17 thoughts on “News/Politics 11-29-22

  1. Surprised?

    Not really. No one vets Democrats for prominent positions anymore, especially if they check the right boxes on the grievance spectrum, or this clown would have never made it into govt in the first place.

    “Biden Transgender DOE Official Charged With Felony for Allegedly Stealing Luggage

    Brinton faces five years in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both. He has been on leave for over a month.”


    “Alpha News reported that Sam Brinton, the deputy assistant secretary of the Office of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition at the Department of Energy, faces felony charges after allegedly stealing a woman’s luggage.

    The MIT graduate has made news for displaying his “genderfluid” style but also, in the past, made it no secret he has a “pup play” fetish. He even gave “Kink 101” workshops on college campuses. There’s also the anti-Catholic drag queen society he belongs to that mocks nuns.

    The MSM gobbled up all those facts about Brinton, showing him off to prop up Biden’s “inclusive” administration.

    And yet I do not see this all over the MSM.

    Brinton is charged with Theft/Take/Use/Transfer Movable Prop-No Consent. It is a federal offense.

    Brinton faces 5 years in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both.”


  2. This woman will push anything that keeps teachers from going to school, regardless of the effects on children.


  3. Yet another reason to dislike lawyers.

    “The Little-Known Lawsuit Lobby

    Understanding the influence of nonprofit activist groups and special interests is key to understanding the country’s sociopolitical landscape”


    “The Capital Research Center (CRC) works to shed light upon activist groups that seek to influence American public policy. Such groups are important to a healthy civil society, but the fact that many are not widely known—or their activities not widely understood—is problematic if one values a well-informed citizenry. To illustrate this, consider CRC’ s new report on the “Lawsuit Lobby,” or the organized special interests representing plaintiff-side trial lawyers.

    In the 2020 election cycle, OpenSecrets rated sixteen of the twenty top political action committee (PAC) contributors to Democratic federal candidates as being either “solidly Democrat” or “leans Democrat” (the remaining four gave heavily to candidates from both parties). Of these sixteen PACs, one was affiliated with Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), and fourteen were associated with labor unions—a traditional and widely-recognized Democratic constituency. The lineup for 2022 looks very similar.

    The last of those sixteen PACs, however, was rather different. It sent 97 percent of its contributions to Democratic candidates, yet it represents a constituency that most Americans probably don’t readily associate with Democratic politics: trial lawyers. Few are likely familiar with the American Association for Justice (AAJ), the membership association that lobbies on behalf of the professional interests of more than 20,000 plaintiff-side civil litigators nationwide. Fewer still understand what that means in practice. Indeed, the AAJ’s very name is unlikely to prompt thoughts of lawyers and lawsuits.

    That was not always the case. When the AAJ decided to change its name from the Association of Trial Lawyers of America in 2006, its reasoning essentially boiled down to the fact that it was concerned with being seen as a special interest group for lawyers. Perceiving a need to “win back the public in both the jury box and the ballot box,” the group’s research had apparently demonstrated that “if our message is or seems to be only about helping lawyers, we lose.”

    Of course, promoting the interests of trial lawyers is what the AAJ does, and Democratic lawmakers certainly appear to have reciprocated for the support they receive. Take a notable example from last year. Buried in the 2021 budget bill passed by the Democratic-controlled House was an amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that would have permitted lawyers operating on a contingency fee basis to immediately deduct expenses related to their lawsuits. Not only is it easy to see how this might incentivize certain attorneys to bring less-than-ironclad cases, but the estimated cost—as much as $2.5 billion over 10 years—would have amounted to “a direct income transfer to plaintiffs’ lawyers, who will turn around and finance Democratic election campaigns,” to quote the Wall Street Journal. The paper’s editorial board called it “the definition of a corrupt political bargain.”

    Were it not for the substantial media coverage that the provision received, the effort might well have flown under most Americans’ radars. That might have been the point. The AAJ has long sought this particular tax break on behalf of its members, yet it also recognized that “a stand-alone bill to help lawyers” had little chance in Congress. Instead, the group determined that it needed “to tuck it into something.” Its inclusion in the budget bill was brazen enough for the Washington Examiner to write that the provision alone “would be sufficient grounds for voting it down.”

    Another example can be found in the AAJ’s strong opposition to limits on attorney’s fees, such as those that were included as part of the proposed Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017—which the AAJ vigorously attacked. While the relative merits of everything that was included in that bill are open to reasonable debate, one of its objectives was to limit attorney’s fees to a percentage of the benefit actually received by the plaintiffs themselves. Not only would this seem like common sense to many ordinary observers, but mounting evidence suggests that excessive fees relative to plaintiff benefit is a legitimate problem in class actions and elsewhere. The bill passed the House over uniform Democratic opposition, but ultimately died in the Senate.”


