Americans are worried that a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) could end up compromising essential freedoms, further centralizing monetary policy, and making the country’s currency vulnerable to hacking, according to a recently published Fed survey.

In January last year, the Fed published a white paper on what a CBDC could look like. It asked for public comments on issues like potential risks and benefits a CBDC can have on the country. On April 20, the Fed released the responses in nine documents. Here are some of the various answers and concerns expressed by respondents, some of whom were named, others who were unnamed, as well as those whose names were redacted.

A student from Texas pointed to the breach of privacy, government overreach, and hacking as risks posed by CBDC. “With this digital currency, the government would be able to usurp freedoms without the knowledge/consent of the public.

“The best e-hackers and cybersecurity personnel don’t work for the government. They work in the private sector. It is naive to think, given the government’s track record, that it could ever be trusted to secure such an asset.” A CBDC might also trigger a “run on financial institutions,” the individual warned.

Andrew W. from Virginia warned that centralization of monetary policies can “easily be abused and cause unintended disruption.” CBDCs can further centralize monetary policies and “only increases the risk potential.”

Hollie Bishop from Indiana cited public mistrust as her number one concern about central bank digital currencies. “People are afraid of being constantly monitored. Also, our aging and elderly population pay bills in cash and may not know how to use this system, leaving them susceptible to hunger, bills not being paid, etc.”

Power Issues, Quantum Computing Hack

Lucas Vincent from Arizona warned that power consumption is a major issue. “The power consumption that provides the means of creating said digital currency, which has caused power outages in places like Kazakhstan and even New York, is an enormous risk that puts Earth at stake because of the environmental damage that digital currency mining causes,” he said.

Andy Garcia from Georgia notes that the dependence of CBDCs on electricity makes them vulnerable. “If the long-term goal is to get rid of paper currency, relying strictly on CBDC, the entire economic system will become vulnerable and susceptible to crippling cyber-attacks. There needs to be a fallback system that would work without electricity, much like paper currency does.”

Horacio Gasquet from Texas pointed out that with the advent of quantum computing, even the most sophisticated encryption algorithms can be cracked. As such, in order for a CBDC to be “truly secure,” the digital currency should be “rooted in quantum key encryption.”

A few of the comments highlighted purported benefits of CBDCs, like faster fund transfers and providing stability in case of hyperinflation.

Should the US Follow Other Nations?

The Fed asked, “How should decisions by other large economy nations to issue CBDCs influence the decision whether the United States should do so?”

An unnamed individual answered (pdf): “It should send warning signs to our country creating a CBDC. There’s a reason China implemented a CBDC, and it’s not for efficiency.”

Aaron Olszewski from New Hampshire also said, “A shift to a CBDC is a shift to push people away from using that nation’s currency.”

Brian Marshall from Idaho replied, “The United States should first worry about following the Constitution and preserving liberty, not trying to follow other countries in their descent into tyranny. Free markets will always provide the means to exchange one currency for another.”

JC Denton from California said that other nations adopting a CBDC does not mean the United States ought to do the same.

“Our financial purpose should be to focus on our own issues. If other nations wish to perform such actions, it is their choice. We don’t need to follow a bad idea just because other groups are doing it,” said Chad Rytting from Utah.

Phil Zobrist from Illinois said that the United States was “the standard” and it can remain so if “you maintain a strong dollar.”

Many of the respondents reacted negatively to the idea of the United States following other countries in adopting financial systems. A small minority voiced support for a CBDC, stating a goal of catching up to other nations.

The US Constitution

Many responses (pdf) to the Fed survey mentioned how the idea of a CBDC was antithetical to the U.S. Constitution.

When the Fed asked, “Should a CBDC be designed to maximize ease of use and acceptance at the point of sale?” Lawrence Raymond from Maryland replied, “No, because all transactions would become public, which goes against the freedoms outlined in the Constitution.”

When the Fed asked, “Could some or all of the potential benefits of a CBDC be better achieved in a different way?” Richard Hay from Texas said, “Yes, return to the constitutional definition of money, which is gold and silver.

“Fiat currencies continue to destroy the poor and middle class by endless expansion of debt and the money supply destroying the value of wages and savings of the vast majority of the population while enriching the owners of assets by driving asset prices higher via inflationary pressures caused by the expansion of credit. Our founders envisioned an honest monetary system.”

Hay added, “The CBDC would eventually be weaponized against political opponents and groups of people that differ from the beliefs of a centralized control governing system.”

Rodger Reed from California said: “Our economy must remain a function of the constitutional mandate created by the founders. By design, a CBDC does not serve the American people the way sound money does.”

When the Fed asked, “What additional potential benefits, policy considerations, or risks of a CBDC may exist that have not been raised in this paper?” Charles Dowling from Colorado said: “The people who are aware of reality do not respect the government whatsoever. And would probably not use your CBDC. And no one wants an illegal, unconstitutional government poking into their business.”

https://subs.theepochtimes.com/template/show?tid=cc3f343f-227c-4eec-8289-8d2fe30e4467&sid=www.theepochtimes.com&v=5&ck=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&pl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Ffed-asks-americans-for-feedback-on-a-central-bank-digital-currency-here-are-some-responses_5215215.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26src_src%3DMorningbrief%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2023-04-24%26src_cmp%3Dmb-2023-04-24%26utm_medium%3Demail%26est%3DikTbHoK%252BiGar7xAnFt%252FNaa1wYMeFopkH2fB8dk%252FZ3Wi5Yl5T1VmQ6s2xyQO%252BNz6K%252Bw%253D%253D&u=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&tn=newsletter_widget&dna=%7B%22u_s%22%3A%22Morningbrief%22%2C%22u_c%22%3A%22mb-2023-04-24%22%2C%22r%22%3A%22%22%2C%22pid%22%3A%22anon490a-3963-4599-8eea-93695a2383d4%22%2C%22uid%22%3A%22user_9dfe546d573c80c140e67580106ed9556b66c4cd%22%2C%22x%22%3A%22641-988-68%22%2C%22vt%22%3A0%2C%22g1%22%3A%22us%22%2C%22g2%22%3A%22md%22%7D&source=morning-bell&email=walkerboh2112%40msn.com

Privacy Concerns

During a recent speech in Washington, Federal Reserve Governor Michelle W. Bowman admitted that “safeguarding privacy is a top concern” with regard to the use of CBDCs. Bowman wants CBDCs to have enough protections to safeguard the privacy of customers and businesses while also being transparent enough to deter criminal activity.

“In thinking about the implications of CBDC and privacy, we must also consider the central role that money plays in our daily lives, and the risk that a CBDC would provide not only a window into but potentially an impediment to, the freedom Americans enjoy in choosing how money and resources are used and invested,” said Bowman.

“So, a central consideration must be how a potential U.S. CBDC could incorporate privacy considerations into its design, and what technology and policy options could support a robust privacy framework.”

An analysis by the Cato Institute warned that CBDCs pose a foundational threat to America’s economic systems. A U.S. CBDC will eventually “usurp” the private sector and endanger the core freedoms of American citizens, it said.

As such, CBDCs should have “no place” in the American economy, the institute stated. It called on Congress to “explicitly prohibit” the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve from issuing CBDCs in any form.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Democratic 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said COVID-19 lockdowns across the United States decimated the middle class, suggesting that it has yet to recover.

“The strength of a nation comes from a strong economy and a vibrant middle class,” Kennedy told Fox News over the weekend, “and we have wiped out the middle class in the country systematically.”

The 69-year-old, who is a prominent skeptic of vaccines, stated that COVID-19-related policies benefited the elite ruling class at the cost of the middle class. Those lockdowns, he asserted, shifted $4 trillion in wealth from the middle class to a “new aristocracy of billionaires.”

Those lockdowns “created 500 new billionaires,” Kennedy stated. “The Oxfam report, which came out this week, shows that the billionaires that existed at the beginning of the pandemic, the people like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeffrey Bezos, Bloomberg, etc., increased their wealth by 30 percent during the pandemic. From the lockdowns. And [Bezos’s] Amazon got to shut down all of its competitors.”

And Kennedy, the son of former Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of former President John F. Kennedy, stated that he believes that former President Donald Trump initiated those lockdowns.

Kennedy added, “I’m in a better position to run against Donald Trump than any of the Democrats because I can hold him accountable for the worst thing that he did, which was the lockdowns.”

However, Trump, as president, had little authority to issue lockdowns at the state or local level. And in early 2020, Trump said that keeping the United States shut down would “ultimately inflict more harm than it would prevent.” For those remarks and others, mainstream media outlets frequently criticized Trump and essentially blamed his policies for the rise of COVID-19-related deaths that year.

“It’s important for all Americans to recognize that a permanent lockdown is not a viable path forward producing the result that you want or certainly not a viable path forward,” the president said in April 2020, about two months after the first COVID-19 cases were detected inside the United States after spreading from mainland China.

The younger Kennedy, who is married to “Curb Your Enthusiasm” actress Cheryl Hines, has never held public office but is perhaps best known for his stance on childhood vaccines. Polls suggest he has a long-shot chance against President Joe Biden, who is reportedly readying a 2024 presidential announcement on Tuesday.

“Like my dad ran on principle, he did not believe that he could win. And his objective was to tell the truth to the American people,” Kennedy said on Fox News. “And that’s what I’m going to do. And if there’s an appetite for that, I’ll be in the White House in 2025.”

When he made his presidential ambitions known last Wednesday, Kennedy told supporters that he knew he is being counted out against Biden. But he maintains that it makes him like his father, who campaigned against incumbent Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968 before Kennedy was assassinated at a hotel following his victory in the California primary.

“He was running against a president in his own party. He was running against a war. He was running at a time of unprecedented polarization in our country,” Kennedy said. “That hopelessness of his campaign,” he added, “freed him to tell the truth to the American people.”

Kennedy also noted that his critics have accused him of disseminating misinformation about vaccines. However, he said that “a lot of the misinformation is just statements that depart from government orthodoxy.”

Outside of Kennedy, Democrat self-help author Marianne Williams announced a presidential bid earlier this year. Like Kennedy, she’s also seen as a longshot candidate.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A former Federal Elections Commission official said that the Manhattan District Attorney’s office has no authority to “enforce federal campaign finance” laws against former President Donald Trump.

“It’s an extremely dubious prosecution, and I say that as a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission,” former FEC Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky, who was nominated by former President George W. Bush as FEC commissioner in 2006, told Just The News over the weekend.

Von Spakovsky, now the manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative, said that Bragg is targeting the 45th president for alleged federal election crimes that aren’t within his authority to prosecute. A number of other legal experts, including George Washington University Jonathan Turley, have made similar statements as Trump was indicted for allegedly falsifying business records in connection to payments made during the 2016 campaign.

“No local state prosecutor has the authority to enforce federal campaign finance crimes in the first place,” he told the news outlet. “There’s just nothing from a factual and legal standpoint to this case. But I don’t think this prosecutor cares about that. What he’s counting on is that he’s in Manhattan. Manhattan is one of the most liberal jurisdictions in the country. I think he believes that he can get a liberal jury to convict Trump, no matter what the facts are and no matter what the law is.”

But if Trump is convicted, the former president would have to rely on U.S. appeals courts. The former president could argue that Bragg’s handling of the case could be grounds for an appeal.

“[Trump] can appeal and try to convince an appellate court that this was everything from a malicious prosecution to the fact that it wasn’t actually a violation of the law,” von Spakovsky said. “A lot of this is going to depend on the judges and the tenure of the judges in the state court system. And I think that’s what Bragg is counting on, because his case is so weak, so nonexistent, that even folks on the left side of the political aisle—including prosecutors—have all basically said there’s just nothing to this case.”

It has long been known that Trump was under investigation by several federal agencies for the alleged hush-money payments. But two of them dropped their inquiries into the former president.

While von Spakovsky did not mention specifically why Bragg’s case is out of his jurisdiction, the FEC in 2021 dropped its inquiry on whether Trump violated campaign finance laws when he paid $130,000 to adult film actress Stormy Daniels via his then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, just days before the 2016 election. Two Democrats on the FEC panel voted to continue their investigation, while the two Republicans on the panel voted to drop the case.

The Department of Justice (DOJ), too, declined to prosecute Trump as prosecutors in the U.S  Southern District of New York brought charges against Cohen, who pleaded guilty to a handful of crimes, including tax evasion and federal election crimes. There were reports claiming that the DOJ did not prosecute Trump because there are longstanding rules around prosecuting a sitting president.

“It’s perfectly legitimate to pay a settlement,” von Spakovsky noted of the 2016 payments. “It’s perfectly legitimate to have a nondisclosure agreement. And Bragg’s multiplying that into 34 accounts—that in itself shows a lack of credibility. When prosecutors take a single incident, or two incidents and turn it into three dozen supposed violations of the law, that’s a sure sign that the prosecutor doesn’t have a case and is trying to overwhelm the jury.”

In the case, Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges that were brought against him. Trump, who has also said he did not engage in an affair with Daniels, has asserted that Bragg’s case is politically motivated and has made it a central theme of his 2024 campaign.

Earlier this month, Trump released a campaign-style message saying he would investigate “Marxist” local prosecutors who took campaign cash from controversial left-wing billionaire George Soros. At the same time, Trump said if he is elected, he would appoint 100 U.S. attorneys who back his agenda upon taking office.

“Soros prosecutors appear to be engaging in selective enforcement based on illegal racial discrimination” in places like Chicago, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, Trump said, vowing for reform.

The Epoch Times has contacted Bragg’s office for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Stephen Friend’s Jan. 6 constitutional objections led him out of the Bureau

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla.—Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures, Stephen Friend was told.

Why would he—an FBI special agent—not want to hunt down and jail rioters who killed police officers at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021?

The question, its justification, and its accuracy were equally troubling when they were presented to Friend by an FBI superior on Aug. 23, 2022.

“I responded back that no police officers were killed by any of the individuals who were charged with the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6,” Friend recalled.

At the time a fairly recent transfer from Iowa to the FBI in Florida, Friend had just lodged a complaint against what he saw as heavy-handed tactics being planned against Jan. 6 suspects in Florida. Sitting with an FBI assistant special agent in charge, he had to correct some of the misinformation that was being used to justify those tactics.

“There was this pause on his part for a few seconds, like that was new information to him,” Friend recalled in an interview with The Epoch Times. “That was never anything that crossed his mind.”

It’s never easy being a conscientious objector.

This fork in the road for Special Agent Friend came out of his concern about the FBI’s plans to use a tactical team to arrest a misdemeanor Jan. 6 suspect. That kind of force against a nonviolent subject raised constitutional issues in Friend’s mind.

‘I Have an Oath of Office’

“I expressed that I have an oath of office,” Friend said during filming for an upcoming Epoch Times Jan. 6 documentary. “And while I’m aware that an arrest warrant is a legal order from a judge, I have an oath to protect the Constitution.

“I felt that us being outside the rules with following our case procedures was a potential breach of the Sixth Amendment for due process,” Friend said.

The arrestee in question had already been in contact with the FBI. He was interviewed by FBI agents. Yet plans were set to go in heavy for his arrest.

“There’s a whole array of methods that you can use to bring somebody into custody that doesn’t involve the use of a tactical team,” Friend said. “That really is the utmost, highest level of enforcement.”

Friend said he was told he was being a “bad team member” and should not report for work the next day. Then he was counted as absent without leave (AWOL). In short order, his security clearance was suspended. On Sept. 19, 2022, he was suspended from his job. His income dropped to zero. He was not allowed to seek outside work.

His convictions were about to be seriously tested.

The use-of-force objection ended up being just the beginning of Friend’s concerns with the FBI. He moved his family to Florida primarily to work on human trafficking investigations, a subject close to his heart.

The sexual trafficking of minors and young adults has exploded into an urgent national crisis, he said, but he was reassigned from that role to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), investigating and hunting down Jan. 6 suspects.

He also called out what he saw as a deviation from the FBI’s normal case-management protocols that he believes was employed to create the illusion that “domestic terrorism” is a much bigger issue than it actually is.

“They’ve chosen to open hundreds of cases and then spread them around the country,” Friend said. “That gives the impression that domestic terrorism is a nationwide threat, when really the numbers the FBI is touting stem from one incident on one day.

“That’s a problem for the country,” he said. “The FBI is supposed to stand for law and order, but instead we’re raising the temperature.”

Friend said he can sit across the table from someone with opposite political views and have a respectful conversation about corporate taxes or some other issue.

“That individual will never have that conversation with me if he thinks I’m a member of the Taliban,” he said. “The FBI is contributing to that by making the rest of the country think that half of its citizens are domestic terrorists. We’re never going to be able to have the conversations necessary to address some real important issues.”

The Epoch Times asked the FBI to comment on Friend’s case, but did not receive a reply by press time.

The FBI, however, expressed some significant concerns about Friend’s forthcoming book, “True Blue: My Journey from Beat Cop to Suspended FBI Whistleblower.”

In an emailed letter to Friend dated April 21, the FBI demanded redactions on 36 pages of his book, including all the contents on Pages 85-110. Friend said he has no plans to redact his book.

“Your manuscript was reviewed pursuant to the terms of the [Prepublication Review Policy] and we concluded some of the information presented falls within a restricted area of disclosure,” wrote Joseph E. Bender Jr., acting chief of the FBI Record/Information Dissemination Section.

“Prepublication approval is contingent upon removal of the redacted information as shown in the attached version. There is no objection to the remainder of your work, as presented.”

Process Equals Punishment

Friend said he is equally disturbed by how the “process” of Jan. 6 cases ends up punishing every suspect before they ever get a day in court.

“For many people who are being interviewed by the FBI, there’s no case to be built against them for January 6,” he said. “It might be stemming from an anonymous tip, where there’s no cell phone GPS information, no facial recognition software. The FBI is still knocking on that person’s door. That’s an undue stress for anybody.”

Friend interviewed one suspect who attended former President Donald Trump’s speech at the Ellipse on Jan. 6, then walked to the Capitol. He asked Capitol Police if he could enter and was told it was OK.

VIDEO

“He doesn’t even walk beyond the red velvet rope,” Friend said. “He walked to the Capitol for a few minutes and exited. We asked him, ‘Did you take anything?’ He told us apologetically that he had taken a free brochure that was available for people who were touring the Capitol. He’d taken it as a keepsake.

“Now that man told me this story inside a law office, which I’m sure was not free for him. He also told us that was the biggest mistake of his life because he’d already lost his career. He might never face jail time, and if he does, it will probably be minimal.

“But even if he never sits inside a jail; even if he’s never charged with a crime, he has been punished. That to me is wrong.”

‘A Toxic Stew’

Most FBI agents view Jan. 6 as a criminal matter for some individuals, Friend said. “We’re all fully aware that there has been a tendency to overcharge, to truly reach into the corners and try to scoop up everybody,” he said. “And the rumbling message that we’ve heard is that the FBI wants to make a point to charge every single person that possibly can be because of the magnitude of what happened on January 6.

“It’s a misallocation of resources,” Friend said. “I think that it is what happens when political agenda marries opportunism. There are some true believers, some people who genuinely feel that January 6 was the worst day in the history of the country. There are others who think it was just a four-hour disturbance.

“For the true believers, they feel they are on a righteous mission. And for others, they see this as the largest, most important case that they’re ever going to encounter in their FBI career. And it behooves them to jump on that if they have ambitions of promotion, awards, anything of the sort.

“When you have incentive to do that, combined with individuals who are true believers, that just makes for a toxic stew.”

For Friend, being an FBI special agent was his dream job. After earning a degree at the University of Notre Dame, he found his way into law enforcement in 2009. He worked as a sworn police officer in Savannah and Pooler, Georgia, for four years before joining the FBI in 2014.

He investigated violent crimes on Indian reservations in northeastern Nebraska for seven years before transferring to Daytona Beach to investigate crimes against children.

“It’s all I ever wanted to do,” Friend said. “And for eight years I got to do it. I really felt like I did a really good job. …I’m certainly not a trouble-making employee who is looking to burn the bridge up behind him as he walks out the door.”

Friend said he always kept politics out of his police work. But in early 2023, Washington politics came looking for him.

He was invited to sit for a transcribed interview with the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in February 2023. Friend resigned from that Bureau the day of his testimony, making him free to speak to his concerns before Congress.

He said the GOP majority allowed him to present his story and air his concerns about the FBI, while the Democrat minority lobbed accusations at him after generating a 300-page report and leaking “cherry-picked” sections to friendly media. The report accused Friend and others of espousing “conspiracy theories” rather than providing proof.

A Grant, a Book, a Grift?

It was suggested that Friend was a grifter because, after losing his six-figure salary with the FBI during his suspension, he took a $5,000 stipend from a charity headed by former Trump aide and Epoch TV personality Kash Patel.

One Democrat attorney showed Friend a photograph of a Jan. 6 suspect wearing a helmet and body armor and asked, “Does that look like somebody who went there that day to do something good?” Friend recalled.

“‘He looks bad,’” Friend said he told the committee. “‘He probably did some really bad things that day. He probably should get arrested for them, get charged with them. It would really be a shame if we lost a trial because we violated his civil rights.’”

Friend said that was his “mic-drop moment” before Congress. “I wish that had been in front of an open hearing,” Friend said. “You know, I was really proud of that.”

Friend hopes to return for public testimony before the Weaponization subcommittee, along with fellow FBI whistleblowers Kyle Seraphin, Garret O’Boyle and George Hill.

Friend has a book on his experience due out in July from Post Hill Press. He started a new job as an analyst with the Center for Renewing America, where he already published an article titled, “Top 10 Systemic Issues Within the FBI.”

Friend said he did his best to make peace with his departure from the FBI starting with a talk with his attorney a few days before he was suspended.

“We kind of had our come-to-Jesus talk,” Friend said. “He said, ‘Have you accepted that they’re never going to bring you back?’ And I said, I said, ‘Yeah.’

“He said, ‘Because that’s a challenge that I have with a lot of my whistleblower clients. They ultimately want to get their job back. And you just have to know that’s not going to happen.’”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A majority of Supreme Court justices halted a lower court’s order on April 21 that blocked access to an abortion drug, but Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

Alito wrote a four-page dissent and explained why he would allow partial restrictions on the drug mifepristone, after the Biden administration appealed a ruling against a Texas district judge who ruled to overturn the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) approval of the pill.

But he disagreed that chaos would be triggered by a conflict between two federal court orders. A Texas judge put an injunction on the FDA-backed drug nationwide, and a judge in Washington state ordered the FDA to not make any changes that would restrict access to the abortion drug.

“At present, the applicants are not entitled to a stay because they have not shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the interim,” Alito wrote (pdf), noting that the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals fast-tracked hearing the arguments of the case. “The applicants claim that regulatory ‘chaos’ would occur due to an alleged conflict between the relief awarded in these cases and the relief provided by a decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.”

Because the “appeal has been put on a fast track, with oral argument scheduled to take place in 26 days,” he noted that “there is reason to believe that they would get the relief they now seek—from either the Court of Appeals or this Court—in the near future if their arguments on the merits are persuasive.”

His reference to “chaos” was in response to Justice Department Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar’s previous petition to the high court. Writing on behalf of the FDA, Prelogar said the government’s appeal dealt with “unprecedented lower court orders countermanding FDA’s scientific judgment and unleashing regulatory chaos by suspending the existing FDA-approved conditions of use for mifepristone.”

“The FDA did not appeal that appealable order, and when seven states that might take such an appeal asked to intervene, the FDA opposed their request,” Alito wrote. “This series of events laid the foundation for the Government’s regulatory ‘chaos’ argument.”

The George W. Bush-appointed justice further stipulated that “it is not clear that there actually is a conflict because the relief in these cases is a stay, not an injunction, but even if there is a conflict, that should not be given any weight.”

The Supreme Court’s decision was published unsigned and didn’t explain why it decided to grant the federal government’s request. The votes of the justices other than Alito and Thomas, who “would deny the applications for stays,” weren’t published.

Mifepristone was approved by the FDA for the termination of a pregnancy until the seventh week of gestation. In 2016, it was approved to be used up to 10 weeks into gestation.

The Texas judge who blocked the FDA’s approval of the drug, District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, sided with a pro-life group in an April 7 ruling. But a conflicting ruling, made by District Judge Thomas O. Rice of Washington state, an Obama appointee, ordered the FDA to keep mifepristone available in 17 states.

The 5th Circuit will hear arguments over the federal government’s appeal on May 17. People will still have access to mifepristone until the appeals court makes its decision, although that ruling could itself be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Alito, who was the author of the landmark decision last summer to overturn the 1972 pro-abortion Roe v. Wade ruling, first issued a temporary stay on the case until April 19. That was extended until April 21.

The group that petitioned Kacsmaryk, Alliance Defending Freedom, represented doctors who are against abortion and sought to strike down the FDA’s approval of the drug.

“Our case seeking to put women’s health above politics continues on an expedited basis in the lower courts,” the group’s senior counsel, Erik Baptist, said in a statement last week. “We look forward to a final outcome in this case that will hold the FDA accountable.”

Pro-abortion groups praised the Supreme Court’s decision last week, but they noted that the case is still being appealed.

“We’re not out of the woods yet,” Center for Reproductive Rights President Nancy Northup told Reuters.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Washington Democrats finally passed legislation to ban the future sale, import and manufacture of so-called “assault weapons” and the gun prohibition lobby is celebrating, despite the fact that gun rights organizations have been preparing legal challenges and were poised to launch court battles.

The Second Amendment Foundation, which is headquartered in Bellevue, Washington, will likely be at the forefront of the legal fight. SAF is already involved in challenges to bans in Maryland and California, and the ban on so-called “high capacity magazines” in Oregon.

By a vote of 56-42, the House passed House Bill 1240, with floor amendments added in the Senate allowing firearms dealers to sell or transfer firearms that were manufactured prior to Jan. 1 of this year, and only to clients out-of-state, “for the limited period of 90 days after the effective date of this section.”

There is also an exemption for people who inherit such a firearm, with this caveat: “A person who legally receives an assault weapon under this subsection may not sell or transfer the assault weapon to any other person in this state other than to a licensed dealer, to a federally licensed gunsmith for the purpose of service or repair, or to a law enforcement agency for the purpose of permanently relinquishing the assault weapon.”

Democrat Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who has been seeking a ban for the past few years quickly went on Twitter to declare, “With today’s historic final approval in the House, Washington will become the 10th state to ban the sale of assault weapons. Thanks to the tireless work of advocates…”

With today’s historic final approval in the House, Washington will become the 10th state to ban the sale of assault weapons. Thanks to the tireless work of advocates, and the support of @GovInslee & sponsors @Strom_Peterson & @senpattykuderer #walegApril 19, 2023

There was no small irony in the fact that the ban was passed on April 19, the 248^th anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts in 1775 when British troops were dispatched to seize arms and ammunition belonging to the Colonial militia. It was the event that ignited the Revolutionary War and led to the inclusion of the Second Amendment when the Constitution was adopted in 1791.

There was some scrambling in the Legislature to pass the 15-page bill prior to April 20, the anniversary of the 1999 Columbine High School attack in Littleton, Colorado.

According to the Associated Press and Seattle Times, which incorrectly described the banned guns as “high-powered firearms,” the new law will immediately ban more than 50 specific gun models. The ban does not apply to sales to law enforcement agencies or the military in Washington state, and it also does not ban possession of guns already owned by an unknown number of Evergreen State residents.

Democrat Gov. Jay Inslee, a perennial anti-gunner since his days in Congress, is eager to sign the bill.

One other thing noted by the AP and Times is this: “President Joe Biden and other Democrats have become increasingly emboldened in pushing for stronger gun controls — and doing so with no clear electoral consequences.”

Republican lawmakers uniformly opposed the ban. According to the AP story, some argued school buildings should be made hard targets via remodeling as a way to address school shootings, rather than infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens. But Democrats, who have been drifting farther to the political left in recent years, were in no mood to listen, rejecting several proposed amendments earlier in the week.

Inslee tweeted Wednesday, “WA does not and will not accept gun violence as normal. Banning the sale of assault weapons, our bill to enact training requirements and a wait period, and the bill to improve accountability of manufacturers and retailers will save lives.”

WA does not and will not accept gun violence as normal. Banning the sale of assault weapons, our bill to enact training requirements and a wait period, and the bill to improve accountability of manufacturers and retailers will save lives. #waleg https://t.co/6ceasI7JuLApril 19, 2023

Washington gun rights activists will remember this, because it is the same sort of rhetoric that preceded passage of gun control Initiatives 594 (in 2014) and I-1639 (in 2018) which were both promoted to voters as ways to reduce so-called “gun violence.” But just the opposite has been the case as the number of homicides has risen since 2015, the first full year in which I-594—requiring so-called “universal background checks”—was in effect.

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2015, there were 209 homicides in Washington including 141 involving firearms. In 2021, the most recent year for which FBI data is available, the state reported 325 murders that year, including 209 committed with firearms.

Dave Workman

Read the original article in its entirety at Ammoland.

READ NEXT: How Will The Pentagon Evacuate Americans From War-Torn Sudan?

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Namibia – a large coastal country bordering South Africa with a population of only 2.7 million – is hosting public hearings on whether to legalize abortion. Namibians have been rallying religious and community leaders and young people to attend the government hearings and express their vote for life. The hearings started on April 15^th in the Khomoas region of Namibia and continue through April 26^th.

In Namibia, abortion is currently only legal in the cases of the life or health of the mother, significant special needs of the pre-born child or rape.

The hearings follow the introduction of a motion in parliament to expand Namibia’s abortion laws. Organized by the government, the hearings gauge the public’s stance on the issue. Votes are taken at each hearing, and the tally of these results gets put into a report which will inform Parliament of the public stance, and then the next round of proceedings will begin.

In Namibia, there is a general sense of the value of life, but a small group of people seeks to sway the youth to support abortion in Namibia, according to the leader of Conservative Namibia, a local organization aimed at spreading the truth. Those advocating for abortion also target the media with misinformation. They are pushing Africa to get on board with Western ideas, especially regarding abortion.

“The goal for us at the moment is definitely to combat that,” stated Sasha who leads Conservative Namibia. How? “By permeating our society with the truth about abortion so that we will be able to stand firm in our understandings and convictions, not only for now but for generations to come.”

Pro-lifers in Namibia have been hosting rallies and protests to raise awareness of the value of human life and call for their government to protect moms and babies.

There are no full-time pro-life media organizations in Namibia. It is Conserve Namibia’s goal and passion to become a dedicated full-time media outlet. They just need resources and funding to make it a reality. They welcome pro-life testimonies and stories to help the public see the reality and impact of abortion on women and their children.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has accused the Pentagon of spying on Mexico‘s government.

During his daily press briefing on Tuesday, Obrador claimed the Pentagon targeted Mexico in the days after leaked information exposed alleged tensions between Mexico’s Navy and the Army. While delivering remarks on the situation, Obrador vowed to safeguard classified military information to protect its national security after a spate of documents leaked in U.S. media.

“We are going to take care of the information from [Mexican Secretary of the Navy] Semar and SEDENA [Secretariat of National Defense] because we are being spied on by the Pentagon, and many media outlets are leaking information that the [Drug Enforcement Agency] gives them,” Obrador said without providing evidence.

Obrador added, according to Bloomberg, that Mexico would guard information “for security because we feel that they are trying to violate our sovereignty in an interventionist plan.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and other Biden administration diplomats have attempted to reassure allies about the security of U.S. intelligence despite hundreds of pages of leaked intelligence.

“We have engaged with our allies and partners since these leaks came out, and we have done so at high levels, and we have made clear our commitment to safeguarding intelligence and our commitment to our security partnerships,” said Blinken Saturday when asked about concerns he may have heard from U.S. allies over the leaks.

Obrador said on Monday that the U.S. intelligence in the leaks was an “abusive, overbearing intrusion that should not be accepted under any circumstance,” adding that he did not plan to rebuke the U.S., but would at some point discuss “conditions for collaborative work,” Reuters reported. Last week, federal authorities arrested Massachusetts Air National Guardsman Jack Teixeira and charged him with violating the Espionage Act for posting dozens of transcriptions and photos of classified documents. (RELATED: FBI Arrests National Guardsman After Biggest Security Breach In 10 Years)

READ NEXT: Chemical Abortion: The US And Japan’s Decisions Endanger Women And Children

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Adam Kinzinger used to be part of the House of Representatives. He was a Republican, too, and was someone many thought would defend the Second Amendment, at least up until he wouldn’t. He turned his back on any support he had for the right to keep and bear arms.

Now, though, he seems to think that the rest of us can be recruited to back gun control.

On Monday night, Kinzinger spoke in Chicago at a meeting organized by The Joyce Foundation. In a session moderated by a former Tribune reporter, White House official and Democratic strategist, David Axelrod, the former congressman spoke alongside Tim Heaphy, the chief counsel and lead investigator for the Jan. 6 House committee.

This was a left-leaning audience, receptive to sharp criticism of the Republican right and far friendlier to Kinzinger than many members of his own party. But something Kinzinger said at the Arts Club caught our attention after the conversation turned to recent school shootings.

“Second Amendment people,” Kinzinger said, “should be on the front line of gun control.”
In essence, Kinzinger was saying, the people who are interested in guns, and most likely to own them, actually know far more about what works and what does not in the matter of gun control than those who have no such knowledge. And as experts on guns, he said, they are thus morally obligated to use that expertise to solve what is clearly a crisis, given all the recent examples of emotionally troubled people acquiring powerful weaponry and using them to take innocent lives, often of children.

Many of them already know this, he implied, at least deep down, and are possibly just waiting to be asked in the right way.

Therefore, rather than seeing fervent supporters of the Second Amendment as the opposition to be defeated, he suggested, those who want to see sensible regulations on gun ownership, such as background checks, age restrictions and red flag laws, should see “Second Amendment people” as potential experts and allies. They know guns better than those who merely despise them.

Except that we’re no such thing.

See, the problem is that people like Kinzinger figure that everyone on this side of the debate is secretly put off by the pro-gun argument. That may be true of some who lean rightward in general, but not of actual Second Amendment supporters.

The Second Amendment makes it very clear, “shall not be infringed,” and while we’re going to see infringement for the rest of our lives, it’s very unlikely that anyone on this side of the debate–the actual Second Amendment supporters, particularly “fervent” ones–are going to ignore that.

Kinzinger makes one thing very clear here. He makes it very clear that he has no understanding of Second Amendment supporters despite having served in the same chamber with numerous such folks.

The truth is that no matter how we’re approached, we’re not going to suddenly decide that we’ll support treating lawful adults as second-class citizens by prohibiting them from buying guns just because they’re under the age of 21 or supporting taking guns from people without due process of law.

That belief won’t change because now Shannon Watts is saying “Pretty please.”

Kinzinger doesn’t understand principles, selling his out for a commentator gig, but we do.

Tom Knighton

Find the original article in its entirety at Bearing Arms.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Governor Phil Murphy, D-N.J., is not a champion of liberty, freedom, or anything having to do with personal responsibility. Aside from his extreme pinko ways, Murphy also has lashed out at the Supreme Court over the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision. After all, the good people of New Jersey have been dealing with the so-called “carry killer” law he signed just before Christmas, as a big “F U” to freedom. This is a guy that loves disarming people and hates rugged individualism. All of which should come into acute focus when reflecting over some tone-deaf comments the Murph made on Twitter yesterday about the 80th anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

To rehash some of what the Murph said about the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision, he noted, “The right-wing majority has made its decision. As tragic and misguided as it was, we must live with it. That’s how it works in our constitutional system.” To which Murphy continued, “But that won’t stop us from doing everything in our power to protect our communities and our residents, consistent with this opinion.” Which translated to having three branches of government conspire to usurp the rights of New Jersey citizens.

