An Honest Mistake?

On Thursday, Hot Air posted an article about the 2020 census and some of the mistakes made.

The article includes the following map:

I realize the map is a little difficult to read, but the purple states were under-counted and the green states were over-counted.

The article notes:

So, the bottom line is that it’s too late now for any of this to matter. Still, it’s hard not to notice the pattern. Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi, Florida and Texas are all red states. Here’s the breakdown of who these states send to the House of Representatives:

    • Arkansas – 4 Republicans
    • Florida – 16 Republicans, 11 Democrats
    • Mississippi – 3 Republicans, 1 Democrat
    • Tennessee – 7 Republicans, 2 Democrats
    • Texas – 23 Republicans, 13 Democrats (though one, Filemon Vela, resigned in March)

These are the numbers:

I am reaching the end of my ability to believe in amazing coincidences.

Voting In Person Works

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article with the headline, “Popularity of mail-in voting plummets in 2022.” One can only hope that it stays unpopular in 2024. I recently watched the movie “2000 Mules” by Dinesh D’Souza. I don’t claim to understand all of the technology involved, but the movie makes a good case for the fact that there was massive ballot drop box fraud in the 2020 election.

The article at Hot Air notes:

Even with all of the chaos that was seen in 2020 because of massive amounts of mail-in voting during the pandemic, congressional Democrats have continued to push “voting reform” bills that make it permanent on a federal level. We were repeatedly assured that too many people were having a hard time voting, and ubiquitous voting by mail would boost participation because people simply like it better. They may want to take a fresh look at that theory following the first rounds of primary voting heading into this year’s midterms. While total turnout has been fairly typical or even slightly elevated thus far in the early voting states, the Associated Press finds that the lion’s share of votes cast thus far have been in person. By contrast, the number of people opting to mail in their ballots has sunk like a stone. This is starting to look like yet another case of the Democrats failing to read the room.

…The five states where primary voters put this theory to the test were Georgia, Ohio, Indiana, Nebraska, and West Virginia. Numbers are not yet available for Nebraska, but the other four showed a decisive trend. In Georgia’s primary in 2020 there were almost one million people who voted by mail. This year, 85,000 requested mail-in ballots. That’s not even one-tenth of the previous primary numbers. And it’s still not known how many of the ballots that were mailed out were actually returned, but obviously, not all of them were.

The ratios in Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia were similar. While we saw a flood of mail-in ballots during the lockdowns, that number has returned to a trickle. Granted, the states who have voted already were mostly red-to-purple states. Perhaps the percentage will be higher in some of the upcoming blue states. But I’ll be deeply shocked if any of them see even half the number of mail-in ballots that they did two years ago. Of course, that tide could still turn in the other direction. Some analysts that the AP spoke to suggest that it’s just too soon to say.

The article concludes:

In-person voting is the norm. It’s always been the norm and it needs to continue being the norm. It’s far easier to conduct a recount (if required) when all of the physical ballots are submitted straight from the voter’s hand in a centralized location for each precinct. The more boxes, bags, and hands of “agents” a ballot has to pass through, the less confidence the voters will have in the outcome.

On November 20, 2020, The Daily Signal reported:

They (the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission) called on states to increase voter ID requirements; to be leery of mail-in voting; to halt ballot harvesting; to maintain voter lists, in part to ensure dead people are promptly removed from them; to allow election observers to monitor ballot counting; and to make sure voting machines are working properly. 

They also wanted the media to refrain from calling elections too early and from touting exit polls. 

All of this may sound eerily similar to the issues in the prolonged presidential election battle of 2020. But these were among the 87 recommendations from the 2005 report of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission. 

The bipartisan commission’s co-chairmen were former Democratic President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, a Republican who served in the George H.W. Bush administration. 

If only we had listened.

Unraveling The Lies Of The Past Five Years

On Saturday, Hot Air posted an article reminding us that the trial of Michael Sussmann begins Monday. I suspect the exhibits are going to be far more interesting than the trial itself.

The article reports:

When we last checked in with the John Durham case against Michael Sussmann, Durham’s team had asked the judge to decide whether a small group of Fusion GPS emails were covered by attorney-client privilege. According to lawyers for Clinton’s 2016 campaign, Fusion GPS was hired solely to provide legal advice about defamation and libel laws which meant everything they did was legal consulting work. Judge Christopher Cooper didn’t seem to buy that claim and yesterday announced that Fusion GPS would have to turn over 22 emails to the prosecutors.

The Washington Post reported on May 12th:

The charge against Sussmann is the first Durham case to go to trial. A Washington-based researcher faces trial later this year for allegedly lying to the FBI about how he collected allegations against Trump. In 2020, a former FBI lawyer pleaded guilty to illegally changing a government record.

Robert Mintz, another former federal prosecutor, said the trial next week “will be the first real test” of Durham’s work. By going to trial, he said, Sussmann has “thrown down the gauntlet and challenged the significance of the prosecution and the wisdom of bringing the case.”

…“The strategy,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew DeFilippis said in court Monday, “was to create news stories … to get the government to investigate it … and to get the press to report the government was investigating.”

…Prosecutors signaled this week that they plan to call a host of current and former law enforcement officials to describe how the FBI pursued the Alfa Bank accusations, and to paint Sussmann as part of a “joint venture” that included Joffe, Clinton’s campaign, research firm Fusion GPS and cybersecurity experts.

The article at Hot Air quotes a Wall Street Journal article by Kimberly Strassel:

Over at the Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel argued yesterday that Durham’s team has already gone a long way to revealing the machinations behind the scenes of the Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS and the rest: (Please follow the above link to the Hot Air article to read the quote)

…Strassel concludes that Sussmann’s trial “on its face is about one lawyer, but in reality is the continuing tale of one of the dirtiest tricks in modern U.S. history.” I guess we’ll see how the trial goes next week. It looks to me like Durham’s team has the goods on Sussmann. Whether that will allow him to make a larger case about the Clinton campaigns dirty tricks remains to be seen.

This might be a really good time to sit back and get some popcorn ready.

Putting Legislative Action Back In Congress Where It Belongs

On Tuesday, Hot Air reported that a federal judge in New Orleans will hear the case regarding Joe Biden’s executive order imposing a moratorium on the sale of new drilling leases to oil and gas companies.

The article quotes the Associated Press:

A federal appeals court in New Orleans hears arguments Tuesday about whether President Joe Biden legally suspended new oil and gas lease sales shortly after taking office because of climate change worries.

The case has not been tried but a federal judge blocked the order, saying only Congress could suspend the sales.

Federal lawyers say the government has broad power to hold, cancel or defer lease sales.

The article reports:

The plaintiffs appear to have a fairly well-developed argument here. The President and the Department of the Interior only have the ability to offer drilling leases because Congress granted them that authority long ago. There is no provision in the existing federal law allowing for the process to be “paused.” In fact, the opposite is true. In a 1987 update to the law, it specifically states that such leases “shall be made available four times per year” in states with eligible federal lands.

In other words, Biden’s executive order not only gummed up the normal process established by Congress, but it may have been a violation of federal law. It’s not as if he has to worry about his own Justice Department trying to prosecute him for this, but the contrast between the claims of the White House and the laws passed by Congress is glaring.