  4. Sure fraud.

    Let’s all take the advice of the 2 groups responsible for unleashing Covid on the world, you and your Chinese partners.

    He and Dems would do this here were it not for the 2nd Amendment.


  5. “Voters Favor More Drilling, Fewer Rules To End Diesel Fuel Shortage”

    “Due to dwindling supplies, diesel fuel prices are up 50% from last year, raising the cost of food, transportation, manufactured goods, and even gifts.”

    So Biden’s answer…..

    Drill in South America and let corrupt dictators make some cash instead of Americans.


    “With the holiday season upon us, the gift-giving and feasting seasons are also in full swing. But this year, Americans will find the prices they pay for holiday essentials higher than ever. Much of that is due to the soaring price of something we all take for granted: diesel fuel.

    Diesel fuel prices are up roughly 50% from last year, in large part due to fast-dwindling supplies, affecting the cost of everything, including food, transportation, manufactured goods, even gifts. Ships use diesel fuel. So do trucks and trains. Desperate farmers need diesel to fuel their tractors and other farm equipment. It all adds up to higher costs.

    Can something be done about this? Americans overwhelmingly answer yes, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.

    In the poll, we asked 1,359 adults the following question: “What should government do to alleviate the diesel shortage?” The online I&I/TIPP Poll, taken from Nov. 2-4, has a margin of error of +/-2.8 percentage points.

    Respondents were given, in order, the following possible responses. Responses 1 to 4 were randomized to avoid any order bias:

    1.”Encourage more drilling and refining of oil.”
    2.”Keep imposing strict limits on carbon-based fuels to reduce climate change.”
    3.”Return to the rules and standards for energy production that prevailed in 2020.”
    4.”Tax oil companies if they don’t produce more oil.”
    5.”Do nothing.”
    6.”Not sure

    Americans mostly favored No. 1, encourage more drilling and refining of oil to boost diesel and other fuel supplies. It garnered an overall response of 39%. A close second, at 36%, was “Return to the rules and standards for energy production that prevailed in 2020.”

    Coming in a distant third, at 25%, was “tax oil companies if they don’t produce more oil,” followed by 22% who selected “keep imposing strict limits on carbon-based fuels to reduce climate change.” The latter response tied with “not sure,” also picked by 22% of respondents.

    “Do nothing” was the least favored response, garnering just 3% from voters. Plainly, based on the polling data, Americans want government to do something and not just ignore the problem.”

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Apple only cares about keeping their low cost slave labor in China’s work camps who make their products. The rest is just noise.

    “Elon Musk Wants Answers About Apple’s Support Of Censorship”


    “Apple suspended most of its advertising on Twitter, according to the blue bird app’s new CEO Elon Musk on Monday. Now, Twitter’s chief is asking questions about Apple’s censorship practices to his more than 119 million followers.

    “Apple has mostly stopped advertising on Twitter,” Musk wrote. “Do they hate free speech in America?”

    LBRY, a publisher that describes itself as the “bitcoin” of publishing, outlined the company’s own experience with Apple censorship in a response to Musk’s post.

    “During Covid, Apple demanded our apps filter some search terms from being returned,” the company wrote back. “If we did not filter the terms, our apps would not be allowed in the store.”

    The response caught Musk’s attention.

    “Who else has Apple censored?” Musk wrote in a quote tweet to amplify the post.

    Musk revealed a few minutes later that Apple threatened to suspend Twitter from its app store, “but won’t tell us why.”

    Giving Twitter the boot over ambiguous standards would closely resemble the company’s decision to strip Parler, a pre-Musk free speech alternative to Twitter, from the Apple app store last year. Days after the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, Apple colluded with other tech conglomerates to take Parler offline. Apple and Google barred Parler from being downloaded on their devices while Amazon stripped the platform from its web hosting services.

    As nationwide protests broke out in China over the weekend threatening to undermine the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under President Xi Jinping, Quartz revealed that Apple plugged a crack in the regime’s “Great Firewall” that dissidents exploited to communicate. Apple’s latest iOS update released in November placed new restrictions on “AirDrop,” a file-sharing feature on iPhones that allows users to share files directly from one phone to another (and consequently under the nose of government monitors). The update erased unlimited use for Chinese users only.

    “Rather than listing new features, as it often does, the company simply said, ‘This update includes bug fixes and security updates and is recommended for all users,’” Quartz reported. “Hidden in the update was a change that only applies to iPhones sold in mainland China: AirDrop can only be set to receive messages from everyone for 10 minutes, before switching off. There’s no longer a way to keep the ‘everyone’ setting on permanently on Chinese iPhones.”

