FLORIDA: Gov. DeSantis Vetoes $35M Facility Over MLB Team’s Anti-Gun Statements

DeSantis goes from one great to another.

DeSANTIS SAYS NO WAY TO RAYS: FLA Gov to Veto $35M Facility Over MLB Team’s Anti-Gun Statements

By Hannity Staff, June 3, 2022:

First Disney, now the MLB. Governor Ron DeSantis is done with wokeism and has had enough of companies politicizing events and issues in the Sunshine State.

According to a report from The Daily Wire, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis intends to veto $35 million dollars earmarked for a new training facility for the MLB team the Tampa Bay Rays. DeSantis is making the move in the wake of a wave of recent anti-gun statements released by the team in response to the events in Uvalde and Buffalo.

“DeSantis plans to veto a $35 million legislation for a Pasco County facility that’s earmarked for the Tampa Bay Rays’ spring training,” OutKick reported. “DeSantis’s decision is in response to the Rays politicizing recent shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde ahead of a matchup with the Yankees in May.”

From The Daily Wire…

The decision comes after the Rays published a statement last week saying that the tragedies “have shaken us to the core.”

“This cannot become normal. We cannot become numb. We cannot look the other way,” the statement said. “We all know, if nothing changes, nothing changes.”

The organization added that it was donating tens of thousands of dollars to far-left anti-Second Amendment organizations.

“The Rays organization stands committed to actionable change and has made a $50,000 commitment to Everytown for Gun Safety’s Support Fund,” the statement said.

“Everytown is the largest gun violence prevention organization in America. Rather than our usual game coverage on social media tonight, we’ve partnered with Everytown to amplify facts about gun violence in America.”

The expected move by DeSantis comes after he signed into law back in April a bill that stripped Walt Disney Co. from being able to govern the land where the Disney World theme park is located.

RELATED VIDEOS:

The Entire Gun Control Debate Summed Up in 15 Seconds

Representative Greg Steube (R-FL) shows off his gun on Tucker Carlson show.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DeSantis vetoes $35M earmarked for Rays facility after team postures on gun violence

WHOA! New York loses $19.5 billion in population exodus, IRS confirms

Apple To Move iPad Production Out of China For First Time: Report

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

COVER-UP? Investigation into Allegations of Statutory Rape by California Sheriff Candidate Wayne Woo ‘Flawed’

Project Veritas released undercover footage exposing the Placer County Sheriff’s Department’s alleged improper actions while investigating claims of sexual misconduct involving a minor by Undersheriff and current candidate for Sheriff Wayne Woo.

Check out the video:

Here are some of the details from the video:

  • Placer County Sheriff candidate Wayne Woo “admitted to sexual relationship” with alleged minor, according to affidavit exclusively obtained by Project Veritas Action (PVA).
  • While the investigation determined the claim that the “alleged victim” was a minor was “unfounded,” the affidavit signed by former Chief Assistant District Attorney Charles Jeffrey Wilson notes the investigation was conducted by Woo’s subordinate “in a manner designed to conceal information” and was “objectively inappropriate.”
  • According to an affidavit exclusively published by Project Veritas Action, outgoing Placer County Sheriff Devon Bell should have referred a criminal complaint against Undersheriff Wayne Woo to the District Attorney’s office. The complaint alleged an inappropriate sexual relationship with a minor who attended ride-alongs with Woo. Bell instead investigated the matter internally and deemed the allegation to be unfounded because the victim’s permission slip indicated she was 18 years old. Project Veritas Action was unable to find evidence that the Sheriff’s office investigated her age beyond the permission slip.
  • The affidavit states the DA’s office, “was never asked to assist in the investigation, nor was a case referred to our office for review.” Project Veritas Action interviewed multiple witnesses in undercover footage who corroborated much of the information in Wilson’s affidavit.
  • According to the affidavit, Sheriff Devon Bell told the DA’s office that Woo admitted having a sexual relationship with the alleged victim, but it was when she was 18 and not underage.
  • Outgoing Sheriff Devon Bell, and The Sacramento Bee, which is Sacramento’s biggest newspaper by circulation, have endorsed Woo in Tuesday’s upcoming election for Sheriff.

With Undersheriff Wayne Woo running in Tuesday’s election, EVERYONE deserves to know the truth about these allegations and the way the Sheriff’s department handled them.

If the allegations are in fact false and the investigation exonerated Woo, why is the investigation being kept secret from the Public?

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*

Stay Tuned…

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas investigation is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. Entrepreneurship Is Up, and “Parentpreneurs” Are Among These New Founders

“Parentpreneurs” are among the cohort of new business owners who are revitalizing the American zest for entrepreneurship and innovation.


The American entrepreneurial spirit has been revived over the past two years after an extended decline. According to the US Census Bureau, new business owners applied for more than 5 million Employer Identification Numbers (EINs) in 2021, the most in at least a decade-and-a-half of record-keeping.

The resurgence of entrepreneurship began in 2020, when widespread economic disruptions caused by the pandemic response led many individuals to strike out on their own. New business starts were up 24 percent in 2020 over the previous year, and up 23 percent in 2021 compared to 2020.

The Census Bureau data suggest that the upward entrepreneurship trend is continuing in 2022, with new business starts up 1.6 percent in April 2022 compared to March 2022.

These new entrepreneurs are a diverse group. Data from the Kauffman Foundation indicate that more middle-aged “Gen Xers” have recently started businesses than those in other age groups. Latinos also launched more new businesses in 2021 than any other racial or ethnic group, and immigrants out-paced native-born Americans in last year’s entrepreneurial ventures.

My guest on this week’s LiberatED Podcast is one of these new entrepreneurs who launched her business last year. Lorianne Bolotin is an immigrant physician and midwife who grew up in the Dominican Republic. She and her husband Jack, a finance executive, never thought that they would be in the education business, until mandates and lockdowns of 2020 led them to find an alternative for their children’s education.

Last year, they founded Metsada, a private membership association (PMA) that prioritizes family freedom. “Our belief is that families have the freedom of making their own choices in health and education,” said Lorianne.

As a project of Metsada, the couple created Independence Day Academy, a learning center in New Jersey that enables parents to enjoy a homeschooling-style educational experience while supporting children when parents work and tend to other responsibilities.

Lorianne found that many parents were frustrated with their children’s public schooling experience, especially over the past two years of school closures and ongoing school virus policies. Parents wanted something different that nurtured their children academically while also allowing for maximum parental involvement. “The main thing that made people wake up to different learning options was that they didn’t feel heard by the school system,” said Lorianne. “Parents discovered that all the power is in the school system, not the parents.”

Metsada is hoping to create a network of independently run learning centers, and shortly after the opening of Independence Day Academy, the Bolotins welcomed Jenny Markus to the Metsada network.

Jenny is a lifelong New Yorker, parent, and self-directed education advocate. She is the co-founder of Coney Island Clubhouse, a child-led learning center in Brooklyn, New York.

Jenny also joined this week’s podcast conversation to talk about the Metsada network and why she launched her schooling alternative. “I really wanted to show that not only could this be done, it can be done in New York City,” she said.

“Parentpreneurs” like Lorianne and Jenny are among the cohort of new business owners who are revitalizing the American zest for entrepreneurship and innovation. By recognizing deficiencies in the status quo and imagining other possibilities for teaching and learning, these new entrepreneurs are creating more options for families and building the future of education.

AUTHOR

Kerry McDonald

Kerry McDonald is a Senior Education Fellow at FEE and host of the weekly LiberatED podcast. She is also the author of Unschooled: Raising Curious, Well-Educated Children Outside the Conventional Classroom (Chicago Review Press, 2019), an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and a regular Forbes contributor. Kerry has a B.A. in economics from Bowdoin College and an M.Ed. in education policy from Harvard University. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts with her husband and four children. You can sign up for her weekly newsletter on parenting and education here.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column and podcast are republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Listen to the weekly LiberatED Podcast on AppleSpotifyGoogle, and Stitcher, and sign up for Kerry’s weekly LiberatED email newsletter to stay up-to-date on educational news and trends from a free-market perspective.

Rep. Bowman: More Cops in Schools Hurts Non-White Kids

Thursday on MSNBC Prime, radical Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) argued that hiring law enforcement as security in schools causes “black and brown kids” to suffer “because of the explicit and implicit racism that still exists within law enforcement that we don’t deal with consistently.”

Bowman stated, “I can talk about, when I was a dean of students before becoming a principal, and the police consistently targeted my students. Because of their ‘misbehavior.’ But they target them aggressively, more aggressively because they were black or brown. And I, myself, had to stand toe-to-toe, in between my students and police to stop police from arresting my students.”

Sounds like those students were targeted not because of color but because their “misbehavior,” as Bowman put it in air quotes to minimize it, was egregious enough to warrant arrest.

“And unfortunately, when there are more police in schools, because of the explicit and implicit racism that still exists within law enforcement that we don’t deal with consistently, black and brown kids are going to continue to suffer and we’re going to continue to support the school-to-prison pipeline,” Bowman continued.

Here’s a solution black and brown kids can consider to avoid going to prison: don’t commit crimes. But that’s a solution Bowman and his leftist comrades will never consider because that would require holding individuals responsible for their own actions instead of blaming “systemic racism.”


