Our own leaders did this to us.


U.S. law bans ‘gain of function’ research here, because it’s so dangerous. So….Fauci figured out a way to fund China so it could be done there.
Of course with my cynical side wondering how much money Fauci was able to siphon off into his own pockets.

 

Should we be surprised anymore?


Biden has nominated an anti-gun activist to be solicitor general

Joe Biden nominated David Chipman, an anti-gun fanatic, to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (although, thankfully, he withdrew); Tracy Stone-Manning, an ecoterrorist to head the Bureau of Land Management; Kristen Clarke, an openly anti-White racist and anti-Semite, to lead the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division; and Rear Admiral Ann Phillips (ret.), someone with zero shipping experience, to serve as the next U.S. Maritime Administration administrator.  That’s why it shouldn’t come as any surprise that his nominee for solicitor general is a fanatical anti-gun activist who participated in the simultaneously abusive and farcical Mueller investigation.

The National Association for Gun Rights sent out a press release detailing the problem with Elizabeth Prelogar:

The National Association for Gun Rights is opposing the nomination of Elizabeth Prelogar to the office of Solicitor General.

“Elizabeth Prelogar represented radical gun control group ‘Everytown’ and clerked for anti-gun Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan,” said Dudley Brown, President of the National Association for Gun Rights.

The Solicitor General argues the government’s position on cases before the Supreme Court, and as such, should fight for the Constitution, including the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

The office is so powerful that the Solicitor General is sometimes referred to as the “Tenth Justice.”

“Given Prelogar’s history advocating for organizations opposed to the Second Amendment, there is no way any U.S. Senator who supports protecting and restoring the Second Amendment should vote for her. If she’s confirmed as the next Solicitor General, her tenure will be an unmitigated disaster for the Second Amendment,” said Brown.

It’s not just Prelogar’s opposition to the Second Amendment that is a cause for concern.  Immediately after her nomination, Ken Sondik wrote at the Spectator that she is a solid partisan leftist when it comes to every hard fought matter in today’s political world:

Continue reading “”

Comment O’ The Day

“It is interesting that the group that claimed Trump was an instrument of Russia are actually putting people in power that believe the completely failed economic system of the Soviet Union should inspire what we do in the US.”


Biden Comptroller pick Saule Omarova refuses to turn over Moscow State University thesis on Marxism
Sen. Pat Toomey claimed Omarova removed the thesis from her recent CV

President Biden’s pick for Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is facing a hard fight over her past comments and studies as she refuses to turn over her thesis on Marxism while a student at Moscow State University.

Saule Omarova was born in the Soviet Union in what is now called Kazakhstan and graduated from Moscow State University in 1989. She has pointed to the USSR’s practices as recently as 2019, when she tweeted about the gender pay gap, citing the USSR as a better model.

U.S. Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Pat Toomey, R-Pa., last week asked Omarova to turn over a copy of her thesis – in both English and the original Russian – for review by the committee no later than Oct. 13. Her thesis, titled “Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital,” remains an item of interest to some members on the committee.

Saule Omarova

Ms. Saule T. Omarova, Professor of Law and Director, Jack Clarke Program on the Law and Regulation of Financial Institutions and Markets, Cornell University.

“While it appears that you have deleted any reference to your thesis in the version of your curriculum vitae (CV) that is currently available on the Cornell Law School website, the paper appeared on your CV as recently as April 2017,” Toomey wrote on Oct. 6.

Omarova had not complied with the request as of Thursday, Oct. 14, a spokesperson for Senate Banking Committee Republicans claimed.

“Ms. Omarova has time to attack Republicans in an interview with the Financial Times, but she can’t bother to comply with a Banking Committee requirement that nominees— regardless of their political party or ideology—submit copies of their writings,” said Amanda Gonzalez Thompson. “We certainly hope she reconsiders so Senators have the information necessary to fulfill their constitutional duty to advise and consent on appointments.”

Thompson argued that such requests are a common part of the vetting process, and other candidates have faced similar requests from committees in the past.

Omarova spoke with the Financial Times in an interview published Thursday in which she claimed that Republicans find her an easy target to “demonize” because she is “an immigrant, a woman, a minority.”

“There is definitely a different standard applied to someone like me,” Omarova said. She asserted that she believes some of the criticism leveled against her is racist in nature.

Toomey stated in no uncertain terms during a committee hearing last week that he does not believe her country of origin factors into consideration for her nomination.

“I also pointed out that some of the most wonderful, loyal, and greatest Americans that I’ve ever met are Americans who happen to have been born and raised behind the Iron Curtain and come to this country,” Toomey said. “That fact of her background has no bearing whatsoever on my judgement about how profoundly misguided the policies she has advocated are and it is perfectly appropriate for us to examine those policies.”

Republicans have targeted past comments by Omarova in which she praised the USSR economic model, citing it as an example of a system that the U.S. should look to for inspiration.

“Until I came to the U.S., I couldn’t imagine that things like gender pay gap still existed in today’s world,” Omarova wrote. “Say what you will about old USSR, there was no gender pay gap there. Market doesn’t always ‘know best.’”

A number of officials have written to voice opposition to Omarova’s nomination, pointing to other comments she has made in which she laid out her intention to reshape “the basic architecture and dynamics of modern finance.”