    Apple’s new update to benefit the CCP is neither a recent development nor an isolated incident. According to a report from The New York Times last year, Apple routinely compromises privacy and security practices to appease communist leaders.

    “Apple’s compromises have made it nearly impossible for the company to stop the Chinese government from gaining access to the emails, photos, documents, contacts and locations of millions of Chinese residents, according to the security experts and Apple engineers,” the Times reported.”


    Enjoy your slave labor made IPhone.


  7. It’s what Dems and the Deep State do best.

    “Appointment of Special Counsel Amounts to Election Interference and Sets Dangerous Precedent”


    “While the Republicans kicked off the 2024 presidential race with the announcement that former President Donald Trump was again running for president, in perhaps the ultimate sign of our ignominious times, the Democrats, in effect, kicked off their half of the contest three days later by appointing a special counsel to escalate their political prosecution of him.

    This is where “our democracy” stands today: with its purported defenders engaging in the singularly anti-democratic act of siccing a hyper-politicized law enforcement apparatus on a candidate for the highest elected office, on dubious grounds, thereby subverting the political process by which we decide who represents us.

    At a minimum, no doubt to an approving President Joe Biden, his law-enforcement arm is now engaged in what amounts to election interference against arguably the president’s top challenger—ironically probing in part Trump’s alleged interference with the transfer of power in 2020, when Trump could make the case that the deep state did the same to him from the inception of Russiagate in 2016 onward.

    Worse, with Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel, the prospect of the former president being charged and convicted of something, anything, is more real than at any time during the perpetual campaign to purge Trump from the body politic.

    Our ruling class really does wish to “lock him up,” or at least hold that threat over the former president’s head for maximum political gain.

    There are many layers to the surreal lawfare assault on Trump worth peeling back—all of which point to the fact that our core institutions are willing to burn themselves down in service of their own power and privilege.

    For starters, we have the inherent third-world nature of the current president, by way of his attorney general, pursuing criminal charges against his predecessor and present challenger. This is an extension of the third-world, Soviet show-trial-style Jan. 6 committee preceding it. The law enforcement apparatus carrying out the investigations has time and again acted, third world-like, as the ruling class’s sword and shield. Such third-worldism in our politics—weaponizing the national security and law enforcement apparatus against ruling-class foes—has now been normalized and institutionalized.

    Next, there are the beyond-dubious grounds on which the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) legal pursuit is putatively based. No Justice Department has ever pursued such probes, on such grounds, concerning such debatable charges, under such circumstances as this one. The 2024 presidential election may hinge in large part on what case(s) the DOJ can make over a document dispute—as even federal law enforcement has acknowledged is at issue with the Mar-a-Lago materials—and the manner in which a president contested an election.

    Setting aside for a minute the contempt with which the DOJ and FBI have treated Trump time and again, looked at on the merits, the agencies have punted far more clear-cut cases concerning the handling of documents by officials with far less authority than the commander-in-chief. To my knowledge, there is little if any guidance on what constitutes “unlawful interference” with the transfer of power, or election certification—meaning, at very best, the DOJ is dealing in hypotheticals and unique matters of interpretation. In other words, the grounds for legal pursuit of Trump by his successor’s administration are shaky and the cases to be made are novel, to put it mildly.

    If federal prosecutors—starting with the attorney general—acted with even a modicum of discretion, they would have immediately dismissed even the thought of pursuing anything but open-and-shut cases, overwhelmingly supported by law and precedent, when it comes to prosecuting a former president and current candidate. Instead, by characteristically holding Trump to a different standard than any president to come before him, our preeminent law-enforcement agencies are undermining the rule of law.

    Another aspect of the story is Garland’s artful attempt to insulate himself from an inherently hyperpolitical prosecution that the DOJ initiated in the first place, and that he ultimately calls the final shots on anyway—and all while the president’s son, not to mention other family members, who monetized patriarch Joe’s office through dealings with our worst adversaries, face no special counsel. Talk about a double standard.

    Then there’s Smith’s checkered record in spearheading past baseless pursuits of Republicans during his time as the head of the Obama-era Justice Department’s public integrity section. His office’s reckless prosecution of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell on bribery charges led to an embarrassing rebuke at the Supreme Court, which overturned the Republican’s conviction by a nine-to-nothing vote. The special counsel has also been implicated in the IRS’s targeting of conservative nonprofits during the Obama years.

    And then, of course, there’s the myriad ways the prosecution can and will be exploited to hobble candidate Trump, cast a cloud over the GOP primary process, stymie congressional Republicans likely to probe aspects of Jan. 6, 2021, and perhaps the DOJ and FBI themselves, and sideline those members involved in contesting the 2020 presidential election—all while distracting from the Biden administration’s misdeeds.”


