6 thoughts on “News/Politics 6-9-21

  1. “Judge Orders Reinstatement of Virginia Teacher Tanner Cross, Who Objected to Proposed “Preferred Pronoun” Policy

    Alliance Defending Freedom: “A massive victory for freedom of speech.””


    “A court has just granted a temporary injunction reinstating Cross, according to a tweet from his lawyers, Alliance Defending Freedom:

    BREAKING: Tanner Cross, a Virginia elementary school teacher and ADF client who was suspended for raising concerns to the board about a proposed gender policy, has won a temporary injunction and the judge has ordered his reinstatement.

    A massive victory for freedom of speech.”

    “A Virginia teacher must be reinstated from leave after telling the school board he wouldn’t address transgender students by their pronouns, a judge ruled.

    The court granted Tanner Cross’s request for a temporary injunction immediately, saying the district must allow him to return to his position and stop banning him from Loudoun County Public Schools property.

    Judge James E. Plowman Jr. wrote that he granted the injunction because Cross’s rights to speech and religious liberty are central to the case….”

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Beijing’s useful idiots.


    “Just over a year ago, I stumbled across an intriguing scientific paper. It suggested the pandemic that was ripping around the world was “uniquely adapted to infect humans”; it was “not typical of a normal zoonotic infection” since it first appeared with “exceptional” ability to enter human cells. The author of the paper, Nikolai Petrovsky, was frank about the disease when we spoke back then, saying its adaptability was either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention”. He even broke the scientific omertà by daring to admit that “no one can say a laboratory leak is not a possibility”.

    But even though Petrovsky has excellent credentials — professor of medicine at a prominent Australian university, author of more than 200 papers in scientific journals and founder of a company funded by the US government to develop new vaccine technologies — I was still anxious when my story went global. His original document had been posted on a pre-print site, so had not been peer reviewed, unlike if it had been published in a medical or scientific journal. These sorts of sites allow researchers to get findings out quickly. Petrovsky told me his first attempt to place these seismic findings was on BioRxiv, run by prominent New York laboratory. But it was rejected; eventually he succeeded on ArXiv, a rival server run by Cornell University. Last week, however, he told me this important origins modelling paper had finally been accepted by Nature Scientific Reports after “a harrowing 12 months of repeated reviews, rejections, appeals, re-reviews and finally now acceptance”.

    This acceptance is one more sign of the changing political climate as suddenly it is deemed permissible to discuss the possibility that the virus causing havoc around the world might have emerged from a laboratory. Petrovsky has had to endure what he calls “the legitimacy” of his paper as a peer-reviewed publication being denied for a critical 12 months — and he is far from alone. “I have heard all too many tales from other academics who have been equally frustrated in getting their manuscripts dealing with research into the origins of the virus published,” he said.

    Bear in mind that in the heat of this pandemic, papers printed in important journals were peer-reviewed within 10 weeks; one rattled through the process in just nine days for Nature. But, like Petrovsky, I have heard similar stories from many other frustrated experts who confronted the conventional wisdom that this lethal virus was a natural spillover event. Some could not even get letters published, let alone challenge those key papers promoting the Chinese perspective which have since turned out to be flawed or wrong.

    Only now is acceptance emerging that the science establishment colluded to dismiss the lab leak hypothesis as a conspiracy theory, assisted by prominent experts with clear conflicts of interest, patsy politicians and a pathetic media that mostly failed to do its job. And yet, at the heart of this scandal lie some of the world’s most influential science journals. These should provide a forum for pulsating debate as experts explore and test theories, especially on something as contentious and fascinating as the possible origins of a global pandemic. Instead, some have played a central role in shutting down discussion and discrediting alternative views on the origins, with disastrous consequences for our understanding of events.

    Many scientists have been dismayed by their actions. “It is very important to talk about the scientific journals — I think they are partially responsible for the cover-up,” said Virginie Courtier-Orgogozo, a leading French evolutionary biologist and key member of the Paris Group of scientists challenging the established view on these issues. The rejection of the lab leak hypothesis, she argues, in many places was not due to Trump’s intervention but the result of “respectable scientific journals not accepting to discuss the matter”.

