20 thoughts on “News/Politics 3-23-21

  1. THIS…. is CNN….

    We don’t really report the news, we just stage it.

    https://prospect.org/justice/did-cnn-air-staged-migrant-crossing-of-the-rio-grande/

    “Did CNN Air a Staged Migrant Crossing of the Rio Grande?

    An unusual video has been flagged by activists as deliberately manufactured to present a story of a border crisis, possibly with the participation of the Border Patrol.”

    “The scene starts out serenely, as CNN national correspondent Ed Lavandera and crew motor by boat down the Rio Grande near the city of Hidalgo, Texas, as the sun sets. But soon, the idyllic setting gives way.

    “That’s when we stumble across a group of migrants loading into a raft,” Lavandera says in the clip. He’s heard speaking with the migrants in Spanish to ease the tension. In the video, shot on March 11 and aired the next day, a group of migrants, including children, board a tiny raft and are led across by a man in a black ski mask and camouflage clothing. The migrants wear clean-looking surgical masks and life vests.

    “The Rio Grande Valley has been ground zero for the latest surge in migration and here you see the operation unfolding right in front of us,” said Lavandera. “After the first raft crosses, the magnitude of this moment reveals itself. Dozens of migrants emerge and walk down to the river’s edge. You can see that this is a serious operation.”

    He narrates what he describes as a “highly organized system,” with the raft taking at least six trips across the river. “Scenes like this are escalating in the Rio Grande Valley,” Lavandera says.

    But the scene may not be all that it appears to be. Immigrant rights advocates and others claim that the footage was staged, potentially with the cooperation of the Border Patrol. CNN was warned that the clip appeared to be a fabrication before it aired, but the network decided to run it anyway. A similar clip that appears to show the same or a similar trafficking incident from another angle was shared across right-wing media and even linked to on the social media accounts of members of Congress. This clip went viral among immigration opponents, and is helping to fuel the story of an out-of-control border. The video—legitimized on mainstream media—easily fit into that narrative. Now a series of charges and counter-charges have demonstrated the radioactive politics of immigration.”

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Eat the rich….. again.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-team-preparing-up-to-3-trillion-in-new-spending-for-the-economy/ar-BB1eQspQ

    ” President Biden’s economic advisers are pulling together a sweeping $3 trillion package to boost the economy, reduce carbon emissions and narrow economic inequality, beginning with a giant infrastructure plan that may be financed in part through tax increases on corporations and the rich.

    After months of internal debate, Mr. Biden’s advisers are expected to present the spending proposal to the president and congressional leaders this week, as well as begin outreach to industry and labor groups. On Monday, Mr. Biden’s national climate adviser, Gina McCarthy, discussed his infrastructure plans — and their role in combating climate change — in a meeting with oil and gas industry executives.

    Administration officials caution that details remain in flux. But the enormous scope of the proposal highlights the aggressive approach the Biden administration wants to take as it tries to harness the power of the federal government to make the economy more equitable, address climate change, and improve American manufacturing and high-technology industries in an escalating battle with China.

    The $1.9 trillion economic aid package that Mr. Biden signed into law this month includes money to help vulnerable people and businesses survive the pandemic downturn. But it does little to advance the longer-term economic agenda that Mr. Biden campaigned on, including transitioning to renewable energy and improving America’s ability to compete in emerging industries, like electric vehicles. Administration officials essentially see those goals — building out the nation’s infrastructure and shifting to a low-carbon future — as inseparable.

    The package under consideration would begin that effort in earnest.”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Overturning an election is only bad when R’s try to do it.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/03/report-democrats-going-all-in-to-take-iowa-house-seat-they-lost-by-six-votes/

    “Report: Democrats Going All In to Take Iowa House Seat They Lost by Six Votes

    The Democrats seem willing to do anything to get rid of their slim House majority.”

    “A source told Politico‘s Playbook the Democrats are going all in to reverse the Republican victory in Iowa’s 2nd District. Mariannette Miller-Meeks defeated Rita Hart by six votes.