  8. Joe’s plan is to keep breaking it until it’s fixed. Ta da!

    “How Joe Biden caused the diesel supply crisis he is complaining about”


    “During recent public appearances, President Joe Biden has continued to complain about energy prices as well as the potentially catastrophic shortage of diesel that has been forecast to hit the United States soon, particularly in the northeast. Of course, he never takes the blame for any of this himself. He instead tries to blame the “greedy” energy companies or, of course, Vladimir Putin. He has called for bans on oil and gas exports and even suggested a mandate that diesel stocks be maintained at a higher level. But a new report from the Institute for Energy Research addresses the actual root of these problems. What we’re facing is a significant loss in refinery capacity in the United States and its various territories. We’ve lost more than a million barrels per day in production capacity, but rather than working to rebuild that capacity, the White House is issuing new edicts that will result in diminishing it further.

    President Biden is complaining about diesel prices and production and his Administration is looking at banning petroleum exports or placing minimum requirements on diesel stocks, which they think will fix the problem. The real problem is that the United States lost one million barrels a day of refinery capacity due to reductions in demand from COVID lockdowns, refinery conversions to biofuels due to lucrative subsidies and onerous environmental regulations.

    Emissions rules and general regulations have increased under the Biden administration, raising operating costs and causing some refineries to either shut down or not expand operations. The Biden Administration is doing nothing to fix the real problem. Instead, it is putting new environmental requirements on a refinery in St. Croix that could help the diesel situation in the Northeast.

    Banning petroleum exports (which are already at severely low levels) would only cut off markets, making the American oil and gas industry even less profitable, thereby disincentivizing any efforts to expand capacity. And as for an executive order directing a specific amount of diesel to be kept in stock, well… that’s simply insane. You can’t order more diesel to magically appear with a few scribbles of a pen. Someone has to produce the required oil, move it to a refinery, and create the diesel.

    Sadly, as mentioned above, refinery capacity is what we’re lacking. We were already down to the refinery capacity we had in 2016 and now we’ve taken another major hit. As the IER report notes, the EPA shut down the Limetree Bay refinery in St. Croix at the end of last year, bankrupting the former owners. It was sold to West Indies Petroleum and Port Hamilton Refining and Transportation, but a fire at the facility in August of this year interrupted production. But now the EPA is ordering the owners to apply for a new Clean Air Act permit. That will require the installation of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of new monitoring equipment and delay the reopening of the refinery for up to three years.

    The St. Croix refinery was previously processing 650,000 barrels of oil per day. It produced huge amounts of diesel fuel that could be making its way to the northeast right now. But the refinery is sitting idle while the EPA works its regulatory magic and we are potentially only weeks away from not having enough diesel to keep the supply chain in operation and homeowners not being able to obtain heating oil or kerosene just as winter is setting in.”


  9. The Schifty One says rules are for everyone but him.

    Funny how his view changed when he’s on the other side, huh? Hypocrite.

    “Schiff doesn’t know if he would obey a GOP subpoena to testify”


    “How many times have we been lectured by Adam Schiff during his endless appearances on CNN and MSNBC about the “obstructionist” Republicans and various Trump associates who failed to cooperate with the J6 committee hearings? We already know how seriously Congressman Schiff takes such matters because Steve Bannon is currently facing a serious stretch behind bars for refusing to appear after he was sent a summons. But now that the GOP is preparing to take charge in the House and begin some investigations of their own, how will Adam Schiff respond if he is the subject of a subpoena? Based on an answer that he gave to Dana Bash yesterday, we’ll have to wait to find out. You see, the subpoena will have to meet his personal standard of credibility to avoid having him simply ignore it. (Conservative Brief)

    Democrats pushed to have Steve Bannon prosecuted for not complying with a Congressional subpoena, but now it is Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff who is not willing to guarantee that he would comply if Republicans subpoena him.

    He appeared on the CNN show “State of the Union” on Sunday when host Dana Bash mentioned the topic of Congressional investigations.

    “The incoming oversight chair, James Comer, told Punchbowl News in an interview, ‘I don’t believe congressional investigations have a whole lot of credibility now. I blame Adam Schiff for that, but it’s also both parties to blame for investigations in the past. I want to change that.’ What’s your response?” she said.

    My apologies for the cliffhanger in the excerpt, but Schiff’s tirade was really a classic moment of political finger-pointing and obfuscating in the history of cable news. He first tees off on James Comer, accusing him of “not taking seriously” a number of investigations handled by the Democrats. He lists investigations involving Russia, Ukraine, and, of course, January 6th. He then lumps them all together as investigations into the “serial abuse of power by Donald Trump.”