Jamaal Bowman

66 Known Connections

Bowman Supports the Defunding of Police Departments

In December 2020 interview with CNN’s Dana Bash, Bowman said that the slogan “Defund the Police” — a policy that he favored — meant “reimaging our country” by implementing “a dramatic reduction in the number of police in our poor communities and. particularly, our poor black and brown communities.” He also said:

  • “Historically, when our communities have needed jobs, they didn’t bring us jobs. They brought us police, and they created a system of mass incarceration.”
  • “We live in a country where if you’re black or brown, you’re more likely to be killed by police and more likely to be incarcerated, and more likely to not afford bail.”
  • “Only five percent of police work is focused on violent crimes — rape, homicide, aggravated assault. The other 95 percent can be handled by other agencies, mental health institutions, domestic violence professionals, etc.”
  • “We’ve been doing policing all wrong for decades. In some cities, 40 percent of the budget goes toward policing, and police are terrorizing black and brown communities. So we have to do something different and not allow Republicans to flip a talking point on its head.”

To learn more about Jamaal Bowman, click here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rep. Steube Snaps Back at Sheila Jackson Lee During Gun Hearing

DeSantis: If Every American Kid Had a Loving Father There Would be ‘Far Fewer’ Problems in Society

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

LeBron’s First Billion: We Should All Be So Oppressed

It’s official.  LeBron James is now a billionaire.  Only a third of it came from playing basketball.  Most of it came from endorsements and his own business ventures.  He was smart enough to demand an equity stake in his endorsers’ businesses, not just a fee.  Now he has a slice of the pie in the pizza business, home gyms, ridesharing, and sports teams.  He built businesses in entertainment and marketing.  All this from a disadvantaged minority youth born to a single mother in an unstable household in that horrible rotten country – America – where, according to some, slavery still exists.  He joins Michael Jordan, Jay-Z, Rihanna, Kanye West, Oprah Winfrey, and nine others in the black billionaire’s club.

I’ve said for a long time anyone with the right values working in the right economic system – free markets – can flourish.  These black billionaires are living proof Booker T. Washington was right when he said:

The individual who can do something that the world wants done will, in the end, make his way regardless of his race.

But the Democrats, the Left, and the professional race hustlers would have you believe otherwise.  They want you to believe America is a horrible, rotten place where minorities are victims and doomed to remain so, no matter what efforts they make.  These black billionaires put the lie to the Left’s entire phony diversity narrative.  They put their nose to the grindstone in America’s free market system and thrived.  If they can thrive, so can everybody else, even if they don’t become billionaires.

But you gotta hand it to the Left, the phony diversity narrative sells, even better than pizza.  A school in Illinois will grade by race, to equalize group outcomes, even if students don’t turn in their assignments.  What an insult to tell perfectly capable people they can never succeed and will always need crutches handed out by overseers who think they’re stupid.  Well-paid overseers, I might add, who are lining their own pockets in the racial guilt industry.

If the diversity narrative is so good, why do the race hustlers have to lie to make their case?  BET, Occupy Democrats, a prominent journalist, and an educator all perpetuated the lie that Kansas City police shot an unarmed black woman five times last week.  Body cam footage showed she had a gun and was pointing it at the officers.

People pushing the phony diversity narrative make the most outlandish claims.  A black professor of race & ethnicity studies at Boston University said property is a racist construct because it was once used to enslave people.  Property is a racist construct – that will come as a shock to every black, Hispanic, and Asian homeowner in the country.  I’ll make you a deal.  If this professor can persuade every black billionaire that property is a racist construct to the point they all give away their billions, I will eat my hat.  Don’t overlook the fact that these entrepreneurs made their billions in America’s free market system which is based on – wait for it – property rights.

According to the diversity narrative, not only is property racist, but free speech is just a white man’s obsession.  This claim was made by someone in the Obama administration and recently echoed by a columnist for Time Magazine.  I wonder if they would have preferred that Martin Luther King not been allowed to make his ‘I Have a Dream’ speech.  LeBron James likes free speech.  He’s been quite vociferous about his left-wing opinions.  I may not agree with what he says, but I’ll defend to the death his right to say it, as well as the right of people who use their free speech to attack free speech.

I recently heard a black female activist on the radio say we don’t really have a Declaration of Independence, that black people don’t have life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness.  That’s preposterous.  Of course they do.  But what’s interesting about this is how, under the phony diversity narrative, everything gets turned upside down and nothing is ever good enough.  The demands are insatiable and never end.  It’s like saying, ‘I’m not satisfied, you’re going to have to do better than that.’  It’s completely open-ended and a form of tyranny.  But it’s also a great business model.  Harp on race all the time, lay on the guilt trips, and, you too, can become a millionaire, just like Ibram X. Kendi.  That’s the free market in operation.  Only in America.

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

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

Partisan Push for Domestic Terrorism Office Targets Local Cops

After the horrific mass murders in Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, New York, Senate Democrats took an opportunity to try and ram through new biased counterterrorism legislation which treats law enforcement and the military as infiltrated by “extremists” and seeks to limit counterterrorism training. The legislation was blocked after Republican senators held firm with Republican Senator Rand Paul calling the bill an “insult” to law enforcement.

“It would be the Democrat plan to name our police as white supremacists and neo-Nazis. I met policemen throughout Kentucky and I’ve not met one policeman motivated or consumed with any kind of racial rage,” Paul said, according to The Hill.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act, sponsored by Senator Dick Durbin (D-Il), is the latest iteration of legislation which has been on the Democrats’ wish list since early 2020. The bill would create a joint “Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee” and would create special Domestic Terrorism offices within DHS and DOJ and the FBI.

The legislation goes further, putting its thumb on the scales and directing these new offices to focus their attentions only on “white supremacist” terrorism by mandating extensive reporting requirements exclusively focused on that threat. This reporting would then be used to justify focusing domestic terrorism and law enforcement counterterrorism training solely on “white supremacist extremism.” Democrats previously shot down attempts by Republicans to include a broader range of potential terror threats within the language of the legislation.

Efforts by politicians to direct law enforcement to investigate only certain types of terror threats can have a severely deleterious effect on intelligence gathering and terrorism prevention. In 2019, the FBI faced substantial pressure from congressional Democrats to eliminate the use of the analytical category “Black Identity Extremism.” The same year the FBI reportedly investigated but cleared Frank James, who went on to conduct the NYC subway mass shooting that injured 10 people. James’ social media was replete with references to black identity extremist ideology.

Two decades after 9/11, it is readily apparent that a top-heavy, politicized federal bureaucracy approach to counterterrorism isn’t working.

Bureaucrats in Washington D.C. shouldn’t presume to tell police scattered around the country what the greatest terrorism threat is for their specific area of operations. Rather they should listen seriously to local law enforcement’s local knowledge and follow their lead.

A federal office of domestic terrorism should not tell local law enforcement officers what kinds of training they can receive, or which threats are most relevant to investigate. Federal agencies cannot continue to demand maximum cooperation from local agencies, hoovering up hard-earned information, only to be ever more secretive and unwilling to share information with those same departments, whom they are being told by politicians to treat as “infiltrated” by extremists.

AUTHOR

Kyle Shideler

Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Welcome Joey!

Joe Kahn
Executive Editor
New York Times

Good morning Joey,

I welcome you to your new position as the Executive Editor of the iconic New York Times.  Be aware Joey, you have some big shoes to fill, now that Deano has left.  I just hope that you have the same journalistic integrity and high moral fiber that Deano had.  I wish him well in his retirement at his toney estate in the highly non-diverse neighborhood in Larchmont California.  I wonder if he knew that he was moving into such a non-minority neighbor when he scouted out this gem……..ah, that’s just Deano being Deano, such integrity.

What approach are you going to take in regards to your signature front page headlines Joey?  You see, Deano used the very savvy approach of using omission, deflection and at times outright lies………..all for the good of the country , of course.

Here is an example: instead of focusing on the rampart INFLATION that is crippling a majority of Americans, day in and day out; Deano used to be laser focused on the events of 1/6/21…..yes, that is 2021!  You see, by doing that Deano, it gets peoples attention away from the disasters that the Joey Bidenflation and his team are inflicting on most Americans daily.  I think it is a phenomenal strategy, don’t you Joey?

The problem is most Americans see this RIDICULOUS attempt to draw attention from this incompetent train-wreck of an installed administration.  They realize that this mentally addled puppet, this installed buffoon is either just corrupt and manipulated or just plain vastly incompetent!  Conservatives state that the National Inquirer has more honest, factual information than Pravda, sorry, I mean the Times. Your tabloid is generally considered a laughing stock of partisan propaganda, by anyone with 5th grade or higher education.

Just take a look at today’s headlines.  Zero mention of the biggest pain thrust upon Americans……..GAS PRICES.  You know, something that affects Americans on a DAILY basis.  Here is an idea, maybe put a gas price meter up.  This would be like the Covid death meter that was ubiquitous during elected President Trump’s tenure, with your trusted tabloid, as well as your partner CNN.  This meter mysteriously disappeared when when the buffoon was installed.  Shocking!  No mention either of the 1,000,000 dead due to Covid.  You know, from the man who was going to shut the virus down……remember Joey Kahn?

So, let’s see where your leadership role takes us Joey.  Following the lead of your predecessor Deano Baquet (highly moral and honest individual), or you can set a new path to follow.   Hey here are a few idea’s for your front page.