    The Democrats have not taken a hard stance publically, but the source said the top people in the House Democratic leadership “blessed” the efforts to oust Miller-Meeks.”

    “House Administration Chairwoman Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said the members of the panel “are keeping an open mind, nothing is predetermined and that Hart has the burden of proof.”

    Interesting because the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) hired top election lawyer Marc Elias. The DCCC is also covering Hart’s legal fees:

    Elias, who helped fight dozens of Trump’s frivolous election law claims in court this winter, doesn’t wade into any old House race. His presence alone signals that Democratic leaders want to take this all the way and flip the seat into Democrats’ control.

    “Federal law provides that this contest is the proper avenue to ensure that all legal ballots are counted and we have presented credible evidence to support their inclusion in the final tally,” Elias said in a statement provided by the DCCC.

    Democrats maintain that the House Admin’s rulings and the motivations of the DCCC are two different things — but it would be politically naive to believe that. The judge in this case is essentially the prosecutor — and yes, this is totally allowed under the Constitution.

    Hart insists the election has 22 valid and uncounted ballots that could give her the victory:

    In their filing to the committee, Ms. Hart’s legal team maintained 22 legal ballots haven’t been counted, saying 18 were cast for Ms. Hart, enough to reverse the outcome. Those ballots included some that were cast through curbside voting but not accepted by the voting machine; absentee ballots that weren’t counted because they were in a box that was marked with a lower number of ballots than it actually contained, leading to confusion; and one absentee ballot that wasn’t counted because the signature was in the wrong location on the envelope.
    Democrats threw a fit and lashed out at Republicans who claimed President Joe Biden stole President Donald Trump’s election.

    Now the opposite has happened, but Trump did one thing different than Hart:

    Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, the top Republican on the committee, questioned why Ms. Hart hadn’t pursued her challenge through Iowa’s court system and said Democrats were being hypocritical.

    “You cannot complain about anyone questioning election certificates again if you’re willing to do the same with a duly elected member, especially since Rita Hart did not finish the court process in Iowa,” he told reporters.”

    Liked by 2 people

  4. More….

    https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2021/03/23/pelosi-losing-dem-support-effort-steal-iowa-2-seat/

    “Pelosi Losing Dem Support In Effort To Steal Iowa-2 Seat”

    “In the question of whether or not Nancy Pelosi will forcibly remove Iowa Congresswoman Marianette Miller-Meeks (R) from her seat and replace her with Democrat Rita Hart, we’ve already learned that the Speaker probably isn’t afraid to use “brute political force.” She hasn’t exactly been shy about it, either. When recently asked if such a result could even be possible, Pelosi said that she could “see a scenario” where that happens. But it’s not going to be a walk in the park. The Democrats hold the majority in the House, but the margin of their majority is in single digits. She can’t afford to lose many Democrats from her caucus and there isn’t a single Republican vote out there in favor of doing this. The path got a bit rockier recently when another vulnerable Democrat signaled that he couldn’t support the plan to overturn the election results. (Washington Examiner)

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is facing growing opposition from within her party regarding efforts to overturn the results of an Iowa congressional election that a Republican won by just six votes.

    On Monday, Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips became the first congressional Democrat to voice firm opposition to the push to have the House Administration Committee investigate the election and decide whether freshman Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks did indeed win the election.

    “Losing a House election by six votes is painful for Democrats. But overturning it in the House would be even more painful for America. Just because a majority can, does not mean a majority should,” Phillips said in a tweet.”

    ——–

    “Ed Morrissey already went over why the “optics” of this are so incredibly awful. At this point, even CNN is asking questions, so you know that the Democrats are playing with fire. But this isn’t really a question of optics in the usual sense when we discuss American politics. Bad optics is when someone casts a vote that flies in the face of positions the member has espoused on the campaign trail. Pelosi it talking about overturning a certified election and ejecting a member whose victory wasn’t even challenged in court back in her home state.

