If You Believe This…

On Tuesday, The Washington Times posted an article ‘explaining’ how a “typo” in an email led investigators in 2016 to believe that false allegations linking former President Trump to Russia’s Alfa Bank came from the Department of Justice rather than from Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.

The article quotes testimony from the trial of Michael Sussmann.

FBI Agent Curtis Heide, who along with agent Allison Sands authored the internal communication, said the inaccuracy, sent out just weeks before the 2016 election, was simply a mistake.

“We may have conflated the Office of the General Counsel and the Justice Department,” Mr. Heide said on the witness stand. “I don’t know how that information got in there.”

On Monday, jurors in the criminal trial of Mr. Sussmann were shown the electronic communication sent in September 2016 by top bureau officials to field agents marking the opening of the case. The communication said the investigation was based on a “referral” from the Justice Department, rather than a tip from Mr. Sussmann.

On Tuesday, John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog reported the following:

I was skeptical that the Sussman prosecution would tell us much that is new, but some significant nuggets have come out. Like this one: “FBI brass were ‘fired up’ about now-debunked Trump-Russia ties.”

FBI leaders, including then-Director James Comey, were “fired up” about a potential connection between the Trump campaign and Russia — which ultimately was proven false, text messages and court testimony revealed Tuesday.

On Sept. 21, 2016, two days after Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann gave then-FBI General Counsel James Baker info about a supposed digital back channel between the Trump Organization and Moscow-based Alfa Bank, agent Joe Pientka texted colleague Curtis Heide: “People on 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.”

So there was zero evidence of any connection between presidential candidate Donald Trump and the Alfa Bank, or any other Russians of note, and all one of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers had to do was waltz into the Bureau with some fabricated “data” and FBI Director James Comey and others were “fired up.” The lust to defeat the interloper Trump and elect Hillary Clinton is palpable.

It’s a shame that they were not nearly so ‘fired up’ over the security problems involved in Hillary Clinton’s secret server.

A Short History Lesson

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is being hailed as the first black woman to be nominated to the Supreme Court. That’s nice. In recent history we also had the first black president. We saw how that worked out (the problems created had nothing to do with the color of his skin–the problems created had to do with his ideas). But about that first black woman to be nominated to the Supreme Court thing–there needs to be an asterisk next to that statement.

A Washington Times article of February 1, 2022, reminds us of the following:

President Biden wasn’t always a supporter of Black women on the federal bench.

While serving in the Senate, Mr. Biden filibustered the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia — twice — before she was finally approved in 2005 after a two-year fight.

His staunch opposition to Judge Brown, the daughter of an Alabama sharecropper, prompted allegations of hypocrisy after he reiterated last week his vow to nominate a Black woman to the U.S. Supreme Court following Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement announcement.

…A former California Supreme Court justice, Judge Brown was nominated by President George W. Bush and retired from the court in 2017. She was seen as a potential Supreme Court pick for the 2005 opening that was ultimately filled by Justice Samuel Alito.

On Wednesday, Breitbart listed five takaways from Tuesday’s hearing on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

These are the five points, please follow the link to read the entire article:

1. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) nailed Jackson on the “1619 Project,” Critical Race Theory, and her sentencing record.

2. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) exposed the fallacy of Jackson’s professed commitment to “originalism.” 

3. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) fought Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-IL) over terror detainees. 

4. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) showed that Judge Jackson is unwilling to state what a “woman” is.

5. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) questioned Jackson closely about her record on sex offenders.

These are all valid questions that the American people deserve answered.

Do They Get Their Jobs Back Now?

On Thursday, The Washington Times reported that the Senate voted Wednesday to end the vaccine mandate on health workers at places that receive federal funding. There is serious doubt as to whether the measure will actually get through the House of Representatives (which is controlled by the Democrats), although that may depend on whether or not the Democrats are reading the polls.

The article reports:

The Supreme Court struck down a broader mandate that required large companies to regularly test workers who refuse to get vaccinated. However, the justices upheld the health-worker mandate.

Republicans say the mandate is bad policy because it could lead to staffing shortages at hospitals and punish workers who served on the frontlines of the COVID-19 battle for two years and choose to remain unvaccinated.

The GOP is betting that forcing Democrats to defend COVID-19 mandates will help Republicans retake the House and the Senate in November’s elections.

One of the really sad aspects of the Covid-19 pandemic is that both political parties attempted to use to crisis for political gain. There was a time when both parties totally ignored the science. Now we are beginning to see that lives could have been saved if we had pursued early treatment as hard as we pursued a vaccine. We know now that early treatment works. We can’t say the same about the vaccines.

Americans are done with mask and vaccine mandates. I was recently told by a pulmonary specialist that when the masks come off we can expect an uptick in pneumonia cases–not because the masks were protecting us, but because wearing a mask interferes with your natural immunity system. After mask wearing, your immune system is not as strong as it would be without a mask, so you are more prone to illness. That’s not good news for the elderly who have been told to keep wearing their masks. Consider not wearing a mask to be like sending a child out to play in the dirt. The germs the child comes in contact with in playing in the dirt strengthen the child’s immune system. Walking around bare-faced exposes your immune system to germs and strengthens it. Also, the fibers in the mask are not close enough to each other to block virus germs. The masks were to make us feel better and to control us. Medically they were not helpful.

When The Actions Just Don’t Match The Words

On Tuesday, Breitbart posted an article about a particularly odd comment in President Biden’s State of the Union address.

The article notes:

President Joe Biden used his State of the Union address on Tuesday night to call on Congress to “secure the border,” after his administration allowed roughly 1.5 million migrants to pour across the southern border in his first months in office.

This is a direct quote from the speech (via CNN):

And if we are to advance liberty and justice, we need to secure the Border and fix the immigration system.
We can do both. At our border, we’ve installed new technology like cutting-edge scanners to better detect drug smuggling.
We’ve set up joint patrols with Mexico and Guatemala to catch more human traffickers.
We’re putting in place dedicated immigration judges so families fleeing persecution and violence can have their cases heard faster.

We’re securing commitments and supporting partners in South and Central America to host more refugees and secure their own borders.

On December 9, 2021, The Washington Times reported:

If anyone is dismantling the immigration system, it is the Biden administration. While it systematically reversed the most successful border security policies ever created, it has been lying to the American people and projecting its failures onto its predecessors.

Within the first few days of taking office, Biden discontinued the Migrant Protection Protocol (MPP), better known as the Remain in Mexico program. He ended it even though it was the most successful border security program ever created and resulted in a significant decrease in illegal immigration. Even after officials from the Trump administration, including myself, consulted with his transition teams on multiple occasions about the risks of ending MPP along with the data that show it was a game-changer, Biden dismantled it anyway.