The article concludes:

The only opposition to the new lease sales these days is actually coming from the oil and gas companies themselves. Industry executives are hesitant to expand their current operations for a variety of reasons. For one thing, there is a shortage of workers available to staff up new operations at the moment. Also, inflation impacts the oil and gas industry as much as anyone else. All of the costs associated with putting up a rig and starting to drill have risen. If the price of oil suddenly starts to crater again when production increases, they could wind up losing money on new drilling sites.

In any event, this entire mess began when Joe Biden took office and decided to keep a campaign promise by shutting down drilling on federal land. The predictable results have been damaging across the board and the President is very late to the party in terms of making a course correction now.

We were energy independent when President Biden took office. We need to be there again.

About That Free Country We Are Supporting

First of all, let me make it clear that what is happening in Ukraine is horrible. Civilians are being targeted, innocent people are being killed, prisoners are being tortured and killed. It’s a horrible situation. I should also mention that the first casualty of war is truth, so we have no way of knowing how much of what we are hearing is true.

On Monday, Hot Air reported that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky put a program in place following Russia’s invasion of his country. His government is seeking to identify “traitors” who have expressed support for Russia and its war against “Nazis” in Ukraine.

The article reports:

Anyone who has been materially aiding the enemy is of course subject to prosecution, but people have been arrested just for expressing their support for Moscow on social media. That’s what happened to a man known only as “Victor” this month. Ukrainian security officers in full riot gear showed up at his apartment in Kharkiv to talk to him about some of his social media posts before hauling him off to jail. (Associated Press)

“Yes, I supported (the Russian invasion of Ukraine) a lot. I’m sorry. … I have already changed my mind,” said Viktor, his trembling voice showing clear signs of duress in the presence of the Ukrainian security officers.

“Get your things and get dressed,” an officer said before escorting him out of the apartment. The SBU did not reveal Viktor’s last name, citing their investigation.

Viktor was one of nearly 400 people in the Kharkiv region alone who have been detained under anti-collaboration laws enacted quickly by Ukraine’s parliament and signed by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy after Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion.

If four hundred people have been locked up just in the Kharkiv region under these disinformation laws, how many have been detained across the entire country? It’s almost certainly in the thousands, and all in a matter of a couple of months. To his credit, Zelensky at least got the Parliament to write up a law and signed it, which is better than doing it via an executive order the way Joe Biden did, but it’s still an alarming development.

I understand that a lot of bad things can happen during the fog of war, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is no exception.

The article concludes:

We already know that a similar situation has existed in Russia from the beginning. Anyone who spoke out of turn about the invasion using unapproved language – including journalists – was quickly hauled from the public square and locked up. How is what Ukraine is doing any different? It’s not, at least as far as I can tell.

Of course, the United States has surrendered the high ground in terms of speaking up about this. We now have our own Ministry of Truth in the Department of Homeland Security where our own Orwellian Santa Clause will be making a list and checking it twice to see who is engaging in speech not approved by the Biden administration. How can we criticize Zelenski for doing the same thing that his biggest foreign supporter is doing?

This doesn’t sound like President Zelensky supports free speech.

Preparing?

Let’s not count our chickens before they hatch, but November is looking good for Republicans in Congress. Despite various statements from Democrats that they are not worried, actions speak louder than words.

On Sunday, Hot Air reported the following:

A wave election is on the horizon and the only question is just how strong of a wave it will be. Will it be a traditional kind of victory for Republicans as the minority party typically picks up seats in midterm elections? Or will it be a red tsunami brought about because of deep disapproval of the Biden administration? Either outcome will result in Republicans taking back control of the House and very well may flip the Senate, too. The White House is girding its loins in preparation of the consequences GOP victories will bring.

A top concern for the White House is the new investigations that will be opened up. Republican leadership has already announced that when Republicans are back in charge, Biden and his administration will be under fresh oversight scrutiny not seen to date. And, look for lots of questions being asked about the shady dealings of Biden, Inc. Democrats try to sweep ethical and legal questions about the dealings of Biden’s problem man-child, Hunter, by saying he’s a private citizen, not an elected official. That’s true but that excuse is slowly falling by the wayside as it becomes clear that Joe Biden is in the middle of his son’s sketchy financial deals, especially with foreign governments. That is important now, given Joe is president and dealing with foreign leaders.

So, what’s a nervous White House to do? This White House is bringing back an experienced presidential advisor and message masseuse. Anita Dunn is returning to help Sleepy Joe manage the upcoming electoral disaster that awaits Democrats. Dunn is the ultimate Washington insider. She is currently a senior adviser at the consulting firm SKDK – the ‘D’ is for Dunn. She agreed to work with Biden as he entered the White House as an advisor and then returned to SKDK. She’s an alum of the Obama-Biden administration.

I really hate the idea that every time Congress changes hands we get a new round of investigations. That is so reminiscent of a banana republic. However, there are some needed investigations that have not taken place under the Democrat Congress that need to take place. Among other things, why is it that Congressmen are still trading stocks and have a better profit average than Standard & Poor? (article here) What about the information on Hunter Biden’s laptop? What about evidence of cheating in the 2020 election? There’s a lot to look into.

The article concludes:

Dunn is returning on a full-time basis. There will also be a change in the White House Counsel’s office.

Changes are also expected inside the White House Counsel’s Office. Ian Sams, who currently works at the Department of Health and Human Services, is going to join in a communications position. He previously served as a spokesperson for Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign, where he developed a reputation for being outspoken and at times for having a combative style, traits that could be useful while facing aggressive inquiries from Republicans.

“If Republicans take one or more Houses of Congress, this is going to be a full-time job that has the potential to suck a lot of the oxygen out of the room,” the person said. “There is a recognition from both the White House counsel’s office and also the communication’s office that oversight is going to be a major focus of Republican efforts which is going to in turn create a lot of media attention around these issues.”

So, the Biden administration is putting a couple of Democrat pitbulls in key positions for communication and the Counsel’s office. Sounds like the White House is pretty nervous about what may be exposed in oversight investigations. A great exodus is already underway from personnel in Kamala’s office. Look for more of that coming out of the White House, too, when Republicans come back into power in Congress.

Be prepared for an abundance of media spin if the Republicans take Congress.

 

 

Waiting To See The Impact Of The Lies

On Friday, Hot Air reported that The New York Times had the tapes to back up their claim that Kevin McCarthy thought Trump should resign and he would take that recommendation to the president and that he hoped Twitter would ban the MAGA types in the caucus like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert who had pushed “rigged election” incitement before the insurrection. When initially faced with the accusation, Kevin McCarthy, in the true spirit of a Washington politician, lied about it.

Meanwhile, The Washington Examiner reported on Friday:

House Republicans appear to be in no rush to consider dumping House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy over his double-speak reaction to the Jan. 6 riots and tapped comments that former President Donald Trump should “resign” over the affair.

According to multiple insiders, Republicans are first looking to see what Trump says (or doesn’t) on the growing scandal and then hope to kick questions about leadership toward a time after the fall elections so it doesn’t distract from the goal of taking back control of the House.