Omarova did not respond to FOX Business’ request for comment.

 

Parent: School Board Association, DOJ Use Same ‘Communist Tactics’ I Saw Growing Up in Maoist China

A Virginia woman says the National School Board Association (NSBA) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are enacting similar strategies to the ones she experienced when she was a student during China’s Cultural Revolution before immigrating to the United States.

“When I was in China, I spent my entire school years in the Chinese Cultural Revolution, so I’m very, very familiar with the communist tactics of how to divide people, how they canceled the Chinese traditional culture and destroyed our heritage,” Xi Van Fleet told Fox News. “All this is happening here in America.”

“Now they are labeling parents and concerned citizens like me as domestic terrorists,” Van Fleet told Fox. “What that can do? You may lose your freedom.”

Her comments come on the heels of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s October 4 memo, which announced the DOJ would be using federal resources to investigate “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”

“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” Garland’s memo goes on to say.  

The memo came soon after the NSBA sent a letter to President Joe Biden requesting help from federal law enforcement regarding frustrated parents that the NSBA equated to “domestic terrorists.”

Van Fleet told Fox News that she believes the tactic is meant to intimidate parents.

I think it’s intimidation, no doubt about it. They called them racists for a long time, but that did not work,” said Van Fleet. “So, they have to upgrade to domestic terrorists.”

Continue reading “”

Such formalism about whether or not this rises to the constitutional definition of ‘Treason’ is unnecessary academic hair-splitting.
Resistance to tyranny needs no such underpinning.


DOES THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S ASSAULT ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT AMOUNT TO TREASON?

THE MEANING OF ‘TREASON’

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”
~Attributed to Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.) Roman Statesman, Philosopher and Orator, in a speech he gave to the Roman Senate in 58 BC as ‘Recorded by Sallust’ in the fictional novel ‘A Pillar of Iron,’ by Taylor Caldwell (1983), ch. 5. ~The quotation bears resemblance to Cicero’s Second Oration in the Cataline war (circa 40 b.c.)

Under Biden’s reign, Americans are slowly losing their fundamental rights and liberties. They have already lost any vestige of a fundamental right of privacy as protected under the Unreasonable Searches and Seizures clause of the Fourth Amendment. And the Right of free speech under the First Amendment is, as well, under tremendous assault today.

And let us not forget the assault on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as codified in the Second Amendment. For without the citizenry’s exercise of the fundamental Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, the exercise of all other Rights is tenuous at best or becomes altogether illusory, leading inevitably, inexorably to subjugation.

Americans already see that Biden, and his fellow Progressive and Neo-Marxist Democrats in Congress, and legions of unelected bureaucrats of the Administrative Deep State have made substantial inroads curtailing the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But the question is: Do these assaults on sacred Rights truly rise to the level of treason, well beyond the federal crimes of sedition, insurrection, and rebellion, awful as they are?

Continue reading “”

We All Know Biden Is Not in Charge; So, Who Is Really Running the Country? The Answer Will Shock You

I’ve given dozens of speeches across America in the past month — in front of conservative crowds, business leaders, patriots and Christians. I’ve told all of them my opinion that President Joe Biden is a brain-dead zombie puppet, incapable of knowing the difference between his wife and sister. I’m certain his wife Jill feeds him baby food in the White House basement — in a mask.

He should be in a 24/7 care nursing home, not the presidency.

He should be wearing a sign around his neck saying, “Hi, I’m Joe. If I get lost, please call my mommy Jill to come get me at 800-WHITE-HOUSE.”

Biden is not running America. Check out poor Joe’s press conferences. As soon as his empty mind starts to wander, or the press asks him any question more difficult than, “What is your favorite flavor of ice cream?” someone cuts off his microphone. Who? Who makes that decision? Who gives that order?

Find that guy or group. Because they are clearly more powerful than the president of the United States. That guy or group is running our country.

Joe doesn’t know what he’s saying. He doesn’t know what he’s signing. He’s a puppet. He’s a wooden dummy.

But the real question is: Who is the ventriloquist?

This is clearly a communist takeover of the United States. Who is carrying it out? Who is the real power behind the throne? Who is speaking and moving the lips when Biden’s mouth opens?

Here is my answer. I believe these are the three evil groups running the show.

No. 1: Former President Barack Obama is back for his third term, to finish the job he started — the destruction of America, American exceptionalism, capitalism and the great American middle class.

No. 2: But make no mistake, Obama isn’t the boss, either. Evil billionaire George Soros is giving Obama his marching orders. In the end, money talks. Soros has all the money in the world, along with a burning passion to destroy America. Obama takes his marching orders from Soros. Obama is Soros’ little b—.

Then we come to the real power behind the throne. The boss of bosses. The capo di tutti. China and the Chinese Communist Party. Everyone is taking orders from China and the CCP. China bribes all the politicians in America and around the world with billions in offshore bank accounts. China owns Biden and his family. China owns virtually the entire leadership of the Democratic Party — and quite a few establishment RINO Republicans, too.

