Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
AUSTIN, Texas – During a recent trip to a Reynosa, Mexico migrant camp, I took photos of a United Nations-supported International Organization for Migration (IOM) operation to hand out cash debit cards to intending and repeat border crossers. One of two workers at a plastic folding table inside the Reynosa camp, which was filled to capacity with at least 1,200 mostly U.S.-expelled Central Americans, said they were distributing the cards for IOM to help migrants waiting until they cross the Rio Grande at greater leisure to claim asylum, for which most will be declared ineligible years later. Many parents, for instance, got about $400 every 15 days, I was told, or $800 a month if they were still there to collect it, although the support level varied.
My photos of this posted to Twitter and related dispatch for the Center for Immigration Studies drew outrage among some Republican lawmakers. They saw the images as evidence that the U.S. taxpayer-funded IOM was providing material support to an ongoing mass migration harmful to America’s national interest.
A couple of weeks later, Texas Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, and 11 other House Republican co-sponsors introduced the “No Tax Dollars for the United Nations Immigration Invasion Act” bill. It would prohibit the $3.8 billion in contributions currently proposed in the White House 2022 budget to the IOM and other UN-supported organizations. A Daily Caller story that broke news of the bill’s introduction quoted Gooden citing my Reynosa photos.
When I took the photos, I wasn’t exactly sure of exactly what I was seeing in Reynosa. But here’s what I have learned since: The money card is confirmed beyond doubt, but also “hard cash in envelopes” and “movement assistance”; and an online IOM “Emergency Manual” describes what I saw as part of a program it terms “Cash-Based Interventions,” or CBIs.
A plastic IOM cash card given to an aspiring border-crossing migrant in Reynosa, Mexico on November 20. Photo by Todd Bensman.
Paying People Who Illegally Enter the United States
So, for starters, country-specific IOM “Cash Working Groups” are indeed coordinating the handouts of the cash-holding plastic cards I saw (referred to as prepaid debit cards, e-wallets and e-cards) to intending U.S. border crossers in Reynosa, Mexico. But it turns out that is just an iceberg tip. The IOM is handing out cash and other material support to intending illegal border crossers in as many as 100 other shelters it helped build, expand, or supports from Central America north. Some form of this has been around for years, but starting with a mass-migration event and Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy in 2019, the IOM supercharged the program and “institutionalized” it. This doubled the countries where it is used in 2020 and increased by 77 percent the number of recipients to 1.6 million worldwide, according to an annual 2020 IOM report. That would include Mexico.
The IOM Emergency Manual document says this cash assistance also includes less-seeable bank transfers, mobile transfers, and e-vouchers that go to intending illegal border crossers en route or at least temporarily blocked like many of those I saw and interviewed in Reynosa. In addition to those and the pre-paid plastic cards, the IOM says in its Emergency Manual that it also sometimes hands out “cash in envelopes (hard cash).” No details are offered on that. Many payments are given as “unconditional; unrestricted cash transfers” for “multi-purpose use,” the manual says. Still other handouts subsidize the lodging, rent, and utilities of intending border crossers for “safe tenure, to reduce the risk of forced eviction.”
Start Tapping U.S. Taxpayers Before You Get There
Then there is “movement assistance” in the form of conditional or unrestricted cash transfers. The IOM describes this money as providing transportation access after, say a camp is closed, but also simply “to sites and other situations related to onward movement of population.”
To border hawks, all of this looks, feels, and acts like an agency providing the means for illegal border crossings. The IOM’s own stated purpose for cash-based interventions would only reinforce the perception: the money is intended to “restore feelings of choice and empowerment for beneficiaries.”
Migrant advocates defend cash support to aspiring illegal border crossers as a means to prevent death and suffering among populations they believe have no choice but to migrate and would whether or not any UN agency helps out. But the legitimate flip side of that claim is that cash in envelopes or in e-wallets—filled in part by U.S. taxpayer money—can also be said to enable, sustain, or even entice many driven not by urgent dangers but by a desire for better jobs amid reports that Americans would let them in.
Spending U.S. Money to Encourage ‘Invasion’
An aggravating irony among the fast-expanding coterie of Republican congressional critics of the UN largesse is that U.S. taxpayer money is being spent in contravention of American immigration law and national interest in controlling the border against economic migration.
“All of this sounds like they’re using U.S. tax dollars to encourage this invasion into the nation, and it seems strange to me that we would support an organization that encourages and funds this,” Gooden told me. “It’s totally crazy. I am baffled that there’s not more outrage, but I think the lack of outrage is due to the lack of knowledge.”
While it may be true that IOM money relieves the suffering of intending border crossers, it is just as arguably true that it creates financial breathing room they need to prepare for more opportune crossing moments. The money enables that highly desired payoff, rather than a forced trip home for lack of funds after, say, an expensive smuggling journey that ended with U.S. expulsion. Those ones arrive in villages with a deterring don’t-try-this message to friends and neighbors.
Regarding the importance of such messaging in the development of mass migration crises, I’ve never met one who didn’t carry a cell phone connected to Internet social media. In interviews with perhaps hundreds of migrants in Mexico and beyond, I learned that this live-time social media grapevine constantly sings with news from the trail upstream that directly informs decisions downstream as to whether to launch north or remain in place. So when word of these IOM cash, lodging, and transportation benefits spreads via social media to hometowns, friends and relatives undoubtedly feel more emboldened to invest smuggling money for their own journeys to UN waystations. Because of all this, monthly IOM cash for food, lodging, and “movement” assistance amounts to material support for illegal immigration. It influences decisions to cross.
Increasing U.S. Cash Support for Illegal Immigration
It’s unclear just how much the United States gives IOM to sustain intending border crossers until they succeed, or how many got some during 2021. But the cash giveaways have been on a steep skyward trajectory since 2019 and only show signs of continuing upward.
The public reporting as to how much the United States, through the State Department, gives IOM and how many got it is opaque at best. President Joe Biden’s 2022 budget calls for $10 billion in humanitarian assistance “to support vulnerable people abroad.” But there’s no detailed breakout.
A Fiscal Year 2019 summary (starting page 37) by the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), which provides U.S. funding to the IOM and many other United Nations agencies, offers one clue of the pre-expansion levels. IOM spent more than $60 million in 2019 for activities in the northern part of South America, Central America, and Mexico during the so-called “caravan migrant crisis” earlier that year, the fiscal year report said.
State Department-funneled money helped IOM provide 29,000 people in the Western Hemisphere with cash and voucher assistance and supported 75 shelter waystations, the State Department report states on page 42, much like the one I visited in Reynosa. Along the northern border of Mexico in July 2019, at the height of a “caravan” crisis, the IOM provided 600 beds and essential items to the Mexican government and helped it expand existing shelters and build new ones to accommodate the “asylum seekers.”
This came as a response to the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” turn-back policy. That deported economic migrants trying to abuse the asylum system, while others chose to wait for Democrats to take the White House in November 2020—a sound bet, it turned out.
The IOM decided to increase the size and scope of the program after 2019, even after President Biden took office and ended Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy. The extent is unclear, but the IOM institutionalized cash handout programs in Panama, El Salvador, and Mexico in 2020. Ambiguously, the IOM’s annual 2020 report on the program showed only that it gave cash to somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000 people in Mexico that year.
Whatever the recipient numbers since 2019, the IOM clearly intends an upward trajectory for the cash giveaways. The IOM’s Emergency Manual stated several times it would do so in alignment with a fairly recent pact among an international consortium of organizations known as The Grand Bargain, of which the IOM is a signatory. The Grand Bargain pact dates to 2016.
An Inter-Agency Standing Committee Grand Bargain website reports that number 3 on the objectives list is “Increase the use and coordination of cash-based programming.” A November 26, 2021 Grand Bargain caucus on cash coordination had all principals agree to increase the use of cash “beyond current low levels” through the use of even more means of delivery.
The section’s first line starts out using familiar language seen in the IOM’s Emergency Manual: “Using cash helps deliver greater choice and empowerment to affected people…”
Here’s the problem: with the greater choice and empowerment that IOM money can buy, aspiring migrants are able to remain within striking distance of the southern border to choose the time of their inevitable illegal border crossings. No one should wonder why border hawks hate this system and open borders advocates love it.
Todd Bensman is a Texas-based senior national security fellow for the Center for Immigration Studies and a writing fellow for the Middle East Forum. For nearly a decade, Bensman led counterterrorism-related intelligence efforts for the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division. Follow him on Twitter @BensmanTodd. Bensman also worked for The Dallas Morning News, CBS, and Hearst Newspapers. He reported extensively on national security and border issues after 9/11 and worked from more than 25 countries in Latin America, the Middle East, and Africa.
University of Pennsylvania transgender swimmer Lia Thomas — formerly known as Will Thomas — has garnered national media attention in recent weeks for shattering collegiate swim records that were previously held by biological women, sparking fresh accusations of unfair competition.
Thomas, who competed as a male at the school during her freshman, sophomore, and junior years, decided to undergo a year of testosterone suppression treatment ahead of her senior year in order to compete as a female. To no one’s surprise, the biological male is dominating the competition.
But it’s one thing to hear about Thomas’ newfound domination, and another thing entirely to see it. A new video that surfaced online shows just how wide the gap is between Thomas and the women competing against her.
“Just to show you how absurd this is. Here’s the trans swimmer ‘Lia’ Thomas crushing all of the female competitors by 40 seconds,” Daily Wire commentator Matt Walsh tweeted in a caption to the video. “This is what that looks like in real time. A total farce.”
Just to show you how absurd this is. Here’s the trans swimmer “Lia” Thomas crushing all of the female competitors by 40 seconds. This is what that looks like in real time. A total farce.
The video showcases the tail end of Thomas’s incredible performance during the 1,650-yard freestyle race at the Zippy Invitational Event in Akron, Ohio, during which Thomas bested the second-place finisher by an eye-popping 38 seconds.
During the video, the narrator quips that “the lefties have just gone a little too far with this one” while pointing out how fast Thomas swam in relation to the competition. He then painstakingly points out the numerous times that female swimmers make their turns and continue racing while Thomas rests having finished well ahead of them.
“Thomas is a 6-foot 3-inch strapping young man coursing with testosterone and here he is in a girls swimsuit competing with the girls,” the narrator says.
Since the story started receiving national attention, at least two teammates of Thomas’s have spoken out about the unfair situation. One anonymous teammate said last week that having Thomas on the team is something that “secretly everyone just knows it’s the wrong thing to do.”
“When the whole team is together, we have to be like, ‘Oh my gosh, go Lia, that’s great, you’re amazing.’ It’s very fake,” the team member told Outkick.
Another teammate expressed that the entire team is “angry” over the situation.
“They feel so discouraged because no matter how much work they put in it, they’re going to lose,”she explained. “Usually, they can get behind the blocks and know they out-trained all their competitors and they’re going to win and give it all they’ve got.”
“Now they’re having to go behind the blocks knowing no matter what, they do not have the chance to win. I think that it’s really getting to everyone,” the female swimmer continued.
The team member added that amazingly Thomas, unfazed by the criticism, has been bragging about being No. 1 in the country amongst female swimmers.
“Well, obviously she’s No. 1 in the country because she’s at a clear physical advantage after having gone through male puberty and getting to train with testosterone for years,” the swimmer said. “Of course you’re No. 1 in the country when you’re beating a bunch of females. That’s not something to brag about.”
Thomas responded to some of the criticism recently in a podcast interview with SwimSwam.
Penn’s Lia Thomas Opens Up On Journey, Transition To Women’s Swimmingyoutu.be
“Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.” —George Orwell
There is nowhere to run or hide from the growing observations that the closer we come to universal vaccination rates in many countries, the worse the pandemic has become. We have always known that leaky vaccines have the potential to create viral enhancement, but the recent data is unmistakable. At the same time, the COVID cultists are panicking over an emerging variant that actually might be the mildest of all while mainly affecting the vaccinated — a perfect refutation to the mass vaccination push. All signs point to the need to suspend the shots and focus exclusively on monoclonal antibodies and other early treatment. Or is there an ulterior motive?
At this point, we better pray that Omicron becomes dominant in the U.S. as quickly as possible. The most devastating observation of 2021 is that more people have died from COVID under the mass vaccination regime during the existing variant than before there was a single jab. According to the CDC’s “Data Table for Daily Death Trends,” there have been 127,184 COVID deaths from September 1 through November 30 this year, which is 45% greater than the 87,829 recorded deaths over the same period in 2020. And some of the deaths from this year are still lagging and likely to be updated.
Typically, viruses mutate down and become less virulent. Last year, there was much less built up immunity, we had fewer treatment options, and we had zero vaccines. It is nearly impossible to ignore the fact that the narrow-spectrum leaky vaccine has made the virus much worse.
During the peak of the winter wave in January, there were 19 recorded deaths for 15- to 17-year-olds. In August, when the vaccines began to leak and we likely experienced vaccine-mediated viral enhancement, kids noticeably got sicker. Although deaths were still very rare, there were 63 recorded deaths among that age cohort, and the numbers have generally remained higher.
Imagine if we had put all the funds for the leaky shots into the monoclonal antibodies and an outpatient treatment regime built on the latest research of dozens of therapeutics that have shown promise in combatting the virus. Yet rather than focus on alternatives and investigate what went wrong with the injections, our establishment leaders are doubling down, even as the failure is undeniably in plain sight. As such, it’s hard to escape the sinister conclusion that they intended this all along.
Consider the fact that Cornell University has an ironclad vaccine and mask mandate, yet 3.5% of the entire campus tested positive last week alone. The school has now switched to online learning.
Consider the fact that before the NFL season started, 52 of 53 players on the L.A. Rams’ roster were vaccinated. Now they lead the league with 11 players on the COVID list.
Consider the fact that Newton, Massachusetts, has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, with 97% of the entire population vaccinated, including 99% of 12- to 15-year-olds and 87% of 5- to 11-year-olds. Yet, despite this and indoor mask mandates, the town has more cases than this time last year and is likely headed toward a record.
Consider the fact that a country like South Korea barely recorded deaths during the entire pandemic, but now has many more cases and deaths, with nearly all adults vaccinated and one of the highest vaccination rates for a country that large (over 50 million).
Consider the fact that England and France, both with very high vaccination rates and large prior COVID waves, have recently set case records.
Likewise, Portugal, with the highest double-vaxxed rate in Europe, now has more cases than during the winter peak.
Several months ago, a Harvard study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology, the only one to look at thousands of U.S. counties and different countries to study correlation between vaccination rates and case rates, found zero correlation. “In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people,” concluded the author.
The establishment suggests that the shots at least provide some with temporary protection from critical illness. But what good is that if the shots actually make the virus more virulent for everyone and then offer a degree of preventive protection for its consumers while screwing everyone else?
Let’s not forget that Dr. Fauci warned from day one that you need a perfect vaccine because a half-baked one runs the risk of making the virus worse. In an interview with Mark Zuckerberg last March, Fauci said in response to those who wanted rushed vaccines, “If you vaccinate someone, and they make an antibody response, and then they get exposed and infected, does the response that you induce actually enhance the infection and make it worse? The only way you’ll know that is if you do an extended study [not on volunteers, but on the public].”
"If you vaccinate someone, and they make an antibody response, and then they get exposed and infected, does the response that you induce enhance the infection and make it worse? The only way you'll know that is if you do an extended study [not on volunteers, but on the public]." pic.twitter.com/OJbXAzGobh
“This would not be the first time, if it happened, that a vaccine that looked good in initial safety actually made people worse,” he continued when the Facebook CEO pressed him on rushing forward with a vaccine.
A month later, Fauci warned at a press conference that “the worst possible thing you could do” is vaccinate someone and create enhancement.
Well, a year and a half later, isn’t that exactly what we are seeing? Remember, the FDA warned during the initial emergency approval period that “risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown.” And that’s at a time when the FDA didn’t know just how badly these shots would wane … or did it? Is it perhaps the intent to create the need for endless shots to fix the immune suppression and viral enhancement created by the first round – just like a heroin addict who constantly needs more poison to temporarily assuage the latest withdrawal symptoms, until he descends into a death spiral?