  • unsecured border with fentanyl flowing into our country (as well as Covid)
  • a baby formula shortage in the United States of America (Joey said he didn’t know about this until April).  The poor dementia ridden fool, just got caught in another of his blatant lies.
  • rampant inflation, especially affecting those those his benevolent party (Democrats) claim to care so much about. Those living paycheck to paycheck are being decimated as we speak.
  •  his drug addict/porn addicted corrupt son Hunter (now a famous artist apparently). Just pretend that his last name is Trump.  This way we could get it splashed across your front page on a daily basis.-the real reason gas prices are so high……wink, wink Joey’s war on fossil fuels and Progressive influencer’s pushing the Green Deal.  C’mon Joey Kahn, you know what you should really do. C’mon man!
  • the entire corrupt Biden Crime Family.
  • Beijing Biden’s obviously declining mental acuity.  Where is that cognitive test that elected President Trump took, maybe little Joey could do the same? How much longer must Americans watch their installed leader read of cue cards, teleprompters and use ear pieces; and be whisked away from unscripted questions from the press?
  • Joey and Heels Up Harris selective outrage and appearances at gun shootings.  Some called massacres, some not even mentioned at all.  Do you have any idea why these are treated differently Joey?  I’m at a loss.

Well, there are a few ideas for you Joey Kahn, Mr. Executive Editor.  Conservatives say, they hope you are not just a political hack, a lapdog like your predecessor. Someone that pushes political propaganda with now conscience whatsoever; while collecting a hefty paycheck from Slushy.

Time will tell Joey, we’ll see.  Hopefully your mantra “printing the news that is fit to print,” will come back into play……..instead of being used as a punchline.  Good luck Joey, the choice is all yours.

I’ll be taking to ya.

Sincerely,

Chris Cirino

©Christopher Cirino. All rights reserved.

High Gas Prices are Caused by Governments, Not Companies

When Governor Newsom and New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern met to announce a deal between the tiny country and the broken state, it was another example of California illegally enacting its own foreign policy. And a reminder of why California gas prices are so high.

The memorandum had California promising to be “carbon neutral” by 2045 and to promote the “environmental integrity of carbon pricing instruments”. California’s crooked carbon pricing schemes have become notorious for both their worthlessness and their corruption.

And California drivers are paying the price.

report from Stillwater Associates last year found that California consumers were paying an extra $1.19 a gallon. This year the added costs include a 51 cent state excise tax, an 18 cent sales tax, 20 cents for Fuels Under the Cap, part of the state’s corrupt environmental cap and trade program and 17 cents for the Low Carbon Fuel Standard.

Californians are paying a $1.41 federal and state tax markup on $3 bucks of crude.

Or almost half.

Biden and other Democrats have blamed corporate profits, but the gas stations and suppliers are making a mere 33 cents a gallon or less than a third of the state’s added $1.08 in various taxes. Even the refiners are only making 72 cents. The biggest piece of the pie is coming from the taxes, many of them hidden, imposed by Democrats in the name of saving the planet.

While Newsom and Big Green describe some of these taxes as “allowances” and “credits” as part of a “marketplace”, they are really a corrupt scheme to force consumers to pay money to special interests and politically connected companies under the guise of “saving the planet”.

The Left now attacks Elon Musk, but California’s environmental regulations kept Tesla profitable. For example, in 2020, Tesla reported $428 million in sales from “regulatory credits” amounting to “four times Tesla’s $104 million of net profit for the quarter”. In the first quarter of 2021, Tesla sold $518 million in “credits” and Autoweek noted that it was making “more money selling credits and bitcoin than cars.” Credits are like bitcoins the government forces you to buy.

Regulatory credits are a corrupt environmental scam in which car makers who sell regular cars to ordinary people have to buy “credits” from electric car makers like Tesla, who sell to the rich, and then pass on the high costs on to working class and middle class car buyers.

The dirty truth about California’s electric car market is that it’s subsidized by people who can’t afford them. And the same situation applies to gas prices with their burden of green taxes.

Democrats sold the fuel taxes as penalties on polluters. They claimed that imposing them would “make the polluters pay”. Few Californians seemed to understand that by “polluters”, the Sacramento political establishment meant the single mother picking up her son from school, the supermarket cashier commuting to work, and everyone else who can’t afford a Tesla.

The California average gas price is now over $6 a gallon, compared to $4.60 for the rest of the country, because Democrats are making ordinary drivers, whom they call “polluters”, pay.

Gov. Newsom is touting his new deal with New Zealand, even though most California environmentalists have turned on the corrupt green scam that’s killing the state.

ProPublica, a leftist group, noted that, “California’s oil and gas industry actually rose 3.5% since cap and trade began.” While the idea that there’s anything wrong with carbon is an environmentalist hoax that props up corrupt green special interests, the Brown-Newsom green tax isn’t even coming close to accomplishing the stated goals that is the basis for those taxes.

Bloomberg article last month began by arguing that, “California’s carbon market was supposed to be a model for the US, harnessing the power of capitalism to fight climate change in the world’s fifth-biggest economy. But nearly 10 years after ‘cap and trade’ began, there’s little proof the system has had much direct impact on curbing planet-warming pollutants.”

Before bitcoin, environmentalists created an imaginary “carbon currency” and a marketplace around it that forced ordinary consumers to fund corporate bribery of top Democrats. Some of the biggest companies in the country boast of going “carbon neutral” by 2030, 2045 or 2980, when what that actually means is that they’re buying “carbon offsets” and changing nothing.

The carbon scam has made the right sorts of people rich and everyone else much poorer.

California began trading “emissions” in the 90s with the Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM).A decade later, Anne Sholtz, an environmental law academic and emissions broker who helped set up the program, had been arrested by the EPA on wire fraud charges.

Sholtz had all but invented the modern electronic pollution marketplace. She met with Al Gore and gave plenty of interviews until she was arrested for trying to trade credits she didn’t have.

But can there be fraud when the whole thing is a scam?

Big Green created a massive industry based on trading indulgences from government environmental mandates. An industry now worth billions, is being touted to investors as having the potential to hit $100 billion or $200 billion or infinity by 2030. It’s an industry that, unlike those it’s using the government and leftist activists to shake down, is worth nothing, produces nothing, and exists purely as a rent-seeking parasite destroying American living standards.

Each company and investor joining the regulatory Ponzi scheme is now motivated to pressure governments, local and national, to impose more taxes and push more companies into the market so that those who got in earlier will steal more from those who come in later. This perverse socialist mockery of capitalism is depicted as “saving the planet” even though it has failed to do anything to move the dial even on the environmental hoax that justifies its existence.

And that is one reason why California’s gas prices are some of the highest in the nation.

But like vegans, legal shoplifting, and shopping bag bans, what starts in California, doesn’t stay there. Biden and Senate Democrats have tried to impose a national carbon tax on Americans.

Had Senator Manchin not rejected last year’s proposed carbon tax, the whole country would have been hit with a tax of at least another 18 cents per gallon. Senator Whitehouse’s proposal would have added about 14 cents a gallon, but would have increased “5 percent above inflation annually.” That kicker, also a part of California’s gas taxes, is what’s really making them rise.

And that’s just for starters.

The Obama administration was proposing a carbon tax that would have added over 40 cents per gallon. The EU’s $75 per ton carbon tax applied here would mean over 60 cents more per gallon. A former Carter adviser has proposed a tax that would be closer to 90 cents.

And it would only go up from there.

California is a cautionary tale that when environmentalists, leftists, and other Democrats claim that they want to “make polluters pay”, they mean you.

Driving by a Los Angeles gas station last week, I saw that the price was approaching 7 bucks.

They’re making us pay. Every single day.

AUTHOR

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED ARTICLE: White House disarray: Low approval ratings rattle Biden, ‘frighten’ Democrats

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

Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Illinois to Stop Counting of Ballots Received After Election Day

Plaintiffs Include Member of Congress.


(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a federal lawsuit against Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law (Rep.Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews (No. 1:22-cv-02754)).

Judicial Watch argues that Illinois election law violates federal law, which defines Election Day as “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.” The complaint states:

Despite Congress’ clear statement regarding a single national Election Day, Illinois has expanded Election Day by extending by 14 days the date for receipt and counting of vote-by-mail ballots

Judicial Watch points out that the current Illinois election law allows vote-by-mail ballots received up to 14 days “after the polls close on Election Day” to be counted as if they were cast and received on or before Election Day. Illinois law also provides that “[e]ven vote-by-mail ballots without postmarks shall be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.”

Judicial Watch’s lawsuit notes:

The Board … advised that the number of ballots received after Election Day through November 17, 2020, could materially affect the unofficial election results.

[ *** ]

[Illinois’ own data indicates that] Illinois received 266,417 vote-by-mail ballots statewide during the period from November 3rd through November 17th.

[ *** ]

[M]ost of the 266,417 vote-by-mail ballots were received after Election Day, which would mean that as many as 4.4% of votes cast in 2020 were received after Election Day. [Emphasis in original]

Judicial Watch argues that holding voting open for 14 days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:

By counting untimely and illegal ballots received after Election Day and diluting Plaintiffs’ timely cast and received ballots, Defendants, acting under color of Illinois law, have deprived and are depriving Plaintiffs of rights protected under the First Amendment and 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

“We are supposed to have an Election Day, not Election Weeks – or months. Illinois’ 14-day extension of Election Day beyond the date set by Congress is illegal, violates the civil rights of voters, and encourages fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

In a separate Judicial Watch election lawsuit against Illinois, a federal court ruled in June 2021 that the lawsuit could proceed against Illinois officials for denying public access to Illinois’ voter registration database.

