Monthly Archives: September 2023

What Happened At The Hearing?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller posted a summary of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. It’s amazing how many Democrats seem to have memory problems.

The article reports what it considers the biggest takeaways:

1. Biden-appointed prosecutors could refuse to cooperate with Weiss

Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan pressed Garland on his previous testimony to Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley that Weiss had complete authority. Jordan emphasized Graves’ decision not to “partner” with Weiss on bringing charges against Hunter Biden.

2. It is unlikely the DOJ investigates the IRS whistleblowers

Republican Louisiana Rep. Mike Johnson questioned Garland on whether his office requested an investigation into the whistleblower testimony.

3. It is unclear why Weiss’ letters to Congress contradict themselves

Weiss wrote multiple letters to Congress in June and July responding to the IRS whistleblower allegations that his charging authority was limited. Weiss wrote a letter to Jordan in June where he said his charging authority was geographically limited to his home district and it was DOJ procedure to collaborate with U.S. Attorneys in their jurisdictions.

4. Garland appeared to dispute testimony from two FBI agents

Johnson questioned Garland on testimony from FBI agent Thomas Sobocinski who said Weiss had a “cumbersome” bureaucratic process for filing charges.

“There was administrative charge — or administrative process, not within DOJ, but also within tax.

5. Garland won’t talk about the details of the Hunter Biden case

The attorney general deferred to Weiss throughout his testimony when lawmakers asked specific questions on the details of the Hunter Biden case.

6. Garland did not consider appointing a special counsel from outside the Justice Department

Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel in August to continue the Hunter Biden investigation, even though DOJ regulations instruct for special counsels to be appointed from outside the government.

The article concludes:

The House Ways and Means, Judiciary and Oversight Committees are investigating the IRS whistleblower allegations alongside House Oversight’s probe into Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings. Speaker Kevin McCarthy said on Sept. 12 that the three committees would be leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden.

Hunter Biden was indicted on Sept. 14 on three counts related to his October 2018 purchase of a Colt Cobra revolver while he was allegedly addicted to crack cocaine. His attorney said in a court filing Tuesday that Biden would plead not guilty to the gun charges.

 

Moving To Protect Americans’ Money

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Washington Examiner reported:

House Republicans have advanced a bill that would stop the Federal Reserve from issuing digital currency, sending the legislation to the House for a vote.

The House Financial Services Committee voted Wednesday to advance the legislation, which was sponsored by Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN). The bill is dubbed the Central Bank Digital Currency Anti-Surveillance State Act. It won support from Republicans and drew opposition from some Democrats on the committee.

If you want the government to have full control over how much money you have and how you spend it, Central Bank Digital Currency is for you. It is one of the worst ideas to come along in a long time.

The article notes:

“The CBDC Anti-Surveillance State Act underscores that fact and protects Americans’ privacy and our financial system from the risks a CBDC would pose,” said committee Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-NC). “It builds on the principles that Republicans developed last Congress to guide our evaluation of a potential CBDC.

“The bill, led by Whip Emmer, emphasizes those principles and ensures that the Federal Reserve cannot issue a CBDC without congressional approval,” he added.

Democrats, though, blasted the legislation as being antithetical to innovation and competition.

“Unfortunately, this bill, which I will call the CBDC anti-innovation act … would commonly shut down important work the Fed is doing to research a potential U.S. CBDC,” said the committee’s Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA). “Instead of taking steps to ensure the United States wins the digital currency space race against emerging powers like China, Republicans are making baseless attacks against the CBDC that does not even exist.”

Remember, the Democrats are the people who want to control the car you drive and the stove you cook on. They are the last people I want to control my income and my spending.

About That Equal Justice Thing…

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

Federal prosecutors on Sept. 18 charged James Ray Epps Sr., who was shown on video encouraging protesters to enter the Capitol on Jan. 6, with a single disorderly conduct count that carries up to a year in jail.

Mr. Epps, 62, was named in a criminal charging document (pdf) filed in Washington D.C. with one count of disorderly or disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds.

Mr. Epps’s case was assigned to Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The filing of a charging document—as opposed to a grand jury indictment—often indicates a defendant will take a plea deal, which is consistent with the docket in the case.

Mr. Epps will be arraigned at 3 p.m. EDT on Sept. 20 via Zoom before Judge Boasberg. The session is labeled on the docket as an “arraignment/plea agreement hearing.”

There have been multiple articles written about the treatment of other January 6th prisoners. It is an affront to any patriotic American who believes in equal justice in America that those prisoners are still in jail while the BLM rioters who burned down buildings and killed people were given a slap on the wrist. It is unthinkable that either party in Congress has allowed the imprisonment of the Jan 6th prisoners to continue. Those people who destroyed property or assaulted anyone should have been given a reasonable jail sentence. There is no excuse for imprisoning those who walked through the Capitol doors that police opened for them. This charge is further proof that Ray Epps was part of a false flag operation set up by the government.

