12 thoughts on “News/Politics 4-8-22

  1. Of course they did.

    Grow the bureaucracy. Get everyone on govt aid, whether they need it or not. This is what happens when the fed govt just gives money away.

    “Calif. Sent Pandemic Food Stamps to Affluent Families”


    “News of the strange COVID payments started circulating quietly among neighbors and friends last year in several affluent beachside communities of North County San Diego.

    Food stamp cards carrying as much as $1,700 were arriving in the mailboxes of all students, even those living in multi-million-dollar homes at two local public high schools serving neighborhoods with some of the highest household incomes in the state. The cards were addressed to the students themselves, and some families with more than one child attending the same school received double the amount or more, at least $3,400 worth of cards.

    As more people discovered the government-issued largesse, local community online chatrooms were sprinkled with questions on whether the cards were illegal and should be sent back, along with complaints of teens buying sushi and other expensive fare from Whole Foods and other pricey organic markets or using the unexpected funds to throw cookouts and graduation parties. The debit cards can only be used for groceries at supermarkets or Amazon, not in sit-down restaurants or fast-food chains.

    Many parents of students receiving the cards, who requested anonymity to speak to RealClearPolitics, weren’t sure what to make of the checks, mainly because their families had never received food assistance from the state and federal government before. And even if they had, the sudden cash windfalls without any warning spurred a myriad of questions: Were they sent by mistake? Would using them trigger tax implications or put their children in a database designating them as recipients of government assistance? The answers from California’s Department of Social Services, which sent the checks, were “No,” “no,” and “no.”

    There wasn’t an easy answer for the broader, more penetrating query: Why did their students receive them from the state when more needy families attending different high schools in the same school district did not? Many of these families didn’t even qualify for the $1,400 in federal stimulus checks sent during the first year of the pandemic to households with incomes of $150,000 or less a year and single adults earning $75,000 or less. The terse information accompanying the P-EBT cards didn’t provide much clarity.

    The California Department of Social Services explained that the households were receiving Pandemic-Electronic Benefits Transfer, or P-EBT, cards as part of a federal program intended to compensate families who had children eligible to receive free or reduced-price school meals but not receiving them during COVID-related school closures in the 2020-2021 school year.

    Some of the parents of California students who received the P-EBT cards don’t remember the schools providing free breakfast and lunch to all students before COVID. However, there were schools in the same district that offered drive-up free meals for any students who wanted them during pandemic school lockdowns. That led to even greater confusion over why the federal government was trying to compensate families who either utilized that free-meal service or chose not to.

    An eligibility survey on a state website to answer the public’s questions isn’t all that helpful either. It includes questions about the child’s age, whether the majority of the students at the school attended in 2020-21 were enrolled in distance learning, and whether the child “was approved” to receive free or reduced-price school meals. If the answer was no to the last question, the survey responds that “at this time, it appears you may not be eligible for P-EBT 2.0 benefits.”

    But many of the parents the online survey denied already had the cards with pre-loaded cash in their hands. They have since inundated the California Department of Social Services with their calls and questions. And even after receiving responses – that they were sent the funds in compliance with state and federal law – they remain bewildered by the payments.

    In California, the broad eligibility rule for students receiving free meals is that a family of four must have an annual household income of $34,060 or less, and $48,470 or less for reduced-price school meals. In the communities in question – Fairbanks Ranch, Del Mar, Rancho Santa Fe, South Carlsbad, and Encinitas – the median household income ranges from $138,078 to $200,000, among the highest in the state, according to the most recent census data.

    Is This Happening Nationwide?

    The scenario most likely isn’t limited to some of Southern California’s wealthiest enclaves. A California DSS spokesperson tells RCP that 854 schools in the state fit into the same federal school lunch category as the two schools in North County San Diego where all students received the cards – Torrey Pines High School and La Costa Canyon High School. (Torrey Pines was ranked one of the best high schools in the nation by Newsweek magazine in 2015 and has 2,479 students, and La Costa Canyon High School, another top-rated secondary institution, has 1,600 students.)

    Hundreds of other California schools whose entire student body received the cards because they occupy a similar “universal” federal school lunch category as Torrey Pines and La Costa Canyon, with all students able to receive free lunch and/or breakfast.

    If all students at these schools received the cards regardless of income, as appears to be the case, it would amount to more than $1 billion in federal P-EBT going to California students who usually wouldn’t qualify for federal reimbursement for free breakfasts and lunches.

