President Joe Biden condemned Uganda’s anti-gay law on Monday, calling for its immediate repeal and the possibility of implementing sanctions.
“The enactment of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act is a tragic violation of universal human rights — one that is not worthy of the Ugandan people, and one that jeopardizes the prospects of critical economic growth for the entire country,” Biden said in a statement.
On Monday, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda signed a tough anti-gay bill into law that orders the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality,” defined as same-sex relations involving HIV-positive people, children or other vulnerable people.
Same-sex relations were already illegal in Uganda.
“This shameful Act is the latest development in an alarming trend of human rights abuses and corruption in Uganda,” Biden said.
Biden said he had directed the National Security Council to evaluate the implications of the law on all aspects of U.S. engagement with Uganda, including the ability to safely deliver services under the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and other forms of assistance and investments.
“And we are considering additional steps, including the application of sanctions and restriction of entry into the United States against anyone involved in serious human rights abuses or corruption,” Biden said.
Unlike China, Ukraine, Romania (and other countries hidden on Comer’s list), it seems that Uganda doesn’t have enough bribe fodder to merit being on the Big Guy’s good side.
However, liberals all around (especially those who sit in universities of various sorts) tell me that judging other cultures by the ruler of the Joe Biden Western standard (or maybe I just added the “Joe Biden” part) is bad. So maybe liberal Joe should live by liberal standards.
On the other hand, Biden has been courting extremely anti-LGBTQ Iran
Biden seeks a balance on Iran
In an earlier article by Politico, there are all sorts of mentions of “balance” and “middle path,” but nothing of “gay” or “LGBTQ” in the country where they hang and throw gays off buildings.
President Joe Biden faces growing calls from activists and even a former crown prince to openly back regime change in Iran as the country’s Islamist rulers face a wave of protests.
But Biden and his aides are unwilling to go that far.
Instead, the administration is charting a middle path — one that voices support for the Iranian protesters and helps them through both easing and imposing some sanctions, but which falls short of an all-out pressure campaign to isolate Iran’s government or abandon nuclear talks with the regime, according to six U.S. officials familiar with the issue.
This week, the administration is expected to unveil more sanctions on Iran related to the protests. Among the possible targets are mid-level Iranian police commanders who have abused demonstrators.
The overall strategy is likely to disappoint many in a complex constellation of activists whose voices are driving much of the public debate about the Iranian regime. It also could make crafting U.S. policy toward the Middle East even harder, especially if Iran’s regime snuffs out the protests and emerges more emboldened to pursue a nuclear program and cause trouble in the region.
But the Biden administration is unified on the approach, according to those involved in discussions. “There aren’t camps,” a State Department official said.
The U.S. officials said they must factor in everything from the human rights demands of Iran’s protesters — many of them young and female — to the U.S. preference for using diplomacy to keep Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Iran’s decision to sell drones and other weapons to Russia for its war in Ukraine also is complicating the picture.
Nothing about human rights, much less the Human Rights Campaign in Iran
Biden didn’t mention the treatment of gays in Iran. He didn’t mention the treatment of Iranian women or the lack of Iranian free speech rights. Joe didn’t even talk about the refined uranium that the Iranians are pulling together.
Could all of this be due to the importance put on the Iranians by Biden’s paymasters, the Chinese?
Facebook-owned Instagram is preventing Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is competing with President Joe Biden in the Democrat primary, from setting up an official campaign account, according to the candidate.
In a post on Twitter, RFK Jr. said that his campaign account is being automatically banned when they attempt to set up a campaign account.
“When we use our TeamKennedy email address to set up Instagram accounts we get an automatic 180-day ban,” said the Democrat candidate on Twitter. “Can anyone guess why that’s happening?”
Interesting… when we use our TeamKennedy email address to set up @instagram accounts we get an automatic 180-day ban. Can anyone guess why that’s happening? pic.twitter.com/0G8oRnoXTv
The Department of Homeland Security has been called out by GOP lawmakers for its repeated targeting of conservative Americans, and for funding a university program that explicitly links the Republican Party, as well as Christian and conservative groups, into the same category as organizations that promote Nazi ideology, Fox News reported on Friday.
Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., on Friday sent a letter cosigned by 15 other Republicans to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Biggs’ letter, which was obtained by Fox News Digital, strongly urged Mayorkas and DHS to stop their alleged pursuit against political adversaries of President Joe Biden’s administration.
“Under your leadership, the Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly targeted conservative Americans for lawfully expressing their First Amendment rights,” Biggs’ letter stated. “The Constitution prohibits the federal government from suppressing the free speech of Americans, by any means, including the use of third parties to engage in unconstitutional attacks on free speech. But this unlawful federal speech regulatory regime continues to be the norm under the Biden administration.”
The Arizona congressman also highlighted in the letter a Homeland Security grant that, according to him, provides funding to organizations that “openly demonize and equate mainstream conservatism with domestic terrorism.” He added that it’s Mayorkas’ “duty to stop this un-American politically motivated targeting of ideas.”
Biggs’ letter refers to stories reported last May which revealed Homeland Security had doled out over $350,000 in taxpayer-funded, anti-terrorism grant money to a University of Dayton program known as the Preventing Radicalization to Extremist Violence through Education, Network-Building and Training in Southwest Ohio (PREVENTS-OH) project.
The program, according to documents obtained by conservative media watchdog Media Research Center (MRC), positioned the Republican Party and several mainstream conservative groups on a “Pyramid of Far-Fight Radicalization” chart alongside militant neo-Nazis. The University of Dayton’s grant application to DHS footnoted a link to a controversial Dayton conference in which an academic researcher presented the chart.
(Read at Newsmax how the leftist bureaucrats categorized Christian groups)
I don’t care what people call me among themselves, but what my government calls me is a different matter
Just as it matters how the leftists in bureaucracy have been able to start calling people who are legally “illegal aliens” as “migrants,” it matters that bureaucrats have decided to slap law-abiding citizens with the label of “nazi.”
Government is not a free-speech zone until you are out of power. As long as you lord power over others (especially as an unelected bureaucrat), you should lose certain rights commensurate with those powers.
Twitter cancels a deal with the Daily Wire to stream “What Is A Woman?” over “misgendering” and claims it will label the film “hateful conduct”
Daily Wire co-CEO Jeremy Boreing revealed Thursday that Twitter canceled a deal with the conservative media company to stream its hit documentary “What is a Woman?” for free on the social media platform due to “misgendering.”
After Elon Musk’s takeover of the social media platform and his promised dedication to free speech, The Daily Wire sought a deal to stream Matt Walsh’s “What is a Woman?” on Twitter for the documentary’s one-year anniversary. Initially, Twitter responded enthusiastically to the idea, even offering The Daily Wire a package to purchase a whole page for Twitter users to view the film, Boreing said. That changed after the platform asked to view a screening of the film.
“After reviewing the film, though, Twitter let us know that not only could we no longer purchase the package they offered, they would no longer provide us any support and would actually limit the reach of the film and label it as ‘hateful conduct’ because of ‘misgendering.’” Boreing said in a Tweet thread explaining Twitter’s reversal.
“Specifically: In the film, a father refers to his 14-year-old daughter as ‘her,’ and a store owner uses the ‘wrong’ pronoun in a confrontation with a trans person,” Boreing continued.
Twitter canceled a deal with @realdailywire to premiere What is a Woman? for free on the platform because of two instances of “misgendering.”
The groundbreaking documentary released last summer was watched by people in over 70 countries, even as legacy media reviewers ignored the film and its effect on the culture. Soon after its release, “What is a Woman?” became the most-watched movie at home, according to Rotten Tomatoes, which also showed that audiences scored the film with a 97% rating.
(Read at the Daily Wire of the documentary and the efforts at Twitter)
If the leftist side is so compelling that it requires such action, why not just convince us?
Why has it been the leftist side that has, over the past few years, shut down coversation? Is the emotional side of the conversation so exhausting that people cannot bear to repeat it? Is there just no logic behind the emotion? What is the reason?
After a confidential human source claimed then-Vice President Joe Biden agreed to accept money from a foreign national to affect policy decisions, FBI agents used what’s called an FD-1023 form to record the allegation. Now FBI Director Christopher Wray is defying a May 3 congressional subpoena to provide this form. On Tuesday, in response to Wray’s refusal to hand over the documents, Oversight and Accountability Committee Chair James Comer announced the House will move to hold the FBI director in contempt of Congress.
It isn’t that announcement — or even the other explosive ones released over the past year by Comer’s Senate colleague, Chuck Grassley — that prove the most telling, however. Rather, it is the combination of all the details, big and small, that suggests the scandal set to unfold over the coming weeks will be bigger than anyone imagined.
The Dirt Is in the Details
Take recent big news from whistleblower disclosures revealing that the Justice Department and the FBI have the unclassified FD-1023 form spelling out Biden’s alleged criminal behavior. Then combine that with other known information to discover the bigger picture.
For instance, in response to Wray’s failure to comply with the subpoena, Grassley, who had previously noted the FD-1023 form was five or six pages long, indicated that the confidential human source (CHS) was “an apparent trusted FBI source.” This is huge because Grassley wouldn’t make that claim unless the whistleblower had. That means the source is not some random guy walking in off the street, but rather an existing “trusted” CHS, which is why the FBI used the FD-1023 form.
In response to Wray’s stonewalling, Comer likewise revealed some significant details, clarifying late last week that the CHS reporting document was dated June 30, 2020, and referenced “the amount of money the foreign national allegedly paid to receive the desired policy outcome” as “five million.” These details could only have come from a whistleblower with deep knowledge of the investigation, meaning the whistleblower’s characterization of the CHS as “trusted” carries more weight. Likewise, the whistleblower’s claim that the FD-1023 “includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose,” is more credible given the whistleblower’s knowledge of other details.
Comer’s reference to “five million” is also intriguing. In a letter to Wray, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, Grassley had previously revealed a promise by a Chinese communist government-connected enterprise to funnel $5 million to “Hunter and James Biden to compensate them for work done while Joe Biden was vice president.” Records released by Grassley and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., also confirmed a $5 million payment to James and Hunter Biden from another Chinese-connected business.