    That brings the comment from Dean Phillips back into focus in terms of what Pelosi could do and what she should do. Each chamber is the final arbiter of accepting election results and seating its members. That’s beyond dispute. But if they’re going to overturn one, they need to provide a reason that’s pretty much bulletproof or the majority will wind up looking like some sort of banana republic mob.

    So what rationale can they cite in this case? Election fraud? Nope. As per the Democrats, that doesn’t exist. Flaws in the certification process? Nope. As I already mentioned, Rita Hart didn’t even challenge it in court. She simply went straight to the speaker and asked Pelosi to declare her the winner after the results had been certified. What else is left? That the election was “too close?” Now we’re just being silly.”

    ————-

    They had the chance to challenge this in court, but opted for the Kangaroo Court that is the House instead. Tells you all you need to know.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Of course they did.

    How long until this is available to all the newly arrived illegals?

    https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2021/03/22/wapo-biden-just-snuck-huge-social-program-covid-19-relief-know/

    “The Washington Post wonders, “Are the politics of big government back?” Only under cover of darkness, in which the paper’s slogan assures us democracy dies. Using the COVID-19 relief/stimulus emergency package as a dodge, the Biden administration launched a stealth welfare program that it hopes Congress can’t afford not to extend, once people get used to more “free stuff.”

    The sudden, unexpected creation of an approximately $120 billion social program has thrown a twist into the political landscape. Some Democrats now fear being labeled big-government spenders in the upcoming midterms. Some conservatives, on the other hand, are embracing the idea as a family-friendly measure.

    With the initiative expiring in a year, all but ensuring it will be a major issue in the midterms, the child poverty measure raises a central question: Are the politics of big government back?

    The program’s impact probably will be profound. It expands the federal child-rearing subsidy by 50 percent — and parents of toddlers will get even more. A family with two young children and no income will now get $600 a month. The parents of 90 percent of the country’s children will benefit, and 27 million children will be lifted from poverty, according to analysts.

    Crucially, the new money takes the form of cash payments, not tax cuts, so even people who don’t make enough to pay taxes will get aid.

    That approach aligns the United States far more closely with European-style wealth redistribution, according to both supporters and detractors. “I liken it to the New Deal,” DeLauro said in an interview. “This changes the country.”

    I guess darkness serves its purposes, as long as those purposes align with the Post’s. Or the Democrats. But I repeat myself …”

    The difference between this and the New Deal, among other differences, is that the New Deal was the highlight of FDR’s agenda — indeed, of his 1932 campaign. Biden didn’t make this payout a secret, but he didn’t exactly proclaim it from the rooftops either. Neither did other Democrats, or for that matter Republicans, who were busier with culture-war issues rather than developing effective messaging against the relief bill. They wanted this to go through Congress as sotto voce as possible, keeping it from becoming a lightning rod for opposition.

    Why? Because they’re playing the long game on changing the country:

    Beyond that, Democrats hope American families will get used to receiving their checks, and they cite the Washington axiom that it’s hard to take something away from voters after they’ve started receiving it.”

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Intercessors For America has a live program on Tues. and Thurs. at 12:15 Eastern. They are good at knowing what to pray for. They cover a lot of issues, and I think today will be on election integrity.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. I say on another thread that we shouldn’t allow statehood for anyone else. We should not have done it for Alaska and Hawaii. Hawaii should be it’s own country. Not part of the USA. .