    That’s when Bash tosses out her closing question and asks Schiff what he will do if he himself is subpoenaed. He responds by saying he would need to “consider the validity of the subpoena.” He makes a few vague references about respecting the need to “follow the law,” while implying that others have not. But he wraps it up by declaring that he would need to “look at the legitimacy or lack of legitimacy of what they do.”

    So what Schiff is basically doing here is declaring that he will be the final judge of whether any investigations in the House chaired by Republicans is “legitimate” enough for him to comply with a subpoena. Surely it’s crossed his mind that Steve Bannon might have had some questions about the “legitimacy” of a subpoena to appear before a committee investigating a riot that he didn’t even attend. Or perhaps that his communications with the President were privileged.

    So how is Schiff somehow immune to the power of the subpoena that landed Banon in front of a judge? “


  10. Why not?

    Expose it all.

    We had to sit thru months of their one sided mockery of a fair hearing, so let’s hear from the other side now, in the interest of fairness.

    “Don’t Shut Down the January 6 Committee – Supercharge It!”


    “Now that the US House of Representatives will be under Republican control, assuming Santa Claus doesn’t deliver Democrat ballots to a few key swing districts as an early Christmas present for the Democrat party, the new House GOP leadership will determine the fate of the January 6 committee.

    Will GOP leaders shut down the committee? Far-left Mother Jones believes it, “Will be coming to an end.” They also think that the GOP will want to, “Exact revenge on the panel by attacking its work—and its members.” Revenge against the two RINO Republican committee members is done as neither will be returning to the next Congress.

    The January 6 committee is a hyper-partisan gaggle of Trump-hating members of Congress, consisting of a Democrat chairman, 6 Democrat committee members including Reps Adam Schiff and Jamie Raskin, and two token Republicans, who loathe Donald Trump even more than their Democrat colleagues, Reps Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

    In a delicious twist of fate, neither Republican will be a member of the next Congress, Cheney shellacked in her GOP primary and Kinzinger wisely not seeking reelection, preferring to take his crocodile tears on left-wing cable news shows.

    Despite their stated goal of investigating the so-called “attack” on the US Capitol on January 6, the true goal is to tar and feather Donald Trump through endless media leaks, eventually turning their “evidence” over to the politicized Department of Justice, which will dutifully indict and prosecute their political opponent just like in a third world banana republic dictatorship.

    But Democrats always have a plan B, whereas Republicans rarely even have a plan A. Since Democrats lost control of Congress and the January 6 committee, and since Donald Trump recently announced his candidacy for President in 2024, plan B calls for the committee’s work seamlessly handed off to a Special Counsel. This is attorney Jack Smith, whose wife, was a producer on “Becoming”, a film perhaps jumpstarting Michelle Obama’s presidential aspirations, and who donated $2000 to Biden’s presidential campaign. Let’s see if this receives the Ginni Thomas treatment. I suspect not as hypocrisy is a Democrat specialty.

    Now that the “bring down Trump at any cost” committee has served its purpose and handed off its two-year long waste of time and resources to a political hatchet man special counsel, what should Republicans do with such a committee? The knee jerk reaction would be to shut it down. But perhaps that’s the easy way out for establishment Republicans who prefer to lick their wounds rather than fight back.

    A better idea would be to renew the committee and stack it with Freedom Caucus Republicans and a few “Never-Biden” Democrats, if any exist. Names like Reps Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Chip Roy come to mind.

    Then let the real investigations begin. There are so many questions that have been ignored and need answers.

    Start with explaining how then President Trump’s speech on January 6 incited an insurrection, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” Those words are hardly a call to arms, despite Democrat efforts to edit the words “peacefully and patriotically” out of his speech to the point that even left-wing Snopes called them on the omission.

    Then ask why despite President Trump offering and authorizing National Guard troops deployed to the Capitol ahead of January 6, the media and January 6 committee claim otherwise. The committee should subpoena Speaker Nancy Pelosi and DC Mayor Muriel Bowser to explain why they refused Trump’s offer of assistance.

    The Chief of the Capitol Police can explain why officers opened doors for and ushered protesters into the Capitol. The Committee can demand and release tens of thousands of hours of video showing what really happened on January 6, rather than relying on what Liz Cheney says happened.

    They can then ask Mrs. Pelosi how it was that her filmmaker daughter was present to film the events of January 6. If Trump’s speech an hour earlier incited the “insurrection”, it’s remarkable that Alexandra Pelosi could get her film crew to the Capitol immediately to set up and begin filming, unless this was all prearranged.

