22 thoughts on “News/Politics 2-14-22

  1. The new worst thing evah!



    Seriously, stop laughing…… 🙂


  2. I’m sure Biden’s DoJ will be all over this. 🙄

    I mean after all, spying on the president is still illegal, right?

    “Clinton campaign paid to ‘infiltrate’ Trump Tower, White House servers to link Trump to Russia: Durham

    ‘Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.'”


    “Lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to “infiltrate” servers belonging to Trump Tower, and later the White House, in order to establish an “inference” and “narrative” to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, a filing from Special Counsel John Durham says.

    Durham filed a motion on Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of interest related to the representation of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.

    The indictment against Sussmann, says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work “for any client” when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented “purported data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.

    But Durham’s filing on Feb. 11, in a section titled “Factual Background,” reveals that Sussmann “had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign.”

    Durham’s filing said Sussmann’s “billing records reflect” that he “repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”

    The filing revealed that Sussmann and the Tech Executive had met and communicated with another law partner, who was serving as General Counsel to the Clinton campaign. Sources told Fox News that lawyer is Marc Elias, who worked at the law firm Perkins Coie.

    Durham’s filing states that in July 2016, the tech executive worked with Sussmann, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm 1 on behalf of the Clinton campaign, numerous cyber researchers and employees at multiple internet companies to “assemble the purported data and white papers.”

    “In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data,” the filing states. “Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.”

    “Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” Durham states. “In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign.”

    Durham also writes that during Sussmann’s trial, the government will establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (DNS) internet traffic pertaining to “(i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP).”

    Durham states that the internet company that Tech Executive-1 worked for “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers” for the Executive Office of the President as “part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP.”

    “Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump,” Durham states.

    The filing also reveals that Sussmann provided “an updated set of allegations” including the Russian bank data, and additional allegations relating to Trump “to a second agency of the U.S. government” in 2017.

    Durham says the allegations “relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic” that Tech Executive-1 and others “had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider.”

    In Sussmann’s meeting with the second U.S. government agency, Durham says he “provided data which he claimed reflected purportedly suspicious DNS lookups by these entities of internet protocol (IP) addresses affiliated with a Russian mobile phone provider,” and claimed that the lookups “demonstrated Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations.”

    “”The Special Counsel’s Office has identified no support for these allegations,” Durham wrote, adding that the “lookups were far from rare in the United States.””


  3. The senile president led by the pretend doctor made the Afghanistan pullout way harder than necessary.

    “Jill Biden Hampered Afghanistan Evacuation With Special Requests”


    “The disaster that took place in Afghanistan in 2021 no longer dominates the headlines, but the after-effects are still being felt. After the evacuation, which resulted in the murder of 13 American servicemembers and countless Afghans, the Biden administration is still trying to clean up the mess it created.

    With women and children set to starve in incredible numbers because of the haphazard pull-out, the president is now moving to issue an executive order that will use frozen funds from the Afghan central bank for humanitarian relief.


    BREAKING: President Biden is expected to issue an executive order to move some $7 billion of the Afghan central bank’s assets frozen in the U.S. banking system to fund humanitarian relief in Afghanistan and compensate Sept. 11 victims, source tells @AP https://t.co/pSimEOz9vR

    — The Associated Press (@AP) February 11, 2022


    The problem with such an order is obvious. The Taliban is a terrorist organization masquerading as a legitimate government. Any money sent into the country is going to be misused and appropriated for nefarious activities. As to giving compensation to the 9/11 victims’ families, that feels like a rather convenient throw-in as Democrats face electoral doom in November.

    Regardless, the question of how things got to this point remains important, and a recent report by the U.S. Army puts much of the blame on the decisions that emanated from the Biden administration during that fateful time. As expected, Joe Biden himself has already rejected its findings, but it includes a very interesting mention of Jill Biden.

    Per the testimony of Navy Admiral Peter Vasely, who was running the operations center at Kabul’s airport during the evacuation, the First Lady and others were making special requests that ultimately ate up “bandwidth” and hampered the mission.