It’s easy to see China is the top dog. You’d have to be blind, deaf or really dumb to not see that. Everything happening in Biden’s first 10 months in office just happens to weaken and divide America while benefiting China:

Continue reading “”

ENEMIES OF THE STATE

We have written about the National School Boards Association’s letter to Joe Biden asking for federal help against an alleged epidemic of violence against school boards, and about Attorney General Merrick Garland’s response to that request, a memo to the FBI dated just five days after the NSBA’s letter to Biden. When Garland’s masters say “jump,” he jumps.

Glenn Reynolds weighs in at the New York Post:

American parents are organizing to fight racist critical race theories being taught in their kids’ schools. Attorney General Merrick Garland, once touted as a moderate, has responded by asking the FBI to treat them as domestic terrorists.

As befits the Biden administration, this over-the-top authoritarianism is accompanied by the stench of corruption, as it turns out that Garland’s son-in-law is in the business of selling educational materials on CRT.

But of course, the genesis of this problem lies with the school boards themselves, not DOJ:

The bigger problem is that school boards all over America seem to be growing ever more authoritarian themselves. Instead of serving as bastions of small-scale representative democracy, boards seem to regard themselves as above accountability to the voters and parents.
***
The magic words “I feel threatened” are now used by bureaucrats to escape accountability for their own misbehavior. That’s what the NSBA has done, on a larger scale, in the face of widespread parental dissatisfaction with curricula that tell white and Asian students that they are inherently racist and black students that they are permanent victims.

That is right. The NSBA’s letter to Biden alleged an epidemic of violence, but the handful of incidents it cited were pathetic. The idea that this is some kind of crime wave that local authorities are unable to cope with is ridiculous.

But the more insidious reference is to “threats.” How, exactly, is the FBI going to investigate these purported threats? The NSBA’s letter to Biden specifically invoked the PATRIOT Act as it relates to domestic terrorism. I take it the reference is to Title II, “Enhanced Surveillance Procedures.” Title II provides broad authority for interception of electronic and telephone communications. So does Garland’s direction to the FBI mean that the Bureau will undertake to collect emails sent and received by parents who are concerned about Critical Race Theory? Or monitor their telephone calls?

It remains to be seen whether Garland’s memo is just a sop to a Democratic Party constituency, or signals a serious intent to violate the civil rights of parents who complain to local school boards. Either way, Glenn’s closing injunction is on the money:

[I]t’s a disgrace that such a campaign exists at all and that our public schools are under the control of people who think such a response to criticism justified or appropriate.

As some Americans focus on cleaning things up at the national level, it’s also clear that people need to be paying a lot more attention on the local level. Want to make a difference? Run for school board.

Leftism Is the True Pandemic

We have suffered through a year and a half of a viral pandemic, which has become for a majority of us the Alpha and Omega of everyday life. We think of little else and organize our lives around media-inflamed anxiety, ever-changing medical reports, and government ordinances. We wear masks. We put distance between ourselves and our fellows. We isolate. We line up for what seems like a never-ending succession of jabs. We devour the News as if it were the truth. We are victims of what is called “fear appeal,” defined as “a persuasive message that attempts to arouse fear in order to divert behavior through the threat of impending danger or harm.”

Yet, in our addiction to the doctrine and apparatus of the COVID industry, far too many of us have missed the big picture. “Maybe there is something darker and more nefarious at work,” remarks Jeffrey Tucker in Liberty or Lockdown. For there is indeed a pandemic that has spread its pathogens across the world and afflicted the West with a disease from which it may not recover, a kind of viral contagion from which there may be no immediate or even long-term escape. We are confronting a curve that may not be flattened in the foreseeable future.

It is a political disease for which we have many names—progressivism, Wokeism, Agenda 2030, the Great Reset, etc.—but they are all subsumed under the aegis of the Left, which approaches in stages or “waves.” We recall Israel’s official virologist Salman Zarka informing us that “[t]his is our life from now on, in waves.” We might say that the Welfare State is the first wave; “Democratic Socialism” is the second wave; full, undisguised socialism is the third; and the absolute tyranny of Communism is the fourth.

Admittedly, the analogy with the COVID regime partially breaks down since, in the transposition I’m proposing, the disease itself is the object and booster shots cannot be regarded as preventative. (Many will argue that this is the case with the medical pandemic as well, but the question is moot.) In the correlate scenario, however, the “boosters” should be thought of as social and cultural “injections” whose ulterior purpose is to prolong the virulence of the political pandemic. For example, “health and safety” mandates—that is, official rhetoric—are designed to convince the people that they are being cared for, thus rendering them obedient and docile; or “vaccine passports”—that is, identity papers—are intended to fracture social unity by creating a compliant class of propagandized citizens and an outcast class subject to harsh measures of repression and exclusion.

The parallel may not be as farfetched at it initially seems. After all, citizens of state collectives are conditioned to regard their political rulers as ostensible benefactors, having their best interests at heart. Those who resist—the politically “unvaccinated”—are regarded as malefactors, agents of subversion, enemies of the state, social pariahs, and finally as traitors to be interned, cast out, or otherwise punished. In this comparison, what we call “escape variants” are merely specific aspects of the fourth wave, particular manifestations of social and political domination applying to local conditions. The “new politics,” for which the COVID event is a convenient stalking horse and pretext—a “dress rehearsal” for the one-party state, writes Cheryl Chumley in Lockdown: The Socialist Plan to Take Away Your Freedom—will have become the authoritarian dispensation under which we would be condemned to live. And the new politics is the old politics redivivus, the pandemic of Leftism intent on annihilating the common, democratic life of rights and freedoms we have known and taken for granted for several generations past.