The date of the FD-1023 form, June 30, 2020, also proves significant when read in conjunction with Grassley’s letter to Wray in July 2022. In that letter, Grassley said the whistleblower had claimed that “the FBI developed information in 2020 about Hunter Biden’s criminal financial and related activity,” but “that in August 2020, FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten opened an assessment which was used by a FBI Headquarters (‘FBI HQ’) team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease.”
The whistleblower further alleged that in September 2020, the FBI HQ team that handled the Auten assessment, after concluding the reporting was disinformation, placed the information in a restricted access sub-file that only the particular agents who uncovered the CHS’s information could access.
(Continue with three salient points that build on eachother at The Federalist)
I look forward to seeing how the press reacts to this scandal (especially the recording)
While Richard Nixon took campaigning as a conservative and governing as a “moderate” to the extreme (since he was the one to establish the EPA, OSHA, MSHA, and NIOSH), the press could not hide its glee when it found corruption to pin on him. Specifically, when there was a break-in at the DNC offices at the Watergate Hotel by Republican operatives and — moreover — when an 18.5 minute gap appeared in Nixon’s recordings, the press went haywire.
However, now that we have a doddering imbicle that can’t cross a level stage in the Oval Office, the press cannot seem to do enough to cover up for the corruption that has spread through the FBI and DOJ while also finding root in the whole Biden family.
In light of the free-press yearnings mentioned above, these are the things I would like to see in the press
Since it seems that this whistleblower has established credibility with previous operations, then the FBI and the Biden-loving press should have a harder time ignoring the accusations made against Dementia Joe. Moreover, since this comes to us on an unclassified form, it would seem that nobody would object to full disclosure.
Just as Woodward and Bernstein went after Nixon, I would like to see some honest journalists across the press go for Biden and his crew.
However, I will expect to see that starting when the New York Times turns in its Pulitzer Prizes it got for reporting on Trump’s collusion with Russia.
House GOP to start contempt proceedings against Wray as FBI refuses to produce Biden document
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said he will begin contempt of Congress proceedings against FBI Director Christopher Wray if the bureau does not physically turn over the Biden document alleging a criminal bribery scheme, despite the FBI giving lawmakers access to the information at headquarters.
The document in question is an FBI-generated FD-1023 form that allegedly describes a $5 million criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.
Comer had subpoenaed the document and set a May 30 deadline for Wray to physically turn it over to the committee, threatening to hold him in contempt of Congress if the deadline was missed. The FBI did not comply with the subpoena but instead offered assurances that lawmakers could access the information in a secure setting.
Comer, Sen. Chuck Grassley and Wray participated in a phone call Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. to discuss the accommodations the FBI could offer for congressional oversight efforts, while maintaining the integrity of bureau investigations.
“Today, FBI Director Wray confirmed the existence of the FD-1023 form alleging then-Vice President Biden engaged in a criminal bribery scheme with a foreign national,” Comer said in a statement. “However, Director Wray did not commit to producing the documents subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee.
“While Director Wray—after a month of refusing to even acknowledge that the form existed—has offered to allow us to see the documents in person at FBI headquarters, we have been clear that anything short of producing these documents to the House Oversight Committee is not in compliance with the subpoena,” Comer explained.
Maybe this source will lead to the end of Wray and the burying of Biden
With a Democrat Senate and a partisan DOJ, we cannot hope to get justice through the impeachment of either Biden or Wray. However, with enough information going around the main stream press, that part of our information economy might be forced into action.
Therefore, through a thousand cuts, the liberal press might be killed and a more reasonable press might be fed to the point where it can help sustain our republic.
Then, from information provided by that more reasonable press, the American people might see a valid reason to dump the party of Biden and insist on the removal of Wray.
Senator Chuck Grassley reveals he’s read Biden bribe claim and says FBI offer is “not good enough”
Sen. Chuck Grassley condemned FBI Director Christopher Wray Thursday for refusing to make public an informant file alleging President Biden was involved in a bribery scheme while serving as vice president — revealing that he had read the document but declining to describe its contents further.
Grassley (R-Iowa) acknowledged on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” that he “read that document” privately but was “not going to characterize it” before it was made public and said “it was “not good enough” for the file to be seen by only a handful of politicians given the allegation facing the president.
“They’ve got to produce this document,” the 89-year-old said. “They’re up against what the Durham report has said about the shortcomings and the political bias of the FBI, and this is just one more example of them not being forthcoming to the public because the public’s business ought to be public, and there’s no reason for a non-classified document to be held in secret.”
A Grassley spokesman confirmed to The Post that the senator “has reviewed the FD-1023 form pursuant to legally protected whistleblower disclosures,” but remains concerned about potential retaliation against the individual who made Grassley aware of its existence.
“The Department of Justice and its components have a sordid track record of reprisal against whistleblowers, so he’s limited his public description of the document in order to prevent bad actors at the Department from identifying and retaliating against these whistleblowers,” said Taylor Foy. “The document contains serious allegations implicating then-Vice President Biden in a criminal scheme, and it’s important that the FBI explains what it did, if anything, to investigate further. We’re confident that we’ll get the document one way or another, and the American people will be able to read it for themselves.”
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that the FBI chief had confirmed the existence of the FD-1023 informant file detailing a June 2020 allegation that Biden engaged in a $5 million bribery scheme with a foreign national during the Obama administration.
Comer refused the FBI director’s offer Wednesday to privately review the file alongside Oversight ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and said he would initiate contempt proceedings.
Bud Light announced a $200,000 donation to the National LGBT Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC) on Tuesday as the company suffers from declining sales amid a boycott over the company’s partnership with transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney.
Conservative activists launched a Bud Light boycott on April 1 after Mulvaney shared a video to social media showing off a Bud Light can that bore his likeness and claimed, “this month I celebrated my day 365 of womanhood.”
Despite Bud Light sales plummeting and parent company Anheuser-Busch’s market value dropping, Bud Light will support the NGLCC’s Communities of Color Initiative.
The initiative is “designed to support the growth and success of minority LGBTQ+-owned businesses through certification, scholarships and business development in an effort to create equal opportunities for the economic advancement of small businesses in the LGBTQ+ community,” according to a press release.
Bud Light will also support the initiative’s “Biz Pitch” program, which allows minority LGBTQ+ business owners to compete for a $5,000 grant and the opportunity to compete for a $50,000 grand prize at the NGLCC’s annual business and leadership conference.
So, with the billions lost by Bud Light over Mulvaney, they are still willing to shell out another $200,000
Of course, when we are talking about billions lost in the Mulvaney transgender business, these hundreds of thousands only amount to a rounding error. However, they also have found a way (with this little move) to put another stick in the eye of conservative America.
I guess they figure they have lost their conservative consumers. I hope they are right.
Kohl’s becomes the newest Target with its center-stage LGBTQ displays for infants’ and childrens’ clothes
Kohl’s stock is down nearly 5% on Tuesday after a social media blitz called for a boycott of the department store based on its Pride Month merchandise.
The customer backlash follows a similar controversy at Target, where social media users criticized the retailer’s assortment of Pride Month products, including a transgender-friendly swimsuit. Videos tagged with #boycottkohls had about 280,000 views on TikTok as of Tuesday. Kohl’s and Target aren’t unique in selling Pride-themed merchandise. Walmart, JCPenney and Gap also sell such products and many retailers have done so for years.
Navigating such customer criticisms has been a thorny undertaking for retailers. Target last week said it would remove some items at all of its stores, noting that the outrage caused some of its employees to feel unsafe. That then prompted criticism from LGBTQ advocacy groups. Target shares are down nearly 16% since the retailer’s stronger-than-expected earnings results on May 17.
Over the past few months, we’ve watched as major corporations such as Disney , Anheuser-Busch, and Target have hopped on the LGBT train and alienated their traditional client bases as a result. Regardless of the often swift and brutal backlash they know will follow, others, including North Face, Nike, and Kohl’s, are always waiting in the wings to become the next sacrificial lamb.
It turns out there’s a reason for this counterintuitive behavior that goes far beyond virtue signaling: Companies are trying to raise their Corporate Equality Index. The more woke issues a company supports, the higher their score.
A CEI is essentially a “woke” credit score that is determined by the Human Rights Campaign, a 501(c)(4) organization that describes itself as “the largest LGBTQ political lobbying organization within the United States.” No one will be surprised to hear that George Soros’s Open Society Foundations is HRC’s largest donor. Other donors include the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the labor unions for the National Education Association and the United Food and Commercial Workers, according to Influence Watch.
Influence Watch reports HRC’s public charity arm, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, plays an influential role in Democratic Party politics by pressuring companies to comply with its social agenda.
A company’s CEI is derived from its performance in five areas:
Workforce Protections (5 points possible).
Inclusive Benefits (50 points possible).
Supporting an Inclusive Culture (25 points possible).
Corporate Social Responsibility (20 points possible).
Responsible Citizenship (-25).
Yes, you read that right. “A large-scale official or public anti-LGBTQ blemish” on a company’s record will result in the loss of 25 points. HRC explains that “scores on this criterion are based on information that has come to HRC’s attention.”
For example, Fox News, which for three years had scored 100%, lost its perfect ratingin April 2022 after several hosts defended Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s (R-FL) Parental Rights in Education Act, better known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.
HRCF’s 2022 reportshows that 842 corporations achieved CEIs of 100%, which earned them the apparently coveted distinction of being one of the “Best Places to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality.”
So as long as we keep paying the ransom to the 2% or less of our population, we cand think happy thoughts about our company and stay on the brainwashed list
If anyone can think of a better reason for avoiding a company than their inclusion on this list. Sadly, just about any publicly-traded corporation will probably be on this list (especially any high tech corporation).
Actually, this goes quite a bit deeper. Thanks to banking rules put into place by Obama and Biden, corporations cannot get federal loans without a good CEI rating. Remember the banking law that Republicans failed to override Biden’s veto on? Well, this is the reason for that attempted override.
Additionally, with the support of Soros and Blackrock, the private funding for corporations has been locked up by the ultra-left. Unless you adhere to the nuttiest of the socialist/deviant world, you will not get a loan (which is something that all large corporations need).
To make things worse, as Democrats continue to get their way, this will be coming for common citizens. If you speak out against the demon state, you will be punished. If you march for freedom or donate to a church, you will be punished.
