COVID Policy: Outrage Upon Travesty Upon Falsehood—Part 1

The Biden Pentagon is forcing soldiers discharged for refusing the COVID vaccine to pay back their signing bonuses despite the termination of the military’s vaccine mandate by law.  That doesn’t seem fair to me, but the government’s other COVID policies are just as misguided, starting with the lockdowns.

The public health experts could not have been more wrong about the lockdowns.  The experts failed to account for learning losses incurred by shutting schools.  Learning loss has been openly discussed for a while now, but the knock-on effects have not.  The workforce of the future will be lower-skilled due to the lockdowns, leaving students with the prospect of 2 to 9 percent lower lifetime income as a result.  But the economic fallout doesn’t stop there.  This translates into future GDP loss of 0.6 to 2.9 percent every year for the rest of the 21st century.  Betcha the public health experts didn’t think about any of that.  They failed to think systemically when they were locking us up and shutting down schools.

Britain is facing years of excess deaths from the lockdown.  Thousands of routine medical treatments and appointments were delayed in the lockdown, which resulted in a lot of heart disease and developing cancers not being caught early.  The bill is coming due.

Fresh evidence has come in proving the experts were also wrong about masks.  A new peer-reviewed, randomized controlled trial showed no significant difference between N95 masks and surgical masks for the prevention of contracting COVID.  N95 masks were thought to be the gold standard offering the highest protection, and surgical masks medium protection. This study followed a previous study showing no difference between wearing a surgical mask and no mask at all.  Remember, in a deposition, Anthony Fauci could not name a single study showing masks to be effective.

We also have more evidence the experts were wrong about natural immunity.  They pushed COVID vaccines as affording better immunity, contrary to common sense.  But a new study shows children developing natural immunity after exposure to COVID had better immunity than children who were vaccinated.  It took a long time, but the experts and pontificators are finally starting to admit they were wrong about natural immunity.  Two new studies show mRNA vaccines produce less effective antibodies than traditional vaccines do.  A Pfizer scientist and a member of Anthony Fauci’s staff were on one of the studies.  And for you Democrats out there who won’t believe anything until you read it in the Washington Post, listen up:

abundant research shows natural immunity conveys excellent protection against covid. One Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study found that vaccinated people who never had covid were at least three times as likely to be infected as unvaccinated people with prior infection. And a Lancet study found that those who were vaccinated but never had covid were four times as likely to have severe illness resulting in hospitalization or death compared to the unvaccinated who recovered from it. Protection from natural immunity also wanes at a slower rate than from vaccination.

There’s also more data now showing the vaccines were not all they were cracked up to be and cause problems themselves, starting with negative efficacy.  A Cleveland Clinic study showed people who got vaccinated were at greater risk of contracting COVID than those who did not.  Stunningly, people who received more than three vaccines were at the highest risk of all.  Finally, just as I told you 16 months ago, COVID vaccines cause new COVID variants to appear. [Daily Skirmish – 9/17/21]  This is backed up by new studies suggesting COVID vaccines are contributing to viral evolution.

There’s more.  Come back tomorrow and I’ll show you more reasons why the government’s phony COVID narratives and resulting misguided policies did great harm.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED ARTICLES:

The death records show the COVID vaccines are shortening lifespan worldwide

What Happens to Soldiers Who Refuse the COVID Vaccine?

VIDEO: Watch Florida’s Volusia County GOP Lincoln Day Dinner with Jim Jordan

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio keynotes the Volusia GOP Lincoln Dinner at the Ocean Center in Daytona Beach, Florida on Sunday, January 22, 2023. The gala event attended by 1,000 also heard remarks from Florida CD 6 Congressman Michael Waltz and CD 7 Congressman Cory Mills. The event also features video highlights from the Ron DeSantis Inaugural and from key Volusia GOP milestone events and activities over the past eventful year.

The Republican Executive Committee of Volusia County in an email stated,

A thousand people filled the Ocean Center Arena to hear from Congressmen Jim Jordan, Michael Waltz and Cory Mills Sunday. It was an epic night for conservative patriots.

We now have the complete video produced by Vic Baker. We promised you movie and a show, and here it is!

WATCH:

©Republican Executive Committee of Volusia County. All rights reserved.

Lockdowns and Vaccines Caused More Death Than They Prevented

Insightful piece here over at The Burning Platform:

2023: FOURTH TURNING MEETS MASS FORMATION PSYCHOSIS

The lockdowns and vaccines have caused more death than they prevented. Suicides, overdose deaths, deaths due to preventative healthcare not accessed, deaths by ventilators and Remdesivir, deaths due to not allowing doctors to prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and now sudden deaths from the Pfizer and Moderna jabs are all verifiable and factual, but no empathy from the covidian cult is forthcoming for these victims. As Desmet points out, once the mass formation began it encouraged various factions to keep it going for their own self-interest. The cult never wants it to end.

[…]

The superficiality of the citizenry, celebration of deviancy, financial illiteracy, unserious culture, technology obsession, and devastating level of governmental, academic, media and corporate corruption, are a perfect recipe for the fall of the American empire.

[…]

It appears 2023 could be a tipping point year in this Fourth Turning, much like the 15th year of the last Fourth Turning (1943-1944) when the tide turned during WWII with the Battle of Stalingrad and Normandy Invasion. Biden’s corrupt administration appears to be imploding. Inflation, rising interest rates, a $31 trillion national debt, $200 trillion of unpayable obligations, a USD that has lost 97% of its purchasing power, out of control surveillance state agencies running amok, broken education system, rampant worship and promotion of deviancy, ghetto crime rampaging in every major urban city, transferring $120 billion to the Ukraine (actually US arms dealers) to instigate WWIII, provoking China over Taiwan, and allowing unelected officials at non-governmental organizations (WEF, WHO, UN, NATO, World Bank) to impose their rules, regulations and mandates on our lives, has set the table for the disintegration of our financial, political, social, and cultural institutions. The downward spiral, decades in the making, is irreversible at this point.

Will all of these lit fuses ignite their powder kegs simultaneously in 2023? Probably not, but a few will explode, producing unintended consequences and start a process of falling dominoes and chaos for the average human on this earth. Having already ruined the livelihoods of tens of millions across the globe, destroying thousands of small businesses, igniting inflation not seen in forty years, causing food shortages, and making our lives far worse, the sudden deaths of children, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, and friends from their mandated gene altering, spike protein inducing therapy should be the last straw and provoke a violent response from the awakening masses.

Read the whole thing here.

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEETS:

Italy Vaccine Victims and Their Families March Through The Streets

RELATED ARTICLES:

The death records show the COVID vaccines are shortening lifespan worldwide

UNDERCOVER VIDEO: Pfizer Scientists Knew That mRNA Covid “Vaccine” Was Likely Cause of Myocarditis, Heart Attacks

FDA Executive Officer on Hidden Camera Reveals Future COVID Policy: ‘Biden Wants To Inoculate As Many People As Possible…Have to Get an Annual Shot’

35-Year-Old Middle School Coach and Teacher Dies Suddenly in Front of His Class

More on Covid ‘vaccine deaths here…

Elon Musk: ‘Felt Like I Was Dying’ After COVID Vaccine

Vaccine Genocide

50,000 Excess Deaths in the UK

21 Year Old Surfer Evan McMillen Dies Suddenly

Young Fox News Exec Dies Suddenly

Died Suddenly: American Idol Contestant CJ Harris Dies at 31

Temporary Morgues are Being Built Across UK Due to Unprecedented Increase in Excess Deaths

Died Suddenly: University of Pittsburgh Student Lindsay Heck Dies Suddenly At 25 Years Old

Died Suddenly: Colorado College Tennis Player Has Died Suddenly at 20 Years Old
Died Suddenly: Former Alabama Running Back Dead at 42

16-Year-Old Basketball Player Suffers Stroke While in School

Kindergarten Student in Ohio Dies Suddenly

17-Year-Old Basketball Player Dies Suddenly at Home

US Air Force Academy Cadet Died Suddenly While Walking to Class

Thrice Vaxxed Young Television Reporter Sparks Vaccine Fears After Collapsing Live On Air

Vaxxed Into Early Graves: This Week’s Young Victims Who Died Suddenly….

CDC and FDA Opens Large Scale Investigation into COVID Vaccines Link To Strokes

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

OK, So Did the CIA Engineer Watergate to Get Rid of Nixon?