COVID is a virus that will be with us in perpetuity, like the common cold and the flu. The plague of Leftism in its various forms, issuing ultimately in Communism, is also a perpetual menace, circulating around the planet like the SARS virion. And as with any despotic regime, there will always be privileges and exemptions enjoyed by the governing elite but not by the governed: the freedom to break the rules, the advantage of accumulating capital, private and unobstructed travel, special favors for family, friends and collaborators, access to the best medical facilities, and the absolute exercise of power—precisely as we have seen with the COVID hierarchy of medical experts and political authorities. The official response to COVID appears to be a strategy and preparation for something far more deadly, a pathology of governance based on economic threat, mass surveillance, police repression, and unitary state control, as we see developing in many Western countries such as Australia, Canada and the U.S. under Biden. As Dr. Peter Breggin explains in his monumental COVID-19 and the Global Predators, it is a function of “military civil fusion [which is] the nature of the totalitarian state.”

We need to recognize that Communism advances on many fronts and, as noted, under various denominations, in its effort to revive Marx’s dream of global hegemony. Of course, the situation “on the ground” has changed since Marx’s day. Its new watchword may well be: Oligarchs of the World, Unite! But we should make no mistake about this. Leftism is a superspreader. It is COVID by another name. It is a thought-virus with real-world consequences. It is the true pandemic.

Of course, we will never reach Communism-zero. There are no miracle vaccines against it, but there are therapeutic measures to halt the scope of its diffusion. As Breggin advises, “It shouldn’t make you helpless. It should rouse you to look with reason at what is happening in the world…unless we unite against the implementation of this plan, there will be no happy ending for any of us.”

Although the Leftist pathogen and its end point in Communism cannot be eradicated, it is, like COVID, treatable by sane and responsible measures: education, political wisdom, a knowledge of history, personal courage, a phalanx of patriots who will not be intimidated and who will not allow the Constitution to be trampled on, and, yes, where necessary, militant quarantine. Recovery is possible and herd immunity may be attainable. Or so we hope.

AG Merrick Garland’s Daughter Married to Co-Founder of Education Company Selling Critical Race Theory Resource Material to School Districts

Well, well, well… This is interesting.  U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland recently instructed the FBI to begin investigating parents who confront school board administrators over Critical Race Theory indoctrination material. The U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum to the FBI instructing them to initiate investigations of any parent attending a local school board meeting who might be viewed as confrontational, intimidating or harassing.

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s daughter is Rebecca Garland.  In 2018 Rebecca Garland married Xan Tanner [LINK].  Mr. Xan Tanner is the current co-founder of a controversial education service company called Panorama Education. [LINK and LINK]  Panorama Education is the “social learning” resource material provider to school districts and teachers that teach Critical Race Theory.

Conflict of interest much?

Yes, the Attorney General is instructing the FBI to investigate parents who might pose a financial threat to the business of his daughter’s husband.

Screen-grabs and citations below:

Continue reading “”

THE IRS WANTS YOUR BANK RECORDS

Earlier today, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellin defended the Biden administration’s proposal to require banks to report inflow and outflow information on all accounts with more than $600 or more than $600 in transactions–in other words, virtually all bank accounts:

During an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday, Yellen was pressed on whether the IRS has the “wherewithal” to collect more information about taxpayers and bank accounts including cash flows, something many Republicans have called invasive.

“Well, of course they do,” Yellen said. “Right now, on every bank account that earns more than $10 a year in interest, the banks report the interest earned to the IRS. That’s part of the information base that includes W2’s and reports on dividends in other income that taxpayers earned. So collection of information is routine.”

That is rather disingenuous. Interest paid by banks is income. Employers and many others report income that they pay out to the IRS. This proposal is different: the idea is that the IRS can compare the amounts of money going into and out of bank accounts with the income reported by a given taxpayer. If the reported income doesn’t seem to match the bank records, the IRS can perform an audit.

“It’s just a few pieces of information about individual bank accounts, nothing at the transaction level that would violate privacy,” the secretary said.

So the IRS won’t see what you spent your money on, it will just know how much went into and out of your accounts.

This is from an exchange between Yellin and Sen. Cynthia Lummis during a recent hearing:

[Lummis]: “Bank customers are not subjects to the federal government. Banks do not work for the IRS.”

Yellen defended the plan, telling the senator, “Banks already report directly to the IRS the interest that they pay on accounts when it exceeds $10, and this is not a proposal to provide detailed transaction-level data by banks to the IRS.”

“Well, $600 threshold is not usually where you’re going to find the massive amount of tax revenue you think Americans are cheating you out of,” Lummis fired back.

“That’s correct,” Yellen admitted, “but it’s important to have comprehensive information so that individuals can’t game the system and have multiple accounts.”

Those $600 accounts can add up.

The administration claims this measure would yield something like $46 billion a year in revenue by catching tax cheats. As an honest taxpayer, I am sympathetic to the argument that it is in my interest for cheaters to be caught. The problem is that I don’t trust the Biden administration, and I don’t trust the IRS.

