ABSURD: AG Merritt Garland’s New Office of ‘Environmental Justice’ yet another Marxist attack on science and free speech

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

My God, just when I thought it can’t get any worse, the Department of In-Justice and its Chief Arbiter, Marxist Merritt Garland announces a new Federal Agency the “Office of Environmental Justice.”  This is yet another Marxist frontal assault on science and freedom of speech. Watch:

The Office of Environmental Justice,

“[W]ill seek to redress health risks from climate change faced by minorities and low-income people in the United States.”

Another draconian measure designed to force and enforce their Climate Change Agenda. I’ll bet it will also create more Federal Agents with unchecked arrest power as well.   If you think we have bad inflation roaring at 8.5% just wait until this ridiculous agency kicks in and causes costs of everything to soar.

Biden DOJ Announces New ‘Office of Environmental Justice’

“Although violations of our environmental laws can happen anywhere, communities of color, indigenous communities, and low-income communities often bear the brunt of the harm caused by environmental crime, pollution, and climate change”

Merrick Garland announced on Thursday that the Department of Justice is launching the Office of Environmental Justice. It speaks volumes about the priorities of this administration.

There are so many major problems in the country right now, and this is their concern.

It’s likely that this is just to remind the left how committed Biden is to fighting climate change. And of course to politicize the language around the topic and criminalize dissent.

Breanne Deppisch reports at the Washington Examiner:

DOJ launches new Office of Environmental Justice

The Justice Department is launching a new Office of Environmental Justice, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced on Thursday, which will seek to redress health risks from climate change faced by minorities and low-income people in the United States.

You can guess where this is going.

Read full article.

RELATED ARTICLE: Free speech concerns mount over DHS ‘disinformation’ board as lawmakers, critics weigh in

RELATED TWEET:

©Royal A. Brown, III. All rights reserved.

The VA Bought 10,000 Smartphones during the Pandemic. 85% Were Never Used

/in , , , , , , , , /by

 

There’s a right way and a wrong way to help homeless veterans.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs wasted $1.8 million in data plan costs for unused phones, according to an inspector general’s report released on Wednesday. The Veterans Health Administration had spent $7 million to purchase 10,000 phones with unlimited prepaid calling plans for homeless veterans, but 85% of the phones went unused. The report also found that $571,000 was wasted on data plans for iPads sitting in storage due to poor oversight.

“The smartphones and iPads were purchased as part of the efforts to increase homeless veterans’ access to telehealth,” the Associate Press explains. “The veterans were enrolled in a Department of Housing and Urban Development VA Supportive housing program.”

The report called for the VA to “establish a realistic goal for days in storage along with a process for closely monitoring days in storage for each data plan provider and taking corrective actions when the goal is not being met.” It also called on the VA to create a process that starts the data plan charges only after the device has been issued to a veteran.

Regrettably, government waste and mismanagement like this is nothing new. From $2 million bathrooms to $400,000 camel statues, governments have managed to throw mad amounts of money down the drain over the years. In fact, government waste is so common that Senator Rand Paul prepares an annual “Festivus” report detailing the most egregious examples of wasted resources from the year.

But while government waste is nothing new, what’s intriguing about this particular case is the reason that was given for the problem.

“The inspector general concluded that Veterans Health Administration officials…made a good faith effort to help veterans get smartphones,” the Associated Press notes. “But they found there was a ‘lack of information for officials to be able to determine the quantity needed for the targeted veteran population.’”

If this assessment sounds familiar, well, it should. As the Nobel-prize-winning economist F. A. Hayek famously asserted, the “lack of information” possessed by government bureaucrats regarding the “quantity needed” of various resources is in fact the key problem with central planning. Waste is inevitable in these systems precisely because they can never accumulate, let alone manage, the knowledge that is required for determining the best allocation of resources.

Hayek spells out the knowledge problem in his famous essay, The Use of Knowledge in Society.

“The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess. The economic problem of society is thus not merely a problem of how to allocate “given” resources—if “given” is taken to mean given to a single mind which deliberately solves the problem set by these “data.” It is rather a problem of how to secure the best use of resources known to any of the members of society, for ends whose relative importance only these individuals know. Or, to put it briefly, it is a problem of the utilization of knowledge which is not given to anyone in its totality.”

The solution to this problem, says Hayek, is decentralization and market prices. With market prices, we can learn what people find valuable and direct production to those ends. But without market prices, we are “groping in the dark,” as Mises says. This is why Veterans Affairs wasted over a million dollars on these data plans. They had no way of knowing the demand for these phones, so they ended up buying way more than were needed.

Of course, none of this is to say we shouldn’t help homeless veterans. The question here is what’s the most effective way to help them. The government approach, or the market approach?

The government approach, as this story illustrates, is to assume that we know what homeless veterans need, buy a bunch of it, and then realize that we actually misjudged the need and wasted a bunch of money.

The market approach, on the other hand, begins with the assumption that we don’t know what’s best for other people or what their specific needs are. Following from that, we realize that it makes little sense to have central planners spending money on their behalf. Thus, rather than trying to guess what they need, we focus our efforts on getting out of their way. We get rid of minimum wage laws and occupational licensing requirements that might be keeping them out of jobs. We cut taxes so they can save money, and we tear down crony regulations that make everyday goods more expensive than they need to be. In other words, we let the market work.

To be sure, the market approach is radically different from what we’ve been doing. But given how things have turned out, perhaps radically different is exactly what we need.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

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

FLORIDA: Monroe County Cuban Republican Caucus Endorses KW Miller for Congress in Florida’s 28th District

/in , , , , , , /by

MIAMI, May 6, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — The Cuban Republican Caucus of Monroe County Florida has endorsed KW Miller for Congress in Florida’s 28th district. The Cuban Caucus represents business owners and entrepreneurs who contribute significant economic revenue, employment and goodwill in Monroe County Florida.

The America First Political Committee Chairman KW Miller is running in Florida’s newly created 28th Congressional District which includes a portion of southwestern Dade County and all of Monroe County Florida.

KW Miller embraces his Spanish heritage and fully supports the Cuban American Community. He will continue will promote policies and laws to allow the Cuban community to continue to achieve the American Dream.

Americans from Spanish heritage should never forget why they and their families came to the United States. Socialism is where people become enslaved to the liberal elites.

KW Miller wants to lift the blockade against Cuba, but does not want to help the Communist Government of Cuba. We must first remove Socialist RINO Democrats like Carlos Gimenez from Congress to advance Cuba policy in Florida’s 28th Congressional District and nationally.

The meaning of the Cuban Flag has significant historical meaning. The blue stripes represent the three Cuban districts at the time the flag was designed. The white stripes represent purity. The triangle is an equality symbol. The colors reflect those of the American flag.

About America First Political Committee:

Our mission is to protect the integrity of the U.S. Constitution, promote conservative political candidates and policy that puts America First.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

FLORIDA: Textbook Publishers Surrender To DeSantis, Scrub Woke Propaganda

/in , , , , , , , /by

Great American hero saving our children’s minds.

Florida Textbook Publishers Surrender To DeSantis, Scrub Woke Content

By: Kendall Tietz , Daily Caller, 

Textbook publishers are surrendering to Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ demands that math instructional materials get in line with state standards, allowing more books to be added to the approved list, according to the Florida Department of Education (FLDOE).