Another instance of liberals not allowing debate when they have no proofs
MSNBC guest says Target boycotts are “literally terrorism”
An MSNBC guest claimed that boycott threats against major retailers like Target amounted to “literal” economic terrorism.
The guest argued, in a video clip that surfaced on Twitter on Tuesday, that such boycotts were proof that a small number of people could control what a store like Target did or did not sell simply by refusing to shop there until the appropriate changes were made.
Chick-fil-A, the chicken sandwich chain long beloved by conservatives for its longstanding opposition to same-sex marriage, is now sparking boycott calls after announcing that it has hired an executive in charge of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The Atlanta-based company announced on Tuesday that it was naming Erick McReynolds to the post of vice president of DEI — igniting angry denunciations on Twitter from conservatives who allege that the firm has “gone woke.”
McReynolds has been employed by Chick-fil-A since 2007.
He was promoted to the position of vice president of DEI in November 2021, according to his LinkedIn page.
I support diversity that is backed by talent, education, and skill
I do not support inserting anyone of any color, sexual preference, or religion just so that the employer can check a box. On the other hand, if someone provides tangible value to the company by way of their education, talent, or experience — then I see not including them in a business stands as proof of bias.
“By their fruits, you will know them” does not only stand as a quote of Jesus, but also a business principle to include in your business plans. When applied to the view of a Christian examining spiritual fruits, it allows the Christian to avoid false teaching by teachers whose life-walk does not match their talk.
Do you like the in-your-face LGBTQ ads by Bud Light and displays at Target and Kohls? Buger King has committed to funding this type of effort by supporting the Human Rights Campaign for the past two years
Burger King commits to giving 40 cents of every sale from their Chi-King sandwiches to the Human Rights Campaign
On June 3, Burger King made a cheeky tweet saying it will donate up to $250,000 of the proceeds from its new premium chicken sandwich, Ch’King, to The Human Rights Campaign (HRC). For every hand-breaded chicken sold, 40 cents will go to the cause.
The company emphasized that the Ch’King is available on Sunday, taking a jab at Chick-fil-A which observes the Sabbath on Sunday.
Chick-fil-A is a fast food eatery known for its chicken-based meals. Before 2012, the restaurant regularly donated to anti-LGBTQ+ groups, and its CEO Dan Cathy said supporting same-sex marriage would invite God’s judgment on the country.
With its Ch’King receiving positive feedback, Burger King is confident it could send a message that love is love.
“This is a community we love dearly and have proudly supported over the years, so we couldn’t miss an opportunity to take action and help shine a light on the important conversation happening,” a Burger King spokesperson told USA TODAY via an email.
LGBTQ radicals reportedly deluged Target with bomb threats in retaliation to the retail giant pulling back on some of its Pride Month merchandise after significant backlash.
The bomb threats were allegedly made against several Target stores in at least three states: Utah, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. An email to one Cleveland store that Cleveland 19 News reviewed indicated that radical LGBTQ activists may have been behind the threats.
“Target is full of cowards who turned their back on the LGBT community and decided to cater to the homophobic right-wing redneck bigots who protested and vandalized their store,” the email reportedly read.
In Utah, Salt Lake City police communications director Brent Weisberg toldUSA TODAY that officers determined that no “credible threat” had been directed at the two stores in the city.
“Officers will continue neighborhood patrols around the Target locations in Salt Lake City out of an abundance of caution,” Weisberg said in a statement.
“We encourage anyone who sees anything suspicious to immediately call 911,” he added.
LGBTQ activists called for new campaigns Monday to warn corporate leaders not to heed opposing voices while chastening those who relent in the face of public pressure.
The call to action follows Target’s announcement last week it removed products and relocated Pride displays to the back of certain stores in response to public protest, as Breitbart News reported.
AP reports California State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) a member of the LGBTQ legislative caucus, led the call for corporations to stand firm by pledging:
We need a strategy on how to deal with corporations that are experiencing enormous pressure to throw LGBTQ people under the bus.
We need to send a clear message to corporate America that if you’re our ally — if you are truly our ally — you need to be our ally, not just when it’s easy but also when it’s hard.
Target is just one corporate entity to have fallen under continued criticism over the past several weeks due to its overt promotion of woke gender ideology and the LGBTQ agenda, despite the fact those who identify as such make up a small percentage of the U.S. population.
Customers voted with their feet – and their wallets – and simply ignored the Target outlets across the country.
The White House published a statement on Monday by far-left President Joe Biden, threatening to cut life-saving aid to Uganda through programs such as the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in response to the country passing its “Anti-Homosexuality Act.”
Dictator Yoweri Museveni signed the “Anti-Homosexuality Act” into law on Monday. The law brutally punishes those found guilty of “engaging in acts of homosexuality,” in some cases with life imprisonment or the death penalty. Individuals charged with “knowingly promot[ing] homosexuality,” despite their own sexual orientation, could be imprisoned for 20 years. Organizations, potentially including Western NGOs or government programs, could be banned from the country for a decade on the same charge.
The law also lumps in overt sexual crimes, such as statutory rape, with identifying as LGBT. The law uses the term “aggravated homosexuality” to mean an adult engaging in same-sex sexual relations with a minor, individuals infected with HIV engaging in sexual activity, or same-sex relations with “vulnerable” people, presumably individuals who cannot consent due to mental health issues. “Aggravated homosexuality” carries the death penalty.
The “Anti-Homosexuality Act” also punishes individuals believed to know of sexual assaults of children and the “vulnerable” but do not alert the police.
“The enactment of Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Act is a tragic violation of universal human rights—one that is not worthy of the Ugandan people, and one that jeopardizes the prospects of critical economic growth for the entire country,” President Biden said in a statement published on Monday. “I join with people around the world—including many in Uganda—in calling for its immediate repeal.”
If Uganda does not repeal the law, Biden warned, it could lose significant percentages of the $1 billion a year that American taxpayers send in aid to the country:
I have directed my National Security Council to evaluate the implications of this law on all aspects of U.S. engagement with Uganda, including our ability to safely deliver services under the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and other forms of assistance and investments. My Administration will also incorporate the impacts of the law into our review of Uganda’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Biden also stated that Washington was considering sanctioning Uganda and banning lawmakers responsible for the law from the country.
Around the time that the F.B.I. was examining the equipment recovered from the Chinese spy balloon shot down off the South Carolina coast in February, American intelligence agencies and Microsoft detected what they feared was a more worrisome intruder: mysterious computer code appearing in telecommunications systems in Guam and elsewhere in the United States.
The code, which Microsoft said was installed by a Chinese government hacking group, raised alarms because Guam, with its Pacific ports and vast American air base, would be a centerpiece of any American military response to an invasion or blockade of Taiwan. The operation was conducted with great stealth, sometimes flowing through home routers and other common internet-connected consumer devices, to make the intrusion harder to track.
The code is called a “web shell,” in this case a malicious script that enables remote access to a server. Home routers are particularly vulnerable, especially older models that have not had updated software and protections.
Unlike the balloon that fascinated Americans as it performed pirouettes over sensitive nuclear sites, the computer code could not be shot down on live television. So instead, Microsoft on Wednesday published details of the code that would make it possible for corporate users, manufacturers and others to detect and remove it. In a coordinated release, the National Security Agency — along with other domestic agencies and counterparts in Australia, Britain, New Zealand and Canada — published a 24-page advisory that referred to Microsoft’s finding and offered broader warnings about a “recently discovered cluster of activity” from China.
Microsoft called the hacking group “Volt Typhoon” and said that it was part of a state-sponsored Chinese effort aimed at not only critical infrastructure such as communications, electric and gas utilities, but also maritime operations and transportation. The intrusions appeared, for now, to be an espionage campaign. But the Chinese could use the code, which is designed to pierce firewalls, to enable destructive attacks, if they choose.
So far, Microsoft says, there is no evidence that the Chinese group has used the access for any offensive attacks. Unlike Russian groups, the Chinese intelligence and military hackers usually prioritize espionage.
In interviews, administration officials said they believed the code was part of a vast Chinese intelligence collection effort that spans cyberspace, outer space and, as Americans discovered with the balloon incident, the lower atmosphere.
New York Times, have you noticed that Chinese harrassment of Tiawan has ramped up during the Biden regime?
Of course, the Chinese are preparing to attack us and the Tiawanese while a weak president who is beholden to them remains in office. They wouldn’t want to try this while either Trump or Reagan were in office.
Democrat-controlled Senate takes actions that indicate a degree of worry regarding adverse events
Senate issues at least 50 satellite phones as security measure
More than 50 senators have accepted satellite phones for emergency communications as part of growing efforts to beef up security for lawmakers in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The phones were offered to all senators and at least half of the chamber accepted, according to CBS News, which cited people familiar with the program.
Senate Sergeant at Arms Karen Gibson told appropriators last month the phones would allow senators to maintain communications in case a man-made or natural disaster takes out standard communications in their corner of the country.
The report said the phone program is part of a broader effort to help lawmakers secure their homes and coordinate with local police departments after a series of concerning events.
Besides the Capitol riot, the husband of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was attacked in his San Francisco home in 2022.
Amid growing concerns of security risks to members of Congress, over 50 senators have been issued satellite phones for emergency communication, people familiar with the measures told CBS News. The devices are part of a series of new security measures being offered to senators by the Senate Sergeant at Arms, who took over shortly after the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The satellite phone technology has been offered to all 100 senators. CBS News has learned at least 50 have accepted the phones, which Senate administrative staff recommend senators keep in close proximity during their travels.
In testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee last month, Senate Sergeant at Arms Karen Gibson said satellite communication is being deployed “to ensure a redundant and secure means of communication during a disruptive event.”
Gibson said the phones are a security backstop in the case of an emergency that “takes out communications” in part of America. Federal funding will pay for the satellite airtime needed to utilize the phone devices.
A Department of Homeland Security advisory said satellite phones are a tool for responding to and coordinating government services in the case of a “man-made” or natural disaster that wipes out communication.
With the Russia-Ukraine war entering a new phase after Russian President Putin announced a “partial mobilization” effort, many around the world are worried the escalation could lead to an all-out nuclear way.