The Democrats have politicized one federal agency after another, and they have weaponized the IRS, in particular, to weaken their political opponents. I have zero confidence that the IRS wouldn’t selectively use this new data source to target Republicans in general, and vocal opponents of the Biden administration in particular. On the contrary, experience suggests that this is exactly what they would do. That being the case, and given the broader concerns about privacy that most Americans share, the last thing I want to do is give the Biden administration private information about essentially every bank account in the U.S.

Merrick Garland Prepares to March on Concord

In March of 1766, as Massachusetts Governor Thomas Hutchinson surveyed resistance to the Stamp Act in the colony he governed, ignorance prevailed. Throughout the colonies, he wrote, “the people are absolutely without the use of reason.” They gibbered and babbled their mindless opposition, incoherent and senseless, wholly incapable of understanding the thoughtful actions of their betters in government. The Stamp Act was obvious, a perfectly sensible solution to a set of clear problems – but try telling that to the idiots in the street.

“The common run of the people, lacking the necessary education, leisure, and economic independence to make an impartial assessment of public problems, were mercurial playthings of leaders who could profit by exciting their fears,” the historian Bernard Bailyn wrote, summarizing the views of the British governing class in the decade before the American Revolution.

In 2021, all dissent has again become insane and depraved, wholly without logic or legitimacy. A supposed whistleblower warns that Facebook isn’t doing enough to control hateful and divisive speech, and Congress laps up the message that social media companies are failing to silence disorderly Americans; the National School Boards Association warns the White House that domestic terrorists are attacking local school board meetings by saying things that school board members don’t want to hear, and the Attorney General of the United States responds by directing federal law enforcement authorities to prepare for action against local political speech.

If you haven’t read that letter from the National School Boards Association, for crying out loud read it. It’s an alarm bell ringing in the late stages of an imperiled free society. The letter warns that “threats and acts of violence have become more prevalent,” and concludes that “these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” Then the letter gives specific examples of the terrorist attacks. Here are some:

“School board meetings have been disrupted in California , Florida, Georgia, and other states because of local directives for mask coverings to protect students and educators from COVID-19.”

“During two separate school board meetings in Michigan, an individual yelled a Nazi salute in protest to masking requirements, and another individual prompted the board to call a recess because of opposition to critical race theory.”

“In New Jersey, Ohio, and other states, anti-mask proponents are inciting chaos during board meetings.”

“In other states including Washington, Texas, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Tennessee, school boards have been confronted by angry mobs and forced to end meetings abruptly.”

Earlier this month, a student in Tennessee was mocked during a board meeting for advocating masks in schools after testifying that his grandmother, who was an educator, died because of COVID-19.

That’s the violence: people are showing up to school board meetings and saying, often loudly and angrily, that they disagree with local school policy choices. A crowd mocked someone; “another individual prompted the board to call a recess because of opposition to critical race theory.” It’s terrorism. Here’s the last of a long list of specific federal actions that the NSBA explicitly requests: “We also request the assistance of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to intervene against threatening letters and cyberbullying attacks that have been transmitted to students, school board members, district administrators, and other educators.”

They want a police state because of “cyberbullying” – people saying on the Internet that school boards are making bad policy.

But really, read the whole damn thing, and pay close attention to every word: “Additionally, NSBA requests that such review examine appropriate enforceable actions against these crimes and acts of violence under the Gun-Free School Zones Act, the PATRIOT Act in regards to domestic terrorism, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the Violent Interference with Federally Protected Rights statute, the Conspiracy Against Rights statute, an Executive Order to enforce all applicable federal laws for the protection of students and public school district personnel, and any related measure.”

Criticism of school boards should be addressed using the Patriot Act in regards to domestic terrorism. May posterity forget that you were once our countrymen.

The organizing force behind this kind of assault on mere disagreement – these people are criticizing us, why aren’t they being arrested? – is the view of an isolated and out-of-touch governing class, a dead-end technocratic elite that regards all of its presumptions as self-evident and incontestable. And it’s extremely familiar.

It ends where it ends. Years after Hutchinson complained about the stupid and pointless opposition to the Stamp Act, he would be baffled to see his successor reject his interpretation of the growing resistance to parliamentary authority (and ultimately to the authority of the king). The military governor General Thomas Gage, Bailyn writes, “appeared to be arguing that the rebellion was not simply the work of a few ruthless demagogues deluging and inflaming an otherwise well-disposed but inert population; he was faced, he claimed, with a general, popular and widely- and deeply-shared movement of resistance, and he did not think it could be suppressed with less than twenty thousand troops.”

Officials in London thought Gage was an alarmist, worrying too much about a manageable threat, and they demanded that he crack down.

Our governing class is precisely this stupid.

Thank God this hack didn’t make it to SCOTUS.


AG Garland Weaponizes FBI Against Parents Protesting Critical Race Theory, Mask Mandates

AG Garland has told the FBI and US Attorneys’ Offices to meet and “strategize” on ways to deal with parents who have the nerve to protest critical race theory. Actually, they want to figure out how to deal with parents who have the nerve to be involved in their child’s education.

How dare they!