“Publishers are aligning their instructional materials to state standards and removing woke content allowing the department of education to add 19 more books to the state adoption list over the past 17 days,” the FLDOE announced on its website.

The FLDOE announced on April 15 that it had rejected 41% of math textbooks proposed by publishers for public instruction because they contained “indoctrinating concepts” such as Critical Race Theory (CRT), Social Emotional Learning (SEL) and Common Core, which are prohibited by the state according to the Benchmarks for Excellent Student Thinking (B.E.S.T.) Standards.

The FLDOE explained that publishers could substitute or revise their submitted bids to meet Florida’s specifications or appeal the decision.

Additional books have been added to the adoption list “because they removed woke content and made other changes to meet state standards,” FLDOE Press Secretary Cassie Palelis told the Daily Caller News Foundation on Tuesday.

“We have high standards and reject books with unacceptable content because we know that publishers can easily adjust their materials to meet our guidelines, as displayed by the fact that it took less than two weeks for additional publishers to amend entire books, resubmit them and get put on the adoption list,” Palelis told the DCNF.

After initially declining to provide examples of rejected textbooks over copyright concerns, the FLDOE published a few examples of the materials in question on April 21.

Examples included a graph that measured racial prejudice according to political identification that showed conservatives are reportedly more racist than liberals and multiple “social-emotional learning,” activities, which critics have argued is a loophole to repackage CRT and disseminate the material throughout public schools……..

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social.

Schiff on SCOTUS Breach: ‘I Don’t Care How the Draft Leaked’

/in , , , , , , /by

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) tweeted on Wednesday that he did not care how the draft of the Supreme Court opinion on Roe v. Wade leaked — despite it being an unprecedented breach in the Supreme Court’s modern history.

“I don’t care how the draft leaked. That’s a sideshow,” he tweeted. “What I care about is that a small number of conservative justices, who lied about their plans to the Senate, intend to deprive millions of women of reproductive care. Codifying Roe isn’t enough. We must expand the court.”

This is the same inveterate liar who tried to protect the identity of the leaker of former President Trump’s classified call with the Ukrainian president. He doesn’t care about the leakers in any instance in which the leak serves his Party’s corruption and power-mad agenda.

And he’s using the leak to push the Democrat agenda to pack the Court with Progressive Justices, because Democrats’ first impulse when thwarted is not to change hearts and minds but to change the institutions whose rules and laws obstruct the Democrat Party.

Adam Schiff

27 Known Connections

Schiff Lies Repeatedly to Promote the Trump-Russia “Collusion” Hoax

In a March 22, 2017 interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, Schiff claimed there was “more than circumstantial evidence” that Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign had colluded with Russian government operatives to tilt the election in his favor. When Todd asked Schiff if he had “seen direct evidence of collusion,” the congressman replied: “I don’t want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and is very much worthy of investigation, so that is what we ought to do.” From that point forward, Schiff established himself as one of the Democrat Party’s leading voices demanding Trump’s impeachment, repeatedly proclaiming to the media that the evidence against the president was overwhelming.

To read more and learn more about Adam Schiff, click here.

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

VIDEO: Google’s Real Agenda Is Turning Humans Into Pawns

/in , , , , , , /by

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Robert Epstein, Ph.D. warns about Google’s ability to control public policy, swing elections and brainwash our children
  • The methods Google uses are ephemeral and leave no paper trail behind, making it very difficult to track and prove that they’re using humans as pawns, manipulating us via ways that we can’t counteract
  • Research by Epstein and colleagues has found that biased search results can change people’s opinions and voting preferences, shifting opinions in undecided voters by 20% to 80% in certain demographic groups
  • Google’s “autocomplete” feature on its search engine can turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into nearly a 90/10 split — all without people realizing they’re being manipulated
  • The first step to breaking free from Google’s dictatorship is recognizing that the manipulation is occurring; the next involves consciously opting out of it as much as possible by protecting your privacy online

Google has the power to manipulate what you see online, targeting you with certain advertisements and burying search results they’d rather you not see. But can they go so far as to control the outcome of political elections? Absolutely, according to Robert Epstein, Ph.D., a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT).

Epstein, a Harvard-trained psychologist who founded the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies, likens Google to a dictator with unprecedented power because it relies on techniques of manipulation that have never existed before in human history. The free services they provide really aren’t free, he warns. “You pay for the with your freedom.”1

Google Uses Ephemeral Manipulation Tools

In the video above, Epstein speaks with Jan Jekielek, senior editor of The Epoch Times, about Google’s ability to control public policy, swing elections and brainwash our children. Google has the power “to censor content, to track our every move, to tear societies apart, to alter the human mind, and even to reengineer humanity,” Epstein writes in his report, “Google’s Triple Threat,”2 which he details in his interview with Jekielek.

The methods Google uses are ephemeral and leave no paper trail, making it very difficult to track and prove that they’re using humans as pawns, manipulating us via ways that we can’t counteract. Ephemeral experiences occur briefly, then disappear, and include things like a list of suggested videos on YouTube, search suggestions and topics in a newsfeed.

“They affect us, they disappear, they’re stored nowhere and they’re gone,” Epstein says. “It’s the ideal form of manipulation. People have no idea they’re being manipulated, number one, and number two, authorities can’t go back in time to see what people were being shown, in other words, how they were being manipulated.”3

Epstein and his team, however, have found ways to track Google’s invisible, almost subliminal, tools, including the search engine manipulation effect (SEME). According to Epstein:4

“SEME is one of the most powerful forms of influence ever discovered in the behavioral sciences … It leaves people thinking they have made up their own minds, which is very much an illusion. It also leaves no paper trail for authorities to trace. Worse still, the very few people who can detect bias in search results shift even farther in the direction of the bias, so merely being able to see the bias doesn’t protect you from it.”

Research by Epstein and colleagues has found that biased search results can change people’s opinions and voting preferences, shifting opinions in undecided voters by 20% to 80% in certain demographic groups.5 Internal emails leaked from Google talk about “ephemeral experience,” and the company makes a point to engineer ephemeral experiences intended to alter the way people think.

SEME, however, is just one of about a dozen subliminal tools that Epstein’s team has discovered. Others include the “search suggestion effect,” the “opinion matching effect” and the “YouTube manipulation effect.”6

Google Shifted Millions of Votes in 2020

As Epstein and his team began to preserve politically related ephemeral experiences, extreme political bias was uncovered on Google and YouTube, which is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet.

In the days leading up to the 2020 Presidential election and 2021 Senate runoff elections in Georgia, for instance, they preserved 1.5 million ephemeral experiences and more than 3 million web pages, which were sufficient to shift “at least 6 million votes in the presidential election without people’s knowledge.”7

This isn’t an isolated incident. In 2016, Google’s search algorithm generated biased search results that influenced undecided voters, giving 2.6 million to 10.2 million votes to Hillary Clinton.