    FBI Director Christopher Wray can be asked under oath to explain the FBI planting informants into Proud Boys and Oath Keepers to monitor and likely incite the January 6 protests. Just as the FBI had a dozen personnel infiltrated into the Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot, more feds than entrapped kidnappers.

    When the House Homeland Security Committee questioned Director Wray recently, he tap-danced Fred Astaire style and didn’t answer questions about how many feds were part of the January 6 protests and what role they played.

    Did the FBI instigate and orchestrate the protests? Or did they have advanced knowledge and chose to ignore it in pursuit of a political agenda? If the FBI had confidential human sources already embedded, they had to know days or weeks ahead of January 6 that something would occur, throwing water on Trump causing a spontaneous uprising. What did the FBI know and when did they know it?

    The new Republican January 6 committee should also get to the bottom of who Ray Epps is and what his role was in all of this. Epps was on the FBI most wanted list, encouraged everyone to go into the Capitol, and now is off the list and has gone to ground. Who is he and what was he doing that day? These are all questions that should be answered under oath. Then there is the mysterious suspected pipe bomber that the sleuth FBI just cannot seem to identify.

    The new January 6 committee should subpoena phone records of everyone in Pelosi and Schumer’s offices in the days leading up to January 6. Who was calling or messaging whom? Let’s see if this was a spontaneous protest or an orchestrated event to kneecap President Trump. Pelosi and Schumer should be questioned under oath about their role in and knowledge of the January 6 events.”


    Expose it all.


  11. Just a reminder that today is the day many R’s will throw in the towel and vote against their long held principles, policy, and biblical standards.

    “Same-Sex Marriage Vote Set for Tuesday”


    “Driving the news: Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced on the Senate floor that the final vote on the bill will be at 3:45 pm ET on Tuesday.

    The bill was fast-tracked by an agreement to allow votes on amendments from Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah), James Lankford (R-Ind.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) aimed at protecting religious freedom.

    Monday’s vote was held open for several hours as three GOP senators who have supported the bill – Sens. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Todd Young (R-Ind.) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) – withheld their pivotal votes until a deal was reached.

    The three senators, who all represent heavily Republican states, have been the subject of some of the most intense lobbying by conservative activists.

    What they’re saying: Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), one of the few Republicans who have been backing the bill from the beginning, told Axios he, too, has heard from constituents and activists in recent days voicing concerns about the bill.

    “There’s so much out there now. A lot of people are confused,” he said, “I’ve had some friends call me up, express a concern.”

    But, he added, “I’ve had an equal number or greater number expressing support.”

    Supporters of the bill include many religious groups, including the Mormon Church and a network of Orthodox Jewish groups.”


  12. VDH asks a question….

    “Was Trump Our Captain Queeg?

    And will the NeverTrumpers finally be exposed to have been as contemptible as the NeverQueegers were in The Caine Mutiny?”


    “The Left, the NeverTrump Right, and many independents are tiring of Donald Trump’s recitations of prior, however justified, grievances at the hands of the media, the Democratic Party, the administrative state, and hard-core Left.

    The conventional wisdom runs that Trump’s whines and victimization recitations reveal deep paranoias, and increasingly to an obsessive degree. We are told that his near neurotic obsessions with the unfairness of his critics are alienating the independent voter, who finds Trump’s strolls down 2020-21 memory lane the same-old, same-old ad nauseam.

    True, Trump’s occasional recklessness contributed to many of his misadventures. At least at some point, friendly critics suggest, he might have realized that his nationalist/populist agenda, his orphaned outsider status, his lack of prior political experience, and his estrangement from the Republican political hierarchy, bipartisan Washington, D.C. media and government fixtures gave him no margin of error—despite what prior presidents and our current commander-in-chief have been accorded.

    The haters would have hated Trump regardless, But his tweets and ad hominem retorts served to disguise their peremptory venom while instead highlighting his own retaliatory crudity.

    “Fact-checkers” doted on every Trump statement, nitpicking them to find some exaggeration, or untruth. Fine. But then these same hypercritics simply went comatose during the Biden Administration, with little care that Biden spins fantasies daily, from a son lost in the Iraq War to insulting claims that he passed his student loan amnesty in the Congress by a close vote, and on and on. With Trump, voters got real achievement with coarseness, with Biden utter failure with near senility.

    The media lied about supposed felonious behavior of the two Trump sons during the Russian collusion mania. The same reporters snoozed when Hunter Biden all but served up a guilty writ of felonious behavior on his laptop. Yet Hunter and the Biden accomplices were given de facto exemption by the Department of Justice and “50 former intelligence officials” who were willing to lie about the laptop’s authenticity rather than risk the chance of seeing Trump reelected.