It is now universally accepted that the vaccine first suppresses your immune system, possibly for six weeks following the first shot, before it provides any protection for a few months thereafter. To encourage people to vaccinate even more while the numbers are high is the surest way of enabling more people to get the virus. This will create an endless feedback loop, driving a vicious cycle of suppressed immune systems, vaccine-mediated viral enhancement, and excess mortality from both the side effects and from COVID, which in turn generates fear to pressure more boosters in the hardest-hit areas. The German state of North Rhine-Westphalia is making boosters available for people to take every four weeks. Thus, the more the shots fail, the more the makers succeed. It’s no longer enough to oppose mandates. It’s time to stand athwart history and yell “STOP” to this entire vicious cycle.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com and WhatDidYouSay.org.
Source: AP Photo/Ted S. Warren
Wow, the racial reckoning after George Floyd sure has gotten a lot of black people killed! According to the FBI, amid the extravaganza of violence following Floyd’s death in 2020, an additional 2,400 black males and 405 black females were killed, compared to 2019. The post-Floyd murder surge of 2020 is, by far, the largest year-to-year increase in homicide in U.S. history.
So far this year, 615 black people have been killed in Chicago (out of a total of 767 homicide victims, 29 white); 164 in Baltimore, (out of 323 total, eight white, with the race of 144 murder victims somehow “unknown”); and 373 black people have been shot to death in Philadelphia (out of 460 fatal shootings, 35 white).
All this makes me wonder if we wouldn’t be better off encouraging the violent elements of the black underclass to stop acting out, instead of ginning up their anger by relentlessly pounding away at “systemic racism.” Perhaps our prestige media could help if they told disaffected urban youth that they’re not heroes when they shoot up neighborhood block parties, beat up their teachers or fight with the police.
Instead, elites tell them the exact opposite. The most celebrated entry in the “White People Are Out To Get You” genre is Michelle Alexander’s 2010 book, “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.” Alexander, who is only half-black (always the loudest at the anti-racism rallies), argues that the criminal justice system “labels” black men “felons” in order to deny them basic human rights, such as the right to vote — exactly like under Jim Crow!
The book has sold a kazillion copies, mostly by virtue of being mandatory reading in every college and high school across the nation.
Although Alexander claims that gobs of black men are in prison solely because of racism, there is another possible explanation: Black men commit a LOT of crime. Black people are only 13% of the U.S. population, but commit 33% of all violent crime (not including murder), according to the Department of Justice.
That’s not a figure whipped up by the police, with their “systemic racism”: It’s based on how victims describe their attackers. (On the plus side, although only 13% of the population, black people are 90% of television commercial models.)
When it comes to murder — the most reliable crime statistic because a dead body can’t be intimidated or threatened — black people are an absolute majority of those arrested. And consider that the astonishingly low clearance rate for random shootings in cities like Chicago and Philadelphia (5% to 11% and 21%, respectively) means that a lot of murders don’t lead to anybody being arrested. (It’s highly unlikely that whites are committing the drive-by shootings.)
The New York City Police Department keeps more detailed criminal statistics than most. In 2020, the city’s population was 33% white, 29% Hispanic and 23% black. And yet, 96% of all shootings were committed by blacks or Hispanics. More than 72% were committed by blacks alone. Just 1.4% percent of shootings were committed by whites.
Also from the report:
“Rape suspects are most frequently Black (49.4%) …
“The race/ethnicity of known Felonious Assault suspects is most frequently Black (53.1%) …
“The race/ethnicity of known Grand Larceny suspects is most frequently Black (60.7%) …
“Misdemeanor Sex Crime suspects are most frequently Black (45.8%) …
“Misdemeanor Assault suspects are most frequently Black (51.5%) …
“The race/ethnicity of known Petit Larceny suspects is most frequently Black (55.9%) …
“Misdemeanor Criminal Mischief suspects are most frequently Black (52.7%) …”
And so on.
Surely, Alexander must have some killer examples of innocent black men rotting in prison solely because they are black. After all, it’s her book that launched the whole “mass incarceration” craze, with zealots, idiots and idiot-zealots demanding that all black men be released from prison — and pronto! (Trump to Biden at the first debate: “You call them ‘superpredators,’ and I’m letting people out of jail now.”)
This is how Alexander begins her book:
“Jarvious Cotton cannot vote. Like his father, grandfather, great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather, he has been denied the right to participate in our electoral democracy. … Cotton’s great-great-grandfather could not vote as a slave. His great-grandfather was beaten to death by the Ku Klux Klan for attempting to vote. His grandfather was prevented from voting by Klan intimidation. His father was barred from voting by poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, Jarvious Cotton cannot vote because he, like many black men in the United States, has been labeled a felon and is currently on parole.”
What trivial infraction did Jarvious commit that got him “labeled a felon”? (No doubt something your typical white person does every day.)
Answer: He shot to death a 17-year-old high school kid after robbing him and his friends at gunpoint, then escaped from jail — with help from his mother — and fled from Mississippi to Brooklyn, where he lived under an alias for five years, before being captured again. Unbelievably, Jarvious continued living in New York for another year while left-wing groups sued to block his extradition to Mississippi, finally losing 8-0 in the New York Court of Appeals.
I wonder if Alexander realizes she left out the murder/jail break part. Maybe she just ran out of space. To be fair, her book was only 421 pages long.
Now, I can’t speak to the accuracy of the stories about Jarvious’ father, grandfather or great-grandfather — though I’m starting to question Alexander’s reliability as a narrator — but as for Jarvious, I’m pretty sure he lost the right to vote not because white people are randomly locking up “black bodies,” but because he murdered a teenager.
Jarvious is Alexander’s case in chief, not mine. If she had had a better example, I think she would have used it.
It’s time for a reckoning on the reckoning. No more woke fantasies, because black lives matter.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
The Marxists on the January 6 Committee Monday evening recommended Trump’s former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows face contempt charges. Mark Meadows informed the committee he would no longer appear before the sham committee for a deposition because they weren’t respecting boundaries concerning executive privilege.
“We agreed to provide thousands of pages of responsive documents and Mr. Meadows was willing to appear voluntarily, not under compulsion of the Select Committee’s subpoena to him, for a deposition to answer questions about non-privileged matters. Now actions by the Select Committee have made such an appearance untenable,” the letter from George J. Terwilliger II stated.
Liz Cheney and Bennie Thompson responded by moving forward with contempt charges against Meadows.
“These text messages leave no doubt…multiple Fox News hosts knew the president needed to act immediately. They texted Mr. Meadows.” Cheney said as the panel voted to recommend contempt charges.
Cheney proceeded to read Mark Meadows’ private text messages with Fox News hosts out loud.
The illegitimate panel voted 9-0 to send the measure to the full House of Representatives.
The House is expected to vote on the contempt charges on Tuesday.
VIDEO:
Full @RepLizCheney statement on holding Mark Meadows in contempt, including texts from Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Brian Kilmeade and others:
"These text messages leave no doubt…multiple Fox News hosts knew the president needed to act immediately. They texted Mr. Meadows." pic.twitter.com/KxrVMS4CTZ
Facebook admitted that its so-called “fact-checking” program is actually cranking out opinions used to censor certain viewpoints.
In its latest legal battle with TV journalist John Stossel over a post about the origins of the deadly 2020 California forest fires, Facebook, now rebranded and referred to as “Meta,” claims that its “fact-checking” program should not be the target of a defamation suit because its attempts to regulate content are done by third-party organizations who are entitled to their “opinion.”
Stossel’s original complaint questioned whether “Facebook and its vendors defame a user who posts factually accurate content, when they publicly announce that the content failed a ‘fact-check’ and is ‘partly false,’ and by attributing to the user a false claim that he never made?” Facebook, however, claimed that the counter article authored by Climate Feedback is not necessarily the tech giant’s responsibility.
Facebook went on to complain that Stossel’s problem isn’t with the Silicon Valley giants’ “labels” on his content but with the obscure organizations that Facebook employs to do its “fact-checking” dirty work.
“The labels themselves are neither false nor defamatory; to the contrary, they constitute protected opinion,” Facebook admitted. “And even if Stossel could attribute Climate Feedback’s separate webpages to Meta, the challenged statements on those pages are likewise neither false nor defamatory. Any of these failures would doom Stossel’s complaint, but the combination makes any amendment futile.”
It’s no secret that Facebook uses its “fact-checking” program to curb information that it wants to be censored, and this November lawsuit gives more insight into the Big Tech company’s methods and twisted rationale.
“The independence of the fact checkers is a deliberate feature of Meta’s fact-checking program, designed to ensure that Meta does not become the arbiter of truth on its platforms,” the lawsuit stated before admitting that “Meta identifies potential misinformation for fact-checkers to review and rate. … [I]t leaves the ultimate determination whether information is false or misleading to the fact-checkers. And though Meta has designed its platforms so that fact-checker ratings appear next to content that the fact-checkers have reviewed and rated, it does not contribute to the substance of those ratings.”
Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist. She graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism.
Mandatory Title IX training violated school’s own free speech policies, critics say
A screenshot of Boston University’s mandatory Title IX training this semester.
Boston University is requiring all students and faculty to affirm that they should “intervene” if a woman is complimented on her husband or encouraged to have children, guidance transmitted during a mandatory Title IX training this semester.
The training included multiple-choice questions that had to be answered correctly in order to complete it. Some questions were empirical—”How often do you think people make false allegations?”—while others asked about the appropriate course of conduct in a given scenario. Faculty who did not complete the training would “not be eligible for merit-based salary increases,” the school said in a campus-wide email, with further penalties possible for “continued non-compliance.” Students who did not complete it would “be blocked from registering next semester,” according to the university’s website.
Several scenarios involved “bystander intervention,” the idea that onlookers should prevent harassment by inserting themselves into potentially inappropriate encounters. In one vignette, an Asian woman is told that her white husband is “good-looking”and that “half-Asian babies are the cutest.” Asked “what should you do,” students and faculty were forced to select “Intervene” to advance through the training. Even though the woman “smiled” at the compliment, the training explains, she still “might have felt uncomfortable” about comments relating to “her race, her husband’s appearance, or the prospect of having children” itself.
The training also required students and faculty to affirm that people “rarely” make false accusations. “You might be surprised to learn that false reports aren’t common, and frivolous claims are almost nonexistent,” the training says. “Sometimes” was not an acceptable answer—though one study found that as many as two-thirds of hate crime accusations turn out to be false.
The training drew sharp criticism from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which told the Washington Free Beacon that Boston University was violating its own free speech policies.
“BU makes clear commitments to free expression and academic freedom, and that includes the right to be free from compelled speech,” FIRE’s Aaron Terr said. But to complete the training, students and faculty “must select the university’s preferred answers as their own,” Terr explained.
“This is compelled speech and has no place at a university that promises its faculty expressive freedom,” Terr said.
Boston University did not respond to a request for comment.
The training, which was created by the education consultancy EVERFI and appears on the school’s “compliance services” website, demonstrates how the antidiscrimination law can become a Trojan Horse for compelled speech. Universities frame such compulsion as a way of complying with Title IX and other civil rights statutes, even when it goes far beyond what the law requires. Simply quizzing students and faculty on their legal obligations does not violate academic freedom, Terr said. But the Boston University training, which requires “them to express agreement with particular viewpoints,” does.
Boston University has seen several such violations since the summer of 2020. Between July and November of last year, the university’s theater and playwriting programs both adopted a policy of requiring “land acknowledgment[s]” before performances, with the theater program also requiring all instructors to “include a [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion] statement in their syllabus.” In October, FIRE sent the university a letter of concern about both policies but has yet to receive a response.
Statutes like Title IX can give administrators cover for this sort of overreach. After Yale Law School’s “discrimination and harassment coordinators” pressured second-year law student Trent Colbert to write a pre-drafted apology for a “triggering” email, the dean of the law school, Heather Gerken, claimed the administrators were merely “attempting to carry out their obligations under university policy whenever discrimination complaints are filed.” She also invoked Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which “oblige[s] the law school to ensure a learning environment free of discrimination.”
In the name of complying with these laws, universities have attempted to regulate a quotidian and constantly expanding list of behaviors. The BU training goes so far as to imply that telling someone to put their phone away could constitute illegal discrimination or harassment. One question asks about the “best path forward” when a classmate “keeps checking their phone” while working on a group project. The “right” answer involves giving the classmate “the benefit of the doubt”; the wrong one involves telling them to “stop checking your phone—that’s rude.”
Other questions encourage people to police flirtatious encounters and potentially offensive jokes. “You sit near Heidi, and for the past week you’ve seen David come over to talk to her several times,” one scenario begins. “You’re not sure, but you thought you saw David rubbing her back at one point today. What should you do?” Students and faculty who said “Nothing” were told to “try again.”
“You don’t have to be certain that potentially concerning behavior crosses the line before taking action,” the training states.
Nor must you be certain that anyone finds a joke offensive before speaking up about it. “What should you do” if “Greg begins speaking loudly in a stereotypical Chinese accent,” the training asks. “Say something. Mocking an accent is offensive”—even if nobody registers offense.
The training justifies such interventions by positing that “microaggressions” are more damaging to “employee well-being” than “overt harassment.” Even “[w]ell-meaning people can still cause harm,” one module says. “It’s important to separate someone’s intention from the impact of their actions.”
Hundreds of thousands of hospital staff members — from nurses and doctors to janitors and receptionists — worked in hospital settings for nearly a year dealing with COVID patients while unvaxxed. They did their duty and were repeatedly heralded as heroes. But after the vaccines came out, how were they treated by the same society and government that had just sung their praises?
President Joe Biden rewarded them by issuing a mandate that health care workers at facilities that take Medicare or Medicaid money would have to get vaxxed or hit the bricks. And because many hospital systems across the U.S. were waiting for the government to act first to give them cover, they followed suit and issued their own mandates. But it didn’t work out as well as they’d hoped.
Hospitals, which were already facing labor shortages before the pandemic began, saw thousands of nurses exit instead of taking the jab, the Wall Street Journal reported. Add to that the fact that those hesitant to get the vaccine made up 30% of all staff, not just nurses, and you’ve got the makings of what experts call a “fustercluck.”
Hospitals needed a way to get out from under their self-imposed staffing crisis created, at least in part, by their mandates. Enter the late-November federal court suspension of the feds’ vax mandate. After a federal judge temporarily blocked the mandate, the Journal reported, some of the nation’s biggest hospital systems suddenly decided to drop their own ill-considered vaccine mandates.
HCA Healthcare, Tenet Healthcare Corp., AdventHealth, and the Cleveland Clinic all announced they are dropping their jab requirements, which had exacerbated the hospitals’ cost of labor problems and caused all kinds of issues with staff retention, the paper said.
The Journal talked to employee benefits lawyer Wade Symons, who noted the “mass exodus” debacle and said facilities that don’t have the vax requirements “could be a magnet” for health professionals looking to practice health care away from mandates.
Alan Levine, CEO of Ballad Health, which has 21 hospitals in Tennessee and Virginia with 14,000 employees, said the federal court did everybody a favor by stopping the mandate, the Journal said. According to Levine, his company had 2,000 folks unvaccinated, and he said that canning that many people “would have been devastating to our system.”
HCA, which has one of the country’s largest collections of hospitals with some 275,000 employees, announced last month that all of its workers would need to be vaxxed by the federal Jan. 4 deadline, but then suspended the oh-so-very-important vaccine policy after the court ruled against the Biden administration.
Other hospital systems are still holding fast to their jab mandates, though, the Journal said. Kaiser Permanente and New York’s Northwell Health combined have let go of about 2,000 employees for refusing the jab, with many more on the chopping block should they not hit the deadline.
Famous author J.K. Rowling is under fire from transgender activists and Twitter leftists again — this time for simply pointing out an obvious truth about transgender rapists.
The “Harry Potter” creator was hit with swift backlash over the weekend after she responded to news that police in Scotland plan to record individuals accused of rape as the gender by which they self-identify and not their biological sex. The reported policy means Scottish police will log rapes as carried out by a woman so long as the offender “identifies as a female” — even if the offender has male genitalia.
On Sunday, Rowling pointed out the absurdity of the policy’s upside-down logic in a tweet, saying, “War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. The Penised Individual Who Raped You Is a Woman,” putting her own spin on a famous quote from George Orwell’s novel, “1984.”