Gun Laws Are Only For Some People

Posted on by

On September 21, The Epoch Times reported the following:

An armed man accused of posing as a federal marshal at an event attended by Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was charged with misdemeanors according to the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office.

Adrian Paul Aispuro, 44, was initially booked on a felony gun charge Sept. 15 and is being held on $35,000 bail, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Inmate Information Center.

According to the office of the city attorney, he is charged with carrying a loaded firearm, carrying a concealed firearm, and impersonating an officer, which all carry misdemeanors.

Are we supposed to believe that if this man had been at a Biden rally (if there is such a thing) that the charge would have been a misdemeanor? This happened in California where there are supposed to be strict gun laws. Aren’t there also strict penalties for violating those gun laws?

The article notes:

In July, Mr. Kennedy said his request for Secret Service protection as a presidential candidate was denied by the Department of Homeland Security.

“Since the assassination of my father in 1968, candidates for president are provided Secret Service protection,” Mr. Kennedy wrote on X. “But not me.”

According to U.S. law under ”18 USC 3056A,” the U.S. Secret Service is tasked to provide protection to “major presidential and vice presidential candidates and, within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses of such candidates.”

The secretary of the Department for Homeland Security (DHS), currently Alejandro Mayorkas, is tasked with identifying “major” candidates in a presidential race in consultation with the Speaker of the House, the House minority leader, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, and one additional member selected by the other members of the committee, which as a whole isn’t answerable to the incumbent president.

DHS has yet to comment on its decision.

I really don’t like the way the Biden administration does things. Even if they don’t approve of a candidate, they should be giving him Secret Service protection–particularly considering the history of the Kennedy family.

When Private Citizens Have The Real Information

Posted on by

I am probably not the only one who has noticed that the hours of January 6th footage that was supposed to be made public never actually appeared. Some of the sentences given to the January 6th political prisoners seemed very much out of proportion to the crimes committed. Walking through a door opened by a policeman and taking selfies does not seem to me to warrant a twenty-year jail sentence in a horrible jail. Meanwhile, Ghislaine Maxwell enjoys the luxury of a Florida country-club-like prison after seemingly being involved in human trafficking for years. Seems a little unequal to me. Well, some of the video information of January 6th is coming to light because of something called ‘crowdsourcing.’

Crowd sourcing is defined as a method of outsourcing work over the Internet or similar network by appealing to people to contribute to the project independently or as a collaboration. In this case it is simply people sharing their cell-phone videos of January 6th.

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported:

The Gateway Pundit has obtained THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF J6 FOOTAGE from “Sedition Hunter” online crowdsourcing groups.

Sedition Hunters are typically Antifa activists who define themselves as part of an anonymous group that tracks, identifies, and reports Trump supporters and protesters who attended the January 6 protests in Washington DC to the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

Defense attorneys representing J6 defendants have access to over 41,000 hours of January 6 footage but are prohibited from publicly disclosing the footage until it is exhibited in discovery in a defendant’s trial.

J6 defendants typically view their discovery for the first time during trial.

The article continues:

Below is a copy of a spreadsheet compiled by Sediton Hunters containing links to thousands of hours of J6 CCTV footage, police body cams and more. 

The document outlines minute-by-minute accounts linked to available video, from January 6th.

Open-Source Intelligence, Capitol Security Footage, Bodycams, J6 Deaths After J6 by Alicia Powe

The article includes a number of links to the video footage. Please follow the link to the article for further information. This is the information that should have been made public in 2021 but was withheld from the public. Hopefully it will overturn some of the Draconian prison sentences on people who were in Washington on January 6th who did nothing wrong. As I have previously stated, people who assaulted others or broke things need to be held accountable; people who walked through a door held open by the police need to be left alone.

How Many FBI Agents Does It Take To Create A False Flag Incident?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported the following:

As reported earlier on Tuesday, The House Judiciary Republicans sent a letter Tuesday that includes transcribed testimony from former Assistant Director-in-Charge of the Washington Field Office (WFO) Steven D’Antuono.

D’Antuono testified that the FBI had numerous confidential human sources (CHS) in the Trump crowd on January 6.

In fact, they had so many FBI operatives in the crowd they had no idea how many were actually there that day!

D’Antuono had quite a record of failures and lies during his time at the FBI.

D’Antuono was the head of the FBI’s Detroit field office as the bureau was investigating an alleged kidnapping attempt against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

As Just the News notes, trial testimony alleges the “plot” wasn’t just investigated but instigated by the FBI, with the jury hearing that the bureau’s informants gave drugs to those who were eventually charged in the plot before recording their conversations and sometimes outnumbered “plotters” during meetings.