Tucker Carlson made some explosive assertions Friday, suggesting that the CIA and the FBI brought down Richard Nixon because he was on to their efforts to undermine the American system as the Founding Fathers had intended it to run and knew that the CIA was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Carlson’s segment quickly became wildly controversial, but is it true? We may never know for sure — and that in itself demonstrates yet again the need to demand and enforce complete transparency and accountability from these agencies that all too easily can go rogue.

Carlson said: “Richard Nixon was re-elected in 1972 by the largest margin of the popular vote ever recorded before or since. Nixon got 17 million more votes than his opponent. Less than two years later, he was gone. He was forced to resign and in his place, an obedient servant of the federal agencies called Gerald Ford took over the White House.” Carlson went on to explain that Nixon believed that “elements in the federal bureaucracy were working to undermine the American system of government and had been doing that for a long time. He often said that.” He suggested that CIA and FBI operatives orchestrated both the Watergate break-in and the two-year-long firestorm that brought Nixon down.

According to Carlson, “on June 23, 1972, Nixon met with the then–CIA director, Richard Helms, at the White House. During the conversation, which thankfully was tape-recorded, Nixon suggested he knew ‘who shot John,’ meaning President John F. Kennedy. Nixon further implied that the CIA was directly involved in Kennedy’s assassination, which we now know it was. Helms’s telling response? Total silence, but for Nixon, it didn’t matter because it was already over. Four days before, on June 19, the Washington Post had published the first of many stories about a break-in at the Watergate office building.” This doesn’t add up to the CIA deciding to take out Nixon, since the break-in and the Post story both happened before the president’s conversation with Helms, unless Nixon had enunciated this before the break-in.

And he had. Tucker Carlson actually got the date wrong. The Nixon/Helms conversation didn’t take place on June 23, 1972, but on Oct. 8, 1971 (it’s further mislabeled on this audio file as taking place on Oct. 10, 1971, but the Nixon tape logs set the meeting on the 8th). Nixon said to Helms: “Uh, Who shot John [JFK]? Uh, is Eisenhower to blame? Is Johnson to blame? Is Kennedy to blame? Is Nixon to blame? Etcetera etcetera etcetera. [This] may become, may become, not by me, but may become a very, very, uh, vigorous issue. If it does, uh, I need to know what is necessary to protect our inquiries, the intelligence gathering and the Dirty Tricks Department. And I will protect it. Hey listen, I’ve done more than my share of lying to protect it. I will do it and I believe it’s totally right to do it.”

This is not all that clear or straightforward a statement, but it does give the impression, since Nixon was talking to the head of the CIA, that the “Dirty Tricks Department” was involved in the killing of Kennedy and might need protection if the full truth about the assassination came out. President Kennedy’s nephew, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., affirmed in December, in response to an earlier Tucker Carlson broadcast, that “the CIA’s murder of my uncle was a successful coup d’état from which our democracy has never recovered.” Yet in the fifty years since Nixon’s conversation with Helms, the Kennedy assassination, while spawning a cottage industry of alternative explanations to the Warren Commission report, has never really become a “very, very vigorous issue,” at least to the extent that the CIA’s role, if any, has been revealed.

Could it ever be? If the CIA really was involved in killing Kennedy and forcing Nixon to resign (which would apparently require Helms to have brushed aside Nixon’s declarations that he would protect the “Dirty Tricks Department” and to have focused solely on Nixon’s revelation that he knew about that department at all) will the American people ever know that for sure?

On Dec. 22, 1963, exactly one month after the Kennedy assassination, former President Harry Truman wrote in the Washington Post that “for some time I have been disturbed by the way [the] CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.” He added, “We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.”

Yet it has never been corrected. The CIA and FBI are almost completely unaccountable to anyone and, it is increasingly obvious, deeply corrupt and politicized. Does anyone have the courage, or the ability, to face down these rogue agencies?

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Leading FBI Official In Russia Collusion Hoax Arrested for Colluding With Russia

RFK Jr: ‘CIA’s Murder of My Uncle Was a Successful Coup D’état From Which Our Democracy Has Never Recovered’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: United Nations Personnel Pose in Front of Taliban Flag

What has been very obvious over the past few years (and going back even before that) is that international diplomacy with the Taliban is a game of bad cop/good cop in which the Taliban are the bad cops and the diplomats are the good cops. And we’re the suckers being played by the Taliban and their political allies.

Sometimes the mask drops. Like when Biden stole money from the families of 9/11 victims to send to the Taliban.

Or when officials from a UN delegation there to lobby the Taliban to be nicer to women posed in front of the Taliban flag.

The United Nations issued an apology after some of its officials were seen posing in front of the Taliban flag in Afghanistan.

The world body called it a “significant lapse in judgment”. A group of UN personnel were in Kabul to address the ban on women aid workers in the country.

The UN revealed on Friday that Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed made a rare visit to the southern part of the nation and expressed concerns to Taliban officials in Kandahar over violations of women’s rights

Mohammed then gave an interview to the Taliban’s pals at Al Jazeera claiming that progress was being made. She told other media outlets that the Taliban had “progressive” voices.

“I think there are many voices we heard, which are progressive in the way that we would like to go,” Mohammed told BBC. “But there are others that really are not.”

“I think the pressure we put in, the support we give to those that are thinking more progressively, is a good thing,” she said. “This visit, I think, gives them more voice and pressure to help the argument internally.”

This is the same scam they pulled with Iran, with the PLO, and with every Islamic terror group around. And, for that matter with the Communists and Nazis. Back in the 30s, Hitler was presented as a “moderate” Nazi. And, once again, people are falling for the lies because no one is talking about what’s going on. And those who are talking about it, are not being heard.

The media is mostly not talking about this. And when they are, it’s in the form of the agonized spin of this CBS News headline. “Top U.N. women’s visit to pressure Afghanistan’s Taliban on rights marred by security team’s poorly planned photo op.”

Poorly planned indeed. What’s the best way to plan a photo op with a Jihadist group?

When someone tells you who they are, believe them. The UN has spent a long time telling us exactly what it is, maybe it’s time we listened.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

United Nations Alliance of Civilizations condemns Qur’an burning in Sweden

Germany: Muslim migrant screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ who stabbed two ‘wanted to kill German men’

Turkey: Thousands of Muslims protest Qur’an burning in Sweden, screaming ‘Europe’s fear is Muhammad’s army’

Crisis in the Caucasus: Two Facts You Aren’t Being Told

In Jordan, Colossal Mismanagement of a Planned New City

Canada: Judge orders government to repatriate four Islamic State jihadis held in Syrian camps

EDITOR NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Individualist Feminism Versus Collectivist Feminism

Feminism is often considered a single homogenous ideology to either endorse or oppose. However, from the beginning, the movement has had two sides.

As libertarian and feminist scholar Wendy McElroy wrote in her 1998 Freeman article “Individualist Feminism: The Lost Tradition,” in the nineteenth century:

“The two basic traditions of feminism that fundamentally questioned the political system were socialist feminism, from which contemporary radical feminism draws, and individualist feminism, which is sometimes called libertarian feminism.”

In another Freeman article published in 1997, McElroy adopted Christina Hoff Summer’s term for contemporary radical feminism: “gender feminism.”

Thus the two sides of the movement could be called individualist feminism and collectivist feminism, with the latter encompassing both “socialist feminism” and its successor, today’s “gender feminism.”

One of the chief differences between individualist feminism and collectivist feminism is what each tradition means by “equality.” As McElroy wrote:

“The differing ideologies of the two traditions were reflected in divergent approaches to equality. To socialist feminists, ‘equality’ was a socio-economic term. Women could be equal only after private property and the economic relationships it encouraged—that is, capitalism—were eliminated.”

Socialist feminism seeks “equality of outcome” between men and women. It regards any inequality of outcome as necessarily a result of a deeper inequality: a discrepancy in power maintained by private-property capitalism and its allied institutions like the family. This power dynamic became known as “the patriarchy.”

Individualist feminism also recognized power discrepancies, but it did not blame private property for these: quite the opposite. The problem was that the rights—including the private property rights—of women had not been respected and protected enough. As McElroy wrote:

“Individualist feminists approached equality in a more strictly legal manner, appealing to natural-law theory. They wished the individual rights of women to be fully acknowledged under laws that protected the person and private property of men and women identically. A term they favored was “self-ownership,” which referred to the moral jurisdiction every human being has over his or her own body and over the products of his or her own labor.”

Thus, individualist feminism seeks “equality” between men and women in the sense of equal rights and equality under the law. It achieves this by abolishing the special legal disabilities imposed on women and the special legal privileges (especially those over women) granted to men.

That was also the kind of “equality” sought and “oppression” fought by the classical liberal movement when it abolished other special legal disabilities (like those imposed on serfs and slaves) and special legal privileges (like those granted to feudal nobles and slave-holders).

Indeed, individualist feminism can be considered to be simply classical liberalism as applied to the rights of women. As Ludwig von Mises wrote:

“So far as Feminism seeks to adjust the legal position of woman to that of man, so far as it seeks to offer her legal and economic freedom to develop and act in accordance with her inclinations, desires, and economic circumstances — so far it is nothing more than a branch of the great liberal movement, which advocates peaceful and free evolution.”

That classical liberal movement revolutionized the West in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. The old order it overthrew was a “caste” system, according to Mises. As McElroy, in her 1997 Freeman essay “Mises’s Legacy for Feminists,” explained:

“Mises called static classes that labor under legal disabilities ‘castes.’ Castes are created when legal barriers are raised to cement people into a class and prevent social mobility. In Socialism, he expanded what he meant by castes, or ‘estate-members’: ‘Estates were legal institutions, not economically determined facts. Every man was born into an estate and generally remained in it until he died. . . . One was master or serf, freeman or slave, lord of the land or tied to it, patrician or plebeian, not because one occupied a certain position in economic life, but because one belonged to a certain estate.’ In essence, castes are legislated classes that create a static society.”

Thus the legal disabilities imposed on women turned the sexes into “castes,” and this created a conflict of interests between men and women.

As Mises wrote in his essay “The Clash of Group Interests”:

“Thus there prevails a solidarity of interests among all caste members and a conflict of interests among the various castes. Each privileged caste aims at the attainment of new privileges and at the preservation of the old ones. Each underprivileged caste aims at the abolition of its disqualifications. Within a caste society there is an irreconcilable antagonism between the interests of the various castes.”

The classical liberal revolution abolished most caste distinctions and thus promoted the harmony of interests that emerges naturally in a free society. The individualist feminist abolition of caste distinctions between men and women was a major part of that glorious project.

But socialists, and especially the Marxists, helped derail that project by confusing the meaning of “oppression.” Marxist class war theory saw an insoluble conflict of interests between the “inherently oppressive” capitalist class and the “inherently oppressed” proletariat class, even when those classes were not made into castes by legal privileges and disabilities.

As McElroy explained, classical liberal philosophy, as informed by sound economics, debunks this dogma:

“Mises’s theory of how society functions is based on classical liberal thought, which considers cooperation to occur only when both sides benefit from the exchange. Indeed, the very perception of benefit is what impels each side to act. Even the infamous hostility between workers and capitalists dissolves in a situation of equal individual rights because each group has no ability to coerce cooperation from the other. Only when force is introduced into the exchange do group conflicts necessarily arise.”

Like Marxism, gender feminism sees inherent conflict and oppression, not between castes, but between classes: specifically between men and women. “Gender feminists, McElroy wrote, “redefined the opposite sex into a distinct political class whose interests were inherently antagonistic to women.” Thus modern gender feminism owes more to Marxism and socialist feminism than it does to classical liberalism and individualist feminism, as McElroy elaborated:

“Gender feminism is based on different theory: [Catharine] MacKinnon has referred to the ideology as ‘post-Marxist,’ meaning that it adopts many aspects of Marxism but rejects its insistence that economic status, rather than gender, is the salient political factor determining a class. Thus, gender feminism incorporates such socialist ideas as ‘surplus labor,’ by which human cooperation is viewed as the process of one group taking benefits from another group. To rectify the class inequity it is necessary to do precisely what the free market forswears—to forcibly intervene in order to assure a ‘socially just’ outcome. The law must act to benefit one class at the expense of the perceived self-interest of another class. Specifically, the law must act to benefit women, who have been historically disadvantaged, at the expense of men, who have been the oppressors. In Misesian terms, women cease to be a class with shared identity based on characteristics and become a caste—a group with shared political and social interests that are legally protected. This form of intervention is epitomized by such measures as affirmative action and comparable worth.”

Whereas individualist feminism seeks equal rights by abolishing legal privileges for men and legal disabilities for women, collectivist gender feminism seeks “equality of outcome” (or “equity”) through state intervention, thereby creating new legal privileges for women and new legal disabilities imposed upon men. This has created new castes and new caste conflicts: a state-fomented battle of the sexes. The misogynistic side of today’s “manosophere” is part of that clash.

We can end the gender war if we reject collectivism—both collectivist feminism and collectivist misogyny—and restore the grand but largely forgotten tradition of individualist feminism that did so much to liberate women and civilize men. With women and men, as with all human relations, collectivism and statism foster hate and conflict, while individualism and liberty breed love and harmony.

AUTHOR

Dan Sanchez

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in-chief of FEE.org. Follow him on Substack and Twitter.

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why Russia’s war in Ukraine today is so different from a year ago

Vladimir Putin’s “special military operation” in Ukraine is approaching its first anniversary. The war being fought by Russian forces today is, however, very different from that being fought when Russia first invaded Ukraine.

In February 2022, the Russian attack on Kyiv — seemingly aimed at bringing about regime change in Ukraine — soon faltered. It quickly became apparent that the current Ukrainian regime would not simply collapse.

Putin appeared to have ignored or not been told about improvements in the Ukrainian armed forces that separatist and Russian forces fighting in the Donbas region since 2014 experienced first-hand. Nonetheless, during the first weeks of the war, Russian forces secured significant territory in eastern Ukraine.

Russia’s war of movement, however, soon degenerated into the sort of fighting that it’s engaged in today. Ukrainian forces also recaptured territory relatively quickly in the fall of 2022, but their war of movement has also come to an end for the time being.

Neither side has been able to gain a decisive advantage on the battlefield. Russia’s army in Ukraine has not collapsed — despite the predictions of many western observers — and shows no signs of doing so. Here’s why.

Redeploying forces

Russia’s attack north of Kyiv was undoubtedly a debacle and it was halted, resulting in a redeployment of Russian forces to the east. That move both greatly simplified Russian supply lines and meant more troops in the east. The Russian pullout from territory near Kherson, in southern Ukraine, had the same effect.

Russia invaded Ukraine with an army far too small to wage a major war there.

Although Putin for many months wouldn’t acknowledge that his so-called special military operation in Ukraine was in fact a full-fledged war, he has certainly now done so — both in words and actions.

His change of tack has been accompanied by a considerable strengthening of Russia’s army in Ukraine. The partial mobilization of reservists has given the Russian army far greater human resources than it started with.

The Russian reservists are concentrated in the east of Ukraine, and they are on the defensive across most of the front lines. This defensive posture means fewer lives lost and more resources than the offensive operations across a wider front nearly a year ago.

Russian offensive operations are now largely focused on trying to secure the remaining territory of Donetsk and LuhanskSecuring that territory was a core justification for the invasion.

‘Grinding advance’

Russia’s current operations in the region of Bakhmut in Donbas are not making rapid progress, but constitute the sort of grinding advance that in many ways better suits the Russian army.

The types of problems with the “command and control” of Russian troops at the beginning of the war have been reduced for operations of more limited scope. Typically less experienced and lacking extensive training, Russian reservists are better suited to the more limited and methodical operations of today.

Russian forces also have considerable experience fighting the sort of artillery-heavy war now being fought.

Russian forces attempted to rush the Chechen capital of Grozny back in late 1994 in a manner not dissimilar to the attack on Kyiv in 2022. In the light of that failure, they adopted the sort of tried-and-tested, artillery-centred approach honed during the Second World War to reduce the city before capturing it. That approach was applied to Mariupol.

As an historian of the Russian and Soviet military, I am well aware of what might be regarded as a Russian cultural disposition towards rash initial offensive operations that make way to a more methodical and measured follow-up. In addition to the case of the seizure of Grozny during the Chechen wars, the Soviet Union’s great Patriotic War is littered with examples of this phenomenon.

This has often been accompanied by a psychological doubling-down and a deeper commitment to the task in hand. There are plenty of signs that this has been the situation for the Russian army since the fall.

Distrust of the West and NATO

Despite Russian losses and setbacks, public opinion polls suggest Russia’s population still supports the war effort in Ukraine. That support is crucial for the army fighting in Ukraine.

Western support of Ukrainian efforts to recapture all territory lost since 2014 is the sort of no-compromise stance that feeds acceptance of the Russian government’s argument that the West has been out to get Russia for some time, and that NATO’s expansion to Russia’s borders is part of a process that justifies Russia drawing a line in the sand.