Rowling wasn’t the only one to criticize the measure as absurd.
“As a lawyer for 20 years and Justice Secretary for almost eight, I’ve seen some legal absurdities,” former Holyrood Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said, according to the Scottish Sun. “But this tops it all and is dangerous. It’s physically impossible and is about dogma overriding common sense.”
But as a prominent global figure who has been branded an anti-transgender activist, Rowling caught the majority of the flak on social media. Transgender activists blasted the author with online missives, characterizing her once again as a transphobe who can’t stop attacking the trans community.
VICE News complained that Rowling “just won’t stop attacking trans people online.”
“Queer Eye” star Jonathan Van Ness slammed Rowling’s tweet as “transphobic cherry picked vitriol,” adding, “As trans women are assaulted, deprived of work, killed, and raped JK is safe in her mansion.”
“I’m just not sure why you keep talking about it. Your entire point now is hating a community of people? We don’t need to hear from you and your little stories anymore. Enough,” Akila Hughes added.
Trans activist Nicole Maines asked, “Why does it sound like you’re more upset about trans people than rapists? Feels like your priorities are wrong here, babe.”
New York Times best-selling author Shannon Hale claimed Rowling’s comments put transgender women at risk and argued “amplifying bigotry helps no one.”
Activist Amy Siskind exclaimed: “Why do you insist on erasing and hurting people, seemingly for sport? Grow up already!”
London artist Daniel Lismore twisted Orwell’s quote to take a shot at Rowling.
It should be noted that despite the overwhelming vitriol leveled at Rowling, many on social media commended the author for her courage to speak the truth.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Allyn Walker, a former professor at Old Dominion University who identifies as non-binary, resigned last month following criticism stemming from Walker’s views on pedophilia. Walker argued that pedophiles should be destigmatized by identifying them as “minor-attracted persons” (“MAPs”) rather than the pejorative term “pedophile,” because attraction to children is a sexual orientation and not immoral.
The pretense is that pedophiles are more likely to seek treatment if their sexual proclivities are destigmatized. Instead of relying on empirical evidence to determine the reasons for those proclivities or strategies that will keep children safe, Walker relies on queer theoretical tools to argue that pedophiles are wrongly oppressed by society’s power structures as a group of the most “hated folk devils of our time.”
What Is Queer Theory?
Walker is a queer sociologist and criminologist who uses the lens of queer theory to explain human society and crime. Like other critical theories, queer theory seeks a collective critical consciousness that will identify and dismantle identity power structures and dynamics. Queer theory seeks to unite oppressed groups that fall outside the privileged normative language categories of sex (male or female) and sexuality (straight, gay, bisexual) into a single, oppressed banner of queer. To do this, it relies on the postmodern knowledge principle, which rejects objective knowledge and favors “knowledges” that arise from the lived experiences of individuals of certain identity groups.
Queer Theory’s Application to Pedophilia
Walker uses theoretical tools to problematize the treatment of pedophilia as a sexual perversion to achieve her agenda. She uses the power of language to advocate for the new acronym “MAP” and blurs boundaries of sexuality. The focus is on the collective oppression of pedophiles. Using a “deconstructionist” perspective, Walker argues that pedophilia is a “social construct.” She boldly concludes that sexual attraction to minors is not morally offensive and claims that the vilification of pedophilia is more about control of sexual minorities than it is about the health or safety of children.
Shockingly, this normalization of pedophilia is not unique to Walker. Another professor at ODU, Vanessa Panfil, has worked extensively with Walker on at least one scholarly article advocating for the destigmatization of pedophilia. Panfil appears to still be gainfully employed at ODU. In addition, Michel Foucault (whom Walker cites extensively) petitioned for the removal of sexual consent laws in France. Similarly, Gayle Rubin defended pedophilia in her 1984 essay“Thinking Sex.”
Missing from Walker’s analysis, and the analyses of many who think similarly, are the true victims of pedophilia: children. Walker advocates for the use of “engrossing and high quality” pornography for pedophiles to resist their sexual attraction to children. Unfortunately, Walker seems to assume that the only victims of child pornography are the people who are prosecuted for it and does not consider the trauma inflicted on children who are trafficked and used in the creation of this “high-quality porn.”
Walker uses the theoretical tools of queer theory to justify a personal view that adults should be free to fantasize and sexualize children — so long as they do not touch them. She has seized on queer theory’s position in the social justice movement to justify what appears to be the next logical step for queer theory’s dismantling of sexual norms. This must be dismissed outright.
Queer Theory in Schools
Unfortunately, queer theory’s rejection of “social constructs” designed to protect the most innocent — even the outright rejection of “childhood innocence” — has spread as far as grade school pedagogy. The “gender unicorn” is taught to small children in schools and books like “Gender Queer,” which contains pornographic comics, are in public school libraries. Social-emotional learning surveys from vendors like Panorama Education ask children in detail about their sexual preferences.
In the name of “dismantling power structures and dynamics” around sexuality, queer theorists must make things that were once taboo (like sexualizing children) no longer taboo. Queer theorists excuse the immorality of pedophilia away because it helps them achieve their own agenda. For example, they would claim that queer pedagogy prevents queer children from being “othered” at school. Yet, that conclusion assumes that children should be sexualized in the first place. Furthermore, to reach that conclusion, the benefits of queer children not being “othered” must outweigh the risks of sexualizing children and of exposing them to books and information that would — at least in some states — run afoul of obscenity laws.
That conclusion is far from settled. In fact, given the obscenity laws currently in place in certain states, it would seem that our society has determined that sexualizing children remains off-limits to private individuals — and so it should remain with schools.
Before we allow ourselves to be swayed by any theoretical excuses to change the societal norms that protect children, we must all decide how far our collective moral consciousness will allow the social justice movement to go in its exploitation of our boundaries. I suggest that we have allowed it to go quite far enough. The sexualization of children has no place in schools or in our society. It is simply one boundary that should not be exploited.
Jennifer Rawls is a practicing attorney and single mother. In her free time, she has spent the past year trying to understand why children are being sexualized and indoctrinated with political agendas in school.
Democrats’ current proposed $3.5 trillion welfare expansion would effectively ban faithful Christians from profiting from federal subsidies for separating infants and toddlers from their families. The current text of Democrats’ massive “Build Back Better” entitlement bill contains provisions that would require religious child-care providers to disavow longstanding theology about sex in order to receive federal child-care funds under a massive new early childhood program.
“The Democrats went out of their way to make sure and prohibit religious care providers from receiving any of these funds, and unanimously rejected an amendment to allow all child-care providers to be eligible for grants, including religious providers,” said Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Indiana, the ranking member on the House’s subcommittee on Worker and Family Support.
Democrats’ legislation would create a new federally controlled child-care entitlement available to the majority of families in the nation. The legislation authorizes up to $20 billion in the program’s first year, $30 billion in its second, $40 billion in its third, and an unlimited amount after that. The estimated cost of this program over the next ten years is $400 billion.
“Making faith-based providers of child-care and pre-kindergarten into recipients of federal financial assistance triggers federal compliance obligations and non-discrimination provisions,” note the leaders of several religious organizations in an opposition letter to Senate Democrats last week.
This means potentially forcing religious organizations to deny all theology that acknowledges basic truths about human biology and reproduction. Given the state of federal “nondiscrimination” law, this could include forcing religious organizations to allow males into female bathrooms, hire transgender babysitters, and teach small children that men can turn themselves into women and that theologically condemned sex acts are in fact morally good.
Just one-third of American children younger than five are placed in center-based care, according to federal statistics. Sixty-three percent of American kids ages five and younger are cared for by family, and 11 percent by a babysitter or nanny. Most American kids ages 0 to 5 who do have regular childcare are away from their parents only part-time. Among the minority of American families who enroll young children in full-time care, 53 percent currently choose a religious facility, according to a January 2021 survey of parents from the Bipartisan Policy Center. Family care was parents’ top preference for their children, with religious-based care the second-most preferred option in the BPC poll.
Democrats’ bill would also likely dramatically increase the costs of childcare by increasing the licensing requirements for people the government pays to babysit tiny children. Most child care workers have low education levels, but states usually don’t raise their licensing requirements because that would reduce the availability of government-controlled child care.
Numerous studies have found that the quality of language and interaction available to a child in infancy and early childhood is extremely important to that child’s intellectual and social development. Studies have also found that frequent one-on-one interaction between a small child and his parents benefits early language development even if the child’s parents are poorly educated. This effect disappears, however, if that poorly educated mother is employed to care for many tiny children at once instead of one of her own to whom she can fully dedicate her attention and conversation time.
Research also resoundingly finds that living with married parents provides far bigger positive benefits to children for their entire lives than does attending an early childhood program.
Large early childhood programs are of notoriously poor quality. The major existing such program, Head Start, has failed to improve attendees’ education and life prospects in all the quality research done on the program that has spent some $250 billion from taxpayers since it began in 1965. In fact, federal research has found that children who participated in Head Start later learned less in math and behaved worse than peers who didn’t participate.
The research that shows any long-term benefit to children of attending early childhood programs derives such results from small-scale, boutique programs that employed teachers and support staff such as doctors who were much better educated than the typical daycare or preschool employee.
Research also shows mass programs that separate small children from their parents decrease children’s intellectual abilities and increase their aggression, risky behavior, and later likelihood of committing crimes. They also tend to erode parenting skills. The more time a small child spends away from his mother, the worse such negative effects tend to get.
“The amount of hours spent in day care each week during the first four years of life was the key child care predictor of behavioral problems,”writes social scientist Dr. Jenet Erickson in a review of several such studies. “In fact, the statistical effect size of the relationship between day care hours and caregiver reports of behavioral problems at age four and a half was so strong that it was comparable to the effect of poverty. Importantly, these statistical effects did not diminish as children aged.”
High-quality studies found that children who attended Tennessee’s state-run pre-K program had worse behavior and academic outcomes than children who did not. Children who attended Quebec’s universal early childcare program were 22 percent more likely to be convicted of a crime in young adulthood compared to children who did not participate in the program. Children separated from their parents in their youngest years through Quebec’s program also demonstrated greater emotional fragility that lasted into adulthood.
“The left is at war with religion and family-centered things. They think cradle to grave, government knows best,” Walorski said.
Walorski has sponsored legislation that would expand tax-free savings accounts families can use to pay for their own child care, tutoring, enrichment activities such as music lessons and summer camp, and more.
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis – a Democrat – declared that the COVID-19 pandemic is “over.” Breaking from the Democratic Party, Polis added that he would not be implementing another statewide mask mandate despite the Omicron variant spreading easily.
“Everybody had more than enough opportunity to get vaccinated,” Polis told Colorado Public Radio on Friday. “Hopefully it’s been at your pharmacy, your grocery store, a bus near you, [or at] big events. At this point, if you haven’t been vaccinated, it’s really your own darn fault.”
“I didn’t hesitate to [issue a statewide mask mandate] in the emergency. The emergency is over,” Polis stated. “You know, [state] public health [officials] don’t get to tell people what to wear; that’s just not their job.”
“Public health [officials] would say to always wear a mask because it decreases flu and decreases [other airborne illnesses],” Polis stated. “But that’s not something that you require; you don’t tell people what to wear.”
“You don’t tell people to wear a jacket when they go out in winter and force them to [wear it],” Polis added. “If they get frostbite, it’s their own darn fault. If you haven’t been vaccinated, that’s your choice. I respect that. But it’s your fault when you’re in the hospital with COVID.”
“And at this point, I think it’s almost like they made a deliberate decision not to get vaccinated,” he noted. “I still encourage everybody who hasn’t been vaccinated to get protected. And for those who are, make sure to get that booster after six months. The data shows it’s important and very likely even more so with this omicron variant.”
Polis said he supported local jurisdictions instituting their own mandates according to their individual needs, but that the state should stay out of it.
Following the tragic death of George Floyd, Minneapolis became the home of the defund the police movement, and even contemplated abolishing the police. However, the government of Minneapolis has completely reversed course after a near-record crime wave has hit the city. Now the city is voting to fund the police.
Nearly two weeks after the death George Floyd, nine of the veto-proof council’s 13 members began the process of dismantling the Minneapolis Police Department.
“We are here today to begin the process of ending the Minneapolis Police Department and creating a new, transformative model for cultivating safety in Minneapolis,” the City Council declared in June 2020.
Days later, the City Council passed a resolution“declaring the intent to create a transformative new model for cultivating safety” for the police department.
By September 2020, violent crimes spiked, as did property crimes – even arson was up 55% compared to the same time in 2019. At the same time, more than 100 police officers left the department in the first nine months of 2020. By November 2020, violent carjackings skyrocketed by 537% compared to the previous year.
In February 2021, the Minneapolis City Council voted unanimously to approve $6.4 million in additional funding that the police department had requested after the crime rate continued to swell. By May 2021, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) – previously a proponent of defunding the police – admitted that limiting law enforcement led to a spike in violent crime.
“It’s just the reality of the solution, you know,” Mayor Frey conceded. “When you make big, overarching statements that we’re going to defund or abolish and dismantle the police department and get rid of all the officers, there’s an impact to that. We need accountability and culture shift within our department, and we need police.”
“It’s going to take a very comprehensive effort,” Frey added. “Yes, it includes safety beyond policing, and it includes police. And, you know, I’m one that has been working lock step with our Chief Arradondo, and I’m calling on the council members to try to work with him as well.”
Because crime continued to swell, a Hennepin County District Court judge ordered in July 2021 that the Minneapolis City Council and Mayor Jacob Frey to “immediately take any and all necessary action to ensure that they fund a police force.”
As of Thursday, Minneapolis had recorded its 91st homicide, according to Minneapolis Police Department data. The previous record for homicides in the city is 96, set in 1995. Now, Minneapolis has done a complete 180 regarding defunding the police.
“Mayor Jacob Frey and the City Council last week agreed to a $1.6 billion budget that includes just over $191 million for the Police Department (MPD), restoring its funding to nearly the level it held before George Floyd was killed in 2020,” the Star Tribune reported on Saturday.
The outlet noted that the “urgency faded as crime surged and the ‘defund police’ message became a political liability.”
Council Member Phillipe Cunningham – who lost his re-election bid this fall – said, “There wasn’t more of that type of action because there wasn’t the political will, really, to do so.”
Steve Cramer – president of the Downtown Council – added, “This vote is a first step on a long road back from the division over public safety that has characterized the past 18 tumultuous months in Minneapolis.”
Meteorologist Joe Bastardi fired back at President Joe Biden for seemingly blaming the devastating tornado outbreak that struck multiple states last week on climate change.
When a reporter asked Biden on Saturday whether climate change contributed to the deadly tornados, Biden pointed to climate change allegedly increasing the intensity of storms.
“All I know is that the intensity of the weather across the board has some impacts as a consequence of the warming of the planet and climate change,” Biden said. “The specific impact on these specific storms, I can’t say at this point.”
“I’m going to be asking the EPA and others to take a look at that,” Biden continued. “But the fact is that we all know everything is more intense when the climate is warming. Everything. And obviously, it has some impact here, but I can’t give you a quantitative read on that.”
Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator Deanne Criswell was more direct. During an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Criswell said the extreme weather “is going to be our new normal.”
“The effects we are seeing of climate change are the crisis of our generation,” Criswell said.
How did Bastardi respond?
The famed meteorologist accused Biden of weaponizing tornados and shared data showing that severe weather this year has not been as severe compared to previous years.
“Clueless Joe Biden In action again with his weaponization of Tornados. 1) Violent tornadoes not increasing. 2) this year tornados, hail and wind all together near-record low,” Bastardi said. “Mindless media should do their dang job and call him on it, I called Trump out on Dorian jibberish.”
The data Bastardi included, coming from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, directly contradicts claims from Biden and Criswell that severe weather is more intense because of climate change.
The first graph shows that, as carbon emissions increased between 1954 and 2014, the number of annual tornados did not increase; in fact, it went down.
The second graphs shows that the number of recorded tornados through Dec. 11, 2021, is, in fact, close to a record low.
The third graph shows that the number of local storm reports of hail — 3,714 through Dec. 11 — is significantly under the average of 7,979 through the same time period.
The fourth graph shows that the number of local storm reports of damaging winds — 12,780 through Dec. 11 — is also under the average of 13,996 through the same time period.