The entire plot was hatched, planned, paid for, and executed by paid FBI informants.

…In the letter released on Tuesday, D’Antuono told House investigators that he did not know how many FBI agents had infiltrated the crowd on January 6.

The letter suggested that “the FBI cannot adequately track the activities and operations of its informants, and that it lost control of its CHSs present at the Capitol on January 6,” D’Antuono wrote.

Later in the interview, he told investigators that “only a handful” of FBI informants were in the crowd that day.

For over two years now, The Gateway Pundit has been reporting on the FBI informants and feds who infiltrated the Trump crowds on January 6, 2021.

And we can report – for certain – that Assistant Director-in-Charge of the Washington Field Office (WFO) Steven D’Antuono is lying about the number of FBI operatives and informants in the crowd on January 6th.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. At the bottom of the article is further information uncovered by the research team at The Gateway Pundit.

Growing Up And Taking Action

Posted on by

On September 19th, PJ Media posted an article that illustrates one current result of the transgender movement.

The article reports:

An unnamed woman who once identified as transgender filed suit last week against the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Nebraska Medicine, and three doctors for “negligence and lack of informed consent” after she had a “gender-affirming” double mastectomy at the age of 16 in 2018.

Now a young woman, the plaintiff will never nurse her children, assuming she is still able to bear them after four years of testosterone treatments that “caused significant mental and physical harm.”

All because the medical industry — I used to call it “healthcare” — decided that surgery and hormones were the answer to a troubled teenager’s emotional and mental health issues and, according to the lawsuit, bulldozed her into their preferred “treatment.”

The obvious question here is, “Why in the world did her parents allow her to do this?” I know some parents have said that their children threatened suicide if they did not let them transition, but since when did parents give in to blackmail by their children?

The article concludes:

Until recently, transgenderism was a condition suffered much more often by men than by women. But in recent years — in no doubt due to social contagion and a medical industry eager to leap on new profit sources — there has been an explosion in emotionally troubled (and often abused) teen girls who believe they’re suffering from it.

“Could it be that this is a fad,” Bethany Mandel asked in the New York Post last June, “driven by social media, that tells young people — particularly girls — that transgenderism is cool, far more common than it really is, and changing your gender is a snap?”

Yes. And it’s pure evil that the medical industry is lining its pockets by preying on it.

But as my old internet acquaintance Emily Zanotti noted on Twitter last week, “Oh, man. I never really thought about it but the lawsuits on this are going to be *nuts* in a few years. If these kids start getting million-dollar judgments… woof.”

I’ve long been a critic of how overly litigious American society is, but when it comes to the medically sanctioned emotional and physical abuse of minors, I hope this segment of the medical industry is sued out of existence.

This segment of the medical industry should be sued out of existence.

Some Thoughts On Impeachment

Posted on by

I don’t like the fact that an impeachment inquiry has begun. First of all, I think it’s theater–I don’t expect much to come of it. I don’t expect the media to report most of what is uncovered; and frankly, it may simply be a distracting waste of time and money. However, it is resulting in some interesting observations and commentary.

On Monday, Issues & Insights posted an article about the impeachment of President Biden.

Some observations from the article:

In just the past few days we’ve seen a multitude of such warnings. Here’s a small sampling:

    • “Impeaching Biden Is a Desperate Gamble That Will Backfire”
    • “Republicans would love to impeach Biden. It would backfire on them.”
    • “How Republicans’ Push to Impeach Joe Biden Could Backfire”
    • “Could the Biden impeachment inquiry backfire on Republicans?”
    • “Will the House GOP’s Biden impeachment probe backfire?”
    • “This is the White House’s Dream!”

Here’s the strange thing. Every one of these headlines appeared in leftist newspapers, were penned by leftist authors, or were uttered on leftist cable news programs.

It’s almost as though these outlets all got their marching orders from a single source. Which, it turns, out, they did – the Biden White House.

An Aug. 31 story in The Hill – headlined “White House warns GOP Biden impeachment will backfire” – says that “the White House remains steadfastly confident that if the GOP goes forward with an inquiry … it will hurt Republicans more than it could hurt Biden.”

The story quotes White House spokesman Ian Sams saying that:  

This baseless impeachment exercise would be a disaster for congressional Republicans, and don’t take our word for it: just listen to the chorus of their fellow Republicans who admit there is no evidence for their false allegations and that pursuing such a partisan stunt will ‘backfire.’

Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y, added “It’s vitally important for congressional Democrats to be in sync with the White House and the Biden campaign.”