In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled its lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after the North Carolina removed over 430,000 ineligible names from the voter rolls.

In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to Maryland’s Democratic legislature “extreme” congressional redistricting gerrymander.

For more than 25 years, Judicial Watch has been known for its aggressive, leading-edge use of public records laws and lawsuits, as well as taxpayer, civil rights and whistleblower protection litigation to fight government corruption. Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of this effort, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.

Christine Svenson, Esq., of Svenson Law Offices in Palatine, Illinois, is assisting Judicial Watch with the lawsuit.

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

Vaccinated Women – Fertility Signals Are Coming Through

Vaccinated Women

Fertility signals are coming through.

The topic of pregnant and nursing moms getting vaccinated under encouragement and coercion is painful. It’s painful to research, painful to write about, and painful to learn how carelessly the most precious among us are being treated. The very essence of life and nature live within pregnant and nursing mothers. Reflecting on how little regard was paid to that life is upsetting, and everything I have to report in this post is done so with a heavy heart and a hope that we’ll get through this with a renewed sense of personal autonomy when it comes to medical decisions.

Notes to Keep in Mind:

  1. The FDA + Pfizer actively worked to keep this data hidden from sight for our lifetimes.
  2. Academic institutions, Medical institutions, and public health agencies are all still recommending that pregnant women take the Covid-19 vaccines as a precaution against Covid.

Dr. Naomi Wolf, Project Manager Amy Kelly, and the WarRoom/ DailyClout Pfizer Documents Volunteer Research Team have uncovered so many new important pieces of information that it’s getting difficult to keep up. I highly recommend pinning DailyClout to your homepage and checking their updates often. Their team of thousands of volunteers including hundreds of lawyers is working quickly, thoroughly, and efficiently.

A lot of information and serious concerns have emerged surrounding pregnant and nursing mothers and the possible effect that the Covid vaccines are having on their babies. Dr. Naomi Wolf has been appearing on Warroom regularly to provide us with updates on the findings of her and her team. On one appearance last week Dr. Wolf broke down some of the main red flags that have emerged, with the help of a female physician who studied the data:

  • Pregnant women were excluded from clinical trials when they were declared safe and effective for pregnant women. Pfizer, the FDA, the CDC, the entire “medical community” and your local employer who declared that you couldn’t come to work if you’re not vaccinated have concluded that this was safe and effective for pregnant women based on trials that were done on rats in France. There have not been any human clinical trials that have been concluded by Pfizer or other pharmaceutical companies to find out if these vaccines are safe for use during pregnancy or breastfeeding. There is currently one that’s still active, has no posted results and won’t conclude until July, 2022.
    • The animal studies that were conducted for the trial that the NIH based their conclusions on included 44 rats and were done over a period of 42 days. There are 2 main issues with this study:
      1. This doesn’t fulfill the requirement to ensure that the drug will do no harm to the next generation
      2. The doctors conducting the trials have all either been employed by or owned shares of Pfizer or BioNTech. There was an attempt to hide this fact by using their initials instead of full names on the study.
  • All Emergency Use Authorization excludes pregnant women.
  • Pregnant and nursing mothers were NOT ALLOWED to participate in phases 1,2, and 3 of human clinical trials. They were included on a list of 21 conditions that were not allowed to be recruited for trials. Page 33
  • The Department of Defense data is showing that female soldiers are having an astronomical rate of abnormalities and fetal problems. (NOTE- Mathew Crawford of RoundingtheEarth Substack has stated that he does not believe ANY of the DOD data is reliable, as it’s been demonstrably tampered with. Having said that, there are whistleblowers on the ground who corroborate that the rates of a variety of serious medical issues have indeed skyrocketed in 2021).

Adverse Events

In the Pfizer documents that were released thanks to legal force, there is data on reported adverse events since the rollout of the vaccine. On pages 12-13 of the document labeled “postmarketing-experience” Dr. Wolf’s Team 5 found:

  • 28% of the 270 pregnancies + 4 fetus/baby cases of adverse events were categorized as serious, including:
    • Miscarriages
    • Fetal deaths
    • Uterine contractions
    • Pre-term deliveries
    • Premature rupture of membranes
    • Fetal growth restrictions
  • Breastfed babies were reported to have effects such as:
    • Infantile vomiting
    • Fever
    • Rash
    • Agitation
    • Allergy to the vaccine
  • 4 nursing women reported adverse events such as:
    • Partial paralysis
    • Suppressed lactation
    • Breastmilk discoloration
    • Breast pain
    • Migraines

The document concludes that no serious adverse events have been detected. Dr. Wolf again questions whether we, as citizens of the United States of America, must begin to consider if all of these signs put together point to a serious national security breach. She has never seen anything as bad as what we’re seeing today in her 30 years in journalism.

There is a strong case that the potential risks for pregnant women from taking the Covid vaccine far outweigh the potential benefits.

On May 17, Dr. Wolf re-appeared on Warroom shortly after the FDA and the CDC authorized the Pfizer Covid-19 booster for 5-11-year-olds. In this segment, Dr. Wolf revealed some new information about data on the vaccine for pregnant and nursing mothers:

  • In Scotland there is an investigation happening right now that was triggered by a threshold that was crossed regarding the number of neonatal deaths. Its double the baseline amount, and this is the 2nd time in 7 months that the rate triggered an investigation.
  • Contrary to BBC claims (partially funded by Pfizer) that the rise in neonatal deaths cannot be connected to the vaccine, Dr. Wolf’s team, specifically Project Manager Amy Kelly, has found conclusive evidence to the contrary in Pfizer’s own documents.
  • Pfizer defined exposure to the vaccine as breastfeeding. This was not disclosed to pregnant women. A research team in Germany has confirmed to Dr. Wolf that breastmilk can deliver elements of the vaccine
  • A baby born to a vaccinated mother died after being born bleeding from the nose and mouth.
  • A mother received her 2nd vaccine dose on March 17, and within 24 hours her breastfed infant developed a rash and became inconsolable. The baby died 2 days later, with evidence of liver damage and a rare blood disorder.

The history of the claims of safety and efficacy regarding the Covid-19 vaccines for pregnant and nursing mothers will hopefully result in individuals who will be held criminally liable.

Missing Data

DailyClout’s expert Team 5 research team has reported some alarming numbers from Pfizer’s documents regarding missing information. In one group of 270 pregnancies, there were “no known outcomes” for 238 of the cases.

That leaves us with 36 known outcomes. Of those 36 known outcomes, 28 babies died before or at birth. It would be really helpful to know the outcome of the remaining 238 cases.

Pieces of the Puzzle – A Timeline

March 2021 – 50 participants in a clinical trial reported becoming pregnant, with some of them subsequently being dismissed from the trials. Cindy L. Weis of the DailyClout found that those 50 women have still not had their profiles updated to include pregnancy outcomes.

In the same March 2021 document, we can see that Pfizer themselves admits the following:

  1. Available data are insufficient to inform vaccine-related risks in pregnancy.
  2. Adverse effects from the vaccine on a breastfed child are a possibility.

July 2021- In Waterloo, Ontario between the months of January – July 2021, there were 86 babies who were born dead, otherwise known as stillbirths. The baseline rate is usually 5-6 per YEAR. One brave MP named Rick Nicholls raised the issue in a parliamentary session with great concern and passion. In response, the Minister of Health gave the answer we’re all used to. The vaccine is Safe and Effective. Just to note, there was no noticeable rise in stillbirths in 2020, the year of Covid.

September 2021 – Scotland launched it’s first investigation into an abnormal spike in newborn baby deaths that was triggered by surpassing a threshold in infant deaths that hadn’t been seen since the 1980’s. (Note- this spike did not occur in 2020, the Year of Covid)

Ashmedai over at Resisting the Intellectual Literati wrote an extensive report on fertility issues and the vaccine back in September 2021.

Is There a Plausible Basis For Fertility Concerns?
In my own community, the most prominent concern on the minds of many of the vaccine hesitant, especially young women of childbearing age, is the fear of an adverse effect on fertility. Possibly because of this, fertility concerns have also been derisively dismissed by the doctors with more passion and vengeance than for any other type of adverse effect…
Read more

August 2021- NPR reported on a survey out of the University of Chicago to investigate reports of changes in menstrual cycles after the vaccine. They received 140,000 responses.,

October 2021- VAERS looked like this:

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VEARS COVID VACCINE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH REALATED REPORTS GRAPH

I ran my own VAERS report using only a few pregnancy-related keywords. The list is 769 events long, and here’s a screenshot of just a few from the first page:

December 2021 – IVF clinics reported unusual issues after the mass vaccination campaign began. Steve Kirsch covered it thoroughly.

IVF clinics started having serious problems right after the vaccines started rolling out
I just got off the phone with a woman who works at a large IVF clinic. She has to remain nameless to avoid being fired for speaking out. Nobody is supposed to know about the serious problems happening in the IVF clinics. Let me tell you what is really going on and the scientific study that explains it…

Read more

January 2022- NIH funded a study that was released that reported a slight causal relationship between the Covid-19 vaccines and a lengthier menstrual cycle.

February 2022- An EU health agency announced an investigation between Covid-19 and disruptions in menstrual cycles based on reports coming in.

