29 thoughts on “News/Politics 7-5-22

  1. Confirmation of what many already suspected.

    Another busted narrative.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Victor Davis Hanson gets it.

    “Who Are the Real Insurrectionists?

    In truth, “insurrection” has been fueled by the Left since 2015.”


    “For 120 days in summer 2020, violent protesters destroyed some $2 billion in property and injured 1,500 police officers in riots that led to over 35 deaths.

    Because blue-state mayors and governors saw BLM and Antifa instigators as useful street soldiers, most of those arrested were never tried in court. Street thugs paid no price for declaring themselves de facto owners of downtown areas of Seattle, which police themselves conceded were no-go zones. Why did public officials in blue states ignore the violence? They were certain that it enjoyed majority support among their leftwing constituencies.

    Indeed, some leftist icons cheered on the violence. Well after the failed attempt to storm the White House grounds, in June 2020, the Democratic candidate for vice president Kamala Harris warned us that protestors were “not going to let up, and they should not.” What did Harris mean by “should not?”—when she knew numerous protests that summer had ended in terrible violence? Was she reckless in the manner Trump was said to be by encouraging a demonstration on January 6?

    The architect of the “1619 Project” Nikole Hannah-Jones assured the nation that vast destruction of (someone else’s property) was not a real crime. CNN’s Chris Cuomo gushed that violent demonstrations and riots were American traditions. Were these national voices urging calm during weeks of violent rioting and looting?

    There were no investigations, no congressional committees, and no voices of outrage from the left-wing establishment over months of such carnage. Indeed, much of the organization of the violent protests was facilitated by social media that was apparently unbothered that the medium under their stewardship was used to torch and loot.

    The Attack on Norms and Customs

    Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) urged her followers to tail, dog, and get in the faces of Trump government officials to the point that they would lose their freedom to even be seen in public. “And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere,” she famously admonished.

    Corporations began boycotting events deemed illiberal in fears of being boycotted themselves. Not saluting the flag for professional athletes was considered patriotic, saluting it insurrectionary. Mobs of leftists, cheered on by Democratic grandees, began tearing down statues of Confederate generals—but only as a preliminary to defacing the Lincoln Memorial and other statues of Lincoln, Jefferson, and Frederick Douglass.

    From 2015-16, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with impunity had wiped away thousands of her supposedly personal emails on a likely illegal private server. To cover her tracks, she ordered her devices destroyed, despite many being under subpoena.

    Clinton also sought to warp the entire machinery of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Clinton’s skullduggery was hidden behind three firewalls—the Democratic National Committee, the Perkins-Coie legal firm, and the Fusion GPS opposition research firm—to mask her likely illegal payments that enlisted a foreign national and ex-spy, Christopher Steele, to assist her campaign by destroying Donald Trump.

    Steele proved a clumsy, grifting con artist who tapped Clinton’s money, her friends, and her former subordinates in concocting a fake “dossier” of gossip, lies, and slander aimed at rendering Trump unelectable. No matter—Steele used Clinton’s State Department contacts and former government clients to compile and seed the lies among a toady media to undermine her political opponent and later sabotage the Trump presidency.

    The War Against Institutions

    The Left, in revolutionary fashion, has waged a sustained and unapologetic attack on constitutional norms and long-held institutions—whenever it senses they no longer prove conducive to its own radical agendas.

    Barack Obama declared during a funeral oration for the late Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) that the filibuster was racist and must end—although as a senator Obama had used it and declared it essential.

    The Electoral College? When the so-called “blue wall” fell, it transmogrified from valuable to a bankrupt fossil. In fact, the Left has wanted to create two new blue states (the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) to fast track four left-wing senators, and cram through a national voting law to make the states’ constitutional prerogative to require voter IDs illegal.

    There is no border. For two years, Joe Biden, again in true revolutionary fashion, has simply abrogated federal immigration law by fiat. In less than two years, he has welcomed 3 million illegal aliens without audit—or COVID-19 tests or vaccinations—during a pandemic in which unvaccinated federal employees and military personnel faced dismissal. Biden had taken an oath of office to faithfully execute the laws of the United States, but then shortly thereafter destroyed immigration laws as we knew them. No prior president has simply rendered an entire corpus of law null and void.