We all remember the story of Br’er Rabbit and Br’er Fox and the briar patch. That’s what the leftist talking points remind me of–they are saying that if the Republicans impeach President Biden, it will hurt Republicans. They are implying that it would be better for the Republicans not to impeach President Biden. They are not admitting that making the evidence against President Biden public will hurt Democrats.

 

 

Exactly Where Do We Go After Roe v. Wade?

Posted on by

The overturning of Roe v. Wade was a constitutional victory as well as a moral one. The federal government has no business getting involved in abortion. Of course the federal government is involved in a lot of things it shouldn’t be involved in (according to the Tenth Amendment), so I guess it was not unusual that it would be involved in abortion. It is a difficult issue, and pro-life Republicans need to proceed carefully when speaking about it. I believe that the ‘pro-life’ position is the correct one, but again, we need to be careful when we speak. A Constitutional amendment outlawing abortion would be as unconstitutional as Roe v. Wade. This is truly a matter that should be left to the states.

On Monday, The Daily Wire posted an article about a recent interview of President Trump by NBC’s Kristen Welker.

The article reports:

“The radical people on this are really the Democrats that say after five months, six months, seven months, eight months, nine months, and even after birth, you’re allowed to terminate the baby,” Trump told Welker during the interview.

“Mr. President, Democrats aren’t saying that,” Welker responded.

Moments later Trump said, “I said with Hillary Clinton when we had the debate, I made a statement, ‘rip the baby out of the womb’ in the ninth month. You’re allowed to do that, and you shouldn’t be allowed to do that.”

“Again, no one is arguing for that. That’s not a part of anyone’s platform, Mr. President,” Welker said.

Besides the untold number of abortion activists who advocate for abortion on demand up to birth, a slew of states currently allow abortion at any point in the pregnancy.

Alaska, Colorado, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. all allow abortion with no gestational limits.

While high-profile Democrats often hedge on whether they support any gestational limits on abortion, some have come right out and admitted they support abortion up to the moment of birth.

Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) was direct about his stance during a Fox News segment in June.

“Is there a cutoff for you before [the due date]?” host Shannon Bream asked Cardin.

“No, to me, it’s a reproductive, it’s a health care decision. It’s up to women to make that decision,” Cardin responded.

If President Trump had not had the information at hand about abortion, the viewers would have been left with the impression that he was not telling the truth. Truth is only one on many ways to fight the abortion lobby.

About That Article V Convention

Posted on by

Many Americans have espoused the idea of an Article V Convention as a way to add two amendments to the United States Constitution–a balanced budget amendment and a term limits amendment. When those of us who are skeptical of the ability of our political class to do the right thing question the idea of holding an Article V Convention, we are told that the checks and balances would prevent any mischief. I am not convinced. We have checks and balances built into our government, and we have had a lot of mischief in spite of those checks and balances.

On Friday, The Western Journal reported the following:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is eyeing a change to the United States Constitution.

The state’s legislature on Thursday approved a resolution in support of Newsom’s call for a 28th Constitutional amendment, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The amendment would enshrine a list of Democratic gun-control policy priorities into federal law.

…The proposed “Right to Safety Amendment” would limit legal gun ownership to adults 21 and older, enact universal federal background checks on gun sales, create a mandatory “reasonable waiting period” for gun purchases, and ban the purchase of many forms of semiautomatic rifles.

The article notes:

The governor claims the new amendment would co-exist with the Second Amendment despite the proposed amendment’s changes to the American legal understanding of gun ownership.

“The Right to Safety Amendment would preserve the integrity of the Second Amendment, while enshrining in our Constitution commonsense safety provisions that are supported overwhelmingly by the American people,” the progressive governor said in a news release.

…Three-fourths of state legislatures need to approve any amendment to the Constitution before it becomes law, and Republicans control a majority of state houses.

Many of the amendment’s provisions already are law in California, but that state experienced the most mass shootings in the nation between 1982 and August of this year, according to Statista. However, the nation’s most populous state had the eighth-lowest gun-death rate among the 50 states in 2021, according to Giffords Law Center.

I don’t want to let this man anywhere near amending the U.S. Constitution.

Why Your Child Can’t Read

Posted on by

On Sunday, The New York Post posted an article about Columbia University closing down its Teachers College Reading and Writing Project.

The article reports:

Just before the Labor Day weekend, Columbia announced that it’s “dissolving” the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project and sending its creator, Lucy Calkins, off on indefinite sabbatical.

For decades, Calkins and her colleagues pushed “literacy” programs based on ideology, not science, programs that failed the children who most needed help.

Her “balanced literacy” approach gave short shrift to phonics — by teaching children to look at pictures and guess words, for example, instead of sounding them out — and failed to foster the building of knowledge and vocabulary vital to learning the love of reading.

