Protesters attack UCSC College Republicans club

Photo of the club via College Republicans at UCSC official Facebook page.

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 11:05 AM PT — Saturday, February 15, 2020

A group of violent leftists attacked the College Republicans table display at UC Santa Cruz ahead of a conservative event on campus. Video footage showed protesters spitting on the American flag, destroying the club’s setup and accusing the students of being racist.

“This is the flag of white supremacy,” said one attacker.

The club was tabling to promote their event, titled ‘Free Speech and Campus Activism,’ along with headliner and free speech activist Hayden Williams.

Williams, who is not a first-time victim of political violence, said he plans to press charges against the protesters for assault.

While school officials said police are investigating the situation, they have yet to make a statement.

RELATED: Man In Custody After Allegedly Driving Car Into Trump Supporters In Fla.

Original Article

Buttigieg calls out Warren for fundraiser attack: ‘Your net worth is 100 times mine’

closeFox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 19Video

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 19

Fox News Flash top headlines for Dec. 19 are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com

The on-going feud between top-tier Democratic presidential nomination rivals Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg over top-dollar donations went from the campaign trail to the primetime primary debate stage on Thursday night.

Warren – who has eschewed fundraisers with top-dollar donors during her presidential bid as she instead focuses nearly entirely on small-dollar grassroots contributions – slammed Buttigieg for holding big bucks fundraisers. Buttigieg quickly shot back that he was the only candidate on the stage who’s net worth isn’t in the millions.

HOLDING BACK NO MORE, WARREN SLAMS TOP TIER RIVALS

The verbal fist-fight kicked off with Warren taking aim at two of her top-tier rivals – Buttigieg and former Vice President Joe Biden.

“Most of the people on this stage run a traditional campaign and that means going back and forth from coast to coast to rich people and people who can put up $5,000 or more in order to have a picture taken … and in order maybe to be considered an ambassador,” Warren emphasized.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., right, speaks as South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg listens during a Democratic presidential primary debate Thursday, Dec. 19, 2019, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., right, speaks as South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg listens during a Democratic presidential primary debate Thursday, Dec. 19, 2019, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Buttigieg responded by pointing to President Trump’s vast re-election campaign war chest, saying, “They’ve already put together more than $300 million … This is our only chance to defeat Donald Trump and we shouldn’t try to do it with one hand tied behind our back.”

Defending his mingling with top-dollar donors, Buttigieg added that “I’m not going to turn away anyone who wants to help us defeat Donald Trump.”

Warren shot back – highlighting that Buttigieg recently held a fundraiser “that was held in a wine cave full of crystals and served $900 a bottle wine.”

“Billionaires in wine caves should not pick the next president of the United States,” she stressed.

Firing back, Buttigieg said, “I’m literally the only person on this stage who’s not a millionaire or a billionaire.”

“This is the problem with issuing purity tests you cannot yourself pass,” Buttigieg added. “Senator, your net worth is 100 times mine.”

“I do not sell access to my time,” Warren responded. “I don’t meet behind closed doors with big-dollar donors.”

Buttigieg counter attacked, noting that Warren transferred millions of dollars to her presidential campaign that she initially raised at big bucks fundraisers during her 2018 Senate re-election bid.

“Your presidential campaign right now, as we speak, is funded in part by money you transferred having raised it at those exact same big ticket fundraisers you now denounce,” Buttigieg stated. “Did it corrupt you, senator? Of course not.”

The verbal fireworks between the two candidates is the latest chapter in their recent feud.

Thanks to repeated pressure from Warren, Buttigieg a week ago announced that he would open up his closed-door fundraisers to media coverage, similar to what the Biden campaign has done this election cycle.

And Buttigieg's campaign returned fire, urging Warren to release her tax returns from before 2008, when she had corporate clients similar to the giant corporations she now rails against. Warren — under pressure — announced that she earned nearly $2 million from private legal work since 1986.

Warren’s increased aggressiveness in going after her top-tier rivals comes as the one-time co-front-runner in the Democratic nomination race has seen her poll numbers deteriorate the past month in national surveys and, more importantly, in polls in New Hampshire and Iowa, the states that kicks off the primary and caucus presidential nominating calendar.