Maybe there is a reason to be worried. President Putin raised the nuclear threat and warned Western leaders that he wasn’t bluffing about the use of nuclear weapons if the security of Russia is at stake. Late last month, Poland distributed iodine tablets to its citizens as fears grow over Europe’s largest nuclear plant in Ukraine as fighting between Russia and Ukraine rages on.
Poland is not alone. The United States is also preparing for the potential of a nuclear war but insisted the procurement of anti-radiation drugs was not in response to the war in Ukraine.
Today, The United States Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it’s buying $290 million worth of drugs for Nuclear Emergencies and radiation sickness. In a statement, the HHS said,
“As part of long-standing, ongoing efforts to be better prepared to save lives following radiological and nuclear emergencies, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is purchasing a supply of the drug Nplate from Amgen USA Inc; Nplate is approved to treat blood cell injuries that accompany acute radiation syndrome in adult and pediatric patients (ARS).”
The HHS added:
“BARDA is using its authority provided under the 2004 Project Bioshield Act and $290 million in Project BioShield designated funding to purchase this supply of the drug.”
Add this to all of the things Joe Biden has received from the Chinese and it seems to mirror the two Biden walls
On the day that Joe Biden went into office, he set himself to destroying the effectiveness of the wall at the Southern Border. He stopped construction of it immediately. He opened the ports of entry all along the South. Additionally, he set at engaging the Border Patrol at tasks other than enforcing the border. However, when it came to the Biden compound in Maryland, Biden certainly did not shy away from spending taxpayer money when it came to protecting himself and his family.
Therefore, Joe Biden’s view of walls seems to be one of “security for me, not for thee.”
The Texas House of Representatives impeached Attorney General Ken Paxton on Saturday by an overwhelming vote. Attorney General Paxton is immediately suspended from office as he awaits a trial in the Texas Senate.
During a hearing on the floor of the Texas House, more than 81 percent of the members voted to impeach Attorney General Paxton on the 20 articles of impeachment filed by the House General Investigations Committee. The final vote was 121 ayes, 23 nays, two present not voting, and three abstentions.
#Breaking: The Texas House has voted overwhelmingly to impeach AG Ken Paxton by a vote or 121-23.
The debate which lasted nearly four hours centered mostly around the process that some members believed was rushed and did not provide due process. Members of the General Investigations Committee laid out the facts they believe support the matter moving forward to a trial in the Texas Senate.
(Read more at )
I, for one, will be looking to see who voted to override my vote for Attorney General on the basis of testimony that would not make it into court
Since it seems that the forces lined up against Ken Paxton have aligned themselves in such a way as to present the case in a day (including debating the case on the floor of the Texas House) and voting it down in quick manner, then they had better be ready for an equally summary judgement of them.
As for myself, I am tired of Republicrats giving power over to Democrats. I am not voting for anyone who voted for this impeachment. I can skip that item on every ballot from now until hell freezes over.
Likewise, I am not donating money to any organization that includes these Republicrats (and I can keep this up for an equally long time).
Texas AG Ken Paxton condemns “profoundly unjust” House vote to impeach him
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton lambasted the state House lawmakers who voted to impeach him on Saturday, calling the entire process “illegal, unfounded, and unethical.”
The Texas state House voted to impeach the GOP state attorney general by a vote of 121-23 on Saturday, which sets up the possibility that he could be permanently removed from office if the state Senate votes the same way. He’ll be temporarily removed from his post until the Senate trial concludes. Paxton responded to the news of the House vote with a lengthy statement condemning the effort to remove him as unlawful and politically motivated.
“The ugly spectacle in the Texas House today confirmed the outrageous impeachment plot against me was never meant to be fair or just. It was a politically motivated sham from the beginning,” Paxton said. “My office made every effort to present evidence, testimony, and irrefutable facts that would have disproven the countless false statements and outright lies advanced by Speaker Dade Phelan and the Murr-Johnson panel he appointed.”
“Unfortunately, they refused to consider anything that would interfere with their desired result,” he continued. “They disregarded the law, ignored the facts, and demonstrated contempt for Texas voters.”
The Texas AG has faced years of corruption accusations — including being indicted in 2015 on felony security fraud charges that he still has yet to beat. He’s largely survived those scandals up to now, during which time he’s established himself as a prominent conservative legal warrior and a known foe of the Biden administration.
He said in his statement that while he was displeased with the state House’s handling of his impeachment proceedings, he had “full confidence” that the “process will be fair and just” in the Senate. It is not yet clear if the state Senate will even hold a trial, as there is nowhere near the necessary two-thirds support to convict him in that chamber.
For something as important as this to happen in the span of two days — that smacks of the totalitarianism more common to Democrats
Recent debates on nationally-important topics started by the Democrats (like COVID, transgenderism, climate change, the effectiveness of eliminating fossil fuels, etcetera) have ended many times with a shutdown of free speech by Democrats.
With the obvious caving of the Texas House leadership to the Democrat minority, it sounds like the supposedly-in-majority Repubilicrats have fallen silent to the wiles of the Democrats.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton impeached and suspended from duties
Defying a last-minute appeal by former President Donald Trump, the Texas House voted overwhelmingly Saturday to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton, suspending him from office over allegations of misconduct that included bribery and abuse of office.
The vote to adopt the 20 articles of impeachment was 121-23.
The stunning vote came two days after an investigative committee unveiled the articles — and two days before the close of a biennial legislative session that saw significant right-wing victories, including a ban on transgender health care for minors and new restrictions on public universities’ diversity efforts.
The vote revealed substantial divisions within the Republican Party of Texas — the largest, richest and most powerful state GOP party in the United States. Although the party has won every statewide election for a quarter-century and has controlled both houses of the Legislature since 2003, it has deep underlying fissures, many of them exacerbated by Trump’s rise and influence.
Few attorneys general have been as prominent as Paxton, who made a career of suing the Obama and Biden administrations. One of Trump’s closest allies in Texas, along with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Paxton unsuccessfully sued to challenge the 2020 presidential election results in four states.
Attention now shifts to the Texas Senate, which will conduct a trial with senators acting as jurors and designated House members presenting their case as impeachment managers.
Permanently removing Paxton from office and barring him from holding future elected office in Texas would require the support of two-thirds of senators.
Impeachment was supported by 60 Republicans, including Speaker Dade Phelan and all five of the representatives from Collin County — where Paxton and his wife have lived for decades. All 23 votes in opposition came from Republicans.
Afterward, Paxton called the vote “illegal, unethical, and profoundly unjust,” adding that he looked forward to a quick resolution in the Senate.
The move to impeach came less than a week after the House General Investigating Committee revealed that it was investigating Paxton for what members described as a yearslong pattern of misconduct and questionable actions that include bribery, dereliction of duty and obstruction of justice. They presented the case against him Saturday, acknowledging the weight of their actions.
“Today is a very grim and difficult day for this House and for the state of Texas,” Rep. David Spiller, R-Jacksboro, a committee member, told House members.
If this could not wait until after the holiday weekend, it tells you something of the swampy nature of this act
If the people pushing this through the votes could not wait for the holiday weekend to be over, it tells you much. They wanted to hide this under the smokescreen of Memorial Day cookouts. They wanted us to ignore the elimination of one of the best voices in defense of liberty.
U.S. Senator Cruz defends Texas AG Paxton amid impeachment efforts from “swamp in Austin”
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz took to social media Saturday to defend Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ahead of a vote in the state House to impeach him, insisting Ppaxton has been the “strongest conservative AG” in America and that the “swamp in Austin” can’t handle it.
A vote to impeach Paxton, slated for 1 p.m. local time, came after the Texas House Investigative Committee unanimously voted 5-0 to adopt articles of impeachment for Paxton earlier this week, according to FOX 4.
“What is happening to @KenPaxtonTX is a travesty,” Cruz wrote in a series of tweets. “For the last nine years, Ken has been the strongest conservative AG in the country. Bar none. No attorney general has battled the abuses of the Biden admin more ferociously—and more effectively—than has Paxton.”
“That’s why the swamp in Austin wants him out,” he continued. “The special interests don’t want a steadfast conservative AG. I understand that people are concerned about Ken’s legal challenges. But the courts should sort them out.”
For the last nine years, Ken has been the strongest conservative AG in the country. Bar none. No attorney general has battled the abuses of the Biden admin more ferociously—and more effectively—than has Paxton.
Further defending Paxton, Cruz wrote, “Virtually all of the information in the articles was public BEFORE Election Day, and the voters chose to re-elect Ken Paxton by a large margin. In my view, the Texas Legislature should respect the choice of the Texas voters.”
The committee vote came as Paxton, who commended Cruz for his comments, is under investigation in a corruption case being led by the FBI over accusations that the attorney general used his office to assist a donor. He was also indicted in 2015 on securities and fraud charges, but hasn’t yet faced a trial.
Multiple aides from Paxton’s office became concerned that the attorney general was misusing the office’s power to help donor Nate Paul regarding unproven claims of a conspiracy to steal $200 million of his properties was taking place.
This seems like a bow to the swamp members in Austin
Since the allegations that supposedly drove Ken Paxton from the position where he successfully argued against many COVID and other overreaches of the Obama and Biden regimes, this seems like a kowtow to the swampy powers in Austin. Since this fell as it did shortly after the House and Senate fought back at Harris County’s lawless election actions, it seems like a bowing to the lawless Democrats.
As part of its month-long focus on adolescent health, the Biden administration is promoting a document that tells Planned Parenthood and other taxpayer-funded family planning offices how to talk to minors about sex without their parents overhearing, and how to secretly deliver birth control to adolescents without parental knowledge or consent.
Federally-funded guidelines instruct adults to pause before discussing sex with minors and to ask, “Are you alone in the room?” These instructions specify tactics to follow “if you’re really having a hard time getting a parent” to leave the room during the sex talk. They suggest children as young as 13 discuss sex with groups like Planned Parenthood in a parked car or communicate in writing, so their parents cannot hear the adults’ side of the conversation. And they encourage offices to have vans roam neighborhoods giving minors federally funded contraceptives; to mail birth control to adolescents in “plain, unmarked packaging;” and/or to have teenagers receive contraceptives at public meet-up places.
A federal grant recipient admitted the cloak-and-dagger sex discussion is necessary, because “parents might not agree with some of the things that we’re talking about.”