Josh Guetzkow reported on data from Rambam Hospital in Haifa, Israel. Vaccinated mothers were experiencing spontaneous abortions/miscarriages/stillbirths at a rate that’s 34% higher than their unvaccinated counterparts.

Stillbirths, Miscarriages and Abortions in Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Women
Data from Rambam hospital in Haifa reveal a stillbirth, miscarriage and abortion (SBMA) rate of 6% among women who never received a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to 8% among women who were vaccinated with at least one dose (and never had a SARS-Cov-2 infection…

Read more

March 2022- A 2nd investigation was launched in Scotland due to the high rate of infant deaths, totaling 18 for the month of March.

Pfizer, what say you?

After spending days reading reports about the horrible negative effects of fertility that are coming out in droves, I had to at least try and get some sort of response from Pfizer. After sitting on hold for a while, a gentleman named Ron got on the line. When I asked if the Covid-19 vaccine is safe for a pregnant woman to take, he read me the entire safety warning from Pfizer’s website. I then told him that I know many women who have had serious disruptions to their menstrual cycle, as well as numerous women who experienced miscarriages late term, shortly after getting one of the Pfizer vaccines. I asked him what he knows about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, given all the new information that’s come out from the FOIA requests.

He responded that he can pass me along to his managers, but first he has to read another statement, this time from the CDC. He proceeded to verbally read it for 10 minutes while I waited patiently. When he finished, surprised that I was still on the line, he asked if I had any more questions. I said yes, and asked if he wanted to be a whistleblower. He said he noted my response and passed me along to Olivia, which was pretty much a repeat of the first conversation.

I left contact information with both of them just in case, but somehow I highly doubt we’ll get a response. I did note to both of them that should they want to get on the right side of this scandal and begin to help those who are suffering, they should do so before the entire thing crumbles down.

Now What?

We’re now in May 2022. The claims of safety and efficacy don’t match their own internal documents that they tried to hide for 75 years. Yet academic institutions and public health agencies continue to insist it’s recommended for pregnant women to receive Covid-19 vaccines and boosters. Until when? Until the wave of misery gets so large that it’s no longer deniable? No one is coming to save us. Groups like DailyCloutVSRFAmerica’s Frontline DoctorsChildren’s Health Defense, and ICAN are sources of inspiration that there are still good men out there, as well as a source of hope that through their strength and efforts, we’ll come out of the other side of this with some integrity still left in some medical professionals.

AUTHOR

American Israeli, homemaker, wife, mom to 3. Buy Crypto. You’re still early. Freedom > Safety.

©. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FDA data shows 97% if pregnant women injected with Pfizer jab lost their babies

Israel study links Covid vaccine to increase in cardiac arrest events for young men and women

Marine Corps Goes Woke With Rainbow Bullets! Semper Fruity?

After reading the below article about the Marine Corps celebrating gay pride month with rainbow bullets we yelled out WTF? Our military is no longer focused on war fighting, rather its focused on fights for social justice and LGBTQMxyz rights. Again, WTF.

The first thing Trump or DeSantis should do as POTUS in 2024 is to force the retirements of every General Officer and Admiral still serving who had any kind of hand in these kind of idiotic policies below even obeying or enforcing them rather than retiring in protest.  This includes doing away with the below policies and more:

  • Exemptions from Deployment for up to a year for pregnant females and even military spouses once baby born.
  • Field Lactation Stations.
  • Opening Every military position including close combat to women.
  • Time Out Cards during basic training.
  • Mandatory instruction on Critical Race Theory.
  • Changing Chaplain’s Corps to entirely non-denominational.
  • Terrible Rules of Engagement for those in combat in Iraq & Afghanistan & elsewhere resulting in unnecessary deaths and maiming.
  • Afghanistan pull out travesty.
  • Allowing transgenders to serve and paying for sex change operations.
  • Facilitating Nation Building rather than Combat Readiness.
  • Islamization of our military.
  • Promoting traitors like Alexander Vindman.
  • Allowing enemies to capture our fully armed gun boats and run rings around a fleet of our combat ships.
  • Training emphasizing Diversity, inclusion and equity rather than combat operations that leads to such disasters as 2 modern destroyers colliding with merchant ships on the high seas and resulting in deaths of sailors.
  • Promoting a policy allowing military to refuse assignments based on perception they will be discriminated against because of LGBTQMxyz or other tendencies.
  • Renaming every military post named after Confederate Generals (despite fact that Congress enacted a law stating that those who fought on side of south are considered US veterans).
  • Following guidance that Climate Change is the #1 threat to national security.
  • Relieving Commanders for displaying views against LGBTQMxyz.
  • Going soft on traitors like Bergdahl whose desertion in combat resulted in deaths of 6 US soldiers looking for him.
  • Changing physical fitness standards to gender neutral thus reducing any kind of reasonable standards.
  • Reducing the standards and requirements for graduation from tough combat courses such as Rangers, Force Recon, Special Forces, Crucible, SEALs, etc. so that women could pass and be “qualified.”
  • Suppressing information on sexual harassment in military where the leading suspects are not heterosexual males.
  • Ridding the service of “toxic masculinity” and replacing many former warriors with pajama or Pillsbury dough boys.
  • Cancelling the culture of the former military that most of us were proud to serve and replacing  the “warrior spirit ethic/ethos” feared by our enemies with something we are hard pressed to identify with that is no longer feared by our enemies.

I’m sure you, our readers, can think of other ridiculous military polices in place under Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., Lloyd James Austin III and Mark Alexander Milley, who have grossly undermined morale and the ability to fight and win in combat.

I know we still have brave, strong soldiers in the trenches but for how much longer under these circumstances?

U.S. Marine Corps Goes Woke, Celebrates ‘Pride Month’ with Rainbow Bullets

The U.S. Marine Corps went full woke on Wednesday, marking the first day of “Pride Month” with a celebratory image featuring rainbow bullets.

“Throughout June, the USMC [U.S. Marine Corps] takes #Pride in recognizing and honoring the contributions of our LGBTQ service members,” the U.S. Marine Corps said in a statement posted to social media.

“We remain committed to fostering an environment free from discrimination, and defend the values of treating all equally, with dignity and respect,” it added, using the hashtags #PrideMonth and #USMC. The statement is accompanied by an image of a Marine helmet adorned with six bullets, each a different color, comprising a rainbow:

Read more.

Royal A. Brown, III. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

China Is About To Exploit Serious Weaknesses In US Military Might, Analyst Warns

Exclusive: Florida State Health Agency Issues Report Challenging Science of Transgenderism

No Free Lunch: Biden Admin Will Pull Meal Funding for Schools That Don’t Comply With Its LGBT Agenda

How A Cyberattack Tried To Stop You From Watching Matt Walsh’s ‘What Is A Woman?’

Why I Bought AR-15s for My Sons

According to the Washington Post, 91% of Trump coverage by the three broadcast networks, which include ABC, is negative.  When a right-wing lunatic massacred people of Mexican descent at an El Paso Walmart in August 2019, the networks blamed the attack on Trump’s “hateful” rhetoric about immigrants.

ABC News promptly produced a story to support the mainstream media’s narrative that violence by Trump-supporters had reached epidemic proportions.  Twisting itself into a pretzel in an attempt to justify the charge, the network scoured the country for instances where bad apples among the 63 million people who voted for Trump perpetrated violence allegedly inspired by him.  After an exhaustive search, ABC News came up with a grand total of 36 violent crimes where Trump’s name was invoked.

Some quick math: 36 bad apples divided by 63 million Trump voters equals 0.0000005.  In other words, ABC News hyped a story about violent acts allegedly perpetrated by zero point zero zero zero zero five percent of Trump’s supporters.  That’s five hundred-thousandths of one percent.  Some epidemic.

If ABC News ever decides to do a connect-the-dots story about Democrat bad apples who commit political violence, here are a few examples they can include:

The deranged 24-year-old who murdered nine people in Dayton, Ohio was an Elizabeth Warren–supporter who had been incited by the Democratic Party to hate Republicans, ICE, and the police.

Having been taught to hate Republicans, a Bernie Sanders–supporter shot and nearly killed GOP rep. Steve Scalise.

After Rep. Scalise was shot, Republican rep. Claudia Tenney received an email that read, “One down, 216 to go.”

Seventy-one-year-old female staffer for California GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher was knocked unconscious by Trump-hating Democrats during a protest outside Rohrabacher’s office.

The FBI arrested man for threatening to assassinate Republican rep. Martha McSally over her support for Trump.

Trump-hating Democrats threatened the children of ICE contractor’s employees.

Trump-hating Democrats fired multiple shots through the window of a San Antonio ICE office in a targeted attack against the agency that enforces nation’s immigration laws.

Trump-hating Democrats angrily confronted DHS secretary Kirstjen Nielsen at a D.C. restaurant.

According to a hidden camera investigation, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC sent paid protesters to incite violence at Trump events.

A Trump-hating Democrat waitress in Chicago spat in Eric Trump’s face.

Peter Fonda: “Trump’s 12-year-old son should be ripped from his mother’s arms and put in a cage with pedophiles.”

A Democrat college professor was arrested for beating Trump-supporters with a U-shaped bike lock.

tweet by a Democrat front group promoted the gruesome murder of ICE agents with step-by-step instructions:

A hate-filled Democrat threatened to kill Trump-supporters at the re-election headquarters of his GOP congressman.

