A.F. Branco and Joe Dan Gorman – Happy Thanksgiving!, Tony’s newest toons, and related issues, along with some videos and bad jokes. Your comments live!   _____________________________________ DONATE to A.F. Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU! A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country in various news outlets, including NewsMax, Fox News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Rep. Devin Nunes, Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Chris Salcedo, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Trump.

President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming cabinet members and other appointees have reportedly been targeted with a number of bomb threats, according to Trump’s transition team. 

Outgoing Democrat Representative Katie Porter has filed a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend after he allegedly bombarded her with threatening and abusive messages. 

Stephen A. Smith Drops BOMBSHELL "Theory" On Why Trump REALLY Ran Again In 2024!

Rumble is suing California for allegedly forcing the social media platform to alter its own speech and censor its users’ speech, according to a copy of the lawsuit obtained by The Daily Wire. The lawsuit was filed Wednesday by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division. Rumble is challenging California’s latest laws punishing speakers for certain political commentary, which California Governor Gavin Newsom has framed as measures that will combat the “harmful use of deepfakes in political ads and other content.” California’s AB 2655, the “Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024,” “deputizes” Rumble to restrict its user’s speech, ADF said in a release, while AB 2839, “Protecting Democracy Against Election Disinformation and Deepfakes,” uses vague standards to punish individuals posting political content about elections. “California’s war against political speech is censorship, plain and simple,” ADF Senior Counsel Phil Sechler told The Daily Wire. “We can’t trust the government to decide what is true in our online political debates.” “The very thought of the government judging the content of political speech, and then deciding whether it should be permitted, censored, or eliminated altogether is about the most chilling thing you could imagine,” added Chris Pavlovski, Chairman and CEO of Rumble. “Rumble
will always celebrate freedom and support creative independence, so we’re delighted to work with ADF to help protect lawful online expression.” Though Newsom and California lawmakers framed the recent bills as measures to address election-related deepfakes, ADF points out that the bills came in response to Newsom’s criticism of a parody video of then-presidential candidate Kamala Harris, in which Harris is depicted mocking herself and the Democratic Party. “Manipulating a voice in an ‘ad’ like this one should be illegal,” Newsom said of the video, vowing that he’d  “be signing a bill in a matter of weeks to make sure it is.” His actions also followed claims from the White House in June that legitimate videos depicting President Joe Biden looking frail and confused were “cheap fakes.” This is amazing ? pic.twitter.com/KpnBKGUUwn — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 26, 2024 Rumble is suing the state to defend the constitutionally protected right to freely post political content online, according to ADF. The website’s lawsuit argues that California is requiring Rumble not only to restrict its users’ speech, but also to alter its own content and viewpoint to promote messages that Rumble does not agree with, and to remove and label content according to the whims of state officials. That includes content that California officials consider “reasonably likely to harm the reputation or electoral prospects” of candidates or “reasonably likely to falsely undermine confidence” in an election. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE “Rumble is one of the few online voices stepping up against this trend of censorship while other platforms and sites cave to totalitarian regimes censoring Americans,” Sechler explained. “Rumble is standing for free speech even when it is hard. Other online platforms and media companies must see these laws for what they are — a threat to their existence.” In September, ADF represented the Babylon Bee when the Christian satire website sued California on similar grounds. Less than a month later, after a federal district court found AB 2839 may violate the First Amendment, California officials backed down, admitting that they could not enforce their laws censoring political satire and parody against The Babylon Bee. “Our job is hard enough when our jokes keep coming true, as if they were prophecies,” Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon said at the time. “But it becomes significantly more difficult when self-serving politicians abuse their power to try to control public discourse and clamp down on comedy.” “Unfortunately for them,” he added, “the First Amendment secures our right to tell jokes they don’t like.” Read the filing here.

Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon blew off criticisms during a recent appearance on the liberal podcast “Pod Save America,” claiming that Harris’ obvious avoidance of tough interviews was just perception driven by “the narrative.” Dillon joined several of the campaign’s top officials — David Plouffe, Quentin Fulks, and Stephanie Cutter — for their first interview since Harris lost her 2024 White House bid to President-elect Donald Trump, and their post-mortem focused on the failures of the American people to see through media narratives rather than any possible faults in their own candidate or campaign. WATCH: Harris campaign chair Jen O'Malley Dillon: "Being up against a narrative that we weren’t doing anything or we were afraid to have interviews is completely bullsh*t, and also, like, took hold a little bit. And we just gave us another thing we had to fight back for that Trump never… pic.twitter.com/sazkll4afT — Jason Cohen ?? (@JasonJournoDC) November 26, 2024 “I do think a narrative, 107 days … two weeks talking about how she didn’t do interviews, which you know she was doing plenty, but we were doing in our own way, we had to be the nominee, we had to find a running mate, and do a roll-out, I mean there was all these things that you kind of want to factor in,” Dillon complained. CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE She went on to argue that Trump — who, along with Vice President-elect JD Vance, was doing dozens of rallies and interviews — was not being held to the same standard as Harris, which she said further complicated matters. “But real people heard, in some way, that we were not going to have interviews, which was both not true and also so counter to any kind of standard that was put on Trump, that I think that was a problem,” she said. “Being up against a narrative that we weren’t doing anything, or we were afraid to have interviews is completely bulls***, and also like took hold a little bit, and we just, it gave us another thing we had to fight back for that Trump never had to worry about.” Dillon also complained that the questions Harris often got when she did make appearances were frequently “processy,” meaning that they did not do much to help voters get a better view of Harris or her policies.

Georgia Congressman Barry Loudermilk is challenging the January 6th Committee’s findings, leading to rising partisan tensions in Congress. Loudermilk demands corrections to a DoD report on January 6th for inaccuracies. DoD officials allegedly misled Congress regarding National Guard deployment timing. Loudermilk’s Challenge to the January 6th Narrative The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight, led by Chairman Barry Loudermilk, has taken a critical stance against the Department of Defense’s (DoD) report on the January 6th events. Loudermilk’s findings suggest that the report contains factual inaccuracies, prompting a demand for corrections. The Subcommittee discovered that the DoD intentionally delayed deploying the D.C. National Guard, and Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy falsely conveyed to Congress that the Guard was en route, despite the Guard remaining at the Armory until 5 PM. Loudermilk’s investigation further revealed that political concerns influenced decision-making, causing significant delays as the situation at the Capitol deteriorated. Video evidence and testimony from key DCNG personnel indicated discrepancies in the DoD Inspector General’s (IG) report, which seemingly favored senior DoD officials and misrepresented the National Guard’s readiness and response. The Subcommittee criticized the report for apparent bias and incompleteness, urging transparency and accountability. OMG: Bobby DeGregoris is a husband & father of 4 kids. On J6, he hurt nobody & damaged nothing—a truly innocent protester exercising his 1A rights. But Merrick Garland’s DOJ lied, terrorized his family with a violent FBI raid, & destroyed him—all to serve J6 fraud. IT MUST END. pic.twitter.com/gpgxwP3l1x — John Strand (@JohnStrandUSA) November 26, 2024 Pushing for Congressional Action Loudermilk’s efforts underline a broader initiative to bring about a congressional resolution to invalidate the findings of the Democrat-led January 6th Committee. He asserts that the evidence gathered during his investigation justifies such a resolution, challenging the narrative established by the Committee. The DoD report, initially released in November 2021, aimed to evaluate the DoD’s role on January 6th; however, Loudermilk and his Subcommittee have raised concerns about inconsistencies and irregularities within it. Encouraging thorough scrutiny, Loudermilk’s stance highlights ongoing debates over accountability and interpretation of events. While Loudermilk presses for action, his advocacy underscores the entrenched political divide in the Capitol, reflecting national disagreements regarding the Committee’s findings. 40,000 hours of video they withhold for J6. This is a very different story from what we have been told. pic.twitter.com/rMK9zU8Q8F — JOSH DUNLAP (@JDunlap1974) November 25, 2024 Ongoing Political Friction The situation epitomizes the deep-seated polarization and divergent views present in Congress, with Loudermilk’s challenge illustrating stark ideological rifts. Questions over the legitimacy of the January 6th Committee’s conclusions continue to loom large, exacerbating tensions. His actions not only focus on procedural transparency but also emphasize the critical need for bipartisan discourse to reconcile varying interpretations of that fateful day. Loudermilk’s bold moves have shed light on overlooked facets of the event and call for greater scrutiny of the DoD’s actions. Through persistent investigation and advocacy, he champions a resolution to examine and potentially overturn the narrative set by the January 6th Committee, shining a light on the persistent and deepening political divides. Sources: J6 questions Loudermilk demands truth The post Loudermilk Disputes Jan 6th Findings appeared first on The Conservative Brief.