Phonics may be old-fashioned, but it is the only way a child can read an unfamiliar word. When my children were little, we watched Sesame Street together. I loved the sections they did on phonics.

Phonics matters. I have three children. Two of them learned to read in Massachusetts, and one learned to read in Rhode Island. Massachusetts taught phonics (they used blow-up ‘letter people’ which were wonderful–Mr. O was obstreperous), and Rhode Island taught ‘see and say’ or sight words. It wasn’t until college that the child who had not been taught phonics caught up with the other two on learning to read well and to love reading.

The article notes:

Columbia’s decision comes months after Chancellor David Banks pulled the plug on the Calkins-friendly approach once used by nearly half of NYC public schools.

Indeed, the drive toward “evidence-based” instruction has seen districts across the nation reject the Teachers College approach.

So Columbia’s move is essentially just recognizing reality.

Definitely a step in the right direction.

Protecting The Deep State

Posted on by

President Trump is not the only person running for President who is a threat to the deep state. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has made inroads in the Democrat primary and would not be a President who would be easily controlled. It is interesting that the Biden administration has so far denied Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secret Service protections (article here).

On Saturday, Newsweek reported:

Police arrested an armed man falsely claiming to be part of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.‘s security team in Los Angeles on Friday night. It happened outside a venue where the Democratic 2024 presidential candidate was giving a speech and just two miles away from where his father, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, was assassinated in 1968.

The incident took place by the Wilshire Ebell Theatre where Kennedy was delivering an address to mark Hispanic Heritage Month. Kennedy posted a photograph of the man who was detained while wearing an Emergency Medical Service top and dark sunglasses, on X, formerly known as Twitter. Kennedy said the man was “carrying a U.S. Marshal badge” and had stated he was part of his security.

While Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has struggled to challenge President Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination, he has picked up considerable conservative support, thanks to his promotion of discredited conspiracy theories about coronavirus vaccines.

Keep in mind when reading this article that it was posted in Newsweek. The comment about discredited conspiracy theories is unnecessary and inaccurate.

Considering the Kennedy family history, Robert F. Kennedy should have been provided Secret Service protection immediately when he announced that he was running for President.

Connecting The Dots

Posted on by

There is a theory that has been floating around for a while that the reason many deep-state politicians are so concerned about President Trump possibly having classified documents is that those documents relate to bad behavior on the part of the deep state in the Russian Hoax and impeachment trials. Every day that theory becomes more plausible.

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article with some very interesting comments by Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Chairman Mark Warner.

Here are some of the comments taken from an interview on Face the Nation:

“I’ve got bipartisan legislation that would reform the whole classification process. We way overclassify. We, frankly, should have a process in place so that no president or vice president ever takes documents after they leave office.”

MARGARET BRENNAN: I have to pick up where your Republican colleague just left off. Are the Trump and Biden classified documents that were in their personal possession, and not in controlled areas, equally egregious?

MARK WARNER: Well, Margaret, three things quickly. One, the administration took way too long to get us these documents. Two, while Mike and I have a great working relationship, I believe, based on the documents I’ve seen, that there is a difference in terms of the potential abuse that came from the Trump documents. And, third, it’s one of the reasons why I’ve got bipartisan legislation that would reform the whole classification process. We way overclassify. We, frankly, should have a process in place so that no president or vice president ever takes documents after they leave office. That is kind of the lowest common fruit.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

The one thing the Senator said that I agree with is that the government does overclassify. Many times things are classified to protect questionable government actions–it has nothing to do with national security.

Something to keep in mind is that a lot of information is going to come out if President Trump stands trial in Georgia. Most of that information will be information on voter fraud that the courts have so far avoided hearing, but it is very possible that other information regarding the deep state may be revealed.

The statements by Senator Mark Warner indicate to me that if someone like President Trump is elected in the future and decides to go after the deep state, the Senator wants to make sure they do not have access to the relevant material. I believe the bill the Senator is proposing is unconstitutional.

Let’s Go Back To Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Speech

Posted on by

The Civil Rights movement of the 1960’s had some really good ideas. Martin Luther King, Jr., expressed one of the best ideas of the movement when he said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” (source here) Unfortunately, we have forgotten or deliberately left behind that idea.

On Saturday, The Daily Caller reported:

Wall Street’s top investment banking firms offer career-advancing opportunities to college students, with one catch — applicants are expected to be of certain races and gender identities.

The programs, run by companies that include Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, aim to increase diversity, prioritizing students based on race and gender. They also potentially run afoul of federal civil rights laws, legal experts told the the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Those programs are likely illegal violations of federal civil rights laws including Title VI, Title VII, Title IX, and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, and they are ripe for a legal challenge of their blatant discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, gender identity or sexual orientation,” University of Michigan-Flint professor emeritus Mark Perry, who has filed hundreds of civil rights complaints against colleges, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The companies encourage specific groups to apply, naming racial and gender categories directly in their eligibility criteria, and then attempt to save face by adding statements to clarify applications are still open to all.