    The same issue is likely occurring in other states with schools that participate in “universal” lunch programs offering free meals regardless of income. A local Atlanta news outlet reported earlier this month that certain schools across the state provided the same type of universal lunch programs as California, and noted that “thousands of students” were receiving the cards.”


    “Misuse of Taxpayer Dollars?

    As COVID upended all Americans’ lives over the past two years, Congress passed nearly $6 trillion in emergency aid designed to fight the virus, assist families suffering from job losses, and help stabilize the economy. The funds were largely provided with no strings attached – meaning states and localities didn’t have to account for how the money was spent.

    But with COVID cases plunging across the U.S. and masks and many other related mandates being lifted, Republicans recently rejected a White House request for $22.5 billion in additional COVID relief money. Republicans have agreed to provide $10 billion more amid a growing debate about the need for greater accountability for the funds. In his State of the Union address, President Biden announced the creation of a new Justice Department task force to ferret out pandemic fraud and has since named a chief prosecutor to lead the effort.”


  2. Bring in the 🤡🤡🤡🤡…..

    We’ll start with allegedly “principled conservative” 🤡, Jonah Goldberg.


    Yeah, except he’s lying again.


  3. ——–

    Funny that…


  4. Next 🤡 up…..

    Poor Mr. Potato Head…. 🙂


  5. More 🤡🤡🤡🤡.

    They don’t like actual journalism.



  6. More groomers exposed at Disney….



  7. And more….



  8. Another predator exposed….



  9. “All the Big Guy’s Bag Men

    As the Biden gang’s corruption is exposed, the kingpin shouldn’t feel too secure in his seat of power.”


    “Joe Biden makes up for lacking the gift of gab in his grift of graft.

    He may call a “salon” a “saloon” and describe his wife as the former vice president. But the Joe Biden who fails in letters passes numbers summa cum laude.

    “The least wealthy [Obama] administration figure is Vice President Joe Biden,” CBS News reported in 2009, “whose net worth is estimated at just $27,012.” Times change, and so did Middle Class Joe’s net worth, which now hovers around $8 million, according to Forbes.

    But Forbes possibly missed some of the president’s fortune.

    We know from the emails contained on the computer of Hunter Biden, the Pablo Picasso of the family, that he paid his father’s phone bills and allowed his father access to his Wells Fargo account for over a decade. His business partner bankrolled thousands of dollars in construction at Biden’s Delaware home. This week, we belatedly discover the involvement of Hunter, at the solicitation of Ron Klain who urged him to “keep it low key” to avoid “bad PR,” in a scheme to raise money for his father’s residence as vice president.

    This ranks as the small stuff for Biden, Inc.

    Biden, Inc., grabbed at least $31 million from the Chinese. The feds arrested one of the shady figures paying seven figures to Hunter Biden, Hong Kong businessman Patrick Ho, for money laundering and bribery in an unrelated case (Ho was convicted and served time). One group with ties to the Chinese Communist Party gave $65,000 a month to the president’s brother, James, atop $100,000 a month and a $500,000 retainer to Hunter. Biden’s son, boasting experience with crack pipes but not oil pipelines, somehow made $1 million a year from Burisma in Ukraine.

    “It’s really hard,” Naomi Biden wrote to her father, Hunter, about the burdens of him serving as the clan’s breadwinner. “But don’t worry, unlike Pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary.”

    Spiro Agnew fell for taking 5 percent. Joe Biden snatching 50 percent, and not from petty government construction projects but allegedly for matters of geopolitical concern in China, Ukraine, and beyond would make Agnew look like a piker.

    And for every quid, there comes a quo.

    “I said, ‘I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars,’ ” Biden boasted of his threats to Ukraine’s leaders to withhold aid over a prosecutor who, coincidence of coincidences, investigated Burisma. “I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in’ — I think it was about six hours — I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a bitch — he got fired.”

    One can foresee Joe Biden leaving office the same ignominious way that his next-state neighbor Mr. Agnew did. The greedy corruption stands as the obvious reason for this. The other reason involves Joe Biden, a person whose ascension to the presidency stemmed entirely from political expedience (i.e., the best guy to beat Trump). The moment he looks like a liability — and one assumes it comes this November — marks the moment his removal from office goes from conservative pipe dream to a possibility that even some Democrats consider.”


  10. But muh narrative…..

    “Another January 6 Narrative Goes Boom

    Capitol Police did, in fact, let the protesters in the building.”