Epstein makes a point to state that he leans left politically, but despite Google’s bias working to support the candidates he supported, he can’t applaud it, “because rigorous research I have been conducting since 2013 has shown me how dangerous these companies are – Google-and-the-Gang, I call them.”8

Even displaying a “Go Vote” reminder on Google on election day in 2018, Epstein found, gave one political party an extra 800,000 to 4.6 million votes compared to what the other party got. What’s more, Epstein says those numbers are “quite conservative.”9 “In other words,” Epstein explained, “Google’s ‘Go Vote’ prompt was not a public service; it was a vote manipulation. This type of vote manipulation is an example of what I call the ‘Differential Demographics Effect.’”10

Epstein also had a monitoring system in place in 2018, which preserved more than 47,000 election-related searches on Google, Bing and Yahoo, along with nearly 400,000 web pages that the search results linked to. The political bias that was uncovered in the results may have shifted 78.2 million votes to one political party.11

Even the “autocomplete” feature that occurs when you start to type in Google’s search engine is a powerful manipulation tool. “A growing body of evidence suggests that Google is manipulating people’s thinking and behavior from the very first character people type into the search box,” Epstein writes.12 Just from this feature alone, Epstein’s research found Google can turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into nearly a 90/10 split — all without people realizing they’re being manipulated.

Further, because Google’s persuasive technologies are so powerful, and many elections worldwide are very close, Epstein’s data suggest Google has likely been determining the outcomes of up to 25% of national elections worldwide since at least 2015.13

Google Is a Surveillance Agency

Download Interview Transcript

It’s important to understand that Google is a surveillance agency with significant yet hidden surveillance powers, and this is one of their primary threats to society. As noted by Epstein:14

“The search engine … Google Wallet, Google Docs, Google Drive, YouTube, these are surveillance platforms. In other words, from their perspective, the value these tools have is they give them more information about you. Surveillance is what they do.”

While surveillance is Google’s primary business, their revenue — which exceeds $130 billion a year — comes almost exclusively from advertising. All that personal information you’ve provided them through their various products is sold to advertisers looking for a specific target audience. Meanwhile, they also have an unprecedented censorship ability. By restricting or blocking access to websites, they decide what you can and cannot see.

The most crushing problem with this kind of internet censorship is that you don’t know what you don’t know. If a certain type of information is removed from search, and you don’t know it should exist somewhere, you will never know and you won’t go looking for it. This is how hundreds of millions of people have been deprived of learning the power of natural healing from me and many other clinicians who have been censored by Google.

For example, Google has been investing in DNA repositories for quite a long time, and adding DNA information to our profiles. According to Epstein, Google has taken over the national DNA repository, but articles about that — which he has cited in his own writings — have all vanished. As it stands, Epstein is worried for the future if no one steps in to stop Google’s power:15

“As the father of five children, I am especially concerned about what humanity’s future will look like if Big Tech is allowed to continue unobstructed on its path toward world domination. In the 1950s, British economist Kenneth Boulding wrote, ‘A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government.’

I am writing this essay because I believe that such a world already exists, and that unless we act quickly and decisively, the power that the technology company executives have garnered will become so firmly entrenched that we will never be able to unseat them from their invisible thrones.”

Epstein’s Six Top Privacy Tips

The first step to breaking free from Google’s dictatorship is recognizing that the manipulation is occurring. The next involves consciously opting out of it as much as possible. It’s especially important that children are protected, as they are among the most vulnerable to the onslaught of manipulation, which will have serious consequences to future generations. Epstein noted:16

“We’re trying to figure out how the manipulation works. But most importantly, we’re trying to quantify it … Because I think that what’s really happening is that there is a cumulative effect of, not just political bias, but a value literally a cumulative effect of being exposed to certain kinds of values, over and over and over again, on one tech platform, or after another.

And I think that the people who are most vulnerable to being impacted by that kind of process are children.”

Epstein has compiled six steps that can help protect your privacy online, noting that he hasn’t received a targeted ad on his computer or mobile phone since 2014 as a result. To take back some of your online privacy, for yourself as well as your children, he recommends:17

  1. Get rid of Gmail. If you have a Gmail account, try a non-Google email service instead such as ProtonMail, an encrypted email service based in Switzerland.
  2. Uninstall Google Chrome and use Brave browser instead, available for all computers and mobile devices. It blocks ads and protects your privacy.
  3. Switch search engines. Try Brave search engine instead, which you can access on the Brave browser and will not compromise your privacy and surveil you.
  4. Avoid Android. Google phones and phones that use Android track virtually everything you do and do not protect your privacy. It’s possible to de-Google your cellphone by getting an Android phone that doesn’t have a Google operating system, but you’ll need to find a skilled IT person who can reformat your cellphone’s hard drive.
  5. Avoid Google Home devices. If you have Google Home smart speakers or the Google Assistant smartphone app, there’s a chance people are listening to your requests, and even may be listening when you wouldn’t expect.
  6. Consider using a proxy or VPN (Virtual Private Network). This service creates a buffer between you and the internet, “fooling many of the surveillance companies into thinking you’re not really you.”
Sources and References

VIDEO REPORT: Afghan Refugees Given $400,000 To Purchase Houses In Florida As Americans Go Homeless

/in , , , , , , , /by

The published this video report on relocating Afghan refugees.

On September 7th, 2021 USA Today in an article titled, “White House asks Congress for billions in emergency funds for Afghan resettlement” Joey Garrison reported:

WASHINGTON — The White House is seeking billions in emergency funds this month from Congress to help resettle tens of thousands of Afghan immigrants into the U.S.

In a spending request Tuesday outlining “urgent needs,” President Joe Biden’s administration asked Congress to authorize $6.4 billion for Afghan resettlement efforts one week after the U.S. ended its military effort in Afghanistan. The U.S. is currently working to resettle Afghan allies evacuated from the war-torn country.

White House officials also requested “at least $10 billion” for recovery efforts from Hurricane Ida, and an additional $14 billion for other recent natural disasters – including Hurricanes Laura and Delta from last year.

Shalanda Young, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, made the budget request Tuesday, less than four weeks before the current 2021 fiscal year ends Sept. 30. Together the requests total more than $30 billion.

[ … ]

The funding for Afghan refugees would support U.S. resettlement operations overseas and plans for as many as 65,000 vulnerable Afghans to arrive in the U.S. by the end of his month, according to the White House, and up to 30,000 additional Afghans over the next year.

Read the full article.

On September 16th, 2021 Nexstar Media Wire in an article titled “Florida to receive over 1,000 Afghan refugees in coming weeks, report says” reported:

The Biden administration began notifying governors and state refugee coordinators across the country about how many Afghan evacuees from among the first group of nearly 37,000 arrivals are slated to be resettled in their states.

California is projected to take more arrivals than any other — more than 5,200 people, according to State Department data for the Afghan Placement and Assistance program obtained by The Associated Press.

Alabama and Mississippi are each slated to welcome 10, U.S. officials said Wednesday. Hawaii, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming and the District of Columbia are not expected to resettle anyone from the first group of evacuees who fled during the final days of the chaotic U.S. withdrawal last month.

Read the full article.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Poll finds one-third of adults say they think an effort is afoot to replace native-born Americans with new immigrants for electoral purposes

Afghan refugees have found a home in Florida, hoping for a ‘peaceful and calm’ life

EUROPE: MP warns ‘EU does not want free speech’ after Elon Musk Twitter takeover

/in , , , , , , , /by

Agenda-driven globalists and Leftists who want control over the public are apoplectic over Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover; so now the gloves are coming off.

Flemish Member of European Parliament Tom Vandendriessche notes: “The EU does not want free speech…That is dangerous for their system.” And threats are in order. Thierry Breton, European Commissioner for Internal Market, warned Elon Musk to “make sure the platform continues censoring content or face the wrath of Brussels.”

