themselves, and history shows that divided organizations cannot stand.
If allowed to propagate, it will foster internal contempt, destroy morale and undercut the demand for excellence on which the success of our military relies.
CopiedIn just 10 words, Napoleon captured perhaps the most important element for leading a team to success: "The moral is to the physical as three to one."
Morale involves cohesion, confidence, a sense of common purpose, and loyalty all wrapped up into a hard-to-measure but readily discernible package. Teams with high morale radiate energy and meet heady challenges head-on. The indifference of those without it is equally palpable.
Back in July, President Joe Biden publicly conveyed his belief that the Afghan army, with 300,000 soldiers and its own air force, would hold against some 75,000 Taliban. And yet, even with 4 to 1 odds, that well-equipped organization melted away in the face of a poorly armed militia.
Though hard to quantify, morale is an essential element of effective teams. More often than not, it is the difference between winning and losing in any arena. Those precious few who have served during conflicts don’t just embrace that fact; they view Napoleon’s dictum as one of the most treasured and carefully guarded elements within their fighting force. They hold the morale of their units close to their chests because it is incredibly hard to develop and so easily lost.
Over the course of its history, the U.S. military has mastered the process that develops unity by compelling recruits to let go of their individualism for the sake of the team. The traits of race, creed, color, faith, and family heritage are hard enough to put in check, but in recent years, technology has delivered an accelerant to individualism.
The military works to rid the iPhone generation of its focus on self through a relentless series of physical and emotional challenges that can be resolved only by believing in and being part of something bigger than themselves. Marine Corps basic training is perhaps the most effective in that role. Its graduates leave with a service culture, work ethic, and an indelible bond that is shared with all others that have earned the right to wear that uniform.
Units receiving those graduates know that any semblance of cliques or individual isolation can be cancerous, so they further that bond by onboarding them technically and socially to ensure every new Marine is fully assimilated into the team. That process enables units to grow closer through the most arduous of circumstances and, when required, to fight and win.
Leaders of organizations with exceptional morale will fight off every stimulus that could pit one part of their team against another or could divide the whole into favored and unfavored elements or factions.
And yet, that is the very essence of critical race theory now working its way into the Defense Department.
By design, critical race theory destroys unifying organizational cultures by dividing people by race and sex. And then, incredulously, it demands each subgroup to identify themselves and the others as either oppressors or the oppressed. The fix, the remedy critical race theory offers society, is to subjugate the "oppressors" to the whims of those it has predetermined to be "oppressed," sanctifying the blight of racism the service has worked so hard to stamp out. Put simply, critical race theory divides organizations against themselves, and history shows that divided organizations cannot stand.
>>> Democrats Just Revealed They Don’t Understand How Critical Race Theory Threatens Our Military
For more than 50 years, our military has set the standard for race relations in the United States. While there will always be room for improvement, critical race theory will reverse that trajectory. If allowed to propagate, it will foster interna...
Transgender Bathroom Policies Open Doors for Sexual Predators
Old Guard Audio ❗
10/14/21 • 5 min
Nicole Russell / @russell_nm / October 14, 2021
A male student sexually assaulted a female student in the women’s bathroom at Stone Bridge High School in Loudoun County, Virginia in May. The girl’s father was arrested on June 22 at a Loudoun County School Board meeting for protesting a proposal that would expand protections for transgender students. Pictured: The Loudoun County School Board discusses transgender issues at a meeting on Aug. 10. (Photo: Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post/Getty Images)
COMMENTARY BYNicole Russell is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Her work has appeared in The Atlantic, The New York Times, National Review, Politico, The Washington Times, The American Spectator, and Parents Magazine.
An explosive piece published this week by The Daily Wire shows what happens when crime, liberal school policies, and leftist law enforcement induce a parent’s worst nightmare.
In “Loudoun County Schools Tried To Conceal Sexual Assault Against Daughter In Bathroom, Father Says,” investigative reporter Luke Rosiak reveals a story about a young man who sexually assaulted a female student in the women’s bathroom at Stone Bridge High School.
This incident is a harbinger of what will happen as school systems, law enforcement, and other powerful groups embrace politically correct social justice agendas over the safety and security of all.
