It’s looking increasingly likely that dock workers on the East Coast will launch a massive strike Tuesday, shuttering 36 ports along the East and Gulf Coasts. If that happens, Americans could experience supply chain disruptions through election day and well into the holiday season. About three quarters of banana imports to the U.S. arrive at ports that would be affected by a strike, according to the chairman of Michigan State University’s department of supply chain management. Coffee and cocoa imports would also be affected, as would pharmaceutical imports — a third of which are routed through the port in Charleston, South Carolina. Contract negotiations between port ownership and the International Longshoremen’s Association, which represents more than 85,000 dock workers, broke down over the summer, and the two sides remain in a stalemate over both wages and automating port operations. A strike of this size would cause wide-ranging supply chain issues that could impact consumers past Election Day and well into the holiday season. The National Tree Company, which sells artificial Christmas trees and other decorations, has rushed to import goods early to beat the strike, but expects to see 15% of its goods stranded if a port strike happens. A strike would delay some $32.8 billion in clothing imports, and just over $23 billion of furniture imports. In the year that ended June 30, about $37.8 billion in vehicle imports passed through the ports that would be shut down, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. Baltimore’s port sees the most car shipments of any port in the country. Peter Kopke, who has been importing fruit at his family’s company Kopke Fruit since 1958, warned that Americans would see prices “rise sharply” if the strike happens. “Right now there’s million of boxes of citrus fruit as well as bananas and others that are going to be caught in the strike,” Kopke said on Fox Business. “And if the strike lasts for any length of time, the fruit will deteriorate, and those business that employ thousands of employees will have to stop because they’re going to lose millions of dollars. So it’s a very, very serious thing, especially for perishables. “This is something that is quite different since 50 or 60 years ago because now the international commerce is a tremendous part of our economy,” he said. “You have 45,000 workers affecting 350 million people.” The strike could also disrupt American exports, of beef, cotton, and poultry. About 70% of all poultry exports and more than a quarter of all egg exports leave via East and Gulf Coast ports, according to customs data and the USA Poultry & Egg Export Council. Nearly half of all pork exports set to travel by ship, about 45%, and 30% of all beef exports were shipped out of the affected ports from January through July, a U.S. Meat Export Federation spokesperson told Reuters. Supply chain shortages could cause prices to rise just as families are trying to recover from the nearly 20% spike in prices since before the pandemic. Inflation is one of the most important issues to voters this presidential election, which has Vice President Kamala Harris locked in a tight race against former president Donald Trump less than six weeks out from Election Day. About 76% of voters say inflation is a major factor in their choice for president, an August CBS poll showed. Over half of voters favor Trump on the economy, compared with 46% who favor Harris, a Fox News poll found. Harris has struggled to say how she would lower prices. She has acknowledged that “the bills add up” and promised that “building up the middle class will be a defining goal of my presidency.” However, many of her proposals would require congressional approval, and the campaign has not offered many details about how to pay for expensive proposals like a free $25,000 down payment for first-time home buyers.

An 89-year-old woman gave powerful testimony about her experience in a Communist death camp Thursday morning as she was sentenced to three years probation over her FACE Act conviction for a peaceful protest in Tennessee in March 2021.  Eva Edl spoke at her sentencing hearing of how her Christian faith and childhood experience in a Yugoslavian concentration camp inspired her to pro-life activism. She was convicted in April of violating the FACE Act, a Clinton-era law that made it a crime to sit or stand in front of the doors of an abortion facility.  “I have been rescuing babies since 1988,” Edl told federal Judge Chip Frensley in a court filled with dozens of supporters. “What I’m doing is for the love of Jesus alone, no other benefit.” Edl was charged by the Biden-Harris administration for her participation in a protest in a hallway outside the Carafem Health Center Clinic in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee. During the sit-in, Edl sang hymns, prayed, and urged women not to get abortions.  “I’ve paid the price,” Edl said of her pro-life work. “It hurts deeply when you do what God says and you’re totally misunderstood.”  Holding up a well-worn Bible in the courtroom, Edl said, “I believe in this book,” saying she took it as her guide. Edl referenced the Book of Genesis, saying that “human life is made in the image of God.”  Edl also spoke of her own experience as a child “when I was declared to be inhuman.”  When she was 9 years old, Edl and her family were imprisoned by Communist dictator Josip Tito because they were ethnic Germans. She said that she and her family were crammed into cattle cars and forced into camps to die.  “I wish Christians or caring people would have stood on the tracks,” to stop the train that was taking her family away, she said. Edl survived her imprisonment and moved to the United States, where she became involved in the pro-life movement.  Am I Racist? Is In Theaters NOW — Get Your Tickets Here! Justice Department lawyer Kyle Boynton pushed for Edl to get three years probation, saying that the case was not about her faith or political views, but about “compliance” with federal law. Edl’s lawyer asked for just one year of probation, pointing to “devotion to her faith” and peaceful nature.  Edl was eligible for a prison sentence of up to six months for her conviction.  Frensley said that while he acknowledged Edl’s beliefs, she had engaged in a “clear violation of the law.” He said that following religious beliefs doesn’t excuse violations of federal law.  Prior to sentencing, Edl gathered with supporters outside the courthouse to sing hymns like “It is Well with My Soul.” She told the group that all she wanted for the day “is for the Lord to speak through me.”  Another protester who was with Edl at Carafem is set to be sentenced Thursday afternoon. 