Yet Twitter’s agenda-driven proponents of cancel culture continue to pretend to care about public “harm” and “responsibility“….

Regardless of ownership, all social media platforms must be responsible,” said a spokesman for Prime Minister Boris Johnson. “That includes protecting users from harm on their sites….

An example of how glaringly dishonest and activist Twitter (and its supporters) had become was its banning of Donald Trump while permitting the Taliban.

Elon Musk Twitter Takeover: ‘EU Does Not Want Free Speech’ Warns Euro MP

by Peter Caddle, Breitbart, May 1, 2022:

A Member of the European Parliament has warned the EU “does not want free speech” after a European Commission official threatened Elon Musk over his takeover of Twitter.

Tom Vandendriessche, an EU-level representative for the Flemish nationalist Vlaams Belang party, has said that the European Union “does not want free speech”, accusing the supranational bloc of wanting to “outsource” censorship to Big Tech corporations.

Vandendriessche’s comments come shortly after one of the European Union’s unelected commissioners, Thierry Breton, issued threats to Elon Musk regarding his Twitter takeover, telling the pro-free speech entrepreneur that he must make sure the platform continues censoring content or face the wrath of Brussels.

In a statement provided by the MEP to Breitbart, Vandendriessche argued that Musk’s publicly-expressed goals for the Twitter microblogging platform are positive and in line with what he has argued for personally in the past — and that the European Union is threatening democracy through its harsh regime of outsourced censorship.

“The EU does not want free speech,” the Flemish MEP said. “That is dangerous for their system.”

“They therefore want to ‘outsource’ censorship to private players,” he continued. “They call that ‘taking responsibility’, but it is nothing less than flat censorship.”…

Vandendriessche’s statement on the Elon Musk takeover runs contrary to the views expressed by Europe’s ruling technocrats, with the bloc’s tsar for the Internal Market, Thierry Breton, demanding that Musk keeps Twitter’s regime of censorship in place.

“Elon, there are rules,” the EU bigwig said, before referencing issues around so-called “hate speech” and moderation. “You are welcome but these are our rules. It’s not your rules which will apply here,” he warned.

“If [Twitter] does not comply with our law, there are sanctions — 6 per cent of the revenue and, if they continue, banned from operating in Europe,” he went on to threaten….

“Regardless of ownership, all social media platforms must be responsible,” said a spokesman for Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

“That includes protecting users from harm on their sites,” the spokesman continued. “It is too early to say what — if any — changes will be made to how Twitter operates.”…

AUTHOR

CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

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

Only Internet Fascism Can Save Democracy

/in , , , , , , /by

Won’t someone save democracy from the people?

Free speech on the internet endangers democracy, Barack Obama told Stanford University.

The widely hailed speech at Big Tech’s favorite university claimed that autocrats are “subverting democracy” and that democracies have “grown dangerously complacent.” In the slow parade of teleprompter clichés he even  warned that “too often we’ve taken freedom for granted.”

To Obama, the threat to democracy doesn’t come from government power, but the lack of it.

“You just have to flood a country’s public square with enough raw sewage. You just have to raise enough questions, spread enough dirt, plant enough conspiracy theorizing that citizens no longer know what to believe. Once they lose trust in their leaders, in mainstream media, in political institutions, in each other, in the possibility of truth, the game’s won,” he summed up.

Like every Obama speech, “Challenges to Democracy in the Digital Information Realm” didn’t offer anything new, just a distillation of familiar talking points and misplaced assumptions.

The assumption at the heart of Obama’s speech and that of the range of arguments depicting free speech as a cultural and national threat is that the purpose of discourse is state power.

Obama, like many post-liberal lefty critics of free speech, reduces speech to its social impact and its social impact to its political impact. This holistic integration is so fundamental to Marxists and many lefties that they don’t even think twice about the idea that everything we do is reducible to a move on the great abacus of social justice. The food you eat, the car you buy, and the words you say have the potential to either save or damn the planet and humanity.

This quasi-religious conception of mass social mobilization pervades American society. It’s the precondition for wokeness because the only possible moral justification for terrorizing random people on social media is the conviction that governance isn’t political, it’s social, and that the only way to avert climate change and social inequality is by controlling what everyone believes.

Wokeness collapses the distinction between the private and public spheres, and between government and individuals. In a national social crisis, the only conceptual framework through which the Left ever really governs, there’s no time for such liberal niceties as private spheres.

Obama’s speech neatly illustrates the fascism at the heart of this panopticon political project.

Introduce disagreement and you “raise enough questions” that people “no longer know what to believe” and then “lose trust in their leaders”, “mainstream media” and even “truth”. Stripped of all the Brookings Institute globalist prose, what Obama is really saying is that individual disagreement undermines the state. And that truth is dependent on public faith in the state.

This is a value system utterly at odds with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, one which envisions an intimate link between individual speech and state authority that would have horrified King George III, but absolutely delighted Hitler or Stalin.

It assumes that there can be no other legitimate points of view other than the official one and that there should be no leaders except those who share them. Limiting the range of opinions is necessary to protect state power because there is no distinction between them and the state.

Or as a certain Austrian artist once put it, “One people, One state, One leader”.

When he was promoting his last book two years ago, Obama made the same arguments. “If we do not have the capacity to distinguish what’s true from what’s false, then by definition the marketplace of ideas doesn’t work. And by definition our democracy doesn’t work.”

The assumption that the democratic process leads to truth rather than choice, absolute rightness rather than people power, is an undemocratic paradigm. Its inevitable conclusion becomes that of Obama, that democracy must be protected by controlling the people.

Not only elections, but ideas, are too important to be left to the public.

Obama doesn’t want a marketplace of ideas because people might get the wrong idea and vote him and his political allies out of office. The explicit goal of internet censorship is to control election outcomes by filtering what information the public is able to access.

Like the provenance of a certain Delaware artist’s laptop.

Narrowing the range of acceptable information in order to narrow the range of acceptable opinions, candidates and political systems is the first fundamental trick of tyrannies. It takes a certain chutzpah and a stock of Orwellian buzzwords to redefine that as protecting democracy.

Obama complains, “China’s built a great firewall around the Internet, turning it into a vehicle for domestic indoctrination” and proposes a democratic firewall around the internet under a “regulatory structure” to be designed with “communities of color” to slow “the spread of harmful content.” The democratic people of color firewall will be so much better than China’s firewall.

Pro-censorship elites have the same assumptions as China about the interaction between speech, society, and the state which is why they, like Obama, arrive at the same conclusions. They can dress up those conclusions in buzzwords about “democracy” and “people of color”, but those are differences of style, not substance. The trains all end up at the same station.

Obama speaks about “bugs” in the Constitution. While he is always happy to critique America, the particular totalitarian bug here is deeply embedded into the leftist worldview which denies that people have individual agency, insists that everyone is a prisoner of their social context, and contends that the purpose of the society and the state is an enlightened intertwining. The bug, which is really more of a feature, directly leads to the same outcome as in China or Stanford.

A free society requires healthy breathing spaces between politics and life. The difference between a politicized society and a tyranny is only time. The question at the heart of this debate is “What is discourse for” which is really the question of, “What are people here for?” To believe, as the Left does, that people primarily exist as vehicles for political change is to enslave them.

