Elder with Dr. John Eastman comes on the show to answer all your questions about immigration and asylum, Trump and Comey, Ivanka Trump’s use of personal email to conduct government business. Is this comparable to Hillary Clinton’s email scandal?

Elder with Dr. John Eastman comes on the show to answer all your questions about immigration and asylum, Trump and Comey, Ivanka Trump&rsquo;s use of personal email to conduct government business. Is this comparable to Hillary Clinton&rsquo;s email scandal?

The Townhall Review is a one-stop-shop for relevant news and intelligent analysis from the leading talk show hosts in the nation: Hugh Hewitt, Dennis Prager, Mike Gallagher,Sebastian Gorka, and Charlie Kirk.

The Townhall Review is a one-stop-shop for relevant news and intelligent analysis from the leading talk show hosts in the nation: <a href="http://www.hughhewitt.com" data-slimstat="5">Hugh Hewitt</a>, <a href="http://dennisprager.com" data-slimstat="5">Dennis Prager</a>, <a href="https://www.mikeonline.com" data-slimstat="5">Mike Gallagher,</a>  <a href="https://sebgorka.com" data-slimstat="5">Sebastian Gorka</a>, and <a href="https://989theanswer.com/radioshow/8875" data-slimstat="5">Charlie Kirk</a>.

Townhall Review | Conservative Commentary On Today's News

Townhall Review Commentary brings together political commentary and analysis from Salem Media's leading conservative talk-radio hosts. 

Townhall Review Commentary brings together political commentary and analysis from Salem Media's leading conservative talk-radio hosts.&nbsp;

Home

Larry Elder with John Eastman on Hot Topics in the News

British police arrested five young men near an air base used by American forces. They were suspected of explosives offenses and preparing a terrorist act.

Today, all five are out on bail. Authorities call them British nationals but won’t release their names. Police are investigating possible foreign-state involvement. Iran denies any role.

The public’s been told almost nothing. And while investigators are still working out what happened, every suspect has been released.

Police say bail conditions are strict. But armed officers responded. Bomb disposal experts examined the scene. If the threat was serious enough for that, why is releasing all five safe?

These men certainly deserve due process. But official secrecy and pompous reassurances are no substitute for protecting the public. This kind of politically correct, cowardly complacency is how once-great civilizations die.

British police arrested five young men near an air base used by American forces. They were suspected of explosives offenses and preparing a terrorist act.
Today, all five are out on bail. Authorities call them British nationals but won&rsquo;t release their names. Police are investigating possible foreign-state involvement. Iran denies any role.
The public&rsquo;s been told almost nothing. And while investigators are still working out what happened, every suspect has been released.
Police say bail conditions are strict. But armed officers responded. Bomb disposal experts examined the scene. If the threat was serious enough for that, why is releasing all five safe?
These men certainly deserve due process. But official secrecy and pompous reassurances are no substitute for protecting the public. This kind of politically correct, cowardly complacency is how once-great civilizations die.

Carol Platt Liebau: Released and Reassured?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/5e27a451-e6e6-4c51-aa03-a7370003783c/clips/510fe8d0-38b7-48e7-83e3-b4d4011233e7/transcript

25 Years After 9/11 The Americans and British are still wrestling with the big challenge we face and a crucial question:

Is the big challenge Islam?—or Islamism?

The Economist magazine recently published a notable cover story.

Where they argued —and I quote: “Islam poses no serious danger. But Islamism and the fear of Islam do.”

Then they argue Islam is not a threat, but Islamism is. They define it as a fringe ideology in Islam, the belief that government and society should be guided by Islamic principles.

The problem for that theory is that central to Islam not just Islamism, but Islam, is the combination of Islam as a religion and a government. It’s not a peripheral idea to Islam. It’s not a misreading. It’s in the Quran.

When you look at Islam, you are looking at a civilizational project. You are looking at a civilizational challenge.

And quite honestly we had better recognize it as such.

25 Years After 9/11 The Americans and British are still wrestling with the big challenge we face and a crucial question:
Is the big challenge Islam?&mdash;or Islamism?
The Economist magazine recently published a notable cover story.
Where they argued &mdash;and I quote: &ldquo;Islam poses no serious danger. But Islamism and the fear of Islam do.&rdquo;
Then they argue Islam is not a threat, but Islamism is. They define it as a fringe ideology in Islam, the belief that government and society should be guided by Islamic principles.
The problem for that theory is that central to Islam not just Islamism, but Islam, is the combination of Islam as a religion and a government. It&rsquo;s not a peripheral idea to Islam. It&rsquo;s not a misreading. It&rsquo;s in the Quran.
When you look at Islam, you are looking at a civilizational project. You are looking at a civilizational challenge.
And quite honestly we had better recognize it as such.

Albert Mohler: Islam or Islamism

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/5e27a451-e6e6-4c51-aa03-a7370003783c/clips/9f9f1250-d375-42c4-9b8e-b4d301233c4f/transcript

We all learned it – or should have – in civics class. Congress makes the laws. The executive branch enforces them. And judges interpret them. But some federal judges in Minneapolis have forgotten it. 

Patrick Schiltz, until recently chief judge of Minnesota’s federal district court, just gave a remarkable 90-minute interview to the New York Times. Schiltz and other judges were sharply critical of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. And as cases poured in, the judges met, consulted, and developed templates for court orders. 

Consider that. Judges personally opposed to administration policy were coordinating their rulings on cases challenging it. 

Judges must rule against any president when the law requires it. But judges shouldn’t become a coordinated opposition to policies just because they personally oppose them.  

That undermines faith in an impartial judiciary — and in a fundamental safeguard of American government.

We all learned it &ndash; or should have &ndash; in civics class. Congress makes the laws. The executive branch enforces them. And judges interpret them.&nbsp;But some federal judges in Minneapolis have forgotten it.&nbsp;
Patrick Schiltz, until recently chief judge of Minnesota&rsquo;s federal district court, just gave a remarkable 90-minute interview to the New York Times. Schiltz and other judges were sharply critical of the Trump administration&rsquo;s immigration crackdown. And as cases poured in, the judges met, consulted, and developed templates for court orders.&nbsp;
Consider that. Judges personally opposed to administration policy were coordinating their rulings on cases challenging it.&nbsp;
Judges must rule against any president when the law requires it. But judges shouldn&rsquo;t become a coordinated opposition to policies just because they personally oppose them.&nbsp;&nbsp;
That undermines faith in an impartial judiciary &mdash; and in a fundamental safeguard of American government.

Carol Platt Liebau: Corruption of Our Judiciary

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/5e27a451-e6e6-4c51-aa03-a7370003783c/clips/7830658f-fe8f-4036-b129-b4d00101acd4/transcript

Larry Elder with John Eastman on Hot Topics in the News

In 2 playlist(s)

Townhall Review | Conservative Commentary On Today's News

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips