Former NIH Director Admits Government Was Top Source Of Covid Misinformation

Four years ago, U.S. state, local, and federal goverments pushed “social-distancing” policies separating Americans six feet away from other people everywhere they went. Now former National Institute of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins has admitted no “science or evidence” ever backed these heavy-handed, comprehensive restrictions — another key proof the left’s war on so-called “disinformation” is so dangerous.

A memo National Review obtained, from the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, details Collins’ closed-door testimony earlier this year. It reveals that Collins had not seen evidence on March 22, 2020, to support the widely obeyed federal policy when the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) instituted six-foot social distancing rules.

“Do you recall science or evidence that supported the six-foot distance?” Collins was asked.

“I do not,” Collins said. “I did not see evidence, but I’m not sure I would have been shown evidence at that point.”

“Have you seen any evidence since then supporting six feet?”

“No,” Collins responded.

So Collins admits the federal government lacked any scientific basis for this massive social policy it pushed on Americans, including by colluding with Big Tech to shut down public debate about Covid-19 responses. Such debate could have revealed that many Covid policies weren’t backed by good research. Instead, numerous federal officials pressed Google, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to shut down skepticism and contrary information it falsely labeled “misinformation” and “disinformation,” including articles from The Federalist.

This censorship effort effectively secured an information monopoly for federal agencies, including the CDC and NIH, to spread false information. As the lawsuit Murthy v. Missouri and other investigations later revealed, these government officials then used their information monopoly gained through accusing others of “misinformation” to spread actual misinformation, including that “social distancing” was scientifically proven necessary to “save lives.”

Continue reading “”

7 cuts in 43 seconds of speaking and the longest they could get was 10 seconds. You have to wonder how many takes had to be made to get this campaign ad patched together

Federal Court Rules Maryland Parents Can’t Opt Kids Out Of Classes With LGBT Content.

The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled 2-1 against Maryland parents who sued their local school board for not letting their children in grades K-5 opt out of reading books supporting transgender ideology and gender transitioning.

The Montgomery County Public Schools board denied the parents their request to be notified when the books would be read to their children and the opportunity to opt out.

“The Board is violating the parents’ inalienable and constitutionally protected right to control the religious upbringing of their children, especially on sensitive issues concerning family life and human sexuality,” The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, litigated the lawsuit, stated, explaining:

In fall 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education announced over 20 new “inclusivity” books for its pre-K through eighth grade classrooms. But rather than focusing on basic civility and kindness, these books champion pride parades, gender transitioning, and pronoun preferences for children.

For example, one book tasks three- and four-year-olds to search for images from a word list that includes “intersex flag,” “[drag] queen,” “underwear,” “leather,” and the name of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker. Another encourages fifth graders to discuss what it means to be “non-binary.” Other books advocate a child-knows-best approach to gender transitioning, telling students that a decision to transition doesn’t have to “make sense” and that doctors only “guess” when identifying a newborn’s sex anyway.

A district court ruled against the parents, prompting them to appeal to the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied the parents’ request for a preliminary injunction but allowed the possibility of changing its position once the classes have already been taught, writing:

We take no view on whether the Parents will be able to present evidence sufficient to support any of their various theories once they have the opportunity to develop a record as to the circumstances surrounding the Board’s decision and how the challenged texts are actually being used in schools.

At this early stage, however, given the Parents’ broad claims, the very high burden required to obtain a preliminary injunction, and the scant record before us, we are constrained to affirm the district court’s order denying a preliminary injunction.

Judge Marvin Quattlebaum dissented, writing, “I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the parents have not produced enough evidence to establish that their free exercised rights have been burdened. The parents have met their burden. They have produced the books that no one disputes will be used to instruct their K-5 children. They produced declarations explaining in detail why the books conflict with their religious beliefs. They have produced the board’s own internal documents that show how it suggests teachers respond to students and parents who question the contents of the books.”

We now know the likely truth about COVID, and how scientists lied.

COVID-19, which killed 1.1 million Americans and destroyed the lives and livelihoods of millions more, is a manmade virus that escaped from a Chinese lab partly funded by the US government.

Even today, you’re not supposed to say that — even though it’s the only plausible scenario.

No, “fact checkers” will rush in to claim that eminent scientists deny this. Which is because those scientists have too much invested — in money, in time, in their own beliefs — to admit the truth.

NIH Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak
NIH deputy director Lawrence Tabak admitted that US taxpayers funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China before the COVID-19 pandemic started.Jack Gruber / USA TODAY NETWORK

But as Congress continues to probe, that truth is coming out, little by little, and the lies are being exposed:

China tried to deflect blame immediately by saying the virus supposedly began in a “wet market” of animal meat in Wuhan.

Dr. Anthony Fauci repeatedly argued it “evolved in nature and then jumped species” in the spring of 2020.

Since then, both long investigations and government reports have concluded that the virus is manmade. Fauci grudgingly admitted it “could be” true.

Continue reading “”

More Chinese Nationals Illegally Entered The U.S. In Two Days This Month Than In All Of 2021.

The implications are not just limited to espionage but extend to the potential for creating societal disruptions and furthering the CCP’s global influence campaign in America.

President Joe Biden has completely abandoned U.S. border security. Of the some 10 million people who have illegally entered America under Biden’s unwatchful reign, a particularly alarming threat has emerged: a massive increase in the number of Chinese nationals illegally crossing our borders.

This phenomenon not only underscores a significant breach in national security but also facilitates greater infiltration by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) into the United States, posing substantial risks not sufficiently addressed by current federal policies.

Chinese illegal immigration has shown a dramatic increase, with reports indicating that in just the first two days of May 2024, more Chinese nationals entered the U.S. illegally than in all of 2021. This stark rise is facilitated by an alarming oversimplification in the vetting process instituted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), reducing the number of interview questions for Chinese nationals from approximately 40 to just five. Such measures dangerously prioritize “processing efficiency” over thorough national security checks, leaving gaping vulnerabilities that could be exploited by the CCP to insert espionage agents or exert undue influence within our borders.

This “processing efficiency” has been made necessary by Biden’s lax border policies, which have resulted in border agents being so overwhelmed with illegal crossings and fraudulent asylum requests that fundamental national security measures have been abandoned.

Unrestricted Warfare

Given the geopolitical tensions and the CCP’s documented strategy of using nontraditional means for warfare — as highlighted in its doctrine of “Unrestricted Warfare,” which advocates for the use of various tactics including economic pressure, cyber-attacks, and ideological infiltration — the lack of rigorous screening and the high volume of unchecked entries is deeply concerning. The implications are not just limited to espionage but extend to the potential for creating societal disruptions and furthering the CCP’s global influence campaign in America.

Continue reading “”

Dem. Sponsor Of WA Gun Owner Insurance Mandate Runs For Insurance Commissioner

The Democrat Washington state Senator who earlier this year introduced legislation to require gun owners to obtain liability insurance is now running to become the next insurance commissioner.

State Sen. Patty Kuderer (D-Bellevue), who has consistently supported gun control measures as a lawmaker, said in a campaign announcement,

“As a State Senator, I have been a vocal advocate for issues such as gun safety, voting rights, and women’s health. I have also been a leading voice on healthcare issues in the State Senate, including sponsoring legislation to create a public option for healthcare in Washington. As your next Insurance Commissioner, I will work tirelessly to protect consumers and to hold insurance companies accountable for their actions. I will fight to expand access to affordable healthcare, to promote transparency and fairness in the insurance market, and to ensure that all Washingtonians have access to the coverage they need to stay healthy and secure.”

She goes on to claim she is “committed to working collaboratively with all stakeholders,” although gun owners may not be included in that definition.

But Kuderer will be facing a Senate foil, at least in the primary. State Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn), an ardent Second Amendment advocate, has also filed for the position. Neither Kuderer or Fortunato would lose their Senate seats this fall.

Kuderer’s measure, Senate Bill 5963, never made it out of committee. She had nine co-sponsors, all Democrats and all whose names are often linked to gun control legislation.

Kuderer is among four Democrats running for the insurance commissioner’s spot. The three others are identified as Chris D. Chung of Tacoma, Bill Boyd of Spokane and John Pestinger of Seattle.

Fortunato also has company from Republican Justin Murta of Snohomish. Two other candidates have filed without stating party preference, Jonathan Hendrix of Seattle and Tim Verzal of Eatonville.

But only one candidate—Kuderer—can be linked to the proposed liability insurance mandate.

Under her bill, any person who owns a firearm would have been compelled to obtain “in full force and effect,” an  insurance policy “covering losses or damages resulting from the accidental or unintentional discharge of the firearm, including but not limited to, death or injury to persons who are not an insured person under the policy and property damage.”

The law would also have required the gun owner to keep valid and current written evidence of the coverage readily available where each firearm was stored.

The law would also have required insurers to ask whether anyone named on the policy owned a firearm and whether it was securely stored.

When Kuderer introduced her bill in January, she was quoted by MyNorthwest.com stating, “This …requirement does not regulate, limit or control the manner or method in which people may keep or bear arms. Instead, it simply says you must have liability insurance.”

KTTH conservative commentator Jason Rantz countered at the time, “This is astonishing. The bill literally regulates and controls both the manner and method in which we may keep and bear arms.”

StunnedTater Cornyn shouldn’t have pushed this bill anyway.
The pushback mail he got must have been white hot caustic.


WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), along with 41 of their Senate Republican colleagues, introduced a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act to strike down the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) rule on the definition of “Engaged in the Business” as a Dealer in Firearms. The rule ignores the law and congressional intent and flagrantly violates the Constitution to try to require anyone who sells a firearm to register as a federal firearm licensee.

“Once again, the Biden administration is ignoring the law in their attempts to infringe on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans and their ability to bear arms. This gun-grab flies in the face of congressional intent, unlawfully shifts the burden to individuals to demonstrate to the ATF that they are not firearms dealers, and prohibits lawful conduct protected by the Second Amendment. West Virginians have my word that I will fight this rule on their behalf and continue to be a fierce defender of their gun rights,” Senator Capito said.

The resolution is endorsed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), Gun Owners of America (GOA), and the National Rifle Association (NRA).

In a case of classic irony, the ship named after the President who warned about the Military Industrial Complex, gets stuck on deployment because the aforesaid MIC supposed to produce naval surface combatant ships is TARFU.


In Red Sea, US Navy paying the price of shipbuilding failures
The Littoral Combat Ship was designed with the current crisis in mind, instead it turned into a boondoggle. Here’s why.

The United States Navy recently extended the deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower while it patrols the shipping lanes of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden protecting commercial shipping from Houthi rebel attacks. The Eisenhower left its homeport at Norfolk on October 14, more than 200 days ago.

The Ike’s sailors aren’t the only ones being forced to spend more time away from home. Many of the carrier’s escort vessels have also seen their deployments extended.

The Navy is struggling to meet some of its operational requirements in part because it simply doesn’t have all the ships it expected. The current threat to navigation in the Red Sea is precisely the scenario for which the Navy invested so much time and resources building the Littoral Combat Ships. The LCS program was sold to the American people as a “networked, agile, stealthy surface combatant capable of defeating anti-access and asymmetric threats in the littorals.”

The Houthi rebels launching missiles and drones from shore and hijacking commercial shipping in the confined waters of the Red Sea meets the textbook definition of an asymmetric threat in a littoral region. Yet the “little crappy ships,” as they have come to be known, are nowhere to be seen inside the Red Sea. Rather, the Navy has to keep a carrier strike group composed of Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers on station longer than anticipated in an attempt to keep an important maritime choke point open.

The Littoral Combat Ship is one of two major shipbuilding failures from the past 20 years. The other is the Zumwalt-class destroyer. Both programs began in earnest in the years after 9/11 and almost immediately ran into trouble. The Zumwalt program saw massive cost growth which forced Navy leaders to slash the planned fleet size from the originally planned 32 to 7 and finally to the three which were actually built. These three ships cost nearly $8 billion each while failing to deliver promised combat capabilities.

The Littoral Combat Ship program cost $28 billion to build a fleet of 35 ships. According to the Government Accountability Office, the Navy expects to pay more than $60 billion to operate the fleet for its expected 25-year lifespan. Like the Zumwalt, the LCS program’s combat functionality is far less than expected. The ships were designed to be modular with crews swapping out mission systems in port for different missions. Engineers could never get the mission modules to work properly, so the scheme was abandoned.

The LCS program does excel in spectacular breakdowns. The USS Milwaukee famously broke down shortly after it had been commissioned and had to be towed into a Virginia port while its crew attempted to sail the ship to its intended San Diego home for the first time. Other ships suffered from saltwater corrosion, cracked hulls, and broken-down water jets. The Freedom-class variant LCS had trouble with the combining gear linking its diesel engine with the ship’s turbines. The problems grew so bad that Navy leaders essentially threw up their hands and began retiring ships decades before they should have smelled mothballs. The Navy decommissioned the USS Sioux City after a single deployment and less than five years after the ship entered service.

Navy leaders are now scrambling to develop the Constellation-class frigate to fill the capability gap that should have been filled by the Littoral Combat Ship. They decided upon a safer acquisition strategy with the new program by selecting the European multipurpose frigate, a proven design already in service with the French and Italian navies, rather than starting at the drawing board. The Navy awarded Fincantieri Marinette Marine the detail design and construction award for the first ship in April 2020.

Of course, the Navy isn’t simply purchasing a fully developed ship. Engineers began with the existing design and have spent the past several years “maturing” it. Like many such endeavors, changes to one shipboard system necessitated modifications to others and the entire process spiraled. Navy leaders had expected to have the first ship to be delivered in 2026, but they recently announced that because of design problems, supply chain issues, and a shortage of skilled workers will delay the first ship by an additional three years.

The U.S. Navy’s last successful comparable surface shipbuilding program was the Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate. The final ship of that class, the USS Ingraham, was commissioned in 1989.

Herein lies the danger inherent with unrealistic acquisition programs. When service leaders convince themselves that a radical design will work before the concept is actually demonstrated in the real world, they commit themselves, potentially for decades, to a program that may fail. By spending so much time and money on the Littoral Combat Ship program, the U.S. Navy squandered 40 years of shipbuilding time. That is an enormous lost opportunity cost and now our hard-pressed sailors enduring extended deployments are paying the price.

Service leaders, the civilians leading them, and members of Congress need to remember this case the next time a defense contractor presents them with a bunch of slick conceptual drawings and then fills their ears with promises of transformative capabilities they can deliver at rock-bottom prices. As the homesick sailors aboard the Ike understand well now, if it sounds too good to be true, it definitely is.

Taking guns away from lawful owners isn’t practical

RALEIGH — When officers from the U.S. Marshal Service, the N.C. Department of Adult Correction, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, and other agencies approached a home in eastern Charlotte on April 29, their purpose was to serve warrants on a fugitive named Terry Clark Hughes Jr.

The fugitive fought back, costing four men their lives: Adult Correction officers Alden Elliot and Samuel Paloche, Deputy U.S. Marshal Thomas Weeks, and CMPD’s Joshua Ayer.

Hughes was a habitual felon. In 2011, he was convicted in Person County of breaking and entering. In 2012, he was convicted in Alamance County of speeding to elude arrest — having fled a checkpoint at more than 100 miles an hour — and possessing a firearm, which as a felon he lacked the right to do.

So, when the task force arrived at the Galway Drive house on April 29, among the charges Hughes faced was the illegal possession of guns. Alas, he still had guns. He used them to murder four men before his outrageous conduct cost him his own life.

The officers were there, in other words, to enforce a gun-control law with nearly universal acceptance. And yet, in the aftermath of this horrific incident, progressive politicians couldn’t help themselves. Rather than tailor their reactions to the facts of the case, they engaged in a robotic plug-and-play.

In his April 29 statement, for example, Joe Biden called the officers “fallen heroes.” Yes, they are.

But the president also said this: “We must do more to protect our law enforcement officers. That means funding them — so they have the resources they need to do their jobs and keep us safe. And it means taking additional action to combat the scourge of gun violence. Now. Leaders in Congress need to step up so that we ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require safe storage of guns, and pass universal background checks and a national red flag law. Enough is enough.”

Several days later, after President Biden met with family members of the fallen heroes as well as others wounded in the firefight, he insisted lawmakers needed to “keep the weapons of war” out of the wrong hands.

The hands of habitual felon Terry Clark Hughes certainly had no business holding firearms of any kind. But it was already illegal for him to do so. That was one of the main reasons the officers were there to arrest him in the first place.

As for the funding of state and federal law enforcement, I see no evidence it played any role here. Safe storage of guns? While the North Carolina General Assembly has already legislated on this matter, it also had no relevance to the case. Nor did the absence of red flag laws (since any report to authorities by family members that he possessed a gun would already have triggered yet another warrant for his arrest) or broader background checks (since he already knew he was precluded from owning a gun and wouldn’t have tried buying firearms from anyone required to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System).

That leaves only Biden’s stated desire to ban all assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Assuming he means semiautomatic rifles such as the AR-15 — automatic weapons are already illegal for the vast majority of Americans to own — there are tens of millions of such rifles currently in private hands across our country. Most have magazines holding more than 10 rounds.

To put the matter bluntly, there is no practical way of confiscating these weapons from their lawful owners. Let’s focus on actual criminals like Terry Clark Hughes.

John Hood is a John Locke Foundation board member. His latest books, Mountain Folk and Forest Folk, combine epic fantasy with early American history (FolkloreCycle.com).

Sometimes, you wonder if corrupt crap like this isn’t done on purpose, simply to test the opposition’s mental acuity.


Judge Aileen Cannon is a Heroine
She is scheduled on June 21st to hear oral argument on whether special counsel Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed

The liberal news media is full of false stories about how Judge Aileen Cannon of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has delayed former President Donald Trump’s trial unnecessarily for allegedly mishandling classified documents. But, in fact, the Biden Administration and its Attorney General, Merrick Garland, are themselves to blame for the current delay. Special Counsel Jack Smith claims to be an inferior officer of the United States, but in fact he holds no such office. Smith is a mere employee of the Department of Justice, and he lacks the power to initiate prosecutions. Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 585 U.S. __ (2018) holds that only officers of the United States can take actions that affect the life, liberty, and property of citizens.