Murphy signed laws that decreased magazine capacity to ten rounds, limited where a permit-to-carry holder could carry a firearm, increased fees – upwards of more than ten times in some instances – for firearm-related permits, and has been pumping money into an anti-gun think tank at Rutgers. That’s just a filet of what Murphy has enacted and preached for in the Garden State since residing at Drumthwacket.

Just like the “orange man bad” mantra we’ve been listening to from the far left, Murphy’s “guns bad” rant is echoing into 2023, as he continues to use the Constitution as toilet paper. Murphy and his ilk had a total hissy fit over the Supreme Court ruling and have been lashing out like petulant children ever since.

Which brings us to the Murph’s out of touch tweet:

Today marks the 80th anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, when a courageous Jewish resistance fought back against their Nazi occupiers in a final act to refuse deportation to death camps.

We remember these brave souls and their eternal message to always stand up to evil. pic.twitter.com/J53P9wJVZ4April 19, 2023

Wow, just think of the cojones on this guy! To get everyone up to speed on what else Governor Phil Murphy is about, besides loving gun-grabbing, this was the same guy that was basking over putting restrictions on the population of New Jersey during the pandemic. The guy would get off during the daily press conferences while he shut down schools, small businesses, and you guessed it – at the behest of commie mommies – gun stores. The dude loved making people put on masks and forcing state workers to get the jab. This is an individual that’s as far from someone I’d expect to celebrate anyone trying to gain their liberty, or stand up to anyone. He even said himself that the Bill of Rights is above his pay grade! 

Murphy – who is eyeing a run for president, so pay attention America – in my opinion, is a boot-on-the-neck-of-the-people fascist.

The former ambassador to Germany (of all places!) reminds us all to remember the Jews who resisted tyranny! What exactly does the Governor think effective resistance is all about?

From the U.S. Holocaust Museum, Holocaust Encyclopedia [emphasis added]:

On April 19, 1943, the eve of the Passover holiday, the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto began their final act of armed resistance against the Germans. Lasting twenty-seven days, this act of resistance came to be known as the Warsaw ghetto uprising. 

The Jewish Combat Organization (ŻOB) had received advanced warning of a final deportation action planned by the Germans. In response, the ŻOB warned residents of the ghetto to retreat to their hiding places or bunkers.
…
Twenty-four year old ŻOB commander Mordecai Anielewicz commanded the Jewish insurgents. The ŻOB fighters were armed with only pistols, grenades (many of which were homemade), and a few automatic weapons and rifles. Nonetheless, they stunned the Germans and their auxiliaries on the first day of fighting. They forced German troops to retreat outside the ghetto wall. Stroop reported losing 12 men during the first assault on the ghetto. These men were either killed or wounded.

About 700 young Jewish fighters clashed with German forces, sometimes in hand-to-hand combat. These fighters were poorly equipped and lacked military training and experience.

Murphy’s proven himself to be a big fan of disarming the population, so we must question his motives given his knowledge of history. Bringing this up is almost mocking not only his own citizens, but the millions of Jews who perished at the hands of Germans. He clearly understands that the only way to be effective against tyranny as a last ditch effort is through being armed. Why is Murphy such a big fan of disarming people?

Scrolling through the comments, it did not take long before I stumbled upon a reply from advocate, author, and friend, Yehuda Remer. I’d say that Remer is Jewish, but he’s not. He’s fully in it, the guy has a bagel holster. Those weren’t lotto numbers written on his grandfather’s arm. Remer goes by the moniker “The Pew Pew Jew,” and is an Orthodox Jew. Remer’s response is priceless:

Yet, you restrict your state with their 2A rights. Stop pandering. You don’t really care! You truly are pathetic. pic.twitter.com/9lub6WF8gcApril 19, 2023

Seeing Remer pose wearing his shirt, with the nuevo battle cry of the oppressed and as a reminder for everyone to #neverforget “People with AR’s don’t get in cattle cars,” was spot on. I reached out to Remer about Murphy’s tweet, and this is what he had to say about it:

“Yesterday, Governor Phil Murphy of New Jersey tweeted a message of remembrance that marked the 80th anniversary of the beginning of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. His message, although seemingly sincere, was nothing more than pandering to the Jews of the world. This is a governor who has enacted strict gun control in his state, severely restricting the citizens of New Jersey of their God-given right to self-defense. Such a control-freak should keep his mouth shut about the “courageous Jewish resistance who fought back against their Nazi occupiers.” His tone-deaf tweet praising armed resistance against tyranny, and then enacting more gun control so tyranny can prevail, shows his hypocritical and true political leanings. The people of New Jersey, Jews and non-Jews alike, should do everything in their power to fight back against Governor Murphy’s tyranny.

Remember, ‘Never Again’ means nothing if you are not willing to do something about it.” – Yehuda Remer, The Pew Pew Jew, on Governor Phil Murphy

Well, there you have it Governor. You’ve heard it from Mr. Pew Pew Jew himself.

I’m not sure the Governor’s sentiments were well meaning, as I personally find everything about the Murph and his administration to be abhorrent. It was a shock that he won the last election as it was. If it were not for a middle-of-the-night mysterious increase in votes for the Murph, his challenger would have won – who was ahead all evening until early morning. Murphy is not cut from the cloth of individuals who should be POTUS, as illustrated here. He’s just a pandering power hungry hack. New Jersey deserves better than Murphy, as well as any other community, marginalized or otherwise. Murph, way to go – you’ve embarrassed the Garden State yet again. You’re carpetbagger from Massachusetts, now go eat some broccoli.

John Petrolino

Read the original article in its entirety at Bearing Arms.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has claimed that then-presidential candidate Joe Biden misled Americans regarding the letter signed by 51 intelligence officials that alleged that Hunter Biden’s laptop contained Russian disinformation.

Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, offered context about the events surrounding the story during an April 20 interview on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle,” after news broke that a special agent whistleblower from the IRS had information about the laptop investigation.

The lawmaker spoke about testimony before his committee by former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell, who was among the 51 signatories of the open letter (pdf) that said the explosive contents of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden bore “classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

Subsequent reporting confirmed that the laptop wasn’t part of a Russian disinformation campaign but had been abandoned at a computer repair shop in Delaware.

Jordan recounted the timeline of events, starting by saying that the story about the laptop came out on Oct. 14, 2020, and included facts about the “Biden business operation” and whether then-presidential candidate Joe Biden was involved.

“Then quickly it turns into this political operation,” he said. “That letter that became the basis for suppressing the story and keeping it from the American people [was released] just days before the most important election we have.

“[On] the 14th, the [New York] Post has a story. The 17th, Tony Blinken … contacts Mike Morell and gets him interested in this. Mike Morell looks at it the next day, organizes on the 18th all these other people to sign the letter. The 19th, the letter goes out.”

Morell has since testified before Jordan’s committee and the House Intelligence Committee that Antony Blinken, then a Biden campaign adviser, was “the impetus” behind the creation of the October 2020 letter.

Jordan noted that Morell played a key role in gathering signatures for the letter before Oct. 22, 2020, which was the date of the NBC presidential debate. It gave Biden a ready answer when, as expected, then-President Donald Trump brought up the laptop issue.

“It was a total political operation, and the most important fact is [the letter] was false,” Jordan said. “[The laptop] wasn’t Russian disinformation. The laptop story looks to be true.”

Along with Morell, signatories included Obama-era CIA Director John Brennan, Bush-era CIA Director Michael Hayden, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash, and former National Intelligence Council Chair Thomas Fingar.

A State Department spokesperson responded at an April 21 briefing to The Epoch Times’ question on the subject, saying this is “not a State Department issue” and that the department wouldn’t comment.

White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations Ian Sams responded to The Epoch Times’ request for comment on Jordan’s assertions by saying House Republicans are “weaponizing their power to go after their political opponents and [trying to] re-litigate the 2020 election with misleading claims” instead of dealing with issues more important to the American people.

“The American people see these House GOP attacks for what they are: political stunts intended to hurt President Biden,” Sams said. “And House Republicans would be wise to instead focus on doing their job, raising the debt ceiling to avoid an economic catastrophe, and working together with the president to make actual progress on important issues.”

Tom Ozimek and Jackson Richman contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Calls by Tennessee Republican Gov. Bill Lee for an extreme risk protection order law were dead on arrival in the Tennessee General Assembly as they attempted to wrap up the 2023 legislative session on Friday without being taken up in either chamber.

The state’s GOP caucus posted on Twitter earlier this week that any call for such legislation, which some have referred to as a red flag law, was a “non-starter.”

“Any red flag law is a non-starter for House Republicans,” the caucus stated. “Our caucus is focused on finding solutions that prevent dangerous individuals from harming the public and preserve the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. We have always been open to working with Governor Lee on measures that fit within that framework.”

Lee called on the state legislature to bring forth and pass an enhanced order of protection law, which some Republicans and gun rights groups have said equates to a red flag law. The governor’s office circulated samples of legislation to debate, which lawmakers mentioned in comments throughout the week.

Red flag laws are enacted to take guns away from those deemed a risk to themselves or others, but objections to such a law revolve around the due process rights of citizens. Lee tried to soften those qualms by stating any Tennessee law would ensure due process and involve local law enforcement in any decision to take away firearms from any individual.

Senate Opposes Calls to Take Up Bill

On the state Senate floor Thursday, Democrat state Sen. Jeff Yarbro attempted to recall from a judiciary committee a previous bill that did not move through that process directly to the floor. The bill was delayed repeatedly until the chairman of that committee tabled all gun-related bills until 2024.

“We have moms that have been here for days on end, moms that are here for the first time. I think I see Evelyn’s mom here with us today,” Yarbro said, invoking the mother of Evelyn Dieckhaus, who was one of three 9-year-olds killed in the Covenant School shooting in March.

He went on to speak of other moms who have called for “common sense” gun laws.

“How do we not feel shame for failing to do anything,” he said. “Mr. Speaker, I do not want to hug another mom, knowing that we could have done more, knowing that we could have at least tried to do more.”

Republican Rules Committee Chair state Sen. Bo Watson objected based on the precedent of not bringing bills directly to the Senate floor.

“At some point in time, all of us have had pieces of legislation that we would have loved to call directly to the floor for a vote,” Watson said. “There has never been an incident when this body recalled a piece of legislation from a standing committee … no motion to recall has ever been successfully achieved.”

His attempt failed mostly along party lines, with one Republican joining the six Democrats in the chamber voting to bring the legislation up for debate.

House Follows Senate

After the legislation failed to move forward in the Senate, Democrat state Rep. Bob Freeman appeared to be dissuaded from bringing any legislation to the floor for a vote—instead calling on the governor and House speaker to call a special session dedicated directly to the topic of the murder problem.

“I was gonna stand and ask for us to bring back a bill from the delayed bills committee, make a motion on the floor, and as I’ve thought about it, I think we need real action—not some political grandstanding of trying to make a symbolic effort,” he said. “Everybody in this room, I would assume, has had somebody from Voices for a Safer Tennessee come by and talk to them about what we need to do about gun violence. If they haven’t come to see you, you’ve seen them in the halls as you walk in this chamber, and they are begging for us to do something.”

Freeman also noted Evelyn Dieckhaus’s mother was in the House chamber.

“In the chamber gallery, we have Evelyn’s mother, and she’s down here asking, begging for us to do something to make a difference,” he said. “I’m not going to put us all in a situation where we have what can even be viewed as political grandstanding. But what I am gonna do is call on … a special session. Let’s come back where we can spend some real time and address gun violence in our state.”

He added, “Not in two months,” but called on a special session to be almost immediate.

Earlier in the day, state Rep. Jason Powell, another Nashville Democrat, called on the legislature to pass Medicaid expansion to tackle the mental health issues leading to mass shootings and to take care of the mental health of victims.

Action was not taken on either of those calls by Democrats.

Previous Action

Shortly after the Christian school massacre, Lee alongside his Republican colleagues, announced budgetary changes to increase security in schools.

The budget items included funding for a school resource officer at every school in the state, along with having a Homeland Security agent in every county. As the House passed the budgetary items this week, they noted the agents would be regional—but each county would still be covered.

Another bill that would have armed teachers was supposed to be taken up on Monday but was essentially put in limbo to be called at any time and is essentially dead for this session.

The Epoch Times reached out to Lee’s office for comment but has received no reply.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Even though U.S. home prices have fallen by their biggest margin in over ten years, monthly housing payments have hit a record high, according to real estate brokerage Redfin.

Median home-sale price fell 2.6 percent from a year back during the four weeks ending April 16, Redfin said in a press release Thursday—the biggest decline in more than a decade and the eighth straight four-week drop. Home prices fell in 30 of the 50 most populous U.S. metros. Despite the price drop, the typical homebuyer’s monthly housing payment hit an “all-time high” of $2,538 as average weekly mortgage rates rose to 6.39 percent. This is up $265, or 12 percent, from 2022.

Redfin points out that homebuyers are “backing off” from the housing market and suggests elevated housing costs to be a reason.

Pending home sales are down 19 percent from 2022, and mortgage purchase applications fell 10 percent over the past week, it noted. Meanwhile, buyers are also facing a shortage of homes available for sale, with listings down by 21 percent.

“Homebuyers are window shopping, and many are entering the store, but few of them are making it to the cash register yet,” said Redfin Deputy Chief Economist Taylor Marr. “There’s not much on the shelves to choose from, and high mortgage rates and still-high prices are making homes too expensive for many buyers.

“Some buyers are discouraged by mortgage rates rising this week, which is partly due to stronger-than-expected bank earnings making it more likely the Fed will hike interest rates next month.”

Affordability Issues

According to data (pdf) from the National Association of Realtors, the monthly principal and interest payment for a home was $1,827 in February 2023, up 32 percent from $1,384 a year back.

However, median family income only rose 6 percent during this period, from $85,952 to $91,152.

As a percentage of income, the monthly payment rose from 19.3 percent to 24.1 percent. The qualifying income for a mortgage rose from $66,432 to $87,696. Meanwhile, the median price of an existing single-family home fell from $370,000 to $367,500.

A U.S. Home Affordability Report issued by ATTOM, a curator of real estate data, shows that median-priced single-family homes and condos were less affordable in the first quarter of this year compared to the historical averages in 94 percent of American counties.

This is a big jump compared to last year. In the first quarter of 2022, only 62 percent of counties had homes that were less affordable than the historical averages.

https://subs.theepochtimes.com/template/show?tid=cc3f343f-227c-4eec-8289-8d2fe30e4467&sid=www.theepochtimes.com&v=5&ck=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&pl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fhousing-payments-rise-across-us-despite-fall-in-home-prices_5214316.html%3Futm_source%3DMorningbrief%26src_src%3DMorningbrief%26utm_campaign%3Dmb-2023-04-23%26src_cmp%3Dmb-2023-04-23%26utm_medium%3Demail%26est%3DeV3re0muixTAbhlIfm%252F2FOe2pJ8mBYincAr4sSGK1K3t32HnyUqEhQ4n4kCfBnfSFg%253D%253D&u=JTdCJTIyaW5mbyUyMiUzQSU3QiUyMmNsaWVudElkJTIyJTNBJTIyYTQ0YjYxNzAtMzZhMi00YTEzLTkwNjUtMjNmYTkwZDZiZTY4JTIyJTJDJTIyaWQlMjIlM0ElMjJ1c2VyXzlkZmU1NDZkNTczYzgwYzE0MGU2NzU4MDEwNmVkOTU1NmI2NmM0Y2QlMjIlMkMlMjJlbWFpbCUyMiUzQSUyMndhbGtlcmJvaDIxMTIlNDBtc24uY29tJTIyJTJDJTIycGljdHVyZSUyMiUzQSUyMiUyMiUyQyUyMm5hbWUlMjIlM0ElMjJ3YWxrZXJib2gyMTEyJTIyJTJDJTIyZmlyc3ROYW1lJTIyJTNBJTIyd2Fsa2VyYm9oMjExMiUyMiUyQyUyMmxhc3ROYW1lJTIyJTNBJTIyJTIyJTJDJTIycmVnaXN0ZXJEYXRlJTIyJTNBMTYwNDQ5ODI0NjAwMCUyQyUyMmlzRW1haWxWZXJpZmllZCUyMiUzQXRydWUlN0QlMkMlMjJnZW8lMjIlM0ElN0IlMjJjb3VudHJ5JTIyJTNBJTIyVVMlMjIlMkMlMjJjaXR5JTIyJTNBJTIyTUQlMjIlMkMlMjJ0aW1lem9uZSUyMiUzQSUyMkFtZXJpY2ElMkZOZXdfWW9yayUyMiUyQyUyMmxhdGl0dWRlJTIyJTNBMzkuMDM5NyUyQyUyMmxvbmdpdHVkZSUyMiUzQS03Ny4xOTE4JTdEJTJDJTIyc3Vic2NyaXB0aW9ucyUyMiUzQSU1QiU3QiUyMnN1YnNjcmlwdGlvblN0YXR1cyUyMiUzQSUyMmFjdGl2ZSUyMiUyQyUyMmV4cGlyYXRpb24lMjIlM0ExNjgyNjM0NDY3JTJDJTIycmVnaW9uSWQlMjIlM0ElMjJ3d3cudGhlZXBvY2h0aW1lcy5jb20lMjIlMkMlMjJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25UeXBlJTIyJTNBJTIyY2hhcmdlYmVlJTIyJTJDJTIycGxhbklkJTIyJTNBJTIycGF5d2FsbF9hY2Nlc3Nfb25seV80Xzk5X21vbl9ub3ByaW50JTIyJTdEJTVEJTJDJTIyaGlzdG9yaWNTdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zJTIyJTNBJTVCJTdCJTIyc3Vic2NyaXB0aW9uU3RhdHVzJTIyJTNBJTIyYWN0aXZlJTIyJTJDJTIyZXhwaXJhdGlvbiUyMiUzQTE2ODI2MzQ0NjclMkMlMjJyZWdpb25JZCUyMiUzQSUyMnd3dy50aGVlcG9jaHRpbWVzLmNvbSUyMiUyQyUyMnN1YnNjcmlwdGlvblR5cGUlMjIlM0ElMjJjaGFyZ2ViZWUlMjIlMkMlMjJwbGFuSWQlMjIlM0ElMjJwYXl3YWxsX2FjY2Vzc19vbmx5XzRfOTlfbW9uX25vcHJpbnQlMjIlN0QlNUQlMkMlMjJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb24lMjIlM0ElN0IlMjJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25TdGF0dXMlMjIlM0ElMjJhY3RpdmUlMjIlMkMlMjJleHBpcmF0aW9uJTIyJTNBMTY4MjYzNDQ2NyUyQyUyMnJlZ2lvbklkJTIyJTNBJTIyd3d3LnRoZWVwb2NodGltZXMuY29tJTIyJTJDJTIyc3Vic2NyaXB0aW9uVHlwZSUyMiUzQSUyMmNoYXJnZWJlZSUyMiUyQyUyMnBsYW5JZCUyMiUzQSUyMnBheXdhbGxfYWNjZXNzX29ubHlfNF85OV9tb25fbm9wcmludCUyMiUyQyUyMnN1YnNjcmliZWQlMjIlM0F0cnVlJTdEJTdE&tn=newsletter_widget&dna=%7B%22u_s%22%3A%22Morningbrief%22%2C%22u_c%22%3A%22mb-2023-04-23%22%2C%22r%22%3A%22%22%2C%22pid%22%3A%22anon490a-3963-4599-8eea-93695a2383d4%22%2C%22uid%22%3A%22user_9dfe546d573c80c140e67580106ed9556b66c4cd%22%2C%22x%22%3A%22641-988-68%22%2C%22vt%22%3A0%2C%22g1%22%3A%22us%22%2C%22g2%22%3A%22md%22%7D&source=morning-bell&email=walkerboh2112%40msn.com

Homeowners Hesitant to Sell

Meanwhile, some homeowners are hesitating to sell their properties. Redfin attributes the decline in homes available for sale on high mortgage rates that are forcing homeowners to hang on to their existing homes.

Many homeowners are hesitant to sell in the current market as this would mean they would have to pay a higher mortgage rate for a new home.

Jennifer Bowers, a Redfin real estate agent in Nashville, pointed out that one of her sellers received multiple offers on their home but pulled the listing off the market when they discovered that they would have to pay higher interest rates.

“There are a lot of homeowners who don’t want to give up their 2.5 percent or 3 percent rate for a 6.5 percent rate. Both buyers and sellers are having a tough time adjusting because rates are swinging up and down so quickly,” she said in an April 19 press release.

Some homeowners are taking advantage of the limited supply in the market. “Many sellers are sitting on a ton of equity. Maybe they bought their home 10 years ago, and it’s gone up in value by hundreds of thousands of dollars,” said local Redfin agent Marshall Carey. “Even with high rates, it’s a good time to move up because they have so much money in the bank to get a nicer home in a better location.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has charged the owner and two employees of a New York midwife practice of distributing more than 2,600 fake COVID-19 vaccine cards.

In a press release, the DOJ said that two nurse midwives (one of whom is the owner) at Sage-Femme Midwifery PLLC, as well as a nurse working at the practice, have been charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States.

All three are accused of conspiring to enroll the midwife practice as an unauthorized COVID-19 vaccine administration site, destroying vials of the vaccine that were meant for patients, and of providing fake proof of vaccination cards.

“Even though Sage-Femme was a small midwife practice, the defendants’ fraud turned it into one of the busiest vaccination sites in New York State, outpacing large, state-run vaccination sites,” the DOJ said.

The charges have been filed in a federal court in Brooklyn as part of a nationwide COVID-19 enforcement action.

“The defendants in these cases used the COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity to engage in fraud, including faking vaccine cards and stealing vital funds designed to keep struggling businesses afloat,” United States Attorney Breon Peace said in a statement.

In total, the enforcement action resulted in criminal charges against 18 individuals for allegedly taking part in health care fraud schemes involving around $490 million in fraudulent claims.

‘Combat and Prevent COVID-19 Related Fraud’

In a separate press release announcing criminal charges against the 18 accused, the DOJ said that it has seized over $16 million in cash and other fraud proceeds.

“This unprecedented enforcement action against defendants across the country makes clear that the Department is using every available resource to combat and prevent COVID-19 related fraud and safeguard the integrity of taxpayer-funded programs,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.

One of those indicted as part of the nationwide action is a California lab owner who has been charged with submitting over $358 million in false and fraudulent claims to Medicare, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), and a private insurance company for laboratory testing.

Also in California, a medical doctor was charged for allegedly defrauding the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) COVID-19 Uninsured Program of around $230 million.

“The doctor was the second highest biller in the country to the Uninsured Program, and he allegedly submitted fraudulent claims for treatment of patients who were insured, billed for services that were not rendered, and billed for services that were not medically necessary,” the DOJ stated.

The doctor allegedly used over $100 million of the fraud proceeds to trade stock options.

Suppliers of COVID-19 over-the-counter tests—which Medicare started to cover in April 2022—were also charged for allegedly supplying dozens of COVID-19 tests to patients that didn’t want or need them. In some cases, the patients were deceased.

In Florida, a doctor and marketer were charged with illegally buying Medicare beneficiary numbers and shipping unrequested over-the-counter COVID-19 tests to beneficiaries, causing over $8.4 million in fraudulent claims.

Separately, the Center for Program Integrity of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CPI/CMS) announced on April 20 that it had taken “adverse administrative actions” against 28 medical providers for their alleged involvement in COVID-19 scams.

“It is particularly offensive to discover individuals who took advantage of the pandemic to defraud the government,” said CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure in a statement.

“CMS will continue to aggressively investigate COVID-19-related fraud and has already taken actions against 28 providers to protect the sustainability of the Medicare program,” she added.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Workers in Chicago who were fired for not complying with the city’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate must get their jobs back, a judge said in a new ruling.

City officials violated multiple parts of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act by imposing the mandate without negotiating with unions representing the workers over the effects of the mandate, including consequences for not getting vaccinated, Administrative Law Judge Anna Hamburg-Gal said in a 78-page ruling dated April 19.

The mandate itself was not subject to bargaining because the vaccination requirements were “integral to [the city’s] ability to maintain a functional workforce that was capable of carrying out public services during a global pandemic,” Hamburg-Gal said. But that didn’t remove the need to bargain over aspects of the mandate.

“Even where an employer’s decision to implement a management policy is not subject to negotiations, the Act requires good-faith collective bargaining over the effects of that policy decision on the terms and conditions of employment of bargaining unit employees,” the judge said.

Effects that should have been negotiated included sick leave availability for workers who were injured by a vaccine and discipline for failing to report vaccination status or failing to get vaccinated, according to the ruling.

No emergency removed the bargaining requirements for the mandate, which was imposed on Oct. 8, 2021, the judge said.

“By that date, the pandemic had been in existence for well over a year and a vaccine had been available to the public for over ten months under Emergency Use Authorization,” the ruling noted.

The city also violated the law by not providing unions with information they requested that was relevant to negotiations and by eliminating a testing alternative to vaccination.

The city was ordered to bargain with the unions, including the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); provide the information that had been withheld, and rescind the vaccination requirements.

City officials were also ordered to reinstate any workers terminated as a result of the mandate, rescind any discipline for workers who were not terminated, and expunge the records of both sets of workers as it relates to actions taken due to the mandate.

Employees who lost pay or benefits due to the improper changes to sick leave made as part of the mandate must be compensated, the judge also said.

A spokesperson for AFSCME told news outlets: “We think it’s a strong decision and favorable for worker rights generally.”

A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said the ruling “was an erroneous decision that does not follow the law, facts nor importantly the science” and that the city was considering its next steps.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

They want to put college students’ lives at risk to protect them from a disease that is easily avoided. If this bill is passed, college students under 26 would be forced to receive this shot in this state.

Download Interview Transcript  Download my FREE Podcast  Video Link

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• If passed, California bill AB 659 would require public college students under 26 to receive the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine in order to attend college.
• The bill originally proposed mandating the shot for middle schoolers, as a requirement to enter eighth grade—this was amended to a requirement for schools to notify parents that their children “are expected” to get the HPV vaccine before entering eighth grade.
• Most people who are sexually active contract HPV during their lifetime—in more than 90 percent of cases, the HPV infection resolves on its own within two years.
• As of March 31 there were more than 73,302 adverse reactions from HPV vaccines listed in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 623 related deaths, 7,400 hospitalizations, and 3,530 disabling conditions. Due to the low VAERS reporting rates, this may represent only 1 percent of the cases.
• In most cases, only long-term, untreated HPV infections will trigger cervical cancer, and these are typically easily caught and treated with regular Pap smears.

A proposed California bill, AB 659, would require public college students under 26 to receive the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine in order to attend college.¹ The bill originally proposed mandating the shot for middle schoolers, as a requirement to enter eighth grade.

This was amended and it now proposes a requirement for schools to notify parents that their children “are expected” to get the HPV vaccine before entering eighth grade at any public or private school in the state.² While HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States,³ there is much fearmongering about its role in cancer—and the HPV vaccine causes more harm than good in many who take it.

Mandating an HPV vaccine to attend college threatens health freedom, and the idea that it’s necessary to protect public health is far more propaganda than science.

The Truth About HPV–It’s Usually Not Harmful

There are more than 200 types of HPV, and most of them are harmless. Most people who are sexually active contract HPV during their lifetime. In more than 90 percent of cases, the HPV infection resolves on its own within two years.⁴ What’s more, HPV antibodies are left behind that may prevent against reinfection.

About 40 HPV types may cause anogenital infections, while 15 are considered high-risk types associated with cervical cancer. “In the general female U.S. population, the prevalence of HPV 16 and 18 infections, considered the most frequent and most aggressive, is only 2.3 percent,” researchers explained in the Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination.⁵

In the cases when HPV doesn’t clear up on its own, infection can become chronic. Over the course of years, precancerous cervical lesions may develop. It’s estimated that only 5 percent of high-risk HPV infections persist beyond three years and progress into cancer precursors. From there, if left untreated, 20 percent may turn into invasive cancer after five years, while 40 percent may turn into invasive cancer after 30 years.⁶

However, this is why it’s recommended that women get regular Pap tests, also known as Pap smears, which collect cervical cells and check them for signs of changes caused by HPV. If the test comes back abnormal, treatment is available to remove the abnormal cervical cells.

According to the National Cancer Institute, “Very few people who are screened for cervical cancer at routine intervals develop cervical cancer. Screening can find cervical changes early, which can lower a person’s chance of dying from cervical cancer.”⁷

Nonetheless, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends Gardasil 9, which is the only HPV vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the United States,⁸ “for routine vaccination at age 11 or 12 years,” although the shots may be started as young as 9.

Further, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends the HPV vaccine for everyone through age 26 if they didn’t get the shot when they were younger.⁹ But in the review of Gardasil published in the Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination, researchers wrote:¹⁰

“Gardasil can only offer women participating in [Pap] screening programs a 10 percent reduction in abnormal Pap tests with a resultant 20 percent decrease in colposcopies and a 42 percent decrease in treatments.”

HPV Vaccine Risks Are Well-Documented

As of March 31, there were more than 73,302 adverse reactions from HPV vaccines listed in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).¹¹ This includes 623 related deaths, 7,400 hospitalizations and 3,530 disabling conditions. More than half the serious adverse events (56 percent) occurred in youth aged 6 to 17 years. Due to the low VAERS reporting rates, this may represent only 1 percent of the cases.

In the United States, there is a federally operated vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) that Congress created under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., handles contested vaccine injury and death cases in what has become known as “vaccine court.”

As of April 1, there have been 766 claims filed with the VICP relating to injuries and deaths after HPV vaccination. The claims involve 20 deaths and 746 serious injuries, but fewer than one-third of the claims have been compensated, according to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC).¹²

Reported side effects of Gardasil vaccination include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally.^13,14 As noted by NVIC:¹⁵

“For example, an HPV vaccine injury claim was filed and awarded by the VICP for Christina Tarsell. Christina was a 21-year-old college student majoring in studio arts at Bard College when she received a series of three Gardasil shots.

“A talented athlete, artist, and honor roll student, she died suddenly and without explanation shortly after the third shot in June 2008. Ten years later, in 2018, the government conceded the case and awarded compensation to her mother for Christina’s vaccine-related death.”16

HPV Vaccine May Lead to Autoimmune Syndrome

The dangers of high immunogenicity were addressed in my 2015 interview with Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., a research scientist at the University of British Columbia. In it, she explains that by triggering an exaggerated inflammatory immune response, vaccine adjuvants end up affecting brain function.

In collaboration with a team led by professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, a world expert in autoimmune diseases who heads the Zabludowicz Autoimmunity Research Centre at the Sheba Hospital in Israel, Tomljenovic has demonstrated how the HPV vaccine can cause brain autoimmune disorders. It was these findings that prompted the Japanese government to remove the HPV vaccine from its list of recommended vaccines.¹⁷

Shoenfeld used the term autoimmune syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) to describe autoimmune conditions that may be triggered by exposure to a vaccine or other stimuli. A team of researchers from Italy explained in the EPMA Journal:¹⁸

“This syndrome is characterized by the appearance of myalgia, myositis, muscle weakness, arthralgia, arthritis, chronic fatigue, sleep disturbances, cognitive impairment, and memory loss …

“The adjuvants added into vaccines can induce a non-specific activation of the immune system with a subsequent expansion of autoreactive (in our case, myelin specific) lymphocytes that may be further accelerated by defective regulatory cells/circuits, in genetically susceptible individuals.

“In the 2016, we retrospectively described a case series including 18 girls (aged 12–24 years) for the evaluation of “neuropathy with autonomic dysfunction” immediately after HPV vaccine …

“All girls complained of long-lasting and invalidating somatoform symptoms of the recently described ASIA syndrome (including asthenia, headache, cognitive dysfunctions, myalgia, sinus tachycardia, and skin rashes) that have developed 1–5 days, 5–15 days, and 15–20 days after the last dose vaccination.

“The HPV vaccine formula contains aluminum … but also high polysorbate 80 (50 mcg) concentration that might also induce a greater meningeal permeability leading to a facilitated entrance of many substances to the CNS [central nervous system]. Based upon these observations, it might be speculated that HPV vaccine could induce some abnormal activation of immune competent cells in the CNS, such as the glia.”

Have Cervical Cancer Rates Decreased–or Increased?

The HPV vaccine is misleadingly referred to as a tool to prevent cancer. Even California’s proposed bill AB659 is known as the Cancer Prevention Act.¹⁹ But does the vaccine actually reduce cancer cases?

A CDC study suggested that incidence rates of cervical squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma declined since the introduction of the HPV vaccine, but this was among women aged 15 to 20 years, who don’t typically receive cervical cancer screening or get cervical cancer.²⁰ There are an average of 14 cervical cancer cases in 15- to 19-year-olds annually in the United States, to put this into perspective.²¹

This simply doesn’t show the whole picture, including whether or not HPV shots are preventing cancer as claimed. Instead, a “troubling spike” in advanced cervical cancer cases has been noted.²² As reported in the December 2022 issue of the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer:²³

“Over the last 18 years [2001 through 2018], 29,715 women were diagnosed with distant stage cervical carcinoma … When examining the trends over time, there has been an annual increase in distant stage cervical cancer at a rate of 1.3 percent per year. The largest increase is seen in cervical adenocarcinoma with an average annual percent change of 2.9 percent.”

There’s even evidence suggesting HPV vaccination makes women more susceptible than their nonvaccinated peers to HPV genotypes not covered by the vaccine.²⁴ Due to a phenomenon known as “clinical unmasking,” it appears that women who received the HPV vaccine may be more vulnerable to infection by other cancer-causing HPV strains.

This “could attenuate long-term reductions in high-grade disease following successful implementation of HPV vaccination programs in screened populations,” according to the study, published in The Lancet Oncology.²⁵

Trial data from Merck even shows that Gardasil may actually increase your risk of cervical cancer by 44.6 percent if you have been exposed to certain HPV strains, such as 16 or 18, prior to vaccination.²⁶ According to a Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee background document regarding Gardasil concerns:²⁷

“One was the potential for Gardasil™ to enhance disease among a subgroup of subjects who had evidence of persistent infection with vaccine-relevant HPV types at baseline.

“The other concern was the observations of CIN 2/3 [abnormal precancerous cervical cells] or worse cases due to HPV types not contained in the vaccine. These cases of disease due to other HPV types have the potential to counter the efficacy results of Gardasil™ for the HPV types contained in the vaccine.”

What’s the Best Way to Avoid Cervical Cancer?

Mandates for the HPV vaccine have no place in public health. There are multiple ways to reduce your risk of HPV infection, as well as cervical cancer, without risking adverse health effects from the vaccine. To avoid contracting HPV, practice safe sex, including using condoms during sexual activity. This can reduce the risk of HPV infection by 70 percent,²⁸ which is far more effective than the HPV vaccine.

Further, women should get regular Pap smears once sexually active, and get treatment if you test positive for HPV infection or abnormal cervical cells. Remember, it’s the long-term, untreated infections that usually trigger cancer, and these are typically easily caught and treated with regular Pap smears.