The DOJ said: “Citing an increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers in our nation’s public schools, today Attorney General Merrick B. Garland directed the FBI and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices to meet in the next 30 days with federal, state, Tribal, territorial and local law enforcement leaders to discuss strategies for addressing this disturbing trend. These sessions will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment and response by law enforcement.”

The “task force” includes everything except the kitchen sink:

  • Criminal Division
  • National Security Division
  • Civil Rights Division
  • Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys
  • FBI
  • Community Relations service
  • Office of Justice Programs

The federal government is involving the Criminal Division and National Security Division to handle those pesky parents.

Continue reading “”

Fauci Makes Outrageous Statement About Individual Rights, Accidentally Reveals Two Big Problems With Biden Claims

Dr. Anthony Fauci seems to have been on overload today for bad statements.

We reported on his statement on “Face the Nation” with Margaret Brennan, where he said that he didn’t know yet if we would be able to gather together for Christmas” yet.

But apparently, he wasn’t finished with outrageous statements there. He also said, “There comes a time when you do have to give up what you consider your individual right of making your own decision for the greater good of society.”

There’s a failure there to even understand the basic nature of America and an American citizen’s autonomy. Americans may decide to do something which they think is for the good of society, but in so doing, they never give up their individual rights. That’s called a choice, not a government mandate. And that’s the basic failure here. They’re gone so far over the slide on this, they no longer even understand how bad what they are saying is anymore.

Fauci from today, meet the old Fauci — before he was completely coopted by political agenda.


Furthermore, there were two things that Fauci and host Margaret Brennan discussed on “Face the Nation” that show big problems with things that Joe Biden has said.

Fauci said, “So that’s the one thing I want to make sure that our viewers realize that we’ve done well in the sense of getting 55% of the population fully vaccinated and 64% with at least one dose.”

I found that curious, because the CDC and Joe Biden said that they reached 70% with at least one dose back on August 2, one month after Biden’s goal of July 4. So did we go back and lose six percent unvaccinated, and/or has no one increased the amount of vaccinations since August? Because that’s surely what it looks like. What’s going on with that number?

But in their discussion, Brennan brought up an even greater issue.

“The president announced nearly a month ago that businesses need to mandate vaccines for their employees or submit them to weekly testing,” Brennan said. “We looked; it’s been a month. None of this paperwork has been filed with OSHA to make that happen. Was this a stunt or are you seeing companies follow through even without the legal mandate filed?”

Biden said he was going to use OSHA to enforce a vaccine mandate and/or testing on businesses with 100 or more employees. Brennan is saying that hasn’t even started, that no paperwork to do this has been generated. “But- but when you’re speaking with immediacy, it doesn’t seem reflected in the action here,” Brennan said.

If that’s true, then what was going on here? Did Biden really just say something he had no intention to pursue immediately? Fauci suggested Biden had to get past legal issues. Generally, the way things work is you work out the legal as much as you can before you make the big announcement — you have some legal format worked out before you announce all that, so you’re ready to go. But in this case, apparently Biden was just talking out of his hat and they haven’t even worked that out yet? Or do they even intend to do it at all? Either way, it sounds again like Joe “I have no plan” Biden strikes again.

Was the real purpose just to try to influence the private businesses to act? But as we’ve reported before, Biden’s actions and demonizing of the unvaccinated haven’t seemed to increase the vaccination rates. And if we take Fauci at his word, that number is even going backwards.

The green movement flirts with violent sabotage.

What actions are you recommending for the pro-life movement?’ the New Yorker Radio Hour host asks his guest, a tenured university professor and author of How to Blow Up an Abortion Clinic.

‘Well,’ the guest replies, ‘I am recommending that the movement continue with the March for Life and crisis pregnancy centers but also open up for property destruction. We need to step up because so little has changed and so many babies are still being killed. So, I am in favor of destroying machines and property, not harming people. I think property can be destroyed in all manner of ways. It can be neutralized in a very gentle fashion, or in a more spectacular fashion as in potentially blowing up an abortion clinic.’

‘Do you yourself plan to be involved in such actions?’ the host asks, scandalized and titillated like a 16-year-old girl whose prom date just whispered his untoward intentions in her ear.

If I were planning things, I wouldn’t tell you, but I’m prepared to be part of any kind of action of the sort that I advocate in the book.’

God, he’s so cool.

And scene.

Of course, this interview never happened. Not only would the author never have been booked on that particular podcast, he’d have been fired from his university, blacklisted by every major publisher, denounced as a terrorist, stripped of his bank account, and placed under federal surveillance.

But replace ‘pro-life movement’ with ‘climate movement,’ and you’ll find that this interview did happen, less than a week ago, with Andreas Malm, whose very real book is called How to Blow Up a Pipeline.

Senate Confirms Radical Eco-Terrorist as Chief of the Bureau of Land Management.

The Senate confirmed, by a vote of 50-45, Tracy Stone-Manning to be the new director of the Bureau of Land Management. That Stone-Manning has espoused radical environmental views should not be a surprise.

But the new BLM director was also a declared sympathizer and member of the radical eco-terrorist group Earth First! and admitted to retyping and sending a letter warning the U.S. Forest Service of a tree spiking in Idaho.