    An admiral for the U.S. Navy claimed “high-profile” requests, including one from first lady Jill Biden, caused disruption to overall Afghanistan evacuation efforts last year…

    …”That’s accurate,” ​Vasley said when asked in sworn testimony for the report whether Pope Francis and First Lady Jill Biden intervened in evacuation efforts to request help on behalf of others.

    “I was being contacted by representatives from the Holy See to assist the Italian military contingent … in getting through groups … of special interest to the Vatican,” he said. “That is just one of many examples.​”​

    “I cannot stress enough​ ​how these high-profile requests ate up bandwidth and created competition for already stressed resources​,” Vasley added.

    What the exact request was from Jill Biden isn’t disclosed, but we can reasonably ascertain that it had something to do with prioritizing a certain person or group of people for evacuation.

    In a vacuum, you could look at such a request as being made in good faith. No doubt, there were lots of people on the ground in Afghanistan that deserved to be evacuated. But that doesn’t mean that it’s appropriate for the First Lady, who holds no elected office and has no actual role to play in the government, to get involved in a military operation.

    It was completely out of bounds for Jill Biden to put that kind of pressure on military leaders, who likely wanted to do their best to fulfill her request — given her husband is the president. That’s the danger in abusing relationships that include varying power dynamics. In this case, according to the report, the move by the First Lady led to negative real-world consequences, handicapping an already chaotic operation.

    “Imagine if this report were dealing with Melania Trump. How would the media react? I’d suggest this would be a full-blown scandal, no matter what the motivation behind the request was.”


  4. More….

    “Commander in charge of Kabul evacuation: White House and Jill Biden were ‘distractions’ during chaotic time”


    “Rear Adm. Peter Vasely, the top U.S. commander in Kabul during the evacuation, is speaking out about the chaos that ensued during the botched Biden withdrawal from that country. He makes it perfectly clear that the “distractions” coming from the people in the White House, including Jill Biden, did nothing but interfere with the plan that was in place. It wasn’t just distractions in the White House, either. Pope Francis and members of Congress hit him up for special favors during the evacuation, too.

    Vasely said that the Pentagon was being pulled in different directions from White House officials, lawmakers, members of the media, and from the Vatican, too. People requested special favors as it related to helping get people out of Kabul and essentially competed for the resources that were available during the evacuation process. The priority was to evacuate American citizens first, then legal American citizens (like green card holders), and then Afghans who helped American military. That is standard priority at the Pentagon but favors were being asked at such a high volume that Vasely felt under pressure to take “certain forces” away from the rescue plan in place.

    We now know what Rear Adm. Vasely experienced during the evacuation because of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the Washington Post. A 2,000 page declassified report has been released. The report includes dozens of interviews with military officials and the most detailed official account of the 17-day evacuation to date. As a reminder, the Taliban arrived as a massive force in Kabul on August 15, ready to take control. American military leaders were not at all confident in the Biden administration’s ability to manage the crisis. We know now that those doubts were justified.

    The long-standing practice of leaving no Americans behind simply didn’t happen. To this day, thousands of American citizens and green card holders are trapped, unable to get out. The same holds true for our Afghan helpers. They were promised the gift of coming to America after their service to our military yet the Biden administration turned their backs on so many of them. Most galling of all is when we continued to hear from the State Department that all of those who wanted to get out, got out. That was a flat-out lie. Blaming those left behind, stuck in Afghanistan, for their own predicament was always absurd. Are we to believe that the greatest military force on earth couldn’t evacuate all those who wanted to leave? The administration left many of them to fend for themselves.

    Thousands of phone calls, text messages and emails flooded the U.S. operations center at Kabul’s airport throughout the evacuation, prompting Vasely, a Navy SEAL, to divert personnel and establish a “coordination cell” responsible for processing the overwhelming volume of communications from Washington and beyond, he told investigators. Vasely said social media exacerbated the problem, broadening the “aperture of ambition” to the point that people even campaigned for the military to rescue specific dogs.

    “But you had everyone from the White House down with a new flavor of the day for prioritization,” Vasely told the Army investigators.