Originally published  April 21, 2023, on Mercola.com

◇ References:

• ¹ Desert Sun April 9, 2023
• ^2, 19 California Legislative Information, AB-659 Cancer Prevention Act
• ^{3, 8, 11, 12} NVIC, Disease & Vaccine Information, HPV Disease and Vaccine Information, HPV Quick Facts, HPV
• ⁴ NVIC, HPV & HPV Vaccine Quick Facts
• ^5, 6 J Vaccines Vaccin. 2010 Nov 23; 1(107): 1000107., Intro
• ⁷ National Cancer Institute, Cervical Cancer Screening
• ⁹ U.S. CDC, HPV Vaccination Recommendations
• ¹⁰ J Vaccines Vaccin. 2010 Nov 23; 1(107): 1000107
• ¹³ NVIC.org, HPV Vaccine and Disease Quick Facts
• ¹⁴ Collective Evolution Jan. 8, 2018
• ¹⁵ NVIC, Can HPV vaccine cause injury and death?
• ¹⁶ Court Listener, Tarsell vs. Secretary of Health and Human Services March 26, 2018
• ¹⁷ Tokyo Times 2014
• ¹⁸ EPMA J. 2017 Sep; 8(3): 295–311., HPV vaccine and ASIA syndrome
• ²⁰ Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2021 Jan; 30(1): 30–37
• ²¹ Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov; 120(5): 1117–1123
• ²² Medscape Sept. 7, 2022
• ²³ International Journal of Gynecological Cancer Dec. 1, 2022; 32(9)
• ²⁴ Medscape June 21, 2022
• ²⁵ The Lancet Oncology June 13, 2022
• ^26, 27 FDA.gov Gardasil HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine May 18, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting (PDF, page 13, “Concerns Regarding Primary Endpoint Analyses Among Subgroups”)
• ²⁸ N Engl J Med 2006; 354:2645-2654, Discussion

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Washington, D.C. – The reports of the collapse of America’s educational institutions are, as Mark Twain might have put it “greatly exaggerated.” That does not mean their current performance is flawless or even adequate. The reality is they are in a state of prolonged decline.

This is as true for institutions of higher learning as it is for local K-12 establishments. Test scores are down. Violence on campus and truancy are up. Simply put, in far too many places like the city of Chicago, there’s considerable evidence that our children are not learning.

This is not because they are somehow deficient or because they cannot learn. They can. It’s that many of the institutions now in operation are failing, something few are willing to address because it means taking on powerful lobbies that have acquired profound political influence.

There is hope. Ralston College, with its innovative Masters’ only program, divides its classes between Greece and Savannah, Georgia. The innovative University of Austin also makes headlines even though it has yet to enroll any students. Then there is Mount Liberty College in Utah which one of us helped found and which will produce its first graduating class later in April.

The purpose of Mount Liberty is to provide a true Liberal Arts education for its students. It started with ten students who responded eagerly to its program, providing a rigorous engagement with the classic books of the world’s history and literature, using the Socratic method.

Licensed by the State of Utah to offer college degrees, Mount Liberty has not sought accreditation, nor will it. Accreditation is the tool the educational establishment uses to enforce conformity. If there was ever a case to be made for it, its time has passed. Graduate schools, professional schools and employers are looking for graduates who can do the job. Accreditation really says nothing about the quality of education an undergraduate receives. Better to rely on aptitude tests and the GRE.

Doubters should take note that one MLC graduate, Ari Johnson, (summa cum laude), has been accepted to a graduate program conducted by the Columbia School of Journalism at Oxford next fall.

The difference between Mount Liberty and so many other institutions of higher learning is that the emphasis is on education, not training. The need for a solid grounding in what makes us human and special is the top-line concern for its administrators and faculty. The arts, history, thinking about truth, beauty and freedom are the constituent parts of the Great Conversation in which students must participate if they are to learn how to learn anything.

Mount Liberty is revolutionary in that it wants to be accessible rather than elite, the aspiration of most private colleges and universities. Tuition for a full load of fifteen semester hours is only $2,250 and, thanks to a modest grant from the Sorenson Legacy Foundation, all enrolled students (so far) receive financial assistance.

That matters because the higher education cartel has it fixed so that no one attending an unaccredited school is eligible for federal financial aid. It’s one more way of keeping potential innovators from breaking ranks.

The college has no full-time faculty. Each has practical experience starting and running a business. From mortgage companies to political consulting firms to software companies, the diversity of entrepreneurial activity is impressive, more so than can be found on the campus of the elite schools in the east.

Jennifer Jensen, another of Mount Liberty’s co-founders thinks this approach generates graduates well prepared for the challenges ahead. “If you look at those who run the highest of high-tech companies,” she says, “you find that they usually have a liberal arts background.”

The purpose of Mount Liberty is not to “produce more cogs for the machine,” she says. “We want to produce the people who will run the companies that own the machines. Anyone can learn to code; but knowing what – and what not – to code, that’s the important thing. We need more entrepreneurs and what better way to learn than from those with the experience.”

This is the kind of innovation that will save American education which, in turn, will save the nation from intellectual collapse. The accreditation monster stands in the way, ready to stomp on the proponents of change by impeding their ability to compete in the marketplace of knowledge. The school’s founders, however, welcome the challenge. As Emerson’s “better mousetrap” probably was not built in a day, neither will higher education be fixed. So long as there are examples for others to follow, like Mount Liberty, the idea of reform shall not die.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Washington, D.C. – The operatives who design and execute strategy in American political campaigns are driven by the need to know why voters behave the way they do. What drives them to pick one candidate over another? Is their choice personality-driven or do issues matter? If it’s the latter, what issues are they? And are they constant or do they change from election to election?

There are a lot of things the pollsters and practitioners of the political arts want to know about why people vote the way they do. Most of all, what keeps them up at night? What all-consuming fear arises in the quiet times when they are alone with their thoughts that leave them sleepless?

That, to put it bluntly, is what the consultant class believes goes into the “secret sauce” that helps people determine which party they’re going to support and how they’ll vote. That’s the theory anyway, which is why the number of negative ads on the air increases as the election gets closer.

In real life, voters are a bit more sophisticated. They’re not just motivated by fear, although it does play a part, as is evident from the way campaigns unfold. That’s why the Democrats spend so much time and money in every election accusing the Republicans of having a plan to cut Social Security benefits. It doesn’t matter if it’s true (and it isn’t, by the way). It’s just a matter of making enough high-propensity voters over the age of 62 believe it’s true enough to influence how they vote.

Unfortunately for many of the consultants and the candidates they advise, the American people are neither monolithic nor binary in their behavior, their attitudes or their fears. They are complex individuals who, in perfectly rational ways, can see the same thing very differently.

Pollsters David Winston and Myra Miller have been exploring this issue as it applies to the debt ceiling. What they’ve found in their latest surveys is particularly instructive.

“The debt limit standoff between the White House and Republicans is not only over philosophies on government spending but also about different views on the most serious threats to the country,” the pair wrote in the most recent edition of The Winston Group’s Discussion Points memo.

That is the issue, on the button. Republicans tend to think the mounting debt, fueled by reckless spending demands coming from Congress and the White House, has pushed the nation to the brink of insolvency and is, therefore, the most serious issue before us.

Democrats, on the other hand, believe it to be what the president and others have called “the existential threat of climate change” which, if left unaddressed, could bring disaster to the nation of an entirely different kind. They, therefore, support the spending, particularly that which was part of the Inflation Reduction Act which has been described by critics and supporters alike as “the most significant climate legislation in US history.”

Both issues are relevant to the debate, Winston and Miller wrote after matching them up head-to-head in a survey at the beginning of March.

“While both issues may be important,” they wrote, “more than half the country (57%) identified the national debt as the more serious threat over climate change at 38%, but with significant differences by party.”

How that breaks down should come as no surprise. Republicans “overwhelmingly prioritized” the debt, 85% to 13% as did independents but by a smaller margin of 50-42. Democrats, meanwhile, said “climate change” but by just 61 to 35, “with some distinctions among moderates and liberals.”

“By more than 3:1, liberal Democrats identified climate change (70%) as a more serious threat than the debt (27%), with moderate Democrats still prioritizing climate change but at a closer 12-point margin (41-53 debt-climate),” the pollsters wrote.

The split is equally interesting by age. “Generation X (60-36) and Baby Boomers (63-32) prioritized the debt by large margins, with millennial/Gen Z — the group most likely to experience long-term consequences of both climate change and the debt — being split (48-47) on which one is the more serious threat,” Winston and Miller explained.

Returning to where we started, it appears that more people are staying up late worrying about debt than climate change, that is if they’re staying up at all. Both President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy presume they are, which is why they’ve each dug in so deep. The GOP proposal released Wednesday appears modest, even reasonable by current standards. The Democrats have responded to it, however, as though it were a plan for ending the world. That reflects not just where they are as politicians and ideologues but where they think their constituent base is as well.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

ANALYSIS – The Democrat domestic disinformation campaign to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop contents as Russian disinformation played a key role in securing Joe Biden‘s win against Donald Trump in 2020.

The central piece of this blatant election interference was the letter signed by fifty-one senior U.S. intelligence officials claiming, without evidence, that the laptop was likely part of a ruse by Moscow.

The letter was signed by national security luminaries (aka partisan hacks), such as former CIA directors John Brennan and Leon Panetta.

And it was all a Team Biden political dirty trick, admits the former senior U.S. intelligence official who Democrats got to organize the letter – the then-recent deputy director at the CIA, Mike Morell.

The successful effort to sway the election was also orchestrated at the very top of the Biden campaign.

The signers admitted in the original letter that they had no proof that Hunter’s laptop was a Russian plot but still claimed the bombshell New York Post story revealing the contents of the laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

This letter was then used by the media to ignore and discredit the bombshell news, and social media platforms outright censored any mention of it as ‘disinformation.’

Joe Biden himself referenced the letter by these intelligence officials during the debate with Trump and repeatedly elsewhere.

And he was lying to us every time, as the House Judiciary Committee reminds us in this video.

It was always a lie. https://t.co/rDaXQh7vJs— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) April 21, 2023

And now we know that it wasn’t just any Democrats behind the nefarious scheme, but a cadre of highly placed Biden campaign officials, including the current Secretary of State, Antony Blinken.

National Review writes:

Within days of the New York Post first breaking news of Hunter Biden’s laptop, Secretary of State Antony Blinken — then a senior official on Joe Biden’s campaign — reached out to a former CIA operative to collect signatures from senior American intelligence figures to discredit the story, according to recently declassified congressional testimony.

Mike Morell…a signatory to the infamous letter, reportedly told the House Judiciary Committee in private sworn testimony that Blinken personally reached out to him to manufacture the letter to undermine the credibility of the Post’s reporting on the eve of the 2020 presidential election.

In his testimony, Morell, who until he wrote and signed the letter had been on a short list for CIA director, admitted that he organized the letter at the behest of Blinken.

He also stated that he later received a call from Steve Ricchetti, Chairman of the Biden campaign, following the October 22 debate to thank him for writing the letter.

Representative Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, tweeted a copy of the letter he sent to Blinken demanding more information about everyone involved in creating and promoting the false laptop letter.

Reacting to this breaking news with @IngrahamAngle at 10:20 p.m. ET on Fox News.

Tune in! https://t.co/U5cLRrehgJ— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) April 21, 2023

In his letter, Jordan states: “It is apparent that the Biden campaign played an active role in the origins of the public statement, which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election.”

As I have argued numerous times before, here and elsewhere, these intelligence officials were engaged in domestic disinformation and election interference at the highest level.

And they should be investigated by the FBI.

When asked why he wrote the letter, Morell states: “There were two intents.”

“One intent, he claims, “was to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue; and, two, it was [to] help Vice President [Biden].”

When asked why he wanted to help Biden, Morell admitted, “because I wanted him to win the election.”

It doesn’t get more clear than that.

On Friday, both the U.S. Supreme Court and the Japanese Ministry of Health made decisions okaying the use of abortion pills – at least for now. Both decisions are deadly.

The U.S. Supreme Court voted to allow the use of the abortion pill mifepristone – until lower court decisions are made, at which point it will likely be appealed back to the Supreme Court. Over half of the abortions in the U.S. are committed using the abortion pill mifepristone.

The facts are clear – chemical abortion isn’t good for women:

• Chemical abortion pills led to a 500% increased rate of abortion-related ER visits.
• The complication rate for abortions using mifepristone is four times higher compared to surgical abortion.
• And one in three women who experience chemical abortion have a negative view of themselves and/or their decision following their abortion.

Chemical abortion’s medical complications aren’t just proven by stats. There are real-life people who are hurt – and even killed.

In a letter to the Japanese government dated April 20, 2023, Dr. Joemol M.S. (OB/GYN) tells what recently happened to a young female recent high school graduate: Manisha.

“Manisha… got admitted to the ward with fever, loose stool, and vomiting. Thinking it could be an acute gastroenteritis we tried to revive her. But she was not responding to the usual treatment. While probing into a detailed history, it was revealed to us that she had got entangled with a boy and was pregnant. She tried to take the abortion pills over the counter to abort the pregnancy, but she landed in an incomplete abortion; slowly she went into a critical stage – septicemia. We had to shift her to a higher center, but she succumbed to death within a day. We lost a young girl with another potential life who was not even given the opportunity to see the light of this world.”

Manisha isn’t the only one who has died from chemical abortion – like Dr. Joemol shared – in every “successful” abortion – the baby dies.

Despite this, Friday, the Japanese Ministry of Health voted to allow chemical abortions – for the first time ever in their country.

In the days leading up to the decision, Sasaki Kazuo – a pro-life advocate from the Tokyo area – took a hunger strike to protest. Sasaki lost nearly 20 pounds while only consuming water. Sasaki’s reasoning? The abortifacients would worsen Japan‘s dropping fertility rate and kill human beings.

“It’s a complete contradiction for the government to be saying that while it’s trying to make abortifacients available to every woman in Japan,” Sasaki said. “We hear endlessly about policies to stem the shrinking of the population, but why are politicians trying to make it easier to kill children? I want to ask Prime Minister Kishida directly: ‘Are you serious about the population problem?’”

Maybe the U.S. Supreme Court decision doesn’t come as a surprise to some. Banning the pills which are used to kill about 500,000 pre-born people in America every year would be very significant.

But the Japanese government’s action contradicts the serious work done by their government to increase the merger birth rate (1.368 live births per woman), which is way below replacement. A previous effort to ban abortions in Japan to increase the fertility rate was made by Liberal Democrat Seiko Noda in 2013. And the measure had delayed twice due to the efforts of the Seimei Soncho Center, a pro-life organization in Japan.

Friday’s decisions are sad and show even more the need to raise up leaders – both in the U.S. and around the world – to be lifesavers – proactively helping young moms in pregnancy crisis find the support and courage to choose life. Pro-Life Global does just this – training and equipping young people to be the change our world needs.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

ABC’s Sunny Hostin came out swinging on Friday’s episode of “The View.”

Her explosive comments were in response to Joy Behar‘s remarks about her safety during a recent trip to Italy. Reflecting on her vacation, Behar called guns “the major problem” in the United States.

Hostin added that the vast majority of gun owners are white men. She opined that they “are being radicalized by Fox News…by other right-wing media” and “taught to fear people that don’t look like them.”

Nicholas Fondacaro of the Media Research Center didn’t take kindly to her words.

Racist Sunny Hostin says the problem with gun owners is that they’re white, calls them a “radicalized” threat to the country.
“People are being radicalized by Fox News. They’re being radicalized by other right-wing media and being taught to fear people that don’t look like them.” pic.twitter.com/PL0YLpL1bN— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) April 21, 2023

Hostin’s co-hosts offered their opinions, as Breitbart notes:

Co-host Sara Haines said, “This instinct to shoot first is a really complicated problem with a lot of different branches. I think the obsession with social media, time spent on social media, the kind of numbing of something social that’s antisocial, I think consumption of porn, now we’re getting into some of the lane of a lot of male of all ages, video games. A lot of these things are removing that humanity, that empathy, that connection.”

She added, “We’re also watching the degradation of church. I am not an institutional church person. I was raised in the church, I’ve got a lot of issues, but one thing across religions and churches, there’s a morality component, a duty to serve your community, your families, to people that are different from you.”

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Reports indicate Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., plans to create a legal defense fund to help pay for tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees relating to the federal criminal probe into his dealings with foreign regulators.

Menendez’s office confirmed plans to create the fund to NBC News as the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York continues its months-long investigation into the Democrat.

Federal investigators opened to new probe into Menendez in October and have given no indication of how long it is expected to continue.

The probe has already cost Menendez roughly $200,000 in campaign funds, according to filings obtained by NBC.

“Senator Menendez is confident that this official inquiry will be successfully closed, but as it is still unresolved he will be opening a separate legal defense fund so as not to drain any further campaign funds,” a spokeswoman for Menendez told the outlet. Fox News Digital reached out to Menendez’s office for additional comment, but they did not immediately respond.

The probe, which involves several federal organizations, is investigating lavish gifts Menendez’s wife received from a food producer that obtained an exclusive contract with the Egyptian government to certify Halal food exports across the globe.

The inquiry is considering whether Menendez may have improperly used his position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to influence the deal.

The committee controls roughly $2 billion in U.S. aid to Egypt, according to NBC.

Menendez was previously indicted on federal bribery charges in 2016.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

A lawyer for Hunter Biden says an IRS agent broke the law by telling Congress about problems with the agency’s investigation of the troubled first son, a claim the agent’s lawyer called an “unfortunate” attack on his client.

Biden lawyer Chris Clark said in a statement Thursday that “it appears this IRS agent has committed a crime” by “improperly disclos[ing] information about an ongoing tax investigation.” Clark was responding to bombshell claims from a senior IRS special agent who says the Biden Justice Department has stalled an investigation into Biden’s taxes for political reasons. The whistleblower also claims that Attorney General Merrick Garland gave misleading testimony last month when he insisted that the U.S. attorney in Delaware, who has led the Biden probe since 2018, has been allowed to proceed unencumbered.

“It’s really unfortunate that statement was made,” Mark Lytle, a lawyer for the whistleblower, said in response to Clark’s statement. Lytle, a veteran whistleblower attorney, added that his client expected to be attacked for coming forward and that “attacks like [Clark’s] were really what he was worried about.” He said Clark’s statements will likely thwart future whistleblowers from coming forward. “I don’t think it helps whistleblowers as a whole,” Lytle said.

The statement from Biden’s attorney marks a surprising turn for Democrats, who staunchly defended whistleblowers in the Trump administration against attacks on their credibility. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.), who led impeachment proceedings against former president Donald Trump, said the whistleblower who kicked off that investigation “will go down in history as a hero.”

A report on Thursday appeared to lend some credence to the whistleblower’s claims. According to NBC News, there is “growing frustration” at the FBI because agents finished their Biden investigation a year ago. IRS agents completed their investigation more than a year ago.

Prosecutors have considered four charges against Biden, according to NBC: a felony charge for tax evasion, two misdemeanor tax charges, and a possible felony charge related to Biden’s application for a gun. Delaware U.S. attorney David Weiss has investigated Biden since 2018.

The IRS agent, who has worked at the agency for a decade, is asking Congress for official whistleblower protections to provide more information about the Biden case. Lytle said in a letter to lawmakers this week that the whistleblower has already filed a complaint internally at the IRS, with the Treasury Department’s inspector general, and with the Justice Department’s inspector general.

The White House, which denied the whistleblower’s allegations on Thursday, did not respond to questions about the remarks from Hunter Biden’s lawyer.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) said Thursday that biological males competing against females is an issue “that doesn’t really exist,” even as several sports organizations have moved to ban transgender athletes in women’s sports.

“MAGA Republicans are trying to sensationalize an issue that doesn’t really exist in the way that they are falsely portraying,” Jeffries told reporters after the House passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act.

House Democrat Leader Hakeem Jeffries says biological males competing on female sports teams is “an issue that doesn’t really exist” pic.twitter.com/9cQrnOwocv

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 20, 2023

The Republican bill, which would require biological females only compete against each other in women’s sports that receive federal funds, passed the House along party lines but is expected to die in the Democrat-controlled Senate. The White House warned President Joe Biden would veto it should it reach his desk. 

Jeffries’s dismissal of the issue comes as sports bodies in recent years have banned biological males from participating in women’s sports in the name of preserving the sport’s fairness and integrity. Last month, the World Athletics Council, which oversees international track and field, imposed a sweeping ban on transgender athletes in women’s events. Last year, the International Rugby League, the International Swimming Federation, and British Cycling passed similar bans.

Transgender athletes became a focus of national attention last year when biological male Lia Thomas won an NCAA women’s swimming championship event after switching from the University of Pennsylvania’s men’s team to its women’s team. Thomas moved from a 65th-place national ranking as a man to first place as a woman, breaking Ivy League records along the way.

Jeffries is also under fire for failing to denounce anti-Semitic views held by his uncle, whom Jeffries once defended in a college op-ed unearthed this month. He said Thursday that he does not “share any of the controversial views that were expressed by my uncle more than three decades ago.”

The 1992 op-ed included defenses of his uncle, who alleged “rich jews” ran the slave trade, and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, an infamous anti-Semite who defended Adolf Hitler and assailed the “stranglehold that Jews have on this government.”

Jeffries also wrote that black conservatives are comparable to “House Negroes” during American slavery, calling them “tokens” and “opportunists.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Suggestions from U.N. leadership that the international body could recognize the Taliban government of Afghanistan met with strong backlash from the United States and other allies. Now the United Nations is backpedaling its statement.

In a seminar at Princeton University on Monday, U.N. deputy secretary general Amina Mohammed said that discussing official recognition for the Afghan terrorist group, which took over Afghanistan two years ago after the Biden administration’s botched military withdrawal, is on the agenda for a U.N.-hosted May meeting in Doha, Qatar.

“We hope that we will find those baby steps to put us back on the pathway to recognition … of the Taliban,” Mohammed said. “In other words, there are conditions.”

U.S. officials quickly responded, saying that discussing a Taliban seat at the United Nations was “unacceptable” and never the “intent and purpose of this meeting.” The office of U.N. secretary general António Guterres reassured reporters in New York that the Taliban’s recognition is not on the agenda.

“The Doha conference on the 1st and 2nd of May is not focusing on recognition and we don’t want there to be any confusion about that,” U.N. deputy spokesman Farhan Haq said. “The point of discussion … is to build a more unified consensus on the challenges at hand.”

The U.N. General Assembly in December shelved for the second time the decision to recognize the Taliban and allow the terrorist group’s leaders to appoint a U.N. ambassador. Granting the Taliban a seat means that the terrorist group would inherit Afghanistan’s current seat on the U.N. women’s rights commission, the Washington Free Beacon reported. Since taking over the Afghan government, the radical Islamic group has stripped women and girls of their rights to work and go to school.

“Under no circumstance should the United States, or any other country, vote to recognize the Taliban at the United Nations,” former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said in November. “It should not be a difficult decision to keep a group of terrorists out of an organization founded to maintain peace and security.”

The Taliban is also stocking its arsenal with $7.2 billion worth of military equipment that the United States left behind during its rushed evacuation, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The Democratic Party’s allies in the mainstream media have never been shy about their distaste for black conservatives, and their animus was on full display last week when Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.), a black Republican, announced he is exploring a run for president.

“Republicans every election cycle need a racial pacifier,” Lincoln Project senior adviser Tara Setmayer said on MSNBC, dismissing Scott’s election bid. “He’s their racial security blanket in the race.”

For posterity’s sake, the Washington Free Beacon has assembled a compilation of some of the most egregious instances of media pundits accusing Scott of betraying his race, like when MSNBC’s Joy Reid accused him of “endors[ing] white power,” or when Mehdi Hasan said Scott downplays his race “until it becomes useful” to Republicans.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

A Lincoln Project adviser on Wednesday attempted to connect the boycott against Bud Light controversy over its sponsorship of a transgender influencer to a spate of recent shootings, blaming both on a “culture of fearfulness.”

“Look, I think there’s a direct line between a culture of fearfulness where people who live in a world in which they feel threatened by Instagram posts or a beer label,” Stuart Stevens, a senior adviser for the Lincoln Project, said in an appearance on MSNBC after host Stephanie Ruhle asked him about recent gun violence.

Frequent MSNBC guest and Lincoln Project senior advisor Stuart Stevens suggested that there’s been a surge in violence in the United States because of the Bud Lite ad with transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney. pic.twitter.com/93BkJqZzpa

— Kevin Tober (@KevinTober94) April 20, 2023

Stevens was referencing the conservative backlash this month against Bud Light after transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney announced a collaboration with the brand. His comments connected the boycott to recent allegedly unprovoked shootings in the United States, such as the shooting of a black Missouri teenager who knocked on the wrong door and of a woman in New York who was killed by a homeowner when she pulled into his driveway.

The Lincoln Project adviser went on to blame Republicans for the shootings, even though there have been no allegations of a political motive in either case. Stevens accused the party of making America the “home of the fearful” through their efforts to “maximize their predominantly white vote, which is a fear- and grievance-based tactic.”

Stevens wrote on Twitter before the TV segment aired, “The same fear that an Instagram post and a beer label is a personal threat to your way of life is the fear that drives someone to shoot a stranger at their door or driveway. It’s a culture of fearfulness in which anything you don’t know or understand is a threat.”

The commentator’s remarks come after members of the media blamed Republicans for the Nashville shooting that killed six people at a private Christian school, with one Nation columnist stating, “Republicans are complicit in these murderers” as “the party of literal death.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

An Army general admitted to Rep. Matt Gaetz (R., Fla.) that the Army’s transgender inclusion policies are “probably not” helping recruitment.

Gaetz pressed Gen. James McConville during a Wednesday Pentagon budget hearing on whether recruitment of a key military demographic, “men from the American South,” might suffer from the Army’s transgender inclusion policies, such as its guidelines allowing biological men to shower with female soldiers.

“Do you think you’re going to recruit more of them with this kind of stuff?” Gaetz asked McConville.

“Probably not,” the general replied.

Allowing men to shower with women in the military DOES NOT build a more cohesive unit.

Even Army Chief of Staff General McConville admitted that this weird force-feeding of DEI from the Army will not help with our nation’s military recruitment crisis. pic.twitter.com/PEAvfUUPkD

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) April 19, 2023

Gaetz argued during the hearing that the policy of transgender inclusion hindered the goal of building a “cohesive team,” telling Army Secretary Christine Wormuth that condoning “people with male genitalia showering with your female soldiers” would hurt recruitment of women.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a big positive recruiting pitch to women that when someone shows up with male genitalia in their shower stall, that we tell them that we’re trying to build a cohesive team,” Gaetz told Wormuth.

Wormuth pushed back against Gaetz’s critiques of the transgender policies, saying, “Women are more worried about being sexually harassed in the Army than they are about the kinds of things that you’re bringing up.”

The U.S. military has faced challenges to recruiting in recent years, such as a growing epidemic of obesity and mental health problems in the American population. With 77 percent of young Americans currently deemed unfit for military service, the Department of Defense has loosened restrictions on recruits with mental health problems. The Air Force this month increased its body fat allowance for recruits in order to combat the dismal recruitment numbers.

The Biden administration has introduced diversity, equity, and inclusion measures into its military branches, with an Air Force division implementing a policy of gender neutral written communications last year to improve “lethality.”

“We must embrace, promote, and unleash the potential of diversity and inclusion,” read a Pacific Air Forces order obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Army missed its FY 2022 recruitment goal by 25 percent, or 15,000 soldiers, and expects continued decline in 2023.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

New ‘Environmental Justice Scorecard’ tracks DOD’s work to fight climate change, address ‘historically overburdened communities’

Joe Biden will grade the U.S. military and all other government agencies on their “efforts to advance environmental justice” through a new scorecard that tracks their work to fight climate change and deliver “environmental and health benefits to disadvantaged communities.”

Biden on Friday morning announced the U.S. government’s “first-ever Environmental Justice Scorecard,” a “new government-wide assessment of federal agencies’ efforts to advance environmental justice.” Included in the project is the Department of Defense, which Biden will grade on its work to address “environmental, climate-related, and cumulative impacts on communities with environmental justice concerns.”

The department’s first scorecard highlights some of that work. The Navy, for example, organized the traffic flow at one of its docks at Pearl Harbor in a way that “minimizes impacts on historically overburdened communities,” according to the scorecard. The Navy also adjusted a “modernization project” at its Fallon Range Training Complex, which hosts pre-deployment combat training for both air and ground forces, to “respond to several Tribal concerns,” the card says. The scorecard goes on to commend the Department of Defense for hosting “40 internal training(s) for staff on environmental justice” and hiring “at least 640 staff that work on environmental justice,” though it does ding the department for not updating its “environmental justice strategic plan” in the last five years.

Biden has placed the fight against climate change at the center of his administration, but the effort does not stop with the Democrat’s Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency. That’s because Biden in January 2021 issued an executive order calling on all government agencies to “combat the climate crisis with bold, progressive action.” Federal agencies from the Department of Justice to the Department of Veterans Affairs responded by releasing “Climate Action” plans, which outline how the agencies will “incorporate climate adaptation considerations” and “comprehensively consider environmental justice” in their daily work.

For Florida Republican congressman Mike Waltz, Biden has gone “way too far” in applying the administration’s climate initiatives to the military.

“While it’s essential we ensure our military bases are resilient, the Biden administration is again taking things way too far,” Waltz told the Washington Free Beacon. “Our country faces more threats than ever before and now our military will be forced to take their focus off lethality to ensure they make some sort of environmental justice scorecard? It’s absurd.”

The White House, which did not return a request for comment, announced the scorecard as part of an executive order aimed at “further embedding environmental justice into the work of federal agencies.” During her Friday press briefing, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre struggled to explain how the order would help vulnerable Americans recovering from a toxic train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, instead opting to tout Biden’s “most ambitious climate agenda.”

Q: What does Biden’s environmental justice announcement mean for East Palestine?

KJP:”What’s important to note about this environmental justice EO is the president’s continued support in his climate agenda. His ambitious climate agenda. He has the most ambitious climate agenda.” pic.twitter.com/d8bzI0Ok1J

— Washington Free Beacon (@FreeBeacon) April 21, 2023

Still, Biden has spent big on environmental justice in recent weeks. Earlier this month, for example, his administration pledged to spend up to $1 billion in taxpayer funds to promote “equitable access to trees,” an effort it said would “advance environmental justice” and fight climate change.

In some cases, Biden’s expensive, whole-of-government approach to climate change has prompted criticism from Republicans for what they say is wasteful spending. Biden’s U.S. Agency for International Development, for example, last year released its 2022-2030 climate strategy, which details a $150 billion “whole-of-Agency approach” to building an “equitable world with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.” Included in the effort is a pledge to inspire and support young climate activists in developing countries and help those activists address the “climate-related mental health conditions” they suffer from, the Free Beacon reported in March. Congressional Republicans hammered Biden in response, with Florida senator Rick Scott calling the policy “the definition of America last.”

“American tax dollars should be spent supporting Americans, not overseas climate activists,” Scott said.

This is not the first time Biden has faced criticism for his “woke military,” with Republicans arguing that left-wing politics are distracting America’s armed forces from their “core mission” to fight and win wars. In one case, the Department of Defense in November issued a “Climate Literacy” questionnaire, which asked service members whether they have the “right amount of knowledge/information on climate change” needed to perform their duties and if they are “integrating climate change considerations” into their “regular responsibilities.” Alabama Republican congressman Mike Rogers trashed the poll, accusing the Department of Defense of “wasting our service members’ time with surveys on climate change.”

“The military should not be distracted from its mission of maintaining the most lethal and capable force in the world,” Rogers told Fox News.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Legislation introduced this week by congressional Democrats would forbid border officials from detaining illegal immigrants who identify as LGBT in almost all circumstances.

The Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act, sponsored by dozens of Democrats including Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.) and Sen. Cory Booker (D., N.J.), would set a norm that “vulnerable” migrants “may not be detained,” Fox News reported. Vulnerable groups, according to the bill, include migrants who identify as “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex,” don’t speak English, or have experienced “severe trauma.”

“This is a measure that will go a long way to restore humanity and dignity to the immigration system.” Jayapal said of the legislation. 

The proposal comes as illegal immigration surges on the southern border. Border Patrol agents reported 162,317 migrant encounters in March, an increase of 32,000 migrants from February. Eleven of the migrants had names matching ones on the terror watch list, the Washington Times reported.

Title 42, the policy allowing agents to turn illegal immigrants away due to the pandemic, will expire on May 11. Biden’s enforcement of it has come into question, with new reporting showing the administration accepted 99 percent of migrants’ requests made through an immigration app for exemptions from the policy. 

Under the Democrats’ bill, the Department of Homeland Security could only detain a migrant identified as “vulnerable” if the agency could prove that it is “unreasonable or not practicable to place the alien in a community-based supervision program.”

The bill contains a host of other provisions that makes it more difficult to detain migrants of any status, imposing, for instance, a “presumption that the alien should be released” during custody hearings.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

‘Arm Taiwan to the teeth’: Lawmakers call for increased military assistance to Taiwan

The United States was unable to fend off a Chinese invasion of Taiwan during a war simulation held Wednesday by Congress, fueling congressional calls for the United States to immediately “arm Taiwan to the teeth.”

Deterrence failed and China struck first, according to officials briefed on the wargame, which was organized by the House Select Committee on China. The simulation found that China’s military would suffer heavy losses during the month-long fight but would be able to implant its invading forces inside Taiwan—even with U.S. forces aiding the island. While the American military sunk around 80 Chinese naval vessels during the course of the exercise, the Chinese military “was able to gain a lodgment with about 80,000 troops on Taiwan,” a source close to the committee who was briefed on the scenario told the Washington Free Beacon.

China’s ability to break Taiwan’s defenses is raising alarm bells with lawmakers on the select committee, which was established earlier this year when Republicans retook control of the House. Rep. Mike Gallagher (R., Wis.), the committee’s chairman, told the Free Beacon the simulation is a wake-up call for the United States to immediately “arm Taiwan to the teeth before any crisis begins.” Without these military resources, Taiwan remains increasingly vulnerable to a Chinese attack, which the U.S. intelligence community assesses could occur anytime from 2024 to 2027.

“We are well within the window of maximum danger for a Chinese Communist Party invasion of Taiwan, and [Wednesday’s] wargame stressed the need to take action to deter CCP aggression and arm Taiwan to the teeth before any crisis begins,” Gallagher said. “The United States needs to deliver on our promises and clear the $19 billion weapons backlog to Taiwan, conduct enhanced joint military training, and reinforce our military posture throughout the region.”

The global economy also fell into “absolute tatters” as a result of the invasion, indicating that the war would spark massive international shockwaves, according to the source. Gallagher said he is distressed by the “disastrous economic consequences” that would blossom in the wake of a Chinese invasion. “Deterring war is the only path to peace and stability, and it is incumbent upon elected officials to take decisive action to do so before it’s too late.”

The war simulation confirmed that the United States’ current determent policies are not enough to stop a military bombardment of Taiwan.

The CCP cut undersea cables during the war game, effectively isolating Taiwan from the rest of the world. This allowed its forces to storm the island and overwhelm Taiwan’s defenses.

After war broke out, “the U.S. adopted a distributed posture throughout the region and leveraged long range strikes to degrade the PLA amphibious assault,” according to the source who was briefed on the simulation.

While the war game did not conclude with a definitive outcome due to time constraints, “the PRC had been exposed to heavy costs, both military and economic, but its commitment to taking Taiwan remained strong,” the source said.

Lawmakers also learned that long range missiles will be critical to any conflict. The United States quickly ran out of long-range stealth anti-ship cruise missiles during the simulation, weapons that were integral to sinking CCP warships.

America also moved to sanction China following an invasion, but many allies were hesitant to join the effort. Global supply chains broke down as a result of the turmoil, highlighting the need for companies to prepare for such a scenario.