The purpose of tree spiking is not to save trees but to strike fear and terror in the hearts of loggers and the companies that hire them. At the time of the tree spiking, Stone-Manning was an active member of Earth First! and was described as “extremely anti-government.”

AZ Central:

Former Forest Service Special Agent Michael Merkley, the lead agent on the tree-spiking case, wrote to members of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee informing them that Stone-Manning was not only “an active member of the original group that planned the spiking to the Post Office Timber Sale Trees,” but that she was “vulgar, antagonistic, and extremely anti-government,” only choosing to cooperate after she was informed that she could face charges if she did not comply with the orders of a federal grand jury.

Stone-Manning also lied during her confirmation hearing, according to GOP Senator John Barrasso.

“This investigator has confirmed what I have been saying,” said Barrasso. “Tracy Stone-Manning collaborated with eco-terrorists who had booby trapped trees with metal spikes. She mailed the threatening letter for them and she was part of the cover up. She did not cooperate with investigators until she was caught.

“Tracy Stone-Manning lied to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee by claiming the tree spiking was ‘alleged’ and that she was never investigated. Now, we have confirmation that neither of those things are true. President Biden must withdraw her nomination.”

Her nomination was opposed by two past BLM directors, including Barack Obama’s BLM chief Bob Abbey, who said, “To put someone in that position that has this type of resume will just bring needless controversy that is not good for the agency or for the public lands.” Another former BLM head, Jim Caswell, said, “If she’s confirmed, it’s just going to be impossible … It’s a detriment to the employees.”

With questionable integrity, radical views (she said the U.S. would do well to follow Communist China’s population control measures), and a dismissive attitude toward other points of view, what is Tracy Stone-Manning doing anywhere near an office of any federal agency?

Stone-Manning’s nomination was a payoff to the radical green groups that worked tirelessly to get Joe Biden elected. Biden had to give the radical greens something, so he threw them a bone with the BLM nomination of an eco-nut.

Surely there are better ways to pay a political debt than rewarding a member of an eco-terrorist group with a job. But in Joe Biden’s Washington, this is how it’s done.

 

Identity, Opposition and Hate.

Say hello to Shardé Nabors, Oregon project manager for a Seattle-based activist organization called Social Justice Fund NW. Curious readers may ask, “What sort of ‘social justice’ does Shardé advocate?” And the answer is, the destruction of the United States of America.

“So, earlier this week I made a post saying that it doesn’t sit right with me that there are white people who own property — multiple properities, at that — in the United States of America while black and indigenous people are experiencing homelessness. And I want to expand on that, especially for my new followers who are white, who followed me because of my anti-racist content. I’m glad that you’re listening to me, but I really want to make sure that you’re hearing what I’m saying. There will never be black liberation or indigenous sovereignty as long as the United States of America exists. If you want black folks around the globe and in this country liberated, if you want indigenous folks to be able to have sovereignty over the lands that their indigenous to, then the United States of America needs to cease to exist. And I don’t know if y’all are ready for that, I don’t know if that’s what y’all signed up for. I’m not sure if anti-racist work is just something you do to lessen the inconvenience of racism in your life, but I hope you’re ready for this. It’s not for the weak.”

That’s the kind of 501(c)3 tax-exempt “activism” she gets paid for. This is where the logic of the “social justice” narrative leads — hatred and destruction, advocating genocide as the Final Solution.

One more indication that SloJoe is merely a meatpuppet.


Biden Is Nominating Soviet-Trained Radicals Now

Presidentish Joe Biden wants to put an actual Communist — self-proclaimed “radical” Cornell University law school professor Saule Omarova — in charge of the nation’s banking system.

Omarova graduated from the Soviet Union’s Moscow State University in 1989 on the Lenin Personal Academic Scholarship, according to the Wall Street Journal. As recently as 2019, she was still praising the USSR’s economic system as in some ways superior to our own. “Say what you will about old USSR, there was no gender pay gap there. Market doesn’t always ‘know best.’”

As a matter of fact, I will say what I will about the old USSR.

Teachers there were paid the same as doctors — because medicine was considered “women’s work” and both were paid crap numbers of worthless rubles. Sexism and central mismanagement, all in one murderously totalitarian package.

There’s a reason the USSR is defunct and the U.S. isn’t — at least until Omarova gets her way.

Omarova’s goal is the eventual elimination of private banking and the establishment of the Federal Reserve as the nation’s only bank.

In her own words:

“The core idea here is simply to allow all U.S. citizens and lawful residents, local governments, non-banking firms and non-business entities to open transactional accounts directly with the Federal Reserve, thus bypassing private depository institutions,” she wrote. “In this sense, it is a variation on the familiar FedAccounts — or FedCoin, ‘digital dollar wallets,’ etc. — theme. In principle, FedAccounts can be made available as an alternative to bank deposit accounts, upon a person’s request.”

Omarova herself wrote that her proposal is “deliberately radical in scope and substance.”

Indeed. Or as Kristin Tate wrote for The Hill on Wednesday:

Taken to its extreme, this would mean that the Federal Reserve, acting on behalf of Washington, could become the only place citizens could deposit their money. Such a massive transformation would be accomplished by replacing consumer deposits into a new digital dollar, held by the Fed.