He also ended the Safe Third Country agreements the Trump administration had put in place with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, the homelands of a majority of the illegal migrants entering the U.S. This policy was also effective at stemming unlawful immigration into the U.S. and helping to prevent thousands of fraudulent asylum claims. This policy made it possible for migrants who claimed to be fleeing fear and persecution from their home government to claim asylum in the first safe country they entered.  

The Biden administration then dismantled the deportation process by placing a moratorium on all deportations. To end consequences for illegal behavior only brings more illegal behavior. The proof can be seen in the caravans and accelerated flow of migrants since Biden assumed office.  

Securing the border is a really good idea. Americans are being killed not only by the illegal drugs coming across the border, but by illegal aliens driving drunk, and stealing from and assaulting American citizens. President Biden needs to undo the Executive Orders he put in place that have made our country less secure.

The Biden Administration Ignores Another Law

If President Biden were a Republican, he would have been impeached by now. His administration blatantly ignores laws they do not like. On Tuesday, The Washington Times posted an article citing another example of a law that is being ignored.

The article reports:

The Biden administration is flouting a law that requires it to produce a report on the number of jobs lost by canceling the Keystone XL pipeline, in addition to describing how its action may have affected energy costs.

The roughly $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by Congress and signed into law by President Biden in November included a provision mandating the Department of Energy to produce a report to Congress detailing the impact to American jobs and energy as a result of Mr. Biden’s decision to end the pipeline.

The legislation allowed Energy Department Secretary Jennifer Granholm 90 days to provide the information to Congress. But that Feb. 13 deadline came and went last week with no response from Ms. Granholm, according to several Republican lawmakers who have since pressed for answers.

The article also notes:

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Energy acknowledged the senators’ letter and added that they “continue to make progress on this report as we prepare to deliver the final version to Congress.” They did not address questions regarding a delivery date and why it had not been disclosed on time.

The Keystone XL pipeline was slated to stretch from Canada to Nebraska, where it would connect with a pipeline that extends to the refineries on the Gulf Coast. It would have been able to carry hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil per day.

The multibillion-dollar project was more than a decade in the making, with numerous legal challenges along the way from environmental groups and American Indian tribes, who fiercely opposed the pipeline because of potential harm to the environment. Proponents argued it was a jobs creator that would drive down energy costs.

Keeping a longtime campaign promise, Mr. Biden issued an executive order during the first hours of his presidency that revoked a key permit for construction that had been approved by former President Donald Trump. Mr. Biden’s directive forced the Canadian energy company behind Keystone XL to cancel the project months later, in June 2021.

Does anyone want to start a pool with dates on it guessing when that report will be released? My guess is late January 2024.

If This Stands, It Sets A Dangerous Precedent

On Tuesday, The Washington Times reported that the families of nine victims in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting have successfully sued Remington Arms for $73 million. According to The Associated Press, the gun used in the attack was the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, manufactured by Remington Arms.

The article reports:

“This victory should serve as a wake-up call not only to the gun industry, but also the insurance and banking companies that prop it up. For the gun industry, it’s time to stop recklessly marketing all guns to all people for all uses and instead ask how marketing can lower risk rather than court it. For the insurance and banking industries, it’s time to recognize the financial cost of underwriting companies that elevate profit by escalating risk. Our hope is that this victory will be the first boulder in the avalanche that forces that change,” Mr. Koskoff added.

…The families pointed to one of the company’s advertisements that showed the rifle with the phrase, “Consider Your Man Card Reissued,” according to AP.

The gun company had argued that their marketing had nothing to do with the shooting and that federal law gave the gun industry immunity. But the Connecticut Supreme Court allowed the case to proceed under state law.

The article concludes with some legal opinions on the case:

Kenneth Abraham, a law professor at the University of Virginia, said it’s uncommon for settlements to include the release of company documents and for gun manufacturers to be held liable in situations like the Sandy Hook massacre. 

“This is unusual. It may well provide a basis for suits against firearms manufacturers in similar situations in the future,” Mr. Abraham said. 

Nora Freeman Engstrom, a law professor at Stanford University, said that while the multimillion-dollar settlement is notable, the fact that company information will be shared is important. 

“Many scholars believe that the greatest benefit of public health litigation is the information such litigation can bring to light. Information is critical, as it can help regulators regulate, and it can steer consumers to safer, not shoddier, goods,” she said. “This litigation could end up being important, not just for the precedent it set but for the information it unearthed.”

But Timothy D. Lytton, a professor at Georgia State University College of Law, warned that lawsuits like this are still a long shot until the Supreme Court weighs in on the matter. 

“This is not a floodgate story. This is a maintaining momentum story,” Mr. Lytton said, referring to lawyers who bring claims against gunmakers. “These lawsuits are still a long shot.”

To me, this is the equivalent of a family killed by a drunk driver speeding in a sports car suing the car manufacturer. The car is not the problem–the person operating the car is the problem. In the case of Sandy Hook, the gun was not the problem–the person using the gun was the problem. However, this is a legal settlement within the State of Connecticut, so hopefully it will end there.

Disturbing News

On Sunday, The Washington Times posted an article about the potential invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

The article reports:

Americans in Ukraine will be on their own if Russia invades so the U.S. government is advising them to take the earliest commercial flight possible out of the country.

On Sunday, State Department officials said they didn’t know if Russian President Vladimir Putin has made the decision to send tanks across the border but insisted such a move could come “at any time.”

“The U.S. government will not be in a position to evacuate American citizens in such a contingency,” a senior State Department official told reporters in a briefing. “Russian military action anywhere in Ukraine will severely impact the U.S. embassy’s ability to provide consular assistance.”

So why aren’t we providing military flights to get Americans out of the country now? The government has issued a “do not travel” advisory because of the coronavirus, but has not ordered American citizens to leave the country.

The article concludes:

Although repeatedly pressed by reporters in Sunday’s briefing, State Department officials wouldn’t say how many U.S. citizens are believed to be in Ukraine.

“It’s a number we are not able to share because we don’t have a solid number (and) it’s not ‘helpful’ to share estimated numbers,” an official said.

U.S. officials wouldn’t comment on British reports that Russia is planning to invade and replace Ukraine’s government in Kyiv with one that could be controlled by Moscow.

“We’re very concerned about attempts to destabilize (Ukraine) internally,” the State Department official said. “We have been concerned and have been warning about those kinds of tactics for weeks. That is very much part of the Russian playbook.”

Remember when America was respected around the world to the point that our citizens were not in danger when they were in other countries?

I heard an interesting commentary on this situation on Saturday. There are well-informed people who believe that Russia is simply posturing in order to get more favorable trade agreements. I have no idea if that is true, but I like that idea much better than the idea of going to war.

 

 

Our Tax Dollars At Work

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the government spending related to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The article reports:

The federal government’s coronavirus spending spree turned out to be a snow job — literally.

One Utah county spent more than $200,000 of its COVID-19 cash to make snow on a hill for sledding.