Resupplying Taiwan once war breaks out also “is not an option,” according to the source briefed on the game. The United States will have to ensure that Taiwan is fully stocked prior to any invasion.

A separate war simulation organized by House Republicans during their annual retreat last month determined that the United States “would face up to 20,000 military casualties in a single week—the most seen since World War II,” the Free Beacon reported.

The wargame comes ahead of a spring push by the House select committee to increase military aid to Taiwan, according to a congressional source familiar with the effort. Lawmakers are particularly troubled by Chinese president Xi Jinping’s repeated declaration to take Taiwan, as well as his efforts to modernize the country’s military in pursuit of this goal.

Making good on the $19 billion in defense equipment promised to Taiwan, the source said, will send a message to Xi that Taiwan is off limits.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Group decries ‘scapegoating’ of diversity dean and ‘White supremacist practices’

Stanford University’s Black Law Students Association will no longer help the university recruit black students after the law school’s dean, Jenny Martinez, apologized in early March to Fifth Circuit appellate judge Kyle Duncan.

The students cited what they described as the “scapegoating” of the school’s diversity dean, Tirien Steinbach, for an incident last month in which students disrupted Duncan’s remarks and Steinbach egged them on.

“The apology was intimately aligned with White supremacist practices,” the group’s board wrote in a letter to the administration, which was posted on Instagram earlier this month. “We cannot, in good faith, participate in recruiting Black students into a community more concerned with palliating wealthy, White conservative donors than the ‘student-focused and community-inspired’ legal education [Stanford Law School] promotes.”

As such, the group said it would “boycott official admit events” for the class of 2026 and encourage prospective students to go elsewhere. It’s the second boycott to which the law school has been subjected: James Ho and Elizabeth Branch, the circuit court judges who said last year that they would no longer hire clerks from Yale Law School, earlier this month announced a similar clerkship moratorium on Stanford, citing the school’s refusal to punish the students who shouted down Duncan.

The law school administration laid the blame for those antics squarely on Steinbach, who at one point took the podium from the judge and told him his work had “caused harm.” In their apology to Duncan, Stanford University president Marc Tessier-Lavigne and Martinez, the law school dean, said that Steinbach’s intervention was “inappropriate.” Steinbach has been on leave since March, and the law school has not indicated when or if she will return.

“Stanford’s administration has actively marginalized its Black community, most recently by scapegoating Dean Tirien Steinbach,” the Black Students Association wrote. “Dean Martinez and President Tessier-Lavigne’s statements continuously minimize Duncan’s behavior and the impact of his work.”

The letter is the latest snag in Stanford’s efforts to appease free speech advocates without sparking a full-scale revolt from activists. After Martinez apologized to Duncan, as many as 100 students protested her first-year constitutional law course, plastering fliers around her classroom and surrounding her as she exited it. Two weeks later, when the embattled dean outlined the steps Stanford was taking to protect free speech, she acknowledged her course of action would “not please everyone”—”not least of which those who have demanded that I retract my apology to Judge Duncan and those who have demanded that students be immediately expelled.”

The riptide from both groups has put Stanford in a tough spot. Dissatisfied with the soft-gloved treatment of the hecklers, law professors, politicians, and state bar associations have all joined Ho and Branch’s pile-on, using the powers at their disposal to make life difficult for the elite law school.

But bowing to that pressure could come at a cost. Like undergraduate admissions offices, law schools go to great lengths to boost minority representation. If Stanford’s own students begin undermining its admissions efforts—especially those aimed at African Americans—the school may decide that a clerkship boycott is a price worth paying to maintain its diversity.

Black students have “historically contributed an extensive amount of free labor to assist the University” in recruitment, the letter said. “But we are continually overlooked by the administration when it makes significant decisions—as evidenced by the institution’s condoning of Judge Duncan’s behavior.”

The Black Law Students Association, which is led by Ashton Woods and Cheyenne Joshua, and the law school’s admissions office did not respond to requests for comment.

The letter also aired a number of grievances that it said predated the Duncan incident. Stanford, the Black Law Students Association argued, had hobbled the group’s ability “to create a safe space for its members,” and—despite black students’ “free labor”—the school’s admissions policies “reproduce and reify White supremacy, classism, and colorism.”

The group also slammed Stanford for allowing “internet harassment” and the “doxxing of fellow students”—apparently a reference to the Washington Free Beacon‘s reporting, which included the names of several students, such as Denni Arnold, who organized the protest.

“Based on the administration’s handling of DEI, we unequivocally share a vote of no confidence in the current state of the administration’s ability to the administration’s willingness to adequately consider and respect the needs of Black students and administrators,” the group said. “We hope this letter will urge the administration to restructure its processes, lend credence to marginalized communities, and truly acknowledge and combat its practices of exploitation and domination moving forward.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The end of the federal tax season is a perfect time to assess what this annual exercise costs taxpayers. Not in the taxes paid. But in the time and money spent complying with the tax code.

Those costs are very real and very big. In testimony before the Senate Budget Committee, the Tax Foundation‘s William McBride noted that the tax code itself is an unwieldy monster that contains “more than 6,000 pages and about 4 million words (plus about 15,000 pages of associated tax law interpretations)…”

It’s no wonder, then that complying with such a behemoth is so costly:

IN 2022 (BEFORE THE IRA OR THE CHIPS ACT), AMERICANS SPENT MORE THAN 6.5 BILLION HOURS TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE TAX CODE, ACCORDING TO THE LATEST ESTIMATES FROM THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF INFORMATION AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS (OIRA). BASED ON WAGE AND BENEFIT ESTIMATES FOR TAX PREPARERS AND CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, WE ESTIMATE THE HOURLY COMPLIANCE COSTS OF THE TAX CODE EQUATES TO ABOUT $313 BILLION EACH YEAR IN LOST PRODUCTIVITY, OR 1.4 PERCENT OF GDP. THE COMPLIANCE BURDEN FOR INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYERS IS NEARLY $74 BILLION ANNUALLY, WHILE THE BURDEN ON CORPORATE ENTITIES OF COMPLYING WITH JUST THEIR INCOME TAX RETURNS IS MORE THAN $60 BILLION. MUCH OF THE REMAINING $179 BILLION OF COSTS COMES FROM COMPLYING WITH HUNDREDS OF OTHER BUSINESS TAX FORMS AND REGULATIONS, SUCH AS THOSE RELATING TO DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION. COMPLIANCE WITH INCOME TAX RETURNS FOR ESTATES AND TRUSTS COSTS $18 BILLION A YEAR, APPROACHING THE AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE RAISED BY THE ESTATE TAX.

Think of it this way: tax compliance costs drain as much from the economy as a mild recession.

– Advertisement –

The IRS is not exempt from the burden, and cost, of having to plow through all those forms and the rules behind them:

PURSUANT TO ITS EXPANDED ROLE, IN FY 2021 THE IRS PROCESSED SOME 261 MILLION RETURNS AND FORMS AND RECEIVED SOME 4.7 BILLION PIECES OF INFORMATION, DETAILING THE COMPOSITION AND ACTIVITIES OF NEARLY EVERY AMERICAN HOUSEHOLD AND BUSINESS. IN RECENT YEARS, THE IRS HAS FOUND ITSELF LITERALLY BURIED IN PAPERWORK, RESULTING IN PROCESSING DELAYS, MILLIONS OF RETURNS BACKLOGGED, AND POOR CUSTOMER SERVICE. LAST YEAR, FOR INSTANCE, THE IRS ANSWERED ONLY ABOUT 13 PERCENT OF THE 173 MILLION PHONE CALLS IT RECEIVED FROM TAXPAYERS ASKING FOR HELP; THOSE WHO GOT THROUGH WAITED AN AVERAGE OF 29 MINUTES. CLEARLY, ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGES AT THE IRS ARE ALSO PROBLEMATIC FOR TAXPAYERS.

The IRS is getting $80 billion over the next ten years – half to help it process returns quicker and answer taxpayer questions better and half to squeeze more money out of “the rich.”

Taxpayers won’t be getting any such boost. Which means the cost of compliance will continue to be a drag on economic growth, productivity, common sense and patience.

A greatly simplified tax code that emphasized revenue rather than assorted political goals, social nudges and interest group lobbying is an obvious solution. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for either major party to suggest a code revamp that puts clarity, simplicity and fairness first.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Petition calls for removal of school board leaders and district superintendent

It took three weeks for parents to discover that a transgender middle school teacher in Florida confessed to a guidance counselor that the teacher was having “bad thoughts” of self-harm and shooting students.

Now parents are demanding answers, accusing the district of a cover-up, and petitioning Florida’s governor to remove certain members of the Hernando County School Board as well as the superintendent.

Ashlee Renczkowski, a biological male who presents as a female, is the teacher who allegedly made the comments while at the school on March 24.

Kerry Thornton is an assistant principal at Fox Chapel Middle School in Spring Hill, Florida, which is part of the Hernando School District.

According to a report filed with the Hernando County Sheriff’s Office by Fox Chapel School Resource Officer Brian Timothy, Thornton alerted Timothy the afternoon of March 24 that Renczkowski “had just made concerning statements about self-harm and then possibly making statements about shooting students.”

Thornton had visited Renczkowski in the classroom and asked how the teacher was doing, according to Timothy’s report. Renczkowski replied, “Not good, I’m having bad thoughts.” Thornton radioed for guidance counselor Kimberly Walby and brought Renczkowski to Walby’s office.

Social Media Triggers

In Walby’s office, Renczkowski spoke of “a social media post where people were talking negatively” about Renczkowski’s “sexual orientation,” according to Timothy. He also said that Renczkowski was triggered by social media posts critical of the “sexual orientation and lifestyle” of Renczkowski’s wife, Fawn Renczkowski, who also teaches at the school.

Thornton and Walby advised the school resource officer about Renczkowski’s comments.

Renczkowski told Walby about wanting “to shoot some students” because they weren’t performing to their ability, according to the police report. Walby then said Renczkowski recanted the statement. But Walby also “began to reiterate that she has short-term memory issues” and was “starting to second-guess the conversation” when it came to “details and the order of events,” according to Timothy’s report.

Renczkowski also admitted to owning three handguns.

Sandra Hurst, the mental health coordinator for the Hernando School District, traveled to the middle school and met with Renczkowski to conduct a threat assessment. Both Hurst and Thornton agreed that Renczkowski was not an immediate threat to students and therefore could not be involuntarily committed under the Baker Act, but the sheriff’s office did send an officer to Renczkowski’s home that evening to collect the firearms, which Renczkowski surrendered without issue.

In his report about the incident, Timothy said that after meeting with Renczkowski, Hurst “advised that a plan will be devised to meet with Ashlee prior to her returning to work with students. The school principal and Safe Schools was made aware of this incident.”

Parents didn’t learn about the incident until a local reporter named Tom Lemons broke the story on April 7.

An April 17 news release from the district indicated that Renczkowski was not at school March 27–29 but returned to work on March 30. Renczkowski was then teaching in the classroom until April 13, when the Florida Department of Education intervened to have Renczkowski removed.

The Epoch Times contacted Renczkowski for comment but did not receive a response by press time.

‘Respondent May Be Seriously Mentally Ill’

To provide “clarification,” Hernando County Sheriff Al Nienhuis issued a press release on April 12, saying “the investigation revealed that no criminal offense(s) occurred; therefore, no arrest(s) could be made.”

Deputies also determined that “the individual did not, at that moment, meet the required criteria for involuntary commitment under the Baker Act.”

But Nienhuis also said, “In an abundance of caution, the HCSO petitioned the court for a temporary Risk Protection Order,” which the court “granted immediately.”

In an April 13 statement, HCSD Superintendent John Stratton said the district was going to “take a hard look at all the actions that were taken on that day, and in the days following the incident, and determine if any steps were missed.”

“As is our longstanding practice, while the matter is under investigation, the teacher will be removed from all student contact,” Stratton assured. No return date has been set.

In response, the Florida Department of Education (DOE) issued its own press release, informing the public that it was only after the DOE expressed concern directly to Stratton that he chose to remove Renczkowski from the school.

In an April 17 news release, Stratton again said that “the district’s threat assessment was conducted by trained Safe Schools staff and the Hernando County Sheriff’s Office” and “all investigating agencies agree the teacher did not meet criteria for imminent harm to self or others.”

However, according to the risk protection order obtained by The Epoch Times—“served upon the respondent” on March 28, signed by Renczkowski, and “filed in open court” on April 10—it was determined by the HCSO that “the Respondent may be seriously mentally ill or may have recurring mental health issues.”

Renczkowski was ordered to immediately surrender all firearms, ammunition, and “any license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm,” and the document further ordered that Renczkowski may not possess, purchase, or receive any firearm or weapon for one year.

Parents Want Answers

In the wake of the March 27 shooting at The Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee, many Fox Chapel parents are afraid. They’re frustrated by the lack of transparency and dismissive responses from the school district.

Now, a new petition alleges that “the delay in notification was due to a ‘cover-up’ that involved District administration and ranking members of the School Board and other agencies.”

“The clear malicious intent of Superintendent [John] Stratton, his staff, and Board Members [Gus] Guadagnino, [Susan] Duval, and [Linda] Prescott in concealing the seriousness of this incident, including its mere existence, not only from the parents, public, and media, but even other Board members should be grounds enough to remove them from the District immediately,” the petition declares.

The petition was started by the Hernando County Chapter of Moms for Liberty. Chapter Vice President Monty Floyd spoke with The Epoch Times.

“We’ve been working with the parents at Fox Chapel, helping them get answers and to find a resolution to this serious problem,” Floyd said. “Until Lemons exposed this in the press 17 days after it happened, parents were left completely in the dark. When we asked the district what happened, we got crickets. They wouldn’t respond to anybody. That shows there was a cover-up in place. Parents are furious. So we showed up at the April 11 school board meeting and demanded answers.”

‘A Hot Mess’

During the April 11 Hernando County School Board meeting, Lemons described how district spokeswoman Karen Jordan denied that the incident occurred when he asked her to confirm the reports. He suggested this was part of an intentional effort to cover up the incident because the teacher involved was transgender.

One woman who spoke at the meeting suggested that the district’s slow response “should tell you, it didn’t happen,” proposing that everyone stop attacking public education and start getting along.

Another woman who has children at Fox Chapel said she felt differently. She admonished school officials for giving her the runaround, and she scolded the board for keeping parents “in the dark for weeks.”

Parent James Looker said he wanted answers so he could decide if he should pull his son out of Fox Chapel, an institution he described as “a hot mess.”

Dana Johnson has two daughters in Fox Chapel. Her husband is an assistant coach. She said she was “kind of baffled” that a teacher who threatened to shoot students was allowed back in the school. She also wondered why the board wasn’t taking the situation more seriously.

Another woman who spoke said her daughter is in Renczkowski’s classroom. She alleged that Renczkowski has a history of mistreating her daughter, specifically saying that “the teacher broke her phone” and that “the door gets slammed in her face and she was given a bloody nose several times from this.”

One man who spoke also has a daughter in Renczkowski’s classroom. He reminded the board that “someone pulled a fire alarm” recently and parents were notified “the day of.” He wondered why they waited two weeks to tell parents that a teacher threatened to shoot his students.

“It’s almost like you guys don’t really care,” the man said.

Administrators Respond

During comments from board members, Mark Johnson deferred to Stratton.

Johnson is one of the two new board members who say they were kept in the dark by leadership. Shannon Rodriguez, the other newcomer, confirmed how the ambiguous notices sent by leadership kept her unaware of the seriousness of what happened. She contacted Stratton. He said he “didn’t have any details” in front of him and someone would contact her later. When she was contacted, no more details were given, she said.

Rather than addressing parents’ concerns or answering their questions, Prescott used her time to thank “Mrs. Greenwell for bringing up the art information,” and to encourage students to apply for scholarships.

Then Stratton spoke.

“I certainly understand in today’s world why you’re here asking about Fox Chapel, I honestly do,” he said, “and I also want to assure you that we take security of our students and our staff very, very, very seriously.”

He then dismissed the accusation by Rodriguez that she had been left in the dark. He pleaded ignorance about the alleged mistreatment of a student by Renczkowski. He denied knowledge of a lockdown, but reiterated that parents weren’t informed about the incident because investigations by Fox Chapel staff and the HCSD had “determined there was not an imminent threat.”

Parents were audibly irritated.

“I need you to trust—” he said, before being cut off by angry chatter.

Duval chose to close the meeting by sharing a video “on the recent district career and technical education event.”

A din of frustration filled the room. Many began to leave.

“If you’re going to leave, do it quietly,” Guadagnino chided.

District Tries to Clarify

On April 17, Stratton issued another press release.

“Much has been said, rumored and reported about the March 24th incident,” he said, adding that “facts have been blurred with misinformation resulting in greater confusion.”

“This report,” he said, “is intended to outline the facts of the situation as have come to be known over the course of investigations by the school district and law enforcement.”

Missing from his “timeline of events” is an explanation for the delay in informing parents of Renczkowski’s threat and that Renczkowski wasn’t removed until the DOE stepped in two weeks later.

The debacle at Fox Chapel could affect Stratton professionally.

Stratton is one of four finalists in the running to take over as superintendent of Brevard Public Schools, a much larger district with over 74,000 students compared to Hernando Public Schools’ enrollment of about 24,000 students.

Florida Today reported on April 18 that one board member on the Brevard County School Board opposed the selection of Stratton as a finalist in the hiring process, citing the March 24 incident with Renczkowski.

‘More Systemic Than You Realize’

It has been almost a month since the threat was made.

The Epoch Times contacted school board members, asking why parents weren’t immediately informed.

Duval replied by email, saying, “This is a matter still under investigation and as such, I will not be able to comment.”

Johnson responded by phone.

“I think there were a lot of errors from beginning to end,” he told The Epoch Times, saying he and Rodriguez had been “kept more in the dark than the rest of the school board.”

While seeing “a lot of management” regarding the incident, Johnson also sees “a lack of leadership.”

Johnson said the issue of unreported incidents at Fox Chapel “is more systemic than you realize.”

The Epoch Times also reached out to Stratton.

“Because the school district has an open investigation regarding the March 24th incident at Fox Chapel Middle School, no additional information or comment will be made pending the outcome of that investigation,” Jordan, answering on Stratton’s behalf, told The Epoch Times by email.

The Epoch Times advised it was not seeking “additional information” about the incident but rather an answer to a question being asked repeatedly by a growing number of people: “Why weren’t parents immediately notified about this threat?”

Jordan prefaced her second response by quoting the HCSO’s April 12th Media Release:

“On 03-24-23, an event occurred at Fox Chapel Middle School which involved an educator. The event itself, and/or one or more versions of what actually transpired, has brought about much confusion and emotion.”

“Because of the ‘confusion and emotion’ surrounding the incident,” Jordan concluded, “it is vital that the district conducts its investigation in accordance with policy to ensure the final determinations are based on the facts.”

Floyd said it’s a frustrating process trying to get answers from district officials.

“When you ask them a straight question, they give you a word salad,” he said. “They’re trying to cover their backs because they know they did something really wrong.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

• Perry Farhat, Administrative Director, Babs Siperstein PROUD Center: “We don’t care if you see a licensed therapist or not…We don’t require that at all. So, we brought in our own therapist to write our letters to rubber stamp surgeries.”
• Farhat: “We do not provide the authorities any of our records.”
• Farhat: “The [New Jersey] state government, [Governor] Phil Murphy, and even [former Governor] Chris Christie have been very supportive. Financially, the state has not given us anything, but they’ve recognized us multiple times which really helps us with our private — our foundation building.”
• Daniel Fernandez, LGBTQIA+ Health Navigator, Babs Siperstein PROUD Center: “We had a 14, 15-year-old who was still undocumented…She just started hormones as well.”
• Receptionist, Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center [New York, NY]: “We deal with patients that come in at 10 [years-old]. They come in here by themselves.”
• Prisha Mosley, De-Transition Advocate: “I actually didn’t need parental consent [for my gender transition]. My parents were just told that I was more likely to kill myself if they didn’t affirm me…but I didn’t actually need their consent.”
• Mosley: “Anyone who says that you can change your sex is lying to you. It will never happen. You will be chasing constant drugs and surgeries for the rest of your life, attempting this fallacy, but it will never happen. All that will happen is you will be the same person with the same problems in a now mutilated body.”

[NEW YORK – Apr. 20, 2023] Project Veritas released a second video today exposing medical professionals who confirmed that children are being submitted to gender transitions without concern for legal restrictions that may be in place to prevent them.

A receptionist who works at the Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center stated that they “deal with patients that come in at 10 [years-old],” and that these children “come in here by themselves” for prospective gender transitions – raising the question of whether Mount Sinai even considers parental awareness and consent before proceeding with such a transition.

Perry Farhat, the Administrative Director for Babs Siperstein PROUD Center, said that his New Jersey-based medical institution does not take the therapist approval requirement seriously when it comes to moving ahead with transgender surgeries on minors.

“We don’t care if you see a licensed therapist or not…We don’t require that at all. So, we brought in our own therapist to write our letters to rubber stamp surgeries,” he said.

Farhat went on to admit that he is not worried about whether the individuals that are being transitioned are in the country legally.

“So, documented or undocumented, we do not turn down anybody,” Farhat said.

“We don’t ask about whether they’re documented or not. You know, it’s — I don’t want to scare any of our patients away,” he said.

“You come right in. You don’t need a license. You don’t need anything. Whether you’re transgender, straight, gay, doesn’t matter, right? We do not look at that at all, and we do not provide the authorities any of our records.”

Daniel Fernandez, who also works at Babs Siperstein PROUD Center as a “LGBTQIA+ Health Navigator,” corroborated Farhat’s statements.

“We had a 14, 15-year-old who was still undocumented…She just started hormones as well,” Fernandez said.

Project Veritas continues to investigate the transgender surgery industry and the incentives that motivate medical professionals to sexually transition minors to a different gender.

Individuals who work within healthcare institutions and have become aware of wrongdoing are invited to contact VeritasTips@protonmail.com so that the public is informed on the issue.

How many more fingers do we have to show pointing at war with China to act upon it? [US Patriot]

The ban on the Chinese video sharing app Tiktok might face hurdles as top officials are on the platform, says cybersecurity expert Rex Lee.

The Chinese app has been in the headlines recently, especially after the testimony from Singapore-based TikTok CEO Chew Shou Zi before members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee in late March.

At the event, Chew failed to convince lawmakers that TikTok had separated from its China-based parent company ByteDance and wouldn’t pose a national security risk.

Since then, there has been a growing call for a complete ban of the platform in the United States.

However, Lee, a security adviser at My Smart Privacy, pointed to the hearing, noting that no further actions had been taken afterwards.

“One good thing about this last TikTok congressional hearing is there was a lot of bipartisan support to ban it, which is a positive thing. But then here we are, two or three weeks later, and there’s no action being taken,” Lee told “China in Focus” on NTD, the sister media outlet of The Epoch Times.

He called such hearings “political theater,” saying, “What I find out about these congressional hearings, they’re more about politics than resolve. We see these executives go before Congress, half of the politicians in the congressional hearings are addressing the real problems, the other half aren’t, and they never seem to come to full resolution.”

Top Officials Remain on Platform

According to him, obstacles stem from the fact that there are still lawmakers using the platform.

“A lot of people don’t realize this, but over 30 members of the House and Senate are on TikTok,” he said.

He singled out the report by Axios, which states that President Joe Biden and his campaign are planning on teaming up with social media “influencers” to reach young voters.

A number of TikTok “influencers” are among the “hundreds” with whom the Biden group would work, the article reads.

“It was just in the news the other day, that the Biden administration had TikTok influencers, along with Instagram and Facebook influencers, at the White House to spread information about the Biden administration’s platform across the social media platform,” Lee said.

“So when you have congressional hearings, when you have congressional members of Congress and the Senate utilizing TikTok as well as the president, I don’t see how it’s gonna get banned anytime soon,” he added.

Powerful Lobbyists

What’s more? According to Lee, behind those tech companies are powerful lobbyists.

He pointed to Tony Podesta, the brother of former Hillary Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, who recently joined the Biden administration to serve as a senior adviser on clean energy innovation and implementation. Tony Podesta, Lee said, represents Huawei.

He further referred to David Urban, president of the lobbying firm American Continental Group and an adviser to former President Trump’s 2020 campaign, who was reportedly hired to lobby for Bytedance, TikTok’s parent company.

“So they’re hiring both advisors from both parties. And they’re not just going after the average lobbyist who may be a former member of Congress, they’re going after presidential advisors. And they’re using them to influence our laws,” Lee warned.

Updated Privacy Law Needed

Lee said that all social media platforms, including TikTok, “are built on surveillance and data mining, because the companies that developed these platforms are in the information trafficking business and that’s how they make their money. They make their money off of the information they can collect from their end users on these platforms.”

Thus, to protect users, he suggested “updated privacy laws … to put the control back into the end users hands of whether they want their data to be monetized or not.”

“And I think if you start to cut the money off in that area, that will have an impact,” he said.

“So, once you take the ability for these companies to monetize you, and sell you in terms of selling your personal and business information, once you take that motive out of the business equation, and there’s no longer money to be made there. Then you’ll see privacy and security return to our electronic circuits,” Lee said.

The Epoch Times has reached out to TikTok for comment.

Melanie Sun contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Jay Cuesta grew up planning to go to medical school. Then, in 2000, his premature infant died at just two weeks old, and Cuesta’s vision for the future was realigned.

Cuesta told The Epoch Times that nurses were beside him and his wife throughout their ordeal. Nurses were beside them when the child they knew would not survive was born. Nurses were beside them as they grieved in the otherwise sterile hospital environment.

They were beside them through it all.

“I knew what kind of medicine I wanted to practice,” Cuesta said. “That’s the hands-on that I wanted.”

According to recent statistics, many nurses, perhaps the very nurses who inspired Cuesta, are now burnt out, fed up, and ready to quit.

A May 2021 survey of nurses by Vivian Health—an employment service for health care professionals—paints a bleak picture. Vivian surveyed 1,273 nurses across all 50 states and disciplines one year into the pandemic.

Fifty-three percent reported pessimism about the future of health care in the United States. Twenty percent said they were optimistic, and 27 percent weren’t sure.

“Nearly three-fourths report hospital morale has gotten worse in their hospital or health care facility since this time last year,” according to the Vivian report.

Cuesta earned his registered nursing (RN) degree in 2005 and is now working to become a nurse practitioner. Cuesta loves his work and plans to do it for as long as possible. According to experts, he is in the minority. Cuesta agrees with that assessment.

“A lot of (nurses) just said, ‘We’re going to retire early,’” Cuesta said.

Burnout a Major Issue

Robert Rossetter is the chief communications officer for the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN).

“Since the pandemic, we are seeing more reports about nurse dissatisfaction due to burnout, insufficient staffing, and poor working conditions, which may lead to more nurses leaving the profession,” Rossetter wrote in an email to The Epoch Times.

According to Cuesta, as their neighbors locked down and worked remotely early in the pandemic, health care workers put in overtime and pressed down concerns about spreading the sickness to their friends and families.

According to the 2021 Vivian survey, 83 percent of respondents felt their mental health had been affected by pandemic-related stress. Forty-three percent felt their employers did not address their mental health concerns.

Ronnie Cubley has been an RN for almost 30 years. He said many of his fellow nursing veterans are just tired.

“Staff desperately need work-life balance and won’t stay without it. Throughout the U.S., many nurses are doing accelerated retirement,” Cubley wrote in an email to The Epoch Times.

Cuesta said the issue extends beyond the physical demands of increased hours. He said that for most nurses, the intangible rewards of nursing were just as important as the paycheck. But as overtime pay increased, the more abstract rewards diminished. The feeling that they might not be doing enough was left in their place.

Cuesta said seeing his patients in the grocery store or elsewhere is common. Having helped them through some of the more challenging experiences of their lives creates a lasting bond.

“It’s very rewarding. It’s nice to see people in Walmart who want to give you a hug. That’s why I do it,” Cuesta said.

“When you’re taking care of your neighbors, you want to do a good job.”

But, when a nurse runs from one bed to the next with little time between, it’s easy to begin feeling as if they are short-changing those neighbors.

“It really makes it more difficult to provide good quality, consistent care,” Cuesta said.

Consequences of Understaffing

A New England Journal of Medicine report indicates Cuesta’s concerns are well-founded.

In March 2011, the journal published a study on the effects of insufficient nurse staffing on patient mortality. The study was done by a team led by Jack Needleman, a professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at the University of California–Los Angeles.

According to the article, the mortality risk for patients on understaffed units was approximately 6 percent higher when compared with fully staffed units. Researchers also found increased mortality risk when a nurse’s workload increased due to high patient turnover.

Cubley expressed the same concerns as Cuesta. He said he has personally seen the impact of the pandemic.

“So many nurses left the profession during the pandemic because of burnout with overwhelming stress caused by excessive workloads,” Cubley said.

But not all nurses left the profession. Some just quit their jobs. The increased pressures on work and family life drove many nurses to find higher-paying jobs. Many became travel nurses.

What Nurses Earn

Travel nurses are RNs who work for staffing agencies and temporarily fill vacant positions. Travel jobs are popular because they typically pay more. The nurses get to do the bedside care they love and avoid much of the administrative work a full-time nurse at a hospital must do.

According to NursingProcess.org, travel nurses can make between $32 and $86 per hour, averaging $56. Most positions include a living stipend, and some cover other expenses. During the pandemic, the average travel nurse’s pay leaped into triple digits, luring many nurses into that field.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the national average salary for registered nurses is $77,600 annually, or about $37 per hour.

Many staff nurses were upset with hospital administrators who paid high rates for temporary travel nurses instead of hiring local nurses or paying existing nurses more.

According to the Vivian survey, 78 percent of respondents said their job search priorities changed. If they would give up aspects of the job they loved, they wanted at least to be compensated. Sixty-six percent of the survey respondents ranked pay as the most important factor.

“Eventually, at the end of the day, we have to take care of our families,” Cuesta said.

But compensation is only a current issue. Administrators say compensation will work itself out through supply and demand market forces. Another more crucial problem is on the horizon, experts say.

Labor Deficit

The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the registered nursing workforce will grow by 6 percent in the next 10 years from 3.1 million in 2021 to 3.3 million in 2031. This is an increase of 195,400 nurses. However, the Bureau expects the demand for nurses to increase to more than 203,000 annually.

Generally, this demand would be met by nursing programs at colleges and vocational schools. But nursing schools only turn out a fraction of the new nurses needed. Rossetter said this isn’t because no one wants to be a nurse.

“Annual data show that thousands of qualified applicants are turned away from nursing schools each year because schools reach enrollment capacity,” Rossetter wrote in his statement.

Simply put, the United States needs more nursing instructors.

According to the AACN, the average nursing instructor earns about $65,000 annually, which is less than a working nurse brings in. With most registered nurses being over 50, a wave of retiring nurses will take their experience with them.

As baby boomers retire, health care providers expect continued growth in the demand for nurses that younger, inexperienced nurses will partially meet.

Cuesta said that when he started his career, some of the most important lessons he learned came on the job from experienced nurses. He said he has tried to follow that example by teaching the younger nurses he encountered. But, just as patient care is more rushed, the increased workload will make it harder to mentor new nurses.

Cuesta said he and his colleagues are concerned the current situation could result in an experience deficit.

Sarah Szanton is the Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing dean in Baltimore. In February, she told the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, that the situation is dire, but some things can be done.

“Our nation is perilously short of nurses,” Szanton told the committee. “The average age of registered nurses is 54. We need people to become new nurses, and we need to retain current nurses.”

Experts Say Solutions Available

Szanton said the Future Advancement of Academic Nursing Act (FAAN Act), introduced in the last Congress, would go a long way toward solving these problems.

The FAAN Act would authorize the Health Resources and Services Administration to award grants to nursing schools to increase their capacity to respond to enhance nursing education programs. The FAAN Act would prioritize programs at historically black colleges and universities and other minority-centered schools.

Testifying before the same committee, Dr. Leonard Seoane, chief academic officer for Ochsner Health in New Orleans, agreed.

He said his organization had 1,200 open positions, including physician and nursing jobs, and their staffing costs had increased 900 percent during the pandemic. He said Ochsner Health is exploring partnerships with universities and medical schools to form apprenticeship programs to recruit and train new medical staff.

“But to scale them, we need support from our universities; we need support from our community colleges; we need support from our governments. I do think it’s a partnership,” Seoane told the committee.

Cubley and Cuesta say such programs can help if they are correctly implemented, and soon. According to Cubley, the health care system can’t continue to rely on temporary staff and overtime pay.

“As a nation, we must invest in the nursing workforce beyond band-aid solutions,” Cubley said.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A former deputy director of the CIA was prompted by the Biden campaign to frame the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation in a letter signed by dozens of former senior intelligence officials ahead of the 2020 presidential election, according to testimony revealed by Congressional lawmakers.

Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell was among the 51 signatories of an open letter (pdf) that said the New York Post’s October 2020 report dismissing the explosive contents of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden.

The letter said that the “arrival on the U.S. political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related to his time serving of the Board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

Subsequent reporting has confirmed that the laptop wasn’t part of a Russian disinformation campaign but had been abandoned at a computer repair shop. Some of the contents found on the laptop included embarrassing photos of Hunter Biden, including one apparently showing him passed out with a crack pipe.

At the time, Biden’s presidential campaign cited the letter in framing the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation. Polling suggests that if voters had been aware of the laptop’s contents, some would have voted differently, with a potentially different outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

Morrell said in Congressional testimony cited by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that Morrell had organized the letter at the urging of Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who at the time was serving as an adviser to Biden’s presidential campaign.

Jordan, who heads both the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, has demanded that Blinken answer a series of questions about Morrell’s testimony and provide records of related communication.

‘Triggered’

Morrell’s remarks come in the form of a transcribed interview with the Weaponization Subcommittee, according to Jordan’s April 20 letter to Blinken.

The transcript shows that Morrell had no intention of writing the letter suggesting the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation but that a conversation with Blinken “triggered” it.

“So his call triggered … that intent in you?” one of the committee members asked Morrell, per Jordan’s letter.

“It did, yes,” Morrell replied, indicating that Blinken called him on or around Oct. 17, 2020, to discuss the Hunter Biden laptop story.

“According to Morrell, although your outreach was couched as simply gathering Morrell’s reaction to the Post story, it set in motion the events that led to the issuance of the public statement,” Jordan wrote.

Jordan said Morrell also received a call from Steve Ricchetti, who chaired the Biden campaign, thanking Morrell for writing the statement.

“Steve thanked me for putting the statement out,” Morrell said, per Jordan’s letter. “And that was the extent of the conversation.”

Morrell said that one of his two goals in releasing the statement was to help Biden in a debate and win the election.

“There were two intents. One intent was to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue; and, two, it was [to] help Vice President Biden,” Morrell said, per the letter.

“You wanted to help the Vice President why?” Jordan asked.

“Because I wanted him to win the election,” Morrell replied, per the letter.

The Epoch Times has been unable to contact Morrell for comment.

The State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for oversight and investigations, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement that House Republicans are “weaponizing their power to go after their political opponents and re-litigate the 2020 election with misleading claims.”

“The American people see these House GOP attacks for what they are: political stunts intended to hurt President Biden, and House Republicans would be wise to instead focus on doing their job, raising the debt ceiling to avoid an economic catastrophe, and working together with the President to make actual progress on important issues,” he added.