    “ow does a mob “illegally storm” the Capitol building when police let them in? That is the latest narrative-shifting question the media wants desperately to avoid after a federal judge on Wednesday found a January 6 defendant not guilty for his conduct during the protest at the Capitol that day.

    Matthew Martin was arrested in Santa Fe, New Mexico on April 22, 2021; he later was charged with the four most common misdemeanors related to the Justice Department’s prosecution of Capitol protesters: entering a restricted building, disorderly conduct, violent entry, and parading in the Capitol building.

    Those petty offenses comprise the overwhelming majority of criminal charges against the nearly 800 or so January 6 defendants. More than 150 people have pleaded guilty to the “parading” charge—many have been sentenced to a few months in prison.

    But those defendants might regret accepting the plea deal offered by the government after D.C. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden not only acquitted Martin on all counts but agreed with Martin’s assertion that he was “waved” in by Capitol Police officers. Martin, who opted for a bench trial before the Trump-appointed judge and testified in his own defense, entered the building around 3 p.m. through a set of doors on the east side. He walked through the Rotunda and stayed inside for about 10 minutes.

    For that activity—a right protected under the Constitution up until January 6, 2021—Martin’s life, like that of every other American ensnared in this abusive prosecution, has been destroyed. Following his acquittal, Martin spoke to reporters outside the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C. “I am very thankful for the judge’s verdict and hoping to get my life back together, get my job back,” said Martin, who was fired as a contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy after he was arrested a year ago.

    As Martin tries to rebuild the life his own government attempted to annihilate over a 10-minute jaunt through a public building which had been vacated by lawmakers, Martin might get the last laugh. His trial blew up one of the most animating features of January 6—that hundreds if not thousands of Trump supporters overran police and unlawfully invaded the Capitol. Despite a trove of video evidence, including security camera footage showing how law enforcement officers stood by as people filed in on both the east and west side of the Capitol, the myth that a “mob” broke down doors to gain entry persists to this day.

    But that narrative just suffered a major blow—and by a witness for the government, no less.

    Testifying under oath, a U.S. Capitol police official told the court that police indeed had allowed people to enter the building that day. BuzzFeed reporter Zoe Tillman, who is covering the in-person trials, reported the bombshell news:

    When Martin entered the Capitol through a set of doors on the east side, there were two US Capitol Police officers standing on either side,” Tillman wrote on April 6. “Video played at trial showed them standing still and for the most part not reacting to the crowd. U.S. Capitol Police Inspector John Erickson testified that given the large number of people, the officers understood they couldn’t stop them from coming in, but could only observe and try to make sure no one got hurt; Erickson wasn’t one of the two officers but spoke generally about the security perimeter and police response.

    The video, according to Tillman, also showed “Martin had waited to enter while the officer leaned forward to speak with another person, and then leaned back, reopening the passageway; Martin tapped the officer on the shoulder and the officer leaned back further.”

    In other words, Martin and others were allowed into the building.

    It’s not the first time video footage confirmed police officers did not attempt to stop people from gaining entry on January 6. Surveillance footage released under a court order in October clearly shows numerous Capitol police officers standing inside a set of doors on the west side of the building as hundreds walked inside over a nearly 40-minute period.

    So, one more allegation about January 6 is exposed as a lie, which can be added to the growing list of falsehoods.

    No, it wasn’t an “armed insurrection.” No, Officer Brian Sicknick was not bludgeoned to death by a fire extinguisher or killed as the result of any attack by Trump supporters. Zero police officers died as a result of January 6, not “several” as Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland maintain. No, “white supremacists” and “right-wing militia” groups are not responsible for what happened that day. No, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) was not in danger of being raped or killed. No, Kamala Harris and Mike Pence were not in the building during the breach, rendering the property off-limits to the public.

    It’s unlikely this latest revelation will stop Joe Biden from continuing to promote these lies, as he appears especially fond of using the talking point of blaming January 6 for Russian aggression in Ukraine. “[How] would you feel if you saw crowds storm and break down the doors of the British Parliament, kill five cops, injure 145—or the German Bundestag or the Italian parliament? I think you’d wonder,” Biden said during a speech on March 3. “Well, that’s what the rest of the world saw. It’s not who we are. And now, we’re proving, under pressure, that we are not that country. We’re united” in taking on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    Only in the imaginary world of Joe Biden’s deteriorating brain did any of that happen.”


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.