The article concludes:

Corporate diversity practices have increasingly been the subject of lawsuits by conservative legal groups. In August, an Atlanta-based investment manager, Fearless Fund, was sued over its grant program for black women. The lawsuit was funded by a nonprofit founded by Edward Blum, the activist behind the Students for Fair Admissions cases that led to the Supreme Court overturning affirmative action.

Separately, a law firm recently removed references to race and sexual orientation in the criteria for its diversity fellowship after it was hit with a lawsuit by Blum’s organization, the American Alliance for Equal Rights.

Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan did not respond to requests for comment.

Let’s get back to what Martin Luther King, Jr., said.

Sinking To The Lowest Common Denominator

Posted on by

Back in the age of dinosaurs, I graduated from a secretarial school that had a strict dress code–dresses or skirts, high heels, hats, gloves, etc. It seems trivial, but because of the professional image of that school, its graduates generally found good jobs and advanced in the corporate world. It used to be understood that people in important jobs dressed appropriately. We have all heard the expression, “Dress for the job you want, not the job you have.” Well, the United States Senate seems to have adopted the motto, “Dress for where you would really rather be.” It appears that the future C-SPAN pictures will include Senators dressed as if they recently visited the clearance section of Wal-Mart.

On Sunday, Fox News reported:

The U.S. Senate will no longer enforce a dress code for members of the upper house elected by those they serve.

“However, others entering the chamber must comply with the dress code. Coats/ties for men. Business attire for women,” tweeted Chad Pergram, Fox News senior congressional correspondent.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., quietly sent the directive to the Senate’s sergeant at arms, news website Axios reported.

So the new dress code only applies to Senators–not staff or visitors.

The article notes:

The change allows Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., to continue to wear his trademark hooded sweatshirts and gym shorts while working for Americans.

Fetterman was previously praised for “turning heads” and “redefining fashion in the stuffy Senate” during his recovery after a six-week stay at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, where he was treated for “clinical depression” and “fitted for hearing aids for hearing loss that had made it harder for him to communicate,” according to an AP story from May.

The senator even found a workaround to the legislative body’s dress code rules by voting from the doorway of the Democrat cloakroom or the side entrance, making sure his vote is recorded before ducking out, per the AP report.

Don’t run for Senator unless you are willing to uphold the dignity of the office. I realize that dignity is often in question, but I believe appearances matter.

The Cover-Up Continues

Posted on by

On Friday, The New York Post posted an article about FBI Special Agent Thomas Sobocinski’s closed-door testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. It seems that the Justice Department is working very hard to control what Congress finds out regarding their shielding the Biden family from any consequences regarding the incredible amount of money they received from overseas sources.

The article reports:

A transcript of FBI Special Agent Thomas Sobocinski’s closed-door testimony before the House Judiciary Committee last week, reviewed by The Post, reveals that the Justice Department detailed what Sobocinski could and couldn’t talk about with lawmakers a day before his Sept. 7 interview.

“Specifically, the Department has authorized [Sobocinski] to discuss U.S. Attorney [David] Weiss’ authority, as well as the October 7th, 2022, meeting, subject to some constraints around the ongoing investigation issue,” Sara Zdeb, a deputy assistant attorney general, informed congressional investigators before questioning began, referencing a letter to Sobocinski signed by Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer.

IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley, who supervised the Hunter Biden tax fraud investigation for more than three years, claimed in bombshell congressional testimony earlier this year that during the Oct. 7, 2022, meeting between senior-level managers from the IRS, the FBI and the Delaware US Attorney’s Office, Weiss declared that he was not the “deciding official on whether charges are filed” against Hunter and revealed that US Attorney Matthew Graves would not allow him to charge Hunter for tax fraud in DC and said he asked for and was denied special counsel authority from the DOJ. 

The article concludes:

House Judiciary Committee spokesman Russell Dye told The Post that Shapley and fellow IRS whistleblower Joseph Ziegler “have been wholly consistent throughout their disclosures to Congress, and the only people who haven’t are people like David Weiss, Merrick Garland, and their liberal cronies.”

Attorneys for Shapley said Sobocinski’s testimony was less credible than Shapley’s own contemporaneously documented notes.

“The ‘minutia’ of tax law and the impending expiration of the 2014/2015 charges are the reason the October 7, 2022 meeting was scheduled to begin with, so sounds like SAC Sobociski wasn’t paying attention—while SSA Shapley was taking notes,” tweeted Tristan Leavitt, president of Empower Oversight, which represents Shapley.