‘Grave Disservice’

Jordan said in his letter to Blinken that it’s apparent that the Biden campaign “played an active role in the origins of the public statement,” which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election.”

Politico published the letter on Oct. 19 with the headline “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

In their letter, the 51 former officials wrote that they “do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement.” Making an appeal to authority, they wrote that their “experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.”

While Jordan acknowledged the “unquestioned right” to free speech on the part of the IC letter signatories, he said that their reference to their national security credentials lent credibility to its contents and its key suggestion that the Hunter Biden story had the markings of a Russian disinformation campaign.

“This concerted effort to minimize and suppress public dissemination of the serious allegations about the Biden family was a grave disservice to all American citizens’ informed participation in our democracy,” Jordan wrote.

He gave Blinken until May 4 to provide the requested documentation.

‘Big Guy’

The letter that was purportedly inspired by Blinken was widely referenced by news outlets in the lead-up to the November 2020 election between then-President Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Biden used the letter to deflect criticism about his son’s business dealings during the second debate with Trump. Around the same time, Twitter and Facebook moved to suppress the New York Post’s initial Hunter Biden laptop story, with Twitter locking the paper out of its account for over two weeks.

Two years after the laptop story was published, a poll found that 79 percent of people who have been following reports about Hunter Biden said that “truthful” media coverage of the story would have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.

In September 2022, a poll from Rasmussen Reports found that 63 percent of likely American voters believe the Hunter Biden laptop story is important.

Hunter Biden, in an ABC News interview in 2019, said that he engaged in no illegal activity and that there was nothing improper about his overseas business deals.

“I gave a hook to some very unethical people to act in illegal ways to try to do some harm to my father. That’s where I made the mistake,” Hunter Biden said at the time.

“So I take full responsibility for that. Did I do anything improper? No, not in any way. Not in any way whatsoever.”

It comes as House Republicans have been probing the Biden family’s business dealings.

Jack Phillips contributed to this report, which has been updated with a comment from the White House.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Republican-controlled Wisconsin State Assembly passed a pair of bills on Tuesday that would preemptively stop any effort by state or local agencies from banning gas-powered vehicles and appliances like lawnmowers and snow blowers.

Wisconsin Assembly Bill 141 specifies that “no state agency and no local governmental unit may restrict the use or sale of a device based on the energy source that is used to power the device,” while Assembly Bill 142 specifies that “no state agency and no local governmental unit may restrict the use or sale of motor vehicles based on the energy source used to power the motor vehicle, including use for propulsion or use for powering other functions of the motor vehicle.”

“The government should not be forcing individuals to buy certain products, eliminate competition and destroy the free market,” said Rep. Ellen Schutt, a Republican from Clinton who co-authored the bills.

AB 141 and 142 passed in the Wisconsin State Assembly by a vote of 62-35 and 63-35, respectively. No Democrats in the State Assembly supported the bills.

Rep. Christine Sinicki, a Democrat from Milwuakee, argued that the state of Wisconsin has no plans currently to prohibit gas-powered vehicles and appliances and called the legislation “a big waste of time.”

“These bills are really a solution that is looking for a problem that does not exist,” Sinicki said, APG Wisconsin reported.

While Sinicki denied gas-powered engines are at risk, Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers recently celebrated the launch of the Clean Economy Coalition of Wisconsin (CECW), which advocates for “Carbon-free power” and “policies that support a 100 percent carbon-free state by 2050.”

Though Wisconsin has yet to set a specific timeline for phasing out gas-powered vehicles and appliances, several other U.S. states have set timelines for ending the sale of gas-powered vehicles. California was the first U.S. state to propose ending sales of gas-powered vehicles by 2035, and other states have since followed.

Rep. Shae Sortwell, a Republican from Two Rivers, also criticized Sinicki’s premise that lawmakers shouldn’t bother with passing legislation to prevent something from happening in the future.

“It’s a basic premise of good government that we try to look into the future and say, ‘OK, what might people do?’” Sortwell said, according to a Wisconsin Examiner report.

“[If] we’re going to say, ‘Oh, we’re not going to pass this because nobody has attempted to do it.’ Well, there’s a whole lot of things that haven’t been attempted yet. And yet, we have laws and constitutions to protect the rights of the people to live their lives, without interference of future governments.”

Gas stations and fossil fuel industry groups such as Kwik Trip and the American Petroleum Institute have thrown their support behind the measures. Meanwhile, environmental advocates and the American Lung Association oppose them.

Veto?

The bills now go on to the Republican-controlled state Senate. While the legislation may pass the legislature, it faces tougher odds of garnering Evers’signature. Republicans recently gained a supermajority in the Wisconsin Senate but are still two votes shy of a supermajority in the State Assembly, making it unlikely that they could override a veto of the bills from Evers.

Evers has been at odds with Republicans when pushing to use state money to build electric vehicle charging stations.

He has not said outright whether he would veto the Republican bills prohibiting bans on gas-powered vehicles and appliances. At an event in Milwaukee on Tuesday, Evers said he didn’t believe a ban on gas engines was necessary for Wisconsin to eventually transition to using electric vehicles.

From NTD News.

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Using drugs or alcohol while pregnant is not a crime, and neither is sex with a minor or defecating on a public sidewalk, according to a recent United Nations report that seeks to globally decriminalize a host of behaviors related to sex, HIV, gender expression, drug possession and use, homelessness, and poverty.

The report, written by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), says these and other behaviors are a matter of human rights, and criminalizing them is harmful to those who engage in such activities, by placing a social stigma on them.

“From long years in the law, and as a proudly gay man, I know profoundly how criminal law signals which groups are deemed worthy of protection—and which of condemnation and ostracism,” Edwin Cameron, retired justice for the Constitutional Court of South Africa wrote in the report’s forward.

“In recent years, in some quarters, there has been a backlash against human rights, especially against sexual and reproductive health and rights, and the human rights of women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, non-binary, gender diverse, and intersex persons, as well as against sex workers, people who use drugs, and people experiencing homelessness and/or living in poverty,” said the report, which alludes to victims as “third parties” among law enforcement and people freely living their human rights.

Criminalization does not protect third parties physically, psychologically, or financially from direct harm, the report said. Instead, it typically seeks to clamp down on consensual conduct, stigmatized identities, and personal status.

Criminalization is “the legacy of colonial, xenophobic, racist, sexist, classist, ableist, cultural, religious, social, political, economic, and other power dynamics,” the report said.

Decriminalizing Sex With Minors

In the United States, the age at which an individual can legally consent to sex varies by state. Most states (34) consider it to be age 16. The rest say consent is either 17 or 18 years. Some other rules apply, relating to age difference between the parties, when determining if law enforcement will charge the older person with criminal rape.

But the report says such charges could be stigmatizing, and it calls for the decriminalization of sex between adults and minors.

“With respect to the enforcement of criminal law, any prescribed minimum age of consent to sex must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner. Enforcement may not be linked to the sex/gender of participants or age of consent to marriage,” the report said. “Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this context, the enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them.”

Prostitution and pimping should not be considered criminal either, the report indicates.

Criminal law may not forbid third parties who facilitate, manage, organize, advertise, or rent a hotel room for sex in exchange for money, between consenting adults, the report said.

The key in all examples, is consent without coercion, force, or abuse.

“Consensual sexual conduct may never be criminalized,” the report said, no matter the “type of sexual activity, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression of the people involved, or their marital status.”

And non-disclosure of HIV status, exposure to HIV, or HIV transmission should only be considered criminal in cases of intentional transmission of HIV: that is, where a person knows their HIV-positive status, acts with the intent to transmit HIV, and does in fact transmit it, the report said.

Abortion Without Restriction

The report provides no protection for the unborn and is decidedly pro-abortion.

“No one may be held criminally liable on the basis that their conduct is alleged to be harmful to their own pregnancy, such as alcohol or drug consumption or contracting HIV or transmitting it to the [fetus] while pregnant, or for their own pregnancy loss,” the report said.

“Criminal law may not [forbid] abortion,” the report said. “Health providers may not be held criminally liable for conduct, such as providing contraception, abortion services or accurate, evidence-based, non-biased information, that enables others to freely exercise their rights to sexual and reproductive health, unless they engage in coercion, force, fraud, medical negligence or otherwise violate the right to free and informed decision-making.”

And parents, guardians, and others who help children get birth control or abortions may not be held criminally liable, unless they have engaged in “coercion, force, fraud, or there was a lack of free and informed decision-making for the child.”

“Abortion must be taken entirely out of the purview of the criminal law,” the report says.

Drugs and Poverty

The report calls for the decriminalizing of drugs, including possessing, growing, buying, and using drugs.

And it addresses poverty, saying no one may be held criminally liable for engaging in life-sustaining economic activities in public places, such as begging, panhandling, trading, touting, vending, hawking, or other informal commercial activities.

Also noncriminal, the report said, are public sleeping, eating, preparing food, washing clothes, sitting or performing hygiene-related activities, including washing, urinating, and defecating, for those who are unemployed or homeless.

Support

The report was signed by 31 supporters from around the world, and seven organizations. Some individual supporters from the United States include Fanny Gómez-Lugo, adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University Law; and Alice M. Miller, co-director, Global Health Justice Partnership of the Yale Law and Public Health Schools at Yale University.

These organizations are mentioned as the first to support the principles in the report: Amnesty International, Global Health Justice; Partnership of the Yale Law and Public Health Schools; Global Network of Sex Work Projects; HIV Justice Network; International Network of People who Use Drugs; Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters; and CREA, an India-based feminist international human rights organization.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A consortium of major media companies is suing the Justice Department and the FBI for ignoring Freedom of Information Act requests to obtain the still-secret recordings of January 6.

Matthew Graves just received a court summons.

As the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Graves is rarely on the receiving end of a legal inquiry. In fact, Graves’ hand must be tired from signing thousands of criminal indictments, sentencing memos, and plea offers related to his ongoing investigation into the events of January 6, 2021. Just this week, the FBI arrested two more individuals on minor offenses, giving Graves’ overstaffed office more fresh meat for the Justice Department’s vengeful retaliation against Americans who protested the certification of Joe Biden’s election that day.

No investigative technique is too invasive for Graves’ henchmen to use in court proceedings. Big Tech, banking institutions, airlines, hotels, and other private interests work hand-in-glove with the Justice Department to hunt down Trump supporters and track their every movement before and on January 6. Much of the evidence consists of video footage captured by Capitol police’s closed-circuit television system during the breach of the building. Investigators routinely include still shots of the surveillance video in criminal complaints.

But now Graves is under pressure from all sides to make the video footage public. A consortium of major media companies is suing Graves and the FBI for ignoring Freedom of Information Act requests to obtain the still-secret recordings. As I’ve reported since May 2021, the entire trove was designated “highly sensitive” government material shortly after the investigation began. Clips entered as evidence in January 6 cases are under strict protective orders.

Top US Men’s Surgeon: Do This Once Daily To ‘Shrink’ an Enlarged Prostate

Ice Water Trick Melts lbs of Wobbly Flab

Over the past two years, a group called the Press Coalition filed motions seeking to unseal video clips in numerous cases, however, it never requested access to the full archive of footage. That changed after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy allowed Fox News host Tucker Carlson to view the videos and air selected clips in February.

Lawyers representing the group—which includes CNN, the New York Times, and Politico among other outlets—wrote congressional leaders to demand “all closed-circuit camera footage recorded on January 6, 2021, inside the United States Capitol and on its surrounding outside grounds.” 

In what might be a first, news organizations commended McCarthy. “The Speaker also explicitly recognized the overriding public interest in disclosure: ‘I was asked in the press about these tapes, and I said they do belong to the American public. I think sunshine lets everybody make their own judgment,’” the letter quoted McCarthy.

“The Press Coalition agrees with the Speaker. Now that the CCTV videos have been released to one member of the news media—one whose program is categorized by its own network as opinion programming—they must be released to the rest of the news media as well.” To bolster its request, the group filed FOIAs with the executive office of the U.S. attorneys and the FBI seeking copies of the videos.

A month later, the group filed a motion to intervene in the criminal case of William Pope, a January 6 defendant representing himself. Pope has been fighting to gain access to footage recorded by both surveillance and police body-worn cameras. In discrediting the Justice Department’s insistence that releasing the CCTV recordings would pose a security threat, the press coalition noted that the government had no such “security” concerns when video clips were aired during Trump’s second impeachment and by the January 6 select committee during televised hearings.

“Because the public already has access to an enormous volume of CCTV videos from inside the Capitol, the Government likewise cannot demonstrate that permitting Defendant to republish other CCTV videos would pose any further threat to the security of the Capitol,” the group’s lawyers wrote in the March 23 filing. “Especially when weighed against the public’s interest in viewing videos of ‘the most significant assault on the Capitol since the War of 1812,’ the Government cannot justify maintaining its designation of the CCTV videos as ‘Sensitive’ or ‘Highly Sensitive.’”

Graves’ office shot back, insisting the security designation was appropriate and questioning the press coalition’s standing in the matter. 

The full trove of video, Graves argued, isn’t a “judicial” record so media access should be limited; only clips produced as evidence in specific cases would qualify as such. Graves also suggested “militants” could study the footage in order to plan another attack on the Capitol. 

“The government thus has good cause to designate the Capitol CCV at issue as Highly Sensitive—notwithstanding the fact that some other Capitol CCV videos, or a few still images from the videos at issue, are publicly available,” Graves maintained. “Nor does the narrower request to obtain a CCV clip here or there somehow transmute press access to thousands of hours of video in the government’s holding.”

Graves’ claims are, of course, absurd. Nearly 28 months later, as he continues his selective prosecution of thousands of Trump supporters, no one has attempted to “attack” the Capitol  again. Capitol police received a major budget boost in the aftermath of January 6, which involved the hiring of new officers and expanding the department’s intelligence services. Capitol police are so flush that the department is opening satellite offices in other states, including California and Florida.

Surely this level of manpower could easily thwart another meemaw/furry-horned “insurrection,” no?

Moreover, once one has lost the regime-compliant corporate press, one is in deep trouble. This could finally be the comeuppance Graves so richly deserves; the judge in the Pope case is now considering the coalition’s motion. Judge Rudolph Contreras sounded skeptical of Graves’ defense during a status hearing several days ago.

Judge Amit Mehta is separately handling the coalition’s FOIA lawsuit against the FBI and Graves, who has yet to respond to the FOIA in the time required. (Ironic how the prosecutor still chasing down Capitol trespassers is immune to following the law himself.) 

The FBI, however, did respond—and said the bureau came up empty-handed. “[We] were unable to identify records subject to the FOIPA that are responsive to your request,” the FBI’s FOIA chief told the group in a letter last month. “Therefore, your request is being closed.”

The press coalition mocked the FBI’s excuse. “[Even] though it is leading the riot investigation and has published excerpts of the Capitol Surveillance Videos on its own website, the FBI has absurdly and improperly claimed that it searched for but was ‘unable to identify’ the requested records.”

As the public, and January 6 defendants, wait for McCarthy to fulfill his pledge to release all the videos, there’s a slim chance a federal judge will beat him to it. Regardless, the patience of the American people, congressional Republicans, and the media is running thin.

SOURCE: American Greatness

North Dakota governor Doug Burgum (R.) on Wednesday signed legislation outlawing sex change treatments for minors, making it a felony to perform a sex change surgery on a minor.

The new law threatens prison sentences and fines for doctors who perform the surgeries or administer sex change medications to minors, the Associated Press reported. North Dakota joins at least 13 other states that have similarly restricted such treatments for minors.

Health care providers who perform transgender surgery on a minor could face up to 10 years in prison and $20,000 in fines under the law. The law assigns a lesser penalty, up to 360 days in prison and $3,000 in fines, for administering sex change medications to minors.

The bill’s signing comes a week after Burgum signed two bills banning biological males from competing in girls’ and women’s sports at the grade school and college levels.

On Thursday, the U.S. House passed a similar measure, that would amend Title IX to ban biological males from competing in women’s sports in federally funded schools. Rep. Greg Steube (R., Fla.), author of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, argued for his bill on the House floor Wednesday.

“Parents do not want biological men in locker rooms with their daughters, nor do they believe it’s equitable a male can compete with women in female athletics,” Steube said.

Missouri last week became the first state to restrict sex change treatments for adults when Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R.) enacted an emergency rule establishing preconditions for obtaining such treatments.

The rule says that because gender transition treatments are “experimental” with “significant side effects,” patients seeking the treatments must first undergo extensive psychiatric assessments and be informed of risks.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Taxpayer money meant to bolster U.S. energy production could instead benefit Chinese entities

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm told a Senate committee the Department of Energy is still considering giving a $200 million grant to Microvast, a China-based lithium battery company, despite months of pushback from Congress.

“That particular award is still under negotiation,” said Granholm during a Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee hearing on Thursday, adding that the DOE is “very vigilant about making sure that no taxpayer dollars goes to any state owned enterprise or Chinese influenced company.”

It was the first time Granholm has faced in-person questions from Congress over the proposed award. Lawmakers have urged the DOE to drop the grant, noting that the infrastructure law funding is intended to bolster American energy production and prevent federal dollars from going to Chinese entities.

The hearing also comes days after DOE’s top watchdog, Inspector General Teri Donaldson, warned Congress that her office is “woefully underfunded” and doesn’t have the resources to properly investigate the department’s spending, including “those big fraud cases that we all know are coming just because this is a lot of money moving fast.”

The DOE has defended the proposed grant, saying that Microvast is headquartered in Texas and the money would be used to build a battery separator facility in Tennessee. According to Microvast’s financial records, the company’s operations are primarily based in China and the Chinese government “exerts substantial influence” over its business activities, the Washington Free Beacon first reported last year.

During the hearing, Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) noted that the majority of Microvast’s revenue comes from China and just 1 percent from the United States.

Barrasso also cited a statement from a Chinese government entity that said it “successfully recruited Microvast’s CEO to return from the United States to China under their talent program.” China’s talent recruitment programs are often a cover for trade secret theft and economic espionage, according to the FBI.

“The CEO is a participant in the Chinese Communist Party talent program,” said Barrasso. “Can you assure us today that you will not go forward with the $200 million award to Microvast or any other company under such significant Chinese influence?”

Granholm declined to rule it out, saying the DOE is still conducting due diligence on the grant and “we’ll get back to you on the final conclusions on that.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

We know a transgender crash test dummy can’t be far behind, right? [US Patriot]

A Democratic representative applauded transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg for fighting “gender inequity” by pushing to include female crash test dummies in car safety testing.

“You also plan to make important investments to address the roadway safety crisis, including the critical funding that would accelerate the development —and this is an area I’ve written to you about—of the use of female dummies in crash testing,” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D., Conn.) told Buttigieg during Thursday’s House budget hearing for the Department of Transportation. “This will start to fight the gender inequity among vehicle safety and crash victims.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) highlights the vital work that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is doing to ensure that “female dummies” are used in vehicle crash testing “to fight the gender inequity among…crash victims.” pic.twitter.com/sZj5TqWrnp

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) April 20, 2023

Buttigieg fell under scrutiny in the hearing for his climate change agenda when Rep. Ryan Zinke (R., Mont.) questioned him on the effect of the Biden administration’s policies on U.S. energy independence.

“How do you get to be energy independent when the components of EV today are all controlled by China?” Zinke asked the transportation secretary. So long as China produces the necessary materials to produce electric vehicles, Zinke said, “our pursuit of EV makes us more dependent on China.”

Female crash test dummies is not the first agenda item Buttigieg has pursued in the name of equity. The transportation secretary last year announced a $1 billion initiative “to build racial equity in roads.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The White House on Thursday denied whistleblower accusations that it is giving “preferential treatment” to first son Hunter Biden in the federal investigation into Biden’s finances.

White House spokesman Ian Sams, who has a long history of mismanaging responses to Democrats’ scandals, said that Joe Biden has upheld his commitment to keep the investigation “free from any political interference,” Fox News reported.

News broke last night that an IRS whistleblower is “offering to provide Congress with evidence that the Biden Justice Department has pulled punches in an investigation into Hunter Biden’s taxes for political reasons,” the Washington Free Beacon reported. The whistleblower also accuses Attorney General Merrick Garland of misleading Congress about the probe. The U.S. attorney for Delaware is investigating Hunter Biden’s unpaid taxes, foreign business activities, and foreign lobbying activities, as well as a gun incident that took place near his home in Wilmington, Del.

The whistleblower’s attorney, Mark Lytle, says his client, who oversees the investigation, has seen evidence of possible perjury by a “senior political appointee,” conflicts of interest, “preferential treatment,” and “politics improperly infecting” the investigation, the Free Beacon reported:

The allegations are sure to spark a firestorm on Capitol Hill, and could raise questions about whether the administration has interfered in investigations of Hunter Biden’s business activities, which have involved other members of the Biden family. The allegations could also pose problems for Garland, who is said to be the senior political appointee mentioned in Lytle’s letter.

“Since taking office, the White House has maintained that the president never spoke to his son about his business dealings,” Fox News noted.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R., S.C.) said Wednesday that she’d seen evidence that the first family had business dealings involving “astronomical” amounts of money, some of which went to “prostitution rings,” the Free Beacon reported. Mace and other members of the House Oversight Committee are examining the Biden family’s murky business dealings, including with Chinese and Ukrainian companies.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) on Thursday requested Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts appear before his committee to discuss the Court’s ethics. The request comes as Justice Clarence Thomas is under fire from Democrats for reports that he failed to disclose vacations he took that were paid for by a Republican donor.

“The time has come for a new public conversation on ways to restore confidence in the Court’s ethical standards,” Durbin wrote. “I invite you to join it, and I look forward to your response.”

Durbin said the Court has faced a “decade-long failure” to address “ethical standards” since justices last appeared before the committee in 2011.

“Since then, there has been a steady stream of revelations regarding Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and, indeed, of public servants generally,” Durbin said. 

Durbin does not have the majority vote in the committee needed to subpoena Roberts if he declines to appear, because Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) has been absent from the committee while dealing with an illness.

A ProPublica report published earlier this month found that Thomas took several luxury vacations with Republican megadonor Harlan Crow and failed to disclose them.

Crow said Thomas and his wife, Ginni, did not ask for the gifts. 

“Justice Thomas and Ginni never asked for any of this hospitality,” Crow said, adding that he “never asked about a pending or lower court case, and Justice Thomas has never discussed one.”

Republican senator Lindsey Graham (S.C.) said he “would be surprised” if Roberts agreed to come. 

“And I would support his decision not to come if that’s what he wanted to do,” Graham said Thursday. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The top Democrat on the House Weaponization subcommittee threatened a journalist with prison time over his congressional testimony that exposed the government’s attempt to influence Twitter.

Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett (D., V.I.) made the threat in a letter to reporter Matt Taibbi, who testified on March 9 about his “Twitter Files” series, which revealed details of interactions between the FBI, federal agencies, and Twitter executives. Plaskett, noting a discrepancy in Taibbi’s testimony, warned him in the letter that providing false information to Congress is “punishable by up to five years imprisonment.”

Plaskett took issue with Taibbi’s claim that the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency pressured  Twitter to censor various news articles on its platform. While the agency did correspond with Twitter regarding the censorship of content on the platform, Taibbi acknowledged in a television interview that he mixed up the federal agency with the Center for Internet Security, a nonprofit that receives federal funding, during his testimony.

Plaskett’s threat is another instance of government backlash to Taibbi’s testimony. IRS agents visited Taibbi’s home in New Jersey while he was in Washington delivering the testimony that spurred Plaskett’s threat. In a letter to the IRS and Treasury Department last month, House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) said his committee would investigate “whether the visit was a thinly-veiled attempt to influence or intimidate a witness before Congress.” The Weaponization Committee Plaskett sits on was created to investigate the use of government agencies such as the Congress, the IRS, and FBI.

Taibbi’s reporting has pulled back the curtain on federal agencies’ efforts to censor conservative content at Twitter. One of Taibbi’s revelations was that James Baker, a former FBI official who worked at Twitter, advised the company in October 2020 to censor an article about emails from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop.

Other documents from the “Twitter Files” show federal agencies pressuring Twitter to moderate content related to the coronavirus vaccines, Russia, and the January 6 attack on the Capitol.

Some reporters called for Plaskett to resign over the letter.

“She should resign from Congress for this and at minimum should be removed from the committee,” said The Intercept’s Ryan Grim. “The press is not the enemy of the people and threatening reporters with prison—especially as we work to free Evan in Moscow—is reckless and dangerous.”

Plaskett’s office did not respond to a request for comment. Taibbi did not respond to a request for comment.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) in comments to reporters on Thursday did not denounce anti-Semitic remarks made by his uncle, whom he defended in a newly unearthed college op-ed, merely saying he does not “share any of the controversial views.”

“I think I’ve made clear consistently that I do not share any of the controversial views that were expressed by my uncle more than three decades ago,” Jeffries said during a Thursday press conference.

Jeffries came under fire last month when CNN surfaced a 1992 opinion piece he wrote as a college activist in which he defended his uncle, Leonard Jeffries, against criticism of his anti-Semitic comments. His uncle had claimed that “rich Jews” were responsible for the slave trade and alleged the existence of “a conspiracy, planned and plotted” by Jewish businessmen in Hollywood to portray black people poorly.

The op-ed contradicts Jeffries’s claims over the years that he had only a “vague recollection” of the controversies surrounding his uncle and hadn’t looked at the anti-Semitic speeches he made. 

In the 1992 op-ed, Jeffries further defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, an infamous anti-Semite who defended Adolf Hitler and assailed the “stranglehold that Jews have on this government.”

“Dr. Leonard Jeffries and Minister Louis Farrakhan have come under intense fire,” Jeffries wrote in 1992. “Where do you think their interests lie?” He claimed his uncle “has challenged the existing white supremist [sic] educational system and long standing distortion of history.”

“His reward has been a media lynching complete with character assassinations and inflammatory erroneous accusations,” Jeffries added. 

Jeffries also compared black conservatives to “House Negroes” during American slavery, calling them “tokens” and “opportunists.”

“The House Negro of the slavery era and the Black conservative of today are both opportunists interested in securing some measure of happiness for themselves within the existing social order,” Jeffries wrote in college.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Democrat says funding will support ‘developing countries in taking stronger climate action’

Joe Biden is pledging $1 billion in taxpayer money to a United Nations climate fund that funnels millions of dollars to China, the world’s largest emitter of carbon and second-largest economy.

Biden during a Thursday morning speech announced the contribution to the United Nations’ Green Climate Fund, saying the money will support “developing countries in taking stronger climate action.” Because the United Nations still classifies China, despite its massive economy, as a developing country, the communist nation receives significant Green Climate Fund money. The fund in November 2019 pledged $100 million to create a “Green Development Fund” in Shandong, China’s second most populated province. The Green Climate Fund disbursed $28 million to its Chinese partner in September 2022, and tens of millions of dollars are still poised to go out to the project, which will remain active through April 2042.

Biden has long stressed the need to help developing countries fight climate change, an effort the Democrat promised he would fund to the tune of $11 billion a year. Biden’s decision to pursue that effort through international organizations, however, is sure to bring controversy. Many of those organizations, such as the United Nations, still consider China a developing country, making the communist nation eligible for international climate investment. In November, for example, the Biden administration agreed to establish an international “climate justice” fund that would pay climate reparations to developing nations. But China did not agree to pay into the fund, and its status as a developing nation left the administration scrambling to ensure “that China would not be eligible to receive money from it,” according to the New York Times.

Beyond its economic status, China is by far the world’s number-one carbon emitter. The communist nation’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2019 “exceeded those of the U.S. and other developed nations combined.” That year saw China pledge to show “the highest possible ambition” in fighting climate change, but two years later, in 2021, China’s coal production surged to record highs.

Daniel Turner, the founder and executive director of energy advocacy group Power the Future, admonished the Biden administration for “subsidizing countries like China” as the communist nation simultaneously ramps up fossil fuel production.

“China is building the equivalent of two new coal plants a week, and they don’t deny it. Meanwhile, we’re closing down our coal plants and giving China money for green products, which we’ll then buy,” Turner told the Washington Free Beacon. “So we’re subsidizing them twice. And you just wonder—how much more in debt do we have to go? And how much more do we have to risk on national security?”

Neither the White House nor the Green Climate Fund returned requests for comment.

The Green Climate Fund says its Chinese investment will go toward climate change “mitigation and adaptation initiatives across several sectors” in Shandong, which “has the highest energy consumption” among China’s provinces due to “its high use of coal as an energy source for its large industrial base.” The Shandong project is not the U.N. fund’s only tie to China—the fund’s board also includes an official from China’s Ministry of Finance, Yingzhi Liu, who the fund says represents “developing country parties from Asia-Pacific states.”

China’s developing nation status has attracted bipartisan ire on the Hill. In March, the House unanimously passed the PRC Is Not a Developing Country Act, a bill from California Republican congresswoman Young Kim that’s aimed at stripping China of its developing country label in the United Nations and other global organizations. Chinese Communist Party propaganda rag China Daily in a Monday column admonished the move, calling China’s developing country status “legitimate.”

“China has not only achieved remarkable results but also become the world’s second-largest economy and the largest trading country,” the column says. “But despite all this, China’s per capita income is still much less than developed countries. This means it is still a developing country.”‘

Still, Kim told the Free Beacon she’s undeterred and will work to get her bill “across the finish line.”

“The People’s Republic of China contributes more emissions than any country in the world yet receives funds from international treaties and organizations due to its ‘developing country’ status. Handing over taxpayer dollars to subsidize the Chinese Communist Party is a bad investment and will do nothing to protect our national security or promote U.S. development globally,” Kim said. “The Biden administration’s announcement of $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund, which sends millions to PRC projects, underscores the need to revoke the PRC’s developing country status and ensure the PRC plays by the rules in international agreements.”

Biden’s Thursday announcement marks the first time the United States will contribute to the Green Climate Fund since 2017, when former president Donald Trump pledged to “terminate” U.S. contributions to the fund. The Green Climate Fund in a Thursday statement applauded Biden’s announcement, saying the $1 billion “will provide urgently needed climate finance for the most vulnerable countries in the world.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

As San Francisco grapples with a spike in overdose deaths, California Democrats are waffling on efforts to crack down on drug dealers.

San Francisco’s medical examiner on Tuesday reported that 200 people died of drug overdoses in the first quarter of 2023, at least a 40 percent increase over the past year. The majority of those overdoses were caused by fentanyl, the synthetic drug that has plagued the city in recent years. Even prior to the recent jump, San Francisco had one of the highest overdose rates in the country.

The city’s overdose crisis does not seem to have motivated California Democrats, who as of this week have killed about a dozen bills to hold fentanyl dealers more accountable. Their reluctance to punish lethal drug dealers comes after a years-long progressive push to roll back criminal penalties for drug-related crimes. Chief among the soft-on-crime groups lobbying in Sacramento is the Drug Policy Alliance, which was founded by the liberal billionaire George Soros and remains a leading critic of fentanyl crackdowns.

In response to San Francisco’s overdose update, Democratic leaders in the State Assembly announced they would grant hearings for five bills aimed at curbing the fentanyl trade. Each of the bills had been blocked by the Assembly’s progressive-dominated public safety committee, whose chairman, Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D.), this week dismissed plans to raise penalties for fentanyl dealers as failing “to address key components of the problem.”

This announcement followed a Tuesday press conference by Assembly Republicans, who, flanked by families of fentanyl victims, warned they would bypass the committee altogether and try to bring legislation directly to the Assembly floor. Most of the five bills that will get another chance are authored by Democrats.

But even Democrat-backed bills have foundered in the Legislature, which can’t even seem to agree on proposals that would give fentanyl dealers the same treatment the state gives drunk drivers. Under these proposals, fentanyl dealers on their first arrest would be formally notified that their actions could be deadly. If the dealer is arrested again in conjunction with an overdose death, he or she could be charged with voluntary manslaughter or murder.

State senator Tom Umberg, the Democratic author of one of the bills, has not been able to get his bill through the chamber. Next week, he will have one last opportunity to introduce the bill before the Legislature finalizes the slate of bills it will consider this session. Umberg faces an uphill battle. The Republican author of the State Assembly’s version of the same proposal said he’s dropping the bill because it has been killed too many times.

One of the lawmakers who blocked Umberg’s bill is Democratic state senator Scott Wiener, who on Wednesday bemoaned the city’s latest fentanyl overdose report. Wiener, who represents San Francisco, is a major force behind California’s soft drug policies. Wiener frequently pitches bills to relax penalties for drug dealing and possession and has carried measures in the Legislature at the behest of the Drug Policy Alliance. Wiener late last month helped block Umberg’s bill over pleading objections from San Francisco’s district attorney.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D.) has been similarly reticent to crack down on fentanyl dealers. The governor last month unveiled a “master plan” to fight fentanyl abuse by spending millions of dollars on drug test strips, treatment programs, and overdose medication for communities and middle and high schools. While Newsom has pledged to hold “Big Pharma accountable” for opioids, he has not made a similar proclamation about drug dealers.

Newsom on Wednesday made an unannounced visit to San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood, the epicenter of the city’s drug trade. Newsom was joined by members of his cabinet, including Attorney General Rob Bonta (D.), whose wife voted against the Assembly proposal to crack down on dealers. When a resident approached Newsom to ask how he planned to fix the city’s fentanyl problem, the governor declined to give a substantive answer.

“What do you want me to do?” Newsom asked in reply. “You tell me what we need to do.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Members of the progressive “Squad” have spent a combined $1 million since the start of their push to defund the police, according to a Washington Free Beacon review of campaign filings.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and her five fellow “Squad” members have spent a combined $1.03 million on private security services since May 2020, when the push to defund the police took off in response to the death of George Floyd. As crime spikes nationwide, the lawmakers have defended their lavish security spending as they work in Congress to strip their constituents of police protection on the streets.

“You would rather me die? Is that what you want to see? You want to see me die? You know, because that could be the alternative,” Rep. Cori Bush (D., Mo.) said in 2021 when pressed by a reporter about her private security budget. Just moments earlier, Bush told the reporter, “Defunding the police has to happen.”

No other member of the “Squad” spent more on private security than Bush, who has doled out $680,000 on personal protection services since May 2020. Among Bush’s reported private security guards are her husband Cortney Merritts and her close friend Nathaniel Davis III, a St. Louis spiritual guru who claims to be a master of psychic self-defense who can summon tornadoes with his hate.

Ocasio-Cortez was the second-biggest spender among her colleagues in the “Squad,” paying $199,000 for private security services since Floyd’s death. Despite enriching her personal protectors, Ocasio-Cortez on Monday criticized New York City mayor Eric Adams (D.) for boosting rookie cop salaries from $42,000 to $55,000—the officers’ first raise in seven years.

“We are now at a point where officially, most officers are paid more than a teacher with a master’s degree serving these same kids involved in these same incidents,” Ocasio-Cortez told Comedy Central host Jordan Klepper. “When we are taking all of those resources and demanding that every single department—except the militarized one—be cut, we are sending a message about who and what we care about.”

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.), who said in June 2020 the Minneapolis Police Department was “rotten to the root” and should be dismantled entirely, came in third, spending $77,000 on private protectors since May 2020. “Squad” members Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.) and Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) spent $53,000 and $12,000, respectively, on private security services.

Coming in last was Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D., N.Y.). The sole male member of the “Squad” spent just $7,900 on private protectors, in May 2021. Bowman has New York taxpayers to thank for his low private security budget: The Democratic lawmaker requested and received a special police detail to guard his home after the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, the New York Post reported.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Yale’s Jewish Law Students Association backs out of event with former Knesset member Michal Cotler-Wunsh.