Nationalized banking with, if I’m reading this correctly, nothing but a centrally-controlled digital currency for legal tender — what could go wrong?

The top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee, Patrick McHenry, said of her last week:

I am concerned Professor Omarova will prioritize a progressive social agenda over the core mission of the OCC — supervising and managing risk in our financial system. Our financial regulators must focus on pro-growth policies that foster innovation to build a robust and inclusive economic recovery, rather than Democrats’ obsession with vague social objectives.

True, although I wonder what’s so “vague” about Omarova’s objectives.

Nominating Omarova to serve as Comptroller of the Currency, as Biden has done, is worse than putting the inmates in charge of the asylum. It’s more like putting a convicted arsonist in charge of the Forest Service.

There’s just no making up anything so absurd, and in Biden’s America, you don’t have to.

217 Democrats voted to block consideration of the proposal which would require DHS to give a COVID test to everyone crossing our border illegally.

Mayorkas: We won’t build a wall because it might work.

In an appearance on Fox News Sunday , Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended the Biden administration’s decision to allow thousands of illegal border crossers into the United States recently in Del Rio, Texas. Stopping them with a physical barrier — a wall or fence — is just not something the administration could “agree” with, Mayorkas said.

“Why did you allow them in the country in the first place?” asked host Chris Wallace. “Why didn’t you build — forgive me, a wall or a fence to stop them from walking — this flood of people coming across the dam, it looks like a highway that allows them to cross the Rio Grande.”

“It is the policy of this administration,” Mayorkas answered. “We do not agree with the building of the wall. The law provides that individuals can make a claim for humanitarian relief. That is actually one of our proudest traditions.”

The subtext of Mayorkas’s answer seemed clear: A wall or fence would stop people from crossing the border illegally, which would interfere with their right to “make a claim for humanitarian relief.” So there shall be no wall or fence.

What Mayorkas neglected to say was that the law also prohibits people from entering the U.S. without authorization. Mayorkas conceded that fact last March during a contentious hearing before the House Homeland Security Committee.

“Entering the U.S. between ports of entry is illegal, isn’t that right?” Republican Rep. Dan Bishop asked Mayorkas. “Yes, it is,” answered Mayorkas. “Are you prepared to say right now that it is wrong for people to enter the United States illegally?” Bishop asked at another point. “Of course I am,” said Mayorkas. “So it’s wrong to break the law, right?” said Bishop. “Of course it is,” Mayorkas said.

Mayorkas then told Bishop that the law also allows people “fleeing persecution by reason of his or her membership in a particular social group” to claim asylum in the U.S. “An individual who makes a claim of asylum is not breaking the law by doing so,” Mayorkas said.

So what is the story? The law to which Bishop referred is the part of the Immigration and Nationality Act that says, “Any alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers” shall be fined or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both. The penalty rises to two years for a second offense.

But the law to which Mayorkas referred to is another part of the Immigration and Nationality Act that says, “Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival) … may apply for asylum.” (The asylum law has existed for a long time, but Congress added the “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” part in 1996.) The law also says the U.S. government can designate that the asylum-seeker wait in another country while his or her claim is adjudicated, saying specifically that it must be a country “in which the alien’s life or freedom would not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”

None of that applies to the people, almost all of them originally from Haiti, who crossed into the U.S. at Del Rio. Driven mostly by economic motives, they have no legitimate claim to asylum under American law.

And as for the law — simply stating that a person who is “physically present” in the U.S. can apply for asylum does not mean that anyone in the world can and should be allowed into the U.S. The authors of the law clearly did not anticipate mass illegal crossings by people with no right to asylum who are then admitted into the U.S. and allowed to disappear into the country on the premise that they will show up at some later date, sometimes years later, at an immigration proceeding. But the law allows Mayorkas to claim that the Biden administration has a legal responsibility not to stop people from crossing illegally into the U.S. — despite the other section of the law that specifically makes crossing without authorization a crime.

So look for Mayorkas and the Biden administration to continue to claim that they have no choice but to accommodate anyone who wants to cross illegally into the U.S. A wall or fence along the border would reduce those illegal crossings — but that is, apparently, the one thing the administration does not want to do.

Milley confirms he told China he would call ahead of US attack, claims Esper ordered calls based on intel

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley confirmed that he told his Chinese counterpart that he would “call” to warn of any potential U.S. attacks on Beijing, maintaining he had that conversation at the direction of then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper after assessing intelligence suggesting heightened Chinese concerns about escalation between the two “great” powers.

Milley addressed allegations that he held “secret” calls with his Chinese counterpart, Gen. Li Zuocheng of the People’s Liberation Army, in October 2020 and days after the Capitol riot in January 2021, which were included in “Peril,” a book co-authored by Washington Post correspondents Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.

Milley has faced calls to resign since the revelations were made public earlier this month. The book “Peril” by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa claims that Milley contacted Li after he had reviewed intelligence that suggested Chinese officials believed the United States was planning an attack on China amid military exercises in the South China Sea. The book claims Milley contacted Li a second time to reassure him that the U.S. would not make any type of advances or attack China in any form.

On Wednesday, during a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee focused on the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, Milley responded to questions about the allegations.

Continue reading “”