It doesn’t matter if the Republicans take control of the House in November if the uniparty is still in control. The statements by Kevin McCarthy indicate to me that he is a member of the uniparty threatened by the popularity of President Trump.

The Washington Examiner concludes:

Importantly, Trump and McCarthy talked Thursday, and the former president isn’t upset in part because McCarthy never pushed for Trump’s resignation, fought impeachment, and subsequently moved to punish Republicans who did vote to impeach.

“It appears that Trump doesn’t care and that McCarthy changing his tune showed he capitulated to him,” said a longtime GOP insider.

Since Trump left office, McCarthy has stayed loyal to the former president and is considered a close ally and adviser himself as the former president eyes another run for office. Trump is also known to hate the press, and the media are already cheering him on to dump McCarthy’s friendship over the resignation call.

Should Trump give McCarthy a pass, “McCarthy will survive,” said a Republican lobbyist close to House GOP leaders.

Helping McCarthy’s cause is the expectation that the GOP will win control of the House and the party’s goal of keeping the focus on Election Day and not internal politics.

Also working for McCarthy, insiders said, is that those on the leadership team, notably No. 2 Rep. Steve Scalise, are not eager to rock the boat because they may get tossed in the storm.

“Scalise wouldn’t challenge McCarthy unless it was a virtual guarantee he’d get the job,” said one ally. “He’s already set to be the House majority leader in a Republican House and McCarthy’s heir apparent,” said the ally, adding, “Why risk it?”

I suspect that there was a deal made that will not be made public that will keep McCarthy in office at least temporarily. This is something to watch over the next two years. It may eventually have a bearing on the next presidential election.

Rumor has it that the tape was leaked by Liz Cheney. The swamp desperately wants to divide the Republican party.

Playing With Fire

On Thursday, Hot Air posted an article about genetically modified mosquitoes in Florida. Yes, you read that right.

The article reports:

…But now there’s a new type of mosquito hanging out in the Florida Keys. It’s one that’s never been seen before because scientists genetically modified the species in an effort to use them in a genocidal war against their own kin. Thus far, the scientists seem to be declaring the experiment a success. But that sort of ignores the fact that there are now five million genetically modified super-mosquitoes roaming around Florida. (Nature Journal)

Researchers have completed the first open-air study of genetically engineered mosquitoes in the United States. The results, according to the biotechnology firm running the experiment, are positive. But larger tests are still needed to determine whether the insects can achieve the ultimate goal of suppressing a wild population of potentially virus-carrying mosquitoes.

The experiment has been underway since April 2021 in the Florida Keys, a chain of tropical islands near the southern tip of Florida. Oxitec, which developed the insects, released nearly five million engineered Aedes aegypti mosquitoes over the course of seven months, and has now almost completed monitoring the release sites.

Based in Abingdon, UK, the firm reported the first results from the experiment during a webinar on 6 April, although it has not yet published the data.

The article explains how the modification is supposed to work:

Okay, so let’s see how this is supposed to work, shall we? This British company, Oxitec, genetically engineered some of the A. aegypti mosquito (also known as the Yellow Fever Mosquito) so that the males inherited a particular new gene. When the males fertilize the eggs of females, the offspring inherit the gene. The gene has no effect on the male offspring but it causes a destructive mutation in all of the female offspring, leading them to die before they can reproduce. In theory, they would begin drastically reducing the population of female mosquitoes until there were so few mating options for the males that the population should shrink drastically.

I don’t want to be anti-science here, but this scares me to death. I realize that scientists know a lot about genetics, but I think they are in dangerous territory here.

As reported by gypsy moth alert:

The gypsy moth was brought to North America from France by Mr. E. Leopold Trouvelot. His purpose was to breed hybrid silkworms that would be hardier than the Chinese species and that could be used to establish a silk industry in the United States. By 1865 he had a million caterpillars feeding under protective netting at his home in Medford Massachussets. In 1869 some of them escaped and were apparently scattered by a windstorm.

Gypsy moths have now spread into most of New England, down the east coast to Virginia, to Michigan and Wisconsin, and to Oregon. They have done tremendous damage to trees in those areas. I am hoping that the genetically modified mosquitoes will at least stay in Florida, but I doubt it.

Two More Weeks Of Masks For Public Transportation

The government does not like to give up control–even when that control is not based on science. To review a few basic facts–the corona virus is smaller than the spaces in the cloth mask–it easily gets through. Wearing a mask to protect you from Covid is like putting up a chain-link fence to protect you from mosquitoes. There is also the fact that wearing a mask has a negative impact on your immune system (my husband and I were recently told this by a pulmonary specialist). The pulmonary specialist is expecting a spike in pneumonia when the masks are permanently gone. At any rate, the Biden administration has extended the requirement for masks on public transportation for two weeks.

On April 13th, NewsMax reported:

The Biden administration will extend for two weeks the nationwide mask requirement for public transit as it monitors an uptick in COVID-19 cases, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was set to extend the order, which was to expire on April 18, by two weeks to monitor for any observable increase in severe virus outcomes as cases rise in parts of the country. The move was being made out of abundance of caution, the person said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to preview the CDC’s action.

When the Transportation Security Administration, which enforces the rule for planes, buses, trains and transit hubs, extended the requirement last month, it said the CDC had been hoping to roll out a more flexible masking strategy that would have replaced the nationwide requirement. 

Meanwhile, on April 12th, Hot Air reported:

We’re still waiting to find out if President Joe Biden will allow the mask mandate for public travel to expire on April 18th or if he will extend it yet again. While he’s making his decision, he might want to take a peek at a new Axios/Ipsos poll that was just released this week. They asked Americans a variety of questions about how serious the threat from COVID was at this point and if the pandemic was still a major driving concern. While it may come as a great surprise to some people, particularly inside the White House and among cable news hosts, people really aren’t seeing this as a crisis requiring any extravagant government intervention at this point. In fact, it sounds like a large majority of Americans crossing party lines and every other demographic are done with the pandemic. (Daily Caller)

Just 9% of Americans believe COVID-19 is a serious crisis, signaling Americans are ready to move past the pandemic, according to a new Axios/Ipsos poll released Tuesday.

The poll asked Republicans and Democrats to characterize the state of the coronavirus in the U.S. Only 16% of Democrats called it a “serious crisis” compared to just 3% of Republicans. Sixty-six percent of Republicans called it a “problem, but manageable,” compared to 81% of Democrats. Overall, 73% of those polled said it was a “problem, but manageable.”

Meanwhile, 31% of Republicans said it was “not a problem at all” while just three percent of Democrats said the same, according to the poll.

The article at Hot Air also notes:

Another interesting recent finding mentioned in the linked report is the reality that the states which took a more “eased” approach to masking and other mandates had better outcomes than those with the harshest restrictions in terms of deaths, hospitalizations, and all the rest. The lowest grades were given to blue states such as New York, New Jersey and California. Utah, Vermont and Nebraska fared the best.

I don’t know exactly how Covid became political, but it is becoming obvious that very few of the decisions made in the last two years were based on science. Unfortunately, I expect that trend to continue.