    The requests came from people or groups seeking to work through official and unofficial channels. In other interviews contained in the investigation report, U.S. troops described being inundated with pleas for help — voice mails and emails from people they had, in some cases, never met but who had discovered they were a part of the rescue operation.

    The calls for help became more frantic as it became clear the evacuation would not be extended. Among those who sought the U.S. government’s assistance were media outlets, including The Washington Post, who had Western journalists and Afghan staff members in harm’s way. This outreach is detailed within the report, and Biden administration officials underscored the point in responding to questions about the documents.

    This tells us that the military was left to fly by the seat of its pants. Because of Biden’s stubborn insistence of a shortened period of time for the evacuation with a hard date for ending the evacuation operation, people concerned about what they were seeing on the ground panicked. The whole operation was horrifying to watch, to be frank. Biden promised it wouldn’t be like the last hours in Vietnam yet it turned out exactly like that. Despite warning received in advance, the Biden administration was completely ill-prepared for the quick takeover of the Taliban. Imagine the pressure put on military leaders as the First Lady and the Pope pressed for special favors in getting specific people out.”


  5. ————


  6. 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡 alert.






  7. This has to be helping with the trucker shortage and supply chain problems, right?

    “Truckers speak for millions – tell Biden, Trudeau they are not the enemy

    What if … Justin Trudeau had met with the truckers the day they first arrived in Ottawa?”


    “What if … Justin Trudeau had met with the truckers the day they first arrived in Ottawa? 

    Instead of bolting and hiding out in an “undisclosed location,” what if Canada’s prime minister had emerged from the Privy Council building and talked to the Freedom Convoy drivers about their demands?

    Might Trudeau have defused the entire protest? Would the truckers have been satisfied that their cause was heard and gone home?

    After all, these are truck drivers, not thugs. Even under the microscope of a censorious press, during those first heady few days, when massive crowds appeared from nowhere to cheer on the drivers, they committed no crimes, no injuries, no looting. There was not a single arrest, much to the disappointment of the liberal media.

    More recently, as police moved in to dismantle the blockade at the Ambassador Bridge at Windsor, almost all the demonstrators peacefully decamped. CNN sounded downright disappointed to report that none went to jail.

    The truckers are speaking for millions of working people in Canada and around the world who are sick of COVID restrictions and increasingly skeptical of the “science” behind them. Canada’s drivers were set off by a new rule, imposed even as the pandemic crested, that required all truckers entering the country from the U.S. be vaccinated or self-quarantine. The rule seemed unnecessary considering that 85% of the truckers had taken the shot, and that most spend the majority of their time alone.

    The new mandate also seemed whimsical in that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other medical authorities have now proclaimed immunities from surviving COVID just as effective against infection as the vaccines. Truckers were praised as selfless essential workers as they continued to work through the pandemic, putting themselves in harm’s way. Presumably, many got sick and now have antibodies; they may not need the vaccine.

    What was Trudeau scared of? That the crowd of burly drivers might scoff at his perfectly coiffed hair? Not be properly reverent of his literature degree from McGill University? That the truckers might not respect a lifelong politician whose career rested on the fame of his father?

    Instead of engaging with the truckers, Trudeau ran like a rabbit, only to emerge from hiding to demean the protesters as a “fringe minority.” The irony is, of course, that Trudeau himself represents a minority, with his Liberal Party setting a record last fall for the lowest vote share of any party to ever form a government, winning a mere 33% of the popular vote. As in 2019, the Conservatives won the popular vote.  

    Trudeau’s response was reprehensible. His unwavering hostility was joined by officials in Nova Scotia who declared it illegal for people to cheer on the Freedom Convoy, threatening to impose fines of up to $10,000 for waving the Canadian flag. Ontario Premier Doug Ford more recently threatened truckers with $100,000 fines and a year in prison. Can these politicians hear themselves? Needless to say, faced with such tyrannical overreach, the truckers doubled down. The blockades on crucial U.S.-Canada border crossings have caused supply problems and began to shut down manufacturing in both countries.