“I’ll f— you up!”: A Democrat instructor assaulted conservative students at anti-Trump campus protest.

Trump-hating Democrats terrified Tucker Carlson’s wife and children at home while he was at work: “Tucker Carlson, we will fight!  We know where you sleep at night!”:

A 17-year-old girl was punched in the face by Trump-hating Democrat.

decapitated animal carcass left on the porch of a DHS staffer.

A car with a Trump bumper sticker was spray-painted and its tires slashed.

A pickup truck with Trump stickers was made a total loss after being set on fire.

A minority man was pummeled in the face for wearing a MAGA baseball cap.

A Trump-supporting immigrant from Africa was beaten by Trump-hating Democrats.

A Trump-supporter was knocked unconscious by Democrat protesters.

WATCH: A white Democrat slaps the MAGA hat off the head of a black man.

WATCH: A black Democrat rips the MAGA hat from a 16-year-old’s head and throws a soft drink in his face.

A student carrying a Trump flag was beaten by eight Trump-hating classmates.

An elementary school student was beaten by classmates over voting for Trump in a mock election.

A Trump-hating student yelled, “You support Trump!  You hate Mexicans!” at a female classmate before ripping her victim’s earrings off.

A black man in a MAGA hat was called a “n—–” by Cheesecake Factory employees.

Trump-hating Democrats assaulted two women wearing MAGA hats.

A 19-year-old Democrat threw an 81-year-old man wearing a MAGA hat to the ground.

WATCH: A Black Trump supporter was sucker-punched in the face by a white Democrat.

A hate-filled Democrat was arrested for ramming a truck into a Trump voter registration tent filled with volunteers.

A 34-year-old Democrat was arrested for assaulting a 15-year-old Trump-supporter at a polling site.

A Trump-supporter in New Jersey was attacked with a crowbar.

To whatever extent the journalistically corrupt networks reported any of the above incidents, the coverage was fleeting at best, and not once, to the best of my knowledge, have they ever “connected the dots” of such violent incidents, as ABC News did in its political hit job on Trump.

What has happened to the modern Democratic Party?

Just days after the 2016 election, six members of the Democrat front group Red Guards/Austin were arrested for violent attacks on supporters of President Trump.  The six communist revolutionaries are pictured below in booking photos taken by the Austin Police Department.

A few weeks later, after Trump took office, a nighttime protest by Occupy Oakland, another Democrat front group, called on Trump’s opponents to “Become Ungovernable” by inciting chaos across America.  A tweet by the communist group boasted this: “We won this night.  We will liberate this land.  We will fight fascists.  We will dismantle the state.  This is war.”  And war is exactly what was declared by the Democratic Party’s “resistance” to a lawfully elected president, a war on our constitutional system of electing the country’s leader.  Dating to the time Donald Trump became the GOP nominee, the Democratic Party has given a wink and a nod to Red Guards Austin, Occupy Oakland, and every other communist group in America to violently act out hatred not only against Trump, but his supporters as well.

Here’s why I bought AR-15s for my sons: when Lenin was asked how the Bolsheviks planned to keep the Russian masses from listening to counterrevolutionaries, he replied in so many words, “We must teach our followers to direct unbridled hatred toward our opponents.”  A half-century later, Saul Alinsky taught Lenin’s “teach them to hate” strategy to the post-1960s Democratic Party, which turned it into an art form.

In August 2016, before Trump was even elected, frenzied rank-and-file Democrats in Minnesota put Lenin’s strategy into practice by repeatedly punching an elderly man in the kidney and spitting on other attendees who were forced to walk a gauntlet of political hatred as they left a Trump fundraiser in Minneapolis.  Please take 30 seconds to watch how successful the Democratic Party has been at inciting its followers to direct seething hatred toward Republicans.

To the best of my knowledge, not a single prominent Democrat forcefully condemned the outrageous incident in Minneapolis, or hundreds upon thousands of others like it.  And why would they?  With invaluable help from the Clinton campaign and the DNC, their own “resistance” movement has intentionally incited anti-Trump violence at every turn.

When a political party teaches its followers to hate the other side, things are not likely to end well.  If Trump is re-elected, I fear that the party of Marx, Lenin, Alinsky, and Obama will quietly turn loose its dogs of war in a seditious attempt to destabilize America, to make it “ungovernable” until Democrats regain power.  If that happens, widespread anarchy will follow.  And that’s why I bought my law-abiding sons AR-15s and enough ammunition to defend themselves — and their country — against a possible bloody insurrection incited by a once-honorable party that has betrayed the constitutional republic it swore to protect and defend.

©John Edison. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: Karine Jean-Pierre Stumped By Basic Gun Question

Gun Control Activist David Hogg Targets Semi-Automatic Rifles

A survivor of the 2018 massacre on Valentine’s Day at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and now enrolled at Harvard, student gun control activist David Hogg has become a sought-after speaker at colleges and universities, and the odds are off the chart that he’ll be given a prime-time slot at the Democratic National Convention in August.  While I fully support his right to protest things he thinks are wrong, I respectfully disagree with his belief that school carnage will end if semi-automatic rifles are banned.

When I was in high school in the early 1960s, there were no mass school shootings.  The only times I remember seeing a police officer at school was once a year to give a talk about obeying the law.  Only occasionally were policemen summoned to schools to deal with violent students.  After the profound cultural changes our society has undergone since the 1960s, threatening behavior by troubled students is commonplace — Nikolas Cruz, who used an AR-15 to murder seventeen people at Stoneman Douglas High, was threatening teachers and other students with violence long before he did the unthinkable.

The dramatic increase in violent behavior by students is why most schools in America now have at least one full-time police officer.  Some schools have more, many more.  Like its counterparts in other large cities, the public school system in Detroit has its own police department, which employees hundreds of administrators, investigators, campus police officers, security personnel and a K-9 unit.  Why is it necessary for so many school districts to have their own police department?  The answer is a national tragedy: schools in our largest cities and counties have become dangerous places where lawless behavior by students is so prevalent that police must be close at hand.  Prior to the anything goes ‘sex, drugs and rock & roll’ cultural decay that generally began in 1968, school systems that had their own police department were virtually non-existent.

If, as I believe, banning semiautomatic rifles will not put a dent in school shootings, what will?  Here’s my answer.  Most school shootings are carried out by severely disturbed young white males whose thought processes went haywire due to acute mental illness (bad genes, drugs) or a dysfunctional childhood (bad parenting) — or both, as was the case with Nikolas Cruz.  Another reason for school shootings can be laid squarely at the feet of the corrosive cultural decline of the society in which these deranged mass murderers developed their upside down sense of right and wrong.

The anything-goes progressive culture that permeates virtually every facet our society teaches these young madmen the politically correct concept of moral relativism, the idea that moral judgments are values that can vary, depending on the viewpoints of differing cultural norms.  In other words, there is no clear-cut right and wrong.  If some people believe it’s O.K. to throw gay men from rooftops — an approved practice in some Muslim countries — who’s to say that’s wrong?  It’s what their native culture believes.  In contemporary America, troubled young minds receive mixed messages about what’s permissible and, far more important, what’s totally off limits.

When I was David’s age, kids had ready access to guns, but not to violent imagery.  Young people of today are bombarded with gratuitously violent movies and video games that make the act of pumping bullets into human beings seem almost hip.  Some studies show little connection between such viewing and mass shootings, but how can a constant stream of bloody visual carnage not have a profoundly negative impact on troubled young minds?  The simulated violence that blurs the distinction between fantasy and reality is knowingly mainlined into the consciousness of today’s youth by the entertainment industry and its anything-goes progressive values.

Progressive curriculums in our schools and colleges teach budding white male mass murderers to be ashamed not only of their country, but their skin color, as well.  Their already-confused minds are methodically indoctrinated with the concept of white privilege, a political narrative designed to create racial guilt and self-loathing among white people.  Militant feminism further erodes the self-worth of young white males by stereotyping them with the invented malady known as toxic masculinity.  Message: They’re not only white and male, God forbid, they’re also wildly cruel to women.  The constant assault on their gender and skin color turns some of them into emotionally damaged young men who withdraw into isolation and anger.

Our society’s progressive-dominated culture teaches mentally troubled young white males to loathe themselves, that right and wrong are malleable concepts, and that viewing simulated images of gory violence is a cool way to have fun.  No wonder some of them become mass murderers.  Through its relentless indoctrination in political correctness, multiculturalism, racial politics and feminist victimization, progressivism further screws up the already screwed-up minds of future school shooters.  The dramatic cultural upheaval since I was in school coincides almost perfectly with the sharp increase in self-inflicted deaths by young people: the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that in 2017 the suicide rate among young people reached its highest point since the government began collecting such statistics in 1960.

Would David also ban knives and automobiles?

I read that four times more people are stabbed to death than are killed by rifles, including semi-automatics, such as AR-15s.  I’m not sure if that ratio is entirely accurate, because the FBI’s crime statistics breakdown of the specific kind of gun used to commit murder is somewhat ambiguous.  In any event, a lot of people are killed by knives each year. I’m sure David would agree that those deaths are just as tragic as the ones taken by Nikolas Cruz, yet no sane person would call for banning knives.