When You Don’t Complete Your Assignment At Work…

What would happen at your job if you left exactly at the end of the day and simply put all of your unfinished work in a drawer and left it there? Then, at the end of every month, if you simply emptied the drawer into the trash? I don’t think you would be a valued employee for long. Well, that’s about what President Biden is telling Immigration and Customs Enforcement prosecutors to do.’

On Tuesday, April 5, Hot Air reported:

There is a backlog of about 1.5 million cases pending in immigration courts. The Biden administration sent out a memo Monday instructing ICE prosecutors to dismiss older cases of illegal immigrants who are not considered public safety threats. What could possibly go wrong?

Last fall DHS Secretary Mayorkas distributed some new rules to ICE agents. The focus of the new rules is to deprioritize deportation of illegal immigrants who are not a threat to public safety. They carried out the crime of illegally entering the United States but since then have not posed a threat to the general population. The backlog of cases has grown unsustainable during Biden’s time in the White House, thanks to Biden’s border crisis, so in order to ease the backlog, ICE prosecutors have received permission to just dismiss older cases.

Congress hasn’t reformed any immigration laws. It’s their job to do so but in the meantime, Team Biden is running roughshod over the immigration laws on the books. The memo was distributed as the end of the use of Title 42 at the southern border approaches. The date set for Title 42 to end is May 23. More than 2.2 million illegal migrants have been apprehended at the southern border since Joe Biden took office and that number could triple with the end of Title 42. Title 42 has been an effective tool used during the pandemic, at CDC’s recommendation as a way to mitigate the coronavirus pandemic, but now that the pandemic is waning the Biden administration is ending the program that progressives have demanded he end since he took office.

BuzzFeed News got a copy of the ICE memo. It allows ICE attorneys to exercise “prosecutorial discretion authority” under the guise that such discretion will help “build public confidence in our immigration system.” That’s a take. What about the public confidence of Americans who expect the president to secure our borders and protect the sovereignty of the United States?

What ever happened to the concept of “legal immigration”?

The article concludes:

I am watching a news report of a bus full of illegal migrants arriving in Brownsville, Texas as I write this. They all look to be adult women. This scene is played out daily along the Texas border. Some reports estimate as many as 170,000 migrants waiting along the border to enter the United States. Most are waiting for the green light when Title 42 ends. The Biden administration doesn’t show much concern about the coming explosion in migrants who will be attempting to enter the United States. Dismissing cases and allowing those here illegally to remain in this country is how Team Biden plans to ease the backlog. All this will do is further encourage the waves of migrants to try to make it to the southern border. The Biden border crisis is deliberate and will only get worse.

There really is no excuse for the lack of security at our southern border. It is not a mistake–it is deliberate.

A Really Bad Tax Proposal

Whenever the Democrats want to raise our taxes, they always cry that the rich do not pay their fair share. That claim is totally contradicted by the actual facts, but that has never stopped them. On Sunday, Hot Air posted an article about their latest scheme to ‘tax the rich.’

The article comments on the Biden administration’s plans for a ‘billionaires tax’:

This isn’t technically a “billionaire’s tax” because it hits anyone making more than $100 million. That’s a staggering amount of money for most of us, but not everyone who brings in $100 million actually has a billion dollars in wealth laying around. That’s sort of a nitpick, I admit, but it’s worth pointing out.

Just as a reminder, under the current system, the top ten percent of earners in the United States (those making more than $151K per year) pay more than 70% of the taxes collected by the government. The top one percent (making more than $546K) pay nearly 40% by themselves. The idea that high earners aren’t “paying their fair share” is simply a display of intentional ignorance.

Another detail of the proposed tax hike should also run into opposition and a likely court challenge. The description of the amount of “income” to be taxed includes the phrase “unrealized investment income.” In other words, if the shares comprising your retirement plan or your stock portfolio go up by a given percentage, that increase will be treated as income and you’ll be taxed on it even though you haven’t cashed it in yet.

So why should I leave money in the stock market if I have to pay taxes on it whether I cash it out or not? Why should I invest in a home if it is going to cost me money each year in addition to the real estate taxes and expense of owning a home? What is that going to do to the stock market and the real estate market?

The article concludes:

Here’s another thing to remember about those people with incomes at those levels. They don’t just pay a lot of taxes. They also tend to be max donors to political campaigns and to PACs as well, including to Democrats. I imagine they will all be watching closely to see how each member of Congress plans to vote on this and those planning to vote for it probably shouldn’t expect those donors to be whipping out their pens and checkbooks for them in the midterm races.

Manchin and Sinema have already come out against any big tax hikes while the nation is reeling under the current Bidenflation levels. It would be stunning if you could find a single Republican to vote for it. This sort of “eat the rich” tax proposal is the stuff of dreams on the left, intended to make the Democratic Socialists sequel with delight. But it’s not a serious proposal and you probably shouldn’t start getting your hopes of seeing it pass into law too far up just yet.

I hope the author of the article is right. The Democrats may get desperate to do something as they watch to polling about the approaching mid-terms.

Does America Still Have A First Amendment?

On Tuesday, The Daily Wire reported that Arizona Democrat Representative Ruben Gallego has called for seizing the trucks of protesters headed to Washington, D.C., and then giving the property to businesses looking to grow. Glad to see we have elected representatives who took their oath to defend and protect the U.S. Constitution seriously. Seizing property and giving it to others is generally called robbery. It is also one of the principles of socialism.

The article reports:

“Perfect time to impound and give the trucks to small trucking companies looking to expand their business,” Gallego tweeted in response to the following news headline: “Trucker convoy could shut down DC Beltway tomorrow.”

On Tuesday, Hot Air reported:

American truckers and their supporters are organizing and heading to Washington, D.C. to protest COVID-19 mandates. The People’s Convoy is patterned after Canada’s Freedom Convoy. Truckers will leave California tomorrow and arrive in Washington on Saturday, March 5. D.C. law enforcement is preparing for their arrival.

The People’s Convoy announced plans to launch a “peaceful and unified transcontinental movement” in Southern California. Organizers say their intention is to have a “law-abiding convoy” with truckers, blue-collar workers and supporters participating in it. According to the news release, they expect supporters from all walks of life. Their news release named some conservative-leaning journalists who will join the convoy to cover the event, providing daily updates as they travel across the country.

…D.C. law enforcement agencies are preparing and a request for assistance from the National Guard has been made. U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) released a statement that they are aware of the convoy’s plans and are on alert. The D.C. National Guard, if activated, will test its new activation process put in place after the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill.

I suppose we should be grateful that the National Guard will be called out to make sure the protest remains peaceful. I suspect the protest will be infiltrated by a few ‘bad apples’ to try to tarnish the cause. The question is whether or not those ‘bad apples’ will be government agents.

Meanwhile, not all of the news about the Canadian truckers is bad.

On Monday, The Patriot Journal reported the following:

As it stands, the Freedom Convoy has been painted into a corner and now they’re facing stiff penalties. Though they have plenty of public and financial support, the government’s power is clear.

In response, Rep. Yvette Herrell (R-NV) has introduced a new piece of legislation specifically designed to aid these truckers.

If it’s successful, it would give the protesters a safe port in the storm, so-to-speak. And it would show them that certain politicians in America absolutely support their right to protest.