While official juvenile records are sealed, attorneys reveal that a young man wearing a skirt was “charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio,” after he assaulted a young woman in the school restroom.
On June 22, weeks after the incident, the young woman’s father, Scott Smith, was arrested at a Loudoun County, Virginia school board meeting for protesting a proposal that would expand protections for transgender students.
He was dragged out, arrested, and later charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. He was merely upset about his daughter’s sexual assault and the connection to changing school policy so that biological boys can use the women’s bathroom if they identify as transgender. The school banned Smith from its property.
Smith’s arrest has sparked media attention, further humiliating him.
The only person who has been convicted of a crime is the heartbroken, angry father, not the young man who assaulted not one, but two women—the story later reveals—in the women’s restrooms.
“My wife and I are gay- and lesbian-friendly,” Smith told The Daily Wire. “We’re not into this children transgender stuff. The person that attacked our daughter is apparently bisexual and occasionally wears dresses because he likes them. So this kid is technically not what the school board was fighting about. The point is kids are using it as an advantage to get into the bathrooms.”
Many angles of this story are disturbing. Elected Democrats in Loudoun County are implementing liberal policies in school districts despite the obvious ramifications as described. The school brushed off the sexual assault of a young woman in order to continue pressing for broad bathroom policies that are inclusive to the small transgender population in high school. The school administrators also treated a concerned father disrespectfully.
The story also reveals an obvious truth about criminal behavior: Predatory people will take advantage of any policy that favors them.
Even though a small percentage of society’s citizens are sexual predators, it only takes a few to upend the lives of victims and clog the criminal court divisions. Similarly, it’s also true that among the transgender population, which is already quite small, very few—if any—are sexual predators.
However, that does not mean sexual predators would not readily take advantage of loosened or broad bathroom policies that allow bisexual or transgender people into women’s bathrooms. The nature of predatory criminals is that they can and will find loopholes so they can prey on vulnerable people easier—transgender or not.
This has
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in 2 Texas Heartbeat Act Cases. Here Are the Top Takeaways
Old Guard Audio ❗
11/02/21 • 8 min
Thomas Jipping / @TomJipping / Sarah Parshall Perry / @SarahPPerry / November 01, 2021
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., Nov. 1. (Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)
COMMENTARY BYThomas Jipping is deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation.
Sarah Parshall Perry@SarahPPerry
Sarah Parshall Perry is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
We are only a month into the Supreme Court’s 2021-22 term and abortion already appears to be this season’s defining topic.
The court heard arguments in two cases on Monday related to the Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans most abortions after the fetal heartbeat is detected (which is usually about six weeks after conception). And in just one month, the court will hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which challenges the constitutionality of Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks.
While Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization focuses on the constitutional merits of the Mississippi ban, the Texas cases focus on how the legislature sought to shield the Texas abortion ban from legal challenge in its Heartbeat Act.
Ordinarily, parties that opposed the law would file a lawsuit before it was scheduled to go into effect, asking for an injunction to stop any enforcement while its constitutionality is litigated. That’s what happened in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The Texas law, however, says that it can be enforced only by “private civil actions” and removes public officials (those normally tasked with the enforcement of state and federal law) from the enforcement process on the Texas Heartbeat Act altogether. As a result, the law went into effect as scheduled on Sept. 1.
In Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, abortion providers sued to prevent state courts from handling any private civil actions to enforce the Texas abortion ban. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit put the Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson case on hold, and on emergency appeal, the Supreme Court left the hold in place, but said that the case raised “serious questions” about the law’s constitutionality.
Even though the 5th Circuit scheduled arguments on the issue of whether federal courts could enjoin state courts from handling these lawsuits for early December, the plaintiffs appealed again to the Supreme Court by way of a rarely used procedural move known as “certiorari before judgment.”
In United States v. Texas, the federal government sued Texas, also asking that the abortion ban be put on hold while its constitutionality is litigated. Like the abortion providers did in Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, the Biden administration did not wait for the 5th Circuit to rule, but appealed directly to the Supreme Court.