Many Russians consider Crimea a core part of Russia, and western support for Ukraine’s attempts to recapture it is a particular affront.

Both sides will suffer shortages in manpower and material as the war drags on. Russia has large reserves, along with a handful of overt allies like Iran and North Korea — whereas Ukraine is backed by the weight of the NATO alliance.

Long war is likely

Both sides therefore have the capacity to keep fighting for the foreseeable future. More western equipment, including some of the latest western tanks and other armoured vehicles, will undoubtedly strengthen the Ukrainian military in the short term. But more vehicle types complicate training, maintenance and supply issues.

If Germany eventually supplies Ukraine with tanks, it will represent a considerable propaganda victory for Putin. Parallels are already being drawn in the Russian media between the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 and the prospect of German tanks on the battlefield in Ukraine today.

If the war continues along its current trajectory, neither side is likely to gain a decisive advantage. One side or the other may gain temporary advantage as they escalate and counter-escalate, but any advantage for either Russia or Ukraine is unlikely to be sustained.

Sadly, in the absence of any negotiations — and certainly meaningful talks in which both sides will have to give as well as take — the bloodshed is likely to continue for some time yet.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

AUTHOR

Alexander Hill

Professor Alexander Hill has taught history at the University of Calgary since 2004. He has PhD in Social and Political Sciences from the University of Cambridge and specializes in Soviet military and… More by Alexander Hill

RELATED ARTICLE: The blood-drenched, suffering lands of Eastern Europe

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

It’s time to treat Big Tech like Big Tobacco

Imagine if a man in a white panel van pulled up in your neighbourhood and began enticing teens to look at pictures and videos featuring drug use, pornography and a range of other antisocial activities. In many neighbourhoods, he’d be in handcuffs within the hour.

And yet, strangely enough, Mark Zuckerberg, Shou Zi Chew and Sundar Pichai do almost the same thing online at Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, where they have virtually unimpeded access to the neighbourhood teens and manage to make billions of dollars poisoning their hearts and minds.

This is the strange moment we are living in, a moment where we still let Big Tech push products on our teens that, as the Facebook Files suggested, make them anxious, depressed and suicidal, among other pathologies.

We’re at a moment with Big Tech much like we were with Big Tobacco in the 1970s, when the studies were rolling in documenting the medical risks associated with smoking, but the government had not yet stepped in aggressively to limit smoking. In the past decade, anxiety, depression and teen suicide have surged, especially among girls, since the mass adoption of smartphones around 2010. Depression more than doubled, from 12 percent in 2010 to 26 percent today for teen girls. Emergency room visits for self-inflicted injuries almost doubled over the same period, again for teen girls. And teen suicide among girls has risen to a 40-year high.

A mounting body of evidence indicates that Big Tech is heavily implicated in the skyrocketing psychological problems of our nation’s adolescents. One recent study found that teens who devote more than eight hours a day to screen time were about twice as likely to be depressed as their peers who were on screens less often than that.

The study, sponsored by the Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute and co-authored by one of us, also discovered that teens who have high tech use were almost twice as likely to report being lonely and about 30 percent more likely to be sleep deprived.

Social media appears to be especially problematic for today’s teens. Excessive time on social media has been linked to “fear of missing out,” cyberbullying, emotional insecurity and body-image problems. The time devoted to social media also inhibits in-person socializing, exercise and sleep, all of which are crucial for adolescents’ emotional well-being. Research by psychologist Jean Twenge found, for instance, that the share of teens who went on dates has fallen by almost 30 percentage points in recent years and that the number of times teens hang out with friends fell by about 20 percent from 2007 to 2015. “As long as teens are scrolling through Instagram more, and hanging in person with their friends less, depression is likely to remain at historically high levels,” noted Twenge.

Of course, just as Big Tobacco had its defenders as debates about the tobacco-cancer link first erupted, Big Tech has its defenders today, as well. For example, Harvard social scientist Mesfin Bekalu argued that routine social media use “could be beneficial,” a sentiment echoed by Zuckerberg in his claim that Instagram is “generally positive” for kids’ mental health. While all social scientists know that “correlation does not equal causation,” there is growing evidence that the negative impact of technology on teens is indeed causal. In fact, new studies of the rollout of broadband internet in Germany and Italy show the penetration of the internet into ordinary communities across these countries fuelled emotional problems among the young, especially young women, providing the strongest evidence to date that it really is Big Tech, not something else, making us miserable.

Here in the United States, a new study finds that the expansion of the internet has driven suicide rates higher in counties across America, further evidence that Big Tech’s effects are causal.

Unfortunately, Big Tech has been able to prey on our teens in part because their apps operate under a law that was designed before the age of social media, giving parents very little control over their kids’ tech use. That law, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, was passed in 1998 in the age of dial-up internet service and online message boards. Since then, the internet has gone through significant changes. Today, at the click of a button or the swipe of a phone, our children can find themselves immersed in apps and games that expose them to antisocial images and messages without their parents’ knowledge, consent or protection.

But since Congress has failed to stand up to Big Tech by updating the legislation, it falls on states to take the lead in protecting our kids. Louisiana recently passed legislation requiring pornography sites to verify users’ ages. And Utah, under the leadership of Gov. Spencer Cox, is now poised to take the lead in protecting teens from the worst excesses of Big Tech.

Inspired in part by the report “Protecting Teens from Big Tech: Five Policy Ideas for States,” Utah state legislators like Sen. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, and Rep. Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan, are working with Cox to advance legislation that would ensure that all social media platforms operating in the state do five things:

  • Age verify their users.
  • Get permission from parents for users younger than 18.
  • Give parents access to kids’ social media accounts.
  • Provide parents with the right to sue Big Tech for financial damages if they do not obey the law.
  • Prohibit Big Tech companies from using kids’ data or addictive algorithms on platforms serving children.

Cox also hopes to launch a public campaign that will educate kids and young adults about the dangers of devoting too much time to the virtual world, and not enough time to the real world.

Some will argue that such reforms are unnecessary or impractical. Regarding necessity, those who are parents today know how hard it can be to police their children’s social media accounts. The law should make it easier — not harder — for parents to protect their children.

As for feasibility, new online technologies make it easy to require age/ID verification for children’s use of apps through third-party services such as Persona. And parental monitoring of such apps can build on the success that companies like Greenlight (which provides debit cards that allow parents to oversee their children’s spending) have already had in implementing this type of technology.

Companies like Alphabet, Meta and TikTok have unparalleled power to shape the hearts, minds and lives of American adolescents. Of course, some of the connections forged by these platforms have been good, helping kids deepen friendships, stay in touch with grandparents or communicate socially redeeming messages.

But much of the time, the power that Big Tech wields over our children’s lives ends up being abused and abusive, and Cox aims to give parents more power to guide and protect their kids online. We hope the Utah state legislature will work with him to pass legislation to rein in Big Tech.

As Cox said at a recent symposium on social media and teen mental health, “I truly believe we are starting to reach this tipping point. I was shocked when I saw some of those charts and graphs. I knew it was worse, but I didn’t realize how much until I saw the data. And when I saw those, it was an awakening for me, and we’re hoping to have that same awakening with policymakers.”

In other words, it’s time for Utah — and the rest of the country — to treat Big Tech much like Big Tobacco.

This article has been republished with permission from Deseret News.

AUTHORS

W. Bradford Wilcox

W. Bradford Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, is a senior fellow of the Institute for Family Studies and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. More by W. Bradford Wilcox

Riley Peterson

Riley Peterson is an undergraduate studying religion and sociology at Baylor University. More by Riley Peterson

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Administration Sues Google Over Allegedly Anticompetitive Ad Practices

The Biden administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Google, alleging that the tech titan’s dominance in digital advertising was the result of anticompetitive practices.

Eight states — Virginia, California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Tennessee — joined the DOJ in the lawsuit, alleging that Google utilized a “simple but effective” plan to successfully establish “durable, industry-wide dominance.” First, Google would buy out “actual or potential” competitors, and secondly, it would simultaneously use its position of dominance to disrupt competitors and ensure that publishers and advertisers used Google products, the complaint alleges.

Google is beset with “pervasive conflicts of interest,” the complaint further alleges. Google owns the technology to offer advertisements space, tools to make better ads and an ad exchange to match publishers with advertisers, and the combination of these powers enables Google to inflate the barrier to entry in digital advertising to “artificially high levels.”

One unnamed Google advertising executive reportedly asked if there was a “deeper issue with us owning the platform, the exchange and a huge network?” according to the complaint. “The analogy would be if Goldman or Citibank owned the [New York Stock Exchange].”