    Like

  8. Narrative fail for the MSM once again…..

    ———

    Like

  9. More….

    And the Biden response, which will do nothing to stop terrorists like this.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9393669/Gunman-21-charged-murder-shooting-killing-10-people.html

    “Syrian-born gunman Ahmad Alissa, 21, is charged with ten counts of murder at Boulder grocery store where victims were getting vaccine shots: Cops reveal wrestling fanatic was shot through leg in massacre

    Ahmad Alissa of Arvada, Colorado opened fire at the King Soopers grocery store at 2.40pm

    He killed two people in the parking lot before entering the store, where he killed another eight people

    His motive is still not known; when he surrendered to police, he asked to speak to his mother

    In Facebook posts over the last 18 months, he complained that he didn’t have a girlfriend and hated Trump

    Alissa’s brother also told The Daily Beast he was ‘very anti-social’ and has been ‘paranoid’ since high school

    His sister-in-law said she’d seen him playing with a gun recently but did not suspect him of violence

    The victims range in age from 20 to 65; among them was a cop, shoppers and people who were getting their COVID-19 vaccine

    The shooting is the seventh mass shooting in the US in a week and comes six days after eight died in Georgia

    President Biden on Tuesday called for a nationwide ban on assault rifles and tighter laws on background checks “

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Of course he did…it has nothing to do with a crazed young man from an Islamic country who hated Trump and had no girlfriend……It’s all about the gun, which his sis in law saw him playing with…even though she knew he was mentally checked out?! Yep…..

    Like

  11. NancyJill,

    I’d like to know how a young immigrant man from a country with serious terrorism issues and a history of mental health problems passed the FBI’s background check.

    Looks like they dropped the ball again.

    Like

  12. https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2021/03/23/affidavit-reveals-details-of-boulder-shooting-suspect-n42463

    “The document does mention, however, that using law enforcement databases, police were able to determine that the suspect had purchased a Ruger AR-556 pistol on March 16th of this year, six days before the shooting took place. Given the fact that the sale of the firearm was discovered using a law enforcement database, that tells us that the sale was conducted through a federally licensed firearms dealer and the suspect underwent and passed a background check before acquiring the gun.

    As for the motivation behind the attack, the affidavit doesn’t reveal any information. Boulder’s police chief has said that the suspect has undergone at least one interview with officers, but hasn’t said if the suspect mentioned anything about why he decided to target shoppers at a busy grocery store miles away from his home, nor have they revealed any possible connection between the suspect and the store where the attack took place.

    One other question that’s likely to come up in the course of the investigation is why, if family members believed that the suspect was “deeply disturbed“, as one brother told the Daily Beast, they didn’t contact authorities when they found him “playing with a gun” a couple of days ago. Colorado not only has a civil commitment law on the books, but in 2019 the state approved a “red flag” law allowing family members and law enforcement to petition the courts for the removal of firearms from those deemed by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others. So far there’s been no indication that the family sought an extreme risk protection order after discovering the suspect’s gun, and police in Arvada say the only contacts they had with the suspects were for cases of assault and criminal mischief. It appears the only case that was adjudicated by the court system was back in 2017, when the suspect was charged with 3rd degree assault for a high school classmate.

    Obviously there are still a lot of unanswered questions at the moment, but the lack of information isn’t stopping gun control activists from seizing on the shooting as justification for sweeping new gun control laws. President Joe Biden himself used the shooting to demand the Senate pass a pair of gun control bills imposing new restrictions on background checks during his remarks on Tuesday (in addition to calling for enactment of his proposed ban on modern sporting rifles and ammunition magazines), though it’s now clear that the suspect didn’t have any issues passing a background check before he purchased his firearm.

    Colorado already has a universal background check law and a ban on “high capacity” magazines as well as the “red flag” law implemented in the state last year, but the media, gun control advocates, and anti-gun politicians are ignoring all of the existing laws on the books while ensuring us that the next gun control proposal will be the one to make a difference. The affidavit released on Tuesday may not tell us everything we want to know about the suspect, but it’s clear based on what’s been made available that he was legally eligible to own a firearm, and that another gun control law wouldn’t have prevented his murderous and evil acts.”

    Like

  13. The Atlanta shooter was a Southern Baptist. The Boulder shooter was a Muslim. Both had issues with women….maybe the issue is male violence against women ie misogyny rather than religion.