A Jewish student group at Yale Law School pulled out of an event with a centrist Israeli politician, Michal Cotler-Wunsh, after deciding the talk would be too controversial, according to Cotler-Wunsh and two professors with knowledge of the situation.

Yale’s Jewish Law Students Association agreed in February to host Cotler-Wunsh for a lecture on anti-Semitism and human rights, one of several planned stops on a speaking tour organized by the Academic Engagement Network, a pro-Israel advocacy group. But on April 14–one week before Cotler-Wunsh’s talk, which is scheduled for Friday—Yale’s Jewish Law Students Association told the Academic Engagement Network that it would no longer be able to sponsor the event, according to Miriam Elman, the network’s executive director.

The drama follows a string of anti-Semitism controversies at the Ivy League university, which just this month hosted Houria Bouteldja, an anti-Israel activist and outspoken defender of Hamas, on the second night of Passover.  The event’s timing sparked blowback from Jewish students—though not from the Jewish Law Students Association—who said their religious obligations prevented them from organizing a counter-event or from attending the talk to pose questions.

Though the Jewish Law Students Association gave no reason for its about-face, Cotler-Wunsh and two Yale law school professors said they understood that the group succumbed to pressure to call off her lecture.

It is not clear who was applying that pressure, and Morgan Feldenkris, the president of the Jewish Law Students Association, did not respond to a request for comment. The talk would have been canceled but for deputy dean Yair Listokin’s willingness to step in and host the event himself, Elman said. Listokin declined to comment.

The behind-the-scenes drama surrounding the event demonstrates the extent to which pro-Israel speakers—even those who criticize the Jewish State’s government—are increasingly unwelcome at America’s top law school.

A former member of the Israeli Knesset, Cotler-Wunsh is part of the Blue and White alliance that briefly unseated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2020. The centrist party has promoted same-sex unions, opposed bans on public transit during Shabbat, and signaled an openness to peace talks—albeit not to land concessions—with the Palestinians, stances that have endeared it to secular Israelis while angering the country’s ultra-Orthodox bloc.

“If I’m controversial, I don’t know who isn’t,” Cotler-Wunsh said.

This is not Yale Law’s first debacle over anti-Semitism or the Jewish state. In 2021, the Yale Law Journal hosted a diversity trainer, Erika Hart, who accused the FBI of artificially inflating the number of anti-Semitic hate crimes. And last year, activists at the law school urged students to boycott a spring break trip to Israel, plastering signs around the school that called Israel an apartheid state, according to sources familiar with the matter. Some of those activists, two sources said, were themselves members of the Jewish Law Students Association.

Such incidents reflect the wider trajectory of anti-Semitism on college campuses, where the line between criticizing Israel and attacking the Jewish people has been steadily effaced. A panel at Cornell University—held on Yom Kippur in 2022—featured a speaker who had likened the Gaza Strip to an “extermination camp, run by Jews.” An event at the University of Michigan in January called for an “intifada revolution”; also that month, George Washington University was hit with a discrimination complaint after a psychology professor, Lara Sheehi, allegedly retaliated against Jewish students who raised concerns about her virulently anti-Israel remarks. Though the university cleared Sheehi of any wrongdoing, it declined to release its full report.

Law schools haven’t been spared the world’s oldest hatred: In April 2022, students at New York University School of Law circulated a letter decrying the “Zionist grip on the media” and defending terrorism against Israeli civilians.

Cotler-Wunsh has seen the vitriol up close. When she spoke at Columbia Law School earlier this week, she said, student protesters covered an Israeli flag with fliers decrying the Jewish state—the implication being that the state of Israel should not exist.

“By allowing speakers like Cotler-Wunsh on our campus,” one flier from the protest read, “Columbia Law School is actively complicit in the dehumanization and repression of Palestinians.”

While the students did not disrupt her talk, they also refused to engage with her. The protest provoked strong words from Cotler-Wunsh, who says that the outcry at Columbia—and the apparent fecklessness at Yale—don’t make solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict any easier.

“When a lecture about anti-Semitism provokes this sort of response,” she asked, “how does that help Palestinians advance their right to self-determination?”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell says he organized the letter to help Biden ‘win the election’

Biden campaign officials prompted a group of former spies to pen the infamous 2020 letter that falsely asserted that Russia was behind the release of emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell told the House Judiciary Committee in a closed-door interview that he organized a group of 50 former intelligence officials to sign the letter after discussions with Sec. of State Tony Blinken, who served on the Biden campaign. Republicans on the committee revealed details of the interview Thursday, in a letter to Blinken which claims the Biden campaign’s actions “had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election.”

Morell said Blinken contacted him on Oct. 17, 2020, to discuss a New York Post story that revealed emails from the younger Biden’s abandoned laptop. The ex-spy also said Blinken sent him an article that said the FBI was investigating whether the laptop was part of a “disinformation campaign.” Morell said that Blinken’s outreach “triggered” him to draft a letter that dismissed the release of the emails as a probable Russian disinformation operation. He forwarded it to former CIA Director John Brennan and others to sign.

Morell, who was reportedly on Biden’s short-list for CIA director, said the Biden team helped strategize the letter’s release. He testified the campaign told him they wanted to provide the letter to the Washington Post. The document was ultimately provided to Politico, which published it on Oct. 19 with the headline, “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

There is no evidence that Russia was involved in the release of Biden’s emails, which shed light on his business dealings with China and his struggles with alcohol and drug addiction. A computer shop owner has said that he provided copies of Biden’s laptop to reporters after Biden abandoned it at his store in 2019.

Morell said he organized the letter because he wanted Biden to win the election.

“There were two intents,” Morell said. “One intent was to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue; and, two, it was [to] help Vice President Biden.”

Asked why he wanted to help Biden, Morell said: “Because I wanted him to win the election.

Biden cited the letter during a presidential debate with Donald Trump, but did not disclose that his campaign was behind it.

“There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant,” Biden said after Trump brought up Hunter Biden’s computer.

Morell testified that members of the Biden campaign thanked him after the debate for organizing the letter, including Steve Ricchetti, who now serves as White House counselor.

Update 9:35 a.m.: This piece has been updated to include additional information.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

A Chinese company has offered the Taliban $10 billion and a proposal to build key strategic infrastructure connecting north-south Afghanistan in exchange for access to the country’s lithium reserves. Some experts raised concerns that the offer would allow the Chinese regime to expand its influence in the region.

The proposal was discussed between a representative of Gochin and the acting minister of the Taliban’s Ministry of Mines and Petroleum, Sheikh Hadith Shahabuddin Delawar, in his office on April 13. The talks happened just a few months after the Taliban arrested two Chinese nationals trying to smuggle 1,000 metric tons of lithium-bearing rocks out of the country.

Experts said it needs to be seen if the deal is feasible, but once signed, it will have diplomatic and political ramifications, and the proposed infrastructure development will likely have a long-term strategic impact.

“Geopolitically, this deal could give China a significant advantage and influence in the region, as it secures a supply of critical resources and strengthens its presence in Afghanistan,” Maher Saadat, an exiled activist and Afghan affairs analyst, told The Epoch Times in an email.

Afghanistan’s lithium reserves potentially rival those of Bolivia, which has the world’s most significant amount of lithium resources. The Taliban’s Ministry of Mines and Petroleum said in a press release that the deal, once executed, will provide direct employment to 120,000 people and indirectly to 1 million.

Abhishek Darbey, a research associate of the Chinese Research Program at the New Delhi-based Center for China Analysis and Strategy (CCAS), pointed out to The Epoch Times in an email that China is among the first countries that supported the Taliban to form a government in Kabul following the withdrawal of the United States from the country. He believes the Chinese regime wants to control the region.

“In the case of Afghanistan, the country is important for China because the land domain of the Belt and Road Initiative will pass through this region, and a peaceful Afghanistan will create favorable conditions for the BRI to grow and progress,” he said.

“Also, China considers itself to be a major power of the region and, therefore, it wants to be a participant in [the] decision-making of the region or wants to be a power with a capacity to influence the regional politics,” he added.

Lithium for the Taliban

Afghanistan’s lithium reserves are a quick source of money for the Taliban, but they don’t have a long-term strategic goal for it, according to the experts.

“They may view it as an opportunity to generate immediate revenue to fund their activities and consolidate their power, given their history of relying on various sources of illicit financings, such as drug trafficking and extortion,” Saadat said.

The Taliban’s focus on immediate financial gains—without considering the long-term implications and sustainable development of the lithium deposits—is likely to limit the potential benefits of the reserves for Afghanistan and its people, he said.

“[It] will not contribute to the overall socio-economic development and stability of the country with certainty,” he said.

The first lithium mine was discovered in Ghazni city in 2013. These rare mineral mines are located in five areas in Afghanistan: Herat, Shuryak Valley, Tagab District in Kapisa Province, Nawur District in Ghazni Province, and Badakhshan.

Darbey said the Chinese interest in the region is not new—in 2021, two Chinese companies were sent to Ghazni to conduct technical research and inspect lithium and goldmines.

While China’s lithium reserves are depleting, the Afghan deposits are unexploited. Five Chinese companies have set up their representative offices in Afghanistan, and around 20 Chinese companies have made inquiries about lithium projects, according to Darbey.

Delawar said that the contract of the mines in Afghanistan would be given according to the Taliban’s law.

Darbey pointed out that the Taliban government is already supporting Chinese investment in its wider mining sector, and China’s two largest lithium miners—Tianqi and Ganfeng—have already examined the lithium mines in Afghanistan.

Infrastructure Development

The Taliban’s Ministry of Mines and Petroleum said in its press release that the Chinese had proposed developing three infrastructure projects: the Salang Tunnel that connects north Afghanistan with Kabul, the Nuristan highway that connects Kunar to Laghman, and a power dam project.

“The Chinese side has said that they will repair Salang Pass for smooth transportation between China and Afghanistan for the purpose of mining and other activities,” Darbey said.

Gochin has proposed to repair the Salang Pass—a lifeline of Afghanistan—in seven months and carve another tunnel over the pass.

The fight for Salang Pass has been an important part of Afghanistan’s war history because of its strategic location on the map—the Soviet Union and the United States used it to move military troops. Today the pass is important for the Taliban’s military movement.

The first construction for the two-lane Salang highway across the Hindukush mountains, which included creating a 1.7-mile-long tunnel at the Salang Pass at 3,400 meters above sea level, was undertaken by the Soviets in the 1960s.

The narrowness of the Salang Pass is one of the factors responsible for the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from the country, according to Saadat, who said that the U.S. military heavily relied on airlifting supplies because it was difficult to move heavy equipment through the pass.

“This airlifting was not only logistically challenging but also economically expensive, which added to the overall cost of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan,” he said, adding that the high cost of the war in Afghanistan was one of the main reasons the United States left the country.

Today the Taliban controls the crucial transportation route for moving fighters and supplies across the country because they have complete control over the Salang Tunnel, making it indispensable for the Taliban’s military operations, according to Saadat.

“Additionally, the Nuristan Highway and Power Dam provide the Taliban with an opportunity to control the region’s infrastructure, which can be used to exert power and influence over the local population,” he said.

The Taliban had last year announced that tariffs on freight traffic would generate $341 million in its treasury. Saadat said that the Chinese-proposed projects could also generate revenue through taxation and extortion, which can be used to fund Taliban activities and consolidate its power.

Darbey said that with more Chinese infrastructure projects, it’s likely that the Chinese will train Taliban troops to improve their security apparatus in a short amount of time.

“The possibility of sending Chinese security troops in the region also cannot be undermined,” he said.

The overall situation could also create tensions with other countries that have interests in the region, potentially leading to conflicts or strained international relations, according to Saadat.

“Furthermore, it could lead to China creating a debt trap for the Taliban, increasing its economic leverage in Afghanistan and potentially affecting the geopolitical dynamics in the region,” he said.

Connection With Central Asia

Experts said the proposed infrastructure development would help improve Afghanistan’s connectivity with Central Asia, benefiting China.

Saadat said that by offering to repair the Salang Pass in seven months, China is offering the Taliban a crucial transportation route that connects Kabul to the Central Asian market through Hairatan.

Hairatan is a town in the northern Balkh Province of Afghanistan and borders Uzbekistan. It was through the same borders that landlocked Uzbekistan, which hosted the U.S.-led coalition forces in 2001 that toppled the Taliban after 9/11.

After the Taliban took over in 2021, Uzbekistan continued to do business with Afghanistan through the same border as its firms sought a path through Afghanistan to ports in Pakistan and Iran.

The Taliban is also a part of the “East-West Railway Corridor project” that stretches from China to Europe through Iran and Afghanistan, and a north-south connection through Salang is important for the overall navigation map of Central Asia that China is developing.

“The importance of Salang Pass for the Taliban is that they cannot do it themselves, and it would enable them to access and export the lithium deposits, which they see as a quick source of money,” he said.

Challenges

Although China has a number of investors willing to invest in Afghan lithium reserves, they will face challenges and risks, including a treacherous topography and increasing terrorist attacks, according to the experts.

“First, throughout the year, harsh climatic conditions prevail over the geographical location of Wakhan Corridor connecting the two countries, and the region remains snow-covered for at least nine months,” Darbey said.

The Chinese regime will have to improve its logistics across this region to ensure the smooth transportation of raw lithium from the mines of Afghanistan to China. He said that improving transport facilities might not be challenging for the Chinese because they have experience building logistics systems in similar terrain in Tibet and Xinjiang.

The other challenge is ISIS. Since November 2021, ISIS has launched 248 attacks, and in retaliation, the Taliban government has conducted 132 military operations against it, according to Darbey. He said that despite all the counter operations, the Chinese nationals in Afghanistan are not safe.

“Though the Taliban government has repeatedly spoken to ensure [the] security of the Chinese investment and investors’ lives, it still has a long way to go before it guarantees the safety and security of the Chinese citizens working in the mining industries.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The former rising Democrat star faces 17 criminal counts

A former candidate for Florida governor, Andrew Gillum, faces 17 counts of fraud and lying to the FBI during his 2018 campaign against now-Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Gillum, who was Tallahassee’s mayor before he ran for governor and was considered a rising star within the Democrat Party, is now on trial in a federal court in Tallahassee. Prosecutors argued that during his run for governor, he committed fraud by using campaign funds to make various purchases.

“This case is not about politics,” assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Milligan said, according to reports from the trial. “This case is about deceiving donors [and] stealing from his own campaign.”

Gillum, 43, is accused of accepting about $57,000 in political contributions that were secretly funneled through a co-defendant’s company to his personal accounts. The co-defendant is Sharon Lettman-Hicks, a longtime political adviser to Gillum and former executive with the People for the American Way Foundation, a progressive group.

She ran unsuccessfully in 2022 for the state House.

Prosecutors also say Gillum lied about his interactions with undercover FBI agents posing as developers who paid for a 2016 trip he and his brother took to New York, which included a ticket to the hit Broadway show “Hamilton.”

Gillum is accused of falsely telling the FBI later that he never received anything from these undercover “developers” and that his brother provided the Broadway ticket.

Start of Investigation

The FBI began an investigation into P&P Communications, a firm founded by Lettman-Hicks, after the agency saw that Gillum was being paid “large amounts of money” by the company, which hired him in 2017 as he was probing a bid for governor. Milligan said that P&P defrauded several nonprofits by soliciting about $242,500 in campaign donations and sending the money to her firm to pay Gillum, the Tallahassee Democrat reported.

“Mr. Gillum had a motive for this,” Milligan told the court on April 18, adding that the case isn’t about whether Gillum was a good mayor or not. “He needed the money.”

Gillum and Lettman-Hicks have pleaded not guilty. Gillum said after he was indicted that he had “a target on my back” since he was the state capital’s mayor, and predicted he will be vindicated.

Margot Moss, a Miami-based attorney representing Gillum, opened her arguments by showing Gillum, his wife, and their three children together in photos.

“This case is about what happens when you put a target on someone’s back,” she said, echoing Gillum’s previous statements, according to the newspaper. “And then they twist and they force the evidence in the direction of the targets. But this is not what our justice system is about.”

Gillum’s salary and the payments he received from P&P were legitimate, Moss argued.

“The truth is Andrew Gillum is innocent. That’s why he has chosen to go to trial to say loud and clear ‘I am not guilty,’” Moss told the jurors.

But an undercover FBI agent, Mike Miller, testified to the court that he posed as a real estate developer seeking help with projects in exchange for cash, WTXL reported.

In one recording that was played in court, Andrew’s brother, Marcus Gillum, claims Andrew Gillum is aware of the scheme and then asks Miller for anywhere between $25,000 to $75,000 in exchange for possible development projects

In 2020, two years after losing to DeSantis, Gillum was discovered inside a Miami Beach hotel room with a male who had allegedly overdosed on drugs. Authorities said Gillum was too far under the influence to describe what had happened in the hotel room.

Later, Gillum confirmed he was seeking treatment for depression and alcohol abuse. He was never charged with a crime in connection to the incident, although it likely torpedoed his political future.

Charges

The Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a 2022 news release that between 2016 and 2019, Gillum and Lettman-Hicks conspired to commit wire fraud “by unlawfully soliciting and obtaining funds from various entities and individuals through false and fraudulent promises and representations that the funds would be used for a legitimate purpose.”

Prosecutors further allege that the defendants used third parties to divert some of the funds to a company owned by Lettman-Hicks, which she fraudulently “disguised as payroll payments” to Gillum for his personal use.

Initially, both defendants were charged with 19 counts of wire fraud, although Gillum now only faces 17 counts. Gillum was also charged with making false statements to FBI agents, the DOJ said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Biden administration will soon punish Americans with high credit ratings to pay more for their mortgages to subsidize loans for homebuyers with lower scores.

Starting May 1, Americans purchasing a new home or are refinancing their existing mortgages will have to pay higher mortgage rates and monthly fees if they have a higher credit score, The Washington Times reported on April 18.

Consumers with lower credit scores and less money for a down payment will be given better mortgage rates than they otherwise would have in a form of wealth redistribution by adjusting the fees on loan-level price adjustments.

Experts said that borrowers with a credit score of about 680 would pay more than $40 per month on a $400,000 mortgage, due to new rules issued by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).

Homebuyers who make down payments of 15–20 percent will get hit with the largest fees to support those who would normally be unqualified for a mortgage, to buy a home.

FHFA director Sandra Thompson explained that the new rules were designed to “increase pricing support for purchase borrowers limited by income or by wealth” and comes with “minimal” fee changes.

The changes will immediately affect mortgages originating at private banks nationwide, from Wells Fargo to JPMorgan Chase, and will effectively tweak interest rates paid by the vast majority of homebuyers.

“In the wake of a three percentage-point increase in mortgage rates, now is not the time to raise fees on homebuyers,” Kenny Parcell, president of the National Association of Realtors, told the FHFA earlier this year.

Biden Wants to Weaken Mortgage Loan Rules or Racial Equity

The Biden administration has been attempting close the racial gap in homeownership by enacting numerous changes to housing market rules that benefit those at the lower end of the spectrum, such as underprivileged minorities.

The FHFA, which oversees federally backed home mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was set up to give consumers more affordable housing options—but instead the White House has made racial equity a top priority.

However, many who work in the housing industry believe the new rules will only serve to frustrate and confuse homeowners.

“The changes do not make sense. Penalizing borrowers with larger downpayments and credit scores will not go over well,” Ian Wright, a senior loan officer at Bay Equity Home Loans, told The Washington Times.

“It overcomplicates things for consumers during a process that can already feel overwhelming with the amount of paperwork, jargon, etc. Confusing the borrower is never a good thing.”

The federally backed agency also raised upfront fees on second homes and for some larger mortgage loans.

“I am all for the first-time buyer having a chance to get into the market, but it’s clear these decisions aren’t being made by folks that understand the entire mortgage process,” Wright continued.

The push to put riskier mortgages into the hands of those who cannot afford homes will, in most cases, likely cause massive disruption to the market when the predicted recession hits.

Former FHA Chief Believes New Regulations Will Disrupt Mortgage Industry

“This confusing approach won’t work, and more importantly couldn’t come at a worse time for an industry struggling to get back on its feet after these past 12 months,” wrote David Stevens, a former commissioner of the Federal Housing Administration, on LinkedIn.

“To do this at the onset of the spring market is almost offensive to the market, consumers, and lenders.”

Stevens, who was also the former CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association, told the New York Post that these changes are unprecedented and that his “email is full from mortgage companies and CEOs [telling] me how unbelievably shocked they are by this move.”

“This was a blatant and significant cut of fees for their highest-risk borrowers and a clear increase in much better credit quality buyers—which just clarified to the world that this move was a pretty significant cross-subsidy pricing change,” added Stevens.

Although Stevens agreed that the lack of low-income, minority borrowers being able to qualify for affordable homes was an issue, he argued that attempting to manipulate prices would not solve the problem.

“Why was this done? The answer is simple: it was to try to narrow the gap in access to credit, especially for minority homebuyers who often have lower downpayments and lower credit scores,” Stevens said.

“The gap in homeownership opportunity is real. America is facing a severe shortage of affordable homes for sales, combined with excessive demand, causing an imbalance. But convoluting pricing and credit is not the way to solve this problem,” he said.

US Housing Market Already Suffering High Borrowing Rates

The housing market has already been struggling due to multiple interest-rate hikes by the Federal Reserve in its attempts to combat inflation.

The changes could further complicate the complicated mortgage-application process and put more pressure on the remaining segment of buyers in a housing market already facing the worse downturn since 2008.

The average 30-year mortgage rate was at 6.27 percent at the end last week, up from about 5 percent a year ago and more than twice as high from 2021, according to data from Freddie Mac.

The FHFA also eliminated upfront fees last year for first-time buyers who are at or below 100 percent of their area’s median income, or 120 percent in areas that are identified as “high cost.”

After much backlash, the FHFA delayed upfront fee changes for debt-to-income ratios of 40 percent or more to August 1.

The ratio is calculated by dividing a homebuyer’s monthly debt payments by gross income, which is one of the ways lenders determine whether an individual qualifies for a mortgage loan.

Thompson claims the postponement will help “to ensure a level playing field for all lenders to have sufficient time to deploy the fee.”

Mortgage Bankers Association president Bob Broeksmit,sent a letter to Thompson in February explaining that the timing of the fee changes was “especially troubling,” and that the debt-to-income ratio fee creates “operational issues and quality control” for lenders.

“A borrower’s income and expenses can change several times throughout the loan application and underwriting process, especially considering evolving assumptions concerning the nature of debt and income, and the growth in self-employment, part-time employment, and ‘gig economy’ employment,” Broeksmit said.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Biden Administration has taken the relatively stable border it received from its predecessor and turned it into a killing field.

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”
— Ronald Reagan

The Great Communicator was probably channeling the frustration of American citizens in dealing with the federal government, but his statement could also apply to those trying to cross our southern border illegally. For all the lofty rhetoric from our political class and their allied remora fish-like immigration activists about helping migrants, their policies result in appalling levels of enslavement, sexual assault, and death.

By its geographic characteristics alone, our southern border has always been a hostile environment for humans to pass. By surrendering operational control of the border under the guise of extending opportunity to the less fortunate, the Biden Administration has taken the relatively stable border it received from its predecessor and turned it into a killing field.

In February, the Federal Register, the journal of the federal government, disclosed that 890 bodies of migrants were recovered by U.S. authorities along the border in 2022, a record number and a 58 percent increase over the previous year.

“It’s like a graveyard,” said Sheriff Tom Schmerber of Maverick County, Texas, which includes the heavily traveled crossing point of Eagle Pass. “I’ve been working the border for almost four decades and never saw tragedies of this magnitude.” 

Top US Men’s Surgeon: Do This Once Daily To ‘Shrink’ an Enlarged Prostate

Ice Water Trick Melts lbs of Wobbly Flab

Off the coast of San Diego, eight migrants, later identified as Mexican nationals, died crossing the border when their two small fishing boats capsized. The dead included a teenager and a three-year-old girl.

These deaths are not the result of overly restrictive border enforcement policies, but the exact opposite. Since the time he was running for president in 2020, Joe Biden has been signaling the rest of the world to “surge the border.” He put the lure out there, and people from around the world responded. He didn’t tell them that his policies have made the border arguably more dangerous than it has ever been.

In addition to the deaths, there is an unfathomable amount of human suffering taking place as a result of Biden policies that have empowered the ruthless human trafficking cartels.   

One migrant reported that certain women who can’t afford the $5,000 fee of the La Linea cartel to cross the border take an alternative to work in U.S. strip clubs owned by the cartel. At least 1-in-10 dancers at border state clubs, the migrant claimed, are enslaved illegal aliens. 

The sexual assault of women and children at the border has become so common that videos are now surfacing of children displaying rape kits that appear to have been provided to them by groups that receive U.S. taxpayer money. The kits come with condoms, birth control, and rape whistles. 

During questioning of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) showed the cruelty of this system by describing the colored wristbands the cartels make migrants wear as “modern-day leg irons,” and the victims as “children being sold into sex slavery.”

Rather than being outraged at this carnage, the illegal immigration lobby instead laments that it is not being done on a grander scale. We get the spectacle of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) play-acting trauma for the cameras at the chain-link fence of a detention facility parking lot while clad in designer clothes. Why is keeping migrants in a controlled environment with food, shelter, and medical care worse than the lawless war zone of the border that the policies Ocasio-Cortez supports have created?

The solutions to this humanitarian crisis are not to lure more migrants into the area and to demoralize the Border Patrol. The undeniable truth is that the border policies of the Trump Administration, despite the vociferous opposition they received, were far more pragmatic and effective. Empowering the Border Patrol, building the wall, and implementing the Remain in Mexico policy, to name a few initiatives, reduced the attraction of illegal migration and resulted in much less death and suffering.  

With the current administration, however, it is an open secret that they care little about the plight of migrants caught in the meat grinder at the border. They appear to be playing a sinister long game that is worsening the border crisis to enhance their own political fortunes. The deaths, rapes, and enslavement are just collateral damage they hope the public never learns of or simply forgets.

Citizens of the world seeking a better life by entering the United States illegally need to know that our government is here to help, and that should terrify them.

SOURCE: American Greatness

(Reuters)—A U.S. House of Representatives committee voted in favor of restoring tariffs on solar panels from four Southeast Asian nations on Wednesday and reversing Joe Biden’s earlier suspension, setting the resolution up for a vote by the full House.

Biden suspended tariffs last June as part of a key pillar of his clean energy policy. The repeal effort is aimed supporting domestic solar manufacturers that have struggled to compete with cheap panels made overseas, often by Chinese companies, though U.S. buyers have spoken against the repeal.

The resolution passed the House Ways and Means committee 26 to 13. Democrat Terri Sewell joined the Republican majority in approving the measure.

The bill faces an uphill battle. If approved by the House, it will be sent to the Senate, which Democrats control and where it is not expected to have enough support to override a veto by Biden.

Republicans and Democrats introduced the measure in January under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a law that allows Congress to reverse federal agency rules with a simple majority.

Representative Dan Kildee, a Democrat who co-sponsored the resolution, did not vote because he was recovering from surgery. He said in a statement that “by suspending tariffs on those who violate our trade laws, we are rewarding bad behavior and penalizing companies that do follow the law.”

The vote is a concern to U.S. solar project developers, who have argued that tariffs would freeze development of projects needed to meet Biden’s ambitious climate change goals.

“The Ways and Means Committee just took a hammer to business certainty and American energy independence,” Solar Energy Industries Association President Abigail Ross Hopper said in a statement.

Biden last year waived tariffs on solar products from Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam as the Commerce Department was considering whether those imports were dodging duties on goods made in China and violating U.S. trade law.

Months later, Commerce issued a preliminary decision to extend existing tariffs on Chinese solar products to goods from those nations.

(Reporting by Nichola Groom; Editing by Josie Kao)

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Senator says China using ‘sister city’ initiative to groom US politicians and push propaganda

China has embedded itself in more than 150 cities across the United States where Beijing is targeting local politicians to expand the Chinese Communist Party’s espionage network, according to a Republican senator.

China has built these networks by exploiting the United States’ sister city initiative, a nationwide program that teams up American communities with foreign partners to promote cultural exchange and increase diplomacy. But China, which maintains 157 of these partnerships, is using the network to groom young American political leaders, push propaganda, and embed its spy apparatus in local governments, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) told the Washington Free Beacon.

“They have used the sister city programs as a way to target local leaders in communities around the globe,” Blackburn told the Free Beacon. “We know this is part of the way they use their spy network, working at the local level, so that they’re building those relationships and friendships with people they deem as future leaders. They want to have that toehold with local individuals.”

To combat these efforts and expose the Communist Party’s propaganda machine, Blackburn and several of her Republican colleagues are pushing legislation that would give the federal government greater oversight over these sister city partnerships. The legislation, introduced in the House and Senate on Wednesday, would force the federal government to begin investigating these relationships to determine how deep the CCP’s spy networks run throughout America. The legislation has broad Republican support in both chambers, and Blackburn said she is working to onboard Democratic supporters.

The legislation comes on the heels of a Justice Department investigation into a nationwide Chinese-run spy network targeting dissidents and other CCP critics. More than 42 Chinese nationals were charged in the espionage ring, which included individuals tied to China’s Ministry of Public Security. A separate investigation also revealed this week resulted in charges against two Chinese government officials who were running a secret Communist Party police station in New York City. The operations shed light on China’s ability to infiltrate American communities and establish clandestine CCP outposts.

While the federal government has long been on high-alert about China’s spy schemes—which include hack attacks on various agencies—smaller American communities have proven to be a softer target. Local officials from small towns are feted by the Chinese government as part of these programs and fed what Blackburn termed “soft propaganda.” In one of the most high-profile examples, Fang Fang, an alleged agent of China’s domestic spy service, developed a years-long relationship with Rep. Eric Swalwell (D., Calif.) and helped raise money for Swalwell’s campaign in 2014. The FBI warned Swalwell about Fang in 2015 after he joined the House Intelligence Committee.

“What we have to realize is that sister city programs, like Confucius Institutes, are a big part of the soft propaganda that the CCP exercises,” Blackburn said, referring to a network of U.S.-based Chinese cultural centers that claim to promote diplomacy. “We also know the CCP claims soft propaganda is a big part of their initiative and push to global domination.”

While sister city partnerships in America have been thriving for years, Congress has little concrete information about them, including what demands China is placing on its U.S.-based partners. Blackburn’s bill, the Sister City Transparency Act, would instruct the federal investigators to launch a full-scale probe into these programs to “mitigate the risks of foreign espionage and economic coercion within sister city partnerships,” according to an information document about the bill circulating among lawmakers and viewed by the Free Beacon.

“The CCP,” the document says, “hides behind the veil of soft diplomacy and mutual benefit until its foreign partners exhibit political nonconformity. Thus, similar to Confucius Institutes, sister city partnerships may leave American communities vulnerable to foreign espionage and ideological coercion.”

“It’s embedded in the Chinese Communist Party’s DNA to exploit cultural and economic partnerships,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), a supporter of the legislation. “Sister city partnerships with China require further scrutiny. This bill would push for greater transparency on the CCP’s ongoing efforts to conduct influence operations upon our cities and nation.”

As part of the legislation, the federal government will also seek to discern “the extent to which foreign communities could use sister city partnerships to conduct malign activities, including academic and industrial espionage.”

The ultimate goal, Blackburn said, is to “make sure we don’t have programs that are providing secret or sensitive info to the Chinese Communist Party.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

A Seattle-area elementary school has canceled its Mother’s Day and Father’s Day events for fear of exposing students to “triggers,” the Post Millenial reported.

Riverview Elementary School principal Derek Larsen said in an April 11 Parent Teacher Organization meeting that he hoped to remove “triggers” for children with non-traditional families. Larsen cited “varying family dynamics and the increasing complexity of the Riverview community and hopes of increasing inclusivity” in scrapping the events.

District communications director Kristin Foley told the Washington Free Beacon that Riverview Elementary will instead hold a “Doughnuts with Grownups” event from May 23-25.

Students are “free to attend any of the days that work for their family’s schedule,” Foley said. “This event is being coordinated by the school and students are encouraged to bring their mother, father, grandparent, special person, etc. with them that morning to share in doughnuts and celebration.” The school nevertheless promoted a family-oriented pride event featuring a drag show.

Even as the school is canceling the holidays, it’s moving forward with promoting a Pride event that features a drag show. Riverview Elementary’s newsletter of community events, which excludes the Mother’s Day and Father’s Day events previously scheduled for May 11 and June 8, promotes a June 3 local Pride parade. The Pride event flier, decorated with the trans and gay pride flags, advertises a “kids play area” and “drag show.”

Doughnuts with Grownups will not receive funding from the school’s Parent Teacher Organization “since parents and teachers/staff did not collaborate to come to this conclusion, it was solely a school decision,” Larsen explained.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Washington, D.C.’s police force is facing its most drastic staffing shortage in half a century as homicides and other crimes are on the rise, according to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).

At the end of March, the agency reported a net loss of about 450 over the past three years, and MPD chief Robert J. Contee III expects the current 3,350-officer force to shrink to about 3,130 by the end of fiscal year 2024, the Washington Post reported.

“Absent significant shifts in national employment levels, the environment for law enforcement, or the interest of younger generations in long-term government careers, MPD staffing may not recover for more than a decade,” Contee told lawmakers at a March 31 city council hearing.

The historic exodus of D.C. law enforcement comes as left-wing progressive policies do little to curb rising crime in the nation’s capital. Homicides exceeded 200 in both 2021 and 2022, a number the city hadn’t seen since 2003, and killings were up 25 percent from this time last year. Carjackings in the city were up 200 percent from 2020 to 2022. The chairman of the D.C. police union, Greggory Pemberton, told the U.S. House Oversight Committee in March that the city council’s proposed criminal code revision, which reduced penalties for offenses including illegal gun possession and carjacking, “has resulted in a mass exodus of sworn law enforcement officers and an exponential increase in violent crime.” Congress and President Joe Biden later rejected the revision.

D.C. is just one of many cities trying to tackle a historic crime surge with a dwindling number of officers. In New York City, 239 cops resigned in January and February, an enormous 117 percent increase from two years ago. A Police Executive Research Forum survey noted this pattern across state police departments, the Post reported:

A survey by the Police Executive Research Forum of law enforcement agencies in 38 states and in D.C. found a similar pattern: Departments have increased the pace of hiring but are not able to keep up with attrition. The institute, which advises law enforcement agencies on best practices, found that the total police staffing of the agencies surveyed dropped nearly 5 percent over the past three years.

The research forum’s executive director, Chuck Wexler, said the number of people applying to be police officers had dropped even before the pandemic and nationwide protests over police misconduct in 2020. But he said even fewer people want to pursue careers in law enforcement “in the wake of the national narrative over policing. It’s pretty negative.”

Contee hopes to hire 20 new officers each month, but he says the new hires won’t make up for the 30 to 35 officers the force is losing per month. Mayor Muriel Bowser’s (D.) proposed 2024 budget would decrease police funding by 2 percent but would maintain $5.4 million for recruitment, bonuses for new hires, and funding “alternative justice programs.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

One of the alleged Chinese operatives arrested for running a secret police station in New York City attended galas and dinners with top Democratic lawmakers, photos from the events show.

Lu Jianwang was arrested Monday on charges of running a “secret police station” for the Chinese Communist Party in Manhattan. Photos obtained by the Daily Caller reveal Lu appeared at fundraisers and other events with top Democrats including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.), New York City mayor Eric Adams, and Rep. Grace Meng (N.Y.).