Google said that the lawsuit was “flawed,” and repeated arguments made in an ongoing lawsuit by Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation

“Today’s lawsuit from the DOJ attempts to pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector,” a Google spokesperson told the DCNF. “It largely duplicates an unfounded lawsuit by the Texas Attorney General, much of which was recently dismissed by a federal court. DOJ is doubling down on a flawed argument that would slow innovation, raise advertising fees, and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow”

The move comes just days after Google cut 12,000 employees as a cost-saving measure in anticipation of a difficult economic year. Like other Big Tech firms, ad revenue fell for Google in 2022, leading its video-sharing and streaming platform YouTube to post its first decline in revenue in the third quarter of last year since Google began publicly tracking the stat in 2020.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a DCNF request for comment.

This story has been updated with comment from Google.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Regulator Fines Tech Giant Millions For Showing Targeted Ads Based On User Activity

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Kamala Harris: ‘We Love’ Abortionists

Former President Bill Clinton tried to soften the Democratic Party’s image as extreme liberals by insisting, “I am not pro-abortion.” Over the weekend, Kamala Harris opened a widely panned speech on abortion by saying she and President Joe Biden “love” abortionists, before concluding her speech, “God bless America.”

The vice president went on to imply that Americans’ unalienable rights do not come from our Creator; omit the right to life from the Declaration of Independence; hint that the national anthem supports abortion; accuse pro-life advocates of attacking the “foundations of freedom; and claim an LGBT riot, in which drag queens tried to burn policemen alive, represents “the strength of our nation.”

Harris delivered an address in Tallahassee, Florida, on Sunday to mark what would have been the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, an anniversary aborted last summer when the Supreme Court overturned the case, which first invented a constitutional right to abortion. Planned Parenthood had already planned to hold a “Rally in Tally” before Harris joined their lineup; Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson spoke earlier in the event. An abortionist with Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida, named Sujatha Prabhakaran, introduced Harris after leading the crowd in a rousing chant of “Abortion is health care!” (In reality, the Hippocratic Oath states, “I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion. With purity and with holiness I will pass my life and practice my art.”)

“We love” abortionists. Arriving at the podium, a confused Harris began by asking where Prabhakaran had gone. “We love all of our frontline folks,” said Harris, referring to abortion industry employees. “And this room is filled with them.”

Harris then delivered a speech that rang alarm bells nationwide for its secularism and historical revisionism.

Erasing the Creator and the right to life. Harris seemed to state that Americans’ unalienable rights do not come from God but from a social contract among voters. “America is a promise; it is a promise of freedom and liberty, not for some, but for all — a promise we made in the Declaration of Independence,” she said. Harris then left out our founding document’s reference to the right to life, saying, “We are each endowed with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Be clear: These rights were not bestowed upon us. They belong to us as Americans.”

The Founding Fathers designed a form of government that would restrain the government from violating Americans’ God-given rights, including the right to life. Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness — That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men.” (Emphases added.)

Both Joe Biden and Barack Obama regularly omitted the Declaration’s reference to “the Creator” — a rhetorical gambit that critics say undermines freedom and liberty.

“We need to know our history and challenge those who want to selectively edit or change our founding documents, because it matters that our rights come to us from God — that they are not a grant from government,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” Monday. “When you take God out of the equation … it enables these power-hungry bureaucrats and politicians to try to usurp those rights.”

Secularism also attacks the foundations of our freedoms, said a lifelong student of the Founders’ views. “In every nation in the history of the world, there’s only really been two options: They either have a really big government or a really big God. They don’t have both, because if you have a really big God, you don’t need a really big government,” Tim Barton of WallBuilders told Perkins Monday. “You don’t need it to be God in your life.”

“But if there is no God, then you need a big government,” Barton continued, “because instead of, ‘My God shall supply all my needs,’ it tends to be, ‘My government shall supply all the needs.‘”

Star-Spangled abortion? Harris continued reimagining the nation’s founding when she implied that abortion rings through every line of our national anthem. “Here is a collection of words that mean everything to us as Americans: the heartfelt words of our great national anthem, that America is ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave,’” she said. “But let us ask, can we truly be free if a woman cannot make decisions about her own body?” Abortionists destroy a child’s body by suction/aspiration or dismemberment; they have also injured or killed the mother.

Protecting 6.9% of babies from abortion is extreme? Harris chided “so-called leaders at the statehouse here in Tallahassee” for passing “a radical abortion ban.” Thanks to the bill, she said, “health care providers face prison for up to five years for simply doing their job.”

Governor Ron DeSantis (R) signed a bill last year protecting unborn babies from abortion after 15 weeks, or slightly after the first trimester. Abortionists commit “nearly all” U.S. abortions (93.1%) before 13 weeks gestation, according to the Biden-Harris administration’s most recent abortion surveillance. A full 72% of Americans support such a law, according to a Harvard/Harris poll.

The “health care providers” Harris mentioned were abortionists, whose job entails ending the life of a child, which begins at fertilization.

“How dare” Republicans protect life? Pro-life politicians “attack the very foundations of freedom,” Harris continued. “Republicans in Congress are now calling for a nationwide abortion ban. Some even from the moment of conception” — which, embryologists agree, marks the moment a child’s life begins.

“How dare they?! How dare they?!” Harris bellowed.

Allowing abortion-on-demand does not contradict any faith? Harris once again tried to appeal to Americans to lay aside faith-based objections to abortion. “One does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree that the government should not be telling people what to do with their own bodies,” she claimed. Christians have held that abortion violates their faith, and should be illegal, for 2,000 years. Orthodox Jews also say they hold a pro-life faith. However, the Satanic Temple regards abortion as a sacrament.

The “strength of our nation” was secured by LGBT rioters who attacked police. Harris told the crowd of abortion industry employees and lobbyists that they must have “the kind of determination” that motivated “our greatest patriots,” including “those Americans who fought a Civil War to end the sin of slavery, who organized at Seneca Falls to secure a woman’s right to vote, who launched the Freedom Rides to advance civil rights, and spoke out at the Stonewall Inn to defend human rights.”

On June 29, 1969, six New York City police officers raided the Stonewall Inn, a seedy bar operated by the Mafia without a license, on a morals charge. Thousands of LGBT rioters surrounded the half-dozen cops, pelted them with bottles, and attempted to burn the bar to the ground with them inside. “Our goal was to hurt those police,” said rioter John O’Brien. “I wanted to kill those cops.”

In 2016, Barack Obama named the Stonewall Inn a national monument.

Harris attempted to encourage the crowd, dispirited by pro-life gains since the Dobbs ruling. “We’re on the right side of history,” she told the crowd.

“May God bless you, and may God bless America,” she concluded.

Inverting historical, moral, and religious truth so completely is not accidental but an attempt to demonize the Founding Fathers, repeal the Constitution, and establish an alternate form of government, Barton said.

“I think it’s very hard to argue that Kamala Harris or President Biden don’t understand the positions they’re taking, and they’re doing it intentionally to promote a political ideology philosophy,” Barton told Perkins. “They are working, as President Obama once said, to fundamentally transform America.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Said He Was a Prostitute. Believe Him.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: Abortion-Marxism Connection

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Don’t miss this: ‘A Wildflower Super-Bloom for the Ages’

With parts of California recently inundated by more rain than any time in the last quarter-century, the climate crisis industry is portraying the unusual weather event as more proof that the much ballyhooed climate “tipping point” is finally upon us. A few years back, they were making the same bogus claim about a stubborn drought that gripped the state from 2012-15. Below are two short articles I wrote about that massively over-hyped dry spell.


California: A Wildflower Super-Bloom for the Ages

In 2012, California was hit with a statewide drought that lasted 4 years. Over that period, The Los Angeles Times ran a relentless barrage of dire stories predicting that unless the U.S. immediately—immediately!—enacted massive carbon taxes, the drought would drone on forever.

Act now! voters were told, or vegetation in the state would be wiped out by a permanently parched environment, snow would be a thing of the past, and every river and lake in the state would dry up.

Despite a deafening crescendo of frantic, man-made hysteria, no carbon taxes were enacted. And guess what? Much to the consternation of the climate crisis industry, the California drought hit a stone wall in 2016, when plentiful rainfall returned to the state.

After failing to sufficiently terrify voters, red-faced editors at the LA Times had no choice but to report that California is flourishing again:

“It’s official: California is 100% drought-free. For the first time since 2011, the state shows no areas suffering from prolonged drought and illustrates almost entirely normal conditions, according to a map released Thursday by the U.S. Drought Monitor.”