Climate change hawks love to exploit isolated weather events to promote a certain narrative about the climate. However, climate, by its very definition, describes observable patterns of weather over long periods of time — not isolated events. Thus, if climate change were truly driving more intense weather, such a phenomenon would be observable over a substantial period of time. But as Colorado University professor Roger Pielke Jr. pointed out on Sunday, the U.S. government’s own data shows that tornados, for example, are becoming less common in the U.S.
“According to data from the U.S. National Weather Service from 2000 to 2020 only four of the strongest category of tornadoes were observed (which are labelled as F/EF5 tornadoes) In comparison, from 1954 to 1974 36 (!) such powerful tornadoes were observed,” Pielke explained. “Our research on tornado damage in the United States over many decades shows a decline that is suggestive of an actual decline in tornado incidence.”
Pielke also highlighted an important point to consider when politicians and those with an agenda begin blaming climate change for weather disasters.
“If it is so well known that disasters are the result of a complex interplay of social and climate factors, why then is climate typically the main focus of attention after every extreme event?” Pielke wrote.
His point: If a tree falls in a forest, but no one hears or sees it, did it make a sound? In a similar way, weather disasters — like the one that happened last week — are only disasters because they impact a significant number of people. If a severe tornado with 200mph winds touches down in rural Nebraska, but causes no damage, no one blames climate change for such an extreme event.
As geographer Gilbert White, known for his work in helping society mitigate the impact of natural disasters, wrote: “Floods are ‘acts of God’ but flood losses are largely acts of man.”
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Inflation. COVID-19. Ballooning federal debt made worse by irresponsible spending in Congress. Lost jobs from medically coercive mandates. A supply chain crisis. Racist and sexually explicit narratives flooding public schools while concerned parents are targeted as terrorists. A heartbreakingly botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. An aggressive dictatorship in China that perpetuates horrific human rights abuses. A border crisis.
Conservatives pride ourselves on our ability to see the world without the rose-tinted lenses of progressives. If men were angels, we would need no government (or government accountability), we say — but men are no angels and thus we must be skeptics.
That candid recognition of our world’s imperfection often leaves us discouraged. We are frustrated that so many naively buy the blatant lies of the corporate press and corrupt politicians, and that even basic truths like “don’t kill babies” and “boys and girls are different” meet vicious opposition.
Yet, unlike the utopian dreams of the globalist left, our goal is not and has never been the perfection of the system. Conservatives should not hope to “fix” the world — nor be despondent when it proves unfixable. While we should seek to cultivate and steward our culture and our communities, our inability to shut off the fire hose of foolishness, evil, and sin in our world today should remind us we await another one.
We Are Made to Long for the Eternal
The Advent season is a time to recall the ancient posture of a world awaiting its savior. We recall the longing of a people who had waited 400 years for the voice of God and millennia for his promised salvation.
But there is another Advent, or arrival, to which we look. We long for the day in which we will surrender our earthly failures and enjoy the presence of a heavenly God. Far from discouraging us, the shortcomings of Earth should embolden our hope. If men were angels, neither heaven nor salvation would be necessary.
For this reason, Christians should take heart at worldly turmoil. “Rejoice that such fruitful times are in store for you, for in them you will be weaned from earth and made meet for heaven,” said the great Baptist theologian Charles Haddon Spurgeon, in an evening devotional based on Job 1:9.
“You will be delivered from clinging to the present, and made to long for those eternal things which are so soon to be revealed to you,” he continues. “When you feel that as regards the present you do serve God for nought, you will then rejoice in the infinite reward of the future.”
Meanwhile, rather than withdraw from a hopeless world, Spurgeon threw himself into practical ministries as well as evangelical ones, founding an orphanage in 1867 and speaking out against the injustice of slavery. Evil in the world should not send Christians into resigned indifference — we are called to “do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause.”
We Engage the Present Because of Our Future Hope
In today’s America, that calling might mean fighting to keep schoolchildren from being vulnerable to political agendas that push sexually explicit material in the classroom and allow rapists access to girls. It can mean speaking up for people like Jack Phillips and Barronelle Stutzman whose livelihoods are targeted for their religious convictions, or fighting for the safety of women in prisons and shelters. It certainly means pleading the cause of the unborn.
Not all of the means by which we as Christians should seek justice, love mercy, and walk humbly are political, of course. But our hope of heaven itself should not dissuade us from stewardship of our communities. We are not of the world, but we are in it.
As we anticipate Advent, our posture is one of hope. But — although church traditions vary — in one common symbolism, hope is only one of four virtues signified by the four candles lit each Sunday of the Advent season. Peace, love, and joy mark the other three, and we are called to live these out in the present even as we look with anticipation to heaven.
Because we have hope, we are to love those around us in a way that demands no return. Because we have hope, we may have peace with even dismal circumstances. Because we have hope, we can look upon a fallen world and know the fullness of joy.
God “wants [men] to attend chiefly to two things, to eternity itself, and to that point of time which they call the Present,” C.S. Lewis said through his character Screwtape. “For the Present is the point at which time touches eternity. Of the present moment, and of it only, humans have an experience analogous to the experience which [God] has of reality as a whole; in it alone freedom and actuality are offered to them.”
Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.
Kimberly Fletcher, president of Moms for America, speaks at a protest outside the National School Boards Association headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, on Oct. 27, 2021. | Moms for America
The fallout over a letter from the National School Boards Association comparing parent protests and threats to domestic terrorism continues as 18 state affiliates have announced intentions to cut ties with the national education organization, according to a watchdog group. The letter at issue, sent by NSBA leadership to President Joe Biden on Sept. 29, requested “federal assistance to stop threats and acts of violence against public schoolchildren, public school board members, and other public school district officials and educators.”
After expressing concern about the increased “acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials,” NSBA President Viola Garcia and Interim Executive Director and CEO Chip Slaven urged Biden to classify “these heinous actions” as “domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”
In October, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland sent a memorandum directing the FBI to “convene meetings with federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial leaders within 30 days” to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff.”
While the NSBA apologized for the letter three weeks after its publication and it has since taken it offline, outrage over the tone of the request still looms large. In the weeks and months following the letter’s publication, the number of state school board associations that have either distanced themselves from the NSBA letter or withdrawn from the organization entirely continues to grow.
The advocacy group Parents Defending Education, which vehemently opposes the rhetoric of the NSBA letter, has compiled a list of actions taken by state school board associations in response to the letter. In the past three weeks alone, state school board associations in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi and Virginia have voted to withdraw from the NSBA. The school board associations in these states join their counterparts in Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee and Wisconsin in announcing their departure from the NSBA immediately or in the near future.
Additionally, several additional states have distanced themselves from the rhetoric in the NSBA letter without formally withdrawing from the national organization. Most notably, the Delaware School Boards Association, based in the president’s home state, issued a forceful response to an inquiry from Parents Defending Education.
“The DSBA disagrees, in the strongest possible terms, with parents and citizens protesting school board meetings being characterized as ‘domestic terrorists’ and their protests being likened to ‘hate crimes,” the organization said in a statement. “The DSBA firmly asserts that citizen and public engagement in school board meetings is an integral and vital aspect of school board governance. We also made it clear that any attempt to silence citizens’ voices is a clear violation of their rights to free speech.”
The DSBA also lamented that the NSBA did not consult with them before sending the letter, noting that had they done so, the state organization would “NOT have allowed the DSBA to be associated with the letter” and “would have asked that the language be changed to reflect the fact that the DSBA does not support the letter and should not be generally included in it.”
The NSBA letter stated that it was sent “on behalf of our state associations and more than 90,000 school board members who govern our country’s 14,000 local public school districts.”
Nine other state school board associations responded to Parents Defending Education, expressing some degree of disagreement with the rhetoric of the NSBA letter or stressing a belief in the ability of parents to speak out about their children’s education. Those states are Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, New Jersey, North Dakota, Texas, West Virginia and Wyoming.
Hawaii is not part of the NSBA. An email obtained via public records request revealed the head of the Rhode Island Association of School Committees telling his board that he thinks they should ignore the email from Parents Defending Education. The remaining state school board associations did not respond to the inquiry from the advocacy group.
The NSBA letter followed a summer defined by intense protests at school board meetings in some localities nationwide as parents and community members had expressed outrage about policies allowing trans-identified students to use bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity as opposed to their biological sex, the use of sexually explicit material in the curriculum and the incorporation critical race theory components into the curriculum.
Specific examples cited by the NSBA letter of “heinous actions” taken by parents speaking out at school board meetings include “anti-mask proponents [who] are inciting chaos during board meetings,” confrontation of school board members by “angry mobs” that have “forced meetings to end abruptly” and a resident of Alabama who describes himself as “vaccine police” calling school administrators “while filming himself on Facebook Live.”
Another occurrence cited as problematic in the letter was the mocking of a Tennessee student “during a board meeting for advocating masks in schools after testifying that his grandmother, who was an educator, died because of COVID-19.”
Five days after the NSBA letter’s publication, Garland wrote the memorandum directing federal law enforcement agencies to work with their counterparts at the local level to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats.” The move led to further criticism and a lawsuit.
Opposition to critical race theory and sexually explicit material in public schools played a significant part in last month’s off-year elections. In last month’s election, candidates who campaigned in opposition to critical race theory performed well in school board races.
At the same time, Virginia’s Democratic gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe, who proclaimed in a debate with his Republican opponent, Glenn Youngkin, that “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach,” lost the election. A recent poll from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty found that 63% of Americans think parents should have the “final say” in what children are taught at school.
An activist holds a rosary while rallying against abortion in Los Angeles, California September 29, 2015. | REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni
A Texas-based pro-life activist organization received a new bomb threat against one of its offices, allegedly due to its support for the state’s controversial heartbeat abortion ban restricting abortion as early as six weeks into pregnancy. Texas Right to Life released a statement Monday explaining that its legislative office in Austin had received a bomb threat that morning. The threat came in the form of what the lobbying group labeled a “suspicious letter” sent to the office, which threatened to bomb the organization and said that they should expect to “receive the bodies of aborted babies.”
Authorities arrived at the office at 11:40 a.m., according to the statement. The Austin Police Department is investigating the incident.
“Devaluing life inside the womb inevitably leads to violence outside the womb,” Texas Right to Life President Elizabeth Graham said in a statement. “These recent crimes demonstrate the brokenness, anger, and pain of the pro-abortion movement. We pray for the perpetrator, that he or she may find healing in Christ, and we ask for prayers for our staff.”
Kimberlyn Schwartz, director of media and communication for Texas Right to Life, told The Christian Post in a statement Thursday that the most recent threat and other threats they have received are “heartbreaking.”
“These threats are heartbreaking, not only because they endanger our staff, but also because they reveal the anger and pain that abortion leaves on the hearts of its proponents,” stated Schwartz.
“Ultimately, this is a spiritual war. Texas Right to Life is taking ground from deep in the Evil One’s territory and proclaiming the sanctity of Life. Now is the time for all Christians to stand up for preborn children and pray for the end of abortion.”
In another email cited by The Texas Citizen Journal, Graham said the organization is working with the Austin Police Department and the FBI to determine the validity of the threat. According to Texas Right to Life, the threatening letter stated: “LETS BOMB TEXAS FOR LIFE AND CHANGE IT TO – TEXAS FOR DEATH.”
Texas Right to Life, which was instrumental in helping craft Texas’ new abortion law, received an email in September from someone threatening to blow up its headquarters in Bellaire. A suspicious package was delivered to that office later that day. The facility was evacuated and bomb experts from Houston checked the package, which turned out to not have an explosive device inside.
“Texas Right to Life did the right thing in contacting the police,” said the Bellaire Police Department in a statement to CP in September.
“It was fortunate that our officers were on scene when the suspicious package was delivered and we appreciate the occupants of the building working with police to quickly clear out in the event that this was an actual bomb.”
In May, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the Texas Heartbeat Act prohibiting most abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, usually about six weeks into a pregnancy. The law is not enforced through state officials but rather through private citizens given financial incentives to sue abortion providers and anyone who helps a pregnant woman procure an abortion. Despite multiple pre-enforcement legal challenges, including from the Biden administration, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the controversial legislation to take effect on Sept. 1.
On Nov. 1, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for around three hours on the Texas law, focusing on the means through which the ban was enforced.
“Since the Texas Heartbeat Act took effect September 1, abortion advocates wished rape upon our female staff and their daughters, left vicious voicemails, circulated the home addresses of employees online, and threatened to bomb our offices twice within four months,” Texas Right to Life’s Monday statement reads. “Texas Right to Life has taken proactive measures to ensure the safety of our staff since we became the target of violent messages online and by phone due to the Texas Heartbeat Act.”
In September, an Oklahoma man was arrested for making death threats to pro-life Texas legislators.
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased 0.9% in November, bringing the key inflation indicator’s year-over-year increase to 6.8%, the highest figure in four decades. The CPI’s increase is the largest increase in four decades, up from October’s 6.2% according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report released Friday morning. Experts surveyed by CNBC projected inflation would increase 0.7% in November, translating to a 6.7% gain on a year-over-year basis.
“These are frighteningly high inflation numbers, the likes of which we haven’t seen for decades,” Allen Sinai, chief global economist and strategist at Decision Economics, Inc., told The Wall Street Journal.
The core price index, which measures inflation of goods less food and energy, jumped 0.5% in November, a decrease from October’s 0.6% increase, according to BLS. Price increases in gasoline, shelter, food, used cars and trucks and new vehicles were among the largest contributors to the index’s jump in November, BLS said. Food prices increased 6.1% on a year-over-year basis, and energy prices soared 33.3% over the last year and 3.5% in November.
Meanwhile, the labor market continues struggle to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, and the emerging Omicron variant has brought new concerns.
“We have tremendous spending by consumers. A lot of people are getting hired. Demand is huge. Monetary policy remains very easy and fiscal stimulus has no precedent in history,” Sinai said.
The U.S. economy added just 210,000 jobs in November, far below experts’ projections of around 573,000, but unemployment slipped to 4.2% from October’s 4.6% figure. The number of Americans who filed new unemployment claims totaled 184,000 in the week ending on Dec. 4 as employers fight to retain workers entering a busy holiday season.
“Looking past the noise, we think claims will eventually hover more consistently around pre-pandemic levels of 220k, assuming the Omicron variant of the coronavirus has only a moderate negative impact on the economy,” Nancy Vander Houten, lead economist at Oxford Economics, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Soaring inflation and falling unemployment have triggered Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to pivot away from pandemic era stimulus programs. Powell signaled that the central bank would wind down its bond-purchasing stimulus, which will lead to earlier-than-expected interest rate hikes.
The central bank is scheduled to meet Dec. 14-15, when a more detailed schedule is slated to be announced.
An 11-year-old girl has been ordered to get vaccinated against COVID-19 by a judge in upstate New York. The ruling sides with the child’s mother and against the girl’s father — who is a scientist and a professor, according to the New York Post.New York
The daughter is in the middle of a messy battle between the divorced couple. The mother — Jeannie Figer — wants to get her 11-year-old daughter vaccinated against COVID-19. She notes that the estranged pair’s other two daughters — ages 17 and 19 — have already been vaccinated against COVID-19. However, the father — Donald Figer — was hesitant about allowing his youngest daughter to be vaccinated. The father — who is reportedly vaccinated against COVID-19 — said he wants to wait for his young daughter to be vaccinated until more information becomes available on the long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on children.
He is reportedly a professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology. The Rochester Institute of Technology lists Figer as the director of the Center for Detectors, and a professor in the College of Science with appointments in the Astrophysical Science and the Technology Ph.D. program and the Microsystems Engineering Ph.D. program. “He is a leader in developing and deploying new photon detection technologies,” the school states.
Monroe County Supreme Court Justice Richard Dollinger said he was “somewhat perplexed that an accomplished scientist and professor would oppose a child vaccine authorized by the CDC and universally encouraged by state and local physicians and other health officials.”
The judge said it “could be years before any researchers have exacting accounts of either the short or, long term consequences of the administration of this vaccine on 11-year-old girls.”