    The Paris Group, for instance, submitted a letter to The Lancet in early January signed by 14 experts from around the world calling for an open debate, arguing that “the natural origin is not supported by conclusive arguments and that a lab origin cannot be formally discarded”. This does not seem contentious. But it was rejected on the basis it was “not a priority for us”. When the authors queried this decision, it was reassessed and returned without peer review by editor-in-chief Richard Horton with a terse dismissal saying “we have agreed to uphold our original decision to let this go”. The authors ended up publishing their statement on a pre-print site.

    Yet this is the same prestigious journal that published a now infamous statement early last year attacking “conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin“. Clearly, this was designed to stifle debate. It was signed by 27 experts but later turned out to have been covertly drafted by Peter Daszak, the British scientist with extensive ties to Wuhan Institute of Virology. To make matters worse, The Lancet then set up a commission on the origins — and incredibly, picked Daszak to chair its 12-person task force, joined by five others who signed that statement dismissing ideas the virus was not a natural occurrence.”


    Follow the science!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. It’s almost as if they actually planned a pandemic in order to oust a sitting President.

    That, of course, is just a crazy conspiracy theory – much like COVID-19 being created in a lab.


    “The two most significant articles promoting the “natural origins” theory for the COVID-19 outbreak originated from scientists who were part of a response team of “experts” brought in by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine (NASEM), in response to a request from a White House official.

    These influential articles were used extensively by media organizations to push the natural origins theory, while simultaneously deriding alternative theories—including that of a possible lab leak—as conspiracy theories.

    The articles appear to have been part of a coordinated effort originating from a Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference organized by Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Dr. Jeremy Farrar, director of the British Wellcome Trust, which took place after a group of health officials scrambled in late January 2020 to respond to public reporting of a potential connection between COVID-19 and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

    Following the officials’ conversations, public discussion of the source possibly being a lab leak was actively suppressed by social media platforms, health officials, and the World Health Organization (WHO).”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “Chuck Grassley to DOJ: Explain Discrepancy In Application Of Law For BLM/Antifa vs. Capitol Rioters”


    ““The law must be applied equally without regard to party, power or privilege. When the Department of Justice treats similar criminal acts differently, such conduct erodes faith in our governmental institutions and the law.””

    “The latest leftist lie that the events at the Capitol on January 6th are the “worst act of political violence since the Civil War” is beyond laughable and aimed at the stupid, gullible, and uniformed (i.e. Democrat voters). This historically-inaccurate hyperbolic nonsense is being peddled by everyone on the left from Joe Biden right down to the dregs of propagandist “journalism.”

    The Democrats need to have a Reichstag moment in order to facilitate their shutting down of any and all dissent. They need the events at the Capitol to be a crisis, and they need that crisis in order to justify expansive federal surveillance and persecution of their political “enemies” among the American people.

    That “coup” and “insurrection” were just the ticket. After all, who needs an actual crisis to declare a war on “domestic terror”? Not the Dems because they have the media and Big Tech protecting this ludicrous lie that America was about to be undone by a ragtag bunch of selfie-takers.

    Federal law enforcement don’t really care if the stinky commie hippies are the “enemy” or if normal Americans are. Agency goals include, always, expanding power and control. If that creeps into monitoring, surveilling, and ultimately persecuting Americans, that’s a win.

    Our federal government is currently waging a “war on domestic terror,” a “war”against non-woke American citizens who reject the racist, communist left’s divisive and destructive agenda. That the events on January 6th were an historically minor incident that is dwarfed by (as but one example) Obama associate Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground setting off a bomb on the U.S. Senate side of the Capitol Building is beside the point.
    Yet under the premise that a bunch of random, unconnected, unarmed people could actually topple our government, the FBI beclowned itself raiding an Alaska couple whom they well knew had never even entered the Capitol building, and the federal government is holding people for months on end who are guilty of, at most, trespassing. Indeed, at least one man held in connection to the Capitol events was allegedly beaten so severely by jail guards that he is permanently blinded in one eye.