    Never understood why DC is partially disenfranchised. And I never understood why there are two Dakotas. But i do know Hawaii was annexed bc of corporate greed and corporate control of the govt. It should have been independent. Then again so should Puerto Rico, Samoa, Guam etc. Either independent or statehood, any other arrangement is a fancy word for colonialism

    Like

  14. So a right wing group with the possible cooperation of the border patrol stages a fake illegal.crossing and its CNNs fault. Shoot the messenger. Does this mean claims of border crossings are hyperbolic?

    Like

  15. Interesting piece from The Gospel Coalition about churches and ‘politics’

    https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/church-disciple-politics/

    Why We Need the Church to Disciple Our Politics
    ___________________

    … What We Mean By ‘Politics’

    Christians deploy the words “politics” or “political” with three potential meanings. First, “political” is deployed imprecisely to mean partisan. One may say a church should not “be political,” but the church should not act partisanly.

    A second meaning is more nefarious, used to “cancel” discussion among Christians on an issue. Calling an issue “political” is sometimes a proxy for “don’t challenge my view.”

    A third meaning—which I use here—is the broadest sense. It has to do with individuals and institutions participating in the public square. Electoral (partisan) politics is but a slice of our political life, which includes good governance and serving our neighbors.

    Applying discipleship to our politics is neither easy nor intuitive, but some churches are developing worthy habits. Some churches find that corporate prayer provides frequent opportunities to enunciate pastoral attitudes and model the use of biblical language, all while praying about cultural and political issues in a nonpartisan way.

    Similarly, pastors need not wait until those rare verses about government come up in the course of expository preaching. Rudimentary biblical mandates like loving our neighbor, obligations to one another, and taming the tongue are ripe for application to self-governance and, frankly, to how we speak with each other about combustible topics. There is no “except for politics” escape clause from neighbor love, or from enemy love for that matter.

    Outside the context of Sunday morning worship, some churches have used panel-style conversations that feature mature believers discussing a given issue from different biblical angles. This practice models charitable back-and-forth on debatable issues.

    … Where we likely agree most on politics, sadly, is in our discontent. But we don’t have to repeat the same practices—or lack of them—that got us here. Consistent practices for the long term offer a church more options than partisanship and silence when a news headline inevitably pops.

    We know God cares about all of life, and we know his Word is sufficient for all of life. Let’s equip pastors and churches with the tools—and permission—to disciple our political consciences as we participate in this grand experiment called self-governance.
    _________________________

    Like

  16. At what point to we just disband the FBI?

    They’re a joke.

    This is a repost, with the added info being the FBI knew who he was, yet again. Maybe they should remove their heads from their @#$#@ and stop worrying about imaginary insurrectionists coming for them in the night and focus on the real problems.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9393669/Gunman-21-charged-murder-shooting-killing-10-people.html

    “REVEALED: Syrian-born gunman Ahmad Alissa, 21, was known to FBI and ranted about ‘Islamophobes hacking his phone’ before killing ten at Boulder grocery store with assault rifle he bought one week ago

    Ahmad Alissa of Arvada, Colorado opened fire at the King Soopers grocery store at 2.40pm

    He killed two people in the parking lot before entering the store, where he killed another eight people

    His motive is still not known; when he surrendered to police, he asked to speak to his mother

    In Facebook posts over the last 18 months, he complained that he didn’t have a girlfriend and hated Trump

    Alissa’s brother also told The Daily Beast he was ‘very anti-social’ and has been ‘paranoid’ since high school

    He described him as mentally ill, said he’d been bullied in school and that it was not politically motivated

    His sister-in-law said she’d seen him playing with a gun recently but did not suspect him of violence

    The victims range in age from 20 to 65; among them was a cop, shoppers and people who were getting their COVID-19 vaccine

    The shooting is the seventh mass shooting in the US in a week and comes six days after eight died in Georgia

    President Biden on Tuesday called for a nationwide ban on assault rifles and tighter laws on background checks”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.