The emphasis on shutting out adults comes as the Biden administration and 24 states are fighting against a lawsuit to recognize parents’ right to know if the government is enabling underage sexual activity by giving teens birth control.
Biden Admin: ‘It Takes a Village’ to Teach Teens about Sex
The Biden administration revealed that it aimed to “expand sexual and reproductive health information and services” for teens during National Adolescent Health Month (NAHM), which runs during the month of May. The announcement made it clear government-funded strangers would take a leading role in forming teens’ views of sexuality.
“The adage ‘It takes a village’ has been proven time and again,” said Jessica Marcella, deputy assistant secretary for Population Affairs and director of the Office of Adolescent Health in the official press release. “[T]his year,” the Biden administration is “amplifying the important role of youth-serving professionals and other caring adults in their interactions with young people.”
‘Why Are You Talking to My Young Person in the Bathroom with the Door Locked?’
The plan to speak about sex one-on-one with impressionable youth begins during scheduling. “Confirm with youth clients that you have their phone number/contact information rather than their parents’ contact information,” the document tells federal grant recipients. “At the beginning of the visit, do a privacy screen. Ask ‘Are you alone in the room?’ or ‘Can other people hear what you are saying?’”
The document links to a webinar which fleshes out these ideas in greater detail. A slide on “Ensuring Adolescent Privacy” tells Title X grantees to ask:
“1. Are they alone in the room? Always ask first! If a parent is present, ask to provide alone time during the appointment.
“2. Can people hear them outside the room? Can they relocate? Use headphones? Use yes/no questions or chat feature?” (Emphases in original.)
The written document tells teens who want to “protect their privacy” from their parents “during a virtual visit” to:
“Take the call in the bathroom, outside, or in a parked car.”
“Schedule the call at a time when there are fewer people at home.”
“[P]arents might not agree with some of the things that we’re talking about and some of the services that our patients are looking for,” Safiya Yearwood, a nurse at Baltimore’s Star Track Clinic, told the webinar. Title X grantees must “mak[e] sure that patients are, number one, safe to even have these conversations, and determine[e] where they can do it.”
We may have secured some local wins in the struggle to keep our gas stoves, but that hasn’t deterred the Left from trying to ban the common household appliance over global warming concerns. While the courts striking down the attempt to nix gas stoves in Berkeley, California is a welcome sign, New York has moved to ban the appliance starting in 2026. We’re about to weigh into a death funnel of linguistic gymnastics and insanity. While other lefty localities and states might not outright say a gas stove ban is coming, they’re just gutting all the infrastructure permitting their continued use. Take Architectural Digest’s take on this culture issue: “No, the federal government isn’t coming for your gas stove. But new legislation and research could point the way to an electric future.”
Democrat Rep. Cori Bush: "I can only imagine the number of my constituents who are unknowingly being poisoned by their gas stove" without the Biden administration's proposed appliance regulations pic.twitter.com/dr8rdmcQX1
That’s like saying one is guilty of the crime but not responsible.
The gas stove debate is dismissed as tin foil hat material by the liberal press, but the secret is out. The Left knows they cannot pass the Green New Deal wholesale at the federal level. There will never be enough votes. But they can implement it piecemeal at the state and local level, though House Republicans are trying to get the wheels moving on a bill that would curb stomp these radical measures nationwide. The House Energy and Commerce Committee advanced a piece of legislation yesterday that would put the kibosh on the gas stove shenanigans, and it garnered some Democratic support (continued).
Over in the Senate, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) temporarily sidelined a Biden nominee who would oversee a gas stove ban policy.
A shocking new report alleges that not only is Fox News headquarters woke and radically pro trans ideology, but that producers had been warned to avoid criticism of Dylan Mulvaney.
A producer for Tucker Carlson Tonight told Daily Signal that “When trans-identifying TikTok star Mulvaney was first gaining prominence last year, producers for ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ had to fight to be able to refer to Mulvaney with male pronouns in the show’s chyrons.”
A source confirmed the directive to The Post Millennial, saying “The mandate is to ‘not be spicy.’”
Mulvaney, a trans TikToker who embarked on a public gender transition journey via short videos called “365 Days of Girlhood,” refers to women’s vaginas as “Barbie pouches,” and did an early segment on how great it is to be a “bimbo.”
The star, who also said it’s time to “normalize the bulge,” and that “some women have bulges,” referring to the bump in Mulvaney’s pleather shorts, brought Bud Light, along with the profits of parent company Anheuser-Busch, to its knees after a marketing affiliation between product and influencer went sideways.
Beyond Mulvaney, it turns out Fox is obsessed with its pro-LGBTQ score doled out by trans lobbyist not-for-profit the Human Rights Campaign, which went hard trans after the legalization of gay marriage in 2015. Fox touts that score in employee trainings, gives employees the option to use preferred pronouns and to transition at work, making others comply with the new speech requirements that come with it.
Women’s bathrooms at Fox are open to men who identify as women, as the handbook reads that employees “may access the restroom corresponding to their gender identity.” They also help employees come up with a workplace “gender transition plan,” according to a 2021 company handbook shared with The Daily Signal.
Tucker Carlson was fired from Fox, and his wildly successful show, on April 24. It was a sudden move and one that left the prime time news spot in flux. Carlson has since said he would continue his show on alternative platforms, such as Twitter.
Fox News’ ratings for primetime slots among key demographics of cable television viewers have declined sharply since the departure of Tucker Carlson, with the latest figures showing rival MSNBC overtaking the conservative juggernaut.
Cable news ratings show that in the two weeks since the host was fired, figures for Carlson’s former spot have dropped by around 50 percent, while the network’s audience among 25- to 54-year-olds had shrunk by two thirds.
The previously successful news presenter left the network after it settled a defamation casebrought against it by Dominion Voting Systems over claims by Trump allies that the 2020 presidential election was rigged, Fox News announced on April 24. In a statement, it said the two parties had “agreed to part ways” and thanked Carlson for “his service to the network.”
Carlson has said little about his departure as yet. According to a report by news website Axios on Sunday, his team is “preparing for war.” His lawyer, Bryan Freedman, told the outlet: “The idea that anyone is going to silence Tucker and prevent him from speaking to his audience is beyond preposterous.”
In addition to losing Tucker, it will be interesting to see how long the Christian voices on Fox remain or start to be silenced
For Monday through Friday, I don’t consume much daytime television. I work during those hours. However, as I edit drawings for use in manuals and complete other tasks not centered on writing, I do listen to the audio of Rumble and YouTube videos and podcasts. Due to that, I run across the words of Harris Faulkner, Shannon Bream, and Kayleigh McEnany. Therefore, I do know that those three (and, I think, several others) have authored Christian books and taken stands on air.
It will be interesting to see the degree to which these voices get allowed to speak from this piont on.
Target facing boycott over Pride collection with Satan-loving designer
Target is facing a consumer boycott over its Pride Month collection which features transgender swimsuits for children, books called ‘bye bye binary’ and a handful of items made by a British designer whose slogans include ‘Satan respects pronouns.’
While there were some initial grumbles about the ‘tuck-friendly’ swimsuits in the women’s section, much of the expansive collection of clothes, books and home décor has gone unnoticed.
But attention – and outrage – has now turned to one of the designers whose works are showcased, and his apparent penchant for the satanic.
Eric Carnell is the British designer behind Abprallen, an LGBTQ brand that sells t-shirts, sweaters, bags and badges.
Target is selling two of the brand’s items – a $25 slogan sweater with the words ‘cure transphobia not trans people’ wrapped around a sword, an $18 ‘too queer for here’ tote bag, and a ‘we belong everywhere’ fanny pack that now appears to be sold out.
Eric – a transgender man – proudly shared photos of the collaboration on Instagram.
‘These have already got the transphobes infuriated with me and I feel like quite the celebrity to think that they believe this is all some big conspiracy and I have any power to brainwash anyone when I’m just some guy drawing pictures!’ he said.
A closer look at his other work reveals some more sinister material.
Badges with slogans like ‘Satan Respects Pronouns’, ‘Young, Queer and Willing’ and a lighter pin with the words ‘burn down the cis-tem’ are among other products.
To my knowledge, Target has never caved to the first boycott based on their allowing anyone who “feels like a woman” into the woman’s changing areas.
Maybe a number of Christians have been cowed into submitting to the LGBTQ+ agenda. Maybe they have not seen the need to protect children from exploitation.
If that is the case, have those Christians looked at the labels at Target?
Why is “tuck-friendly construction” needed except to hide the fact that clothes made for a boy are being worn by a girl? Why is “extra crotch area” needed except to allow a boy to wear clothes made for a girl?
Calls to boycott Target have spread on social media after the retailer released another line of LGBT clothing for kids, including for newborn children.
According to Target’s website, it recently released its so-called “Pride Collection” for 2023, including onesies for infants that feature pro-LGBT content coming in sizes of zero to three months. One onesie includes the text “Bein Proud,” while another features what appear to be LGBT rainbows and hearts along with the transgender flag colors.
The Minneapolis-based retailer is also selling child LGBT books, including “Bye-bye Binary” and “What Are Your Words,” which tells kids how to use transgender pronouns. Some products for kids also appear to feature drag queens, according to products sold on the company’s website.
Broadcaster Megyn Kelly wrote this week that “we don’t need our kids seeing this [expletive] when we walk down the aisle at Target,” while Fox Nation host Tomi Lahren added that “Target has gone full woke and it’s repugnant.”
Conservative commentator Candace Owens was more explicit in her criticism and suggested a boycott of the retailer.
“I cannot state enough how important is for people to choose not to shop at target. There has never been a company that has been more pro-transgenderism than Target,” she wrote. Meanwhile, another conservative commentator, Steven Crowder, simply wrote: “Boycott Target.”
And more controversially, Target is allegedly selling so-called “tuck-friendly” swimwear for children, according to videos posted online from inside a Target location. “Did you know @Target also sells ‘tuck-friendly’ bathing suits for children in the Pride section? Well now you do,” reads one social media post.
A spokesperson for Target told The Associated Press that the “tuck-friendly” swimsuits are only offered for adults and the children’s line of clothing doesn’t feature that label. “The ‘tuck-friendly’ swim suits are for adults only,” the spokesperson told the newswire service.