The article continued:

“Reservoirs are full, lakes are full, the streams are flowing, there’s tons of snow.”

Thanks to Earth’s ever-changing climate, droughts come and droughts go. Unusually hot temperatures in the state gave way to cooler ones—Los Angeles just experienced its mildest February in recorded history, with not a single day above 70 degrees.

After being told that vegetation in the state would be permanently wiped out, Californians are now enjoying one of the most spectacular wildflower super blooms ever seen. Take a deep breath before looking at the pictures below, and don’t forget to thank God for climate change.

How could a dying planet produce a magnificent nature show like the one shown below?

RELATED: PHOTO 1PHOTO 2, PHOTO 3, PHOTO 4, PHOTO 5, PHOTO 6, PHOTO 7, PHOTO 8, PHOTO 9.

Drought Fizzles: After 4 Years of Environmental Hyper-Ventilating by Climate Fear Industry , California’s Lakes Are Back at 100% Capacity

“A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.” – Lenin


Feb. 2017: Since December 2015, sustained rainfall has caused water to flow into the spillway at California’s Lake Berryessa.

For the last four years, California votes were repeatedly told in increasingly frantic terms that the drought that began in 2012 was nail-in-the-coffin proof that the climate collapse “tipping point” had finally been reached.

Progressives in government, academia, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and the media relentlessly trumpeted dire warnings that California’s lakes would permanently dry up unless Americans agreed to immediate remedial action in the form of massive new taxes on carbon energy. Such taxes were never enacted, so did California’s lakes permanently dry up, as ominously predicted?

No, they didn’t. Not even close.

Last week, an official of the Data Exchange Center of the California Department of Water Resources told me the water level of the 47 selected reservoirs measured by the state are collectively 109% above historical averages.

One of the state’s most famous lakes, previously dried-up Lake Tahoe, joined the party with its largest water level rise in recorded history. In recognition that most of California’s lakes have returned to full capacity, the state’s Democrat governor was left with no choice but to declare an official end to the heavily-hyped drought.

Below are side-by-side pictures of Almaden Reservoir in Northern California near San Jose. One was taken before the drought started, the other when the drought was in full swing. This image is typical of the kind of visual terror progressives use to frighten voters into acquiescing to stratospheric new energy taxes.

Lake Almaden

But before enough voters could be sufficiently frightened, Mother Nature dealt progressives a devastating setback. In December 2015, rain returned to California, lots of rain, something that wasn’t supposed to happen unless massive new taxes were enacted.

By spring 2016, Lake Almaden was back at full capacity, exactly where it was in 2011, and exactly where voters were told it would never be again unless they submitted to crushing new taxation. According to the Santa Clara County Water District, as of May 1 of this year, Almaden and other reservoirs in the District were at 106% of historical average capacity.

Contrary to what progressives would have you believe, even the most severe droughts eventually end. And even though they know better, progressives would also have you believe another Big Lie, that extreme droughts were scarce as hen’s teeth until man began burning fossil fuels.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing.

Ancient mega-droughts

Here’s part of California’s drought history that progressives try to hide at all costs: Studies of tree rings, sediment and other natural evidence have documented multiple extreme droughts in California over the last 1,0000+ years, including several that lasted more than 20 years–that’s FIVE TIMES longer than the relatively puny 4-year drought of 2012-15.

Twenty years is a long time, but some California droughts lasted even longer. Much longer.

One that began in the year 850 AD droned on for a staggering 240 years, and that mega-drought occurred 1,140 years before progressives of the 1980s invented the climate crisis industry out of whole cloth.

The drought of 850 wasn’t alone. Fifty years before it began, another mega-drought, one that lasted 180 years, was just winding down. Here’s an inconvenient truth progressives will never share with you: the region now known as California has been plagued for eons by extreme droughts, 100% of which eventually came to an end.

Why won’t Democrats tell you about California’s drought history? Because it would blow a hole bigger than Grand Canyon in another Big Lie they repeatedly tell, that extreme weather events in recent years are worse than at any time in Earth’s history.

Not a single one of their apocalyptic climate predictions has even come close to happening, yet they keep using Lenin’s teaching that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.

©John Edison. All rights reserved.

Dems Run for the Exits as the Number of Mishandled Documents Multiplies

As the scandal over Joe Biden’s classified documents widens, Democrats may finally be jumping ship. After weeks of holding their fire, party leaders showed the first signs of turning on the president after Friday’s revelations that a fifth batch of documents had been found at the Bidens’ Delaware home. In a string of interviews across the Sunday shows, the White House’s support seemed to crumble, as one Democrat after another blasted the president for his carelessness.

Biden should be “embarrassed by the situation,” the Senate’s second-highest ranking Democrat told CNN. “There’s a standard we follow when it comes to members of Congress and classified information,” Dick Durbin (Ill.) said on “State of the Union.” “To think that any of them ended up in boxes in storage one place or the other is just unacceptable.”

Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who, like many Americans, was stunned to hear the president say he had “no regrets” about the revelations, argued that Biden “should have a lot of regrets. …[I]t’s irresponsible.” But it’s more than just “irresponsible,” the House’s new Oversight and Accountability Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) explained on Fox News. It’s “downright scary.”

Some of the files, which attorneys say date back to his time in the U.S. Senate, raised serious questions from current senators like Ted Cruz (R-Texas). “How on earth did he do that?” Cruz asked. “I’ve served in the Senate for 10 years. EVERY single classified doc I’ve read — 100% — have been in a secure SCIF in the basement of the Capitol.”

Meanwhile, the White House’s strategy seems to be projecting Biden as the picture of cooperation — a strategy that former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy says is nothing but a phony façade. “To try to stave off this chain of political disasters, Biden has decided to pose as a dedicated public servant who cooperates unfailingly with law enforcement because he has nothing to hide. Don’t fall for it,” McCarthy argues. “Team Biden has been playing games for two months. And clearly the president not only has things to hide; he has been hiding some of them for over 15 years.”

“A guy who has nothing to hide does not retain high-priced lawyers to pack up his private office,” McCarthy went on. “… Having lawyers pack up is the kind of thing you do when you’re a Democratic president who raked in millions of dollars from operatives of foreign governments, and when Republicans are about to take control of the House — and use its subpoena power to investigate.”

At the end of the day, McCarthy insists, “The president did not consent to an FBI search of his home because he is unconcerned. He consented to it because he knew law enforcement had more than sufficient evidence to compel a search of his home. From his standpoint, with his 2024 reelection hopes now teetering, it was better to pose as a cooperative volunteer than be forced to open his door to federal agents brandishing a judicial warrant.”

For now, Team Biden seems to be using the same game plan with Comer’s House investigation, which the president’s team promises to accommodate. In a letter to the Kentucky legislator, the White House says it will comply with “legitimate oversight interests within the Committee’s jurisdiction,” warning that it must also respect “the separation of powers and the constitutional and statutory obligations of the Executive Branch generally…” Still, White House Counsel Stuart Delery wrote, “We look forward to engaging in good faith with you and your staff regarding your requests.”

Comer will believe it when he sees it. On “Washington Watch” Friday, the chair told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, “I could make a strong argument that the Biden administration is the least transparent administration in history. And the way they’ve started off in the first two weeks of my tenure as chairman of the House Oversight Committee, which is supposed to be a check and balance on the administration, I can tell you — I don’t see it getting any better anytime soon.”

The appointment of a special counsel has Comer’s antenna up. “I’ve always been critical of the special counsel process. This is something that I don’t believe has ever proven its worth. …[M]y fear is when they appointed a special counsel for Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents, that they would try to use that as a shield for saying, ‘Well, we would work with you, and we would give you the information … but we can’t because the special counsel is investigating it.’”

The irony, Comer said, is that he always felt there would be a special counsel, “but I [thought] it would be over Hunter Biden’s shenanigans and not Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents.”

Now the two seem disturbingly linked.

A lot of the concern with these discoveries, Comer explained, are the national security implications. As far back as a year ago, Republicans tried to dig deeper into the connection between China and the Biden Center for Diplomacy at the University of Pennsylvania. “… I don’t think any of the press ever picked up on it,” he said. “We knew that the University of Pennsylvania was receiving more money from China than any other university in America, and we knew that Pennsylvania was funding the Biden Center for Diplomacy. So you could say that the Biden Center for Diplomacy was being funded by China. … We want to know who those anonymous sources were, because is China just giving money to the University of Pennsylvania because they like the job they’re doing. Or are they trying to get a return on their investment?”