    The protests may come to the U.S., as we predicted. And Joe Biden is poised to make exactly the same mistakes as Trudeau. Already his henchmen in the press have labeled the convoys right-wing extremists – because, you know, they don’t bow to Anthony Fauci and didn’t attend Ivy League schools. 

    The Freedom Convoy puts Biden in a pickle. When he recently sat down with the Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany, he celebrated our countries’ shared values, including “the foundational commitment to the dignity of workers and the need to treat all people with respect.” Question for Joe: does that include truckers?

    The reality is that Biden, like Trudeau, is a lifetime pol who has never worked with his hands and has no regard for people who do. He celebrates labor, writ large, because he is tight with union leaders who fund his campaigns, but workers? Not so much. “


  8. “The search for the origin of Covid-19

    Viral makes a compelling case for the Covid lab-leak theory.”


    “At the beginning of 2020, the consensus was that Covid-19 probably originated naturally, spontaneously. It was assumed to be a zoonotic virus that most likely leapt from a particular animal species to humans, either directly or through an intermediary, such as a different infected species at a market. After all, that was how HIV originated (in chimpanzees), influenza (in ducks and other birds) and, of course, SARS (in bats). And so it seemed likely that SARS-CoV-2 probably began in much the same way – through animal-to-human transmission in or around Wuhan, China, possibly in one of its suddenly infamous wet markets.

    This quickly became the official narrative. The world’s leading scientists promoted it in esteemed medical journals. Politicians, a few populist exceptions aside, endorsed it in public, as did the mainstream media. And for much of the pandemic, Big Tech removed social-media posts contradicting it.

    Yet over two years on, this so-called natural spill-over theory remains just that – a theory. Actual evidence to substantiate it, be it the discovery of infected market animals or ill food handlers, is still to be found. To put this into context, investigators took a few months to identify the first patients and then the origins of the SARS outbreak of 2003. And they did so with far inferior technology than that which is available to investigators today. And yet here we are, over two years into the worst pandemic for a century, and we’re still no closer to understanding where and how it emerged.

    As Matt Ridley and Alina Chan explain in their indispensable new book, Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19, this failure to explain how Covid-19 emerged matters, ‘not for assigning blame’, they write, ‘but for preventing future outbreaks’. So if Covid came from some part of the animal kingdom, that part must be identified. If it was produced by some farming practice, that practice must stop. And if it escaped from a laboratory somewhere, regulatory and safety measures must be reviewed. ‘Searching for the origin of Covid-19 could not and cannot be some idle pastime for a few curious scientists and internet sleuths’, they write, ‘it is a vital task for the safety of humankind and demands a rigorous, credible and evidence-based investigation by experts worldwide’.

    Rigorous, credible and evidence-based – Viral itself is all of those things. It is also a compelling, sometimes thrilling piece of detective work, with Ridley, Chan and a self-selecting team of largely Twitter-based truth-seekers chasing down leads in Chinese databases, and hunting down clues in academic journals, in their quest for the real origin of Covid-19.

    Does Viral find the origin? No, not conclusively. But it finds plenty of circumstantial evidence that points away from the natural spill-over theory, and towards another hypothesis – that Covid-19 leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, with the Wuhan Institute of Virology the prime suspect.

    Viral begins its story in the Mojiang copper mine in Yunnan province, where, in 2012, a mysterious pneumonia broke out among miners. Six became ill, with dry coughs, fever and aching limbs and the oldest three died.

    In 2013, a student at Kunming Medical University wrote a medical thesis about the Mojiang incident. He attributed the virus to the bats that infested the mines, and called for further investigation. Scientists from across China, including from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), 1,800 miles away, heeded the call, such was the concern about new SARS-like viruses. As Ridley and Chan explain, records show that the WIV team collected hundreds of samples from the mine, including one – known as Ra4991 – that remains the closest genetic match to SARS-CoV-2 yet found.