“Waiting — to be ‘sure,’ as the father asks — is simply untenable, when the specter of a killing or incapacitating disease is swirling in the environment surrounding this young girl,” Judge Dollinger said. “The wait, requested by the father, could extend beyond the term of the virus, as scientists may never catch up to this ever evolving and elusive virus and variants.”
“This Court, weighing the child’s best interests, cannot wait for the vaccine’s side effects or efficacy to be scientifically established beyond a reasonable doubt or even to the father’s satisfaction,” the judged ruled. “The imminent risk of contracting the disease is too high and the consequences of acquiring it potentially too dire.”
The judge noted that Monroe County recently declared a state of emergency because of rising hospitalization rates related to COVID-19. The judge sided with the mother, who is reportedly an attorney. He ordered the mother to schedule an “immediate appointment” for the child to be administered a COVID-19 vaccination “as soon as possible.”
On Oct. 29, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for kids ages 5 through 11 years old. This isn’t the first time that COVID-19 vaccines have been front-and-center in legal disputes between divorces.
In August, a Chicago mother was temporarily stripped of her parental rights over her 11-year-old son by a judge because she was unvaccinated. The judge asked the woman what her vaccination status was during a child support hearing with her ex-husband. A judge rescinded the ruling weeks later.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Those who believe in the freedom of bodily autonomy are celebrating a slew of recent court rulings enjoining the Biden administration’s injection mandate. However, no GOP state attorney general has bothered to fight the equally immoral, illogical, and inhumane mask mandates that are still in place. Despite nearly two years of evidence that strict mask-wearing has zero effectiveness in stopping the spread, the mandates on 2-year-olds on planes and in many schools still continue. Slovakia is a perfect case study of the mask mendacity.
On May 13, 2020, the Atlantic published an article lauding Slovakia for, at the time, having the lowest per-capita COVID death rate in Europe. The article’s prediction should now be the laughingstock of the world:
When this pandemic ends, and when the reckoning over how the world responded invariably begins, Slovakia will likely be among those highlighted as a success story, whereas the United States—which was supposed to be the country best prepared for such a crisis—will be remembered as among those that suffered the worst. How Slovakia was able to flatten its curve comes down to more than just quick decision making and the widespread adoption of face masks. Perhaps the greatest lesson to be learned from Slovakia is of the value of leading from the front.
Well, that was before Slovakia’s first winter wave. One can excuse people for mistaking low spread at the time for mask efficacy rather than the fact that the country just didn’t get its turn yet. But for countries to continue this inhumane mandate despite what we now know demonstrates that masks are not a means to public health but an end in themselves of tyranny.
At over 2,000 new cases per million per day, according to Our World in Data, Slovakia now has more cases per capita than any country in the world. To put this in perspective, that is almost three times the level of the winter peak in the U.S., a country that has not exactly performed well in the pandemic!
It’s true that some individual states closer to the size of Slovakia have had more severe waves. However, even the worst counties in the upper Midwest are tracking about 1,200 new cases per million per day.
And here is the epidemiological curve presented by the inimitable Ian Miller, juxtaposed to policy solutions:
It’s not just Slovakia. Wherever you turn in Europe, both masks and vaccine mandates have failed miserably, and the spread is now worse than ever. Belgium is now six weeks into the new mask mandate, and it has more cases than ever before, even though the Belgians already suffered one of the deadliest waves in all of Europe. Oh, and 87.4% of adults are vaccinated.
To begin with, the CDC, as late as May 2020, was citing the 10 randomized controlled trials that showed “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.” The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford also summarized six international studies that “showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”
The only randomized controlled trial studying mask efficacy against COVID published last year was the now famous Danish study that failed to show any meaningful reduction in spread from mask-wearing. Then, several months ago, the media trumpeted a large study done in Bangladesh that seemed to show efficacy. Well, now that the authors have released the actual data, we see that indeed no such claim can be made from the study. It turns out that out of over 340,000 individuals over a span of eight weeks, there were only 20 fewer cases of COVID detected in the mask group over the control group – 1,106 symptomatic individuals confirmed seropositive in the control group and 1,086 such individuals in the treatment group.
Even these results are hard to interpret because of numerous confounding factors. University of California Berkeley professor Ben Recht critiqued the study as follows:
This study was not blinded, as it’s impossible to blind a study on masks. The intervention was highly complex and included a mask promotion campaign and education about other mitigation measures including social distancing. Moreover, individuals were only added to the study if they consented to allow the researchers to visit and survey their households. There was a large differential between the control and treatment groups here, with 95% consenting in the treatment group but only 92% consenting in control. This differential alone could wash away the difference in observed cases. Finally, symptomatic seropositivity is a crude measure of covid as the individuals could have been infected before the trial began.
Given the numerous caveats and confounders, the study still only found a tiny effect size. My takeaway is that a complex intervention including an educational program, free masks, encouraged mask wearing, and surveillance in a poor country with low population immunity and no vaccination showed at best modest reduction in infection.
It’s not OK for Republican-controlled states to continue to ignore the facts that masks are inhumane and they simply don’t work. Consider the fact that Head Start has now mandated masks on 2-year-olds, many of whom have special needs. Oregon has moved to make its mask mandate permanent. Why are no red state governments at least suing against the federal mandates, and why are so few red states even banning mask mandates within the states?
The courts are all political. They only responded to the lawsuits against the vaccine mandate when they saw robust political opposition within the political branches of the red states. They see no such opposition regarding the mask mandates. Thus, absent a unified effort from state attorneys general, they are unlikely to respond to a handful of individual lawsuits. The same legal rationale denying the feds the power to force vaccines also denies them the power to cover our breathing holes. But the courts only respond to political momentum.If nearly two years of masking failing to work anywhere is still not enough to end the most invasive human mandate of all time, then we truly are no longer a free people.
Jussie Smollett destroyed his career and reputation trying to live up to a racist expectation of “blackness.” It’s the same mistake former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick made. Popular culture’s puppet masters — academia, Big Tech’s social media apps, the executives running the TV, movie, music, and sports industries, and the political left — have established victimhood as the highest form of blackness. Attaining victim status is the primary expectation placed on American black men. Meeting this expectation is especially important for mixed-race, wealthy celebrities. In the culture created by the left, victimhood is their rite of passage into the fraternity of blackness.
As much as I despise Smollett for the 2019 racial hoax he staged in Chicago, the alleged crime that currently has him on trial, my disdain for the culture that baited him into the act far exceeds my disgust for Smollett.
Smollett, the child of a black woman and a white Jewish man, did what the culture told him to do and what the culture puts enormous pressure on half-black, half-white kids to do: prove their blackness. In modern American culture, there’s nothing blacker than being worthy of a white man’s aggression. Smollett isn’t worthy. So, he allegedly paid two black men to pose as white and attack him.
The whole scenario is funny until you consider the sadness of the mental state that would devise such a scheme and a culture that would entice it.
Smollett and Kaepernick, the self-made national anthem martyr, are victims. They’re victims of the racist expectations imposed on them by a sick, secular culture. At different levels, all American black people are victims of this culture. Human beings respond to expectations. Expectations can be and should be the greatest gift imposed on human beings. Expectations inspire behavior and shape mindsets.
Tuesday night, I had dinner with two friends. We engaged in a debate about white privilege. What is it? Does it exist? Can it be fixed? I argued that white privilege certainly exists in America and that the greatest white privilege is expectations that align with success. White people are expected to achieve academically. They’re expected to master the English language. They’re expected to have good credit. They’re expected to show up on time. They’re expected not to use the N-word. They’re expected to make an effort to avoid racist thoughts and actions. They’re expected to wed the mothers or fathers of their children. Do all white people meet these expectations? Absolutely not. But being born into a world that expects you to adopt principles and behaviors that lead to success is a privilege that puts you far ahead of people who don’t have those expectations on them.
Black people, as a collective, don’t have those expectations on them. Popular culture, as controlled by liberals, removes virtually all expectations from black people, particularly black men. We’re expected to excel at football and basketball. And we’re expected to meet the liberal standard of blackness. Anything we do or achieve beyond that is considered a bonus.
The lack of expectations imposed on black people is the most racist act in America. It’s far more racist than Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd’s neck and back. Had George Floyd entered a world that expected him to achieve beyond the athletic field, he would have been much less likely to find himself needing to be restrained by police.
The lack of expectations placed on black people is systemic racism. Victimhood being the highest level of blackness is systemic racism. Jussie Smollett is a victim of the systemic racism maintained by white liberals.
On Tuesday, while being cross-examined by the prosecution, Smollett complained that the white prosecutor was offending the black people in the courtroom by reading aloud Smollett’s direct messages to one of his black attackers. Smollett repeatedly used the N-word in the direct messages. The prosecutor apologized and asked Smollett to read the direct messages. Smollett obliged. We expect black people to call each other derogatory names. It’s acceptable and appropriate. We’ve been programmed to hate ourselves and express our self-hatred in writing, music, and acts of violence. We expect it.
Our expectations for white people are much different. We’re shocked and outraged when they mimic our anti-black behavior. We don’t expect that from them. We’re determined to rid them of the negative behavior. Our expectations for ourselves are much lower and/or nonexistent. That’s why it’s easy for us to ignore thousands of gang murders in black neighborhoods and hold summer-long protests over a tiny handful of police-involved shootings. That’s why Jussie Smollett has no problem saying the N-word repeatedly, but is mortified when a white man reads his words inside a courtroom. We’re victims of the racist expectations we’ve adopted.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org
Wow, the opposition press isn’t what it used to be!
In a Sunday interview with “The Sexiest Man Alive,” Anthony Fauci, CNN’s Jake Tapper played a clip of Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., criticizing Fauci for keeping the public in a state of raw panic over COVID.
Johnson: “Fauci did the exact same thing with AIDS. He overhyped it. He created all kinds of fear, saying it could affect the entire population, when it couldn’t. And he’s doing — he’s using the exact same playbook for COVID.”
At that point, the anchor is supposed to say something like, “Dr. Fauci?” and let him respond. But CNN apparently thinks Fauci is too delicate a flower to answer an attack all by his lonesome.
So, before turning it over to the interviewee, Tapper blathered: “Obviously, that’s a bizarre and false assertion. President George W. Bush gave you the Presidential Medal of Freedom because of your leadership in the AIDS crisis. But I did want to give you an opportunity to respond.” (I guess this is how you apply for Chris Cuomo’s job at CNN.)
At that point, Fauci merely had to join Tapper in sneering at the senator: “Jake, how do you respond to something as preposterous as that?”
Thank you, Dr. Fauci for that penetrating response. Next up on CNN …
Actually, Fauci then went on to use the Hillary Benghazi defense: HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ME WHEN PEOPLE DIED!!!
He said: “Overhyping AIDS? It’s killed over 750,000 Americans and 36 million people worldwide. How do you overhype that? Overhyping COVID? It’s already killed 780,000 Americans and over 5 million people worldwide. So, I don’t have any clue of what he’s talking about.”
That would have been a fantastic answer if Sen. Johnson had questioned whether anyone had ever died from AIDS or COVID. Unfortunately, he didn’t do that. Rather, he accused Fauci of overhyping the risk of COVID, terrifying everyone — as he did with AIDS — instead of concentrating protections on high-risk groups.
Overhyping car accidents? Cars have killed over 3.6 million Americans and multiple millions of people worldwide. How do you overhype that?
Yes, but you recommended that people drive blindfolded.
Long after it was clear that COVID was dangerous nearly exclusively for older people and the obese, Fauci lied, just as he once lied about AIDS being a risk for heterosexuals long after it became clear that it was almost entirely a problem for gay men and intravenous drug users.
Instead of devoting massive resources to shutting down bathhouses and shooting galleries to stop the spread of AIDS, and blanketing older Americans with protections in the case of COVID, Fauci repeatedly claimed that everyone was at risk.
This isn’t a matter of It’s a new virus! No one knew anything! I knew the high-risk groups back in March 2020. (bit.ly/3oBu8Et)
It seems that Fauci believes in “science” — except when he needs to terrify heterosexuals in the cause of destigmatizing gays, or frighten the entire population so as not to stigmatize the elderly and obese.
AIDS first appeared in 1981 in gay communities in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Two years later, 72% of cases involved gay men, and 90% of the non-homosexual AIDS victims were intravenous drug users. Most of the rest were children born to AIDS-infected mothers or victims of AIDS-tainted blood transfusions.
This wasn’t a big secret. According to CDC, by June 1983, out of 1,552 AIDS victims, only 37 were not gay men, drug users, hemophiliacs or Haitians. Frontline doctors actually dealing with AIDS patients were assuring the public, “The average person has nothing to be concerned about,” as a New York cardiologist told The Associated Press. (Then, as now, you can trust your doctor; you can’t trust “public health authorities.”)
But Fauci was out there, alarming the entire population about the odds of contracting AIDS. In April 1983, he said: “As the months go by, we see more and more groups … AIDS is creeping out of well-defined epidemiological confines.”
A month later, he wrote: “The finding of AIDS in infants and children who are household contacts of patients with AIDS … has enormous implications with regard to ultimate transmissibility of this syndrome.” (This was based on a study of eight infants in Newark, New Jersey — who may or may not have had AIDS, in households with people who also may or may not have had AIDS. So it was a solid study.)
By 1985 — four years after AIDS first appeared — 73% of the cases were in gay men, 17% in intravenous drug users, 3% in Haitians, 2.2% in those who’d received blood, and 1% in sexual partners of AIDS patients. Less than 4% didn’t fit into one of these categories.
With zero cases of proven heterosexual transmission, in February 1985, Fauci said, “Am I worried about [heterosexual transmission]? Yes.”
By 1987, only 4% of AIDS cases could possibly be attributed to heterosexual contact — and half of those were in Africans and Haitians.
And yet, here was Fauci in March 1987, still babbling about the risk of AIDS to heterosexuals. Asked if AIDS could be transmitted to men by vaginal intercourse, he answered, “Absolutely.” He actually warned the public about French kissing: “[H]ealth officials have to presume that it is possible to transmit the virus by exchange of saliva in deep kissing.”
If some of these quotes sound familiar, I cited a few of them in that March 2020 column, at a time when “public health authorities,” cable news hosts and the president were demanding nationwide lockdowns.
Today, Fauci is doing the exact same thing with COVID, treating teenagers as if they face as much danger as people in their 70s, despite the latter having a 300 times greater chance of dying from COVID than those under 20. For young people who contract COVID, the chances of dying are less than the risk of dying from sunstroke over the course of their entire lives. Even for those in their 30s, the odds are about the same as their lifetime risk of dying by choking on food.
If he’s ever interviewed by a serious journalist, perhaps Fauci could explain why his idea of “science” is about avoiding stigmatizing certain groups, and not about saving lives.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
While documenting my former high school’s attempt to indoctrinate me with critical race theory six years ago, I remarked that now, several years later, “the situation has undoubtedly worsened.” Worsened it has. Now, Campbell Union High School District has promoted more than 100 “equity resources” to students and staff, including a document that taught students how to put a curse on those who say “all lives matter.”
Colorblindness, Cops, and Curses
The page serves as a vast library for CRT resources and features 60 different links, including a Google Drive folder with 45 different documents. The list made sure to include the full range of CRT buzzwords, with links like Raising Race Conscious Children, the infamous 1619 Project, Anti-Racism for Beginners, and Social Identities and Systems of Oppression, among others. One link takes you to an “Anti-Racism Resource List,” which teaches about “white fragility” and claims that racism can only be perpetrated by white people. One of the “resources” provided was a Trevor Noah speech labeled “Why rioting makes sense,” followed by an unhinged anti-white rantfrom Sonya Renee Taylor, demanding that white people “throw your white body” on police officers and “put their bodies on the line for the purpose of justice.”
The list also addresses white people when it says, “We are socialized into white supremacy from the moment we are born” before going on to say, “It is about completely dismantling how you see yourself and how you see the world, so that you can dismantle … white supremacy.”
Samuel Martin graduated from CUHSD’s Branham High School in 2019 and was appalled by the district’s actions. He told The Federalist, “The idea that white students must ‘dismantle themselves’ in the context of their personality is cultish. Not only is it cultish, but it is deliberate in that this school system wants its’ white students to hate themselves. Do these people honestly think that drilling racial identitarianism into childrens’ heads from a young age is going to make them less racist?”