It’s going to be an interesting week.

 

 

Elections Have Consequences–Sometimes The Voters Don’t Like Those Consequences

On Monday, Hot Air posted an article about the quality of life in Portland, Oregon.

The article reports:

I know you’ll be shocked to hear this but voters in the city which saw a string of nightly riots, beatings and even a murder by an Antifa mob over the past 18 months feels quality of life is on the decline. An annual survey of registered voters in Portland and the surrounding area funded by the Portland Business Alliance found 88% of respondents felt that way. The poll also included a right-track, wrong-track question which found that nearly 3/4 of respondents in Portland felt the city was going in the wrong direction.

Maybe the voters need to ask themselves who voted for the current leadership of Portland. However, it does seem as if the voters have learned their lesson.

The article concludes:

In other words, even in the city of Portland, voters have rejected “defund the police.” It never made sense that it was necessary to cut police funding in order to fund other priorities. The activist left has now lost this argument in the city that was probably most prone to agree with it.

Finally, it looks like voters haven’t forgotten who was pushing those issues. City Councilwoman Jo Ann Hardesty who has been the loudest proponent of defunding the police is going to be facing a tough reelection. Just 18% of respondents support her while 54% say they are ready to vote for someone else.

I think all Americans have learned in the recent past that elections have consequences.

This Is Not Good News For Anyone

On Saturday, Hot Air posted an article reporting that China and Iran have officially announced a 25-year “cooperation agreement”. So what does this mean? Unfortunately, it probably means that Iran is now going to take a significant shortcut in its development of nuclear weapons. When you understand one of the basic tenets of Islam regarding the Mahdi, this is frightening. Many Muslims believe that chaos will hasten the return of the Mahdi (their messianic figure who will bring peace, stability, and sharia to the world). Therefore the idea of a nuclear war is not a problem for them–it simply will hasten the arrival of paradise. Do we really want to do anything to allow people with that philosophy to have nuclear weapons?

The article reports:

For a while now, I’ve noted the development of what seems to clearly be turning into the 21st-century version of the Axis of Evil. It’s composed of Russia, China, North Korea, Venezuela, and arguably Turkey. All of these repressive governments have been growing increasingly aggressive on the world stage and simultaneously seemed to become increasingly comfortable supporting each other where possible. Two of the members, China and Iran, took the process one step further this week, announcing a 25-year “cooperation agreement” between Beijing and Tehran. During the same announcement, China formally reiterated its opposition to the United States and international sanctions against Iran. They also blamed Washington for the collapse of talks aimed at restarting the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and expressed their support for putting the deal in place. So just in case you were wondering which side the Chinese Communist Party is taking in all of this international drama, they’ve made it pretty clear at this point. (Reuters)

On January 15th, Reuters reported:

China and Iran, both subject to U.S. sanctions, signed the 25-year cooperation agreement last March, bringing Iran into China’ Belt and Road Initiative, a multi-trillion-dollar infrastructure scheme intended to stretch from East Asia to Europe. read more

The project aims to significantly expand China’s economic and political influence, and has raised concerns in the United States and elsewhere. read more

The foreign ministry summary said the agreement would deepen Sino-Iranian cooperation in areas including energy, infrastructure, agriculture, health care and culture, as well as cyber security and cooperation with other countries.

Iran and the U.S. remain locked in talks over whether a compromise can be found to renew the deal and dispel fears of a wider Middle East War. A source close to negotiations said on Friday that many issues remain unresolved. read more

Wang, who earlier in the week met with several counterparts from Gulf Arab countries concerned about the potential threat from Iran, also said China hopes to set up a dialogue mechanism with Gulf countries to discuss regional security issues.

Aside from the dangers of a nuclear Iran this alliance creates, it is also an indication of America’s worldwide influence under President Biden. We need to quickly move to electing leaders who are respected around the world and capable of diplomacy that represents the interests of America.

 

 

This Is All Very Confusing

On Sunday, Hot Air reported that Lia Thomas, the transgender swimmer on the University of Pennsylvania swim team, recently lost the 100-meter freestyle race to another transgender swimmer. Okay, fair is fair. That seems logical. However the story gets a little weird after that.

The article quotes an Outkick article:

Penn transgender swimmer Lia Thomas, who had been crushing her competition since joining the women’s swim team after three years swimming as a biological male, met her match Saturday in the 100-meter freestyle during a tri-meet with Yale and Dartmouth.

Thomas won the 200-meter and 500-meter races at Penn’s final home meet of the season, but she finished sixth in the 100-meter where Yale’s Iszac Henig, a transgender swimmer who is in the process of transitioning from female to male, crushed Thomas. Henig finished the 100 in 49.57 while Thomas touched the wall in 52.84.

“I wasn’t prepared for that. Everything is messed up. I can’t wrap my head around this. The NCAA needs to do something about this. They need to put science into the decision and discussion,” a Penn swim parent told The Daily Mail.

The article at Hot Air concludes:

Not all of the irony has been removed from the story, however. What this really means is that trans swimmer Thomas was beaten by an actual woman, so how well would Thomas do against the guys? This is a subject we touched on when the story first emerged last month. Thomas may be setting records for the University of Pennsylvania and for these specific meets, but all of the times posted thus far are still slower than the current NCAA women’s division records for those events. And they are laughably far behind the men’s division records. And now, even with the distinct biological advantage that Thomas enjoys, the swimmer has been defeated in multiple events by an actual female.

That doesn’t remove all of the injustice from the situation, of course. There are still plenty of other legitimate female college athletes who are being bumped down the charts. As the linked article indicates, one parent of a female Penn swimmer was once again calling for the NCAA to “put science into the decision and discussion.” We already saw one collegiate swimming official end her career in protest over what’s been going on. Sadly, the NCAA has clearly drunk deeply from the new chalice of wokeness and they aren’t likely to voluntarily embark on a return to sanity any time soon.

This makes my head hurt.

 

 

Where Did Omicron Come From?

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about the origins of the new variant of the coronavirus. As usual, what we are being told does not necessarily line up with the actual facts.

The article reports:

Last year, Trump complained frequently that the only reason America’s COVID case numbers looked so grim on his watch is because we did so much testing. There was logic to that, of a sort: Obviously the less testing you do, the fewer confirmed cases you’ll find. If you’re dejected by the misery around you, just close your eyes and pretend like it’s not there. What if Omicron has been spreading in hot spots across the globe but South Africa is the only country with its eyes open, doing the testing needed to detect it? Like the UK, they’re aggressive about genomic surveillance. It’s no surprise that they would detect a case of a new variant early while the U.S. still has no confirmed cases despite the fact that literally everyone believes the variant is already here.

If the variant didn’t originate in Africa but was merely spotted there first, the travel ban that’s been imposed on the southern part of the continent is essentially a penalty for being diligent about surveillance. Not great.

The news today from the Netherlands bolsters the possibility that Omicron didn’t originate in Africa, although what’s described here isn’t the earliest known case of the variant.