Auditors said Uintah County bought six snow guns at $20,000 each, along with snowcats and pipes, and paid $3,000 in shipping costs, all authorized by a single county commissioner. Local politicians told the Uintah Basin Standard they were coming up on a deadline to either use the cash or give it back to the state, so they needed a reason to spend. And they decided on snow.

Sen. Joni Ernst on Monday dedicated her December “Squeal Award,” which highlights ridiculous government waste, to Uintah and other state and local governments that found creative Christmas-style ways to waste COVID-19 money.

That includes Connecticut, where West Haven city officials spent federal coronavirus money on Christmas decorations.

The CT Mirror said Christmas wasn’t the only holiday city officials blessed with federal cash. They also rented a 20-person band to march in the Memorial Day parade with $7,000 of Uncle Sam’s money.

The article concludes:

A number of states used money to run tourism campaigns.

Auditors in local governments reported money allocated to holiday ornaments or bonuses to employees, both of which seemed at odds with the intention of the funds.

Ms. Ernst, in her Squeal Award, said at a time when Americans are facing soaring inflation and struggling to buy Christmas presents, it’s unseemly for governments to blow taxpayer dollars on boondoggles.

“There are too many struggling families and small business owners who are desperately trying to survive while untold amounts are being squandered because of inadequate guidance and oversight,” the senator said.

One of the COVID-19 projects Ms. Ernst exposed Monday involved plans by the town of Westfield, New Jersey, to buy 2,000 tote bags emblazoned with “Shop Local, Shop Safe, Shop Westfield.” The point was to encourage people to patronize local businesses struggling amid the pandemic during last year’s Christmas season.

But the bags weren’t actually distributed before Christmas.

Months later, they were discovered in unopened boxes in a warehouse, Ms. Ernst said.

Wasteful spending is neither a Republican nor a Democrat problem–both parties are guilty. We need American voters to keep track of what their representatives vote for and boot out the representatives that support wasteful spending. Inflation is a byproduct of wasteful spending. If we can get spending under control, we at least have a chance of getting inflation under control.

Shouldn’t We Be Alarmed At This?

On Thursday American Greatness posted an article about a recent statement by President Biden about Israel’s Six-Day War.

The article reports:

Either Joe Biden’s faulty memory or his lifelong habit of padding his resume was on display Wednesday during a menorah lighting at the White House in celebration of Hanukkah.

During his remarks before the lighting, Biden bragged about “the many times” he’d been to Israel, and then decided to alter history and insert himself as an important player in the Six-Day War.

“I have known every — every prime minister well since Golda Meir, including Golda Meir,” Biden said to applause. “And during the Six-Day War, I had an opportunity to — she invited me to come over because I was going to be the liaison between she and the Egyptians about the Suez, and so on and so forth.”

This would be an impressive story, except Meir wasn’t Israel’s prime minister during the Six Day War of 1967 (she was PM from March 17, 1969 to June 3, 1974), and Biden was still in law school at the time, (where he ranked a dismal 76th in his class of 85).

Golda Meir became Prime Minister in 1969. Levi Eshkol was Prime Minister from 1963 to 1969.

The article at American Greatness quotes a National Review article from December 2 of this year.

The National Review article reports:

Biden did indeed meet Golda Meir in 1973 — six years after the Six Day War — but that is . . . not how the Israelis remember that meeting, at least according to a contemporaneous classified Israeli memo from that time:

Biden warned that Israel’s actions in the territories it had captured during the Six Day War, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, were leading to “creeping annexation.”

Since he believed Israel was militarily dominant in the region, he suggested the Jewish state might initiate a first step for peace through unilateral withdrawals from areas with no strategic importance.

The official said Biden criticized the Nixon administration for being “dragged by Israel,” complaining that it was impossible to have a real debate in the Senate about the Middle East as senators were fearful of saying things unpopular with Jewish voters.

Meir rejected Biden’s call for unilateral steps, launching into a speech about the region and its problems (possibly the spiel Biden alluded to in his own comments years later).

The official added his own personal impressions regarding the young senator at the bottom of the document, saying Biden was full of respect toward the Israeli leader and repeatedly said he had come to learn, “and yet while speaking displayed a fervor and made comments that signaled his lack of diplomatic experience.”

In August 2021, The Washington Times reported:

You have to give President Biden credit for consistency. Unfortunately, he has been consistently wrong. As Robert Gates, former defense secretary in the Obama administration, once put it, Biden has “been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

Unfortunately President Biden is the person currently leading our country.

Does Your Government Work For You?

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about President Biden’s $1.75 trillion expansion of the federal safety net.

The article reports:

An analysis by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog, estimates that President Biden’s $1.75 trillion expansion of the federal safety net could kill more than 103,000 jobs over the next decade and add $750 billion to the federal deficit.

The estimate is based on a thorough analysis of the White House’s spending “framework” and the corresponding 1,684-page bill text released by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat. Experts from the Tax Foundation say the proposal would fall far short of White House promises.

“We estimate that the House bill would reduce long-run economic output by nearly 0.4% and eliminate about 103,000 full-time equivalent jobs in the United States,” the experts wrote. “It would also reduce average after-tax incomes for the top 80 percent of taxpayers over the long run.”

It should be shouted everywhere that according to a CNBC article posted in August 2021, more than 100 million U.S. households, or 61% of all taxpayers, paid no federal income taxes last year, according to a report from the Tax Policy Center. Think about that for a minute. If you are not paying taxes, why should you care how much the government is spending or how much the government is planning to raise taxes? This is not a good situation.

The article at The Washington Times concludes:

Mr. Biden is backing a 5% “wealth tax” on those with adjusted gross income above $10 million. The figure jumps to 8% on adjusted gross income over $25 million.

“I can’t think of a single time when the middle class has done well but the wealthy haven’t done very well,” Mr. Biden said. “I can think of many times, including now, when the wealthy and the superwealthy do very well and the middle class doesn’t do well.”

Despite the rhetoric, Tax Foundation economists say, the provisions would affect all workers by killing more than 29,000 jobs.

The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 

The report was released one day after Sen. Joe Manchin III, West Virginia Democrat, accused his colleagues of engaging in “budget gimmicks” to hide the true cost of the spending package.

“As more of the real details outlined … what I see are shell games and budget gimmicks that make the real cost of this so-called $1.75 trillion bill estimated to be twice as high,” he said. “That is a recipe for economic crisis. None of us should ever misrepresent to the American people what the real cost of legislation is.”

Actually, the middle class did very well during the Trump administration. Trump administration policies helped increase the number of Americans in the middle class.

Does anyone remember the Luxury Tax of 1990.

On September 10, 2011, The American Enterprise Institute posted the following:

Flashback:Wall Street Journal editorial on January 6, 2003

“Most Americans celebrated as the ball fell in Times Square New Year’s Eve. But for auto dealers this new year is especially sweet. January 1 marked the expiration of the federal luxury tax on cars, the last vestige of the destructive luxury tax package in the infamous 1990 budget deal.

Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10% luxury tax on cars valued above $30,000, boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000. Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his “no new taxes” pledge.

But it wasn’t long before even these die-hard class warriors noticed they’d badly missed their mark. The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected — for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods. Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy’s home states of Maine and Massachusetts, was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77% drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.

The end of any federal tax is such a rarity that it’s well worth celebrating. And the luxury tax lesson of economic damage is worth keeping in mind as politicians begin to wail that President Bush’s new tax proposals aren’t punitive enough on the rich.”

HT: Pete Friedlander

The recession that followed the 1990 luxury tax cost President George H.W. Bush re-election. The Democrats might want to keep that in mind.

 

Removing The Policy That Worked

The Washington Times is reporting that Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is seeking to cancel the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” border policy.

The article reports:

The move comes even as Mr. Mayorkas is trying to restart the program under a federal judge’s injunction.

In a lengthy memo, the Department of Homeland Security said the U.S. cannot assure the safety of people it pushes back across the border under the policy, officially known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, and the government doesn’t want to spend the money needed to improve conditions in Mexico.

I realize that there is a humanitarian element to this, but we are not responsible for the people that are ‘pushed’ back across the border. That is like saying that if someone breaks into your house and you manage to get them out of your house you are responsible for their safety on the street. No. These people are breaking the law and coming into our country illegally. We owe them nothing except possibly a trip home. President Trump had the right idea in trying to help improve conditions in the countries the migrants are coming from. Until the corruption and lawlessness in these countries is dealt with, there is no point in sending the countries financial aid–it will only add to the corruption and lawlessness. However, if we can put strings on any financial assistance, we may actually be able to help some of the poorer countries in South America and Central America. Meanwhile, we simply do not have the resources to support the entire western hemisphere.

The article concludes:

But immigrant-rights groups said some legitimate asylum-seekers were pushed back and faced kidnappings, robberies and other abuse while waiting in Mexico.

The Biden administration had halted MPP (Migrant Protection Protocols) early in its tenure, and Mr. Mayorkas issued a memo in the spring attempting to cancel it altogether. But a federal judge in Texas ruled he cut too many corners.

In particular, the judge said Homeland Security in the Trump years had conducted a review of the program and found it to be a critical border tool. Canceling the program required more than Mr. Mayorkas‘ cursory dismissal of those findings, the judge said.

The judge ordered the program restarted, and the Biden team says it is negotiating with Mexico to do that — even as it works to undermine the program legally.

The new memo canceling the program runs to 39 pages of justification, arguing MPP is a misuse of resources at a time when the Biden team is trying to erase most of the Trump immigration legacy.

Mr. Mayorkas has promised a new system that he said will erase the incentives for illegal immigration while protecting legitimate asylum cases.

The thing to keep in mind is that there is a difference between legitimate asylum and economic migration. Economic migrants need to work to find a way to improve conditions in their home countries. I realize that in many of these countries, corruption and lawlessness are a problem, but until someone stands up to the problem, it will continue to exist.

Policies Matter

One of the successes of the Trump administration was the growth of small business and the growth of the middle class during his administration. There were a lot of reasons for that growth–the corporate tax cut caused all businesses to grow and the elimination of a lot of government regulation gave small and large businesses freedom to grow. The elimination of red tape took some of the load off of businessmen trying to start or grow a business. Unfortunately, the Biden administration seems to be blindly determined to undo anything the Trump administration did regardless of whether or not the Trump policies actually helped Americans and the American economy.

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the Biden administration’s plans for businesses in America.

The article reports:

President Biden accelerated the regulatory state on his first day in office by ordering agencies to consider aspirational but vaguely defined goals and benefits when imposing new rules on businesses large and small.

The order greenlighting regulations even when the benefits “are difficult or impossible to quantify” sent shudders down the spines of CEOs. They fear business growth will be smothered in pursuit of vague objectives such as “human dignity” and “the interests of future generations.”

“It is the most aggressive thing I’ve ever seen by an administration,” said Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, a right-leaning economic think tank. “It’s one thing to put out a bunch of regulations, but this changes the way regulation is done. It allows you to jam through any regulation you want regardless of the impact [on] the private sector.”

The order, which tosses out the government’s traditional cost-benefit analysis before approving a regulation, is among a slew of executive actions Mr. Biden has signed to curb the power of businesses.

Mr. Biden‘s regulations provide a road map for his plans to transform business and what he sees as anti-competitive business practices. Without the regulations, Mr. Biden said, businesses can stifle competition, raise prices and limit consumer choice. The regulations are also designed to give workers more power to demand higher wages and mobility, the president has said.

The article concludes with an example:

Mr. Holtz-Eakin sees it differently. He said the red tape combined with the administration’s rhetoric has created a “negative business environment.” He views Mr. Biden‘s talk and actions as a two-pronged approach to getting business to bend to the administration’s will.

Last month, Mr. Biden‘s agriculture secretary and top economic adviser accused the meat industry of illegal price-fixing and blamed it for soaring food prices. They vowed to investigate and restrict the industry in the name of protecting consumers.

An industry trade group accused the administration of scapegoating meat producers. It said the prices increased because of a nationwide labor shortage.

“I think that was relatively unprecedented,” Mr. Holtz-Eakin (Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum) said of the attack on the meat industry. “There have been other industries singled out by presidents, but that one was a surprise.”

What we need to be aware of is the fact that the Biden administration is moving us away from private enterprise to government control of businesses. It’s not a good direction to be headed. The only solution to this is to elect conservatives to Congress in 2022 and elect either President Trump of Governor DeSantis as President in 2024. Otherwise we will probably be a socialist country within five years.

The Dangers Of Incomplete Vetting

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about Chasib Hafedh Saadoon Al Fawadi, who entered the United States in 2016 when President Obama was resettling refugees from the Middle East. The problem is that Al Fawadi was a former member of an Iranian-funded Shiite militia.

The article reports:

Al Fawadi won refugee status for himself and his family by claiming he’d been persecuted by Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq for refusing to help them kidnap Sunni Muslims.

In fact, he has since admitted in court, he actually joined up with the militia, which American authorities say is funded by Iran and is known for its violent attacks on U.S. troops and for kidnapping Iraqis and Westerners alike.

Al Fawadi lied to U.S. authorities to conceal his membership in, and support of, an Iranian-backed militia that has carried out attacks in Iraq and Syria,” Antoinette “Toni” Bacon, the acting U.S. attorney for northern New York, said when the charges were first brought last year.

Al Fawadi entered a guilty plea in the federal fraud case last week. He still faces first-degree rape charges in New York.

U.S. authorities have long struggled with vetting of migrants fleeing countries afflicted by terrorism and sectionalist violence.

The article also notes:

Meanwhile, investigators are probing reports of men assaulting a female soldier at one Afghan holding center in New Mexico, and prosecutors have charged two men with sex crimes at another center in Wisconsin.