    What, then, are we to make of Trump’s endless tales of maltreatment? Is he a genuine victim or a “victimized” near-neurotic, or neither, or both? The question again is apart from what he accomplished and what now is in Trump’s self-interest. Clearly it would be more advantageous for him to move on, speak of his plans for a second term, contrast his own past record with the Biden catastrophe, and refer to balloting only in terms of reform to increase greater scrutiny and audit—but not replay the injustices done to him in 2020.

    Target Trump
    Yet the truth is that Trump was a victim, no matter how much or how tiresome it is that he recites the endless script of injustices. And his victimizers have far more to answer for than their victimized target.

    The record is clear: no president in U.S. history has ever been impeached twice. None has ever been impeached and then tried as a private citizen out of office.

    Remember, in both rush-to-judgment politicized efforts, there was no special counsel’s report, and no lengthy cross-examination of witnesses. The first impeachment writ was based on a clumsy phone call in which Trump suspended aid to an often compromised Ukrainian government until it investigated the Biden family’s corruption and collusion with members of the Kyiv apparat and state-related corporations.

    Trump did not cancel the approved aid in quid pro quo fashion, but eventually greenlighted a package that included offensive weapons, ironically vetoed by the prior Obama-Biden Administration.

    His allegations of Biden family illegality were not just part of partisan pressure, but prescient given what we know of the Biden family syndicate from Hunter’s former associates and his own self-incriminating laptop.

    Trump’s Justice Department certainly did not go after candidate Joe Biden, much less raid his home, or otherwise harass a potential rival to his reelection. By such impeachment standards, Joe Biden would be in the danger zone by railing at American ally Saudi Arabia, and radically altering long-standing U.S. foreign policy, because he was angry the kingdom would not flood the world with cheap oil before the midterm election. Ditto his pre-midterm selfish efforts to beg enemies like Venezuela and Iran to help assuage his unpopular and self-created energy crisis.

    Trump was certainly reckless in cheering on volatile demonstrations on January 6, 2021. But he did not plan or condone the violence. The act of unarmed but often violent buffoons trashing the Capitol building was sordid, but they were clowns, not insurrectionists. There has been so much misinformation and disinformation about that riot that we will have to await a disinterested investigation. In the meantime, recall that Officer Brian Sicknick did not die by the hands of violent protestors as is still alleged by Joe Biden and many members of the media.

    The name and identity of the officer who shot and killed an unarmed Ashli Babbitt were suppressed for months. Reporters and leakers alike attest that numerous FBI informants were ubiquitous among the protestors. And the January 6 committee deliberately banned questions about lax security. Ditto communications between Capitol security and Nancy Pelosi’s office.

    In any case, the day’s violence did not compare with the still uninvestigated 120 days of largely non-stop looting, arson, assault, and death, all orchestrated by BLM and Antifa that were often contextualized and excused by Democratic mayors, governors, and congressional officials. And there were plenty of iconic targets such as the torching of a federal courthouse, a police precinct, and an historic church across from the White House.

    Storming the Capitol is a mortal sin, but so is attempting to rush the White House grounds to injure a president and his family. That failed leftwing mob effort was cheered on by the New York Times, with its snarky headline “Trump Shrinks Back.”

    For 22 months the media cheered on leaks from Robert Mueller’s special counsel dream team. House Intelligence prevaricator, Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) habitually offered outright lies concerning the culpability of the president, without a single retraction or apology when they were exposed as utterly untrue.

    Collusion was better defined as either the Obama-Clinton disastrous reset policy that appeased a thuggish Putin, or Hillary Clinton’s efforts to destroy the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency with the false charge of Putin partnership.

    No one in retrospect can seriously argue that Trump colluded with the Russian government to corrupt an election. In fact, the truth was far worse than that false allegation. His projectionist accuser Clinton most certainly did collude through Christopher Steele’s use of Russians, or Russian-based sources that fed him a litany of lies he then turned around and built upon with his own concoctions. In a just world, Clinton would be indicted for hiring foreign nationals to work for her campaign, by using stealth DNC funds to hire opposition contractors to frame the innocent, and for lying about her own role in forging such a conspiracy.

    In this entire sordid process, the obsessed FBI disgraced itself through doctoring writs, losing subpoenaed records, and leaking to a toady press. Its dream team included the amorous members Peter Strzok and Lisa Page who were either fired or resigned from the team in disgrace. Mueller himself proved either non compos mentis or untruthful in his final testimony before Congress. His lieutenant Andrew Weissmann confirmed right-wing allegations that he was a rank partisan out to get Trump.