That’s why every leftist revolution invariably slides toward tyranny along the same worn tracks.

The Founding Fathers believed that people would self-define their purposes. That was why America’s revolution uniquely led to freedom and why leftist revolutions lead to tyranny.

America defined freedom as individual power while lefties define it by the power of the state.

Obama is simply replaying what happens when liberation is treated as a collective enterprise, a journey toward rather than from, that can only be achieved collectively, through the exercise of state power rather than individually through personal choices. The internet, once individualistic, has become collective, and social media, the ultimate embodiment of that collectivism, has become the battleground between individualist expressers and collectivist censors.

AUTHOR

DANIEL GREENFIELD

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 ARTICLES:

The Critical Qur’an: ‘A Qur’an commentary that goes where others fear to tread’

Muslim cleric quotes Muhammad saying even women in labor must have sex if husband wants it

Italy: Muslim migrant cook beheads Muslim migrant dishwasher

Sweden: Almost 30% want to ban ‘offensive’ demonstrations after Muslims riot over Qur’an-burning

England and Wales raise marriage age to 18 in bid to protect Muslim girls

Why Should the UN Consider It Its Duty to Protect Islam from Criticism?

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

War on Parents: Fighting Back Update

/in , , , , , , /by

Others more clever than me have observed ‘never get between a Mama Bear and her cubs.’  Parents around the country are fighting back against the hard-Left takeover of public schools, using the courts, state legislatures, and several other means.

Parents are challenging books in school libraries and classrooms in record numbers.  They’re objecting to sexually explicit content, profanity, anti-police messaging, and other left-wing indoctrination found in schoolbooks. The most-challenged books are “Gender Queer” and “Lawn Boy”, the latter a gay story normalizing sex acts between 4th-graders which has been criticized for encouraging pedophilia.

Members of the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC) have inundated Disney executives with almost 150,000 thousand phone calls and emails objecting to the company’s self-described ‘not-so-secret’ gay agenda. There’s a website where you can join this national campaign.

Parents in North Carolina protested an elementary school’s Satan Club which is an organized effort now pushing hard in several states.  An elementary school in Pennsylvania refused to allow such a club.

The America First Legal Group has a website showing parents how they can assert the federal Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (20 U.S.C. § 1232h) which allows parents to review curriculum and opt their children out of school surveys that pry into students’ sex lives, drug use, and attitudes.

In the courts, parents sued the Baltimore City Public Schools – where kids graduate from high school without being able to read – for failing children and wasting taxpayer money.

In Florida, a conservative legal foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of two parents against a school district for hiding the transgender counseling the school was giving their 12-year-old daughter who attempted suicide twice. Similar suits against schools for secret gender transitioning have also been filed in Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Maryland.  One attorney for parents pointed out schools have parents sign forms for field trips and require parental consent before a school can give a child ibuprofen but somehow, magically, schools claim harmful gender transitioning is exempt from disclosure.

As for legislation, the Iowa House passed a bill to require schools to post their curriculum and materials online for parental review.  A curriculum transparency bill is also pending in Arizona.  Another bill in Arizona would prohibit schools from exposing kids to sexually explicit content without parental consent.

Which brings us to the new law in Florida that prohibits the early sexualization of young children third-grade and below in public schools, the law that made Disney throw a hissy fit.  It’s already having results.  At least two teachers are planning to leave the profession because they feel they are no longer free to talk to their students about their gay proclivities or their gay marriage.  What’s odd about these two is that they both teach above the third grade, so the law doesn’t even apply to them.  Be that as it may, I say good riddance if you were only there to indoctrinate kids into the gay agenda.  Private sexual activity between consenting adults is one thing, but it’s quite another to claim the right to promote left-wing agendas in the classroom and interfere in your young charges’ sexual development.  Unfortunately, left-wing agitators no longer distinguish between the two. Being forced under penalty of law to shut your mouth about your sex life is what you get for coming between Mama Bears and their cubs.

I mentioned the “Transition Closet”, a group in Arkansas pushing the availability of opposite-sex clothing for kids being pushed into transgenderism in schools across the country.  Not content with operating at the college level, the group is now going after young children in public schools.  The founder of the group supports keeping the activity secret from parents.

Another far-Left group, AMAZE.org, pushes sex education for young adolescents, producing videos some call pornographic.  Its website bears all the hallmarks of a well-funded, well-oiled machine of the Left, starting with a couple dozen staffers.  That doesn’t happen by accident.  That takes money.  The group’s managing partner is Advocates for Youth, another well-oiled machine that pushes wider access to abortion, free menstrual products, free condoms, and gender neutral restrooms.  The group has assets of $10 million [p.1] and won’t disclose its donors on its tax forms. [p.24]  They also get government grants [p. 9], which means you are paying for some of their activities.

We also encountered after-school Satan Clubs along the way.  They are run by the Satanic Temple which is now bringing lawsuits to try to get its way in the schools.   They also litigate to promote abortion as part of their religion, to give Satanic invocations at public meetings, and to remove Christianity from the public square.  Overall, they are trying to foment “social change”, a dead giveaway placing them squarely on the Left.

One group I haven’t mentioned yet is the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).  They oppose the new Florida law preventing the early sexualization of children and call for more LGBT content in children’s programming.  They are agitating in Hollywood to bring it about.  Like the Satanic Temple, this group is up front about working for “cultural change”.

Another gay group, the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus, said last year, “We’ll convert your children….We’re coming for your children.”  I take them at face value, but here’s what you need to understand:  This isn’t about transgender rights or the gay agenda.  Those are merely weapons to get to where the leaders of these groups want to go: socialism.  I’ve documented that ultimate aim in previous commentaries, including the communist theorist who came up with the idea of destroying society with sex and the transgender activists caught on video late last year saying their goal is communism and they are merely using transgenderism to get there.   These leaders are hardcore committed Leftists, first and foremost.  Their sexual agendas are for the useful idiots.  The real goal is to weaken and destabilize society so Leftist leaders can seize power.  The issue is never the issue; the issue is always wealth and power for a tiny elite.

This set of Leftist leaders has been called the ‘Gay Gestapo’ and their methods go beyond sexual indoctrination in schools.  They also want to destroy religion by denying tax exemptions to churches that oppose gay marriage.  These people are deadly serious and playing for all the marbles.  If you want to see society destroyed and a tiny communist elite take over, throw in with them.  For the rest of us, take what they say about taking over at face value and respond accordingly.

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

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

LA High School Promotes Abortion Resources to Students, Parent Permission ‘Not Required’

Google owned YouTube Hosts Kids’ Channel Promoting Pornography, Abortion

School Board Says NO to Satan Club in Elementary School

Dispute ignites over transgender students’ bathroom use in Lincoln County, Missouri

RELATED VIDEO: Florida Parents fighting back: Choosing for their children.

Biden’s claim about children: I WISH it were a gaffe

/in , , , , , , , /by

President Biden has more than his share of gaffes. But he made a remark last week on education, as he and his wife Jill hosted a Teacher of the Year event at the White House.  It was not a gaffe.

Biden said to teachers: “They’re not somebody else’s children. They’re yours when you’re in the classroom.”

Excuse me? Teachers suddenly supplant the children’s parents when the school bell rings?

The left doesn’t get it. They really do think the state owns the children.