That matters, Comer went on, because “when you find out that there are classified documents there — where potential Chinese Communist Party members are going in and out of. Then it’s a concern when you find out that Hunter Biden, who’s a national security risk, and Joe Biden’s brothers who have influence-peddled for two decades, are going in and out of a house where documents are just sitting in a garage. Then it’s a concern. So we are investigating Biden to determine whether or not this administration is compromised, because it makes no sense of all the money they’ve received from China.”

It’s a big job for the new majority — especially considering the other crises that deserve Comer’s attention — but he says Republicans are up to the task. “I have 25 other members of the House Oversight Committee. I would argue that they’re some of the top members of our entire conference. They’re aggressive. They work hard. … I believe that we’ve got plenty of places to start our investigation, and we’re going to go wherever the information leads us.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Kamala Harris: ‘We Love’ Abortionists

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Revenge Riot in Atlanta: The New ‘Evil Empire’ Strikes Again

The riot in Atlanta over the weekend has prompted new legislation to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization.  Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said she would introduce such a bill which, if passed, would result in an investigation into Antifa’s operations and funding.

If you only paid attention to left-wing media coverage of the riot, you must be wondering what it has to do with Antifa.  The Guardian and the Associated Press both portrayed the protesters as ‘environmental activists’, one of whom was shot and killed by police during previous ongoing demonstrations against the building of a police training facility in a wooded area near Atlanta.  The Guardian said there is no evidence the man shot first at police, as was widely reported, and quoted the man’s mother saying her son was “assassinated in cold blood.”  The Guardian story said the action was unprecedented, the first killing of an environmental activist in the U.S.  The ‘Stop Cop City’ movement began in 2021 after the Atlanta city council approved the new training center, the Guardian went on.  But vandalism caused officials to start calling the protesters ‘terrorists’.  Police began conducting raids, leading to the arrest of six “forest defenders” on state domestic terrorism charges in mid-December, also an unprecedented affront to the environmental and justice movement, the Guardian reported.  Seven more militants were similarly charged on the day one of the protesters was killed last week.

The Associated Press story went on in the same vein, that these were harmless little tree huggers who wouldn’t hurt a fly.  The person killed was a transgender who used they/it pronouns – an “extremely loving, caring member of the ‘Stop Cop City’ community,” the AP reported.

To its credit, the AP did mention explosive devices were recovered during the riot and mortar-style fireworks, edged weapons, pellet rifles, gas masks, and a blow torch were found at the protesters’ camp site.  But neither story mentioned Antifa at all.

However, Andy Ngo, a victim of Antifa who wrote a book on them, reported, “The riot was organized as revenge for their gunman dying in a shootout at the autonomous zone.”  Autonomous zones are an Antifa thing.  All of the seven militants arrested after the shootout were from out of state, another Antifa hallmark.  Other indicia this was Antifa include radical environmentalism and anti-police militancy, both found in Antifa’s manifesto.  With regard to the latter, the protesters were trying to stop the construction of a police training facility.  During the riot, they targeted the Police Foundation building in downtown Atlanta and set a police car on fire.  Adding to the case this was Antifa, a cross-over from transgenderism to Antifa has become apparent in recent months.  Both share communist ideology, as is apparent from Antifa’s manifesto and from a video showing transgender activists talking about using transgenderism to usher in communism.

There is no serious dispute these were far-left militants in Atlanta, whether they formally belonged to an Antifa group or not.  So Marjorie Taylor Greene’s proposed legislation to go after Antifa is a good place to start.

The radical violent Left should never been allowed to get this far.  I blame politicians like Portland’s Mayor Ted Wheeler for being complicit.  Without the cooperation of politicians, the Antifa riots and lawless autonomous zones of 2020 could not have happened.  Because politicians were complicit, a billion dollars in property damage, the wholesale destruction of downtown areas, and injuries to 700 police officers in the riots of 2020 would not have taken place.  You have to ask yourself why politicians – all Democrats – would want to bring about such destruction.

You also have to ask why the FBI and the Justice Department are completely uninterested in pursuing Antifa and violent left-wing militancy more generally.
You also have to ask why left-wing media would cover up or minimize the seriousness of the riots and Antifa’s involvement in them.  Once again, we were treated to media gaslighting us during the Atlanta riot.  A local TV reporter called the riot a “largely peaceful protest” while the camera showed a police cruiser engulfed in flames in the background.  You will recall CNN made the same idiotic claim with buildings on fire in the background during the riots of 2020.  Things are not made better by lying about them.

Left-wing politicians, left-wing media, and government agencies captured by the Left, all working in concert to further the aims of radical violent left-wing militants, who constitute the armed wing of the left-wing Democrat Party in this country.  This is why I now call the Left the ‘Evil Empire’ and you should, too.

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Armed Democrat Militia (Antifa) ‘Night Of Rage’ Riot Left Businesses Destroyed, Police Car Scorched‘

My Greatest and Most Profound Mistake: Not Seeing the Existential Danger of the ‘Red-Green-Rainbow Alliance’

Anarchist medic killed in shooting with Georgia State Patrol

Planned Global Socialist Destruction of Western Civilization—The Great Reset

Yes, we are dealing with a Planned Global Socialist Destruction of America by the American government today. I have been warning you about Planned Global Socialist Destruction for forty years. America doesn’t know Russia and its Intel, as a result, we have an incredible chaos nationwide and threat for the future. It is painful to watch Fox News, they are fearlessly arguing, but none of them knows the political history of Russia. They haven’t read my books and columns and don’t know that soon after WWII ended, WWIII began…

The UFO saga started in 1947. Maybe it was connected to the Planned Socialist Destruction of America and WWIII? Maybe? The timing is very suspicious to me. Why does America ignore a chunk of such an important time in the 20th century world history? It was the birth of Stalinism, the ideology of Soviet Socialism, I called Soviet fascism. My latest column reminded you about Soviet Socialism and the way it has been implemented in half of the word by using Socialist modus operandi: lies, deception, fabrication, and fraud. Regrettably, the U.S. is no exception. Read it here

I am not alone talking about Stalinism and the time after WWII. Decent journalists in Russia are also returning to that time. Please, read their assessment of the time and compare in to the information mentioned in my column:

СССР К 1984 ГОДУ. ЗАРОЖДЕНИЕ ПРАВОЗАЩИТНОГО ДВИЖЕНИЯ

22 ИЮНЯ 2022, ВЛАДИМИР ШЕСТАКОВ

USSR BY 1984. THE ORIGIN OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENTJUNE 22, 2022, VLADIMIR SHESTAKOV

“Soviet power relied on an effective system of state security, which regularly served the political leadership of the country. All Bolshevik leaders, beginning with Lenin, considered political repression to be a legitimate and effective element of politics. The state security organs reached their greatest power under Stalin. The “Leader of the Peoples” and his inner circle made extensive use of the state security apparatus for political purposes. Stalin himself initiated the mass repressions of the 1930s, delved into all their details.” Everyday Journal, January 19. 2023, Actual Archive. The author writes it in the country, where the cult of Stalin’s personality is alive, well and promoted by his devoted disciple Vladimir Putin. The author is in fear of the same KGB’s Mafia/Army, I was reporting and describing for you during the last forty years. Nothing has changed in Russia.

The author as a decent individual has no choice as history determined presence, and future. Only by reading my columns, you will see how careful he is in his observation of Stalinism. He had to do so to prevent a political storm against him. I gave you this piece of history for a reason: my column of January 18, 2023 was written for two Special Counsels appointed to investigate two American Presidents. We are dealing with a Planned Socialist Destruction of America by the American government today and knowledge of inextricable connection to Russia and its Intel is a Must.  The timing is helping to see the real design and Stalin’s strategy to pursue of control and power. On October 24, 1945 the United Nation has been officially established in San-Francisco, CA. From that exact day it has become the main target of Russian Intel. There have been nine Secretary-Generals of the UN, one was a KGB’s member and another was assassinated in the plane crash by the KGB—he refused the offer. Read my books. The recent Secretary-General is Antonio Gutierrez, I don’t trust him: he pursues control and power. He impudently and arrogantly propagandized old KGB’s ploy of “climate change” like Gore and Kerry. Read my book and a story about the Olympics in Moscow and listen to Gutierrez in the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2023:

The Elite gathered in Davos now to push a global agenda designed by Stalin and promoted by his devoted disciples, a tandem of current Socialist/Communist Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese Communist leader Xi Jinping. “There are no perfect solutions in a perfect storm,” said Antonio Gutierrez.  He has served as secretary-general of the United Nations since 2017. He stressed on January 18, 2023. “But we can work to control the damage and seize opportunities.” “Now more than ever, it’s time to forge the pathways to cooperation in our fragmented world.” He is echoing the Biden team in full compliance with Socialist modus operandi: lies, deceit, fabricated, and fraud to help Biden’s team to fool and brainwash you. He knows about an upcoming GOP’s investigation and the critical story of Biden’s mishandling top-secret documents and violation of American national security—the crux of the matter with the awful smell of Treason. Remember Socialist modus operandi: lies, deception, fabrication and fraud.