    No Speaker of the House has ever torn up a president’s State-of-the Union Address on national television as did Nancy Pelosi in an act of historical disgrace. CNN ruined its reputation and was rendered inert by its fixations with Trump that were nightly manifested through exaggeration, hearsay, smears, rumors, and lies.”


  13. Never forget the cruel and heartbreaking way the “medical experts”, and medical profession treated innocent people. They further victimized the folks least likely to do be able to do anything about it..

    We’ll never know, because they continue to hide their botching of this from the start. And Dems and the media continue to enable it.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Another DC clown jury conviction which will be thrown out by higher courts.


  15. Sure Mitch.

    As for the media, I love it when the anti-Israel in every matter frauds call someone else anti-Semitic. LOL. 🤡🤡🤡🤡


    “in recent weeks, we’ve seen Jew-hatred promoted by rapper and designer Ye (formerly known as Kanye West), basketball player Kyrie Irving, and the legion of ignorant haters inspired by their bigotry. On a per capita basis, Jews are the victims of more hate crimes in America than any other group; over 10 times as many as Asians or Latinos, more than twice as many as Muslims or African Americans, and 50% more than episodes of violence pertaining to sexual orientation or gender identity.

    We Jews are attacked in the streets, in synagogues, and on college campuses. Real Jew-hatred is a serious problem, which makes it even more disturbing when accusations of antisemitism are leveled for political reasons, as happens too often against former President Donald Trump.

    Last month, President Trump posted on Truth Social, “No President has done more for Israel than I have. Somewhat surprisingly, however, our wonderful Evangelicals are far more appreciative of this than the people of the Jewish faith, especially those living in the U.S. Those living in Israel, though, are a different story – Highest approval rating in the World, could easily be P.M.! U.S. Jews have to get their act together and appreciate what they have in Israel – Before it is too late!”

    This entirely accurate statement was described as “antisemitic” and “insulting” by White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. But then, Jean-Pierre has been known to smear Jews and supporters of Israel. In 2019, she wrote that “Israel may have committed war crimes,” and that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee uses “severely racist, Islamophobic rhetoric.”

    She previously worked for Moveon.org, an organization that supports vicious Jew-haters Linda Sarsour, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar, as well as the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel. So forgive me if I don’t take her opinions on antisemitism seriously.

    Sadly, many American Jews don’t appreciate how important Israel is, both for their own safety and for the Jewish people. President Trump is, in fact, so popular in Israel that, were he eligible to run, he would likely be elected prime minister. “


  16. You can get 5 years for stealing luggage? Was it filled with gold or drugs? Srsly, this is what is wrong with the US prison system – far too many people spent far too much time in prison for minor crimes.

    Measures to prevent the spread of covid did not lower the immunity of children. At the very least it’s impossible to prove children’s immunity has lowered because of covid measures. There’s simply too many factors to take into account.

    I’m always amused that Republican leaning sites expose lobbying groups that favor Democrats and Democrat leaning sites expose lobbying groups that favor Republicans. The only conclusion a neutral observer can reach is that there is an incredible amount of corruption.

    I should use that survey on how to solve the diesel fuel crisis in my data management math class on how to construct a biased survey question. It’s a leading question with leading answer options. The answer is not to lower EPA standards unless of course you are willing to live in the vicinity of a refinery. I live in a rust belt city centre – EPA type regulations are needed to maintain air quality. Those who wish to negate EPA type regulations for cheap fuel prices should volunteer to live near the refinery.

    It’s unlikely the Republicans will continue the Jan 6th committee. They will be inviting perjury when they call the people they support whereas many Republincan politicians wish this will all go away. The Democrats would love for the Republicans to continue the Jan 6th investigation – nothing motivates their base to vote than that committee.

    For those who think the DOJ is investigating Trump because of his announcement to seek the Republican nomination, there is just as many people who believe he lauched his campaign so early to hopefully avoid any DOJ investigation as it would be labelled political. Trump needs to keep running for an office, any office in order to discourage any investigation of his past behaviour. He’s being investigated for tax fraud, tax evasion, Jan 6, stealing documents, etc; it is thought that regaining the presidential office is his only hope to stave off investigations and convinctions.

    The behaviour of the Court will motivate the Democratic base well into the next election. The Democrats will reward the motivation by continually to legislate into law current rights that seem threatened by the Courts. Support for gay marriage, birth control rights, abortion rights, etc are in the majority in the US and many Republicans politicians know this. It puts them in a tough spot – do they risk being primaried or should they be worried about the general election. As long as these types of questions and bills are in the news, the Democrats will continue to have more success thus most Republicans will vote just to move past these issues.

    It is ironic that Republican politicians displayed blatant hypocrisy and managed to control the Court only to have it be a giant albatross.


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 )

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.