In his End of Day Report (4/28/22), Gary Bauer notes: “The left thinks America is evil, ‘systemically racist’ and riddled with white supremacy. They think half the country is made up of ‘deplorables’ and ‘irredeemables.’ So, of course, they can’t let that half of the country teach their children about values. They must ‘counterprogram’ them.”

One silver lining of COVID-19 came in reference to education. In many cases parents were forced to hear what their children were learning in school for the first time. And they didn’t like it.

This gave rise to the “mama bear” phenomenon. As we all saw, it cost the left the elections in Virginia last year.

One of the groups fighting for parental rights in education is the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), co-founded by Dr. D. James Kennedy, Dr. James Dobson, Bill Bright, Larry Burkett, and others.

I spoke with Emilie Kao, senior counsel of the ADF, recently on a radio segment and asked her about some of their parental rights in education cases.

She told me: “Parental rights do not end at the schoolhouse gate. Parents have the right to direct the upbringing, the education, the character of their children. And this has become particularly important in light of the toxic ideologies, like critical race theory and transgender ideology.”

Kao explained some of ADF’s work to protect families from these “toxic ideologies”: “The Alliance Defending Freedom has multiple lawsuits on behalf of parents. The first one is Albermarle, Virginia litigation on behalf of five families who are challenging a policy that indoctrinates children of different races with the tenets of critical race theory.”

I think most Americans would agree that fighting racism and striving toward a color-blind society, is a worthy goal. But what if the attempts to achieve that goal actually promote the very thing they say they are fighting?

Kao comments on the Albemarle curriculum: “The school district has implemented what they call an ‘anti-racist policy,’ but their ‘anti-racist policy’ actually divides students by race and assigns them into an ‘oppressor’ and ‘oppressed’ category, and it tells white students that they have to fight against white culture.”

She adds, “It tells minority students that their ambitions in life are limited by their race.” This indoctrination could inflict damage on a whole generation of children.

Kao speaks of one student who comes from a multi-racial background: “He began to see himself as disadvantaged because of his race. He has started to attribute negative associations to his ethnic heritage. It is very damaging to students’ self-perception, as well as their perceptions of others.”

In a similar vein, recently a concerned father wrote an op-ed at Fox News with the simple title: “I’m a dad who wants schools to teach kids how to read—not how to be gender fluid.”

In that article, Brandon Michon notes, “Parents don’t want gender ideology and critical race theory taught to their children. We want our children to learn how to read and write. The single biggest equalizer in history is literacy. Teach any child from any socio-economic background how to read and comprehend what they read and empower them to take control of their futures.”

Michon adds, “We need politicians to expressly state that children, who are the most easily influenced and innocent part of the population, need to be protected. They shouldn’t be taught about sexual orientation or gender ideology. Our children need to keep their innocence in childhood and in their youth.”

In the first 200 years of American history (dating to the arrival of the Pilgrims in 1620), the schools were run by churches generally. Also, many parents either taught their children at home or hired an instructor.

Back then the Bible was the main textbook in one way or another, and the literacy rates, especially in New England, were very high. John Adams said to find an illiterate man in New England was as rare as a comet.

The Bible teaches that parents, fathers in particular, are responsible for the education of their children—not the state (Deut. 6:6-9). Even if the parents delegate that authority to teachers, God still holds the parents responsible for the children and their education.

The idea expressed by Biden that the teachers should have more authority than parents when the children are in school is wrong-headed in every way.

©Jerry Newcombe. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

The True Cost of Government ‘Pay More, Get Less’

/in , , , , , , , /by

Americans for Prosperity has release a video and a free eBook titled The True Cost of Government – Pay More, Get Less.

Watch this short video on the True Cost of Government:

The True Cost of Government – Pay More, Get Less asks:

Do you feel your paycheck isn’t going as far as it used to?

That when you go to the grocery store, you’ve noticed your bill is higher, but there are fewer and fewer items in your cart with every trip? (Perhaps you’ve even taken items out while waiting in line at the checkout counter.)

And that when you pull into the gas station, you decide more often that maybe you can stretch it before you need a full tank?

You’re not crazy. 62 percent of Americans think their family’s income is falling behind, and 83 percent of voters say they’re experiencing hardship due to increased prices.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, real wages are down 2.6 percent in the last year.

On top of that, inflation is costing the average American household $430 per month — essentially an additional tax of $5,200 this year

Here are Americans for Prosperity‘s solutions to the ongoing problem of we the people paying our federal, state and local governments more and getting less.

But there’s a better way. We can reimagine how to make life more affordable for everyday Americans.

It’s possible if we:

  • Unleash energy abundance
  • Cut red tape that keeps prices high
  • Stop restricting housing supply
  • Beat inflation through better budgeting
  • Fuel the flexible workforce of tomorrow
  • Tackle rising costs through trade

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Of Mules and Donkeys: Dinesh D’Souza’s ‘2000 Mules’ Documentary

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The Epoch Times provides below a wonderful overview of the movie “2000 Mules” by Dinesh D’Souza. Both The Epoch Times and D’Souza have investigated and followed the many aspects, conflicting arguments, waves of evidence, people directly involved, and more…associated with the very sophisticated, multi-dimensional interference of the last national election in November of 2020. Without a doubt the compilation of evidence substantiates the reason for the initial Joint Public Arizona Legislative Hearing in Phoenix on November 30, 2020. Arizona State Rep. Mark Finchem and Arizona State Senator Sonny Borrelli co-chaired the day-long hearing, and testimony along with cyber-evidence presented by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and a team of professionals. Epoch Times, One America News, and seven other fair and balanced news organizations provided national coverage for the ten hour hearing. I was privileged to coordinate all aspects leading up to the legislative hearing, and then thereafter. This hearing launched investigations and hearings in 16 other states.

Arguments were made as to why many public officials did not support such a hearing or even an investigation. Most disturbing was the fact that when preliminary evidence was presented to various officials – obtained from both the public legislative hearing, as well as private briefings from President Trump, Vice President Pence and Mayor Giuliani, elected officials did not take every possible and legal step to obtain answers for citizens who already were very disturbed by preliminary evidence showing our national election was attacked and severely compromised. Evidence of fraudulent ballots had already been presented, but many elected officials were too timid to examine this charge. Much, much work was accomplished to bring an election forensic audit into life; which, finally, was accomplished as the nation now knows. Throughout the forensic evaluation led by a Florida based team of cyber-security professionals, Mr. Doug Logan and his firm “the Ninjas,” many elected officials either kept far away from the proceedings or publicly trashed the evaluation even before any findings could be formally produced and presented.

Since the forensic evaluation’s completion, an additional Joint Public Arizona Legislative Hearing was held in Pima County, Arizona to review still further evidence of ballot fraud, collusion to undermine an election, and demonstrate further that crimes had been committed throwing into question the legitimacy of the national election of 2020. Properly gathered and secured, evidence was handed to the Arizona Attorney General for inclusion into an already begun formal criminal investigation on matters associated with ballot fraud, manipulation, election machinery compromise, tabulation, and other factors leading to the premise that our nation experienced a very sophisticated election coup. The Arizona Attorney General submitted a Preliminary Report of Findings confirming that serious election irregularities leading to the hypothesis that election fraud did occur in Arizona on November 3, 2020. Why several elected and public officials have not been charged is still a question, with a preliminary answer that the investigation is still on-going. Regardless…the Arizona Attorney General did find more than sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the two Joint Public Legislative Hearings were justified, and findings from said hearings along with additional evidence submitted and testimony given under oath, showed very grave consequences developed in the last national election, and immediate and serious steps must be taken to ensure such diabolical actions are not repeated.