Jason Foster, chairman of the pro-whistleblowing group, wrote, “The only question is how close to perjury others are willing to dance to tow the Garland/Weiss company line—while DOJ-minders watch them testify. ‘Don’t recall’ feels safe when folks are trying to keep their jobs.”

Shapley’s testimony about other aspects of an alleged cover-up in the case has been partially corroborated by Ziegler and by recently retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent Joe Gordon.

Until the swamp in Washington is drained, influence peddling, money laundering, and insider trading will continue.

What Did You Learn In School Today?

Posted on by

On Friday, BizPacReview posted an article about a recent school assignment given to 5th graders in Plainview, New York.

The article reports:

Conservative commentator Dave Rubin shared a stunning 5th-grade school assignment he said a friend sent to him — the revelation being the latest example of the absurdity going on in public schools today.

“An unknown enemy has launched a nuclear strike on Long Island,” the assignment states.

Students are told they have 20 minutes to get to a local fallout shelter and when they arrive there will be ten other people waiting to get in. The student is then instructed to pick 6 survivors to join them in the shelter.

The choices include a 16-year-old pregnant girl, a police officer with multiple charges of brutality, a 38-year-old retired prostitute, a 75-year-old priest, a 35-year-old sterile female doctor, a lawyer husband and his alcoholic wife, a 31-year-old homosexual architect, a 50-year-old musician once addicted to coke, and a 28-year-old drifter with no apparent skills.

…Turns out, 5th-grade health teacher Mandy Bieder was “removed from the classroom” this week at Howard B. Mattlin Middle School, located in Plainville, N.Y., after giving the questionnaire to her students, according to News 12 Long Island.

Not only is the assignment inappropriate, but the descriptions of the people are inappropriate. The assignment is encouraging the children to judge people according to their sex life, their now irrelevant past, and other inappropriate things. Also note the specifics that are mentioned–the police officer is charged with brutality, the lawyer has an alcoholic wife, and the architect is homosexual. How is it appropriate for a 5th grader to be asked to judge the worth of people based on that information? I would also note that if the child is supposed to figure out what is best to continue the human race, this is not the best group of options. What are we teaching our children about the value of life? Do different lives have different values? Isn’t that how Hitler started? Why not have them read Animal Farm and see how that philosophy ends?

Is This An Acceptable Statement?

Posted on by

On Saturday, Zero Hedge posted an article about a recent statement by President Biden. This is a statement the White House immediately tried to revise.

The article reports:

In another humiliating gaffe, the 80-year-old Biden suggested that black and hispanic workers don’t have high school diplomas.

“We’ve seen record lows in unemployment particularly — and I’ve focused on this my whole career — particularly for African Americans and Hispanic workers and veterans, you know, the workers without high school diplomas,” he said in televised remarks.

…The White House, of course, went into damage control mode – doctoring the official transcript to read something Biden never said, and claiming that there was supposed to be the word “and” separating the minority groups and veterans, from ‘those without high school diplomas.’

“We’ve seen record lows in unemployment particularly — and I’ve focused on this my whole career — particularly for African Americans and Hispanic workers and veterans, you know, and the workers without high school diplomas,” reads the official transcript.

Blacks, hispanics, veterans, and possibly those without high school diplomas took offense, and general mockery ensued.

The article includes the following chart:

An apology is needed.

The House Of Representatives Did Something Good For American Consumers

Posted on by

On Friday, Just the News reported that the House of Representatives has passed H.R.1435.

This is the main part of the bill according to Congress.gov:

Basically this bill prevents the government from passing a law that would prohibit Americans from purchasing gas-powered vehicles. The bill is called the “Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act.”

All of the Democrats who voted cast votes against the bill. All of the Republicans who voted cast votes for the bill. I guess the Democrats only support choice when it comes to abortion.

 

Ken Paxton Has Been Acquitted

Posted on by

Ken Paxton’s actual crime was defeating a Bush in a primary election; however, that was not listed among the crimes he was charged with.

According to a National Pulse article posted September 16th:

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been acquitted of all 16 charges against him, following an impeachment campaign leveled against him by establishment Republicans who partnered with left-wing “impeachment managers” to try and remove the pro-Trump figure.

Texas state senators voted Saturday morning to acquit Paxton on 16 articles, including “disregard of official duty”, as well as “misapplication of public resources”, “constitutional bribery”, “false statements in official records”, “conspiracy and attempted conspiracy”, “dereliction of duty”, “unfitness for office”, and “abuse of public trust”. 

Paxton was not present for the verdict, and his wife, Senator Angela Paxton, was prohibited from voting.

Four original articles were held in abeyance, with the Senate dismissing them in a vote conducted after the acquittal.