    According to Ridley and Chan, the WIV team ‘partly sequenced this new virus in 2017 and then fully sequenced it in 2018’. Yet much of this was hidden during 2020 because, for some unknown reason, Wuhan scientists changed the name of the viral sample, from Ra4991 to RaTG13. As Ridley and Chan explain, the connection between RaTG13 and the Mojiang mine didn’t become clear until 17 November 2020, when Nature published an addendum to an article by Dr Shi Zhengli, the director of the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the WIV. This addendum ‘acknowledged the existence of the Kunming medical thesis, it confirmed the story about the Mojiang mine, the testing of the miners’ samples at the WIV, the new name assigned to the sequence from the 4991 sample, and the sequencing of its full genome by 2018 rather than 2020. It had taken nine months for the WIV scientists to come clean.’

    Viral builds a compelling case for the lab-leak hypothesis. It demonstrates that the WIV was at the centre of a global effort to catalogue viruses with pandemic potential. It delves into the genetic make-up of SARS-CoV-2, highlighting a 12-letter genetic sequence – the furin cleavage site – unseen in other SARS-like coronaviruses, but which makes the virus so much more infectious. It shows that the WIV was engaged in so-called gain-of-function research, editing the genomic sequence of virus samples so as to make them much more, well, infectious. It points out that the aim of such research was to devise vaccines against these viruses. And it also reminds us that lab leaks are far from uncommon – for instance, several outbreaks of the original SARS virus have been traced to laboratories.

    In short, Viral demonstrates why a novel coronavirus with pandemic potential happened to emerge in Wuhan – a city home to a scientific institution dedicated to cataloguing and experimenting with novel coronaviruses. As Viral slyly puts it, of all the gin joints…”

    But Viral exposes something else, too – namely, the effort from the Chinese authorities and other interested parties to obstruct any proper investigation into the origins of Covid-19. Indeed, almost from the start of the pandemic in early 2020, the Chinese state seemed to be doing its utmost to impede any investigation. In February 2020, the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention announced that all scientific studies relating to coronaviruses now had to be approved by the higher authorities. The raw data relating to the early Covid-19 cases in Wuhan, including that of Covid’s first official victim, a 55-year-old man, were either destroyed or kept hidden. And the Mojiang mine itself, long disused, was placed under armed guard.

    Such actions are hardly those of institutions and state bodies with nothing to hide. After all, as Ridley and Chan note, if the Chinese authorities ‘wanted to quash rumours of a laboratory leak, the simplest thing to do would have been to share unredacted hospital records from Wuhan with outside investigators, alongside information on the locations and professions of the first cases. If these showed no connection to any virus laboratory in the city, it would argue against a laboratory leak.’ That they have failed to do so speaks volumes.

    But, as Viral shows, it has not just been the Chinese authorities inhibiting the search for Covid-19’s origins. Various international actors are implicated, too. The World Health Organisation has too often danced to the Chinese authorities’ tune, with its much derided, white-washed 2021 report on Covid’s origins a case in point. Likewise, certain quangos, such as the some-time Pentagon-funded Ecohealth Alliance, have sought to protect their considerable investment in the WIV by wilfully sidelining the lab-leak hypothesis. And the scientific establishment, from national chief scientific advisers to research bodies and institutions, have consciously and disingenuously downplayed the lab-leak hypothesis in order, it seems, to protect the reputation and autonomy of science.”


  9. And of course these clowns think that they should be the ones to decide what is “legitimate” and what isn’t.

    “Legitimate Political Discourse’ Is Latest Media Hoax”


    “Donald Trump famously called the Fake News Media the “enemy of the people,” but they should more appropriately be called “the enemy of the truth” – especially with regard to how Trump and his supporters are treated.

    It is hard to know whether the news anchors and reporters who shape the mainstream narrative are corrupt, stupid or just plain lazy, but they seem to be incapable of doing their basic job of informing the public of the facts.

    This all became self-evident during the Russia Collusion Hoax, when the New York Times and the Washington Post won Pulitzer Prizes for collaborating with anonymous fabulists who wanted to disrupt the Trump presidency. More recently, we’ve endured the Big Lie Hoax. Every time you’ve heard a reporter say that there is no evidence of widespread election fraud in 2020, you know that you are dealing with a person who lacks the one essential trait of a good journalist – curiosity. Open your eyes!