    This is police state intimidation, it’s totalitarian political oppression, it’s banana republic political prisoner nonsense that is an absolute embarrassment and disgrace not just to the DOJ and FBI but to our entire country.

    Meanwhile, BLM and antifa vandals, rioters, arsonists, and assailants are arrested and returned to the streets in record time. Among the many people pushing bail funds for these violent criminals was then-senator and now VP Kamala Harris.

    BLM and antifa criminals can literally commit arson, vandalism, assault, be filmed doing it, and be released the same day to continue their illegal activities. Meanwhile, people who wandered into the Capitol on January 6th to take few selfies, and who didn’t set fire to or vandalize a single thing (or set up some crazy ‘autonomous zone’ that explicitly rejects U.S. government and law) are being held, beaten, permanently disfigured, and charged to the fullest extent of the law.

    This disparate, blatantly unequal treatment of the Capitol Hill trespassers who are being persecuted not for actual crimes but for political purposes versus the criminal burning, looting, and murder by BLM and antifa throughout last summer (and continuing in Democrat-run cities to this day) is an outrage.

    Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is demanding an explanation from the DOJ about this unequal application of the law.”


  5. Of course….

    “The Largest Gun Registration and Confiscation Scheme Is Being Planned By the Biden Administration”


    “We know Joe Biden wants to confiscate guns. He’s open about it. He wants a ban on so-called assault weapons but also high-capacity magazines, an equally moronic term. His vice president, who is getting kicked in the teeth over the border crisis in what’s turning out to be a disastrous visit to Guatemala, also said that she would issue an executive order to ban these firearms. That’s not legal, but when has that ever-stopped Democrats from waging their war on the Second Amendment. The magazine limits don’t just apply to rifles, but also handguns, meaning the millions would become felons under the Democrats’ gun confiscation scheme. We all know the endgame, but they don’t have the legislative majorities to do so. Biden is then taking to tweaking current regulations through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. It’s through this avenue that his scheme to turn millions into felons is being planned as we speak. It’s significant for sure, with many in the industry calling it the largest gun registration and confiscation scheme in American history. Stephen Gutowski of The Reload has more:

    A new rule proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) at the request of President Joe Biden would make most firearms with stabilizing pistol braces illegal. Owners would have to register, turn in, or disassemble the guns to avoid federal felony charges. One government estimate found as many as 40 million guns could be affected.

    “It will be the largest gun registration, destruction, and confiscation scheme in American history,” Alex Bosco, who invented the stabilizing brace and founded the biggest manufacturer of them, told The Reload.

    The rule outlines a complex point system the agency wants to create to judge when a gun with a stabilizing brace should be classified as a pistol and when it should be classified as a short-barrel rifle requiring registration under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The proposal aims to reconcile the ATF’s decade-long track record of approving the braces on a case-by-case basis. That process was often criticized by members of the gun industry and gun-rights movement as arbitrary and contradictory.

    But gun advocates said the new system is worse than the old. While the system gives objective measures for the weight or length of the guns affected, opponents pointed to the seemingly random criteria used to determine which braces are legal and which aren’t. They said factors like whether the gun can be easily fired with one hand or whether an attached brace is adjustable in length have no basis in the statute, which sets the line between pistols and short-barreled rifles at whether the gun is “designed and intended” to be pressed against the shooter’s shoulder.

    “Today’s proposed rulemaking on pistol-braced firearms represents a gross abuse of executive authority,” said Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America, in a statement.

    Bosco said the rule would outlaw the vast majority of braces on the market and read like it was “reverse-engineered to make braces illegal.” He called it “arbitrary and capricious.”


    The rule is the result of executive action taken by President Biden. Biden has pressed for an aggressive expansion of gun-control laws since taking office but has made no progress on his legislative agenda on guns because the measures he wants can’t garner 60, or sometimes even 50, votes in the divided Senate. Instead, as part of his effort to bypass Congress and unilaterally impose new gun restrictions, he directed the Department of Justice and ATF to create proposals to ban so-called ghost guns and certain pistol braces in the aftermath of mass shootings in Georgia and Colorado.

    Gutowski added that some 10-40 million Americans already own firearms with stabilizing pistol braces.”


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 )

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.