The National Pulse previously reported on how impeachment managers had tried to hide evidence from Paxton, so as to stymie his defense. After our report, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick imposed a discovery order on the state’s House of Representatives, demanding they reveal they basis for the impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton.

This is Attorney General Paxton’s statement about the acquittal:

Some Important Information On The Covid Booster

Posted on by

On Thursday, Dr. Marty Makary and Tracy Beth Hoeg wrote an article for The New York Post about the new Covid booster. Dr. Makary is a health care expert at Johns Hopkins University.

The article reports:

Pfizer’s version, approved this week as well, also has zero efficacy data and has not been tested on humans at all. We only have data about antibody production from 10 mice.

The FDA, or Moderna (frankly, it’s hard to tell the difference sometimes), should disclose what happened to the patient who took the new vaccine and had a complication that required medical attention.

The public has a right to know.

The last time the Biden administration approved and recommended a novel COVID bivalent booster, last fall, with no human-outcomes data, it was an epic fail.

Only 17% of Americans took it (and some of those were forced to do so by their employer or school).

Not foreseeing such weak public support for the booster last year, the Biden administration had prepaid pharma $4.9 billion for 171 million doses — many of which were tossed in the wastebasket.

Now it is making the same mistake.

Two weeks ago, the Biden administration upped its orders for the pediatric version of the new COVID vaccines from 14.5 million doses at $1.3 billion to 20 million doses for $1.7 billion, which is more than four times as many pediatric doses as were used last year.

There clearly seems to be a special push this time to give it to children — the same group European regulators are not supporting.

In fact, the original Moderna vaccine was banned in parts of Europe for people under age 30.

European doctors are not alone.

Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine-mandate supporter and FDA adviser from the University of Pennsylvania, told The Atlantic this week that he’s not going to take the new COVID vaccine.

He didn’t take the bivalent booster last fall either, despite being 72 years old.

While he disagreed with Jha on the booster, he recently confessed, “Yes, he was wrong, but you know you can’t say that exactly.”

Yes, you can.

The article also notes:

Unlike influenza, COVID-19 is constantly circulating, so there is ample opportunity to run a trial; indeed, Moderna already ran a randomized trial.

Its trial of just 50 people began four months ago and oddly only reported 14-day side effects.

Why didn’t it enroll more people in its trial? Why didn’t it report three-month effectiveness and do a proper trial?

Conducting a placebo-controlled trial in people during this time would not only yield useful information; it would enable further study of those subjects three and six months from now, when a winter surge may occur.

Let’s be honest: Follow-up studies of COVID vaccines in general have revealed a disappointing truth — mild efficacy against infection is transient, lasting just a few months.

Perhaps Pfizer and Moderna knew the FDA regulatory process was greased for them and they didn’t have to.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Our government is not doing us any favors by encouraging Covid booster shots.

News From The Oversight Committee

Posted on by

The House of Representatives Oversight Committee released a blog post detailing some of the evidence they have regarding President Biden’s involvement in his family’s financial schemes.

Here are just a few examples:

1) In July 2023, former Biden business associate Devon Archer described how Joe Biden was “The Brand” and was used to send “signals” of power, access, and influence to enrich the Biden family from foreign sources.

2) Devon Archer alone was aware of at least 20 times in which then-Vice President Biden spoke on speakerphone with Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates. Democrats would have Americans believe that these phone calls with then-Vice President Biden were simply to discuss the weather.

3) In February 2014, then-Vice President Joe Biden dined with oligarchs from Russia and Kazakhstan who funneled millions of dollars to Hunter Biden and his business associates.

4) In April 2015, then-Vice President Biden dined with Hunter Biden’s foreign business associates, including Ukrainian Burisma executive Vadym Pozharsky. Burisma was then being investigated by Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin for corruption.

5) Then-Vice President Biden had coffee with Hunter Biden’s Chinese business associate, Jonathan Li of BHR, in Beijing and wrote a college letter of recommendation for his daughter.

6) In 2015, then-Vice President Biden hosted Hunter Biden and Devon Archer and other business associates at the official residence of the Vice President. The topic of discussion was filling the top seat at the United Nations. The Kazakhstani government official who wanted the U.N. position attended both dinners at Café Milano with then-Vice President Biden.

7) Using the pseudonym “Robert L. Peters,” Vice President Biden was informed by his staff of a call in 2016 with President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. Copied on that official email? Hunter Biden, who was sitting on the board of the Ukrainian company Burisma.

Please follow the link above to the article to see the entire list.

The thing that should be mentioned is that these actions took place while Joe Biden was Vice-President. I am not sure how that will impact his impeachment. However, to me, the real crime of President Biden is his refusal to secure the southern border. That is a violation of his Oath of Office and is impeachable. Whether or not that will become part of the procedure remains to be seen.