'Asset managers should prioritize helping Americans'

'He was obtaining these donations from what they call straw donations'

'This should've never made it as far as it did'

'He lied so much'

'The questions surrounding the origins of the documents and how they came to our attention were more newsworthy'

'Fails to align with American values and interests'

THE DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION—Former First Lady Melania Trump criticized the media’s rhetoric on Thursday for allegedly fueling the would-be assassins’ motives to commit violence against former President Donald Trump. The former first lady said during a “Fox & Friends” interview that it is expected that two would-be assassins would threaten her husband’s life since members of the left-wing media repeatedly call him a “threat to democracy.” She further accused the media of becoming silent about the two assassination attempts not long after they occurred, leading her to ask more questions about the incidents. “It’s interesting how quiet everything became all over the mainstream media. There were a few days they were reporting about July 13 event, and everything then became quiet. So I had a lot of questions, what’s going on? This is not normal,” Melania said. “And, is it really shocking that all this egregious violence goes against my husband, especially that we hear the leaders from the opposition party and mainstream media branding him as a threat to democracy, calling him vile names. They’re only fueling a toxic atmosphere and giving power to all of these people that want to do harm to him. This needs to stop.” Melania said she rushed to the television when she first learned of the first assassination attempt on her husband during a July 13 rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. She initially received no answer from either her husband or the Secret Service when she tried calling them, but then received notice that Trump was safe. Her son, Barron Trump, came rushing in when he received the news about the first attempt and had a “very, very difficult” discussion with his mother, she said. The former first lady said she was in New York City during the second assassination attempt on Sept. 15, prompting her to call the Secret Service to make sure her husband was safe. She said the former president’s survival during the attempts are “miracles” and that a divine power saved his life so he could serve the U.S. “I think both of the events, they were really miracles,” Melania said. “If you really think about it, July 13 was a miracle. Like that much and he could not be with us … I think something was watching over him. I think, it’s almost like the country really needs him.” Thomas Matthew Crooks, the first would-be assassin, climbed onto the roof of the American Glass Research (AGR) building located 130 feet away from the rally and shot eight rounds into the crowd. The shooting injured the upper portion of Trump’s ear and killed 50-year-old Corey Comperatore. The second assassination attempt occurred on Sept. 15 when 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh was spotted with an AK-47-style rifle at the former president at Trump International Golf Course in West Palm Beach, Florida. Originally published by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The post Melania Trump Says Media Is ‘Fueling A Toxic Atmosphere’ Against Her Husband Following Assassination Attempts appeared first on The Daily Signal.