Original Article

House Dem blasts Trump after attack on John Dingell: ‘Hell will be too good for him’

closeBret Baier: Trump 'stepped in it' with remark on John DingellVideo

Bret Baier: Trump 'stepped in it' with remark on John Dingell

'Special Report' anchor Bret Baier says President Trump has possibly hurt himself with Michigan voters and independents after suggesting Democrat Rep. Debbie Dingell's late husband John Dingell may be 'looking up.'

Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., had a scathing response to President Trump after he criticized the former congressman John Dingell, D-Mich., by suggesting that he might be "looking up" after his death.

"It's moments like these that we are reminded that the president is not only a criminal, he is impulsively cruel and truly rotten to the core," Yarmuth tweeted on Thursday. "Hell will be too good for him."

Trump lodged that attack during a Wednesday rally in Michigan after the House of Representatives voted to impeach him. He took special aim at Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., the former congressman's wife, after she voted to impeach him.

“Debbie Dingell, that’s a real beauty,” Trump said to a rapt crowd that booed the mention of Dingell's name. The president said he gave the late Dingell the “A+ treatment” after his death last February and his wife had called him to say “it’s the nicest thing that’s ever happened, thank you so much. John would be so thrilled. He’s looking down.”

REP. DINGELL RESPONDS AFTER TRUMP ATTACKS LATE HUSBAND: WE NEED TO TREAT EACH OTHER WITH 'DIGNITY AND RESPECT'

“I said, 'That's OK. Don't worry about it.' Maybe he's looking up. I don't know," he quipped to mixed reactions from the audience. “Maybe, but let’s assume he’s looking down.”

Rep. Dingell responded on Wednesday night via Twitter. "Mr. President, let’s set politics aside. My husband earned all his accolades after a lifetime of service," she said.

"I’m preparing for the first holiday season without the man I love. You brought me down in a way you can never imagine and your hurtful words just made my healing much harder."

On Thursday, she also told Fox News' Sandra Smith that the comment made her "sad."

Debbie Dingell: Trump's attack on my husband made me sad, but I'm still going to do my jobVideo

TRUMP GETS HELL FROM DEBBIE DINGELL AFTER SAYING DEM'S LATE HUSBAND MAY BE 'LOOKING UP' AT MICHIGAN RALLY

"I was already having a hard time with this holiday, and the comment that he made was just — it made me sad," she said. "But I'm going to keep doing my job and I'm going to work with Republicans and Democrats, as I always do."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

She added that "compromise isn't a dirty word," and "we need to listen to each other" and "respect each other."

"Treat each other with dignity and respect and you can get things done," she stated.

Fox News' Brie Stimson and Julia Musto contributed to this report.

Original Article

Klobuchar goes on attack, grills Horowitz on Russian interference

closeSen. Amy Klobuchar: Let’s remember this is not about one election or one party, it’s about our democracyVideo

Sen. Amy Klobuchar: Let’s remember this is not about one election or one party, it’s about our democracy

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar questions Department of Justice watchdog Michael Horowitz on his report on alleged FISA abuse.

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., went on the offensive during the Senate Judiciary Committee's questioning of Justice Department Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz on Wednesday, shifting the focus of the hearing from the failures of the FBI during its Russia investigation by grilling Horowitz on the ongoing threat of Russian election interference.

While Republicans used their time during the hearing to hammer the investigation over their use of inaccurate and misleading evidence to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant for Carter Page, Klobuchar used her time to illustrate how Russia was and remains a real threat heading into the 2020 election.

IG MICHAEL HOROWITZ TESTIFIES BEFORE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: LIVE UPDATES

"I think it's important to put this discussion in context with what happened in the 2016 election, which is why we are here today," she said. "It is now undisputed by our intelligence agencies that Russia invaded our democracy. Not with bombs, or jets, or tanks, but with a sophisticated cyber-mission to undermine the underpinnings of our very democracy."

She then looked to the race she hopes to participate in, the 2020 presidential election, and recalled a warning from former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coates.