The article notes:

Three different European countries had Omicron on their turf before South Africa’s experts knew about it, eh? And at least one case in Germany was found in a person who hasn’t traveled abroad or been in contact with anyone who has, a smoking gun of local community spread. Are we looking at a European origin for Omicron?

Well, hold on. The earliest known samples to test positive from the variant came from four people in Botswana who tested positive on November 11. Botswana is an African country, of course, one that borders South Africa to the north. But there’s a catch about the four people who tested positive: They were … foreign diplomats. And Botswana hasn’t said which country they were from or where else they had traveled. Did those diplomats bring the virus in from their home country or did they pick it up while they were in Botswana? Hmmmm.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It includes charts and graphs that create more questions than answers. The only good news here is that so far medical experts are saying that the new variant is much less severe than the variants we have seen so far. If that is true, we can end our panic and get back to life as usual.

While Homeland Security Is Watching Parents…

Hot Air posted an article yesterday about Xiaoming Zhang, a civilian professor at the Air War College, headquartered at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama. Professor Zhang has plead guilty to making false statements to a federal agent. He faces a maximum of five years in prison for lying about his relationship with a Chinese official to a federal agent.

The article includes a portion of his resume:

Before teaching at the Air War College, he taught at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, Texas, USA and Texas A&M International University in Laredo, Texas. On October 30, 2003, the Texas A&M University Press published his book “Red Wings Over the Yalu: China, the Soviet Union, and the Air War in Korea.” On January 1, 2004, China International Press published his book “China’s Tibet.” (b)(c)
In 2010, Air University published his article “The Art of Military Discovery: Chinese Air and Space Power Implications for the USAF,” which he co-wrote with U.S. Air Force colonel Sean D. McClung. (d)
On February 1, 2018, the University of North Carolina Press published his book “Deng Xiaoping’s Long War: The Military Conflict between China and Vietnam, 1979-1991 (The New Cold War History).”

The article notes:

This isn’t a case of a naturalized American citizen being duped by the Communist Chinese. This is a case of espionage committed purposefully after Zhang realized the foreign official, a Chinese Communist, was gathering sensitive information from him. He knew, yet he continued the relationship. This is not the first such case of the Chinese government infiltrating college campuses, using relationships with American professors for information. Some professors are paid by the Chinese government and get into trouble when they fail to disclose financial ties. It is a national security risk and during the Trump administration, the China Initiative began. It is a program that targets economic espionage and intellectual property theft, especially at research labs and universities.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Unfortunately this is not an unusual situation. There are numerous foreign agents working in American colleges that need to be sent home. Unfortunately our Justice Department is more concerned about parents who want to know what their children are being taught.

 

Is Showing Up A Requirement For This Job?

I realize that in the age of the Internet, many people are fortunate (or unfortunate depending upon your point of view) to be able to work from home. However, a lot of the people who work from home are required to show up at an office periodically just to show that they are still alive and breathing. I guess that rule does not apply to some federal employees or department heads.

Yesterday Hot Air posted an article with the following headline, “Why is Pete Buttigieg still the Secretary of Transportation?” I think that is a very good question.

The article reports:

Pete Buttigieg has been away from his desk at the Department of Transportation for two months and no one noticed until this week. He’s been home on paternity leave since the birth of his twins. Normally, we might just shrug our shoulders and say who cares? These are not normal times, though, and there is a transportation crisis going on that has to be handled. The supply chain is facing severe disruption and cargo ships are backed up trying to get their goods unloaded in American ports, especially in California. Where’s Pete?

Politico had a piece about Pete going missing, having only now realized it, too, apparently. The liberal site dragged conservatives for noticing Pete’s absence and questioning where the Secretary of Transportation is these days. The chaos in the supply chain and the difficulties facing shipping companies and trucking companies all fall under his department’s supervision. Perhaps conservative outlets and social media were asking questions on Pete’s whereabouts because, though he recently began turning up in liberal outlets for interviews, he was absent from conservative networks. In his political career pre-birth of the twins, Mayor Pete was a frequent guest on both liberal networks and on Fox News. He is or was a go-to person to speak for the Biden administration. Just as the pain from the supply chain disruptions was being noticed and felt by most Americans, suddenly Pete went missing.

The Politico piece went on to explain family leave policy in government jobs and compared Pete’s leave to others like a U.S. senator and the Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Ok, but that’s an apples and oranges comparison. A cabinet secretary is in a different position. The country can function smoothly during the absence of a senator during maternity leave, the same with an acting OMB director. However, cabinet secretaries have certain responsibilities unique to being a member of a presidential cabinet. If he planned to go on a two-month paternity leave, why didn’t he make that announcement public and formally declare his deputy secretary of transportation in charge? He has one. Her name is Polly Trottenberg and she was sworn in back in April. She’s actually an experienced public servant in transportation who, at least on paper, looks like she could do the job.

The article concludes:

Here’s the thing – Pete Buttigieg is a member of the president’s cabinet. He is not an ordinary elected official and his presence on the job is required, especially during a national crisis. He’s inept but he has people around him, we hope, that know what to do to ease the situation. I don’t begrudge him the opportunity to spend some time with newborn babies. His lengthy paternity leave right now, and as the shipping crisis grew along with supply chain problems, shows a true lack of judgment. The economy is at risk while he stays home. He has to handle both roles as other parents do. A week home with the babies when he first got them? Ok. Put the deputy secretary in charge and go home for a week. Then come back and get back to work. That’s how this works. Pete is showing his inability to perform his role in the president’s cabinet and he needs to be held accountable, new parent or not. Fire him.

I would like to add one bit of information about the problems with the supply chain backup in California. Someone who knows more than I do mentioned that owner-operator truckers are not allowed to take cargo from the ports in California. One whole sector of the trucking industry is banned from helping ease the crisis. It was noted that the reason for this is that unionized truckers can be easily controlled through their unions. Non-union truckers cannot be controlled as a group–only individually. There are a number of layers to the supply chain problem, and it would be nice if someone supposedly in charge was addressing those problems.

Lying With A Straight Face

Yesterday Hot Air posted an article with the following headline, “Psaki: Migrants at the border don’t need to show proof of vaccination because they don’t intend to stay for long.” Wow. I guess that’s why the Democrats are fighting so hard to pass amnesty for illegal aliens. Wait, what?

The article reports:

What Psaki means is that migrants who surrender to the Border Patrol and apply for asylum can, in some circumstances, be summarily expelled under the CDC’s Title 42 pandemic authority. You file your asylum application and then you’re either repatriated or told to get comfortable in Mexico while you await a ruling. Ideally.

But there are two wrinkles. First, not everyone is turned away.

Maybe those families released into the U.S. will show up for their asylum hearing or maybe they’ll disappear and become illegal immigrants. In which case, for all intents and purposes, they are here forever.

Second, whether the Biden administration will be able to summarily expel families for much longer is in doubt thanks to a federal judge.

The article notes:

In a 58-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan found that the Title 42 policy does not authorize the expulsion of migrants — and, in turn, does not allow for those removed to be denied the opportunity to seek asylum in the U.S. The judge’s order will go into effect in 14 days…

Sullivan’s order applies only to families, meaning the Biden administration can continue to expel single adults arriving at the U.S. southern border. Unaccompanied children have been exempt from being expelled using Title 42…

In recent months, Mexico has been increasingly resistant to accepting families expelled from the U.S. under Title 42, resulting in a majority of families entering the U.S. to be permitted to remain in the country.