CUHSD also links to the Black Lives Matter Resource Guide, specifically their section labeled “high school,” which itself includes 45 different texts. Amid a wide variety of CRT inspired assignments is a document that includes writing prompts on police brutality and racist violence.
One section titled “Hex” tells the reader, “Hexing people is an important way to get out anger and frustration.” It becomes increasingly deranged, suggesting that those who say, “all lives matter” or commit “microaggressions,” should be targeted. “Write your own hex poem, cursing that person,” it instructs.
When asked her thoughts on the document that instructed K-12 students to use witchcraft on political opponents, Branham teacher Meredith Allen told The Federalist she hasn’t read the documents her district recommends, so she “can’t comment,” but that she is generally “opposed to the ‘all lives matter’ message.”
Another section labeled “A World With No Police” cites police and military as “systems or institutions that … contribute to oppression.” It asks, “What would the world be like without them?” before telling the reader to write a poem discussing “a world without these institutions.”
“The Black Radical Tradition,” is a 565-page e-book that includes articles from the Communist League and Noel Ignatiev under the pen name Noel Ignatin. Ignatiev was a Marxist who argued that “abolishing the white race is … so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.”
Then there’s a slide show entitled “What is the Black Lives Matter Movement?” which is made for children and was produced in part by teachers at LAUSD. It includes a glossary of terms like “white supremacy,” the definition of which includes the line, “systems, like schools and jails, have white supremacy built into them because white people have had so much power for so long.”
The ADL’s linked document “George Floyd, Racism, and Law Enforcement” defines racism as “the … oppression of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people,” a definition that reinforces the malicious lie that white people can’t be the victims of anti-white racism.
The district’s equity resources page is just the most visible result of a series of steps in support of CRT that started long ago. In fact, the district was a testing ground for CRT before it spread throughout the nation. The book “Research Studies on Educating for Diversity and Social Justice” was published in 2018 and describes the process. An entire chapter, written in part by my former teacher, is dedicated to discussing how CRT was used at my high school so it could be replicated.
The book noted the use of the theory, saying, “CRT is used here to centralize the discussion of race and racism at Branham High School.” It went on to describe an “equity advisory” class that I was placed in as a sophomore, where “Students learn about the different types of oppression along with the privilege it affords the oppressors.” The authors hoped their tactics would spread, writing, “the intent behind sharing the process Branham underwent is to provide a model that could be followed by other schools across the nation.”
The district’s Board of Trustees supports this agenda, recently offering unanimous support for a resolution resolving to “dismantle institutionalized racism in our society and our school district” and is “committed to … implicit bias training, Ethnic Studies, and resources that foster dialogue around the guiding principles of #BlackLivesMatter.”
Note the district’s adoption of the term “equity” rather than “equality.” Here’s superintendent Robert Bravo two hours and 39 minutes into a board meeting saying he believes “equity is about equity of outcomes.”
CUHSD even established an Anti-Racism Team, which is divided into eight Equity Teams that include teachers, principals, administrators, and even two students who must be “BIPOC.” That means white students are banned from the “Equity” Teams. They’re tasked with “challenging imbalances of power and privilege,” among other roles.
Michael Espinoza is a member of one such Equity Team and a teacher at Branham High School who won the district’s teacher of the year award. Here he is calling a Native American tribe the “rightful stewards of the lands our schools and district offices stand on” and telling teachers to recognize “the power of critical race theory and use it in our lesson plans.”
He also gave a speech to the class of 2021, where he levied leftwing complaints against America and quoted Huey Newton, imploring students to engage in revolution instead of “conforming to the machine that is the United States.” On his Instagram account, Espinoza celebrates mandates for ethnic studies classes and complains of living under “white supremacist, heteropatriarchal rule” in a plea to his “co-conspirators.”
If this is CUHSD’s model teacher, what does their model student look like? Espinoza’s students created a variety of leftwing posters in his ethnic literature class. One poster demanded “Dear White PPL: Start Listening, Stop Talking” and others that said, “Wear UR F-cking Mask” and “Give us back our land.” Principal Lawton took down the posters amid outcry before caving in and apologizing to the leftwing agitators.
Co-Conspirators? Or A Conservative Counter Culture?
The full ramifications of our education system’s descent into leftwing radicalism is yet to be fully realized, although we can be certain that many of the students it doesn’t lose to homeschooling will be successfully transformed into “co-conspirators.” But as the rhetoric of revolution becomes standard for stodgy school administrators, its appeal to youth might wane.
Conversely, they run the risk of creating a small but clever cadre of conservative youth who understand from firsthand childhood experiences the consequences of toxic racial grievance politics. Don’t be surprised if the propagandizers who intend to give permanency to left-wing hegemony instead give rise to a nascent conservative political force that will uproot it.
Spencer Lindquist is an intern at the Federalist and a senior at Pepperdine University where he studies Political Science and Rhetoric and Leadership and serves as Pepperdine’s College Republicans President. You can follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach him at LSpencerLindquist@gmail.com.
A Pennsylvania church was vandalized by unknown assailants who desecrated the property with graffiti depicting satanic symbols and the words “kill God.” The Lititz Church of the Brethren in Lancaster County was vandalized sometime between Thursday evening and Friday morning, police said, according to The Morning Call. The chalk graffiti displayed the phrases “kill God” and “hail Satan,” as well as the satanic symbol of a star inside a circle. The vandalism also featured the number 666, the biblical number for the Antichrist.
Eric Landram, the lead pastor of Lititz Church of the Brethren, told The Christian Post on Monday that the “chalk which was used left no permanent damage and clean up was minimal.”
Landram explained that such vandalism has not occurred on his church’s property in the past, so they are “are treating it as a one-time prank and are not concerned by the antics.” He added that apart from “what has already been reported, we have no additional comments to make at this time.”
News of the church vandalism grabbed the attention of the editorial board for Lancaster Online, which denounced the actions as “egregiously wrong” and “especially disturbing.”
“There is something especially disturbing about vandalism directed at a place of worship or a religious symbol. It seems designed to rattle people of faith who regard their sacred spaces as sanctuaries to which they go in times of both grief and joy,” wrote the editors.
“There was no lasting damage to the church. But memories of the desecration likely will linger. Even if it turns out to be the work of clueless young people. Or the product of a disturbed mind.”
The editorial board also cited a report by Axios published in October, which concluded that houses of worship of various faiths were “experiencing high amounts of vandalism, arson and other property damage.”
“2021 is on track to exceed last year’s spike in hate crimes in the U.S., many of them linked to religious bigotry,” Axios reported.
“The number of hate crimes reported in FY 2020 was the highest since 2001, when a wave of Islamophobia followed the 9/11 attacks, according to updated FBI data.”
Deportations of illegal immigrants, including those convicted of serious crimes such as burglary and homicide, dropped to the lowest levels in decades during President Joe Biden’s first six months in office, according to new data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In total, deportations of illegal immigrants from Jan. 21, 2021, through July 9, 2021, dropped by 90 percent compared with the same time period in 2019, the last year before the COVID-19 pandemic, which ground attempted migration into the United States to a near halt.
The curb in deportations extended to all types of illegal immigrants living in the United States, including those with criminal convictions. Deportations of illegal immigrants with convictions for crimes such as aggravated assault, kidnapping, sexual assault, and homicide fell by double-digit percentages in the first six months of 2021 when compared with the previous two years. The number of illegal immigrants with serious criminal convictions deported declined by more than 50 percent from 2020 and 65 percent from 2019.
The data, obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request from the Center for Immigration Studies, provide a picture of the dramatic change in immigration policy and priorities from the White House. The drop in deportations is due to a mix of factors, according to the report’s author. Biden promised to pause removals for his first 100 days in office, and new bureaucratic procedures from political appointees have made it nearly impossible for ICE agents to carry out their mission. Jessica Vaughan, who wrote the report and is the director of policy studies at the center, said the Biden administration has paralyzed immigration enforcement at a time when border crossings have reached unprecedented levels.
“This collapse in deportations is undeniably due to the policies President Biden put in place upon taking office, including a deportation moratorium (later blocked in federal court) and by severely restricting the types of cases ICE officers can pursue,” Vaughan told the Washington Free Beacon. “Officers are allowed to take action against only the most egregious illegal alien lawbreakers, and even then they have to complete voluminous paperwork for what would normally be routine deportation cases.”
Earlier this year, ICE acting director Tae Johnson said the agency would focus on deporting illegal immigrants who present “threats to national security, border security, and our public safety.” The announcement came as part of a new federal directive to reevaluate how ICE uses its resources.
Although illegal immigrants with serious criminal convictions did make up a larger number of total deportations—32 percent in the first half of 2021 versus 14 percent in 2020 and 9 percent in 2019—the total number of deportations dropped significantly. During the first six months of 2021, ICE removed just 6,000 illegal immigrants with serious criminal backgrounds, about a third as many as the Trump administration removed during the same time period in 2019.
The deportation numbers provided to the Center for Immigration Studies do not make a distinction between interior and border removals, meaning some of the decline in ICE’s activity could be attributed to the Biden administration’s use of Title 42, a public health measure that has allowed immigration authorities during the coronavirus pandemic to turn away migrants as soon as they enter the country. The center maintains that the severe drop in deportations from ICE field offices—in San Antonio, for example, deportations dropped from 44,523 in 2019 to 2,386 in 2021—are evidence of the Biden administration weakening immigration enforcement. Some ICE field offices were virtually inactive during the first six months of Biden’s term, with the Baltimore field office removing just 32 illegal immigrants during that time.
“In addition to requiring what is essentially pointless busywork to seek an extra layer of approval for each arrest, agency leadership has also reduced interior enforcement by downsizing the number of working officers,” the CIS report reads. “This has been accomplished in many ways, including sending officers to work at the border and even by paying officers not to work.”
The 2021 fiscal year saw 1.7 million migrant arrests on the southern border, more than any other year on record. In fiscal years 2013 through 2019, border arrests averaged around 540,000 annually.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
In a recent online exchange, the YouTuber Casey Neistat posted his fury after his car was broken into and the contents stolen. Los Angeles, he railed, was turning into a “3rd-world s—hole of a city.”
The multimillionaire actor Seth Rogen chastised Neistat for his anger.
Rogen claimed that a car’s contents were minor things to lose. He added that while living in West Hollywood, he had his own car broken into 15 times, but thought little of it. Online bloggers ridiculed Rogen. No wonder: The actor lives in multimillion-dollar homes in the Los Angeles area, guarded by sophisticated security systems and fencing. Yet both Neistat and Rogen accurately defined Third Worldization: the utter breakdown of the law and the ability of the rich within such a feudal society to find ways to avoid the violent chaos.
After traveling the last 45 years in the Middle East, southern Europe, Mexico, and Asia Minor, I observed some common characteristics of a so-called “Third World society.” And all of them might feel increasingly familiar to contemporary Americans. Whether in Cairo or Naples, theft was commonplace. Yet property crimes were almost never seriously prosecuted. In a medieval-type society of two rather than three classes, the rich in walled estates rarely worry that much about thievery. Crime is written off as an intramural problem of the poor, especially when the middle class is in decline or nonexistent.
Violent crime is now soaring in America. But two things are different about America’s new criminality. One is the virtual impunity of it. Thieves now brazenly swarm a store, ransack, steal and flee with the merchandise without worry of arrest.
Second, the left often justifies crime as a sort of righteous payback against a supposedly exploitative system. So, the architect of the so-called “1619 Project,” Nikole Hannah-Jones, preened of the riotous destruction of property during the summer of 2020: “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.”
Third Worldization reflects the asymmetry of law enforcement. Ideology and money, not the law, adjudicate who gets arrested and tried, and who does not.
There were 120 days of continuous looting, arson and lethal violence during the summer of 2020. Rioters burned courthouses, police precincts and an iconic church. And there was also a frightening riot on Jan. 6, when a mob entered Washington, D.C.’s Capitol and damaged federal property. Of those arrested during the violence, many have been held in solitary confinement or under harsh jail conditions. That one-day riot is currently the subject of a congressional investigation. Some of those arrested are still — 10 months later — awaiting trial. The convicted are facing long prison sentences.
In contrast, some 14,000 were arrested in the longer and more violent rioting of 2020. Most were released without bail. The majority had their charges dropped. Very few are still being held awaiting capital charges.
A common denominator to recent controversies at the Justice Department, CIA, FBI, and the Pentagon is that all these agencies under dubious pretexts have investigated American citizens with little or no justification — after demonizing their targets as “treasonous,” “domestic terrorists,” “white supremacists,” or “racists.”
In the Third World, basic services like power, fuel, transportation and water are characteristically unreliable. In other words, much like a frequent California brownout.
I’ve been on five flights in my life where it was announced there was not enough fuel to continue to the scheduled destination. The plane was required either to turn around or land somewhere on the way. One such aborted flight took off from Cairo, another from southern Mexico. The other three were this spring and summer inside the United States.
One of the most memorable scenes that I remember of Ankara, Old Cairo, or Algiers of the early 1970s were legions of beggars and the impoverished sleeping on sidewalks. But such impoverishment pales in comparison to the encampments of present-day Fresno, Los Angeles, Sacramento, or San Francisco. Tens of thousands live on sidewalks and in open view use them to defecate, urinate, inject drugs, and dispose of refuse.
In the old Third World, extreme wealth and poverty existed in close proximity. It was common to see peasants on horse-drawn wagons a few miles from coastal villas. But there is now far more contiguous wealth and poverty in Silicon Valley. In Redwood City and East Palo Alto, multiple families cram into tiny bungalows and garages, often a few blocks from tony Atherton. On the main streets outside of Stanford University and the Google campus, the helot classes sleep in decrepit trailers and buses parked on the streets.
Neistat was right in identifying a pandemic of crime in Los Angeles as Third Worldization. But so was Rogen, though unknowingly so. The actor played the predictable role of the smug, indifferent Third World rich who master ignoring — and navigating around — the misery of others in their midst.
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and author of the book The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won. You can reach him by e-mailing authorvdh@gmail.com.
Jeffrey Epstein will no doubt go down as one of history’s most notorious sex criminals, preying on vulnerable young women. However, while up until this point a picture has been painted of a man who used and abused teenage girls, testimony provided during the trial of his longtime confidant and accused accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, underscores that twisted financier may have been even more infatuated with children than we realized.
Brace yourself — this is highly disturbing, even for an Epstein story.
A woman using the pseudonym “Kate” took the stand on Monday morning, who, according to Reuters, is the second of four women listed in the indictment against Maxwell. Because she was 17 at the time of her reported sexual encounters with Epstein, above the relevant age of consent, the jury was instructed to consider that she had not engaged in “illegal sex acts” with the now-deceased pervert.
While the Times reported that was some disagreement between prosecutors and Maxwell’s attorneys over whether “Kate” could be considered a victim when she says she was lured into Epstein and Maxwell’s clutches, her story nonetheless paints a picture of a man who decidedly enjoyed at least the idea of sexual acts with children.
“It follows that Ms. Maxwell’s role in grooming Kate to engage in sex acts with Mr. Epstein was a part of, and therefore constitutes evidence of, the conspiracy charges against Ms. Maxwell,” prosecutors have written in court documents, according to The New York Times, and have noted that Kate was still a minor when she was allegedly groomed by Maxwell and Epstein.
Whatever the legal technicalities, it’s clear that “Kate,” who said she was initially “exhilarated” by Maxwell’s friendship when she was promised help with her aspiring music career, was clearly taken advantage of and fetishized for her youth.
The New York Post reported Monday morning that Kate testified she was instructed by Maxwell to don a schoolgirl outfit to serve Epstein at his Palm Beach mansion and was once even told she was “such a good girl” after the twisted pedophile appeared to be pleased with her, um, “services.”
Kate said that she met Epstein and Maxwell in Paris in the early 1990s and was instructed to provide sexual massages to Epstein first in Maxwell’s London mansion before later engaging in sexual acts with him in his own notorious Florida property as well. Maxwell, who is standing trial for sex trafficking and sexual abuse, has long been accused of recruiting and grooming young women and girls for Epstein to abuse and even, at times, abusing them herself.
In London, Kate was led to a massage room by Maxwell in the socialite’s London home, where the accused madame told her to “have a good time” as she opened to the door to reveal a nude Epstein, ready for his (ugh) service.