Judge Cannon has asked for oral argument on June 21, 2024 on former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment on the ground that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed to his current job because he is not an inferior officer. Washington, D.C. super-lawyer, Gene Schaerr, has filed an amicus brief in United States v. Trump on behalf of former Attorney Generals Edwin Meese III and Michael B. Mukasey, as well as me and Professor Gary Lawson, arguing that Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed to be an inferior officer, and Judge Cannon has asked Gene Schaerr to participate in the oral argument, which he has agreed to do.

The Appointment Clause of Article II, Section 2 provides that: “the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” Jack Smith claims to be an inferior officer of the United States appointed by the Head of the Justice Department, but he is instead a mere employee.

We argue in our amicus brief that Congress has never by law vested in the Attorney General as the Head of a Department the power to appoint inferior officers even though Congress has explicitly vested that power in the Heads of the Departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, Transportation, and Agriculture. The only power, which Congress has given to the Attorney General is the power to make a sitting U.S. Attorney a Special Counsel with jurisdiction to prosecute cases nationwide and outside his or her home district. Thus, the Delaware U.S. Attorney, David C. Weiss, currently has nationwide jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Hunter Biden as a Special Counsel, and this appointment is completely constitutional. Similarly, former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Patrick Fitzgerald, was quite legitimately given nationwide jurisdiction to prosecute former Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, in Washington, D.C. Fitzgerald got Libby convicted and sentenced to time in jail.

Jack Smith, however, was a private citizen, and not a sitting U.S. Attorney, when Attorney General Merrick Garland named him to be the Special Counsel who would investigate and prosecute Donald Trump. Smith’s appointment as an inferior officer was thus unconstitutional, and therefore the cases against former President Donald Trump, which Smith is prosecuting in Florida and in Washington D.C. must be dismissed. Again, Congress has never by law vested in the Attorney General the power to appoint inferior officers

Continue reading “”

Joe Biden’s Weapons ‘Pause’ Will Get More Israeli Soldiers, Civilians Killed

President Joe Biden’s reckless halt of weapons to Israel will result in countless Israeli soldiers being killed in buildings that would otherwise have been destroyed.

According to a military source, Israeli soldiers will have to take cover in buildings as Hamas continues its attack in Rafah as the Biden Administration revealed it withheld 2,000-lb. and 500-lb. bombs. 

D.C. bureaucrats have urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to refrain from invading Rafah without defense for its civilians. The PM has long insisted that ground invasion into the region is necessary in order to remove Hamas from power. Biden’s halt of a weapons shipment to the Jewish state made that near impossible. 

During a CNN interview this week, Biden warned that the U.S. would stop supplying weapons to Israel if the IDF attacks Rafah.

The source claimed that everything in Rafah is rigged to blow up, including all of the buildings. He also warned that Hamas has been preparing for Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to enter the region. 

“We are being engaged in numerous buildings, and tunnels rigged in a manner we have not yet encountered,” the source said. 

Hamas had plenty of time to prepare after Biden’s opposition forced Israel to delay an operation in Rafah for three months. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) practice in Gaza has often been to identify buildings where Hamas has hidden, warn residents to leave, and then bomb the buildings.

Dozens of soldiers died earlier in the war in booby-trapped buildings. The IDF is prepared for a slow, methodical campaign in Rafah. But that also means Israel will have to accept a higher number of military casualties than it otherwise would have. Via Breitbart News. 

In a soon-to-be-released report from the Biden Administration, it does not indicate that Israel violated terms for its use of U.S. weapons. According to two U.S. officials and a third person briefed on the situation, the report is expected to be critical of Israel. 

Congressional aides claim the delay in bomb shipment’s value as “tens of millions” of U.S. dollars.

In addition to Republicans demanding answers from the Biden Administration on its efforts to withhold weapons from Israel, 26 Democrats sent a letter to U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan expressing concerns over the situation. 

In a rare unison, Republicans and several Democrats believe the U.S. should not abandon its top ally. 

“With democracy under assault around the world, we cannot undermine our ally Israel, especially in her greatest hour of need. America’s commitments must always be ironclad,” the letter read. 

Day Before Biden Admin Announced It Would Withhold Weapons From Israel, It Issued Sanctions Waiver To Allow Arms Sales to Qatar and Lebanon.

Less than a day before the Biden administration announced its intent to cut off U.S. arms sales to Israel, it issued a sanctions waiver to bypass congressional prohibitions on arms sales to a host of Arab nations that boycott the Jewish state, including Hamas ally Qatar and Iran-controlled Lebanon, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

On Tuesday—just a day before President Joe Biden threatened to withhold key weapons deliveries from Israel if the country moves forward with an incursion in the Gaza Strip’s Rafah neighborhood—the State Department informed Congress that it intends to bypass laws that bar the United States from selling weapons to nations that boycott Israel, according to a copy of the notification obtained by the Free Beacon.

The Biden administration, which has waived these sanctions in the past, said in the notification that it intends to extend the waiver through April 30, 2025, allowing weapons to be sent to a host of nations that work closely with the Hamas terror group and other Iran-backed terror proxies.

While the administration determined that these countries engage in Israel boycotts, a condition that triggers American anti-boycott laws, bypassing these restrictions remains “in the U.S. national interest” to maintain regional stability, according to the waiver. But this justification is drawing scrutiny on Capitol Hill as the Biden administration threatens key arms shipments to Israel in a bid to force it into abandoning its campaign to eradicate Hamas.

Continue reading “”

Well, it is political Kabuki Theater, but it’s better than summer reruns…


Joe Biden Faces Impeachment Calls After Threatening to Withhold Weapons From Israel

Republicans are calling for immediate disciplinary action against President Joe Biden after he threatened to withhold ammunition from Israel. 

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) suggested that Biden should be impeached for caving to pro-Hamas agitators and halting the shipment of offensive weapons to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in an attempt to prevent the Jewish state from attacking the terrorist group in Rafah.

Several GOP lawmakers, including Cotton, say Biden deliberately did it as a “political decision” ahead of the 2024 presidential election. 

“The House has no choice but to impeach Biden based on the Trump-Ukraine precedent of withholding foreign aid to help with reelection,” Cotton wrote on X. “Only with Biden, it’s true.”

In response to Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL) drafting impeachment articles against the president, Kash Patel, former DoD Chief of Staff, drew comparisons of Biden’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan to his threatening to cut off aid to Israel. 

He noted that Biden’s reckless actions have abandoned the nation’s allies that have resulted in the release of terrorists. 

Continue reading “”

Ignore the Shocking Number of Rapes Committed by ‘Newcomers’ or You’ll Be Punished, You Bigot

As I’ve written before, the globalists have spent decades indoctrinating Westerners to believe that legitimate criticism of people with darker skin is a sign of racism, if not “proof” of so-called “white supremacy.” That includes speaking out against the epidemic of illegal immigrants, or asylum-seekers — call them what you will — committing unspeakable levels of sexual assault against Western women.

Most Americans have no idea what has been happening in Europe for two decades. But as I’ve warned in the past, the United States is only five to seven years behind the UK. Watch our Brit friends if you want to see what the pinkos have planned for “The Great Satan,” otherwise known as We the People.

Gang rapists in Britain, a vast majority of whom are/were Pakistani Muslims, had been sexually assaulting thousands of young girls and women with near impunity. How was such a heinous, nationwide calamity allowed to take place? Once the “woke” British cops realized most of the rapists were Muslims, they tucked their cowardly tails between their smooth, Ken-doll legs and said nothing for fear of being called “racists.”

When it comes to an alarming and fairly secret wave of crimes being committed by “diversity delegates,” England isn’t alone. Danish crime stats from 2010-2021 revealed the dirty little secret that “asylum seekers” committed far more crimes than citizens born in Denmark. Roughly 58% of the sexual assaults in Malmo, Sweden, considered the “rape capital” of Europe, were committed by minority “foreign-born” attackers.

FACT-O-RAMA! Gropey Joe Biden referred to Laken Riley’s murderer as an “illegal.” Realizing his faux pas, he apologized to the woke gods for his insolence, claiming he should have referred to the animal as “undocumented.”

Merely being quiet about the tens of thousands of Western women being raped seems not to be working anymore, so the globalists allowing the carnage have begun punishing those who speak out.

Continue reading “”

US says no aid entered Gaza via Kerem Shalom; IDF releases footage showing trucks crossing

US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller says that while Israel reopened the Kerem Shalom crossing this morning, no trucks carrying humanitarian aid actually went through the gate today due to logistical and security concerns.

Hours earlier, though, the IDF released drone footage showing the entry of trucks carrying humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip today via the crossing.

Miller also says at the press briefing that despite assurances from Israel, the Rafah crossing into Gaza wasn’t opened to fuel shipments either, and urges Israel to immediately ensure the delivery of aid into Gaza.

Defense sources tell The Times of Israel that the Rafah crossing with Egypt will remain closed amid the ongoing IDF operations on the Gazan side of the crossing. The IDF hasn’t given any timeline regarding its operation in eastern Rafah or what will subsequently happen with the border crossing with Egypt.

Trump Classified Docs Trial Postponed Indefinitely.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon indefinitely postponed Trump’s classified documents trial.

“The Court also determines that finalization of a trial date at this juncture—before resolution of the myriad and interconnected pre-trial and CIPA issues remaining and forthcoming—would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court, critical CIPA issues, and additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury,” Judge Cannon wrote.

“The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice.”

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents case against former President Donald Trump has been on shaky ground lately. On Friday, Smith’s team admitted to misleading Cannon and tampering with the evidence that had been used as the basis for his case against Trump.