    Fueled by leftist billionaires, the Left waged a multiyear effort to elect big-city district attorneys whose agendas were pure nihilism: to not enforce laws, to release arrested criminals without indictments, to end cash bail, and prematurely to release convicted and hardened lawbreakers. The guiding principle was the revolutionary theory that the law was a simple construct used against marginalized peoples and the poor, and therefore simply could be ignored or discarded.

    There is no longer free speech on college campuses. Guests who voice minority opinions are in danger of being shouted down or put into physical danger—with the near certainty that their attackers will face few if any consequences.

    “Safe spaces,” dorms, and graduation ceremonies are often racially exclusive—all knowingly in violation of the spirit and the letter of once vaunted civil rights legislation. At many colleges, faculty and potential faculty are asked to write “diversity statements,” apparently in emulation of the old McCarthy “loyalty oaths” that likewise served both to eliminate any dissent and to frighten would-be apostates. Any dissident professor will have his biography thoroughly scanned for thought crimes, and then be libeled as a “racist” or “sexist”—as a clear warning to others to keep silent.

    There is a revolutionary war now being waged against the Supreme Court, because it no longer characteristically legislates from the bench. If the Court was once beloved as an iconic institution that was a sort of liberal judiciary, legislature, and executive all in one, it is now utterly despised as counterrevolutionary. Indeed, it is declared illegitimate, and its rulings to be ignored. ”


    But these aren’t the droids the Jan6 Clown Committee is looking for….

    Liked by 2 people

  3. “The 2022 House Midterm by the Numbers”


    “Midterm elections involve high stakes, a great deal of groundless guessing, and lots of numbers – oddly similar to lotteries. Unlike lotteries, though, the many numbers associated with midterm elections are meaningful. The six meaningful midterm “lotto” numbers below should help historically ground your anticipation of what is likely or unlikely to happen in this year’s House elections, as well as set the eventual outcome in its historical perspective. You will have to use your imagination about the numbered ping-pong balls and the machine mixing them up. On to the all-important numbers.

    Our first number is 7. Since 1912 when the size of the House was fixed at 435 seats, there have been 27 midterm elections. As most everyone knows, the president’s party gained seats in only three of these (1934, 1998, and 2002). But in four additional midterms, in-party’s losses were minimal (fewer than ten seats). 7 glimmers of hope for Democrats.

    Our second number is 58. The 7 in-party success story midterms are ordered in Table 1 by the net number of seats gained or lost by the president’s party. Gallup’s presidential approval ratings immediately prior to the election are included, with two exceptions. These are Coolidge’s 1926 and FDR’s 1934 midterms that pre-date Gallup’s collection of approval ratings.”

    “In each of these 7 midterm success stories, presidents were very popular. Approval ratings were in the mid-60s for three and likely a fourth – that being Kennedy in 1962. His mid-October rating was a strong 61%, but it missed the boost he received from the resolution of the Cuban missile crisis. The crisis occurred after the October poll, but before the election. In his first post-midterm poll in late November, Kennedy’s rating had soared to 74%. His approval on election day was probably in the mid to high 60s.

    The two presidents on the list with unmeasured approval marks, Coolidge and FDR, were certainly very popular in their midterms. Both midterms were bracketed by presidential landslides. The list’s lowest approval rating of a president is President George H.W. Bush in 1990 at 58%. To get on the midterm success story list, it takes a presidential approval rating of at least 58%.

    Our third number is 41. In contrast to success stories of popular presidents, parties of unpopular presidents routinely take a beating. The midterms of the eight least popular presidents in the 19 midterms since 1946 are listed in Table 2. The table starts with 1946, the first midterm in which Gallup’s presidential approval ratings were collected. Presidential unpopularity ranged from the mildly unpopular Obama (45% approval) in 2010 to the extremely unpopular Truman (33% approval) in 1946. In seven of these eight midterms with unpopular presidents, the in-party lost more than 25 seats. In two, losses exceeded 55 seats.”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Another media hoax, because it’s what they do.

    “Media Hoax: News Outlets Misreport Justice Clarence Thomas Quote in NY Vaccine Mandate Case

    “Clarence Thomas suggests COVID vaccines are made with ‘aborted children’,” Axios falsely reported. Several other media outlets filed similar dishonest reports, including NBC News and Politico.”