When the encounter concluded, Maxwell told Kate that she was “such a good girl” and that she was “so happy you were able to come.” Kate noted that Maxwell “sounded really pleased.”
In Palm Beach, Kate arrived to visit the notorious power couple to find a schoolgirl outfit laid out for her on a bed, complete with pleated skirt, white socks, and a shirt. Maxwell told her she thought it would be “fun” for Kate to bring Epstein his tea in the outfit. Given what’s well known about the relationship between Epstein and Maxwell — that she played the role of Epstein’s procurer for more than a decade, it’s a fair conclusion that Maxwell didn’t just think the school uniform would be “fun” on her own. She knew it’s what Epstein wanted.
According to the Post, Kate testified that she was then given a tray to bring Epstein his tea, where he then engaged in sex acts with her by the pool.
Last week, an accuser identified as “Jane” testified that Maxwell and Epstein had also appealed to her creative aspirations, playing the chums and even paying for music lessons before they began to sexually abuse her.
There is no doubt that Epstein has consistently been accused of preying on young, vulnerable, and easily influenced women. And while Kate’s disturbing testimony is in line with this theme, it makes it clear that he wasn’t simply interested in young, underage women. He was seemingly interested in girls, and according to her account, enjoyed the impression that he was being waited on. Epstein’s alleged victims have often been referred to as his “sex slaves.”
I don’t think it’s ever been clearer that that’s exactly what they were.
Isa grew up in San Francisco, where she was briefly a far-left socialist before finding Jesus and her husband in Hawaii. She now homeschools their two boys and freelances in the Ozarks.@crunchyconmama
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Dozens attended a live reenactment of Jesus’ nativity scene held outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. on Thursday Dec. 2 2021. | The Christian Post/Nicole Alcindor
WASHINGTON — Dozens attended a live reenactment of Jesus’ nativity scene held outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building on Thursday, the day after the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could alter abortion law precedent nationwide.
The annual reenactment, organized by the Christian missionary and spiritual outreach organization Faith & Liberty, was held across the street from the East Façade of the Supreme Court.
The ceremonial event consisted of a little over a dozen impersonators dressed as biblical figures like Mary, Joseph, the baby Jesus, the three wise men, angels and more to shed light on the meaning of Christmas and spread the Gospel message.
Dozens attend a live reenactment of Jesus’ nativity scene held outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. | The Christian Post/Nicole Alcindor
The reenactment of the virgin birth that occurred over 2,000 years ago came less than 24 hours after the outside of the Supreme Court Building was crowded by thousands of pro-life and pro-choice demonstrators as the nation’s high court heard arguments for and against Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban.
Many believe that with the current 6-3 conservative makeup of the court, the case, Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health, has the potential to change legal precedent on abortion set in the 1973 case Roe v. Wade.
At the nativity event, pro-lifers in attendance said it is a “blessing” that Jesus’ “unplanned” birth could be displayed the day after many pro-choice demonstrators openly proclaimed their belief that mothers should have the right to end an unplanned pregnancy.
A woman holds camel during a live nativity scene at the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. on Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. | The Christian Christian Post/Nicole Alcindor
“Yesterday, the court talked about the shedding of innocent blood,” said Allan Parker, a pro-life attorney and the president of The Justice Foundation, a Christian public interest nonprofit litigation organization.
“And today, we are witnessing the reenactment of the most innocent blood in American history. Jesus shed His most innocent blood so that even murderers could be forgiven. We just have to humble ourselves and say: ‘Lord, forgive me.’”
Parker believes that the nativity scene “is cleansing the grounds that we stand on after yesterday’s event.”
Parker reasoned that because Mary was shocked to discover that she was chosen to give birth to Jesus, her pregnancy can be viewed as “unplanned” from the worldly perspective.
Actors reenact Jesus’ nativity scene outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. | The Christian Post/Nicole Alcindor
“Mary’s unplanned pregnancy led to the salvation of the whole world,” Parker told The Christian Post while standing outside on the stairs of the Supreme Court Building. “If Mary were alive today, Jesus might have been aborted, and then Jesus and the world would be in darkness instead of having a chance to step into the light.”
Many others in attendance believe that Jesus’ birth was “humble” because He came into the world as an infant and a servant when He could have come to earth as a king.
Nancy Claudio, an 81-year-old pro-life demonstrator who lives in Washington, D.C. and attended the nativity scene, said she thought the reenactment was “breathtaking and encouraging.”
Claudio felt led to attend the event because she loves Jesus. She said Jesus has been a part of her life as far back as she can remember. She told CP about how Jesus saved and delivered her before she began many years of work as a traveling missionary.
“I am Spirit-led and I live every day to please Jesus. And we all need to remember that Jesus came to a place that is not fancy, and He came because He loved the world and us,” Claudio said. “Events like this are so important because this happened 2,000 years ago, and we are still celebrating and living in the victory that Jesus brought us through his servant Heart. He was laid in a manger where cattle eat out of, and He came to serve, not be served.”
Judy Mcdonough attended the rally and the nativity scene in association with the Christian organization Intercessors For America. She told CP she believes it is “God’s timing” that both of the days spent at the Supreme Court are related to pregnancy.
“It’s all about the humanity of the baby in the womb, and every child is so innocent,” Mcdonough, a devoted pro-life Christian, told CP.
“I am all about praying, and the nativity scene today is a way that we can act, pray and exercise our constitutional right. Everything about Jesus goes against what we would naturally think about ourselves and who God should be. He’s the only God who came humbly, and He asks us to respond to Him humbly. He is unique because He came humbled, and at the same time, He says [to] bow before Him.”
Others who came to view the scene agreed that it is “necessary” to reenact the birth of Jesus in front of the Supreme Court in hopes elected officials cab develop a relationship with Jesus.
“This showing is desperately needed because the only hope we have is through the life of Jesus, who promises peace, and we have hope for reconciliation, and we were sent to be reconciled to Him and others,” attendee Becky Lyttle said.
“These elected officials need to know that corruption is not the answer because many are corrupt. People in ruling positions need the Word of God. We all desperately need the Lord.”
Attendees came from across the nation to view the nativity scene.
Coming from Chicago, Debra Smith, who identifies as a charismatic nondenominational Christian, said she attended the nativity scene because she felt led to pray in tongues on the premises of the Supreme Court Building. She had also prayed at the Supreme Court during the oral arguments the day before.
“His Holy Spirit lives with me, and He is always with me. Jesus is the best because He came as a helpless baby, and there are so many other helpless babies out there that desperately need saving,” she said.
Joel Enge traveled from Texas and is also a representative from the organization Intercessors of America. He attended both the rally and the nativity scene.
“We have killed millions in America because we have been pro-death, and this event shows us the life that Christ offers can move us from being a nation of death to life. This is amazing,” said Enge, who attends a Baptist church and is the founder and director of a private Christian school.
“Jesus’ entry into the world is very important because the Creator of the world came to His creation. Jesus became a zygote. He developed in Mary’s womb. He went through the same process that children being terminated went through. There’s no comparison. We can’t compare.”
Some in attendance said the scene brought them “relief” because it showed them that outward expressions of faith can still exist in similar settings.
“It was amazing. My whole life is built around the Christian faith,” said Paul Kope from Delaware. “Our country was founded on Christian beliefs and the right to worship. It shows we still have rights that they would do this demonstration.”
CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect that the number of jobs created in November is among the lowest initially reported for a single month in 2021.
The U.S. economy added 210,000 jobs in November, marking nearly the lowest number of jobs created in a month since President Joe Biden took office in January.
November’s jobs report was well below economists’ estimate of 573,000, according to CNBC. Additionally, unemployment fell to 4.2% from October’s 4.6% figure, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The U.S. economy, still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic but now subject to uncertainty related to the Omicron coronavirus variant, appeared to slow in momentum in November, The Wall Street Journal reported.
“Just as Delta derailed the recovery in terms of the labor market, if Omicron behaved like that, I would guess it would hold back any recovery in the labor market,” Justin Weidner, an economist at Deutsche Bank, told the WSJ.
“Greater concerns about the virus could reduce people’s willingness to work in person, which could slow progress in the labor market and intensify supply-chain disruptions,” Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said in Senate Banking Committee testimony on Tuesday.
The BLS initially reported that 194,000 jobs were added to the economy in September, the lowest number of new jobs for a single month in 2021, but that figure was revised substantially in October to 312,000 jobs, CNBC reported.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis talks to the media during a news conference in Miami, Fla., August 29, 2019. (Marco Bello/Reuters)
There’s some choice DeSantis Derangement Syndrome on CNN this morning. Check out this headline:
DeSantis proposes a new civilian military force in Florida that he would control
Gosh! A “civilian military force in Florida that he would control”! That sounds terrifying — especially when paired with the piece’s artwork, which, for some reason, shows both Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump.
And what would this “civilian military force in Florida” do?
St, Petersburg, Florida (CNN) Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis wants to reestablish a World War II-era civilian military force that he, not the Pentagon, would control.
DeSantis pitched the idea Thursday as a way to further support the Florida National Guard during emergencies, like hurricanes. The Florida National Guard has also played a vital role during the pandemic in administering Covid-19 tests and distributing vaccines.
Sounds . . . fine? Useful, even.
Ah, but this is unusual, right? Oh wait, no, it’s not:
States have the power to create defense forces separate from the national guard, though not all of them use it. If Florida moves ahead with DeSantis’ plan to reestablish the civilian force, it would become the 23rd active state guard in the country, DeSantis’ office said in a press release, joining California, Texas and New York.
So nearly half the states do it — including California and New York — and Florida itself used to have one before it was abandoned. Which makes the problem . . . what, exactly?
CNN continues:
But in a nod to the growing tension between Republican states and the Biden administration over the National Guard, DeSantis also said this unit, called the Florida State Guard, would be “not encumbered by the federal government.” He said this force would give him “the flexibility and the ability needed to respond to events in our state in the most effective way possible.” DeSantis is proposing bringing it back with a volunteer force of 200 civilians, and he is seeking $3.5 million from the state legislature in startup costs to train and equip them.
Ah, right. The problem is that this unit would be “not encumbered by the federal government,” and, thereby, that it would be under DeSantis’s control. Which is just absolutely horrifying — unlike, say, the massive, nuke-filled, “civilian military force” that is under Joe Biden’s control, which is completely different, for reasons that CNN will presumably arrive at next time a Republican is in the White House.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
The National Fraternal Order of Police – the oldest and largest police union in the United States – said that 2021 is already the bloodiest year in history for American law enforcement officers. As of Tuesday, the National Fraternal Order of Police reported that 314 police officers were shot in the line of duty — 58 of whom were killed. There were 42 cops shot in Texas, 25 in Illinois, 21 in California, and 17 officers shot in both Florida and Georgia.
Despite a month left to go in the year, 2021 is already the deadliest year on record for police officers, according to the FOP. There were 312 police officers shot and 47 killed in 2020. There were 293 cops shot and 50 killed in 2019.
Another disturbing trend is that there were reportedly 95 ambush-style attacks thus far in 2021 – a 126% increase compared to 2020. The ambush attacks resulted in 119 officers being shot and 28 who lost their lives.
“We are on pace this year to see the highest number of officers shot in the line of duty in one year ever recorded,” FOP president Patrick Yoes said on Wednesday. “We’ve already had more officers killed in the line of duty by gunfire this year than any other — and there is still one month left.”
“There is no doubt that the recent erosion of respect for law enforcement has fueled more aggression towards police officers than what has been seen in previous years,” Yoes added. “As violence continues to be aimed at law enforcement, our officers continue to show up every day to keep the communities they serve safe. These men and women run toward danger to protect the public when everyone else is running away.”
The National Fraternal Order of Police called on Congress to pass the “Protect and Serve Act” – legislation reintroduced by 17 Republican lawmakers in March that would “create federal penalties for individuals who deliberately target local, state, or federal law enforcement officers with violence.”
The FOP demanded, “Congress must act now to address the terrible violence targeting our law enforcement officers and pass the ‘Protect and Serve Act’ to better protect the brave men and women who wear the badge and send a clear message to those who would seek to do them harm.”
The FOP blamed “rogue prosecutors refusing to prosecute violent criminals” for the rising crime across the country. The group also called out media members for not covering increasing crime rates.
“Those saying that America’s #CrimeCrisis is not out of control are either not paying attention or trying to cover for the rogue prosecutors pushing radical policies,” the police organization wrote on Twitter. “To the various media folks who’ve been turning a blind eye to the killings in our streets: do your damn job!”
The FOP also blamed “activist judges” for contributing to the “historic crime wave” by “releasing violent criminals on probation with low bail or no bail.”
— National Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (@GLFOP) November 17, 2021
The U.S. murder rate skyrocketed 30% from 2019 to 2020 – the largest single-year increase in modern history, according to data published in October by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In September, the FBI published similar findings that homicides jumped up by 30% in 2020 compared to the previous year. Several cities have experienced surges of violent crime in 2021.
The Council on Criminal Justice released a report in July that found the number of murders in 22 major U.S. cities increased by 16% compared to the same period in 2020 and soared by 42% compared to the first six months of 2019.
Philadelphia has reached 512 murders, surpassing the record of 500 homicides that was set in 1990.
Washington, D.C., has recorded 205 homicides in 2021, surpassing 200 for the first time since 2003.
Portland set a new record for homicides in September with 67.
House lawmakers considered several proposals to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in an Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday, with Republicans and Democrats each using the opportunity to advance their agenda.
“It’s wrong for anyone to use this opportunity to push for more censorship, more power, and more control over what they determine Americans should say, post, think and do,” Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers said. “One of the bills before us today, the Justice Against Malicious Algorithms Act, is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure companies to censor more speech.”
Democratic Rep. Darren Soto dismissed allegations of tech censorship, arguing that Republicans were attempting to use free speech concerns to spread disinformation.
The hearing also featured left-leaning witnesses who stressed the dangers of misinformation and hateful speech on social media platforms, calling on lawmakers to reform Section 230 in order to hold platforms liable for such content.
House lawmakers considered several proposals to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in an Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Wednesday, with Republicans and Democrats each using the opportunity to advance their agenda.
While both parties lobbied for Section 230 reforms, their reasons for doing so and their proposals diverged considerably; Republicans stressed the dangers of tech companies censoring online speech, particularly conservative political content, and Democrats decried the threat posed by social media misinformation.
In her opening remarks, Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers emphasized her concerns with tech platforms censoring speech, characterizing Democrats’ Section 230 reforms as an attempt to encourage social media companies to remove more conservative political content.
“It’s wrong for anyone to use this opportunity to push for more censorship, more power, and more control over what they determine Americans should say, post, think and do,” McMorris Rodgers said. “One of the bills before us today, the Justice Against Malicious Algorithms Act, is a thinly veiled attempt to pressure companies to censor more speech.”
The bill, introduced by top Energy and Commerce Democrats, removes Section 230 liability protections from tech platforms that recommend “personalized” content contributing to “physical or severe emotional injury” of a user, thereby allowing “injured” users to sue. Rep. Frank Pallone, who co-sponsored the bill, said the legislation would stop social media platforms from promoting “extremism” and “disinformation.”
“Clearly, companies will have to decide between leaving up content that may offend someone and fight it in court, or censor content that reaches a user; which do you think they’ll choose?” McMorris Rodgers asked.
Democratic Rep. Darren Soto dismissed allegations of tech censorship, arguing that Republicans were attempting to use free speech concerns to spread disinformation.
Former Facebook employee Frances Haugen testifies during a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing entitled ‘Protecting Kids Online: Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower’ on Capitol Hill October 5, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
“It seems like as we’re working on key reforms like protecting civil rights, accountability for social media companies, and protecting our kids, the main opposition is by Republicans today; they want a license to have the right to lie without consequence,” Soto said.
House Republicans also pressed key witnesses including former Facebook employee Frances Haugen, who has called for increased federal oversight of social media platforms’ content moderation decisions.
“I wanted to start with a yes-or-no question: do you support Big Tech’s censorship of constitutionally protected speech on their platforms?” McMorris Rodgers asked Haugen.
“I believe we should be re-architecting these systems so that they are more focused on our family and friends, because this is not about good ideas or bad ideas; it is about making the system safe,” Haugen responded.