Last month, Cannon unsealed a trove of new documents in the case that also revealed that an FBI agent had testified that the General Services Administration (GSA) was in possession of Trump’s boxes in Virginia before ordering Trump’s team to come get them. The same boxes that the GSA had been holding and ordered Trump’s team to retrieve ended up being the boxes that contained classified markings, raising questions about whether the Biden administration had set up Trump.

“So an entire pallet full of boxes that had been held by GSA somewhere outside of DC is dumped at Mar-a-Lago,” independent journalist Julie Kelly noted. “Apparently these are the boxes that ended up containing papers with ‘classified markings.'”

The Supreme Court also heard oral arguments over Trump’s claims to presidential immunity, which may affect this cause.

Cannon’s decision is a major win for President Trump, who has repeatedly sought to delay the case until after the presidential election in November. In early April, Cannon rejected Trump’s previous attempt to dismiss the case, which he based on the argument that the documents found at his estate were personal records. Trump had filed multiple motions for dismissal back in February, employing various arguments, such as asserting presidential immunity and questioning the legitimacy of Smith’s appointment.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden had classified information that he was never entitled to have stored in boxes in his garage for years but was not charged. In February Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report concluded that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen” and that his actions “present[ed] serious risks to national security.” However, Hur wouldn’t bring charges against him because Biden “would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Because of this, Hur concluded it would be “difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him […] of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.” Hur found that Biden’s memory was “significantly limited, both during his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017 and in his interview with our office in 2023” and that he couldn’t remember the years he was vice president or when his son Beau died.

John Kirby Says Israel Can’t Eliminate An Ideology With Force. History Disagrees.

In the 12th century, the Christian dualist movement Catharism began spreading across northern Italy and southern France. It was neither the first nor the last heretical challenge to orthodox Christianity in medieval Europe — as Catholics can surely attest.

In any event, the Cathars essentially believed, among many other heresies, in two gods: one of eternal heaven and another of worldly evil. The belief became so popular that Pope Innocent III, apparently not a fan of religious liberty, was compelled to launch the Albigensian Crusade to stamp out this theological perversion. Hundreds of thousands likely perished. In one French Cathar city, 20,000 people were reported slaughtered under papal legate.

I thought of the Cathars, as one does, when Kirby responded to a question about the United States’ support for Israel’s goal of eliminating Hamas with his popular trope — “You’re not going to eliminate an ideology through military operations.” Unlike the Albigensian Crusaders, of course, Israel is taking unprecedented precautions to protect the civilian life of their enemies — even though Hamas, unlike medieval Christians, hides behind them.

The worst part of Kirby’s platitudinous nonsense, however, is that it creates the impression Israel is trying to eliminate an entire “ideology” rather than trying to eradicate an organized military and cultural force that uses theology for violent political aims. Of course Israel can’t bore into the souls of Gazans and transform them into right-thinking people. It can destroy Hamas’ hold on territory and render its ideology largely useless. It can bring the purveyors of Hamas ideology to justice and eradicate their military capabilities. For now, that’s good enough.

Moreover, if fighting wars to defend enlightened ideas against nefarious ones is really such a waste of time, why are we sending hundreds of billions to Ukraine to fight Putinst aggression? We are incessantly assured that the European war is a battle between “autocracy” and “democracy.” These are ideological camps. If Volodymyr Zelensky could strike a debilitating blow to Putin’s political power, would Kirby contend it was a waste of time?

Continue reading “”

With ‘friends’ like this, we need no enemies.


Cornyn Engages in Damage Control on ATF New Rule

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act wouldn’t have passed without the help of one Sen. John Cornyn.

Cornyn championed the bill in the Senate, getting enough Republicans to sign on in order to get it out of that chamber and onto the House where there was never a chance at stopping it.

Which, honestly, might not have been too big of a deal were it not for this one bit that changed the definition of gun dealer, removing the requirement that someone attempt to make a livelihood out of selling firearms.

It seemed a small thing, but now it’s opening up things for the ATF where they can essentially push through universal background checks without going through Congress.

And Cornyn is now trying to do something about it.

The U.S. Justice Department rolled out a new policy last month requiring background checks for people who informally sell firearms at gun shows or on the internet. The rule, which is set to take effect on May 20, is based on a revised definition of gun dealers put forth in Cornyn’s so-called Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

Previously, gun dealers were defined under federal law as those who sell firearms with the “principal objective of livelihood and profit.” Under the revised definition, gun dealers are any people who “predominantly earn a profit” from selling firearms.

“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said last month. “This regulation is a historic step in the Justice Department’s fight against gun violence. It will save lives.”