"He said that, in fact, Russia has been emboldened to do this again," she said.

A former prosecutor, Klobuchar then asked a rapid-fire series of questions about Russian interference — past, present and future.

"Do you think that interference in our elections by a foreign government constitutes a national security threat?" she asked.

"Yes, I do," Horowitz said.

"Does anything in your report call into question the finding in the Special Counsel's report that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in a sweeping and systematic fashion?" she asked.

"No it does not," Horowitz said, saying that he cites former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report in his own report.

"Does anything in your report call into question the assessment of FBI Director [Christopher] Wray that Russians' interference in our elections is ongoing, and that its interference in the 2018 midterms [was] a, quote, 'dress rehearsal,' end quote, for the 2020 elections?" she asked

"No, it doesn't," he answered.

"Does anything in your report call into question the finding in the Special Counsel's report that quote 'the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome?'" Klobuchar asked.

Horowitz said he "did not take issue" with any of Mueller's report.

This line of questioning came after Klobuchar took aim at President Trump, who is facing possible impeachment over his request for Ukraine to investigate Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election. She echoed Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who stated earlier in the hearing that it was Russia, not Ukraine, that interfered.

Klobuchar then referred to the recent testimony from former National Security Council official Fiona Hill during the impeachment inquiry.

"She said anyone that is repeating this lie is basically peddling in Russian propaganda," Klobuchar said.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

At the conclusion of her time, Klobuchar asked Horowitz if he agreed with Attorney General Bill Barr's belief that the Russia investigation was launched based on "the thinnest of suspicions."

While Horowitz said that there was "sufficient predication" for opening the Russia probe, he did make clear that this was a "low threshold."

Original Article

AOC compares dog breeding to paid family leave in attack on free market

closeAlexandria Ocasio-Cortez called out for claiming Trump food stamp changes might have left her family 'starved'Video

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called out for claiming Trump food stamp changes might have left her family 'starved'

Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is receiving pushback after claiming her family 'might've just starved' had the Trump administration's tightened requirements for food stamp recipients been in place when her father died in 2008.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., made a puzzling argument on Tuesday in order to counter a conservative nonprofit's argument about free markets providing paid family leave.

"Do we know how long puppies are allowed to stay with their mothers after a dog has given birth?" she asked during a House Oversight Committee hearing on paid leave.

"Uh, eight weeks. So, the market has decided that women and people who give birth deserve less time with their children than a dog," she added.

Ocasio-Cortez seemed to be referring to the practice of breeders keeping puppies until they reach 8 weeks of age, at which point they're sold and likely never see their parents again.

Paid family leave generally refers to a limited period of time in which human parents can leave work to take care of a new child. The parent is still able to live with the child after that paid period ends.

AOC CALLED OUT AFTER CLAIMING TRUMP FOOD-STAMP REVISIONS MIGHT HAVE LEFT HER FAMILY 'STARVED'

She made those comments in an apparent attempt to dispute Heritage Foundation scholar Rachel Greszler, who had advocated businesses and workers negotiating their own terms for wages and paid leave. Greszler, in a statement provided to Fox News, criticized Ocasio-Cortez's comments.

“As a woman who has given birth to six children, I find being compared to a breeding dog with puppies incredibly offensive. What AOC failed to point out is the reason many states require puppies to spend at least eight weeks with their mothers is in the context of them being sold to people after that period," she said.

Ocasio-Cortez's use of the word "allowed" indicated some kind of legal prohibition — meaning that by definition, the government interfered rather than allowing the free market to act. A long list of states has instituted regulations surrounding that point in development.

AOC RAKES IN $1.42M IN THIRD QUARTER, TOPPING BOTH PELOSI AND SCHIFF: REPORT

Ocasio-Cortez's office did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment. The congresswoman stood by her argument on Twitter.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

After serving up several questions to Greszler, Ocasio-Cortez made her dog breeder analogy and pushed for more government intervention in paid leave policies.

"And I think that that, at its core, has shown that the market has failed to treat people with dignity and with basic respect — and so when that happens, I think it's our job as the public to redefine the rules of society," she added.

Original Article