When McMorris pressed Haugen for a clear yes or no answer, she failed to provide one.
The hearing also featured left-leaning witnesses who stressed the dangers of misinformation and hateful speech on social media platforms, calling on lawmakers to reform Section 230 in order to hold platforms liable for such content.
“Big Tech is profiting off of yelling ‘fire in a crowded theater,’ and though I understand that we have these conversations about the First Amendment, there are limitations to what you can and cannot say,” Rashad Robinson, president and CEO of left-wing advocacy group Color of Change, adding that “freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.”
Bipartisan leaders of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee vowed to continue promoting nuclear energy during an industry conference Wednesday.
Both Energy Committee Chairman Joe Manchin and Ranking Member John Barrasso reiterated their support for nuclear energy during the American Nuclear Society winter conference in Washington, D.C., arguing that an economy-wide transition to clean energy would be impossible without it. The Senate leaders added that the U.S. must produce more energy and avoid reliance on foreign entities.
“The reality is that you cannot power the world with solar panels and wind turbines alone,” Barrasso said during his remarks. “The demands for energy worldwide are going to continue to increase. Not just in the United States, you’re gonna see that worldwide.”
“Every time we use energy, we’re using it more efficiently, but you still have increased demands,” the Wyoming Republican added. “Nuclear has to be a very, very important part of that.”
Barrasso said more members of Congress should support nuclear energy because of its efficiency and built-in storage systems unlike solar and wind power.
“It is smaller, it’s more efficient and includes an energy storage system when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining,” he said. “It’s an interesting debate that I have occasionally with the Bernie Sanders’ of the world who is not pro-nuclear. He should be, but he’s not.”
Republican Sen. John Barrasso speaks alongside other GOP lawmakers during a press conference on rising gas and energy prices on Oct. 27. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
In July, Barrasso and a bipartisan group of senators introduced the American Nuclear Infrastructure Act (ANIA), which proposed to bolster domestic nuclear reactor development. The bill was ultimately included in the infrastructure package signed into law by President Joe Biden on Nov. 15.
Manchin highlighted the legislation Wednesday, saying it was part of the “significant progress” made by the U.S. in advancing nuclear infrastructure over the last year. He noted that the ANIA funds two billion-dollar advanced reactor projects, allocates $6 billion for supporting financially-strained nuclear plants and includes money for developing a nuclear-powered clean hydrogen hub.
“I will continue pushing for the inclusion of funding for the advanced nuclear fuel availability program,” Manchin said during a pre-recorded speech. “As you know, proper funding of this program will ensure a domestic supply of high-assay low-enriched uranium, eliminating reliance on Russia or other foreign suppliers.”
“The U.S. must maintain our nuclear supply chain, creating high paying manufacturing jobs and reassert U.S. leadership,” he continued.
The Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on the future of nuclear in the U.S. on Nov. 4. Witnesses included experts from the Idaho National Laboratory, American Electric Power and Council of Radionuclides and Radiopharmaceuticals, who all testified in favor of nuclear.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.com
Source: AP Photo/Matt Rourke
Twitter announced this week that Parag Agrawal will be the social media giant’s new CEO. (This is an incredible achievement for the Indian-born Agrawal, given that the selection process heavily favored people born in India.) He has a difficult job ahead of him, trying to maintain the site’s reputation for fast-paced, free-ranging commentary, while also keeping the platform free of dangerous misinformation.
Agrawal is probably aware of the mounds — and I mean mounds — of irrefutable SCIENTIFIC PROOF that conservatives are gullible paranoids, constantly falling for misinformation and hoaxes. For example, consider these 100% objective academic studies:
Conservatives More Likely To Believe False News, New Study Finds — Maggie Fox, CNN, June 2, 2021
Return of the Paranoid Style: Fake News Is Fooling More Conservatives Than Liberals. Why? — The Economist, June 3, 2020
Conservatives’ Susceptibility to Political Misperceptions — R. Kelly Garrett and Robert M. Bond, Science Advances, June 2, 2021
On the other hand, now that I think about it, even powerful Democrats, establishment news organizations and influential celebrities have been known to err when evaluating the news.
Hey! That reminds me — the Jussie Smollett trial kicks off this week! (It’s a good thing I remembered that while writing this column.)
Smollett, you will recall, is the half-black, half-Jewish gay actor formerly of the Fox TV show “Empire” who claimed, back in January 2019, that he left his Chicago apartment at 2 a.m. in the middle of a polar vortex to get a sandwich, whereupon he was viciously set upon by two white guys shouting racist and homophobic slurs. (Despite being racist, homophobic white guys, they were huge fans of “Empire,” recognizing Smollett immediately.)
They beat him about the face, put a noose around his neck and doused him with a “chemical substance.” (Yes, as luck would have it, the white guys happened to be carrying a noose and chemical agents. Duh. It was a polar vortex.)
For extra bonus authenticity, Smollett said his assailants yelled, “This is MAGA country!” Did I mention this was in Chicago? (Trump: 12.4% of the 2016 vote.)
Even a skeptic would have to admit, Smollett’s account had the ring of truth. When you add (to an already highly believable story) the fact that there have been dozens of “noose incidents” over the past few decades, and every single one of them, without exception, turned out to be a hoax, his narrative only becomes more convincing!
To leap ahead to the conclusion, the Chicago Police Department spent 3,000 man-hours carefully examining surveillance tapes of the neighborhood where the incident had occurred and determined that — please sit down for this — the “attackers” turned out to be two Nigerian extras on “Empire.” (That does explain how they were able to recognize him.) After their arrests, they admitted that Smollett had paid them $3,500 to stage the attack.
Liberals, those calm, dispassionate seekers after truth — not conservative dolts, with their “paranoid style” and “susceptibility” to “false news” — reacted to Smollett’s alleged attack with the cool detachment we have come to expect from them.
“What happened today to @JussieSmollett must never be tolerated in this country. We must stand up and demand that we no longer give this hate safe harbor; that homophobia and racism have no place on our streets or in our hearts. We are with you, Jussie.” — Joe Biden
“@JussieSmollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know … This was an attempted modern-day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.” — then-Sen. Kamala Harris
“The racist, homophobic attack … is an affront to our humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once & for all.” — Rep. Nancy Pelosi
“This is a sickening and outrageous attack, and horribly, it’s the latest of too many hate crimes against LGBTQ people and people of color. We are all responsible for condemning this behavior and every person who enables or normalizes it. Praying for Jussie and his family.” — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
“There is no such thing as ‘racially charged.’ This attack was not ‘possibly’ homophobic. It was a racist and homophobic attack. If you don’t like what is happening to our country, then work to change it. It is no one’s job to water down or sugar-coat the rise of hate crimes.” — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
“Regarding the heinous attack on @JussieSmollett, yet another reminder that Trump’s ascendance and the resulting climate of hate has meant that lives have been increasingly at stake since 2015. Smollett could have been killed by those thugs screaming MAGA. Let that sink in.” — Karen Attiah, Washington Post editor
“The horrific attack on Jussie Smollett has no place in a decent human loving society. Homophobia existed before Trump, but there is no question that since he has injected his hatred into the American bloodstream, we are less decent, less human, & less loving. No intolerance! No DT!” — Director Rob Reiner
“Jussie Smollett was violently attacked by two white men who poured bleach on him and put a noose around his neck. He was targeted for being black and for being gay. THIS is why we have to have zero tolerance against homophobia and racism. Jussie’s life matters.” — Actress Olivia Munn
“Heartbroken and furious reading about the attack on @JussieSmollett. I want Trump and all MAGA lunatics to burn in Hell.” — Actor Billy Eichner
All this blithering idiocy, about something that was an obvious hoax from day one, was posted on the very social media site that Agrawal is about to oversee. Nearly identical tweets from nearly identical liberals could be produced for similarly deranged takes on Nick Sandmann, Kyle Rittenhouse, Althea Bernstein, the NASCAR “noose,” the “Klansman” at Oberlin College, the “racist” bus attack in Albany, Trump supporters ripping hijabs off Muslim girls, racist graffiti at the Air Force Academy, the noose at Columbia’s Teachers College, the Duke lacrosse rape hoax, the University of Virginia gang rape hoax, the synagogue bomb threats and on and on and on.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
The Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Human Relations, Diversity & Equity prepared a presentation that told students critical race theory isn’t being taught in schools while the district made presentations that did precisely that. The district also mandated that teachers take an “antiracism” course taught by a known critical race theorist who told them to “challenge whiteness.”
LAUSD Lies, Denies That Critical Race Theory Is Being Taught In Schools
A LAUSD presentation titled “Critical Race Theory and Racism in K-12 Education” starts out by defining the theory as a “Theoretical Framework through which researchers and scholars try to understand how structural and racial inequities exist and endure in our society.”
The PowerPoint implores students to rename a headline referring to critical race theory, “since we now understand that Critical Race Theory is not taught in schools.” A separate document, which claims “there is no evidence that CRT is widespread in K-12 education,” is also listed on LAUSD’s website.
Although administrators at LAUSD claim CRT isn’t taught in their schools, the district created lesson plans that embed the corrosive theory in their very own classrooms, all after the district brought in a critical race theorist to tell teachers how to “challenge whiteness.”
K-12 Students Subjected To Critical Race Theory By Diversity And Equity Team
The LAUSD Office of Human Relations, Diversity and Equity introduces its advisory lessons by highlighting their desire to speak with students “about power, privilege, oppression, and resistance.” The section of the website labeled “Human Relations, Diversity & Equity” lists several critical race theory-inspired presentations, including slideshows that teach Thanksgiving is evil and propose an alternative holiday.
One presentation told students to check their privilege and included a video called “What is Privilege.” It shows people engaging in a privilege walk, an activity that I had to do six years ago as a freshman at my California high school. In it, people line up and take steps forward or backward depending on their answer to a series of questions. It is incredibly easy to manipulate the results through selective questioning in order to make people believe CRT’s sweeping claims of privilege and oppression based on skin color.
The presentation claims that white people, among others, are uniquely privileged, before telling students how to become an ally of left wing social justice movements. There’s also a slideshow about the Black Lives Matter movement that includes a note signed by the LAUSD Human Relations, Diversity and Equity team. The presentation mocks the phrase “all lives matter” in a comic.
It also includes the infamous tagline “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family” and featured a grab bag of intersectional insanity, imploring students to “celebrate queer people,” “dismantle patriarchal practices,” and undermine “hetero normative thinking.” One graphic demanded that our society “fund counselors not cops” and “mandate black history and ethnic studies.”
The presentation discussed white supremacy, which it defined as “The belief that white people are better than other races” and claimed that “Some systems, like schools and jails, have white supremacy built into them because white people have had so much power for so long.”
The administrators are evidently not fazed by the irony of peddling the conspiracy theory that America’s schools are fundamentally controlled by hegemonic white supremacy while they, as influential members of the nation’s second-largest school district, engender animosity against their white students by offering a state-sponsored crash course on racial identity politics.
A wide variety of other presentations also peddled the same themes and pushed for CRT.
Teaching critical race theory and then lying about its presence in schools isn’t new. Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, has claimed CRT isn’t taught in schools after her organization boasted of teaching it on national television.
LAUSD Enshrines Core Tenets of Critical Race Theory
One slideshow focused on the Cleveland Indians changing their name, claiming that various teams were named after racial slurs and that Native Americans are the only people group whose identity has been turned into a mascot, conveniently forgetting about teams such as the Minnesota Vikings, Boston Celtics, and Notre Dame Fighting Irish.
A whole section on the LAUSD website is dedicated to “Election, Insurrection, and More.” One slideshow focused on “domestic terrorism,” invoking Jan. 6, 2020. It also features discussion of white supremacist domestic terrorism, while making no mention of Black Lives Matter riots or the rape and murder-infested Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone.
When asked why the Human Relations, Diversity and Equity team told students that CRT is not being taught in schools despite teaching it themselves, the team’s coordinator Judy Chiasson avoided the issue, responding, “We encourage students to hear different perspectives, become critical thinkers, and build camaraderie across identities so they may become the leaders of tomorrow.”
LAUSD Brings In Known Critical Race Theorist
Lest you believe these presentations were simply the handiwork of a rogue team of far left administrators, turn your attention to this memorandum from the LAUSD that mandates that teachers take a course dubbed the “Anti-Racist Journey.”
During the training, Howard tells teachers to “celebrate people of color,” and then discusses the need to “challenge whiteness,” which he bizarrely connects to ideas of merit and individualism. As Howard and one facilitator guide notes, “Whiteness’ … does not mean an indictment of white people and refers to a majority perspective and construct.”
But critical race theorists frequently use the term to secure this indictment. Psychoanalyst Donald Moss published an article claiming that whiteness is a “parasitic condition” without a “permanent cure,” while Noel Ignatiev, the communist and Harvard lecturer who founded the journal “Race Traitor” and claimed that “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity,” argued that “abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists.”
Yet we’re somehow expected to believe that these critical race advocates are just trying to end racism. They’re not being anti-white. They’ve simply constructed an ideology around attributing some of the worst evils to “whiteness.”
In the face of the district’s lies, there might be reason to rejoice. It might be an indicator that even school districts in incredibly far-left areas have realized just how quickly they’re losing ground on the issue among decent people of all races. By lying, LAUSD might’ve accidentally admitted a greater truth about critical race theory: that parents and voters can stop it.
Howard, the LAUSD School Board, and Superintendent Reilly did not respond to requests for comment.
Spencer Lindquist is an intern at the Federalist and a senior at Pepperdine University where he studies Political Science and Rhetoric and Leadership and serves as Pepperdine’s College Republicans President. You can follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach him at LSpencerLindquist@gmail.com.
First lady Jill Biden revealed the 2021 White House Christmas decorations on Monday, and the State Dining Room was adorned with stockings above the mantel. But there was one blatant problem with the decor.
According to Daily Mail reporter Emily Goodin, the stockings were meant to represent the Bidens’ grandchildren, with each one having the name of a different grandchild.
Trees in state dining room decorated with old photos of first families. Stockings on fireplace have names of Biden grandkids pic.twitter.com/pkFjrAPyhy
However, Twitter users quickly noticed a glaring omission from the mantle. Only six stockings hung above the fireplace despite the fact that President Joe Biden has seven grandchildren.
According to Marie Claire, Biden has three granddaughters from his son Hunter: Naomi, Finnegan and Maisy.
He has two more grandchildren from his late son, Beau: Natalie and Robert, who goes by Hunter after his uncle.
So who is Biden’s seventh grandchild? That would be Hunter Biden’s son with adult entertainer Lunden Alexis Roberts. The boy was born in 2018 and Hunter was proven to be the father in 2020, according to Marie Claire.
So that makes a total of seven grandchildren, one more than the number of stockings on the mantle.
Multiple people pointed out the omission on Twitter, including reporter Amber Athey of The Spectator.
Despite this seemingly obvious exclusion, the establishment media refused to report on it. (At The Western Journal, we fight to bring you the news other outlets will not. You can support us in the fight for truth by subscribing.)
Many social media users also speculated that Hunter Biden’s child with Roberts was the one grandchild who was left out.
In the photo above, some letters can be seen on the stockings. The beginnings of the names “Naomi,” “Finnegan” and “Natalie” appear to be written.
Since all the names cannot be seen, it is hard to confirm that Roberts’ child is the one left out. However, that does not make the Biden family look much better.
If the family left out Hunter’s son with Roberts, they were essentially ignoring him because they view him as an embarrassment. If it was a different grandchild who was left out, the family simply forgot one of their grandchildren.
Trees in state dining room decorated with old photos of first families. Stockings on fireplace have names of Biden grandkids pic.twitter.com/pkFjrAPyhy
Grant is a graduate of Virginia Tech with a bachelor’s degree in journalism. He has five years of writing experience with various outlets and enjoys covering politics and sports.
Parag Agrawal is the new Twitter CEO, and so far, according to Crowder, he is worse than Jack Dorsey. Crowder exposes how. He also takes a look at how the worst Republican is still better than an average Democrat. And why is the left turning Christmas woke with both gay and black Santas?
Want more from Steven Crowder?
To enjoy more of Steven’s uncensored late-night comedy that’s actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.