The FBI, CIA and The KGB’s Mafia/Army

The Elite gathered in Davos to push a global agenda designed by Stalin was encouraged and sponsored for years by his devoted disciple Russian President Vladimir Putin. Please, remember that Vladimir Putin was a respected member of the G20 in 2021. That was happening, because the FBI and CIA were not properly functioning or infiltrated by the foreign powers. I was showing that foreign powers during the decades introduced to Americans the KGB Chairman Yuri Andropov 1967-1982 and his KGB’s Mafia/Army. It was Andropov who designed and implemented the simultaneous infiltration in American security apparatus and media by the Russian Intel. If I didn’t believe it being in Russia, I saw it in America 60 years later. I was also introducing the “criminal cabal” in America that colluded with a new term—the KGB’s Mafia/Army—the Andropov’s Doer…

The current Biden’s Docs scandal can be understood only by people who are familiar with the KGB Chairman Yuri Andropov. For them the entire picture of the Dem’s treason is clear. If you read my columns or books you will learn about Soviet Fascism long-term procedure moving slowly from Russia to America. It started under Clinton and continued under Obama and Biden. Putin is a devoted disciple of Stalin and Andropov, his collusion with Biden is obvious by the events in the Southern border if you know that Mexican Cartels are in fact the Russian Cartels of the KGB’s Mafia/Army operated since 1950-1960 in Mexica. Knowing Andropov, you will also learn the main point of collusion and his definition of information: “information is the precious commodity in politics.” Russian needs the information, read Unmasking the Underground Enemy: Russia,December 12, 2022.

FBI searches Biden’s Wilmington home and finds more classified materials. The FBI makes believe that the agency acts similar to the Trump case. It is not. On the contrary, the FBI has exposed the differences in many respects, a crumbling misleading defense of Biden. After collaborating with Biden’s team and associating in fraud making Biden the President, I don’t trust the FBI. The agency under Mr. Wray, for unknown to me reason didn’t want to know Russia, its Intel and lost the ability to vet the enemy that was demolishing us from within. You will hear a lot about Russian ties very soon. Moreover, The FBI committed a crime by preventing Americans from reading my books and columns about Russia in 2002, making me a Foreign Agent and banning my writings. This is a result of the recent chaos in America and the World…

The FBI and CIA have failed us, we have not been protected for a long time. In fear and disgust I am watching Dems-Socialists covering-up for Biden. I have already given you their names, but the FBI prevented you from knowing them and forced me to do it again. I called them Socialist Charlatans, lying thugs, and traitors for forty years, they are from different generations constantly destroying the American Republic: Georg Soros, Berny Sanders, James Clyburn, Debbie Dingle, Tim Kaine, Nancy Pelosi, and seventy others in the American Congress. This is only a tip of the iceberg. Read my columns to learn many other names. The Supreme Mystery is not a mystery for me: I know the KGB’s Mafia/Army and I suspect that two Supreme Court Justices have ties with them.

You were witnessing total chaos within Biden’s team during the last two weeks—Docs Drama. We are now dealing with criminal investigation, legal process, where subject matter is criminal handling of top-secret Docs for decades. The “criminal cabal” of the Democrat Party will not investigate itself, as they did in Hillary’s case, not touching Bill’s Global Foundation, which I called—the eyes and ears of the KGB. It was a terrible mistake. We now have nationwide chaos because of the prior Dem policy, in my opinion Treason. We ought to learn a lesson and don’t allow the Democrats committing crime again. We also should learn Putin’s mentality and behavior watching Ukraine. He deliberately and inhumanely by fascist methods annihilated the Ukrainian people and their dwelling in the cold winter of 2022/2023.

There is instability around the world and now you feel that we are at WWIII. It will deteriorate. The agenda of two Special Counsels is very timely. I am writing this column for them to learn who is behind all American troubles. We are dealing with a legal process, where the subject matter is criminal handling of top-secret documents. The evidence is the crux of the matter in both cases. If the two Special Counsels are decent individuals, they will use the information, I have recorded for forty years, to establish the Truth. The fate of the American Republic and the Constitution left to us by our Founding Fathers depends on their professional investigations.

Putin/Biden Collusion in Destruction of America

First, please, consider the fact that Biden’s cognitive state is under the question. But his collusion with Putin started in 2013-2914 on the issue of old corrupt Ukraine, when Biden was well. Now he has the same staff and the same advisers. I suspect that the same KGB’s Mafia/Army is now running the White House. You can read my book Socialist Revolution in America. XLIBRIS, 2021. Biden’s chief of staff is suddenly leaving the job…? There are several issues discussed in my books and columns that proved the Putin/Biden collusion for years. However, the national security catastrophe on the Southern border is the most harmful and damaging for the American future.

So, the first is a national security catastrophe on the Southern border. Today, America experiences Putin/Biden conspiracy in all directions, especially on the Southern border, where there is a global invasion orchestrated by Putin’s KGB the way he had been with the Muslim invasion in Europe 2015, and now with Biden’s open border policy to destroy America. An organized invasion, with thousands of migrants lining up and expanding every day. Don’t forget: Russia is a terrorist State and there are no Mexican Cartels—all those Cartels are the Russian Cartels of the KGB’s Mafia/Army. The agency operates on multiple fronts! The crime, chaos and catastrophe on the Southern border will not be solved until the Putin/Bide conspiracy is investigated and exposed…

Republicans are struggling with the issue of abortion, because they don’t know that the Dems were using Socialist modus operandi, a subversion for decades to propagandize the issue. They had been working on this for decades and overturned Truman’s Party to Socialist one. I am writing about the events of this process for years to warn you. Read the latest column: Abortion & Other Socialist Plans to Destroy AmericaOne Down, Two to Go. June 24, 2022. A So-called Democrat Party is responsible for all violence connected to the issue and for defrauding you for decades by using Socialist modus operandi: lies, deception, fabrication, and fraud…

Indoctrination of our children is obvious, I recognized it. Read about my childhood in the Soviet Union and it is a clear repetition of it in America. Adam Gillette, Accuracy in Media is right writing about indoctrination of the American children. There are many other socialist destructions in America, but I can’t describe all of them in one column. The Covid-19 is the combined invention of Socialist/Communist tandem Russia and China waging a war against American capitalism for decades. There are some Republicans who don’t know about WWIII, they are making mistakes, like Mike McCaul. To know Ukraine, you have to know Russia, its Intel, and Vladimir Putin, a devoted disciple of Stalin/Andropov, who is now sending Antifa to Atlanta…

To be continued www.drrichswier.com/author/spipko/  www.simonapipko.com

©Simona Pipko. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Biden’s Proposal—Increase National Debt By 57.8%

GUESTS AND TOPICS

TERRY JEFFREY 

Terry Jeffrey is editor in chief of CNSNews.com. Prior to that, he served for more than a decade as editor of Human Events, where he is now an editor at large. From 1987-91, he was an editorial writer for The Washington Times, which entered his investigative editorials about then-House Speaker Jim Wright for consideration for the Pulitzer Prize. In 1992, he served as issues and research director for Pat Buchanan’s first Republican presidential campaign. In 1995-96, he was national campaign manager for Pat Buchanan’s second Republican presidential campaign. Buchanan that year won the Alaska, Louisiana and Missouri caucuses, placed second in the Iowa caucuses, and won the New Hampshire primary.

TOPIC: Biden’s Proposal: Increase Debt By 57.8%

E. CALVIS BEISNER, PH.D.

E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., Founder and National Spokesman of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, www.CornwallAlliance.org, author of over a dozen books and over a thousand articles, former associate professor of historical theology and social ethics at Knox Theological Seminary and of interdisciplinary studies at Covenant College.

TOPIC: Setting the Record Straight on Climate Change

©AUN-TV and Conservative Commandos Radio. All rights reserved.