This is somewhat illogical:

Families are coming across the border without proof of vaccination and being released into the United States to remain for months and potentially years. Meanwhile, until literally this morning, fully vaccinated tourists with proof of immunity were barred from entering the U.S. even just to enjoy a vacation of a few days.

The people who really do intend to stay only briefly are asked to prove they’re no threat to the population while the people who hope to stay permanently aren’t. Go figure.

The article concludes with the following statement and a video of a comment by Jen Psaki:

There’s another class angle. Tourists who fly in from abroad for vacation to spread their money around are apt to patronize middle- or upper-class establishments, where they’ll mix with professionals. Dirt-poor migrants, on the other hand, are likely to spend most of their time in downscale American communities. The governing class doesn’t care much if the poors are exposed to COVID but they don’t want it in their own spaces. Which probably also explains why most major businesses are okay with not requiring customers to prove they’re vaccinated but are more eager to have their own staffers get their shots. The low-paid cashier or sales assistant can take their chances with infected shoppers out front, but executives don’t want any ‘rona around them back in the office.

I’ll leave you with another soundbite from Psaki at today’s briefing, in which she deflects Biden’s role in the horrendous drone strike that killed seven Afghan children in part by noting that he knows how painful personal loss can be. Is there no uncomfortable moment politically that the White House won’t try to use Beau Biden’s tragic death to extricate themselves from?

I am beginning to wonder if America will survive the Biden administration.

This Is Where We Are

Yesterday Ed Morrissey posted an article at Hot Air detailing some of the players and events in recent days in Afghanistan.

The article quotes one of President Biden’s recent statements about Afghanistan:

Look, let’s put this thing in perspective here. What interest do we have in Afghanistan at this point with al Qaeda gone? We went to Afghanistan for the express purpose of getting rid of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, as well as — as well as getting Osama bin Laden. And we did.

Well, not so fast.

The article reports:

Say, remember when Joe Biden assured us that al-Qaeda was “gone” from Afghanistan? Ten days later, the security chief for Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora returned to his home province in Nangarhar, amid adulation — and Taliban protection. Amin ul-Haq even flashed a thumbs-up to his admirers out an open window as Taliban troops waved his car through a checkpoint.

In FDD’s Long War Journal, Bill Roggio reports:

Dr. Amin al Haq, the former head of bin Laden’s Black Guard, was captured on video in a large convoy as it traveled through a checkpoint in Nangarhar province. Haq was accompanied by a large convoy of heavily armed Taliban fighters in brand new SUVs. A small crowd flocked to Haq to shake his hand and take selfies with him.

The video of al Haq is evidence that Al Qaeda commanders now feel secure enough to appear publicly in a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

The article at Hot Air includes a screenshot of the Taliban’s new arsenal:

I don’t care how much the media spins this–it is not good news.

 

Remember That Oath?

When President Biden was sworn in as President, he took the following oath of office:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of  the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Note the part that says preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

Yesterday Hot Air reported the following  regarding President Biden’s eviction moratorium:

This is the aspect of his moratorium chicanery that I find most breathtaking, the frank admission that he’s trying to exploit the legal process to extend a dubious executive order. Most everyone else has focused on the substance of what the White House did, replacing a certainly illegal moratorium order with a new one which they have every reason to know is almost certainly illegal.

And that’s appalling. But the problem could be solved if the courts reacted quickly by scheduling an expedited hearing on the numerous challenges to the new order. When the president is as candid as Biden is here in admitting that he’s gaming the judicial system to keep an illegal measure in place for as long as he can, they have a duty to stop him by putting all other business on hold to consider the merits of that measure. If they don’t, they’re letting him get away with it.

Look at it this way. If this court fight drags out for six months and SCOTUS finally rules that the new moratorium is also illegal, as everyone expects, what’s to stop the White House from drafting yet another moratorium that’s a tiny bit different from the previous one and litigating the lawfulness of the new order for six months after that? Biden is engaged in litigation that’s dilatory by design, which he admits. It’s essentially frivolous. The courts have to show him that that won’t work.

The article concludes:

“Specifically, and in blatant violation of his solemn duty to execute the laws faithfully, Biden has usurped Congress’s legislative authority and declared the power to legislate,” writes Andy McCarthy. “He is running roughshod over the separation of powers, which is the foundation of our constitutional framework, limiting power and preserving liberty.” His old boss Barack Obama did the same thing when he seized Congress’s immigration power to legalize DREAMers under DACA. But Obama didn’t face a recent Supreme Court ruling directly on point that should have steered him away from attempting such a thing. And his DACA order didn’t come pre-packaged with a dilatory legal strategy designed to keep the program up and running while meritless litigation played out in court. Even if, ah, it’s sort of worked out that way in practice.

He will not be impeached–the Democrats control the House of Representatives (and the powers that be are not fond of Kamala Harris)-but he should be.

Ignoring The U.S. Constitution One Article At A Time

On Tuesday, Breitbart reported that President Biden had reversed his previous position and renewed the moratorium on evictions.

The article reports:

Socialist Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rallied to her cause, holding rallies at the capitol to demand the administration act. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) also joined the protests and sang, “This Land Is Your Land” in defiance of Biden’s decision.

The president reversed his decision on Tuesday after it was clear that leftists were furious with it.

At the White House, Biden complained the courts prevented him from extending the moratorium by ruling against the Centers for Disease Controls order in July.

“Look, the courts made it clear that the existing moratorium was not constitutional, that it wouldn’t stand,” Biden said.

Biden’s new eviction moratorium, scheduled for release Tuesday evening, will reportedly extend protections for up to 80 percent of Americans in some of the areas experiencing a rise in cases.

But Biden conceded his new moratorium would also likely face legal challenges.

“At a minimum, by the time it gets litigated, it will probably give some additional time,” he said.

So let’s look at this for a minute. The Centers for Disease Controls (CDC) does not have the power to make laws. That is the obvious problem. Next, the federal government does not have the power to cancel a private contract (rental agreement) between two private parties. Also, if the tenant is excused from paying rent, why isn’t the landlord excused from paying the mortgage on the property? This extension will force some landlords to go into foreclosure themselves. The right to private property is one of the foundations of our Constitution. The eviction moratorium strikes a blow at private property–it is the government telling the landlord that he cannot evict people who are not paying the rent due him.

In December 2010, I posted an article about the connection between private property rights and the prosperity of a county. Basically the article notes that private property rights are one of the keys to bringing a country out of poverty and into prosperity. So why then are we undermining those rights?

Hot Air posted an article today about the impact of the decision to extend the eviction moratorium on landlords.

The article notes:

When the eviction moratorium does eventually come to an end, property owners will be reluctant to evict tenants who communicated with them in good faith, worked out payment plans, and applied for government assistance, Pinnegar said. On the other hand, people who “ghosted” their landlords – meaning they stopped paying rent, stopped responding to emails and letters, and actively avoided contact – likely won’t be given the same benefit of the doubt.