One of those men stands accused of beating his wife.

Al Fawadi, the Iraqi refugee, faces his own charges of raping and choking his wife, according to an indictment from Onondaga County, New York.

She also filed for divorce and won a decree last October.

According to court documents he applied for refugee status for himself and his family while in Turkey in 2015. They were approved and resettled a year later, among 9,880 Iraqis who were admitted to the U.S. in 2016.

In the just-ended fiscal year 2021, only about 500 Iraqi refugees were admitted, with most coming after Mr. Biden took office and vowed to increase refugees.

We need to understand something here. Regardless of past associations with the militia groups, the refugees we are importing do not live according to American social standards. They are coming from a culture where beating your wife or raping a women who they feel is inappropriately dressed is appropriate. We are allowing them to come here in such large numbers that assimilation will be difficult. If the Biden refugee policies continue, we can expect to see a spike in crimes against women in America by these refugees. Where are the feminists?

One Foreign Policy Consequence Of Afghanistan

On Thursday Bill Gertz posted an article at The Washington Times reporting that as Afghanistan falls, China is already flexing its muscles against Taiwan.

The article reports:

China’s military stepped up flights of H-6 bombers near the southeastern tip of Taiwan, triggering air defense forces of the island state, the Taiwan defense ministry said Thursday.

The H-6 bomber incursion is the latest military demonstration by the People’s Liberation Army that also conducted large-scale war games near Taiwan this week and stepped-up propaganda criticizing both Taipei and Washington.

Two days ago, the PLA flew two H-6K bombers — those equipped for conducting long-range missile strikes — into the Taiwan air defense zone, along with several other warplanes and reconnaissance aircraft, including six J-16 jet fighters. The H-6 dispatched on Thursday was not identified by its variant letter.

The Taiwanese ministry said on its website that interceptor aircraft were launched and air defense missile systems were deployed in response to both bomber incursions. The bombers also were warned in radio communications, the ministry said.

The bomber flights come as China carried out large-scale, live-fire war games near Taiwan this week that the state media in Beijing said was directed at growing U.S.-Taiwan bilateral cooperation.

The article concludes:

In response to renewed Chinese saber-rattling and questions about American reliability, Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen said her country’s “only option is to grow stronger and become more united, strengthening our determination to protect ourselves. It is not our option to do nothing and only rely on others for protection.”

In a related development, the South China Morning Post reported this week that China is building an airport along the coast opposite Taiwan.

The airport will be built on reclaimed land between two islands and, once completed, could put Chinese military aircraft closer to Taiwan across the 100-mile-wide Taiwan Strait.

Stay tuned.

Making Up The Rules As You Go Along

On June 7th, CBN News reported the following:

A unanimous Supreme Court ruled Monday that thousands of immigrants living in the U.S. due to humanitarian reasons are ineligible to apply to become permanent residents if they entered the country illegally. 

Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court that federal immigration law prohibits people who entered the country illegally and now have Temporary Protected Status from seeking “green cards” to remain in the country permanently.  

The designation applies to people who come from countries ravaged by war or disaster. It protects them from deportation and allows them to work legally. There are 400,000 people from 12 countries with TPS status.

Meanwhile, The Washington Times reported the following yesterday:

The Department of Homeland Security will speed up work permits for tens of thousands of illegal immigrants who claim they are victims of crime, the department announced Monday, saying the current wait, which can last up to five years, is too long to make people remain in economic limbo.

More than 160,000 people were waiting for the victim visa, officially known as the U visa, as of December.

Under the new rules, U visa applicants can be awarded work permits and deferred action, which is an official amnesty for deportation, once they have filed their petition, had their fingerprints taken and are deemed to have made a good-faith claim. The process is known as a Bona Fide Determination. Until now, they had to wait until their cases were further along in the process.

And we wonder why our borders are being flooded? All you have to do as an illegal immigrant is say that you are a victim of a crime and you will get a visa that allows you to work and live here indefinitely. I suspect that when their cases come up, many illegals will simply vanish into the general population, work legally or illegally, and go on with their lives. Meanwhile, American taxpayer will be paying to educate their children and provide for their medical needs. A nation cannot survive this sort of invasion. It will collapse the safety net. Please research Cloward-Piven if you have not already done so.

Ending Policies That Work

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about one of the Trump administration  policies that has been eliminated by the Biden administration.

The article reports:

President Trump gave an unprecedented voice to victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants, creating an office in ICE to highlight their plight.

The Biden administration on Friday announced a new policy to expand the office’s purview in a way that victims say drowns out their voice.

What Mr. Trump dubbed the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement Office (VOICE) is now being changed to the Victims Engagement and Services Line, and it will handle calls from anyone who claims to be a victim, no matter what their immigration status or the status of the perpetrator.

And it will specialize in helping illegal immigrants who say they are victims of crimes get special visas to stay in the country.

The article also reports:

In addition to helping immigrants get U and T visas, which give legal status to illegal immigrant victims of certain crimes and human trafficking, respectively, the new office also will serve as a hotline for immigrants in detention to complain of their treatment.

The office also will serve as a notification system for immigration court cases.

Don Rosenberg, whose son was killed in a traffic collision by an illegal immigrant, said the lack of any focus on crimes committed by illegal immigrants was “conspicuous.”

“It is not ICE or the Department of Homeland Security’s function to ‘help’ illegal aliens,” Mr. Rosenberg, who is president of Advocates for Victims of Illegal Alien Crime, told The Washington Times. “This new office is another outrageous violation of our immigration laws and another ‘service’ to allow illegal aliens to remain in America.”

Mr. Trump gave victims and their relatives like Mr. Rosenberg an unprecedented voice in public policy. First as a candidate and then as president, Mr. Trump repeatedly met with them, invited them on stage at events and gave them a platform to highlight an often untold side of the immigration debate.

The article concludes:

Jon Feere, who served as chief of staff at ICE during the Trump administration, said the VOICE office was able to provide information about illegal immigrant perpetrators to victims. He said that’s important for victims trying to follow court cases and make sure people are brought to justice.

He said it’s not clear whether ICE will continue that service under the new VESL system.

“It was a well-functioning, apolitical, victim-centered office that did a lot of good in providing a needed resource,” Mr. Feere said. “This is a completely unnecessary change that trashes years of branding and outreach by career officials. If the Biden administration cared about victims, it would not have done this.”

Mr. Feere, now director of investigations at the Center for Immigration Studies, said with more criminal immigrants being released rather than deported by the Biden administration, there’s a pressing need for the work the VOICE office does.

Who is the Biden administration working for?

Were Lives Lost Because Of Politics And Greed?

I think it’s time to ask if the political games the media played during the Trump administration and the conflict of interest in some members of the National Institute of Health resulted in the deaths of Americans. Hot Air posted an article today about s recent study on the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat Covid patients.