But in response to the controversy, Daily Wire commentator Matt Walsh wrote that “what Target is doing is far worse than anything Bud Light did,” referring to the controversy and boycott of Bud Light after it produced a can with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney’s face on it. “They are selling chest binders and ‘tuck-friendly’ bathing suits for children,” he added.
Obviously, the gay-themed onsies for newborns are directed at ultra-liberal new parents who want to proclaim their allegiance to the gay agenda
Clothes for babies and toddlers with messages on those clothes are really only proclamations by the parents. Just as no one-year-old has expressed an interest in some football team or college, not one of them has debated for the queer cause.
However, when it comes to Target selling “tuck-friendly” clothing for children or “binding” for young girls, then that seems to point to an effort of grooming on the part of forces aligned with Target.
Target to pull some LGBT-themed merchandise after customer backlash
Target said Tuesday it would remove some products related to Pride Month from stores after a backlash from customers caused employees to feel unsafe, becoming the latest company to get drawn into the U.S. culture wars.
Times that there have been offenses against the Left, the announcement has been “store shelves have been cleared overnight”
If Target really has committed to divorcing itself from this attempt to let the LGBTQ+ forces use their shelves to groom our children, then why the slow-motion removal of LGBT-themed merchandise? Is it merely a shuffling of products to stores situated in gay-friendly communities?
After sowing the wind, Target never expected to reap the whirlwind
“Violent incidents are increasing,” Target CEO says.
Target CEO Brian Cornell offered a sobering warning to investors during the company’s post-earnings conference call on Wednesday.
“The unfortunate fact is violent incidents are increasing at our stores and across the entire retail industry,” Cornell said. “Beyond safety concerns, worsening shrink rates are putting significant pressure on our financial results.”
If you plant a row of corn seeds, you don’t wake up several weeks later with apple trees.
As Galatians 6:7-10 reminds us, we get what we put out there. If we plant lawlessness (as in ignoring condemnation of homosexuality, effemininity, and other sexual sin), then we cannot expect to gather a harvest of lawfulness (as in not having your stores experience stealing). Additionally, planting one seed usually doesn’t result in getting one seed back. If you plant a corn seed (and who just plants one?), you usually get at least five cobs of corn per plant (and each cob holds up to 200 seeds).
Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary. So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith. (Galatians 6:7-10 NASB)
Target told Christians to butt out when it came to morals. Now they complain about the immoral behavior of those who frequent their stores
Target expects profits to take $1.3 billion hit from “theft and organized crime”
Crime-battered retail giant Target said it expects to suffer as much as a $1.3 billion hit to its bottom line because of “theft and organized crime,” according to the company’s first-quarter earnings report released Wednesday.
The Minneapolis-based chain said its profit will be squeezed by “$500 million more than what we saw last year” – when the company lost as much as $800 million from “inventory shrink.”
“While there are many potential sources of inventory shrink, theft and organized retail crime are increasingly important drivers of the issue,” the company said. “We are making significant investments in strategies to prevent this from happening in our stores.”
Inventory shrink is an industry term that refers to fewer products being on its shelves than what’s reported in its inventory catalog.
“We are working with legislators, law enforcement and retail industry partners to advocate for public policy solutions to combat theft and organized retail crime,” a company spokesperson told The Post on Wednesday.
Despite the rampant shoplifting, Target recorded a 0.5% growth in sales — which it attributed to new locations — and a nearly 1% growth in traffic, the earnings report said.
Rather than working with lawmakers (since I think stealing is already illegal), why doesn’t Target try an alliance based on Biblical standards?
Since I am fairly sure that stealing ranks as one of the most common illegal activities (maybe just behind crossing the border illegally) and people obviously do it frequently at Target, why don’t they try another tack?
Why not completely drop the immoral clothing (and, yes, there are t-shirts with naked women and transitioning men on them)? Why not then create alliances with local churches to support traditional values like the value of mothers and fathers who direct their children?
Anheuser-Busch has lost a staggering $15.7 BILLION in value since Bud Light controversy began
Obviously a portion of the beer-drinking public has tired of the liberal/progressive indoctrination that has come to the forefront of a lot of advertising
Since the Bud Light fiasco has been going on for over a month, it seems that beer-drinking America has informed Bud Light and the rest of progressive, corporate America of something: consumers in America don’t like to be the subject of un-invited preaching. If we don’t run in the trans crowd, we don’t like having it waved in our faces.
LGBTQ group slashes Anheuser-Busch’s “perfect rating” after AB backtracks on the Dylan Mulvaney Bud Light controversy
The hits keep on coming for Anheuser-Busch after the largest LGBTQ advocacy group told the Belgian beer giant on Thursday that they will be stripping the company of its former “perfect rating” after they decided to back peddle following the Bud Light controversy with Dylan Mulvaney.
USA Today reports that the Human Rights Campaign, which rates companies based on their policies towards the LGBTQ community through a Corporate Equality Index (CEI), told Anheuser-Busch that they will be losing their 100 percent perfect score, according to a leaked letter that the outlet obtained.
“Anheuser-Busch had a key moment to really stand up and demonstrate the importance of their values of diversity, equity and inclusion and their response really fell short,” Human Rights Campaign senior director Eric Bloem told the outlet.
Anheuser-Busch was previously listed on the website under “Best Places to Work for LGBTQ+ Equality” after being issued a perfect score in the categories that include protections from workplace discrimination, inclusive benefits, corporate social responsibility and responsible citizenship.
While HRC did not inform them of what their new rating will be, the group told the beer giant that they have 90 days to respond, according to the outlet.
On Friday, HRC updated its website which displays a “points deducted” notice on Anheuser-Busch’s page.
An Anheuser-Busch representative told the outlet, “Our ERGs (employee resource groups) are intended to be a safe space for those who identify with a given community and those who wish to be allies.”
The Los Angeles Dodgers on Monday decided to invite the Sisters of Indulgence back to their Pride Night event next month after initially removing the left wing group of so-called “trans nuns” from their honoree list.
“After much thoughtful feedback from our diverse communities, honest conversations within the Los Angeles Dodgers organization and generous discussions with the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, the Los Angeles Dodgers would like to offer our sincerest apologies to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, members of the LGBTQ+ community and their friends and families,” the organization said.
“We have asked the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to take their place on the field at our 10th annual LGBTQ+ Pride Night on June 16th. We are pleased to share that they have agreed to receive the gratitude of our collective communities for the lifesaving work that they have done tirelessly for decades.
“In the weeks ahead, we will continue to work with our LGBTQ+ partners to better educate ourselves, find ways to strengthen the ties that bind and use our platform to support all of our fans who make up the diversity of the Dodgers family.”
The MLB team announced that it would be honoring the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a group of “queer and trans nuns,” during a June 16 event, but quickly received backlash from religious groups for the decision given the history of anti-Catholic messaging and shocking performances.
The team said last week it would no longer be honoring the group during the upcoming LGBTQ event.
“Given the strong feelings of people who have been offended by the sisters’ inclusion in our evening, and in an effort not to distract from the great benefits that we’ve seen over the years of Pride Night, we are deciding to remove them from this year’s group of honorees,” the Dodgers said Wednesday.
The Dodgers received backlash from Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and religious advocacy group CatholicVote for allowing the group to participate in its festivities.
The Dodgers’ decisions on the anti-Catholic group come amid a trend of well-known companies being called out for sponsoring individuals with controversial viewpoints and lifestyles.
(Read more at Fox News if you need a review of April-May 2023)
This is not just anti-Catholic. You cannot have someone stomp on the toe of the body of Christ and not feel it throughout.
Doctrinal differences aside: they worship Christ and depend on His sacrifice for their salvation. That makes them Christian. Therefore, to have a group denegrate my brothers and sisters like this will not go overlooked.
Bye, Major League Baseball. When you have cleaned up your association, maybe I might visit again.
Now for the Big Guy and sniffer of little girl’s hair
First day in office, Biden lifts transgender military ban
President Joe Biden signed an executive order to repeal a Trump-era ban on most transgender Americans joining the military on Monday alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.
“This is reinstating a position that the previous commanders and, as well as the secretaries, have supported. And what I’m doing is enabling all qualified Americans to serve their country in uniform,” Biden said, speaking from the Oval Office just before signing the executive order.
President Donald Trump’s ban has been rebuked by the Democrat-led House of Representatives and condemned by LGBTQ activists as discriminatory. Austin voiced his support for overturning the ban in his Senate confirmation hearing last week.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Monday that cases in which transgender service members were discharged from the military because of their gender identity would be reexamined.
“No one will be separated or discharged from the military or denied reenlistment on the basis of gender identity, and for those transgender service members who were discharged or separated because of gender identity, their cases will be reexamined,” Psaki said during a White House briefing.
“President Biden believes gender identity should not be a bar to military service and that America’s strength is found in its diversity,” Psaki said. “America is stronger around the world when it is inclusive.”
The federal Department of Education concluded an investigation into a Georgia school district Friday, arguing that the removal of several books containing pornographic material “created a hostile environment” for LGBTQ and nonwhite authors and readers, according to a letter.
The DOE’s Office of Civil Rights launched an investigation into the Forsyth County School District after a complaint was made by an individual, whose identity has not been released, that the district had purposefully gotten rid of books about the LGBTQ community in January 2022, according to The Washington Post.
The department sent a letter to the school district’s superintendent, Dr. Jeff Bearden, on Friday that its investigation had concluded the district was attempting to remove books with “diverse authors and characters, including people who are LGBTQI+ and authors who are not white.”
“Indeed, one student commented at a district school board meeting about the school environment becoming more harsh in the aftermath of the book removals and his fear about going to school, and evidence OCR (the Office of Civil Rights) reviewed to date reflects other students expressing similar views,” the letter read.
“District witnesses reported to OCR that the district has not taken steps to address with students the impact of the book removals. In light of these communications and actions, OCR is concerned a hostile environment may have arisen that the district needed to ameliorate.”
The district had removed eight books after multiple parents complained about the content matter being too pornographic for children, according to The Washington Post. One mother was initially banned from board meetings after trying to read out loud a scene from “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close,” by Jonathan Safran Foer, that describes how to give oral sex.