“There will be some evictions,” Pinnegar said, “but I think the conversation about millions of people being evicted, and homeless centers being overrun, and people on the streets, it’s a great exaggeration that I think unfortunately is driving public policy.”

The government is meddling where it shouldn’t meddle. Someone in Washington needs to have the courage to stand up and say this is unconstitutional.

Which Is A More Serious Crime–Murder Or Sexual Harassment?

Recently I posted an article about the decision by the Department of Justice not to investigate the actions of some governors who sent coronavirus patients into nursing homes. The specific states whose governors did that were New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. A number of New York residents were disappointed to hear that Governor Cuomo seemingly will not be investigated for his role in sending coronavirus patients into nursing homes in New York State. However, the Governor’s legal problems are not over.

Hot Air reported the following yesterday:

There’s no federal investigation into New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, however, Attorney General Tish James isn’t quite done, yet.

James could release details of her investigation into whether Cuomo sexually harassed nine women before the end of the summer, something the governor’s office seems to believe is becoming more political by the day. Cuomo senior adviser Richard Azzopardi told The New York Times last week, “the continued leaks are more evidence of the transparent political motivation of the attorney general’s review.”

A rather curious statement since Cuomo asked James to look into the allegations while promising cooperation from all New York State employees. (One would guess this includes the governor.) There’s also no evidence of any leaks despite Azzopardi’s protestations on Twitter and in the press, including calling a union president an extortionist who supports James in the governor’s mansion. Cuomo critics like James, but it seems more along the lines of enjoying thorn-like poking in Cuomo’s side versus lobbying for her to challenge him in 2022.

What’s interesting is Republicans are the ones saying James has a better shot at Democrats staying in the governor’s mansion.

When the media reports that a Democrat is being investigated for sexual harassment, it is political–if the media is reporting it, there is an ulterior motive–Democrats don’t usually warrant media reports when they are charged with sexual harassment.

The article concludes:

Not everyone believes James’ report signals doom on Cuomo’s political future. State Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie cast doubt on whether the governor could be impeached for sexual harassment because he wanted the Judiciary Committee to review it as part of its own probe into Cuomo. That comment caused one of the attorneys representing a Cuomo accuser to suggest Heastie betrayed his duties by showing loyalty to the governor instead of the rule of law.

The amusing parts? James’ reputation had been one of a Cuomo loyalist, instead of someone seeking higher office. A source told Yahoo News back in March that the pair had a good working relationship but James would buck things when it was the right thing to do. Perhaps she’s seeing how the political winds are moving and believes she’s the better candidate.

Except no one knows if James will run for governor. The rumors are all coming from Cuomo’s camp, not anyone connected with the AG. Meaning Cuomo’s worried. It’s possible the DoJ’s decision to pass on investigating the nursing home deaths won’t matter. Still seems odd since one would think avoidable elderly deaths matter more than in the grand scheme of things than sexual harassment. This isn’t taking away from the sex misconduct allegations against Cuomo but just pointing out the strangeness of what gets the public up in arms.

And I thought Texas politics was a bloodsport.

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe Governor Cuomo needs to be investigated for sexual harassment simply because so many accusations have been made?

 

Not Surprising

Hot Air is reporting today that Senator Manchin of Kentucky has seemingly decided not to be the finger in the dike to control Democrat spending. It'[s not definite yet, but I suspect he will be voting with the Democrats on their latest spending spree. As I have previously stated, the Senator only votes with the Republicans when his vote is not significant. When push comes to shove, he can be depended upon as a Democrat vote. His recent statement is going to put immense pressure on Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema to support the Democrat’s reckless spending.

The article reports:

When Senate Democrats had lunch with President Joe Biden on Wednesday, much of the discussion centered on their 3.5 trillion dollar grab-bag spending bill that was announced earlier this week. They’ve already resigned themselves to the idea that there won’t be a single Republican vote in favor of the measure, so they can’t afford to lose a single Democratic vote. As usual, that means that all eyes are on King Joseph of West Virginia to see if he will derail the entire thing. Manchin took the floor after Biden left the meeting and reportedly told them that he will be “a team player” and not derail the bill, provided he’s kept in the loop as it is being written. But he didn’t go as far as saying he would definitely vote for it, either.

…Manchin is talking about being a “team player” but he added in a lot of caveats that didn’t show up in the story lede. Reading into the details, all he’s saying at this point is that he won’t try to block a floor vote on allowing the bill to be drafted. That doesn’t mean the finished product will receive his approval. That’s why he is asking to be kept in the loop and for the members working on crafting the bill to keep some of his priorities in mind.

The article concludes:

Obviously, Joe Manchin can envision scenarios where that roadblock will crop up. And all it would take is one roadblock to send the entire thing down in flames. In other words, Joe Manchin may not be part of the committee that’s going to assemble the bill, but he’s pretty much the one calling all the shots as to what does or doesn’t make the cut. And if they somehow do manage to pass this bloated Democratic wish list, it’s going to meet his requirements. Joe Manchin is still clearly the most powerful person in the Senate at the moment and probably will be until the Democrats either lose their majority or expand it significantly.

I expect Senator Manchin to vote for the bill, but I would love to be wrong.

When What He Says Does Not Match What He Does

Hot Air posted an article yesterday about a statement that President Joe Biden made on his first day in office. President Biden stated that there would be a ‘pause’ on drilling permits on public lands or for offshore sites. Obviously this was not good news for the oil and gas industries. However, things were not what they appeared to be.

The article reports:

Many of us who follow the energy industry closely had a sinking feeling because that “pause” could easily turn into a de facto ban. But not long after that, a strange thing happened. Permits began to quietly be approved again. Unless I missed it, I never saw an official announcement from the White House declaring an end to the pause, but business seemed to be returning to normal in the oil and gas industry. (Or as close to normal as anything gets these days.) And now, in news that will likely come as a shocking disappointment to many of Biden’s most ardent supporters in the environmental movement, the total number of permits issued since Joe Biden was sworn in has grown to record levels not seen since George W. Bush was in office. (Associated Press)

The article concludes:

So what’s going on behind the scenes? That’s not too difficult to figure out. Joe Biden is getting a lot of pushback, not just from Republican elected officials, but from the voters. They’ve already watched tens of thousands of good jobs disappear when Biden canceled construction on the Keystone XL pipeline. If he significantly slashes the amount of oil and gas exploration going on, even more jobs will go away.

On top of that, gas prices have been spiking ever since Biden took office. If they continue to rise and he’s seen as having squeezed the supply, he’ll be the one taking the blame for it. It’s simply not practical to basically shut down the oil and gas industry in this country and it would be political suicide to try it. That one industry impacts and supports many others and touches on far more aspects of voters’ lives than just the cost they pay at the pump or the heating bill they receive at the end of the month.

In other words, both Biden and Haaland (Interior Secretary Deb Haaland) talked a good game on the campaign trail and the Sunday morning shows. But when the time came for actual action, calculations were made and some campaign promises no longer were practical to keep.

The fact that the campaign promise was broken is good for America. It means that the cost of driving our cars and heating our homes will not go through the roof. It would be nice if we could continue to be energy independent–for both economic and security reasons.