The movie by D’Souza “2000 Mules” is still another profound and legitimate set of steps revealing the absolute disgrace and sophisticated operation that occurred to remove a President of the United States rather then allowing the People of America that privilege as given to us by our founders. Dinesh D’Souza presents clear and convincing evidence by which each American should ponder most seriously, most soberly who is seeking an office this coming November. Not simply be swayed by political ads or brochures, not taken in merely by a candidate’s presence or speech style, but what evidence is there in the candidate’s life and actions that he/she shall truly protect and defend our constitutional rights, our individual freedoms, and not merely talk-the-talk! The movie “2000 Mules” is profound, and Dinesh D’Souza is to be complimented for taking on an investigation many in public office to this day refuse to address, other than to mock and ridicule, and through willful ignorance pretend nothing irregular occurred in the November 2020 election.

Thank you, Dinesh, for accomplishing what many in elected and high appointed office refuse to accomplish… their job!

Of Mules and Donkeys

Commentary

Today, I release a new documentary film called “2000 Mules.”

The film releases in 300 theaters on May 2 and May 4, and there’s an in-home virtual premiere on May 7. After that, it will be available for digital download, but only on two uncancellable platforms: the Rumble-owned platform Locals and the Salem Media platform SalemNow. I’ve made six documentaries, but in an age of censorship, you have to create a novel way of distributing them.

Here I want to talk about mules and donkeys. Strictly speaking, of course, a mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey. A few months after I came to the United States as an exchange student from India, my host parent in Arizona took me to the Grand Canyon.

“We can try to walk down,” they told me, “or we can ride a mule.”

We chose to walk, but on the way down we saw mules carrying tourists and sure-footedly making their way down the treacherous pathways to the bottom of the canyon.

2000 Mules: Extended Trailer

The term mule is now commonly used in drug trafficking and sex trafficking. The mule is the middleman, the guy who makes the transport. My friend Catherine Engelbrecht, who runs the election intelligence organization True the Vote, borrowed this term to apply it to the paid political operatives who engage in ballot trafficking. Mules are professional deliverymen and women who are hired by left-wing organizations to deliver fraudulent and illegal ballots to mail-in dropboxes.

Now let’s turn to the evidence in the movie that was assembled by True the Vote. The organization purchased 10 trillion pings of cellphone data. Basically, they bought the data covering all cellphone movements in key urban areas of the five swing states in which the 2020 election was decided. True the Vote then ran a search algorithm seeking to ferret out mules who picked up stashes of ballots from left-wing organizations embedded in those cities and then made delivery drops of those ballots to 10 or more drop boxes.

The point of this high bar was to avoid false positives and only capture the most industrious mules. After all, there might be some reason why a person might stop by a local activist organization and then go to, say, two drop boxes. Perhaps he dropped off his ballot at the first and then had to tie his shoelace, causing him to stop at the second. But can anyone think of a rational reason for someone to go to 10 mail-in drop boxes? The only conceivable reason is to dump illegal ballots.

Since each of our cellphones has a distinct ID, True the Vote has the cellphone IDs of more than 2,000 mules hired by left-wing organizations to do ballot trafficking in Atlanta, Phoenix, Detroit, Milwaukee, and the greater Philadelphia area. These mules alone generated approximately 400,000 illegal ballots. When you break down the fraud state by state, you see that it was more than enough fraud to tip the balance in the presidential election. Trump should have won, not Biden.

The geotracking evidence is corroborated by video evidence, and I’m talking about the official surveillance video taken by the states themselves. True the Vote obtained more than 4 million minutes of video, and the movie shows mule after mule after mule stuffing illegal ballots into the drop boxes.

Typically, this occurred in the middle of the night. In many cases, you can see the mules stuffing in multiple ballots. Some mules wear gloves, so as not to leave fingerprints. Mules typically take photos of the ballots going into the boxes, evidently to confirm that they’re performing the work so that they can get paid.

All of this is flatly illegal. To understand this, we must make an important distinction between vote harvesting—legal in some states—and paid ballot harvesting—illegal in all states. In Georgia, for example, it’s legal to give your absentee ballot to a family member or caregiver to drop off. In no state, however, can money change hands, whether it’s money paid to a voter or money paid to a mule or other type of delivery man.

Who’s deploying the mules? I believe the answer is the donkeys. By donkeys, I obviously mean the Democrats—the party of the donkey. Donkeys are the recognized experts at election fraud. They’ve been doing it since the 19th century. In the Tammany Hall days, for instance, Democrats would greet immigrants coming right off the boat, ask them to sign ballots that the Democrats would later fill out on their behalf, and give them in exchange a bottle of alcohol or a reference for someplace where they might find work.

Read More

Researcher Featured in ‘2000 Mules’ Documentary Explains How Local Election Fraud Was Grown to National Scale

D’Souza’s ‘2000 Mules’ Is an Absolute Must-See

Filmmaker: Documentary Proves Rampant Illegal Vote Trafficking in 2020

This fraud operation was ramped up in the 2020 election, largely because of the changes in the rules instituted under the pretext of COVID-19. Suddenly, mail-in ballots were dispatched by the tens of millions. Suddenly, mail-in drop boxes proliferated, especially in the major donkey strongholds. No wonder the fraudsters saw their opportunity to escalate their operations—and they did.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Dinesh D’Souza

Dinesh D’Souza is an author, filmmaker, and daily host of the Dinesh D’Souza podcast.

The Supreme Leak

/in , , , , , , , /by

“The document leak was accompanied by the mobilization of protesters around the Supreme Court, whose police officers erected barricades to keep out the fomenting mob. The DNC dispatched fundraising emails— as if right on cue.” – Kyle Becker, The Wildfire Newsletter.

That abortion leak is grave for the court, a horrific scandal. Leaks like this was previously unheard of  but the Democrats have taken a wrecking ball to every institution. The objective of the leak is clear – to radicalize women and change the direction of the mid-term elections. It is a gross politicization of the venerable body.

In two centuries of our nation’s history, this has never happened. It’s destructive and corrosive.

The fact is truth Roe v Wade is bad law. It usurped states rights. But it will never be properly explained. The Democrat media axis will scream,  “WOMEN! THE NAZIS ARE TAKING YOUR RIGHTS AWAY.”

Bottom line, Roe v Wade has not been overturned. This is the Alito opinion for the Conservative side of the Court.

Protesters clashed outside the Supreme Court after leaked draft strikes down Roe v. Wade. Politico: The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes (Politico). The leak itself is unprecedented. Kathryn Jean Lopez: It’s shocking. Not that the Supreme Court would overturn Roe, but that someone would presumably leak a draft opinion (we don’t know if it is the current one) to change the ruling (National Review). Andy McCarthy: If this story is true, the Court should issue its opinion right away. Otherwise the disgraceful leak wins. I would say that if my side lost. If we lose the integrity of the Court’s process, we lose the Court. That should be intolerable to all of us who love the country (Twitter).

Before Finally Overturning Roe, Supreme Court Must Block Yet Another Insurrection Attempt

Those who care about norms, decorum, civility, institutions, and rule of law must hold the leaker and any co-conspirators fully accountable for this egregious breach.