The article reports:

For most of us, the whole controversy over the use of hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 patients seemed mostly political in nature and less so about the drug’s effectiveness. Once Donald Trump came out in support of it, the gloves came off. At least half of the country decided that HCQ was not a scientific treatment for the coronavirus because the bad Orange Man was an anti-science president. Never mind that it was Trump who expedited the vaccine process to historic speed with Operation Warp Speed. He put together a White House coronavirus task force before many people (especially on the left) were willing to acknowledge the pandemic that originated in China. When Trump announced that he was taking HCQ himself, he was roundly mocked. Nevertheless, others in the medical community studied the use of the drug during the pandemic and found some positive results.

The article notes that hydroxychloroquine costs under $10 for the course of a COVID-19 treatment and the drug being promoted by the National Institute of Health (NIH) during the Trump administration, remdesivir, costs about $3,500 per treatment. Hydroxychloroquine has been used for years with known side effects. The side effects of remdesivir are unknown.

The article suggests we follow the money and continues with the following excerpt from The Washington Times:

Although, many doctors around the world were finding success with HCQ, in February 2020 NIH started enrolling patients for a remdesivir COVID-19 trial, with Dr. Fauci overseeing its progress. He had the final say on all the press releases, and presumably was working closely with Gilead. On April 16 something funny happened with the trial — the endpoints of it were quietly changed and updated on the clinicaltrials.gov website. Instead of evaluating remdesivir’s ability to prevent death from COVID-19, the study was redesigned to evaluate how fast a patient recovered from remdesivir.

…On May 1, the NIH’s COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines panel members granted emergency use of remdesivir and stated HCQ could only be used in hospitals or in studies. Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson found 11 members of that panel had financial ties to Gilead. Two were on Gilead’s advisory board, others were paid consultants or received research support and honoraria. None of the members, however, had ties to HCQ, which is made by numerous generic manufacturers, and “is so cheap, analysts say even a spike in sales would not be a financial driver for the companies,” Ms. Attkisson reported.

Ms. Attkisson also found one of the authors of a small Veterans Administration trial that claimed HCQ caused increased deaths received a $247,000 grant from Gilead in 2018.

The article at Hot Air concludes:

You may remember that when Trump was hospitalized with COVID-19, he was treated with remdesivir and did, indeed, experience a speedy recovery. By the way, Gilead spent $2.45 million in the first quarter of 2020 lobbying the federal government.

The results of the latest study showing success with HCQ in patient recovery time for those on a ventilator is very encouraging. Perhaps the Follow the Science people should practice what they preach. How many lives were lost because of tunnel vision?

This is disgusting. All of the members of the NIH who had ties to Gilead should be fired. Lives were lost because they were greedy.

An Upside Down Department Of Justice

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the priorities of the Department of Justice under Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The article reports:

Attorney General Merrick Garland acknowledged Wednesday that the Justice Department is prioritizing prosecuting those who participated in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol over those who rioted and looted during last summer’s social justice demonstrations.

“I think it’s fair to say in my career as a judge and in law enforcement, I have not seen a more dangerous threat to democracy than the invasion of the Capitol,” Mr. Garland said in testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee. “There was an attempt to interfere with the fundamental element of our democracy — the peaceful transfer of power.

“If there has to be a hierarchy of things that we prioritize, this would be the one we would prioritize because it is the most dangerous threat to our democracy,” he continued.

It should be noted that on April 15th, MSN reported:

Federal prosecutors in Portland, Ore., have moved to dismiss almost half the cases they charged in connection with violence accompanying last year’s protests over racial injustice, as authorities grapple with how to tamp down politically motivated unrest that has arisen since then.

Of 96 cases the U.S. attorney’s office in Portland filed last year charging protesters with federal crimes, including assaulting federal officers, civil disorder, and failing to obey, prosecutors have dropped 47 of them, government documents show. Ten people have pleaded guilty to related charges and two were ordered detained pending trial. None have gone to trial.

The penalties levied so far against any federal defendants, most of whom were arrested in clashes around federal buildings in Portland including the courthouse, have largely consisted of community service, such as working in a food bank or encouraging people to vote.

On January 3rd, The Daily Caller reported:

  • At least $4 million in physical damage was done to businesses downtown during the first month of protests, according to the Portland Business Alliance.
  • The riots cost downtown Portland another $18 million in revenue, according to the PBA.

I think it’s time for the Attorney General to re-examine his priorities. Those who participated in the riot at the Capitol deserve to be punished, but none of the rioters had weapons and the only person killed was killed by the Capitol Police. The destruction and threats to human life in Portland were far more serious. The only reason for the priorities the Attorney General is stating is political bias. No wonder many Americans have lost faith in the legal system in our country.

Violating The Civil Rights Of Americans

Red State Observer is reporting that during the impeachment trial of President Trump in late 2019, the FBI was spying on his Apple iCloud account.

The article reports:

Mr. Giuliani said the U. S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan on Thursday informed his attorney, Robert Costello, that covert wiretapping took place.

“He asked [the prosecutor] to repeat it because he couldn’t believe it was true,” Mr. Giuliani said this week on the “Rita Cosby Show” on WABC radio in New York. “To me they just trashed the president of the United States.”

Mr. Giuliani, once the mob-fighting top prosecutor in New York and then the city’s mayor, said an assistant U. S. attorney made the disclosure because the operation will have to be detailed in court. The penetration happened under the Trump administration and then-Attorney General William P. Barr and was carried out by the U.S. Southern District of New York. It prosecuted former Trump attorney Michael Cohen on tax charges.

The article quotes The Washington Times:

“I can’t fathom that would be done to an ordinary citizen,” he said. “The president doesn’t have any more rights than anybody else, but he doesn’t have any less. To me, they just trashed the president of the United States like he has no constitutional rights.”

Mr. Giuliani said he conducted many conversations with the president that presumably could be retrieved off of iCloud — a backup cyber storage system for emails, texts, documents, photos — just about anything contained on personal devices such as cellphones and computers.

“Unless these people have no ethics or any sense of what it means to be a lawyer, what you do when you do that, people who listen to this now say how can I trust talking to my lawyer,” he said. “The government may come in and start listening to it or might try to see text of memoranda.”

Mr. Giuliani said that after he learned of the iCloud penetration, he notified two Trump attorneys.

“I let them know his rights once again have been trashed by what now has to be described as the department of injustice,” Mr. Giuliani said. “If they can do this to us they can do this to anyone they want to do it to.”

If we have learned nothing else during the past five years, we have learned that the Washington swamp is deep and wide. It is unfortunate that President Trump was not able to drain more of it than he did. Hopefully he will get another chance in the future. Meanwhile we have a politicized justice department that is willing to turn its head when laws are broken by its political allies and to violate the civil rights of those who hold different political beliefs.