    “There are few things the mainstream media loves doing more than trying to make the conservative Justices on the Supreme Court look out of touch, ignorant, and/or factually challenged on legal matters. That is exactly what happened last week in the aftermath of a decision from the SCOTUS on a vaccine mandate/religious freedom case out of New York.

    On Thursday, our nation’s highest court rejected a legal challenge from New York health care professionals who sued Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) over the state’s health care worker vaccine mandate put in place in August 2021 by Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) before he resigned in disgrace.

    Justice Clarence Thomas was one of three on the court (Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito were the others) who argued that they should have heard the case. In Thomas’ dissent (see here, pages 47 and 48), he cited claims from the plaintiffs about how the vaccines were developed:

    “Petitioners are 16 healthcare workers who served New York communities throughout the COVID–19 pandemic. They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children.”

    Seems pretty straightforward, but that’s not how media outlets like Axios, Politico, and NBC News initially reported Thomas’ remarks. For instance, in the below tweet, you’ll notice Axios falsely claimed it was Thomas’ opinion:”

    “Not only that, but in their original report (which has since been corrected – sort of), they also made several false and irrelevant claims, as noted by author Dale Franks among others:”

    Liked by 2 people

  5. The Thomas report on abortion cells and vaccines isn’t misreporting; its bad editing and word usuage by Thomas or more likely his satff.

    “They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children.”
    This is a bad sentence it should be rewritten as
    “They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because, as they allege, the vaccines were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children.”

    Failure to insert “as they allege” and ambigous pronoun use could easily lead to the conclusion reaced by Axios. As a Supreme Court judge, Thomas (and his staff) should know better.


  6. Hanson has reached the point in his career where he can babble endlessly with no real purpose or evidence and it will get published.

    Pro Jan 6th and/or anti BLM supporters have created an unfounded meme that the 2020 rioters suffered no punishment for their crimes. Simply not true — 14,000 rioters were arrested and like many of the Jan 6th protesters were charged with minor offences, — breach of curfew, blocking roadways, vandalism, etc

    Although most Democratic politicians supported the demonstrations, to quote Harris “not going to let up” as supporting violence is a stretch when it could be more easily construed to say she encouraged the demonstrations to continue. Connecting ambiguous words to concrete violence is difficult (for the same reason, Trump won’t get charged for incitement)

    I read the “1619 Project”. There’s no call for violence in the book just an assertion backed by evidence that American history is a history of riots and violence. This culture of violence is described in the books as mostly European based against natives and later blacks. And yes, the US has a far more violent history than other western nations — not too dissimilar to Latin America which has a similar history of European violence. The book presents solid evidence for this history but never calls violence itself. However, it does point out much of the modern motivation for violence and racial hostility is a fear that African Americans will exact revenge wheresa African Americans have historically been more culturally conservative and simply want the Constitution appied to everyone equally. (this latter claim had less evidence than the historical claims; it’s an uneven but interesting book)

    There was no need for congressional committees on the 2020 riots as they were a matter of law enforcement. I doubt the Republicans would want a committee anyway as the Demcorats on the committee who use it as an opportunity to discuss police brutality and other reasons behind urban anger.


  7. Attack on Norms and Customs – I hardly called corporate boycotts as an attack on norms. That’s capitalism responding to customer complaints and needs. Don’t like capitalism? Neiher do I but that’s how it works.

    “not saluting flags” – athletes never salute flags, some may put their hand on their heart but that’s about it. They stand up for the anthem, some choose to kneel instead. Hanson is great at strawmen here; creating an offense that athletes wouldn’t do normally.

    The US is the only country I know who puts up and maintains statues of traitors and of generals who attacked their country. In general, statues of historical people are a waste of material. One doesn’t learn history from a statue – read a book. Every generation rewrites history, Hanson just doesn’t like the new version.

    No neo-con rant is complete without a dig at Hilary – still the emails, the server, etc. She used her own email!! as did most of the Trump admin. Steele was first hired by the Republican party and most of the research Hilary obtained was initially completed for Republican rivals in the primary. They quickly disowned the research they paid for. As opposed to the clumsy grifter portrayed by Hanson, Steele is a recognized expert and used by both BBC and Sky for Russina political inside information.