Prosecutors allege that Lu, along with Chen Jinping, ran an outpost in Chinatown for Chinese officials to spy and collect information on enemies of the regime.

“This prosecution reveals the Chinese government’s flagrant violation of our nation’s sovereignty by establishing a secret police station in the middle of New York City,” federal prosecutor Breon Peace said in a statement. 

Prosecutors said the two defendants deleted correspondence with Chinese officials after they learned they were under investigation.

The photographs come as a federal watchdog found that U.S. officials don’t know how much taxpayer money is making its way to the CCP. The U.S. Government Accountability Office said data on money to China are “incomplete and sometimes inaccurate.”

Schumer and Adams are not the only prominent Democrats to have had contact with alleged Chinese spies. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D., Calif.) famously had a years-long relationship with suspected CCP spy Fang Fang, who worked as a fundraiser on his campaign. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

WASHINGTON (Reuters)—China and Iran are becoming increasingly brazen in their attempts to silence dissidents on American soil and influence U.S. policy, the FBI warned on Wednesday.

In a news briefing with reporters about transnational repression, FBI counterintelligence officials urged victims to come forward, saying the bureau is tracking a growing trend of foreign authoritarian regimes breaching U.S. laws to intimidate certain communities.

The officials said the governments have at times resorted to using private investigators to conduct surveillance on dissidents and that several criminal cases have been brought by federal prosecutors involving their use.

“A lot of these are new tactics and lines that are being crossed that we have not seen China and Iran do on U.S. soil in previous investigations,” one FBI counterintelligence official said. He added that the FBI hoped to raise awareness of such trends and alert the private investigator sector and state and local law enforcement.

Officials said the goals of transnational repression schemes are multifaceted, and at times also aim to influence U.S. policy decisions through “malign influence tactics.”

“We’ve really seen an inflection point in the tactics and tools, and the level of risk and the level of threat that have changed over the past few years,” another FBI counterintelligence official said.

The call with reporters on Wednesday came just two days after federal agents arrested two New York residents for allegedly operating a Chinese “secret police station” in Manhattan’s Chinatown district, in what prosecutors said is part of a broader U.S. government crackdown on Beijing’s alleged targeting of dissidents.

Safeguard Defenders, a Europe-based human rights organization, has published reports in recent months revealing the presence of dozens of Chinese police “service stations” in major cities around the world, including in New York and Los Angeles.

FBI officials declined to comment on the New York case or speak about any other open investigations.

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Michael Martina in Washington; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Disturbing revelation appears in ‘exclusive’ People magazine puff piece

Celebrity influencer Gisele Fetterman visited her husband, Sen. John Fetterman (D., Pa.), just “once a week” while he was being treated at Walter Reed Medical Center for what his office described as “depression,” according to a puff piece published Wednesday in People magazine.

By comparison, the “exclusive” report notes that Fetterman had “daily visits” with members of his staff during his six-week stay. The revelation confirms a Washington Free Beacon report from February about Gisele taking a road trip to Canada after her husband, who was also recovering from a near-fatal stroke, checked himself into Walter Reed.

Once again, Gisele’s reported actions stand in “sharp contrast” to the doting wife narrative projected by the Fetterman campaign after the candidate’s stroke in May 2022. Social media commenters have also pointed out Gisele’s habit of cropping her massive husband out of photos to ensure her fancy shoes are visible in frame.

Fetterman’s wife wrote an article last month for Elle, the French fashion magazine, in which she claims running for public office is something she “would never do.” That, however, is precisely the sort of rhetoric deployed by ambitious politicians—Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton, for example—before announcing campaigns.

Fetterman’s wife’s husband returned to work on Wednesday but struggled to perform his duties as chairman of a Senate agriculture subcommittee.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Blue states that give shelter to minors from other states who want to get sex changes without parental consent may be violating the Constitution, experts say.

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D.) last week signed “safe haven” legislation, which offers protection to minors who cross state lines to undergo gender surgery or have an abortion and legal shields to doctors who perform the procedures. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D.) signed a similar law last year, and Washington State is poised to follow suit. But while popular among progressives, these bills may be on shaky legal ground.

“All it’s going to take is one parent whose minor child has been shielded from them, and this [policy] will fall under a constitutional challenge,” Sarah Parshall Perry, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation told the Washington Free Beacon. “Absolutely, these are violations of the 14th Amendment. Every time we see the state standing in loco parentis, or trying to step into the shoes of the parent, that immediately raises constitutional red flags.”

The 14th Amendment bars states from making “any law” that denies Americans “equal protections of the law.” In a landmark 1997 case, the Supreme Court clarified that the amendment protects the “fundamental right of parents” to raise, care for, and educate their children as they see fit. In their rush to enshrine minors’ rights to undergo controversial medical procedures without parental consent, blue state leaders may run afoul of this precedent, legal analysts say.

Should a court strike down California or Colorado’s safe haven laws, it could throw a wrench in Democratic agendas across the country. Democratic lawmakers in Oregon and Minnesota are pushing safe haven laws of their own, while California and Washington State are both advancing bills that would let the state take custody of children whose parents don’t support their transgenderism.

Constitutional challenges to these and similar progressive legislation have been simmering at the local level for years. Parents are suing school districts that told teachers and administrators to lie to parents whose children were presenting as a different gender at school. These lawsuits include a case in Wisconsin where judges have temporarily blocked the Madison Metropolitan School District from deceiving parents about their kids while the complaint winds its way through the courts.

Matt Sharp, senior legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, says schools have a duty to inform parents when their children are experimenting with transgenderism.

“We know that if a student has low performance on tests, or behavioral or other issues, schools have a duty to notify parents, and so we think it’s the same thing,” Sharp said.

According to Sharp, laws that encourage children to run from their parents “not because of evidence of physical abuse, but a disagreement over parenting philosophy” clearly violate parents’ 14th Amendment rights. He also noted the growing pushback in Europe, where countries that once pushed sex changes for minors have reversed course.

Even as constitutional challenges loom, Democrats are forging ahead with safe haven bills. Oregon Democrats notched a win last week when their safe haven bill advanced out of committee, even though the state’s nonpartisan legislative counsel noted it would be “up to the court to decide” whether or not the state’s safe haven laws violate the 14th Amendment.

The session was not without controversy. Democratic leaders in the chamber were shocked when the counsel noted that their bill would allow girls as young as 10 to get an abortion without parental consent. A few committee leaders can be heard expressing their disbelief at the counsel’s verdict in video of the session.

“Wow, well alright that’s just shocking,” one committee member said.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Update: On Thursday, hours before Pomerantz scheduled testimony to the committee, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary administrative hold on the subpoena’s return date to allow the court to review Bragg’s application for a permanent hold on the subpoena while the lower court’s decision is being appealed. The appeals court indicated that the administrative stay does not indicate the court’s position on the merit of Bragg’s case. The court instructed the parties to complete court filings on a permanent stay on the ruling on Saturday.

NEW YORK—A federal judge in Manhattan ruled on April 19 that the U.S. House Judiciary Committee and its chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), can subpoena a former prosecutor who worked for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, a Trump appointee, ordered that the congressional panel has the authority to become involved in the investigation of former President Donald Trump.

Specifically, Vyskocil granted—over Bragg’s objection—that Jordan could subpoena Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in Bragg’s office, for his testimony related to the DA’s investigation of Trump.

Pomerantz could be subject to criminal liabilities by testifying in Congress, one of Bragg’s attorneys said during the hearing on April 19. Meanwhile, he also could be held in contempt of Congress if he doesn’t cooperate with Congress’s requests, his lawyers said in an April 17 filing.

The April 19 order came after an hour-long verbal clash between Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., counsel for Bragg, and House general counsel Matthew Berry in the Southern District Court of New York. It gave the Judiciary Committee’s lawmakers a victory in their legal clash with Bragg, which began when Bragg sued the committee, as well as Pomerantz, to stop the panel from enforcing the subpoena on Pomerantz.

In her order, Vyskocil ruled in favor of the congressional lawmakers, affirming their stance that the subpoena they issued on Pomerantz serves legitimate legislative purposes and is thus protected from lawsuits by the speech and debate clause of the U.S. Constitution. That clause protects federal legislators from lawsuits for actions that serve a valid legislative purpose.

“It is not the role of the federal judiciary to dictate what legislation Congress may consider or how it should conduct its deliberations in that connection,” the judge wrote in her ruling. “Mr. Pomerantz must appear for the congressional deposition.”

“No one is above the law.”

“Today’s decision shows that Congress has the ability to conduct oversight and issue subpoenas to people like Mark Pomerantz, and we look forward to his deposition before the Judiciary Committee,” Russell Dye, a spokesperson for Jordan, told The Epoch Times in a statement following the April 19 ruling.

Lawyers for Bragg wrote in a filing following the district court’s ruling that they intend to ask the Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit for “emergency relief” and delay the deadline for the subpoena issued to Pomerantz.

Judiciary GOP Takes on Bragg

Jordan’s probe into Bragg’s prosecution of Trump began two days after Trump announced on March 18 that he would be arrested. Jordan asked Bragg to provide documents about his “politically motivated prosecution” of a former president.

Then came Trump’s indictment on April 4. The former president was charged with 34 counts of felony falsifying business records. On April 6, Jordan subpoenaed Pomerantz to seek his testimony.

Pomerantz had pushed for an indictment against Trump in 2021 after leading a probe into the former president’s finances. He left the Manhattan district attorney’s office in February 2022 because Bragg initially decided not to pursue a criminal case against Trump. Pomerantz later released a memoir about the case.

In response to Jordan’s subpoena to Pomerantz, Bragg filed a federal lawsuit on April 11 seeking to nullify Jordan’s subpoena, which included an emergency request for a temporary restraining order on Jordan and an injunction to block the subpoena’s enforcement. The court ordered a hearing on the emergency request, leading to the April 19 hearing and the subsequent rejection by the court of Bragg’s request.

Michael Scotto, who worked for 23 years as a prosecutor in the Manhattan DA’s office, told The Epoch Times in an email on Thursday that Bragg’s lawsuit is still “pretty much dead,” even considering the appeals court’s Thursday order extending the subpoena deadline. He agreed with Vyskocil’s assessment that Congress has legitimate legislative interests in inquiring about the prosecution of a former president and that Bragg’s separation of powers claims would not override those interests.

Another consideration, he added, is that Pomerantz could invoke various privileges at the House hearing—which can be litigated if Congress finds his refusal to answer on privilege grounds is baseless—which weakens Bragg’s central claim that Pomerantz’s testimony would cause irreparable harm to his case. Additionally, Scotto indicated that Pomerantz’s testimony would not significantly interfere with Bragg’s criminal case because Pomerantz didn’t work on that case and isn’t currently working for Bragg.

“If there was never a book, we wouldn’t be here,” Scotto said.

Question of Congressional Authority

During the hearing, the House general counsel asserted that the committee’s subpoena to Jordan serves a valid legislative purpose and is therefore protected from any interference from the courts under the Constitution’s speech and debate clause.

Berry proposed two reasons for that claim.

First, he stated that Congress had introduced legislation that Pomerantz’s testimony could help inform. He cited a bill that, if enacted into law, would bar the use of federal funds to investigate a sitting or former president (the Accountability for Lawless Violence In our Neighborhoods, or ALVIN, Act), as well as another that would allow Congress to remove of an action or prosecution against a former president (H.R. 2553).

Berry also stated that Congress is within its authority to examine whether “politically motivated” prosecutions of a former president would interfere with the duties of a sitting POTUS. For example, it might inappropriately influence a sitting president’s decision-making on policies, for the president may “fear” the posthoc prosecution by a local DA for a decision that may be unpopular to the people in the DA’s locality, Berry said.

Bragg’s attorney objected to those contentions. The committee’s subpoena, Boutrous said, exceeded congressional authority because it’s the judicial branch’s job—not that of Congress—to ensure that this ongoing prosecution is not “politically motivated.”

He said that the committee, in issuing the subpoena, intended to “disrupt” Bragg’s criminal case against Trump and that this action “encroaches” upon other branches of government—the New York Executive Department and the judicial branch.

Bragg’s attorney cited the Supreme Court case Trump v. Mazars, in which the high court ruled in Trump’s favor and stated that the congressional committees couldn’t subpoena Trump’s financial statements. The Supreme Court reasoned in that ruling that conducting a criminal investigation is a power of the executive branch and that Congress’s subpoena against Trump violates the principles of separation of powers.

Boutrous says the Supreme Court ruling applies to this case because this case also raises significant separation of powers questions.

In her April 19 ruling, Vyskocil affirmed Congress’s position that the subpoena serves a valid legislative purpose.

Furthermore, she rejected Bragg’s reasoning that Trump v. Mazars applies to the case.

“The congressional subpoena in Mazars was directed at materials pertaining to the sitting President of the United States,” Vyskocil wrote in her ruling.

“In contrast, here, the subpoena was issued to a private citizen who is no longer employed by any state government and who has written a book and spoken extensively about the subject matter of the congressional inquiry,” she wrote. “The Court is not persuaded that Mazars applies to this case.”

Zachary Stieber contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Accusations of mismanagement and chaos are piling up against St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner.

Gardner appeared in court on April 18, the first hearing in Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s attempt to remove her from office. Gardner’s lawyers are seeking dismissal of that case.

Bailey asserts she neglected her duties by failing to properly staff her office and allowing thousands of criminal cases to languish. Gardner’s lawyers counter that Bailey never even alleges she committed any “intentional” acts that would justify her ouster.

Lawyers from Bailey’s office argued that Gardner should be disqualified from holding office because of her alleged pattern of “inaction” and “willful neglect” of her duties.

A day before the hearing, a judge ordered Gardner to “show cause” why she shouldn’t be held in contempt of court for failing to ensure that prosecutors from her office show up for a murder trial on April 17. A hearing in that matter is set for April 24, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

The contempt action comes after a judge sanctioned Gardner for failing to turn over evidence in a double murder case earlier this month.

During the hearing in Bailey’s case against Gardner, a representative of judges in St. Louis’ 22nd Circuit Court said: “The circuit attorney’s office is now in a state of near total collapse.” The man, whose name was unclear during a live broadcast of the Gardner hearing, told Visiting Judge John Torbitzky: “An expedited resolution of this matter is very important.”

Torbitzky is expected to decide within a couple of weeks whether to throw out Bailey’s petition against Gardner. He ordered attorneys to file written arguments about the motion to dismiss within a week; Torbitzky said he would decide whether to dismiss the case promptly after that.

If it proceeds, a trial likely would be held in September, based on a scheduling discussion during the hearing.

In his original court filing (pdf) against Gardner, Bailey wrote: “She has sacrificed the safety of the city of St. Louis. She has squandered the goodwill of the courts through misdirection and incompetence. She has turned away grieving families while murderers walk free.”

Action Follows Outcry

But an attorney representing Gardner, Jonathan Sternberg, said Bailey doesn’t have the goods on Gardner.

“This is an attack on the democratic process by someone who was never elected,” Sternberg said, taking a dig at Bailey, who was appointed to his position in January after the former attorney general, Eric Schmitt, became a member of the U.S. Senate. Bailey and Schmitt are Republicans; Gardner is a Democrat.

“Mr. Bailey doesn’t like the job Miss Gardner is doing,” Sternberg said. So the appropriate remedy would be for Bailey to support an opposition candidate in the next election rather than trying to throw her out of office via a court proceeding, Sternberg said.

Such drastic action should be reserved for cases involving intentional acts and corruption, which aren’t alleged in this case, Sternberg said.

Janae Edmondson Case

Bailey filed the action against Gardner last month following a public outcry over the tragic case of Janae Edmondson. That visiting teen athlete, who is from Tennessee, lost both of her legs in a pedestrian-vehicle crash. The driver accused of causing the crash that hurt Janae, is an armed robbery suspect who remained free despite violating his house arrest order dozens of times.

Gardner is one of 75 prosecutors nationwide who benefited from billionaire George Soros’ efforts to get “progressives” elected, according to author Matt Palumbo, who wrote a book about Soros.

Gardner’s battle to keep her job is occurring in the context of a national debate over the alleged “soft-on-crime” policies of some Democrat prosecutors in big cities, particularly those who received backing from funds from Soros. According to The Missouri Times, Gardner’s campaign benefited from Soros’s largesse.

Although embattled, Gardner has announced she is seeking re-election in 2024 to the position she has held since 2017.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

• Nora Scott, Licensed Social Worker, Dell Children’s Medical Center [Austin, TX]: “We do have patients who are starting [transition] as young as eight, nine [years old].”
• Dr. John Steever, Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center [New York, NY]: “I follow the WPATH guidelines, the World Professional Association of Transgender Health guidelines, and really what they would say is, the way to go at this age – age 10 — would be something like a puberty blocker…and that really stops puberty pretty quickly so that no further development of the secondary sexual characteristics happen. So, things like, there’s no real chest development. There’s no menstruation. Things like that.”
• Dr. Steever: “When you then get to age 14 is when I’ll consider some, you know, cross-gender hormones. 14 [years-old] is a reasonable age. Most kids are mature enough to make a relatively informed decision.”
• Dr. Steever: “Cross-gender hormones, testosterone in this case, you know, do have some permanent effects. So, I need the patient to be a little — to be mature enough to make a relatively informed decision. I get it, that there are some 14-year-olds that are not, you know, mature — but generally speaking, they are usually pretty good.”
• Prisha Mosley, Detransition Whistleblower: “They [doctors] said it was transition or suicide. Like, I was given no choice. I was told, ‘You will kill yourself if you don’t go through with these treatments.’”

[NEW YORK – Apr. 19, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing the transgender surgery industry — where several medical professionals were surreptitiously recorded admitting that children as young as eight years of age are considered for gender transitions.

According to industry experts, transgender surgeries are a lucrative business which leads certain doctors to conduct them for profit at the expense of patients – who are often young teens.

Dr. John Steever, who works in the Pediatrics division of the Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center in New York City, explained to a Veritas journalist how he views the gender transition process. He believes that most teens can make life-altering choices on their own.

“I follow the WPATH guidelines, the World Professional Association of Transgender Health guidelines, and really what they would say is, the way to go at this age – age 10 — would be something like a puberty blocker…and that really stops puberty pretty quickly so that no further development of the secondary sexual characteristics happen. So, things like, there’s no real chest development. There’s no menstruation. Things like that,” Dr. Steever said.

“When you then get to age 14 is when I’ll consider some, you know, cross-gender hormones. 14 [years-old] is a reasonable age. Most kids are mature enough to make a relatively informed decision,” he said.

“Cross-gender hormones, testosterone in this case, you know, do have some permanent effects. So, I need the patient to be a little — to be mature enough to make a relatively informed decision. I get it, that there are some 14-year-olds that are not, you know, mature — but generally speaking, they are usually pretty good.”

Another New York City doctor, Matthew Pabis, told a Veritas journalist how much effort he is willing to put in to arrange gender surgery for young children:

Veritas Journalist: “You don’t think anybody can do that for a 10-year-old, to do the [gender-reassignment] surgery?”

Dr. Matthew Pabis, Family Medicine Specialist, St. Mark’s Institute for Mental Health [New York, NY]: “They could, yeah!”

Veritas Journalist: “To reduce it [breasts]? That’s who we’re looking for.”

Dr. Pabis: “That’s going to definitely be a psychiatrist to sign off on it. 100 percent.”

Veritas Journalist: “If we were able to get that through from a certified psychiatrist, we could bring that into the person–”

Dr. Pabis: “Then the surgeon would be able to do the surgery.”

Veritas Journalist: “They wouldn’t be like, ‘Oh, they’re too young?’”

Dr. Pabis: “Again, the sort of psychiatrist — I’m going to hook you up with the groups that actually do this. Like, centers.”

Veritas Journalist: “Okay.”

Dr. Pabis: “Centers that do this, so they will have all the resources in one. I’m not going to leave you hanging.”

Nora Scott, who works at the Dell Children’s Medical Center in Austin, Texas, went even further. She admitted that children under 10 years of age can be considered for gender transition.

“We do have patients who are starting [transition] as young as eight, nine [years old],” she said.

To date, neither New York nor Texas has laws in place that restrict the age at which children can undergo sex changes. The question then becomes how young is too young for one to go through these permanent bodily changes?

Prisha Mosley, one of the countless individuals that has been pressured into transitioning, spoke to Project Veritas about her experience.

“They [doctors] said it was transition or suicide. Like, I was given no choice. I was told, ‘You will kill yourself if you don’t go through with these treatments.’”

SOURCE: Project Veritas

America is one signature away from having 27 constitutional carry states.

The unicameral legislature in the midwestern state of Nebraska passed its final version of LB77 – this year’s version of constitutional carry – on Wednesday morning.

Much of the opposition to the bill – which was expressed by several legislators who represent more populous areas in the state including Lincoln and Omaha – centered around a desire for “carveouts” for these urban areas.

Senator John Fredrickson of Omaha was one such legislator who stated concerns about the nuances of the bill, and acknowledged that it may work in rural parts of the state but in Omaha and urban areas, it doesn’t.

Still, his fellow legislators decided that the second amendment doesn’t need carveouts and that geography shouldn’t affect one’s constitutional rights.

Travis Couture-Lovelady, Nebraska state director for the NRA noted in a media release issued by the group that “state-by-state, NRA is working to eliminate overly burdensome carry requirements that have put restrictions on law-abiding Americans for far too long. Nebraska is the latest state to recognize law-abiding citizens are not the problem — criminals are.”

The final vote on the legislation was 33 Yea votes to 14 Nay votes, which was the minimum number required to pass the legislation.

Upon receiving the news, Governor Jim Pillen thanked the legislature for sending this bill to his desk.

I am proud to support LB 77 and Nebraskans’ constitutional rights. Thank you to the Nebraska Legislature for sending this bill to my desk. pic.twitter.com/25kn0oT0jCApril 19, 2023

Pillen has previously pledged to back the bill becoming law. A release issued by the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action last month stated “Gov. Pillen has pledged to sign Constitutional Carry into law. He has never wavered in the fight to expand and protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Nebraskans.”

25 states have already enacted constitutional carry including Alabama, Ohio, Indiana, and Georgia which passed their bills last year. Florida beat Nebraska in the race to become the 26th constitutional carry state when Governor Ron DeSantis signed his state’s constitutional carry legislation earlier this month. Florida’s law will be enacted on July 1st, 2023.

This is a breaking news story. Please refresh the page for the latest updates.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Ideology creates paranoid mindset and can lead people to blame others, society for their problems

Ideology currently permeating the political movement around gender and transgenderism drives its adherents into psychological corners and makes them susceptible to radicalization, according to several experts on radical movements and religious extremism.

The ideology imparts a simplistic, polarizing worldview that traps its victims in paranoia and rage, they said.

The issue has come to the forefront recently with several high-profile incidents.

On March 27, Audrey Elizabeth Hale shot dead six people, including three children, at the Covenant School in Nashville, Tennessee. Police said Hale identified as transgender.

About a week later, a 19-year-old was arrested in Colorado for attempted murder after police found in his home detailed plans for multiple school shootings. He identified as female, local news reported.

Also in Colorado, one of the two murderers in the 2019 STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting, 16-year-old Alec McKinney, was a woman who identified as male.

While the incidents don’t add up to a trend, they may reflect a deeper problem.

Surveys in recent years have revealed an elevated potential for radicalization among transgender people.

“Transgender and gender-diverse youth emerge as the group at the highest risk of support for VR [violent radicalization]. This is in line with results of a recent survey conducted during the pandemic that highlighted high levels of support for VR as well as psychological distress among gender minorities,” said a paper based on a 2021 survey of Canadian college students.

Signs of psychological stress among transgender people are off the charts, with surveys indicating about 30 percent of them attempt suicide.

Underlying Mental Problems

If a person, especially a child, expresses discomfort with their gender, the matter should be handled thoughtfully on a case-by-case basis, experts have argued.

“I would want to ensure that people who continue to have problems with the sense of their body … get serious medical attention and serious attention to all of their emotional and psychological issues,” said Philip Carl Salzman, emeritus professor of anthropology at McGill University.

Salzman has dedicated the latter part of his career to studying the issue of freedom and equality. He noticed that rather than handling transgender cases individually, the approach has become a formulaic “fast-track gender affirmation policy.”

That, in and of itself, he considers irresponsible.

“Many of the people who are trans now have very serious psychological comorbidities. Many of them are autistic, many of them have deep depression,” he said.

“There’s a vulnerable time in adolescence where people feel very disturbed,” he said.

For some, that may involve questioning their gender, but “the great majority of young people who say they’re not comfortable in their body desist from that claim once they’ve gone through adolescence,” he noted.

Yet now, there’s a broad push to make gender questioning universal, especially among youth, and seemingly to encourage as many people as possible to settle on a gender other than the one they grew up with.

“They’re being groomed to do this,” Salzman said.

“They’re being groomed to do it by teachers. They’re being groomed to do it on social media. These things are being directed to them, being imposed on them.”

This push has emerged as a consequence of mixing a legitimate medical condition of gender dysphoria, extreme discomfort with one’s innate sex, with a radical political narrative, he and others have observed.

‘Us’ vs ‘Them’

The political narrative around transgenderism posits that “gender-diverse” people are fundamentally at odds with people willing to live with their innate sex, who they are encouraged to call “cisgender.”

“It’s a neo-Marxist model that divides society into oppressors and victims and characterizes the victims as innocent and the oppressors as evil. So people who identify as victims feel justified in hating the category of people who are alleged to be their oppressors,” Salzman said.

This paradigm has been applied by Marxism to class, by critical race theory to race, by radical feminism to sex, and by “queer theory” to gender.

For the adherents of the transgender ideology, “cis-hetero-normativity” is “the enemy that wants to destroy them,” Salzman said.

This kind of worldview then “fuels resentment, opposition, hate, and potentially violence,” he said.

“It’s a paranoid mindset in the sense that all of your troubles are the result of what other people do to you. So my problems are not my problems, they are problems that have been foisted on me.”

Many parents struggling with their children’s self-declared gender change have reported their children speaking dismissively or resentfully about “cis” people as a group, especially when talking to their transgender friends.

“In general, cis-gendered people are considered evil and unsupportive, regardless of their actual views on the topic. To be heterosexual, comfortable with the gender you were assigned at birth, and non-minority places you in the ‘most evil’ of categories with this group of friends. Statement of opinions by the evil cis-gendered population are [considered] phobic and discriminatory and are generally discounted as unenlightened,” one parent said, according to a 2018 study.

The ideology prevents its followers from living a balanced way of life, according to Janice Fiamengo, a retired English professor at the University of Ottawa and expert on radical gender ideologies in the feminist realm.

“I think the main issue is the resentment that victim ideology inevitably produces. Victim ideology is grounded in the belief that one’s group is uniquely victimized, and that no one else suffers in the (preventable, allegedly) manner in which the victim does,” she told The Epoch Times via email.

“In this, it rejects the wisdom of most world philosophies and religions, which understand that suffering is part of the human condition, and that accepting suffering is necessary for wholeness and health.”

Precursors to Violence

The oppressor-oppressed dynamic is one of four precursors to political violence that has many times ravaged various corners of the world over the past 100 years “under the masthead of the isomers of equity,” according to filmmaker Curt Jaimungal, who exhaustively documented the phenomenon in his documentary “Better Left Unsaid.”

Another precursor is the claim that “evidence of oppression is the inequality between groups,” the documentary says.

In this context, trans activists most often point to the high suicide rates among transgender people as well as anecdotal evidence of transgender people being murdered as evidence of “trans genocide.”

Salzman rejected such a characterization.

“The idea that there’s some campaign to kill trans people is totally imaginary and totally paranoid,” he said.

In 2021, there was one murder classified as a hate crime against a transgender or gender non-conforming person, meaning this identification allegedly figured in the crime’s motive, based on data from about two-thirds of U.S. police agencies.

In 2022, 38 transgender people were killed in violent incidents, according to Human Rights Campaign, an LGBTQ lobby group.

Given that transgender people make up an estimated 0.6 percent of the population, the homicide rate would be about three to four times lower than in the general population. The group cautions, however, that the data is likely incomplete because the gender self-identification of the victim is not always reported.

For cases where details have been reported, the most prominent circumstances of the killing appear to be domestic violence and prostitution, according to an analysis by The Federalist’s Chad Felix Greene.

The third precursor Jaimungal pinpointed is a claim that “peaceful dialog and understanding between the groups is impossible since the dominant group’s strategy is to retain its power.”

Trans activists have commonly argued that the issue cannot be debated because criticizing the ideology encourages people to dismiss the experiences of transgender people as imaginary, the implication being that this increases psychological stress on such individuals and increases the risk of suicide.

Any attempts to approach the issue without total acquiescence to the ideology typically prompts dramatic accusations.

“Disagreeing is hate speech and hate is equivalent to violence,” Salzman summarized.

The final precursor Jaimungal identified is a call for violence.

Journalist Andy Ngo has documented a number of examples of trans activists engaging in, threatening, or advocating for violence in just the past two weeks.

While sporadic so far, such acts of violence seem to trace a broader ideological milieu.

Thomas York, who holds a doctorate in religious studies and previously lectured on religion, violence, and ethics at the University of Toronto, has noticed radicalization in the trans community bears similarities to Islamist radicalization.

Though not religious per se, the trans ideology fits the “functional definition of religion,” meaning it serves the “social function or the psychological function” of a religion for its followers, York told The Epoch Times.

“It does perform a lot of the same functions. It has rituals, it has a community, it has its own sense of good and evil, its own morality. Moreover, it shares the same characteristics as the radical movements in religious traditions that bring about religious violence,” he said.

After dialog has been abandoned as a solution, violence is the next logical step.

“It’s either they feel it’s going to take too long or it’s not going to work, that things are so wrong that there has to be this ‘purge’ of the old world order, a violent purge,” he explained.

The violence is then framed as an act of self-sacrifice.

“They view themselves as a martyr, that they’re defending a marginalized community that they feel is under attack,” he said.

Still, the individual usually needs to feel the violence would accomplish something, even meet with approval.

“They don’t arise out of a vacuum. They are encouraged by a lot of people who themselves would never engage in violence,” he said.

The community might publicly disavow the violence, but privately condone it or sympathize with it.

“Most Muslims don’t agree with suicide bombers, but there is a large enough contingent within Islam that does believe it that it encourages the suicide bombers to take action. They are actually venerated by numerous people in their community and that’s why it encourages them to do it,” he explained.

The terrorist act itself then doesn’t need to accomplish much in and of itself, but rather “purge” the perceived evil symbolically.

“They can’t eradicate the entire old world order by themselves, so they do it through this great symbolic gesture that they know is going to get attention,” he said.

Way Out

Leaving a radical movement tends to be a painful experience, York said, speaking from a personal experience of being a radical animal rights and environmental activist in his youth.

“It brings a kind of a feeling of euphoria to you to be a part of a movement. You lose your identity in it and you become part of this group and you feel empowered by that,” he said.

“So it’s a euphoric feeling and you feel very, very committed to it. But then you’re also at the same time afraid that if you don’t conform or you say suddenly the wrong thing, you will be excommunicated or purged by other people.”

That can put a lot of pressure on the members, especially those who don’t have much of a life outside of the movement.

“You feel almost suicidal because you feel like you’ve lost your entire raison d’etre, your reason for being,” York said. “So the fear of doing that makes them conform more to this narrowing of the ideology. And some of them become ‘superactivists’ who see their role as taking it to the next level and sort of outdoing the others and being the leaders.”

In his experience, since members get to depend on the movement for “a sense of purpose and belonging,” they won’t let go of it easily.

“I think the only way they can get out of it is to sort of suffer what has been called existential disappointment,” he said.

“Your heart is broken by what you perceive as the irreparable failures of the movement and that you can’t fit in it anymore or you’re purged from it maybe.”

That was his experience. He still believed in animal rights and environmental causes, but could no longer identify with the activism. He was particularly turned off by people bringing Marxist ideas into the movements, he said.

“I didn’t really think they belonged to those movements, but I was alone in that.”

In the end, he felt he had to leave.

“It’s as serious as a very committed relationship breaking apart. But you get over it,” he said. “Just like a heartbreak, it repairs in time.”

It’s actually normal for young people to pursue a controversial cause.

“When you’re a teenager, you rebel and you adopt this alien identity that eventually you grow out of. It’s called individuation,” York said, referring to the term used by psychologist Carl Jung.

The problem with taking up the transgender cause for this purpose is that it can leave life-long consequences. Gender transition is a long process that can be extremely taxing on both the physical and mental health of the patient, especially when it reaches the level of surgery.

“This is much more serious than just becoming punk rocker,” he noted.

The way the movement presents itself, however, is exactly by catering to the individuation urge.

“On social media, which has amplified this a lot, these kids, they’re drawn to the power of this movement because it has such conviction,” he said.

Matching that conviction can earn one praise and encouragement—often a scarce commodity in adolescence.

“What happens in this community is that you feel compelled to jump in with both feet and become hardcore. There are rewards involved in doing that,” York said.

The solution, he said, would be to offer people “an alternative paradigm” which “has to be as strong as the thing it’s replacing.”

“As an activist, it’s hard to go from something that gives you ultimate meaning to just regular, everyday life again. It’s very difficult to make that transition” he said.

“Because everyday life is not fulfilling. You have your boring job or school or the problems in life and you still see the problems everywhere that compelled you to be an activist and they’re not being addressed.”

The alternative thus needs to be deeper and more meaningful.

“You have to have something as powerful to draw you away from it almost, like another faith, if you will,” he said.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

California’s failing rail project is a metaphor for a state that has turned its back on the ordinary, hardworking people who live there.

t sounded too good to be true, and it was. Travel from downtown San Francisco to downtown Los Angeles in two hours via high-speed rail. California voters in 2008 approved Proposition 1A, authorizing $9.95 billion in general obligation bonds to build this so-called “bullet train.” They were told not only that the total cost would only be $33 billion but also that the entire 500-mile system would be running by 2030.

Fat chance.

In March of this year, the California High-Speed Rail Authority released its latest progress report. The project is now projected to cost $127 billion, and there is no longer a projected completion date. The initial stretch of track, a 171-mile segment across the sparsely populated, pancake-flat San Joaquin Valley, is projected to be done by 2030 at a cost of $35 billion.

These are staggering numbers, a testament to a staggering waste of financial and material resources. For this first segment of track, Californians are going to pay $206 million per mile, and that’s if there aren’t any more overruns. The financing alone—based on preposterously optimistic ridership projections for this segment of 6.6 million riders per year, and a 30-year-term at 5 percent annual interest—would work out to a cost of $348 per ticket. Not exactly an easily affordable means of travel.

Ice Water Trick Melts lbs of Wobbly Flab

Doctors Can’t Explain But This Can Vanish Tinnitus (Ear Ringing)

California’s high-speed rail project, in short, is a disaster. Everything about it fails any rational cost-benefit analysis. It will be a permanent financial drain on Californians, because in order for anyone to be able to afford to use the train for a daily commute, ticket revenue won’t even pay operating costs, much less pay back the construction costs.

From an environmental perspective, the California High-Speed Rail Authority boasts that the initial segment will reduce total vehicle miles traveled in California by 183 million miles. That sounds like a lot until you take into account that Californians logged 340 billion vehicle miles traveled in 2022. High-speed rail by 2030 expects to reduce that total by 1/20th of one percent.

But the opportunity cost of blowing $127 billion, and counting, on a train that will not significantly alleviate either traffic congestion or “greenhouse gases” is perhaps the bitterest joke of all. For $127 billion, Californians could build infrastructure that would improve their quality of life for generations.