    Last week we witnessed one of the most shameful episodes in the history of journalism, as there was a tidal wave of fake reporting about what the Republican National Committee did when it chastised two GOP members of Congress in an exceedingly rare formal act of censure.

    According to the New York Times, by passing the censure resolution, “The Republican Party … officially declared the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and events that led to it ‘legitimate political discourse.’” That was shortened in the online headline to “G.O.P. declares Jan. 6 attack “Legitimate Political Discourse.”

    In fact, that isn’t what the resolution said at all. No such declaration exists. That is propaganda, plain and simple, and to watch the nation’s most famous newspaper engage in it is terrifying. But it wasn’t just one paper lying; this Democratic Party talking point was repeated nearly verbatim by dozens of anchors and guests on CNN and MSNBC, plus hundreds of reports in newspapers and journals and on the Internet, all repeating the same utter falsehood – that the RNC had made excuses for the Jan. 6 riot and labeled it “legitimate political discourse.”

    How do I know it is fake news? Easy. As a journalist with 40 years’ experience, I took the obvious step of reading the resolution for myself. Nowhere does it connect “political discourse” with the Jan. 6 violence. What the Republican National Committee actually did in the resolution was to censure Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger because of their role on the Democrats’ Jan. 6 Select Committee.

    “Representatives Cheney and Kinzinger are participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse,” the resolution declared, “and they are both utilizing their past professed political affiliation [with the Republican Party] to mask Democrat abuse of prosecutorial power for partisan purposes.”

    The resolution does not specifically define who is being persecuted by the Jan. 6 committee for engaging in “legitimate political discourse,” but you can bet no one on the Republican National Committee thought it was a reference to rioters smashing windows, assaulting police or desecrating the U.S. Capitol. The RNC later explained that the resolution was a reference to Americans being chased down with subpoenas and threatened with jail time because they had supported President Trump’s attempt to prove election fraud. But the media pundits stuck with their initial claim that the RNC had defended political violence. If reporters were doing their real job instead of carrying water for the Democratic Party, they could have looked up “discourse” in the dictionary and discovered that it refers to “written or spoken communication or debate.” There’s no way to apply that word to the Jan. 6 riot unless you are intentionally misleading the public, but that’s just what countless journalists did.

    To put it plainly, what was missing last week in almost all of the media reports was one brave reporter who stared back at Jake Tapper or Martha Raddatz or Joe Scarborough and said, “You know that’s not what the RNC resolution said. They never claimed that the violence on January 6 was legitimate political discourse, so let’s set the record straight.”

    That void of media truth-telling was despicable, only rivaled by the spectacle of Republicans rushing in to denounce their party leadership for condemning party disloyalty. This allowed the Trump-hating media to put together clips of the usual suspects – Sens. Lindsey Graham, Bill Cassidy and Lisa Murkowski, among others – pleading with their fellow Republicans to bend a knee and go along with the debasing Democrat agenda. Pathetic.

    But there was one hopeful note. When Margaret Brennan on “Face the Nation” tried to get Sen. Marco Rubio, to condemn the RNC and its resolution, he dug in his heels and pushed back hard:

    “Anybody who committed crimes on January 6 should be prosecuted,” he said, “and they are being prosecuted. But the January 6 commission is not the place for this; that’s what prosecutors are supposed to do. This commission is a partisan scam. The purpose of that commission is to try to embarrass and smear and harass as many Republicans as they can get their hands on.”

    Bravo, Sen. Rubio. Too bad no supposedly unbiased journalists could figure out the same thing. And if you wonder why most Republicans repeat the Fake News narrative instead of speaking the truth, consider what happened to Rubio when he engaged in actual “legitimate political discourse” without fear or shame.