So, on Nov. 1, the Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases—one brought by abortion providers and one by the federal government—involving procedural issues that must be cleared up before the constitutional merits of the Texas abortion ban can even be addressed.
In Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, the question is whether Texas can insulate its state law from federal court review by delegating enforcement to the public instead of state officials.
In United States v. Texas, the question is whether the federal government has an interest in the case sufficient enough to sue state courts and officials to prevent them from enforcing the law.
Texas argues that its new law does not prevent the courts from deciding this underlying constitutional issue. The enforc...
08/17/21 • 10 min
0
Fact-Checking 6 Claims at Senate Democrats’ Voting Law Hearing
Old Guard Audio ❗
07/20/21 • 11 min
Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / July 19, 2021
"Spurred on by the big lie, these same actors are now rolling back voting rights in a way that is unprecedented in size and scope since the Jim Crow era,” Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., testifies Monday during a Senate Rules Committee hearing on Georgia's new voting law in Atlanta. (Photo: Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images)
Senate Democrats took their push to nullify state election laws on the road Monday, holding a “field hearing” in Atlanta to attack Georgia’s recent election reforms and promote their bill to eliminate voter ID and other requirements.
Only Democrat members of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee showed up to question witnesses, also all Democrats.
Committee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said Republicans had the opportunity to call a witness to defend the Georgia law, but didn’t request one. A spokesperson for the committee’s ranking member, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., didn’t respond Monday to The Daily Signal’s emails and phone inquiries on this point.
The hearing, held at the National Center for Civil and Human Rights, included numerous assertions, some true, but others debunked in previous fact checks.
Here’s a look at six big claims from the hearing in Atlanta, which Democrats titled “Protecting the Vote.”
1. ‘Hurdles’ to Ballot Drop BoxesSen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., isn’t a member of the Rules and Administration Committee, but was the first witness in his home state. Warnock, who took office in January, criticized Georgia’s election reform law for “reducing the number of drop boxes where voters can return those ballots.”
Klobuchar jumped in later to say, “If you’re looking for evil, you can find it pretty easily” in the Georgia law.
“Drop-off boxes cannot stay open beyond the time of the early voting,” Klobuchar said, adding, “Some of these voters were working day and night, several jobs, then they can’t go to a drop-off box.”
The fact is that ballot drop boxes weren’t used in Georgia nor in most other states before the 2020 election, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Georgia election officials provided drop boxes to collect voters’ ballots based on Gov. Brian Kemp’s emergency order to address voting concerns during the pandemic.
But for Senate Bill 202, passed by Georgia lawmakers, officials wouldn’t have to provide drop boxes in future elections. That said, fewer drop boxes will be available as those elections presumably take place without a pandemic.
Also, the new law restricts voting by drop box to hours when early in-person voting is available.
Each county in Georgia must provide at least one drop box under the law. But boxes will have to be located near early-voting sites and be accessible for dropping off absentee ballots when those polling locations are open.
2. ‘Big Lie’Democrat senators and witnesses argued that the law in Georgia and other election reforms across the United States were prompted by former President Donald Trump’s claim that his election loss in November to President Joe Biden was fraudulent.
“We saw record-breaking voter turnout in our last elections—participation that should have been celebrated—get attacked by craven politicians, and, spurred on by the big lie, these same actors are now rolling back voting rights in a way that is unprecedented in size and scope since the Jim Crow era,” Warnock said.
Biden beat Trump by about 12,000 votes out of 4.9 million cast, according to official final results, to win Georgia’s 16 electoral votes.
Georgia state Rep. Bill Mitchell, a Democrat and president of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, called the November election a major success.
“I define its success not by our candidates’ winning their elections, but by the fact that when you have as many people vote as we did in the 2020 election cycle, with as few problems, with all challenges being dismissed—you have to consider that to be successful,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell later said “The Heritage Foundation and others” were pushing election reform legislation.
The Heritage Foundation, a leading conservative think tank, is the parent organization of The Daily Signal.
“When you have the highest levels of voter participation, combined with the lowest levels of challenges, why would you want to change that?” Mitchell said.
However, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week reported that digital ballot im...