Cornyn has vowed to file a congressional resolution of disapproval over the policy, and he said the Biden administration’s efforts to tie it to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is “an outright lie.”

“This rule has long been on Democrats’ wish list, and for the Biden administration to say it’s a result of our school safety and mental health law is a shameless attempt to hide their real goal: to take away the firearms of every law-abiding American,” Cornyn said in a joint statement with North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis. “We will fight this unconstitutional rule tooth and nail, and look forward to overturning it in the Senate as soon as possible.”

I’m sorry, but Cornyn doesn’t get to play savior here.

He’s the reason we’re in this mess to begin with. Were it not for him crossing the lines for BSCA, the definitions wouldn’t have changed enough for the ATF to even begin to try this. He cajoled and pushed for the precise legislation that opened the door.

Now, he’s trying to engage in damage control, hoping he can keep his job by being aggressive in his rhetoric about the Biden administration’s efforts.

Did he not see this coming? Did he even read the bill?

To be fair, I don’t actually think Cornyn intended for this to happen. I think he just didn’t think through the ramifications of his actions.

Yet let’s also remember that we don’t give people a pass on the results of their actions. How many people are held culpable for the accidents they get into while driving drunk? They don’t intend to hit other cars or pedestrians, but they do, and we hold them accountable.

The Crumbleys didn’t intend for their child to carry out a mass shooting, but the lack of intention didn’t absolve them in the eyes of the court.

Hannah Guiterrez-Reed didn’t intend for a live round to end up in the gun that killed Halyna Hutchins, but she’s going to do time for it just the same.

We hold people accountable for the outcomes of their actions, and in this case, Cornyn’s actions directly led to the ATF’s proposed rule. While we can argue that even with the BSCA’s changes, it’s still overreach, it’s overreach that wouldn’t be remotely possible had Cornyn not bent the knee to Biden on it in the first place.

BLUF:
From what I can gather, the problem in cities is usually not that the police department itself is unwilling to assist, but that they are under orders from the mayor, afraid of upsetting far left constituents, to stand down.

Well, of course that’s what’s going on. Police usually do exactly what their city’s management tells them to do. Geez……


DAVID BERNSTEIN

Hans Bader on Selective Law Enforcement
Police in some major cities are refusing to enforce the law against protest “encampments”
I have been increasingly aware of, and disturbed by, instances of local police declining the requests of universities to help the universities–which generally do not have law enforcement officers capable of dealing with hundreds of people resisting arrest–arrest  protestors and remove their protest encampments. I was preparing to write a blog post about this, but Hans Bader beat me to it. So rather than reinvent the wheel, with permission, below is a shortened version of Hans’ post:

You have a right to free speech, but that doesn’t give you a First Amendment right to camp out on my lawn with protest signs. That’s trespassing. But government officials sometimes allow trespassing when they sympathize with the trespasser’s viewpoint. Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC have refused to remove progressive anti-Israel protesters camping out at private universities — Johns Hopkins University, the University of Pennsylvania, and George Washington University.

Law professor David Bernstein notes that “Baltimore police will not assist in removing illegal encampment at Johns Hopkins University. Worse, they actually praise the illegal encampment as a valid exercise of First Amendment rights, which is complete nonsense. It’s especially nonsensical because most of the protesters are trespassers with no connection to the university.”

“The City of Baltimore strongly stands with every person’s First Amendment rights. Barring any credible threat of violence or similarly high threshold to protect public safety, BPD currently has no plans to engage solely to shut down this valid protest or remove protesters,” said the Baltimore police department in a statement apparently dictated by the mayor’s office.

Contrary to what this statement claims, there is no “First Amendment” right to camp out on public property, much less private property like the campus of Johns Hopkins University, which can tell trespassers to leave regardless of whether they are engaged in First Amendment activity. Camping out on someone else’s property is not a “valid protest,” even if the protesters have not yet made any “threat of violence.” The Supreme Court ruled that protesters do not have a right to camp out even on public property devoted to public use, like national parks, in Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence (1984).

Yet Neetu Arnold of the National Association of Scholars notes that Philadelphia is similarly refusing to clear out a protest camp at the University of Pennsylvania, a private Ivy League university: “Philadelphia Police ignores Penn’s request to disband unauthorized encampment. The university has to provide proof that the encampment poses an imminent danger. Penn students have received multiple warnings to avoid the immediate area.” The Daily Pennsylvanian reports that the “Philadelphia Police Department declines to disband encampment after Penn requests immediate help.”

As a University of Pennsylvania alumnus notes, these illegal protests are only being allowed by progressive officials because of the viewpoint they are expressing. If the protesters were “white nationalists waving nazi flags and telling black people they should go back to Africa I’m sure [police] would be out there pretty quickly” to remove them.

Continue reading “”