    Because his comments flew in the face of the “official” narrative, the senator was branded by the mainstream media as a Trump sycophant (something which his record doesn’t support). Vanity Fair declared that “Marco Rubio’s mouth refuses to form the words ‘Trump was wrong.’” Newsweek wrote an entire 400-word story dedicated to a 20-word tweet from Kinzinger to make the point that Rubio was the true embarrassment to Republicans.”


  10. Vindication for Trump yet again.

    “Yes, Hillary Clinton spied on Donald Trump — while he was president”


    “Special counsel John Durham, who has been investigating the origins of the “Russiagate” hoax for the past year, confirmed in a court filing last Friday that former President Donald Trump was illegally spied upon by associates of Hillary Clinton in order to delegitimize his election victory and presidency.

    In the filing, which was obtained by the Washington Examiner, Durham said he has evidence that “Technology Executive-1,” known to be former Neustar Senior Vice President Rodney Joffe, worked with indicted Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann to exploit internet traffic data and access “dedicated servers for the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP).” Joffe then “exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump,” the filing says.

    Joffe also “enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university” who had access to “large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract,” Durham said.

    “[Joffe] tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” he added. “In doing so, [Joffe] indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign.”

    In other words, the Clinton campaign deliberately funded and ordered Sussmann and its other lawyers at Perkins Coie to monitor Trump and his allies, even after he took office, by any means necessary. The man they hired for this job, Joffe, hacked into private servers and exploited relationships he had with private companies to gather data he had no right to. If this isn’t considered criminal behavior, it should be.

    Durham’s filing proves the campaign to undermine Trump went far beyond what many suspected. They didn’t just spy on Trump’s campaign, they spied on his White House, and they did so by hacking into the federal government’s confidential servers and then using what they found to manufacture the narrative of Russian collusion.”


    And the frauds who run the FBI just ran with their false allegations rather than go after these clearly criminal acts from Clinton and company.


  11. “Video Excerpts from “Inside the Woke Indoctrination Machine”

    My WSJ op-ed with Andrew Gutmann “Inside the Woke Indoctrination Machine” has generated enormous attention. Watch excerpts from the training sessions cited in the article, with a lot more to come as part of the project I have launched at Legal Insurrection.”


    “Here is an excerpt from the Op-Ed:

    Last spring we exposed how two elite independent schools in New York had become corrupted by a divisive obsession with race, helping start the national movement against critical race theory. Schools apply this theory under the guise of diversity, equity and inclusion programming. Until now, however, neither of us fully grasped the dangers of this ideology or the true motives of its practitioners. The goal of DEI isn’t only to teach students about slavery or encourage courageous conversations about race, it is to transform schools totally and reshape society radically.

    Over the past month we have watched nearly 100 hours of leaked videos from 108 workshops held virtually last year for the National Association of Independent Schools’ People of Color Conference. The NAIS sets standards for more than 1,600 independent schools in the U.S., driving their missions and influencing many school policies. The conference is NAIS’s flagship annual event for disseminating DEI practices, and more than 6,000 DEI practitioners, educators and administrators attended this year. Intended as professional development and not meant for the public, these workshops are honest, transparent and unfiltered—very different from how private schools typically communicate DEI initiatives. These leaked videos act as a Rosetta Stone for deciphering the DEI playbook.

    The path to remake schools begins with the word “diversity,” which means much more than simply increasing the number of students and faculty of color—referred to in these workshops as “Bipoc,” which stands for “black, indigenous and people of color.” DEI experts urge schools to classify people by identities such as race, convince them that they are being harmed by their environment, and turn them into fervent advocates for institutional change. (read more)

    The article has generated enormous attention, shared widely on social media and approaching 2000 comments on the WSJ site, as of this writing. “


  12. Uhhhhh…..


    I’m guessing no…..


  13. 🤡 Alert!

    Be afraid!



  14. ‘Cuz he’s a 🤡


    A frightened and insecure 🤡 at that….


  15. Bingo.


    Liked by 1 person

  16. Warms me heart.

    But 81 million of you are still morons….. “Allegedly”

    There’s only one state that he hits 50%, that’s Vermont, where apparently crack is free.