09/21/17 • 42 min
*With special commentary by Rush Limbaugh*
United Nations New York, New York
10:04 A.M. EDT
PRESIDENT TRUMP: Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, world leaders, and distinguished delegates: Welcome to New York. It is a profound honor to stand here in my home city, as a representative of the American people, to address the people of the world.
As millions of our citizens continue to suffer the effects of the devastating hurricanes that have struck our country, I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to every leader in this room who has offered assistance and aid. The American people are strong and resilient, and they will emerge from these hardships more determined than ever before.
Fortunately, the United States has done very well since Election Day last November 8th. The stock market is at an all-time high -- a record. Unemployment is at its lowest level in 16 years, and because of our regulatory and other reforms, we have more people working in the United States today than ever before. Companies are moving back, creating job growth the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time. And it has just been announced that we will be spending almost $700 billion on our military and defense.
Our military will soon be the strongest it has ever been. For more than 70 years, in times of war and peace, the leaders of nations, movements, and religions have stood before this assembly. Like them, I intend to address some of the very serious threats before us today but also the enormous potential waiting to be unleashed.
We live in a time of extraordinary opportunity. Breakthroughs in science, technology, and medicine are curing illnesses and solving problems that prior generations thought impossible to solve.
But each day also brings news of growing dangers that threaten everything we cherish and value. Terrorists and extremists have gathered strength and spread to every region of the planet. Rogue regimes represented in this body not only support terrorists but threaten other nations and their own people with the most destructive weapons known to humanity.
Authority and authoritarian powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances that prevented conflict and tilted the world toward freedom since World War II.
International criminal networks traffic drugs, weapons, people; force dislocation and mass migration; threaten our borders; and new forms of aggression exploit technology to menace our citizens.
To put it simply, we meet at a time of both of immense promise and great peril. It is entirely up to us whether we lift the world to new heights, or let it fall into a valley of disrepair.
We have it in our power, should we so choose, to lift millions from poverty, to help our citizens realize their dreams, and to ensure that new generations of children are raised free from violence, hatred, and fear.
This institution was founded in the aftermath of two world wars to help shape this better future. It was based on the vision that diverse nations could cooperate to protect their sovereignty, preserve their security, and promote their prosperity.
It was in the same period, exactly 70 years ago, that the United States developed the Marshall Plan to help restore Europe. Those three beautiful pillars -- they’re pillars of peace, sovereignty, security, and prosperity.
The Marshall Plan was built on the noble idea that the whole world is safer when nations are strong, independent, and free. As President Truman said in his message to Congress at that time, “Our support of European recovery is in full accord with our support of the United Nations. The success of the United Nations depends upon the independent strength of its members.”
To overcome the perils of the present and to achieve the promise of the future, we must begin with the wisdom of the past. Our success depends on a coalition of strong and independent nations that embrace their sovereignty to promote security, prosperity, and peace for themselves and for the world.
We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government. But we do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties: to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation. This is the beautiful vision of this institution, and this is foundation for cooperation and success.
Strong, sovereign nations let diverse countries with different values, different cultures, and different dreams not just coexist, but work side by side on the basis of mutual respect.
Strong, sovereign nations let their people take ownership of the future and control their own destiny. And strong, sovereign nations allow indiv...
Show more best episodes
Show more best episodes
FAQ
How many episodes does Old Guard Audio ❗ have?
Old Guard Audio ❗ currently has 49 episodes available.
What topics does Old Guard Audio ❗ cover?
The podcast is about Politics, Education, Podcasts, American, Congress, Commentary and News.
What is the most popular episode on Old Guard Audio ❗?
The episode title 'Waukesha Deaths Preventable' is the most popular.
What is the average episode length on Old Guard Audio ❗?
The average episode length on Old Guard Audio ❗ is 12 minutes.
How often are episodes of Old Guard Audio ❗ released?
Episodes of Old Guard Audio ❗ are typically released every 6 days, 16 hours.
When was the first episode of Old Guard Audio ❗?
The first episode of Old Guard Audio ❗ was released on Jun 6, 2017.
Show more FAQ
Show more FAQ