Left at rest, a loaded gun is incapable of spontaneously discharging. The only way a gun can kill is if a human picks it up and fires it.  Making guns the scapegoat for school shootings and other mass killings is no different than blaming DUI manslaughters on cars and trucks.  I have never been arrested and have no history of mental illness.  Other than to home invaders and anarchists, my AR-15 poses a threat to no one.  Taking such weapons away from responsible people like me wouldn’t stop a single school shooting.  The battle we face is not against inanimate objects used by deranged people to kill.  The battle is against the mental illnesses, drug addictions and cultural depravity that cause disturbed people to do horrible things.

©John Edison. All rights reserved.

PUTIN PANIC: Are We Being Fooled by a Wall of Propaganda?

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Oliver Stone, an award-winning film director, was the executive producer of “Ukraine on Fire,” a documentary that came out in 2016. Stone also interviewed Russian President Vladimir Putin between 2014 and 2016. The interviews became the documentary series, “The Putin Interviews,” which aired in 2017
  • Stone recently sat down to talk to Lex Fridman about Russian president Vladimir Putin and the Russia-Ukraine conflict
  • “Ukraine on Fire” focused on the Maidan Revolution that began in 2013. After months of peaceful protests against the Ukrainian government’s decision to not sign a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, favoring an offer from Russia instead, deadly violence broke out
  • Petro Poroshenko was elected president in a special election in May 2014. According to the official story, Ukrainians were dissatisfied with President Viktor Yanukovych’s “growing authoritarianism,” and his refusal to sign the EU association agreement. Yanukovych and other high-level officials, however, claim the violent revolution was orchestrated by the U.S. for the purpose of regime change
  • Stone speculates that Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine may in part have been influenced by a realization that the U.S. is intent on regime change in Russia and is willing to destroy Ukraine to do it

In the video above, Lex Fridman interviews Oliver Stone about the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Stone, an award-winning film director, was the executive producer of “Ukraine on Fire,”1,2 a documentary that came out in 2016.

Stone also interviewed Russian President Vladimir Putin between 2014 and 2016. The interviews became the documentary series, “The Putin Interviews,” which aired in 2017. So, Stone has some insight into both countries. Fridman, meanwhile, is half-Russian, half-Ukrainian.

Ukraine on Fire

“Ukraine on Fire” focused on the Maidan Revolution3 that began in Kiev in 2013. After three months of peaceful protests against the Ukrainian government’s decision to not sign a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU, favoring an offer from Russia instead, deadly violence broke out.

Petro Poroshenko was elected president in a special election in May 2014. According to the official story, Ukrainians were dissatisfied with president Viktor Yanukovych’s “growing authoritarianism,” and his refusal to sign the EU association agreement, so they overthrew him.

Yanukovych and other high-level officials, however, claim the violent revolution was orchestrated by the U.S. for the purpose of regime change. Leaked conversations revealed top-level officials discussing how to implement a coup to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected government.

You can read more about this and see the film in my previous article, “Ukraine on Fire: 2016 Documentary by Oliver Stone.” The current president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, a former comedian and actor, was voted in in April 2019.

Putin, the Leader and the Man

In this interview, Fridman and Stone primarily focus on Putin — how and what he thinks, based on Stone’s perception of the man — and Russia’s incursion into Ukraine. Stone presents a different side of Putin that many Americans probably have never seen, and explains why Putin’s behavior is, perhaps surprisingly, rational.

The U.S. has a long history of anti-Soviet bias. As noted by Stone, the American stance was that capitalism works and communism doesn’t. Modern Russia is no longer communist,4,5,6 yet the U.S. antagonism against Russia remains, while the U.S. government, ironically, is now doing everything in its power, and beyond, to implement communism here.

Stone notes that Putin is “very much a market man,” and has been very clear that he believes national sovereignty is paramount for world peace and harmonious relations. Putin insists that all nations must be sovereign, “and I believe the United States has never accepted that,” Stone says. The U.S., Stone believes, is far more interested in keeping nations subservient to it and its ideologies.

According to Stone, Putin has a generally good reputation in other countries for being a man who promotes the interests of his country, but not at the expense of others. Keeping the world in harmony, “this has always been in his picture,” Stone insists.

When asked if he thought power had a corrupting influence on Putin, Stone insists that Putin would never last if he were acting as a dictator. The Russian people would not keep him in a position of power — which he has kept, on and off, for about 20 years.

Russia is a functioning democracy, and the people’s displeasure would reveal itself in several different ways. The ballot box is only one avenue by which they exhibit their dissatisfaction. But, apparently, they think Putin’s doing a good job at protecting the country and looking out for its needs.

Fridman, on the other hand, notes he senses a mixture of fear and apathy toward the leadership when he speaks to Russian family and friends, and this concerns him. Stone counters Fridman’s concerns saying he saw “far more freedom in the (Russian) press than what is pictured in the West, and that means different points of view. Russians are always arguing among themselves. I’ve never seen a more contentious country.”

Stone’s Experience With Putin

Part of Putin’s political longevity may have something to do with his ability to stay unruffled. “I never saw him lose his temper,” Stone says, noting that while most Americans tend to be emotional, Putin, in contrast, is calm, rational, balanced, mature and respectful, even under pressure. And, contrary to charismatic dictators such as former Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, Putin doesn’t try to charm you. He’s a straight-shooter.

All of his interviews with Stone were granted without rules or restrictions. All questions were allowable. Nothing was off the table. Putin also did not request to see any of the work before it was published. “He trusted me,” Stone says.

According to Stone, Putin has “no empire intentions,” and repeatedly expressed his desire to have friendly relations with the U.S. Unfortunately, Putin’s reputation has been tarnished by U.S. media, people acting from a political agenda, those who never met him, never went to Russia and don’t know Russian history. This U.S.-fabricated persona of Putin as an enemy of both his own people and the rest of the world has made such relations difficult.

Stone’s Initial Take on Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

Stone had a harsher critique against Putin in a March 2022 Facebook post, in which he had the following to say about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine:7

“Although the United States has many wars of aggression on its conscience, it doesn’t justify Mr. Putin’s aggression in Ukraine. A dozen wrongs don’t make a right. Russia was wrong to invade. It has made too many mistakes:

1)underestimating Ukrainian resistance

2)overestimating the military’s ability to achieve its objective

3)underestimating Europe’s reaction, especially Germany upping its military contribution to NATO, which they’ve resisted for some 20 years; even Switzerland has joined the cause. Russia will be more isolated than ever from the West

4)underestimating the enhanced power of NATO, which will now put more pressure on Russia’s borders

5)probably putting Ukraine into NATO

6)underestimating the damage to its own economy and certainly creating more internal resistance in Russia

7)creating a major readjustment of power in its oligarch class

8)putting cluster and vacuum bombs into play

9)and underestimating the power of social media worldwide

But we must wonder, how could Putin have saved the Russian-speaking people of Donetsk and Luhansk?

No doubt his Government could’ve done a better job of showing the world the eight years of suffering of those people and their refugees — as well as highlighting the Ukrainian buildup of 110,000 soldiers on the Donetsk-Luhansk borders, which was occurring essentially before the Russian buildup. But the West has far stronger public relations than the Russians.

Or perhaps Putin should’ve surrendered the two holdout provinces and offered 1-3 million people help to relocate in Russia. The world might’ve understood better the aggression of the Ukrainian Government. But then again, I’m not sure.

But now, it’s too late. Putin has allowed himself to be baited and fallen into the trap set by the U.S. and has committed his military, empowering the worst conclusions the West can make. He probably, I think, has given up on the West, and this brings us closer than ever to a Final Confrontation. There seems to be no road back.

The only ones happy about this are Russian nationalists and the legion of Russian haters, who finally got what they’ve been dreaming of for years, i.e. Biden, Pentagon, CIA, EU, NATO, mainstream media — and don’t overlook Nuland and her sinister neocon gang in D.C. This will significantly vindicate the uber hawks in public eyes.

Pointing out the toxicity of their policies (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, NATO expansion, breaking nuclear treaties, censoring and omitting crucial facts from the news, etc.) will be next to impossible. Pointing out Western double standards, including Kyiv and Zelenskyy’s bad behavior, will likewise fall on deaf ears as we again draw the wrong conclusions.

It’s easier now to smear those of us who tried to understand the Russian position through these last two decades. We tried. But now is the time, as JFK and Khrushchev faced down the perilous situation in Cuba in October 1962, for the two nuclear powers to walk this back from the abyss. Both sides need to save face.

This isn’t a moment for the U.S. to gloat. As a Vietnam War veteran and as a man who’s witnessed the endless antagonism of the Cold War, demonizing and humiliating foreign leaders is not a policy that can succeed. It only makes the situation worse. Back-channel negotiations are necessary, because whatever happens in the next few days or weeks, the specter of a final war must be realistically accepted and brokered.

Who can do that? Are there real statesmen among us? Perhaps, I pray, Macron. Bring us the likes of Metternich, Talleyrand, Averell Harriman, George Shultz, James Baker, and Mikhail Gorbachev.

The great unseen tragedy at the heart of this history of our times is the loss of a true peaceful partnership between Russia and the U.S. — with, yes, potentially China, no reason why not except America’s desire for dominance.

The idiots who kept provoking Russia after the Cold War ended in 1991 have committed a terrible crime against humanity and the future. Together, our countries could’ve been natural allies in the biggest battle of all against climate change.

In its technical achievements alone, in large scale science, in its rocketry, heavy industries, and its most modern, clean nuclear energy reactors, Russia has been a great friend to man. Alas, in our century so far, man has failed to see or reach for the stars.”

How Does He See It Now?