  17. I’d just say that the church and Christians need to be cautious about all politicians, left or right, who will try to woo them for their own political benefit. There’s a real danger there among the world’s wolves and the church needs to be wise and, sometimes (probably always) wary in order not to fall into those traps.

    Cautionary tales abound.

    Focus on issues, but view (all) politicians will wariness.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. I’m sure everybody and their mother was trying to get ahold of someone so they could prioritize friend, family, colleague etc in the evacuation from Afghanistan. I have two students trying to get family out…. Not surprised Biden had her list, as did members of Congress (probably both parties), the Pope, and I’m sure retired military, current military etc. One can criticize all of them for overwhelming those in charge of logistics but the real blame lies in the Afghan Army and the overestimation of their strength by the US Army. They need to reevaluate how they take into account the corruption of their Third Wold allies.

    the “legitimate political discourse” was an attempt by the Republicans at messaging and they got too cute and Orwellian. As it was a criticism of the Jan 6th cmttee it was a wink wink nudge nudge to the Trumpist while at the same time trying to limit the inquiry and discipline their colleagues. And now they are trying to salvage their statement.

    As school boards continue to ban books and monitor teacher’s daily lessons, the right sounds quite hypocritical complaining about wokeness and cancelling.


  19. Reading American commentators trying to make sense of a Canadian news story and somehow connect it to American politics is amusing.

    First, the extremists were there the first weekend in Ottawa. There were far too many Confederate flags and swastikas to blame it on agent provocateurs. And far too many pictures of others tolerating these symbols — if you see a Nazi at your demo, grab his flag, punch him, run him out of there, none of which happened that first weekend. One of the leaders while condemning the Nazi flags felt flying a confederate flag was “freedom”.

    There are very few truckers at these demonstrations.In the beginning many supported the group thinking it was truckers but its clear the truckers have almost all left and its a core group who have remained. This is not (or is no longer) a working class demonstration, it is a fringe group who have within it an extremist component. Police today found a cache of weapons, body armour, etc in a trailer at the Alberta border demonstration. Hardly any truckers remain but the thugs are all there.

    This idea that Trudeau should have met the group and thus would have defused the situations is bizarre. If I saw a group surrounding my workplace with flags saying F*ck Henry and online content threatening me, I’d take at least a week off too. I’m sure his security detail didn’t want him anywhere near the protest. Its quite clear from the preparations made and the leaders own statements that the protesters didn’t want to speak to him — they wanted an end to all mandates and for him to resign (despite winning the last election).

    The lack of arrests is in part a failure of the Ottawa police and a general tendency of the Cdn police not to arrest people for minor protest crimes. They did arrest a dozen or so people at Windsor- Detroit but they were only charged with mischief so they were let go to appear later in court. They are ticketing every vehicle at the blockade everyday in the end the fines will add up, licenses may be lost etc. Its Cdn policing.

    Trudeau as your article states only won a minority — he won the most seats with 33% of the votes, the Conservatives won 34% of the vote but it was concentrated in rural western areas so they have less seats. However, the article you cite fails to mention the socialists NDP won 18%, the leftist Quebce Bloc won 8% and the Greens won 3% — so although the Liberals only won 33% the parties to the left of them on the spectrum won about 30%. Most of the current demonstrators support the right wing People’s Party who won 5% of the vote and some support the Conservatives ( the protest is dividing the part in half). In this context, the protesters are indeed a fringe group who Trudeau can safely ignore.

    Recent polls also indicate the fringe nature of the protesters and their lack of support. Polls show about 65% of Canadians strongly oppose the protests and one poll even suggests 60% think Trudeau should call the military to get rid of the protesters since the Ottawa police seem to be reluctant or even favour the protesters.


  20. I recently joined a facebook group Millennials for the Guillotine – mostly for the amusing memes, but if you think your right wing news sites are hard on Biden, the left is worse. So many of the disapproval percentage are not just Republican voters but also leftist disappointed Biden isn’t favoring their policies. He’s got to throw them a few bones to get their support back — forgiving student loans seems to popular


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.