  8. The War against Institutions

    The filibuster isn’t in the constitution. It may not be racist (although it allowed the old South to stop things they disapporved of) but its stupid. It has led to a legislative deadlock and increased power to the executive and judiciary. Of course Obama and other Democrats used it before – if it’s available why not. But seriously its just plain dumb. 50 plus 1 is enough,

    The Electoral College is out of date, an anchorism when presidents and senators weren’t directly elected. In the past it may have made sense, but in an era of instant vote counts and mass communication, the popular vote should count.

    DC and Puerto Rico should be states – no taxation without representation. The political leanings of the colony or territory should not be the issue. The Republican attitude towards Puerto Rico if applied 70 years ago would have prevented Hawaiian statehood. DC wasn’t a state when created simply because the only permanent residents were slaves while most politicians and their staff were thought to live there temporarily. Since slaves no longer exist and DC has more permanent residents than some states, it’s time it was a state, too.

    There is no border – rhetorical excess. I still need a passport and vaccine to visit my brother. On the southern border, illegal migration in 2021 matched 2019 rebounding from a dramatic drop in 2020. There has been an increase in expulsions to go along with this. Usually March is the peak month for migration especially for agricultural workers, so it remains to be seen if 2022 is that dramtically different. The composition of the migrants is changing with many coming from further south and the Carribean.

    Leftist billionare??? that’s an oxymoron. I imagine this is a reference to Soros and his Open Society project. Soros is a classical liberal in the tradition of Adam Smith etc. Open Society is an organization he uses to promote classical liberalism – free market, free ideas, etc. Soros like most classical liberals thinks an open society will benefit everyone and give equal economic opportunity with the right institutions in place. He also thinks it will create a stable society in which his wealth is safe. Personally, I think he’s full of it, then again I’m a leftist.

    The idea behind abolishing cash bail is that it discriminates against the poor. You either deem a person safe and release them with no cash bail or you deem them unsafe and hold them without bail, The current system allows the rich to abscond but keeps the poor and innocent needlessly in jail. It also perpetuates the private bail bonds industry which is also exploitative. If a person is released on a cash bail who shouldn’t be, blame the judge not the group who put up the bail. Or we’d have been blaming the bail bondsmen all this time. This forces judges to take more responsibility and justify their bail decision.

    There was never absolute freedom on university campuses – try raising Marx’s theory of surplus value in a 1980s economic classroom; a good way to fail.

    The Supreme Court and its legitimacy is questioned for the way it was constructed and the way it ignored precedent. Aside from McConnell’s shenanigans, judges in English common law can’t simply ignore or repeal precedents. Roberts made that point in the Mississippi abortion case — he agreed with the other judges that the Mississippi law was valid but didn’t think it was necessary to repeal Roe vs Wade for it was part of 50 years of other rulings.

    And the Court is still making law. Rove vs Wade was a decision that declared an abortion law unconstitution and set parameters for new abortion rules. Today’s court just repealed a New York gun control law as unconstitutional and set new gun control rules. I fail to see how one is an activist ruling and the other is not.


  9. HRW,

    And you know they were how exactly?

    Did the media and corrupt DoJ say so, so good enough for you?

    And you do realize as well that many more protesters were never charged do to “prosecutor’s discretion ” as well, right?


    It’s funny to watch you pretending to believe everything the feds say as if it’s gospel now that Dems are in charge. 😀


  10. A perfect example of what I just said….

    Who is Ray Epps?

    He’s the fed plant on numerous videos of Jan6 telling protesters to storm the building.

    Yet he still hasn’t been charged. Why do you suppose that is?

    Its beecause he ran this fed operation and was their informant.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Why do feds refuse to answer the question about fed involvement?

    And why doesn’t the Clown Committee or the media care?

    It’s the Whitmer “Assassination” 2.0

    Liked by 2 people

  12. HRW, your comments on the filibuster are built on your assumption that “50 plus 1 is enough”. The problem is that when the country is closely divided, you get 51-49 one year, 48-52 two years later, and it goes back and forth. Who’s to say that bare majority should be able to do whatever it wants – affecting everyone – when almost as many people disagree?

    You say that makes it hard to get anything done. Well, it should be hard to get things done on issues where the country is closely divided. Maybe if the country is close to 50-50, we should let things be – not create new laws that half the country doesn’t want and might undo a few years later.

    Similarly, your comments on the electoral college assume a democracy where states don’t really matter. But the founders did not intend a pure democracy, and states did matter.