Not Surprising To Anyone Paying Attention

Obviously there is a lot of money that floats around in politics. Much of that money comes from Political Action Committees (PAC’s). PAC’s are funded by corporations, unions, and groups of people uniting behind a cause. Unfortunately, many PAC’s are indirectly funded by the federal government–organizations that take federal money then have extra money that they can put into PAC’s. Planned Parenthood, American Association for Retired Persons ( AARP), and unions are all examples of this. It is simply glorified money laundering. Most of the money from the groups mentioned above goes into Democrat campaign coffers. Therefore it should not surprise anyone that our current President is working hard to increase union membership and make unions stronger. That is one of many ways to strengthen Democrat political majorities.

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about a new task force President Biden is forming:

President Biden tapped Vice President Kamala Harris on Monday to lead a White House task force aimed at the unprecedented goal of unionizing more workers in the U.S. with the broad support of the federal government.

Mr. Biden signed an executive order creating the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment to mobilize Cabinet agencies and other federal offices to help workers “organize and successfully bargain with their employers,” the White House said.

National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix called Mr. Biden’s task force “a blatant payoff to the union politicos who backed his campaign” in 2020.

I suspect the Vice-President will be devoting more time to this than she has to the border crisis.

The article notes:

It was another sign of organized labor’s grip on the Democratic Party and its influence with Mr. Biden. Unions gave more than $27 million to Mr. Biden’s presidential campaign and groups that supported him, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The initiative was announced less than a month after online retail giant Amazon defeated a move to unionize workers at its huge warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama. It also follows a series of pro-union steps that Mr. Biden has taken, including a shake-up of the leadership at the National Labor Relations Board and an endorsement of the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, broad legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize.

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, a close Biden ally, said the president “is acting to remove the structural impediments to the power and promise of unions so workers can join together for a better life.”

“Workers finally have a champion in Washington,” she said.

Conservatives and pro-growth groups slammed the executive order as an effort to put Mr. Biden’s thumb on the scale of the labor market.

Sean Higgins, a research fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, said Mr. Biden “seems to believe joining a union is an obligation that the federal government must prod workers to do.”

“This executive order is a harbinger of further aggressive sales tactics from this administration on behalf of its union allies,” Mr. Higgins said.

Mr. Mix said the move will result in “another attempt to rig the law against workers who want nothing to do with union officials’ so-called representation.”

This is not good news for workers who choose not to be part of a union.

That’s A Big Change In The Numbers

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about the Biden administration’s revised estimate of how many jobs the infrastructure bill would create. The numbers have changed dramatically.

The article reports:

The White House clarified Tuesday that one study projects that President Biden’s $2.25 trillion infrastructure package will create roughly 2.7 million jobs — not the 19 million jobs administration officials had touted over the weekend.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki cited a study from Moody’s that projects the U.S. economy will add 19 million jobs over the next decade if Congress passes Mr. Biden’s plan and about 16.3 million jobs if Congress doesn’t pass it.

“So that is what the impact would be of the American Jobs Plan — 2.7 million, to be totally clear,” Ms. Psaki said. “It is important to be clear and to be specific about jobs numbers — to provide clarity to the American people.”

Frankly, considering the cost of the proposed infrastructure bill, I’d prefer the 16.3 million jobs.

The article concludes:

Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council, and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg had both cited the study over the weekend to say the plan would create 19 million jobs.

The White House later indicated that Mr. Deese misspoke.

Mr. Buttigieg clarified on CNN Monday that the Moody’s study projects an additional 2.7 million jobs in its forecast if the plan is passed.  

I wonder how many Americans missed the ‘clarification’ and are still believing the original number given.

When Judges Don’t Read The U.S. Constitution

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about a recent decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The article reports:

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that there is no right to carry a gun in public.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 7-4 ruling rejected a challenge to Hawaii’s requirement that residents must pass an application to have weapons outside the home.

Hawaii’s law requires residents to show an urgency or need to carry a firearm, the applicant must have good character, and he or she must be “engaged in the protection of life and property.”

The Second Amendment states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

The article continues:

George Young applied twice for a firearm carry license, but was denied. He unsuccessfully sued Hawaii officials over the restrictions.

“There is no right to carry arms openly in public; nor is any such right within the scope of the Second Amendment,” the court ruled in an “en banc” decision that involved 11 of the panel’s judges.

The article concludes:

Four of the panel’s judges disagreed with the ruling, arguing the state regulations destroyed the right to carry a gun for self-defense outside of the home. 

“This holding is as unprecedented as it is extreme,” wrote Judge Diarmuid  O’Scannlain, a Reagan appointee.

The National Rifle Association said it would not allow the ruling to stand.

“The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit just ruled that THERE IS NO RIGHT TO CARRY – either openly or concealed in public. This ruling impacts RTC laws in AK, HI, CA, AZ, OR, WA, & MT. This was not an NRA case but we are exploring all options to rectify this,” the gun-rights group wrote on Twitter.

Blue states saw the ruling as a green light to implement strict firearm laws.

Gurbir Grewal, New Jersey’s attorney general, said he was proud to lead 10 states that filed a brief in the legal battle to support firearm safety laws.

“Today the Ninth Circuit agreed that laws that limit carrying guns in public are constitutional,” he wrote on Twitter.

Some of my concealed carry permit holder friends believe that the right to concealed carry is enshrined in the Second Amendment. It seems to me that you could make a better case for that interpretation of the Constitution than the interpretation by the 9th Circuit.

 

A Serious Flaw In The Covid Relief Bill

Yesterday The Washington Times posted an article about an item that is included in the Covid Relief Bill that simply should not be there. We have learned in recent years how deep and wide the swamp  in Washington is, but this item reaches a new level.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden’s coronavirus stimulus package outlines a one-time $1,400 check to families financially affected by the virus.

Yet the fine print in the House stimulus bill sneaks in this fascinating nugget: If you’re a federal employee, you can receive $1,400 a week in paid time off for 15 weeks if you decide to stay at home and virtually school your child.

As first reported by Forbes, the carve-out is included in the bill’s $570 million “Emergency Federal Employee Leave fund,” which is exclusively reserved for federal employees.

Among those eligible are those who are “unable to work” because they are caring for school-aged children not physically in school full time “due to COVID-19 precautions[.]”

The new fund allows a federal employee “caring for a son or daughter” to qualify for the paid leave, specifically “if the school or place of care of the son or daughter has been closed, if the school of such son or daughter requires or makes optional a virtual learning instruction model or requires or makes optional a hybrid of in-person and virtual learning instruction models, or the childcare provider of such son or daughter is unavailable, due to COVID-19 precautions.”

The article continues:

Meanwhile, millions of families are trying to balance work with virtual learning and child care — with only a lousy one-time $1,400 check to help compensate them for their efforts. Yet federal government employees will be paid weekly not to work. The entire thing is insane, and another example of how the swamp takes care of its own.