By: Mollie Hemingway, The Federalist, May 3, 2022;

The Supreme Court is poised to relinquish its nearly 50-year stranglehold on abortion law and return the debate over whether states may protect unborn human life to the American people and their elected representatives, according to a draft opinion that was leaked to Politico reporters. If the draft opinion authored by Associate Justice Samuel Alito stands, it would be a momentous course correction for the court.

Roe v. Wade, the radical decision that took the abortion debate away from the American people, has myriad legal, scientific, and constitutional critics. Even abortion supporters complained about its weaknesses, as Alito mentions in his draft opinion. Roe was issued in 1973, shortly after the end of the Warren Court, known for pushing through radical changes through the power of a majority of justices rather than on the basis of the Constitution.

“[W]ielding nothing but ‘raw judicial power,’ the Court usurped the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves for the people,” Alito wrote in the draft opinion.

A previous attempt to salvage the court’s abortion edicts, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, was supposed to keep the court from having to hear so many controversial abortion cases from the states. Instead, the court has been inundated with challenges to its complicated abortion jurisprudence. And states have gotten better at fine-tuning their challenges.

Few legal observers felt confident in Roe v. Wade’s ability to survive yet another state challenge, such as the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case before the court this term. That case deals with a Mississippi law that protects the lives of those unborn children who have reached the age of 15 weeks gestation. The vast majority of countries in the world limit abortion at a similar point in pregnancy.

The draft opinion, which runs 67 pages, is being described as a “tour de force” by those who have read it. It carefully works through all arguments for retaining Roe, and favorably addresses arguments made by other justices who as of February had joined the majority.

“The reported draft opinion is thoughtful, scholarly, and thorough. It does the work that the majority in Roe and Casey refused to do, looking to the Constitution itself to determine whether it includes a right to an abortion. The opinion concludes it does not,” writes Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network and my co-author for our national best-seller “Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court.”

She adds, “Justice Alito’s opinion does not mince words about Roe and its progeny. He describes Roe as ‘an abuse of judicial authority’ and as being ‘on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided.’”

The Shameful Leak

While Alito’s draft opinion is being welcomed and celebrated by pro-lifers, and strongly objected to by abortion supporters, the way it became public is a horrific scandal.

Someone leaked the draft, almost certainly to pressure the justices to change their views. Alito’s draft opinion from February would go to the concurring justices for feedback, commentary, and fine-tuning. It would also go to justices on the other side of the issue for their knowledge as they write their dissents.

It is unclear who leaked it, but it is considered a grave problem to have done so. Such leaks violate the trust shared by justices. The Supreme Court is viewed more as a family, and the betrayal from the leaker threatens the whole institution.

Still, many on the left celebrated the leak. “Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said ‘f-ck it! Let’s burn this place down,” wrote Ian Millhiser, an activist with Vox.

Brian Fallon, the former Hillary Clinton campaign spokesman who became the leader of a dark money group behind the fight against the nomination of Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, issued a pretty clear call for intimidation of the court: “Is a brave clerk taking this unpredecented [sic] step of leaking a draft opinion to warn the country what’s coming in a last-ditch Hail Mary attempt to see if the public response might cause the Court to reconsider?”

“All Democrats need to show the same urgency as the clerk who apparently risked his or her career to sound this alarm. Those on the inside know best how broken the institution is. We should listen,” he added.

Crowds comprised of many staffers from abortion groups gathered at the Supreme Court immediately after the leak. “Chants of ‘fascist scum have got to go,’ interspersed with the names of the conservative justices,” noted one reporter. Signs included, “F-CK SCOTUS,” and “Sam Alito Retire B-tch.”

The Supreme Court was attacked by a crazed mob in the aftermath of the Kavanaugh confirmation. Hundreds of raucous protesters tried to break down the 13-ton bronze doors. They scaled the building and its statues and threw tomatoes and water bottles at the cars of justices who had attended his swearing-in. The mob even went after Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan.

Mobs had also rioted in Senate buildings in the leadup to Kavanaugh’s confirmation. They had disrupted the official constitutional proceedings associated with his nomination and review.

When a riot broke out at the massive post-election protests around the U.S. Capitol, the entire Democrat and media complex said it was an insurrection that had been egged on by Trump and other critics of the 2020 election.

Even after the attacks on the Supreme Court, Sen. Chuck Schumer went in March 2020 to the steps of the Supreme Court and specifically threatened Justices Neil Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Referring to an abortion case, he said, “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Even liberal activists were appalled.

The attacks on the court have continued through this term. In recent years, Democrats have openly called for court-packing as an intimidation tactic to get the court to rule the way Democrats desire. Justice Clarence Thomas has been pressured to follow an invented recusal standard for having a wife with conservative political views. Justice Gorsuch was the victim of a made-up story leaked to NPR. Justice Breyer was forced to retire when his decision to step down was leaked as part of a high-pressure campaign.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Violence Is Their Religion’: Tucker Carlson Calls Out The Left Threatening Violence Against Supreme Court

‘Let’s Burn This Place Down’: Left Calls For Violence After Treasonous SCOTUS Abortion Leak

The SCOTUS Abortion Decision Leak Is What Actual Treasonous Insurrection Looks Like

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

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

D.C. School Gives 4-Year-Olds ‘Anti-Racism’ Instruction Telling Them To Identify Racist Family Members

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Condemning, turning in family members is employed by Nazis, Stalinist, Communists — vicious totalitarians. The Democrats mean to get our children when they are young and groom them in the style of Hitler Youth.

DC school gave 4-year-olds ‘anti-racism’ ‘fistbook’ asking them to identify racist family

By Jessica Chasmar , Kelly Laco, Fox News

The book provides students a step-by-step process on how to address racism in their home and within themselves.

A public elementary school in Washington, DC, gave children as young as 4 a lesson on “anti-racism” that asked them to identify racist members of their family.

According to a Nov. 30 letter from Janney Elementary School Principal Danielle Singh, students in Pre-K through 3rd grade participated in an “Anti-Racism Fight Club” presentation by speaker Doyin Richards.

“As part of this work, each student has a fist book to help continue the dialogue at school and home,” Singh’s letter stated, linking to Richards’ presentation. “We recognize that any time we engage topics such as race and equity, we may experience a variety of emotions. This is a normal part of the learning and growing process. As a school community we want to continue the dialogue with our students and understand this is just the beginning.”

Richards’ “Anti-Racism Fight Club Fistbook for Kids” explains that “white people are a part of a society that benefits them in almost every instance,” and that “it’s as if white people walk around with an invisible force field because they hold all of the power in America.”

“If you are a white person, white privilege is something you were born with and it simply means that your life is not more difficult due to the color of your skin,” the “Fistbook for Kids” explains. “Put differently, it’s not your fault for having white privilege, but it is your fault if you choose to ignore it.”

The “Fistbook for Kids” says anti-racism “isn’t a spectator sport” but requires “being loud, uncomfortable, confrontational and visible to ensure change is made.”

A series of questions in the book asks children, “Where do you see racism in yourself? This requires true soul-searching. Be real with yourself, don’t feel guilt/shame and own it. It’s the first step in becoming an anti-racist.”

CLICK HERE TO VIEW PAGE FROM: “Fistbook for Kids”

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

Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.

Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.

Follow Pamela Geller on Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.