“All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George Johnson follows the story of a black boy growing up and learning about different sexual experiences. It goes on to describe several graphic sexual situations, including two boys performing oral sex on each other.
Another book removed by the district was “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison, about an 11-year-old African American girl who enters puberty in the 1940s, because of its “heavy sexual content,” according to a review from Squeaky Clean Reviews.
“Sexual content includes but is not limited to incest, pedophilia, a graphic description of one married woman’s distaste for intercourse with her husband, an odd description of the same woman’s affinity for masturbating with a pet in her lap, and a graphic flashback in which Pauline recalls when intercourse with her husband was pleasurable,” the review read.
The book was one of several that President Joe Biden defended in a video announcing his reelection campaign in April, in which he called out “MAGA extremists” for banning certain books from the classroom due to pornographic material.
Biden declares himself “blameless” if US defaults on debt, says “MAGA Republicans” are trying to crash the economy to sabotage his re-election bid
Biden: “I’m looking at the 14th Amendment as whether or not we have the authority”
The Daily Mail quotes Dementia Joe as he tries to weasel out of the homework he should have been doing since January (but didn’t start until last week).
President Joe Biden on Sunday said he would consider using the 14th amendment to solve America’s debt limit but conceded it is probably too close to the June 1st default deadline to use it in this round.
‘I’m looking at the 14th Amendment as whether or not we have the authority,’ he said at a press conference in Hiroshima.
‘I think we have the authority. The question is could it be done and invoked in time that it would not be appealed and, as a consequence, pass the date in question and still default on the debt?’
(Read more at the Daily Mail)
Rather than inventing a 14th Amendment authority, why not return to policies that work and allow Americans to recover from Biden’s first two-plus years?
Rather than spending us into oblivion and spurring who-knows-how-much-more inflation, why not go to the model that recently brought us out of the “Great Recession?”
Pelosi tantrum on the 150th Anniversary of the 14th Amendment
In a toothless poke by Nancy Pelosi at President Trump on 9 July 2018, San Fran Nan suggested that the 14th Amendment primarily made us equal before the law (thus somehow invalidating President Trump’s then-recent appointment of a conservative to the Supreme Court in favor of a LGBTQ-friendly selection she would have made).
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement to mark the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the 14th Amendment, which lays out the rights of citizenship, access to due process and guarantees equal protection under the law to all people in the United States:
“One hundred and fifty years ago, with the ratification of the 14th Amendment, our nation took a monumental step forward in its ever-advancing march toward a more perfect union. By expanding the rights of citizenship and due process and guaranteeing equal protection under law, the 14th Amendment righted historic wrongs by overturning the outrageous, immoral Dred Scott decision. This landmark amendment soon paved the way for many of our nation’s most important legal and legislative victories, including the desegregation of schools, a woman’s right to choose and marriage equality.
“On this historic day, the protections guaranteed in the 14th Amendment are under dire threat from a Republican Administration and Congress determined to undermine the health, safety, civil rights and financial security of hard-working Americans. President Trump’s nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy places a generation of progress for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, voting rights, workers’ rights and health care in peril. All of President Trump’s potential nominees are prepared to dismantle our nation’s promise of liberty, equality and opportunity for all, and to radically alter the course of American justice for decades to come.
“The rights enumerated in the 14th Amendment are fundamental to our democracy and to our values as a nation where all are created equal. While Republicans work to undermine these values and weaken our democracy, Democrats will stand firm against these outrageous attacks as we continue our work to build a freer, fairer and more just future for everyone.”
At a lunch roundtable with columnists earlier today, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi urged President Barack Obama to avoid a new debt-ceiling showdown by stating that a statutory borrowing limit is inconsistent with Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States … shall not be questioned.”
She at first referred to this possibility obliquely while making a larger point about the lack of cooperative spirit between the Republican Party and the Obama administration but clarified her stance in response to further questions saying, “I would like to see the Constitution used to protect the country’s full faith and credit.” She didn’t offer a legal argument in favor of the position but argued on policy grounds that “you cannot put the country through the uncertainty” again, noting that America’s sovereign debt was downgraded by ratings agencies in the wake of the standoff even though it was successfully resolved.
“This isn’t just about credit ratings,” she said, “it’s about the dynamism of our economy.”
Speaking last summer, former President Bill Clinton also endorsed this approach and anonymous members of Congress alleged that Pelosi privately supported it. Obama, however, has indicated that his administration’s lawyers are not persuaded the constitutional argument is correct. In my experience discussing this with constitutional scholars, the key point is less about the merits of the argument per se than it is about whether there’s anything the courts could or would do to prevent a president from acting unilaterally in this regard. Most people I’ve spoken to feel that this would be a classic nonjusticiable political question and no court would issue a restraining order enjoining the Treasury Department from issuing additional debt.
However, this agreement comes from polar opposite stances politically. Hers seems to be one of figuring how to twist the Constitution to fit a modern/progressive/socialist agenda. Mine comes from trying to figure what the founders meant as I read it during work breaks.
While I don’t hold a degree in Constitutional law, my reading of the Constitution finds enough commonality between the Word of God and our founding document that there would be common themes. And, while I cannot prove it, one of those themes seems to be a chance for forgiveness. Because, on one hand, our nation was largely founded by people seeking to start anew and, on the other hand, our God is the model of the Father of the Prodigal son (running out to meet him and covering his rags with luxurious robes), our Constitution would offer to its people the chance to start over. However, in order to maintain the stability needed for such forgiveness, such a standard would not be afforded to the government. Our government must operate at a higher level.
President Obama backs away from invoking 14th Amendment on debt ceiling
Obama backs away from invoking the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, but would it even worked if he tried to do it?
At a press conference Monday, President Obama confirmed that he would not use the 14th Amendment to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling unless both houses of Congress gave him the express authority to do so.
“If [Congress] wants to put the responsibility on me to raise the debt ceiling, I’m happy to take it,” he said. “But if they want to keep this responsibility, then they need to go ahead and get it done.”
While top Democrats have urged him to look more closely at unilateral options, Obama continues to hold Congress responsible for making good on the debts its own appropriations have incurred.
But if Republicans refuse to raise the debt ceiling, as some have suggested doing, Obama may have to act unilaterally if he wants to avoid a government shutdown. In this scenario, would the President have legal authority to raise the federal debt limit via the 14th Amendment?
Here is the section in question, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
A Reconstruction-era Amendment, Section 4 was added for two reasons. First, Union lawmakers were eager to affirm that debts incurred by the Confederate South would not be honored by the United States or any other country. This safeguarded Congress from years of disruptive politics. Second, they saw the necessity in guaranteeing the federal debt in case rebel sympathizers returning to Congress threatened to repudiate it for political ends.
Section 4 includes “pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion” as an illustrative example of the kind of debt that would be guaranteed. In other words, compensation for soldiers and their widows was safe from the whims of future Congresses.
As for myself, I trust Obama not to get himself in such a bind that the majority of Republicans in the House impeach or override him
If there is anything I trust about Obama, it resides in his self-interest. Therefore, if Dementia Joe has any reason or any reasonable advisors, it would be a good idea for him to steer clear of using the 14th Amendment to stave off what he sees as a problem. Of course, by increasing debt, he will likely increase our inflation and might push the US out of the market of being the world’s reserve currency.
Massachusetts U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins is planning to resign after a lengthy investigation by the Department of Justice into her alleged misconduct found that she unethically attended a partisan Biden fundraiser last summer and “falsely testified under oath” about leaking “sensitive DOJ” information to the press in an effort to help a Democrat win elected office.
Details of Rollins’ misconduct – highlighted in the report released Wednesday by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s office – showed that Rollins attempted to swing an election by assisting “Ricardo Arroyo with his Democratic primary campaign for Suffolk D.A.”
Rollins, according to the report, went so far as to offer Arroyo advice on how to handle the sexual assault allegations levied against him during his campaign and also provided media outlets with “negative information” about his challenger, Kevin Hayden.
“Rollins’s efforts to advance Arroyo’s candidacy included providing negative information about Hayden to The Boston Globe and suggesting where the Globe could look to find more information,” the report stated. “The evidence demonstrated that at a critical stage of the primary race, Rollins brought her efforts to advance Arroyo’s candidacy to the MA USAO, when she used her position as U.S. Attorney, and information available to her as U.S. Attorney, in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to create the impression publicly, before the primary election, that DOJ was or would be investigating Hayden for public corruption.”
The efforts, the report noted, included Rollins “trying unsuccessfully to convince her First Assistant U.S. Attorney to issue a letter that would have created the impression that DOJ was investigating Hayden and, when that effort failed, disclosing non-public, sensitive DOJ information directly to a Herald reporter before the primary election.”
“Then, after the Herald did not publish the story before the primary election and Arroyo lost to Hayden, Rollins disclosed additional information to the Herald to damage Hayden’s reputation while he was an uncontested candidate in the general election,” the DOJ report stated.
The Justice Department also concluded that Rollins “falsely testified under oath during her OIG interview when she denied that she was the federal law enforcement source that provided nonpublic, sensitive DOJ information to the Herald reporter about a possible Hayden criminal investigation.”
Rollins later admitted to being the source after she “produced relevant text messages, which definitively showed that Rollins had indeed been a source for the reporter and had disclosed to him the internal DOJ recusal memorandum quoted in the story,” the report said.
In addition to providing the press with sensitive information about Arroyo’s challenger, Rollins helped Arroyo last summer with a response to sexual assault allegations he faced on the campaign trail.
(Read further of the specifics of the data leaked and those implicated at Fox News)
Even the top-level Biden appointee slights the Biden DOJ does action occur
Maybe this ultra-lib thought that she was working for the underdog by releasing DOJ secret information to the press, but all she got was onto the bad side of Biden and the DOJ.
Police officer from Virginia charged with lying about leaks to Proud Boys leader
A Washington, D.C. police officer was arrested Friday on charges that he lied about leaking confidential information to Proud Boys extremist group leader Enrique Tarrio and obstructed an investigation after group members destroyed a Black Lives Matter banner in the nation’s capital.
An indictment alleges that Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Shane Lamond, 47, of Stafford, Virginia, warned Tarrio, then national chairman of the far-right group, that law enforcement had an arrest warrant for him related to the banner’s destruction.