How the mighty have fallen! Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo won a coveted Emmy Award in 2020 in recognition of his daily televised briefings on COVID-19. Cuomo’s allegedly successful response to the deadly pandemic made him a Democratic national hero, and, of course, a darling of the liberal media. Cuomo’s media glory ended one year later, however, amid charges of sexual harassment and impeachment threats, and the International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences withdrew his Emmy. Today, thanks to a recent hearing conducted by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, Americans have learned more about Cuomo’s “Emmy-winning” response to New York’s COVID-19 crisis. Notwithstanding the previous media adulation for his televised briefings as governor, the record shows that Cuomo’s pandemic response increased New Yorkers’ mortality rates, particularly among nursing home residents.   Responding to Rep. Kweisi Mfume, D-Md., during the House subcommittee’s tense Sept. 10 inquiry, Cuomo urged the panel to “forget about the politics [and] look at the facts” and insisted that “New Yorkers follow the science.” Well. Let’s look at those facts. Nursing homes. Cuomo issued a directive March 25, 2020, mandating that his state’s nursing homes accept patients recovering from COVID-19. The directive’s language was unequivocal: “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the nursing home solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. Nursing homes are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident, who is deemed medically stable, to be tested for COVID-19 before admission or readmission.” Cuomo claimed his policy was grounded in scientific evidence and adhered to federal public health guidelines. In fact, however, the language directly contradicted recommended practices at the time, which included testing all patients before admission to a nursing home to prevent potential outbreaks of COVID-19. Rep. Richard McCormick, R-Ga., an emergency physician, highlighted this contradiction and challenged Cuomo’s directive. “If you prohibit the testing of a patient, you don’t know what you’re dealing with,” McCormick said, “so it’s a dishonest argument to begin with.” In his congressional testimony, Cuomo argued that the “law” took precedence over the “advisory,” claiming that guidelines from both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services held legal authority, not his directive. The former governor testified that his nursing home policy was merely advisory, not mandatory.  The problem, however, was that Cuomo’s directive used clear, authoritative language, including terms such as “shall” and “prohibited,” plainly declaring itself to be mandatory. As Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, chairman of the subcommittee, pointed out to Cuomo, his statewide advisory “referred to itself as a directive in the very first paragraph, with your name at the top.”   Federal assistance. Next is the issue of Cuomo’s response to federal assistance on COVID-19. Then-President Donald Trump deployed the USNS Comfort, a state-of-the-art hospital ship, with a capacity of approximately 1,000 beds and several operating rooms. Trump sent the ship to New York to alleviate the expected pressure on the state’s health care system to cope with an expected explosion of COVID-19 cases. Less than a month later, Cuomo decided not to take advantage of the ship and its ample resources. He acknowledged the Trump administration’s logistical support but deemed it unnecessary, stating at the time: “It did give us comfort, but we don’t need it anymore.” By April 21, 2020, despite crowded New York City hospitals, the USNS Comfort had received only 178 patients. Meanwhile, throughout 2020, the Trump administration focused heavily and successfully on the rapid and unprecedented development of COVID-19 vaccines through the initiative dubbed Operation Warp Speed. However, a key weakness in the federal response was the Trump administration’s failure to pursue a similar effort for rapid development and distribution of therapeutics for treating the novel coronavirus that caused COVID-19, including the use of preexisting antivirals. Therapeutics dispute. During the Sept. 10 subcommittee hearing, the issue resurfaced when Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., claimed that the use of hydroxychloroquine as well as ivermectin—a medication available well before the pharmaceutical company Pfizer Inc.’s development of its Paxlovid brand—had been scientifically debunked. Growing evidence now supports chloroquine, a drug similar to hydroxychloroquine (also called HCQ) in structure and effects, as effective against COVID-19 if properly prescribed. Dr. David Gortler, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former Federal Drug Administration official, has noted that HCQ is safe when used correctly—a fact the FDA itself has confirmed. Despite the CDC’s acknowledgment in 2017 that hydroxychloroquine is relatively well-tolerated, the drug became controversial during the politically charged atmosphere of the deadly COVID-19 pandemic. The House subcommittee’s inquiry, like previous hearings on the federal government’s COVID-19 response, provided important insights. Although Congress has examined the role of federal agencies, it also should assess how other state governments, which received significant federal aid, managed the pandemic. The New York case is a prime example. Cuomo’s notorious nursing home directive of March 25, 2020, continues to be widely scrutinized. It contributed to a preventable tragedy and had devastating consequences for at least 4,000 families. Members of the House Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic have already have amassed an impressive record of vital information, including sworn testimony from top federal officials on major issues related to government’s responses to the pandemic. That body of work can be of enormous benefit to the next presidential administration in reforming and improving the performance of America’s major public health agencies. Their work, however, is far from finished. The post Responding to COVID-19: Andrew Cuomo’s Dismal Performance Before Congress appeared first on The Daily Signal.