As Forbes notes, the drafting of the federal employee leave fund is intentionally sloppy. It doesn’t include age requirements for the children (meaning federal employees could apply for this leave even if their children are attending college), and it also would allow for government employees to receive the benefit even if their child could be in school five days a week, but the employee chooses a virtual option instead.

The entire House stimulus bill includes no financial reimbursement for working families who have decided to place their children in private schools because their school districts are virtual, even as they continue to pay school taxes. They continue to pay for a service not being rendered — with no exact timeline of when it will be.

This is a disgrace. The small businesses that have been forced to close receive a fraction of what employees of our bloated federal government receive. That is simply wrong.

This Is Troubling, But Not Surprising

Yesterday PJ Media posted the following headline, “REPORT: Former Obama Staff Colluded With Iran to Undermine Trump.” This is not really a surprise. There were a lot of Democrats and Republican who sought to undermine Trump. We heard a lot of talk about a ‘peaceful transition of power’ when Joe Biden was elected, but we need to understand that there was no ‘peaceful transition of power’ when President Trump was elected. President Obama remained in Washington, D.C., and from his command center threw every obstacle he could into the path of President Trump with full compliance from the media. The antics of the Democrats, some swamp-dwelling Republicans, and the media from 2015 until 2020 are a disgrace to our republic.

The article reports:

Former Obama administration officials, including former Secretary of State John Kerry, went behind President Donald Trump’s back in backchannels with Iran, sources told The Washington Times. Some of the architects of the Iran nuclear deal met with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif after Trump withdrew from the deal.

A slew of former Obama officials, including Kerry, Obama’s Middle East advisor Robert Malley, and Obama-era Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, met with Zarif during the Trump years. Kerry, Malley, and Moniz led negotiations in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in which the U.S. provided sanctions relief and access to tens of billions of dollars in frozen bank accounts in exchange for Iran’s promises to limit nuclear enrichment.

Trump pulled the U.S. out of the deal in 2018, citing the need for a tougher agreement that also addressed Iran’s support for terrorist groups and its destabilizing behavior in the Middle East. Yet a former senior U.S. official told The Washington Times that Zarif met with Democrats like Kerry multiple times in 2017, 2018, and 2019, before the Trump administration halted his visa in 2020.

The former official told the Times that Zarif’s meetings aimed “to devise a political strategy to undermine the Trump administration” and to build support for a new version of the Iran deal in case a Democrat returned to the White House in 2021.

Kerry acknowledged meeting with Zarif at least twice in the early years of the Trump administration. He told radio host Hugh Hewitt that there was nothing secret about his meetings with the Iranian minister. Kerry said he intended to find out “what Iran might be willing to do in order to change the dynamic in the Middle East for the better.”

Kerry was a private citizen at that time; he had no authority to represent America in any way or to meet with foreign leaders in any capacity.

The article concludes:

“Former administration officials can play a very helpful role in close coordination with a sitting administration to open and support sensitive diplomatic channels,” Mark Dubowitz, chief executive at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the Times. “But it is not good practice for senior officials who served at the highest levels of a former administration, Democratic or Republican, to be trying to undermine the policy of a sitting administration by engaging actively with a known enemy of the United States.”

Indeed, Malley was reportedly engaging in this “shadow diplomacy” while Iran-backed militias targeted U.S. troops in Iraq, leading up to the assassination of Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani in January 2020.

Sources also told The Washington Times that Zarif wields tremendous influence over the Iran lobby in the U.S. They described a “web” of activity linked to think tanks across the U.S. as well as lobbying efforts that reached into the Obama White House.

Many members of Congress, including Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), have hired current or former staffers with the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), an organization with links to Iran’s regime and which Iran state media has described as “Iran’s lobby” in the U.S.

Did the Obama administration architects of the Iran deal carry out a “shadow diplomacy” with the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism in order to undermine President Trump, hoping that a Democrat would win in 2020 and return them to power? Did they work with the Iran lobby behind the scenes? This explosive report suggests the answers to those questions are “yes,” but the details are yet to be forthcoming.

Where is the Logan Act when you actually need it?

Vendetta

According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, a vendetta is 1. a blood feud or 2. an often prolonged series of retaliatory, vengeful, or hostile acts or exchange of such acts. I sincerely believe that what we are currently seeing in American politics is a vendetta against President Trump. So what did he do to trigger this vendetta? Let’s take a look back for a minute.

President Trump came into politics as an outsider. The mainstream media treated him as if he were a joke. He had the audacity to win. What happened when he won? First of all he discovered that a lot of Washington insiders took joy in stabbing him in the back. Secondly, he discovered that the intelligence apparatus in America was being used as a political weapon. (That has never been dealt with and probably continues under the Biden administration.) Third, he exposed the Washington swamp and was able to accomplish some noteworthy things in spite of it–energy independence, wage increases at the lower end of the economic spectrum, bringing manufacturing back to America, creating jobs, lowering gas prices, peace treaties in the Middle East, developing the coronavirus vaccine in record time, etc. Because he was successful as an outsider the Washington swamp hates him. They impeached him twice, and his poll numbers are still high. But they are not done yet.

There are two recent headlines those of us who believe the attack on President Trump has been over the top need to pay attention to. An article in Red State posted yesterday reports that the Attorney General in Fulton County, Georgia, is planning the charge President Trump with a crime in relation to a phone call to the Governor of the state. The  headline in yesterday’s Washington Times reports, “Trump properties in New York under investigation: Report.”

The Washington Times article states:

Former President Trump is facing scrutiny from prosecutors in Manhattan over millions of dollars in loans he took out for several properties in New York, The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.

Citing unnamed people familiar with the matter, the Journal reported that the office of Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance is “investigating financial dealings” involving the Trump properties.

Specifically, the people said prosecutors are looking at loans that were made to Mr. Trump by subsidiaries of the same real-estate investment trust, Ladder Capital Corp., the Journal reported.

On May 9, 2018, The Oxford Eagle posted an article that noted the following:

Lavrentiy Beria, the most ruthless and longest-serving secret police chief in Joseph Stalin’s reign of terror in Russia and Eastern Europe, bragged that he could prove criminal conduct on anyone, even the innocent.

“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime” was Beria’s infamous boast. He served as deputy premier from 1941 until Stalin’s death in 1953, supervising the expansion of the gulags and other secret detention facilities for political prisoners. He became part of a post-Stalin, short-lived ruling troika until he was executed for treason after Nikita Khrushchev’s coup d’etat in 1953.

Beria targeted “the man” first, then proceeded to find or fabricate a crime. Beria’s modus operandi was to presume the man guilty, and fill in the blanks later. By contrast, under the United States Constitution, there’s a presumption of innocence that emanates from the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments, as set forth in Coffin vs. U.S. (1895).

Regardless of how you feel about President Trump, do you want to see the Constitution shredded because the deep state has a vendetta?