    It’s an interesting question whether or not states still do matter. Do laws have to be the same everywhere? Or can California be left alone to be California, and Texas to be Texas?

    Liked by 4 people

  13. AJ – district attorneys always have discretion and in most cases it’s due to lack of evidence or simply not worth the time. However, data collected does suggest over 14 000 charges and almost 100 federal charges. The FBI and local police were actively policing the protests.

    There were FBI agents on Jan 6th just as they were at BLM protests. FBI agents routinely infiltrate any political group deemed radical and then encourage actions leading to arrests. They’ve been doing this for decades. With some minor groups, more were FBI agents than actual members. Was it Ray Epps? Highly unlikely. Most agents will disappear and be never seen again. The naivety of the right who are outraged and shocked amuses me.

    Epps providing encouraging words could not have caused the violence. If all it takes is a few encouraging shouts to cause a riot and criminal behaviour, I have to question the intelligence of the people there. The evidence so far suggests there was a plan or idea on how to change the outcome of the election and lawyers were involved not Epps.

    Did I say Trump orchestrated the events? No, I said it would be impossible to prove his words led to violence as an analogy of Hanson’s claim that Harris’s words incited violence. Now if you think Harris’s words caused violence, a consistent application of this logic would say Trump incited violence — and its no to both.


  14. Kevin – you have a point. The swings back and forth from one party to the other do cause problems in terms of policy. Its the main problem of First Past the Post and electoral districts. It encourages two party systems, false majorities and policy swings. However, this problem is usually found in a lower house or unicameral legislature. To eliminate these problems in a lower house, the non Anglo-Saxon democratic world uses a variant of proportional representation. This increases the number of parties in the legislature and rarely does any one party rule, this resutls in the middle group of parties agreeing to work together for a limited period of time producing a moderate course of centrist policies.

    In terms of the Senate, I would think the filibuster and the electoral college undermine states such as Texas and California and empower Wyoming and Vermont at their expense. Rural areas almost always have a more powerful vote per capita and regional identies are almost always taken into considereation around the world but in the US, its rather extreme in that an electoral vote in Vermont or Wyoming is worth three-four times as much as California or Texas — this doesn’t encourage regional and state identity, it promotes some at the expense of other states. With a Senate where each state gets two votes, the empty rural states already have disportionate power, add the filibuster and electoral college and a small minority could hold the Senate hostage. The filibuster and electoral college are not needed for states to have their voices heard.


  15. 52 shot in a city of 8 million over a long weekend in the summer can be expected especially in the US. However, NY State is in the middle of the pack in terms of murder by gun at 2.7 deaths per 100,000. If a state, DC would be the highest but the highest states are Louisiana, Missouri, Maryland and South Carolina with rates 2-3 times as much as NY. Now we can blame the cities in the first three but South Carolina?? If you look at murder rates in medium and large cities NYC comes close to the bottom. The average murder rate is 12.8 per 100,000. NYC is at 5.6. As Democratic cities go, NY is well run and quite peaceful.
    Interesting to note NY State has the second lowest rate gun deaths per capita. Only Massachusetts is lower. Gun control works. Gun deaths include accidents and suicides — less guns = less accidents, less suicides, less murder. There is a correlation between sucide rate and access to guns.


  16. I live in one of the poorest districts in Canada. Once I retire, I’m selling my overpriced home and finding a cheap winterized cottage by a lake. I actually like it here but economically it makes sense to retire in a place with a lower cost of living. If I was the mayor of Philadelphia, I’d take my pension and move too.

    The poll is an open ended question about what concerns your family. Quite normally a person would reply with some economic concern – work, bills, inflation, etc. It’s interesting that the pollsters clumped them altogether. In terms of political concerns affecting their vote, I believe the answers would be different — still heavily weighed towards economic concerns but depending on the demographic surveyed abortion might overweigh economic concerns for many women. If the election is about Biden or the economy, the edge goes to the Republicans, but abortion/Jan 6th as a political issue may out weigh economic concerns to the benefit of Demcorats. And as elections esp in the US are all about turnout and demogrpahics, the abortion issue may motivate more young women to the polls than usual to the Republican detriment. (I still think the Republicans will gerrymander enough to win more seats, but their voter base will continue to dewindle.


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.