Tarrio was arrested in Washington two days before Proud Boys members joined the mob in storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Earlier this month, Tarrio and three other leaders were convicted of seditious conspiracy charges for what prosecutors said was a plot to keep then-President Donald Trump in the White House after he lost the 2020 election.
A federal grand jury in Washington indicted Lamond on one count of obstruction of justice and three counts of making false statements. A magistrate judge ordered Lamond’s release from custody after he pleaded not guilty to the charges during his initial court appearance Friday.
The indictment accuses Lamond of lying to and misleading federal investigators when they questioned him in June 2021 about his contacts with Tarrio. The indictment also says Tarrio provided Lamond with information about the Jan. 6 attack.
Of course, as District Attorney Bragg proved with President Trump, you can indict a ham sandwich
You may be able to indict anyone (even a ham sandwich). Additionally, with Washington’s biased juries and liberal/communist judges, you might be able convict a policeman for walking the beat. However, if this policeman really did violate the wall and the prosecution can prove it, then he should get the punishment he deserves. Still, if leaniency has been offered to some criminals, consideration for the situation and history of this policeman should come into play.
“Worse than Watergate” has become a Washington cliche that is both inescapable and meaningless. Dozens of political scandals since then have been objectively worse, but the scandal still looms large. This is because of the mythos it created involving a press corps and a Washington establishment allegedly concerned with moving heaven and earth to get at the truth, even when the story involved little more than “third-rate burglary,” as Richard Nixon’s secretary famously called it.
Watergate also marked a sea change in how we held presidents accountable. Prior to his downfall, Nixon’s sentiment that “if the president does it, it’s not illegal” was to some extent the informal understanding, even if that sounds outrageous to contemporary ears. A corrupt president could either be impeached by Congress or thrown out of office by voters, but there was no constitutional middle ground to hold them accountable. Since Watergate, the FBI and the Department of Justice more broadly have increasingly found themselves in the awkward and untenable position of being subject to the president’s constitutional authority while simultaneously being tasked with investigating White House corruption.
So 50 years on, the post-Watergate question remains: How is empowering the FBI and unelected deep-state bureaucrats to hold the president accountable working out for us? With last week’s release of special counsel John Durham’s 306-page report into the origins and development of the Russia collusion investigation that engulfed Donald Trump’s presidency, the question has been definitively answered. The corruption it has enabled has been calamitous, and no one in Washington seems to care about the truth anymore.
Thanks to the report, the public finally has a clear and reliable accounting of possibly the most complicated scandal in American history. The big-picture conclusions of the report sound almost understated: “Senior FBI personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor towards the information that they received, especially information received from politically affiliated persons and entities.” But make no mistake, the details in the report that buttress those conclusions are devastating to the credibility of the FBI and those who championed the collusion investigation into Trump.
Take, for example, the story of the so-called Steele dossier and its origins, which is laid out in detail in the report. The Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign hired a disreputable opposition firm known as Fusion GPS, though the hiring was done using a law firm as a cutout so that they could hide their connection to Fusion GPS via attorney-client privilege. Once hired, Fusion GPS retained the services of former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who began compiling evidence of Trump’s links to Russia via his supposedly extensive network of sources. But according to Durham’s report, a single person, Igor Danchenko, claimed he “was responsible for 80% of the ‘intel’ and 50% of the analysis contained in the Steele Dossier.”
Danchenko, a Russian citizen working at the Brookings Institution in Washington, had previously been the subject of counterintelligence by the FBI between 2009 and 2011. According to the Durham Report, “In late 2008, while Danchenko was employed by the Brookings Institution, he engaged two fellow employees about whether one of the employees might be willing or able in the future to provide classified information in exchange for money.” Despite this, the results of the counterintelligence investigation into Danchenko were inconclusive — after the FBI ended the investigation in 2011 having erroneously believed Danchenko had returned to Russia.
In other words, when the FBI repeatedly cited the Steele dossier as evidence to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to get warrants to spy on a future president, it was relying on the word of someone who may or may not be a Russian spy. Remember that the next time a government agency gives the people a lecture on succumbing to disinformation.
But the problems of the dossier are so much worse than that. Danchenko “maintained a relationship with Charles Dolan, a Virginia-based public relations professional.” Dolan had worked with “key Russian government officials,” and it was Dolan who supplied Danchenko with much of the information he gave to Steele. In fact, Dolan was the source of the dossier’s infamous claim that Putin had “kompromat” on Trump in the form of a surreptitiously recorded video of him getting micturated on by Russian prostitutes.
However, Durham noted that in addition to working with the Russian government, Dolan “had previously held multiple positions and roles in the Democratic National Committee (‘DNC’) and the Democratic Party.” So, the two biggest sources of the dossier were a possible Russian spy and a former employee of the DNC, the entity ultimately paying for the creation of the dossier.
To put the final capstone on this dispiriting mix of corruption and credulity, in March of 2017, long after the FBI had tried and failed to prove the accuracy of the dossier and had good reason to believe Danchenko had lied to the bureau, Durham noted that the FBI hired Danchenko as a “confidential human source” and paid him $220,000 over the next 3 1/2 years. Why? The FBI bought his silence. If Danchenko were forced to answer questions publicly about the dossier, it would be humiliating for the FBI. As long as Danchenko was on the FBI payroll, he was not subject to congressional oversight due to policies preserving the secrecy of FBI investigation “sources and methods.”
Aggrivating – yes. Reason to vote conservative – yes. Damning – no (nobody is going to jail over this, much less having a greater chance of hell from this)
While this might be fodder for conversation and may push up the chances of some Republicans into action, the only good thing that might come out of this might be the restructuring of the FBI by the House.
Rep Matt Gaetz confirmed today that the government was running several assets in the crowds during the January 6, 2021 protests in Washington DC.
As the Gateway Pundit as previously reported — Dozens if not hundreds of government operatives infiltrated the protests at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The Gateway Pundit previously identified 20 different confirmed incidents and operations involving federal, state, and local government operatives who infiltrated the massive Trump crowds on January 6, 2021.
Each one of these incidents has been confirmed by the far-left press or the government in court documents.
We currently have no idea how many federal, state and local government operatives were working undercover on January 6 but it looks like it is close to 100 operatives leading the charge on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Recent court documents reveal the Biden Department of Justice admitting to at least 40 undercover operatives with the Proud Boys on January 6.
In September 2022, TGP learned the FBI was running operatives inside The Oath Keepers on January 6th. The DOJ sprung this on the Oath Keepers members before their trial in Washington DC before a Kangaroo Court. The US government finally admitted in this letter they sent out before the trial that they were running Confidential Human Sources (CHS) inside the Oath Keepers organization on January 6.
In November 2022, the FBI finally admitted they had 8 informants inside the Proud Boys organization on January 6 and likely more.
SHOCK: The DoJ now admits that another 40 undercover agents were with the Proud Boys on J6 - from HSI - Homeland Security Investigations. The vast majority of the group was paid by the government as either W2 employees or CHS. pic.twitter.com/tCKZubpJmq
FBI officials said the thousands of violations, which also include improper searches of donors to a congressional campaign, predated a series of corrective measures that started in the summer of 2021 and continued last year. But the problems could nonetheless complicate FBI and Justice Department efforts to receive congressional reauthorization of a warrantless surveillance program that law enforcement officials say is needed to counter terrorism, espionage and international cybercrime.
FBI officials repeatedly violated their own standards when they searched a vast repository of foreign intelligence for information related to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and racial justice protests in 2020, according to a heavily blacked-out court order released Friday.
FBI officials said the thousands of violations, which also include improper searches of donors to a congressional campaign, predated a series of corrective measures that started in the summer of 2021 and continued last year. But the problems could nonetheless complicate FBI and Justice Department efforts to receive congressional reauthorization of a warrantless surveillance program that law enforcement officials say is needed to counter terrorism, espionage and international cybercrime.
The violations were detailed in a secret court order issued last year by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has legal oversight of the U.S. government’s spy powers. The Office of the Director of the National Intelligence released a redacted version on Friday in what officials said was the interest of transparency. Members of Congress received the order when it was issued last year.
“Today’s disclosures underscore the need for Congress to rein in the FBI’s egregious abuses of this law, including warrantless searches using the names of people who donated to a congressional candidate,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. “These unlawful searches undermine our core constitutional rights and threaten the bedrock of our democracy. It’s clear the FBI can’t be left to police itself.”
At issue are improper queries of foreign intelligence information collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which enables the government to gather the communications of targeted foreigners outside the U.S. That program expires at the end of the year unless it is renewed.
The program creates a database of intelligence that U.S. agencies can search. FBI searches must have a foreign intelligence purpose or be aimed at finding evidence of a crime. But congressional critics of the program have long raised alarm about what they say are unjustified searches of the database for information about Americans, along with more general concerns about perceived abuses of surveillance.
So, in the international court, we have at least sunk to the level of the banana republic
If we are not at the level of the banana republic, it is only because they see us either as the drunk sugar daddy republic or the sadistic banana republic holding the gun to their heads. Both, I would argue, are on significantly lower levels than just the banana republic.
Obama roasted for answer to what keeps him up at night: “Starving for attention”
“The thing that I’m most worried about is the degree to which we’ve now had a divided conversation, in part because we have a divided media,” he said. “When I was coming up, you had three TV stations. And people were getting a similar sense of what is true and what isn’t, what was real and what was not. Today, what I’m most concerned about is the fact that because of the splintering of the media, we almost occupy different realities. Now, people will say, ‘Well, that didn’t happen, or I don’t believe that.’”
Watters roasted the former president for his answer on “Jesse Watters Primetime,” saying it’s not China, fentanyl, or “dirty nukes,” but a “divided media” that keeps him awake.
Now that a precedent has been set for local District Attorneys charging former presidents of unprovable crimes …
Now that District Attorney Bragg has opened pandora’s box, Obama might want to consider that presidents can be charged for jaywalking. Additionally, former presidents like him (and there are a few) might want to consider that they might get charged for real crimes that can be proven.
Therefore, it might be a good time for Democrat presidents to purchase beachfront property in a country where America does not have an extradition treaty.
You must be logged in to post a comment.