Now, two months later, how does he feel about the situation? “It’s very hard to be honest about this because the West has brought down a curtain. Anyone who questions the invasion of Ukraine and its consequences is an enemy of the people,” Stone replies. “I’ve never in my lifetime seen such a WALL of propaganda as I’ve seen in the West.”

And, the way European countries are jumping in with NATO suggests they do not, in fact, have sovereignty over their own countries, Stone says. Why hasn’t NATO objected to the massacres taking place in the Donbas region of Ukraine ever since 2014, when Ukraine under Poroshenko took an anti-Russian position as an ally of the United States?

There were death squads, local leadership were being murdered, as were journalists. An estimated 14,000 Ukrainian Russians were killed between 2014 and early 2022 by the Ukrainian military and Nazi battalions,8 and the U.S. has supported it, and continues to do so.

Stone claims the logs of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine show that before Russia’s “invasion” of Ukraine, February 24, 2022, there was heavy artillery coming into the Donbas from the Ukrainian side. According to Russia’s Foreign Ministry, Moscow’s action against Ukraine was a “special military operation” to end the “systematic extermination of the Donbas population.”

Ukrainian forces had built up on the border, and Stone believes Ukraine was actually planning to invade Donbas. Russia then responded by sending forces to the border, but this buildup on both sides has been largely ignored by Western media, which portrayed it as a sudden and unprovoked invasion by Russia.

In other words, we cannot analyze the Russian invasion of Ukraine without taking the Donbas conflict, which has been ongoing since 2014, into account. Stone is convinced that Poroshenko was instructed, from the start of his presidency, to refuse negotiations with Russia, and to maintain a hostile stance.

“This is very, very dangerous,” Stone says. Zelensky, also, has maintained this stance since 2019. “The whole world is being hurt by this, and no one is calling it out.”

Stone believes Putin realized that the U.S. is intent on regime change in Russia, and are willing to destroy Ukraine to do it. So, he took action. Fridman suggests the Ukraine conflict may in reality be a proxy war between Russia and the U.S., and Stone seems to agree with this theory. But that still doesn’t give us any greater insight into this war. Putin could have surrendered the Donbas and offered safe harbor for the refugees. He chose not to, but why we don’t know.

Whatever the reason, Stone is convinced that it was a calculated move — and not one based on the misuse of power. He also points out that Zelensky had mentioned bringing in nuclear weapons into Ukraine shortly before Russia’s invasion, which could have set off alarms and influenced Putin’s decisions.

Stone also warns that the U.S. is more than capable of a nuclear and/or chemical false flag. A small nuclear device could be set off in the Donbas, and even if it didn’t make sense, the propaganda machine would automatically blame it on Russia. Of course, Russia also has a significant nuclear arsenal, which could be brought to the fore.

“Can we walk back from the brink of nuclear war?” Fridman asks. “Yes,” Stone replies. “What do we need to walk it back?” Stone replies:

“Reason. Reason, and then diplomacy. Talk to the guy. Mr. Biden, why don’t you calm down and go talk to Mr. Putin in Moscow. And try to have a discussion without falling into ideologies.”

Sources and References

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

Black Lives Matter’s Goal to ‘Disrupt’ the Nuclear Family Fits a Marxist Aim That Goes Back a Century and a Half

Black Lives Matter’s goal fits a Marxist paradigm that stretches all the way back to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.


The organization Black Lives Matter has removed from its website a page that included language condemning America’s “Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.”

The page, titled “What We Believe,” included various public policy positions unrelated to police brutality and police reform. The Washington Examiner discovered on Monday the page had been removed.

“Page Not Found. Sorry, but the page you were trying to view does not exist,” the page now reads.

The Wayback Machine archived the page, however, and it contains a lengthy description of the organization’s tenets and objectives. Among the views expressed is a desire to “disrupt” the traditional family structure.

“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

According to the Examiner, BLM did not respond to the paper’s request for comment, so it’s unclear if the page was deliberately removed.

Whatever the case, BLM’s endorsement of this language should come as little surprise. As Brad Polumbo has shown, there are effectively two Black Lives Matter phenomena: the Black Lives Matter™️ organization and “black lives matter” as an informal movement.

The latter involves people fighting in good faith for police reform who believe African Americans suffer disproportionately from police violence. The former, Black Lives Matter™️, is an organization co-founded by Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi that has roots in Marxism.

“We actually do have an ideological frame[work],” Cullors said of her organization in 2015. “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.”

As I pointed out in a 2017 article, Karl Marx was interested in abolishing much more than just private property. In The Communist Manifesto, Marx and his associate Frederick Engels defend attempts by Communists to abolish the traditional family.

“Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists,” Marx wrote. “On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie.”

Marx and Engels proceeded to compare the nuclear family to public prostitution, before explaining why it was natural and desirable for the institution to “vanish.”

“The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital,” Marx and Engels wrote. “The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.”

From where does this hostility to the family stem? Marx and Engels offered clues.

“The modern family contains in germ not only slavery (servitus), but also serfdom, since from the beginning it is related to agricultural services,” Engels wrote in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the Statequoting Marx. “It contains in miniature all the contradictions which later extend throughout society and its state.”

The hostility to the traditional family did not die with Marx and Engels, however. One of the first steps the Bolsheviks took after seizing power was to begin a decades-long struggle to abolish marriage and weaken the traditional family.

“The issue was so central to the revolutionary program that the Bolsheviks published decrees establishing civil marriage and divorce soon after the October Revolution, in December 1917,” writes Harvard historian Lauren Kaminsky. “These first steps were intended to replace Russia’s family laws with a new legal framework that would encourage more egalitarian sexual and social relations.”

A 1926 article from The Atlantic, written by a woman living in Russia at the time, describes these efforts in detail. The term “illegitimate children” was abolished, and a law was passed that allowed couples to divorce in “a matter of a few minutes.” Legislation was introduced to eliminate distinctions between legal wives and mistresses, including granting property rights to the unmarried consorts.

“Chaos was the result,’ the Russian woman wrote. “Men took to changing wives with the same zest which they displayed in the consumption of the recently restored forty-per-cent vodka.”

About a half century later, the Chinese Communist Party introduced a different version of state-enforced family orchestration. It’s “one-child policy” (1979–2015), the most extreme population planning policy in world history, placed limits on the number of children Chinese families could have.

Decades before the policy went into effect, Party Chairman Mao Zedong (1893–1976) famously explained why it was necessary for the state to manage family procreation and the labor stock.

“(Re)production needs to be planned. In my view, humankind is completely incapable of managing itself,” Mao said. “It has plans for production in factories, for producing cloth, tables and chairs, and steel, but there is no plan for producing humans. This is anarchism—no governing, no organization and no rules.”

Even today the aversion to the traditional family remains strong in socialists. A 2019 article in The Nation titled “Want to Dismantle Capitalism? Abolish the Family” offers a glimpse of the modern socialist critique of the institution.

“We know that the nuclear private household is where the overwhelming majority of abuse can happen,” author Sophie Lewis explains. “And then there’s the whole question of what it is for: training us up to be workers, training us to be inhabitants of a binary-gendered and racially stratified system, training us not to be queer.”

For true believers of collectivism, there’s little question that private family matters are also state matters. Socialism requires collective control of resources, and humans are the ultimate resource. This is why the traditional nuclear family, which places authority in the hands of parents rather than the community, is an affront to so many socialists.

The scholar Robert Nisbet has explained that the family is one of the three pillars of authority outside the state, along with the church and civic organizations. All three of these institutions offer humans something essential to the human experience: community.

Nisbet believed all three pillars served as important checks on centralized political power, which is why Nisbet saw the decline of the family, church, and civic organizations in America as an ill omen for liberty.

“…the quest for community is an impulse that stems from human nature. All yearn for participation and for a sense of belonging within a cause or body greater than the single person,” Nisbet wrote in The Quest for Community: A Study in the Ethics and Order of Freedom (1953). “If the desire for community cannot be filled in church, in family, in neighborhood, or in locality, then it will be filled instead by the central State.”

It’s unclear why Black Lives Matter™️ scrubbed the anti-nuclear family language from its website. What’s clear, however, is that its previously stated goal to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure” fits the Marxist paradigm that stretches back a century and half.

Perhaps the removed page reflects a change of heart. On the other hand, it could simply be a tactic to conceal its Marxist roots. As Dan Sanchez and I wrote in a recent FEE article, in recent decades purveyors of socialism have shown a tendency to shun the Marxist label even while embracing its ideals.

”There are a lot of people who don’t want to call themselves Marxist,” Eugene D. Genovese, an eminent Marxist academic, told The New York Times in a 1989 article on the mainstreaming of Marxism in US universities.

We don’t know for certain why many individuals and groups advocating doctrines rooted in Marxism tend to reject the Marxist label—Cullors’s 2015 confession that she and Garza are “trained Marxists” appears to be a mistake of candor—but it seems likely adherents have gleaned a basic truth once observed by the writer Upton Sinclair.

“The American People will take Socialism, but they won’t take the label,” Sinclair observed in a private 1951 correspondence with fellow socialist Norman Thomas.

Many people and organizations of good faith support the black lives matter movement because they believe all people deserve equal treatment and due process before the law.

But Americans should be careful to not confuse the broader black lives matter movement with Black Lives Matter™️, an organization whose goals may be antithetical to freedom and family—even if they no longer say so.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

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