Even in absurdly expensive California, $127 billion goes a long way. That much money could pay to raise the height of the Shasta Dam, build the proposed Sites Reservoir to its original 2 million acre-feet storage capacity, restore every aqueduct in the state, build new systems to harvest and store storm runoff, upgrade every major treatment plant in the state to recycle and reuse wastewater, refurbish the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant to last till 2050 or longer, build two additional nuclear power plants of the same size, and resurface and add lanes to every major interstate freeway.

For $127 billion, even at ridiculously inflated California prices for public works, Californians could have abundant, affordable water and power, they could have a freeway system upgraded for the 21st century, and they would still have tens of billions left.

Corruption and Waste as a Way of Life

The problem with spending money on rational, practical solutions that lower the cost of living and improve the quality of life for millions of Californians is that this goal is inconvenient for the special interests that run California. On the other hand, pouring every spare bit of money, materials, and labor into a make-work megaproject serves several hidden agendas.

The rationale for high-speed rail is to help save the environment, as if adding a 500-mile scar to the landscape, consuming millions of tons of steel and concrete in the process, is somehow preferable to simply upgrading the capacity of existing road and rail assets in the state.

But the true motivation to fund useless megaprojects is a desire to neglect California’s essential water, power, and transportation infrastructure, because by creating scarcity and high prices for these resources, public utilities and private energy producers reap larger profits. This plays out across several economic sectors.

For example, public utilities collect regulated profits, fixed at a percent of revenue. If renewable electricity costs several times more than conventionally generated power—and it does and always will if you do honest cost accounting and factor out the punitive permitting costs—then utilities make more profit. Ten percent of $0.40 per kilowatt-hour of renewable electricity at peak is a much bigger number than 10 percent of $0.04 per kilowatt-hour for clean natural gas-generated electricity.

With water, the higher the price goes, the easier it is for big agricultural corporations to outlast and buy out small family farms, consolidating the industry. It’s also more lucrative for hedge funds that are buying land in California just for the water rights. The higher the price of water, the more valuable their investments.

One would think California’s powerful unions would recognize the benefit that practical infrastructure investments would have for all working families in California, but they don’t. As long as their construction workers have lucrative jobs on the high-speed rail project, there is no upside to them taking on the environmentalist lobby or the corporate and financial players that profit from scarcity and high prices. Nonetheless, California’s construction unions could be a political wild card. If they want to demand projects that would generate positive economic benefits and help all working families, they have the political power to make it happen.

The Ripple Effects of Scarcity Policies

Affordable and abundant water and energy form the foundation for broad-based prosperity. They make home ownership more affordable, because the supply of homes cannot be significantly increased unless there is adequate water. They make electricity and gasoline affordable, which benefits households and businesses. And scarcity of water and energy are not the only essential resources that California denies its citizens.

Building materials, lumber in particular, need to be imported from other states and nations since California’s state legislature has regulated in-state timber harvesting to less than 25 percent of what it was as recently as the 1990s. But rather than thin the forests with responsible revitalized logging, every year the firefighting industrial complex gears up to collect additional billions fighting cataclysmic fires in overgrown, mismanaged forests, and silences criticism with two words, “climate change.”

California’s overregulation of everything has led to its so-called housing crisis because it is now impossible for private developers to make a profit building homes that working families can afford. Instead, a host of special interests, collecting countless billions in money from taxpayers, have created a massively subsidized industry in low-income housing and “permanent supportive housing” for the homeless.

These projects waste stupefying amounts of money, but if regulations were loosened up to allow private development of homes people could afford, or if homeless people were humanely moved off the streets into supervised encampments where they could recover their sobriety and their dignity, the scams would come to a screeching halt.

Spending $200 million per track mile on high-speed rail and over $500,000 per unit of “permanent supportive housing” has nothing to do with saving the planet or helping the disadvantaged homeless. These insanely overpriced projects endure because spending that money wisely would create a competitive economic environment, threatening the margins and the market share of the special interests that run California.

Wasting billions on projects that will never yield the public benefits they promise but will nonetheless ensure permanent sources of profit and power for California’s public sector bureaucrats, its environmentalist pressure groups, its public utilities, its hedge funds and pension funds, its corporations, and its subsidized land developers is the business of California’s elite now. All of them are determined to keep things just the way they are. Because for all of them, ongoing public failure is ongoing special interest success.

California’s High-Speed Rail project is a failure. It is also a metaphor for a state that has turned its back on the ordinary, hardworking people who live there. The larger problem is that California is exporting this mentality into the rest of America, along with its propaganda, and its corrupt, punitive economic model.

SOURCE: American Greatness

Republican representative Nancy Mace (S.C.) said Wednesday that she reviewed “over 100 suspicious activity reports on the Biden family,” which show the Bidens’ business dealings with “astronomical” sums of money.

“Every time you unturn, overturn, or look under a stone, there’s so much more you have to investigate,” Mace said in a video posted to Twitter. Not only do the reports show “astronomical” amounts of money, she said, but they also detail “the source of the funding, where the money’s going, the shell companies, prostitution rings, etc.”

Read several of those Suspicious Activity Reports at the Treasury just now.

The number of Biden family members involved (more than previously known), the amount of money involved (astronomical), the shell companies, the accusations of prostitution rings… wild… pic.twitter.com/fVTdazOi2T

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) April 17, 2023

“It’s insanity to me that it’s not been investigated in the way that it should be,” the congresswoman said.

Mace and other members of the House Oversight Committee on Monday examined suspicious activity reports that banks sent to the Treasury Department flagging potential criminal activity in transactions involving President Joe Biden’s family. The committee’s chairman, Rep. James Comer (R., Ky.), said afterward that nine Biden relatives may have benefitted from the family’s business schemes, six more than were previously implicated.

“The Biden family enterprise is centered on Joe Biden’s political career and connections, and it has generated an exorbitant amount of money for the Biden family,” Comer said.

The committee is investigating the first family’s murky business dealings. Comer said last month that Biden “lied to the American people” about a Chinese company’s payments to first son Hunter Biden. The committee’s investigation has determined that the Chinese company made payments to the president’s brother, son, and daughter-in-law, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

After “two months of dragging their feet,” according to Comer, Treasury Department officials released the suspicious activity reports, which banks filed against Biden family members, last month. Comer also announced in March that, following a Free Beacon report, the committee is talking to a think-tank executive who says the Bidens warned a Chinese businessman about a looming federal investigation, allowing the businessman to flee the country.

Evidence shows that Hunter Biden’s suspicious business partners had extensive dealings with Joe Biden, Mace said last week.

“This is corruption at its core,” she told Fox News.

Update April 19, 11:04 a.m.: This piece has been updated with additional information about the House Oversight Committee’s investigation.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

The only REI store in Portland, Oregon, will close early next year, the Seattle Times reported Wednesday, with the camping gear company citing the far-left city’s crime spike as the main reason.

Last year, REI Portland “had its highest number of break-ins and thefts in two decades, despite actions to provide extra security,” prompting the closure, the company said in its announcement. REI spokeswoman Megan Behrbaum told the Times that crime is “overwhelming [security] systems in place” even after company representatives met with Mayor Ted Wheeler (D.) over “concerns for the safety of our employees, members, and customers.”

The Portland store’s crime problem came to a head last November, when a car crashed through the REI’s glass front door, the Times reported.

REI’s statement comes only days after a Portland coffee shop announced its sudden closure, with employees saying they “feel unsafe” in the crime-ridden city. REI is far from the only company to shutter stores in a Democrat-run city, however. Whole Foods last week closed its “flagship” location in San Francisco over rampant crime and drug use, while Walmart shut down four Chicago stores on the same day that the Democratic Party announced it will hold its 2024 convention in the Windy City.

All of these cities have embraced left-wing “criminal justice reform” in recent years. While Wheeler’s office told the Times that it is working “to find ways to address crime,” the mayor has embraced “criminal justice reform” goals such as putting “in place a progressive … Police Reform Action Plan,” emphasizing “deescalation and bias training,” and sending crisis workers rather than police officers in response to 911 calls.

While REI is “evaluating opportunities,” it does “not believe a downtown Portland location is a possibility in the near future,” KGW8 News reported.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Former officials tell Congress Al Qaeda and ISIS have rebuilt under Taliban rule

Less than two years after the Biden administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, the country “is once again a terrorist safe haven” with groups capable of orchestrating attacks on the American homeland, according to former defense and counterterrorism officials.

Under the Taliban’s rule, terrorist groups like al Qaeda and ISIS-K have rebuilt their forces, acquiring the operational capacity to launch strikes across Europe and the United States in as little as six months from now, the former officials told Congress during a Tuesday hearing on repercussions of the Biden administration’s 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan. As the war-torn country breeds new terrorists at an accelerated rate, there is a growing fear in the U.S. defense community that a major attack in the United States is on the horizon.

“The threat environment in Afghanistan is bad and getting worse,” said Nathan Sales, a former coordinator for counterterrorism at the State Department who said the U.S. military has been unable to effectively collect intelligence about terror plots since its withdrawal. “With no presence on the ground, it’s much harder to monitor terrorist groups as they train and plot.”

The former officials also raised concerns about the $7.2 billion worth of American military equipment that was abandoned in Afghanistan. Not only could this equipment fall into the hands of multiple terrorist groups, but it could be intercepted by adversaries like Russia and China, which are still active in Afghanistan and maintain ties with the Taliban.

The Biden administration, on the other hand, has mostly forgotten about the country. Even as terrorist forces amass in Afghanistan, the United States has conducted just one drone strike in the 20 months since it left the country. “One drone strike in 20 months is not a viable strategy,” Sales said.

The lack of intelligence from Afghanistan has also impacted the Department of Homeland Security’s travel and vetting system, which was created in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Without a steady flow of information from Afghanistan, these networks are breaking down, Sales said, pointing to a spike in the number of watch-listed individuals caught at the nation’s porous southern border. Nearly 100 individuals on the terrorism watchlist were caught at the border in 2022 and another 69 have been apprehended so far this year.

“When terrorists have safe haven, as they now do in Afghanistan, they’re able to plot attacks far beyond their borders, including their ultimate goal of hitting the U.S. homeland,” Sales said.

Simone Ledeen, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, raised concerns about the Biden administration’s decision to airlift Afghan citizens into America without proper screening or credentials. The disorganized effort allowed at least 324 Afghans to enter the United States who were on the Pentagon’s watchlist, according to Ledeen.

Leaked emails provided to Congress in 2021 appear to corroborate this information, indicating the Biden administration allowed unvetted refugees to fill flights out of the country.

Retired Col. Christopher Douglas, a Marine Corps veteran conducting the investigation into the terrorist bombing at the Kabul airport that killed 13 U.S. service members, said he was shocked when the Biden administration announced the hasty withdrawal. He blamed the lack of notice from the administration for the botched evacuation, as well as the current situation in Afghanistan.

“I and presumably many of our Afghan partners were in disbelief by the announcement of the withdrawal date,” Douglas said. “This reduced our U.S. force posture and boots on the ground to nearly zero,” exacerbating an already tense effort to get Americans out of the country.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Biden must decide if fighting so-called climate change is bigger priority than fighting America’s actual enemies

The U.S. military is not on board with Joe Biden’s plan to address so-called climate change by building large unsightly wind farms along the East Coast.

Bloomberg reports that the Pentagon is concerned that many of the administration’s proposed wind farm sites would conflict with military operations in the area. Maps circulated among industry stakeholders—eager to cash in on the administration’s enthusiasm for so-called clean energy projects—show that the Navy and Air Force have deemed vast swathes of the offshore terrain earmarked for wind farm development to be “highly problematic.”

The Coast Guard has also raised concerns about how Biden’s wind farms could disrupt its operations off the coasts of North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. The military’s objections are great news for critics and skeptics of Biden’s radical goal of producing 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by the end of the decade. That’s the equivalent of 30 nuclear reactors.

Alas, Biden and his Democratic allies have made clear that they view fighting so-called climate change as a much higher priority than they do fighting America’s actual enemies and maintaining a dominant military force. So the president may ultimately decide to ignore his own military advisers to litter our oceans with wind turbines.

Some context: The Obama administration, in which Biden served as vice president, ruthlessly deployed wind turbines and other so-called clean energy contraptions in an effort to kill and maim hundreds of thousands of majestic birds, including bald eagles.

READ MORE:

Two Suspected Illegal Immigrants Killed a Bald Eagle for Dinner. Federal Authorities Don’t Seem To Care.

Democrats Are ‘Saving the Environment’ by Killing Whales

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

‘We were already fearing for our lives. Now, it’s even worse.’

KANSAS CITY, Mo.—A black teenager was shot last week while attempting to pick his brothers up at the wrong house in Kansas City. On Monday, police said the suspect was an octogenarian.

This detail, according to elderly people in the state and across the country, has pumped toxic gas into an already incendiary situation that has led many of them to fear for their safety.

Just as members of the “trans community” were terrorized by trans school shooter Audrey Hale’s killing spree in Nashville last month, old people are the real victims of this tragedy.

Police charged Andrew D. Lester, 84, with felony assault and armed criminal action for allegedly shooting 16-year-old Ralph Yarl after the teen showed up outside his home on the evening of April 13. Yarl, who suffered gunshot wounds to the head and arm, was released from the hospital on Sunday and is expected to make a full recovery.

The incident occurred amid an alarming increase in anti-elder rhetoric, much of it fueled by Democratic politicians and liberal activists. Dianne Feinstein, the 89-year-old senator from California, has been bombarded with flagrantly ageist demands that she resign because her advanced age and probable dementia makes her unfit to serve.

“It has become painfully obvious to many of us in California that [Feinstein] is no longer able to fulfill her duties,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.) seethed during an interview on CNN, echoing the ageist attacks that have been lobbed against President Joe Biden, 80, as he prepares to launch his campaign for reelection.

Amidst this noxious fervor of anti-octogenarian rage, liberal commentators seized on Lester’s advanced age in an effort to bolster their political agenda. Prominent social media user @JoJoFromJerz viciously mocked the wrinkled features and dazed expression visible in Lester’s mug shot.

“If this isn’t the face of evil, I don’t know what is,” the Democratic influencer wrote in a Twitter post, several months after visiting the White House. This prompted user @wiley_coyote22 to suggest that elderly Americans should be stripped of their constitutional rights. “That’s just a man too old to have guns,” quipped the self-described “Very Gay” “Social Libertarian.”

“We are terrified for the octogenarian community here,” said Joy Summer, a pro-elderly activist based in St. Louis. “Nursing homes are calling in snipers, putting up razor wire, it’s like a war zone. More blood’s going to be shed.”

Elderly Americans across the country are feeling increasingly vulnerable amid what feels like an alarming rise in anti-elder violence. In June 2022, a group of teens attacked a 73-year-old man in Philadelphia and beat him to death with a traffic cone. In October 2020, the beloved actor Rick Moranis, 67 at the time, was sucker-punched while walking near Central Park in Manhattan.

Just as concerning as the epidemic of anti-senior violence is the stunning rise in incidents of elder abuse in recent years. A 2019 study by the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention revealed a significant “increase in violence” against elderly Americans. The assault rate among men aged 60 and older surged 75 percent between 2002 and 2016, while the homicide rate jumped nearly 10 percent between 2010 and 2016, the study found.

Dr. Ronan Factora, chair of the Special Interest Group on Elder Abuse and Mistreatment at the American Geriatrics Society, argued the CDC study underestimated incidents of violence against seniors due to the significant number of cases that go unreported. “This is really a small fraction that represents a larger problem that has been growing,” he said.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Four months after transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg said he would hold Southwest Airlines accountable for mass flight delays, the airline ordered a ground stop, meaning flights not already in the air cannot take off, delaying at least 1,820 flights across the country.

The Tuesday disturbance was due to the failure of a “vendor-supplied firewall” that led to the loss of operational data, CNN reported. The Federal Aviation Administration tweeted at 10:36 a.m. that Southwest requested a “pause” on its departures. The airline resumed service just before noon.

Buttigieg came under intense fire in December when Southwest faced a massive system meltdown that led to 16,700 flight cancellations, nearly half of its schedule, between December 20 and 29.

More than two dozen House Democrats wrote a letter to Buttigieg in January demanding the transportation secretary penalize Southwest Airlines for the cancellations. “We believe much more needs to be done,” the lawmakers wrote. 

Buttigieg claimed in December that he “made clear” to the airline’s CEO “that our department will be holding them accountable for their responsibilities to customers.”

The secretary said he would hold Southwest to account to “make sure that this can’t happen again.”

Tuesday’s incident is the latest transportation crisis to take place under Buttigieg’s watch, two months after he faced bipartisan criticism for his slow response after a train derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, causing a chemical spill. But Buttigieg has directed his agency to focus on racist highways and roadways. Polling found the majority of Americans want him to quit the role. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Justice Department civil rights chief Kristen Clarke, who in college rubbed shoulders with at least two anti-Semitic scholars, spoke at the agency’s Holocaust Remembrance Day event on Tuesday.

In her speech, Clarke spoke of “the enormity of the loss of six million Jews” in the Holocaust and the lessons it provides for ongoing atrocities in “Ukraine, Ethiopia, the Congo, and elsewhere around the world.” She mentioned a rise in anti-Semitism in the United States, then pivoted to hate crimes against other racial and ethnic groups.

“Attacks against black people—the most targeted group—and against other marginalized communities continue to increase,” she said.

Clarke may not be the ideal choice to represent the Justice Department on the topic of the Holocaust. In college, Clarke rubbed shoulders with black liberation activists known for anti-Semitic views. As the president of Harvard’s Black Students Association in 1994, Clarke hosted a speech for Wellesley professor Tony Martin, who promoted false theories that a cabal of Jews orchestrated the global slave trade, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

Clarke defended Martin after outcry over the event as an “an intelligent, well-versed Black intellectual who bases his information of [sic] indisputable fact.”

Martin in 2002 gave a talk, “Tactics of Organized Jewry in Suppressing Free Speech,” at a conference hosted by a Holocaust denial group, the Institute for Historical Review.

Clarke also served on the editorial board of an academic journal with Amiri Baraka, a black liberationist poet who once blamed Jews for 9/11. Clarke concealed her affiliation with Baraka during her Senate confirmation hearing in 2021 when she told Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah) that she had never served on “the editorial staff of a journal with Amiri Baraka.”

Several left-wing Jewish groups during her confirmation hearing defended Clarke against charges of anti-Semitism. She was narrowly confirmed to the civil rights post in a party-line vote.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Atlantic Council sponsor Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. is buying up discounted barrels of Russian oil

The Atlantic Council has positioned itself as one of the Beltway’s most vocal critics of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But one of its biggest donors is snatching up a massive amount of discounted Russian oil, fueling what the prominent think tank has called “Russia’s war machine.”

The United Arab Emirates, through its national oil companies, has purchased hundreds of thousands of barrels of discounted Russian oil, the Wall Street Journal reports. The relationship has frustrated American officials but proved lucrative for the Emiratis, who have been able to turn the Kremlin crude for a handsome profit on the world market.

These profits will likely benefit the Atlantic Council, which has urged foreign governments to boycott Russian energy to avoid funding Russian president Vladimir Putin’s “war machine” and “war crimes.” Abu Dhabi National Oil Co., which recently stored 700,000 barrels of oil for Russia’s Gazprom, is a major sponsor of the Atlantic Council’s Gulf Energy Forum. The UAE embassy in 2021 gave more than $1 million to the Atlantic Council, while the UAE’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation gave between $100,000 and $250,000, according to donor records.

The UAE’s oil deals could make things awkward for the Atlantic Council, which has been at the forefront of calls for aggressive steps to thwart Russia with economic sanctions. In a memo to NATO leaders this month, the Atlantic Council said that “a failure to fully exercise the West’s economic leverage risks prolonging this conflict by fueling Putin’s war machine.” Atlantic Council senior fellows called for sanctions on the purchase of Russian oil in order to “stop funding Russia’s war machine” and urged Europe to halt energy purchases from Russia to “stop funding Vladimir Putin’s war crimes in Ukraine.”

Atlantic Council president Fred Kempe, writing at CNBC, recently decried Putin’s “weaponization” of the energy industry to fuel his “criminal war in Ukraine.” In the op-ed, Kempe touted Sultan Al Jaber, the head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Co., as an “ideal choice” to lead a United Nations climate conference later this year.

Kempe’s op-ed caused a minor stir in the think tank world after the Washington Free Beacon reported Atlantic Council’s financial ties to UAE, which Kempe failed to disclose. CNBC added an editor’s note to Kempe’s article, saying that the Atlantic Council’s relationship with UAE was “an obvious conflict of interest” that “does not meet our standards of transparency.”

It’s the sort of foreign entanglement that has caused headaches for the Atlantic Council before.

The think tank has had a lucrative relationship with the increasingly authoritarian Turkish government. Kempe met with Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan at an event in Washington in 2017 while the Turkish autocrat’s bodyguards were attacking peaceful protesters outside the venue.

Burisma Holdings, the Ukrainian energy company linked to Hunter Biden, paid the Atlantic Council $300,000 as part of an image rehabilitation campaign in 2017. The Atlantic Council entered the partnership even after State Department officials warned the think tank of Burisma’s rampant corruption.

Two Atlantic Council scholars lobbied on behalf of the Russian gas pipeline, Nord Stream 2. Several companies that constructed the pipeline have donated to the Atlantic Council over the years.

The Atlantic Council has helped UAE burnish its image in other ways, even as the oil-rich Gulf nation has faced criticism over its human rights record. Last year, the think tank organized an all-expenses-paid junket for congressional staffers to meet with Emirati officials regarding its efforts to fight climate change.

American officials are increasingly concerned by the Emiratis’ growing ties with Russia. American spies intercepted communications of Russian intelligence officials boasting they had convinced the Emiratis “to work together against US and UK intelligence agencies,” the Associated Press reported.

An Atlantic Council spokesman defended the relationship with the Emiratis, saying the think tank’s experts maintain “total intellectual independence” from corporate and foreign donors.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

GOP lawmakers refute Bragg’s assertions in remarks to The Epoch Times

The House Judiciary Committee and its chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), on April 17 filed a response to a motion filed by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

The filing comes amid a legal clash between Bragg and Jordan on whether Congress has the authority to investigate Bragg’s prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

It began when Bragg sued to halt a congressional subpoena from Jordan that sought the testimony of Mark Pomerantz, a former Manhattan prosecutor who led an investigation into Trump’s finances.

In the 35-page filing (pdf), attorneys for the House Judiciary Committee and Jordan argued that Bragg’s lawsuit to quash Jordan’s subpoena violates the speech or debate clause in the U.S. Constitution.

The attorneys asserted that Jordan’s subpoena serves a valid legislative purpose and is therefore protected from any interference from the courts under the clause.

They also argued that Congress is within its authority to “examine whether former Presidents are being subject to politically motivated state investigations and prosecutions due to the policies they advanced as President, and, if so, what legislative remedies may be appropriate.”

Pomerantz, who had pushed for an indictment against Trump after having led a probe into the former president’s finances, left the Manhattan district attorney’s office in February 2022 because Bragg initially decided not to pursue a criminal case against Trump. Pomerantz later released a memoir about the case.

After that, Bragg convened a New York grand jury that ultimately indicted Trump in late March for 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, to which the former president has pleaded not guilty.

On April 6, following a weeks-long probe into Bragg’s office before Trump’s indictment on March 30, Jordan subpoenaed (pdf) Pomerantz to seek testimony from the former prosecutor as part of the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight of Bragg’s “unprecedented indictment” of a former U.S. president.

In response, Bragg filed a federal lawsuit on April 11 (pdf) seeking to nullify Jordan’s subpoena, which included an emergency request for a temporary restraining order on Jordan and an injunction to block the subpoena’s enforcement. But on the same day, the court declined to enter Bragg’s emergency request into the record because of a lack of documentation and ordered a hearing on the matter. An initial hearing in the case is scheduled in the Southern District Court of New York for April 19.

GOP Lawmakers Refute Bragg’s Allegation of ‘Threat to Federalism’

Bragg, in his April 11 complaint (pdf), characterized the subpoena of Pomerantz as an “unprecedently [sic] brazen and unconstitutional attack” on Bragg’s prosecution and investigation of Trump.

“That campaign is a direct threat to federalism and the sovereign interests of the State of New York,” Bragg said in the complaint.

He also said that Jordan has “no power under the Constitution to oversee state and local criminal matters” and that he has “no legitimate legislative purpose” for issuing the subpoena.

“The subpoena threatens the sovereign powers of the States, confidence in the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, and the integrity of an ongoing criminal prosecution,” attorneys for Bragg argued. They said the congressional subpoena to Pomerantz “marks the first time in our nation’s history that Congress has used its compulsory process to interfere with an ongoing state criminal case.”

In a memorandum of law (pdf) to support Bragg’s lawsuit, filed on April 11, attorneys said the congressional subpoena both “exceeds Congress’s authority” and “obstructs New York’s sovereign right to enforce its criminal law.”

Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee disagreed with Bragg’s assertions.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), who is also the vice chairman of the House Republican Conference, told The Epoch Times that the House Judiciary Committee has an interest in probing Bragg’s case to make sure federal tax dollars are being spent appropriately.

Bragg’s office previously stated that some federal funding has gone into its investigation of Trump or the Trump Organization.

“Our jurisdiction is limited largely to the use of federal funding,” Johnson told The Epoch Times on April 17. “We do have the power of the purse in the house—and at the end of the day, we’ll be proposing legislative reforms that are meaningful and probably looking at some of the expenditure of these funds.

“If some of that funding has been misspent or misapplied, then we have a responsibility as stewards of the taxpayers’ dollars to track that down and make sure that it’s not. Bragg’s office has admitted that they’ve at least used some federal funding, for example, on the pursuit of Donald Trump, and so that’s of interest to us.”

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) echoed Johnson’s view. He told The Epoch Times the House Judiciary Committee didn’t violate any principles of federalism in issuing Pomerantz a subpoena.

Attorneys for Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee noted on April 17 that the committee started investigating Bragg’s office after “concluding that the prospect of a politically motivated prosecution of a former President could give rise to issues of substantial federal concern.”

They said that the federal government “also has a substantial interest in the welfare of former Presidents.”

Pomerantz is named as a defendant in Bragg’s lawsuit “so that he may continue to abide by the Office’s instruction without facing a risk of contempt proceedings,” a spokesperson for the Manhattan district attorney’s office told news outlets. The spokesperson also noted that Pomerantz previously indicated he would follow the Manhattan District Attorney’s (DA’s) office’s instruction “not to provide the committee with information or materials relating to his work in the DA’s Office.”

Pomerantz, in a declaration to the court filed on April 17 (pdf), noted that he wasn’t involved in the decision to indict Trump.

In seeking the court to halt the congressional subpoena, Pomerantz wrote: “Absent some relief from this Court, I will find myself in an impossible position.

“If I refuse to provide information to the Committee, I risk being held in contempt of Congress and referred to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution. If, on the other hand, I defy the District Attorney’s instructions and answer questions, I face possible legal or ethical consequences, including criminal prosecution.”

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly characterized the nature of the filing by attorneys for the House Judiciary Committee and Rep. Jordan. They filed a response to Manhattan DA Bragg’s motion in a lawsuit he filed against the committee and Jordan. The Epoch Times regrets the error.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Biden administration has announced that the president will veto the H.R. 734 bill that seeks to protect female sports from transgender athletes.

H.R. 734, also known as “The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act,” was introduced by Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) and is expected to come to vote in the House this week. The bill seeks to prevent biological males from participating in women’s sports. H.R. 734 will amend Title IX to recognize sex as “based solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.”

The House Education and Workforce Committee already approved the bill 24–17, with Democrats voting against it and every Republican voting for it.

“The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 734,” according to an April 17 statement (pdf) made by the office of the Biden administration. “If the President were presented with H.R. 734, he would veto it.”

The Biden administration addressed the issue by focusing on “elementary schoolers” who would miss learning “life skills” if the bill were passed. “Politicians should not dictate a one-size-fits-all requirement that forces coaches to remove kids from their teams.”

The statement talked about a “nationwide mental health crisis” suffered by transgender youth who will be further stigmatized following the passage of such a law. “Discrimination has no place in our nation’s schools or on our playing fields.”

Moreover, the administration blamed Congressional Republicans for prioritizing policies that “discriminate against children” instead of focusing on “pressing issues” like “raising teacher pay, keeping guns out of schools, addressing the mental health crisis our youth face, and helping students learn and recover academically from unprecedented disruptions.”

However, the statement failed to address issues faced by female athletes due to the presence of males in competitions, which has historically never been allowed to happen due to the biological advantages males possess.

Challenging DOE Rule

H.R. 734 is a direct challenge to a newly proposed Title IX rule by the Biden administration’s Department of Education (DOE) that seeks to make school policies illegal if they “categorically ban transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity just because of who they are.”

The rule is currently open to public comment.

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce as well as an original co-sponsor of H.R. 734, criticized the DOE’s proposed rule in an April 6 press release.

“At the hands of the Biden administration, Americans are witnessing a major shift in the country, where woke, far Left politics are advancing inequality and unfairness,” she said in a statement.

“This proposed rule takes on a totally perverse interpretation of Title IX that completely ignores the biological differences between boys and girls and men and women.”

Caroline Medina, director of LGBTQI+ Policy at American Progress, a nonpartisan policy institute, insists that H.R. 734 is a “discriminatory bill” that will harm transgender youth and the civil rights of all students, according to an April 17 press statement.

“The effort to exclude transgender and intersex youth from participating in athletic programs in schools is part of a larger, coordinated campaign by MAGA extremists to attack and erase the identity of transgender and other LGBTQI+ kids in schools and beyond,” she said.

Defining Woman, Protecting Female Sports

During a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona was present to defend the department’s proposed new Title IX rule. When Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) questioned Cardona on “what is a woman,” the Secretary of Education gave no direct answer.

“Our focus at the department is to provide equal access to students, including students who are LGBTQ, access free from discrimination,” Cardona said. Even after repeatedly asking Cardona to define a woman, Clyde received no answer.

Rep. Burgess Owens (R-Utah), a former professional athlete with the NFL’s New York Jets, warns that the ramifications of allowing biological men to compete in women’s sports go far beyond a “game.” Many girls rely on athletic scholarships to get into college, he said.

“We should not allow biological men to steal from women and girls their spot on a sports team. We need more people with old-school courage to stand up and say as much … You can’t let young girls continue to suffer just to stay on the safe side of political correctness.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) blocked Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer trying to temporarily replace Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Schumer, on April 18, tried to pass a resolution by unanimous consent that would have put Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) on the committee pending Feinstein’s return from her weeks-long absence due to shingles. With Graham’s objection, the move would require 11 Republicans to join the remaining 50 available Democrats. Without Feinstein, the Democrats control the Senate, 51-49.

“Few have left their mark on this country like our dear friend, Sen. Dianne Feinstein,” said Schumer ahead of asking for the unanimous consent.

In objecting to Schumer’s request, Graham said that while he wishes Feinstein a “speedy recovery and return back to the Senate,” he decried Schumer’s attempt being “about a handful of judges that you can’t get the votes for.”

Usually, committee assignments, which are finalized via resolution, get green-lit by the Senate by unanimous consent and very little fanfare.

However, the GOP said no to Schumer’s maneuver.

“The stated reason, the supposed emergency, is that Senate Democrats are unable to push through the small fraction of their nominees who are so extreme and unqualified that they cannot win a single Republican vote,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on the Senate floor.

“Senate Republicans will not take part in sidelining a temporarily absent colleague off a committee just so Democrats can force through their very worst nominee,” McConnell added.

McConnell was joined by other Republicans in the chamber.

“I will vote against any attempt by Senate Democrats to temporarily replace Sen. Feinstein on the Judiciary Committee. I deeply respect Senator Feinstein, but this is an unprecedented request solely intended to appease those pushing for radical, activist judges. This is especially concerning as Senate Democrats seek to end the bipartisan blue slip process so they can bypass advice and consent with home state senators and ram through left-wing judges,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) posted on Twitter on April 17.

“Sen. Feinstein has been an extraordinary senator and she’s a good friend of mine. During the last two years, there’s been a concerted campaign to force her off the judiciary committee, and I will have no part of that,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

“I don’t think there is any appetite on our side to help what we consider to be controversial or unqualified nominees to get confirmed,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).

There are currently 77 federal judicial vacancies with 35 nominees awaiting confirmation. President Joe Biden got 97 judges confirmed in his first two years as president.

Feinstein, 89, has been in the Senate since 1992 and recently announced she will not run for reelection in 2024.

Although the Senate Judiciary Committee, without Feinstein, is deadlocked 10–10, Schumer could hypothetically bring up the judicial nominees without having them being voted on in the committee as long as no Democrats join all Republicans in opposition. Committee votes on nominees, judicial and otherwise, are not constitutionally required. While there is the committee tradition of the “blue slip” from the senators of a nominee’s home state, it is not a requirement.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A lawmaker in the West Virginia House of Delegates has switched allegiances from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party, shrinking his former party’s presence in the state’s legislature.

Del. Elliott Pritt announced his party switch on Monday, bringing the balance of power in the House of Delegates to 89 Republicans and 11 Democrats. Pritt, who is in his first term, and won in a district previously held by a Republican, said he felt he needed to change parties “if I am to accurately represent my constituents and my people as well as my own conscience.”

“It has become more and more obvious that there is very little room in the party for traditional values or differences regarding political opinion-we are being pushed out,” Pritt wrote in a letter to Democratic House Minority Leader Doug Skaff and the dwindling Democratic Caucus in the House and posted on Facebook. “The values, beliefs, and way of life that the people of Southern West Virginia and Fayette County hold dear are no longer compatible with the trajectory of the Democratic Party.”

Pritt said he would continue to work with Democrats on issues of mutual interest “such as supporting working people, public education, clean water, and issues that will help grow wages and benefits for working-class West Virginians” but said he could no longer support or advocate for positions “that the vast majority of my constituents do not support.”

West Virginia Republican Party chairwoman Elgine McArdle welcomed Pritt’s party switch decision and, in a Monday statement, said, “Like so many West Virginians, Delegate Pritt has recognized that the Democratic Party of today is not the Democratic Party that our parents grew up with.”

The West Virginia Democratic Party called Pritt a “human weathervane” after the party switch and noted Pritt had previously been a self-avowed Socialist Party USA member, then joined the politically progressive environmentalist Mountain Party of West Virginia, and finished last in a seven-way 2018 election before winning his 2022 election as a Democrat.

“Elliott Pritt’s decision reflects a lack of core values and honesty. West Virginians deserve reliable stewards of the public trust, not political hacks who flap in the breeze,” said West Virginia Democratic Party second Vice-Chair Sam Petsonk. “When Elliott grows disenchanted with the radical, self-centered, divisiveness of the GOP, and inevitably flops to another political home, voters should remember that political opportunism is not the stuff of which real leaders are made.”

Skaff said he is disappointed in Pritt’s decision to switch parties, adding, “It’s kind of odd that just a few weeks ago, he was one of the most vocal Democrats working within our caucus to call out and hold Republicans accountable for their legislative agenda. Elliott made it clear that the Republicans had their priorities wrong on numerous occasions, and I’m curious to see how well he’ll be received within his new caucus.”

Democratic Lawmakers Switching Sides

Pritt’s decision to change party affiliation has come as numerous state Democratic lawmakers have left the party and switched affiliations to join Republicans.

North Carolina State Rep. Tricia Cotham switched from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party earlier this month, handing Republicans a supermajority in the state’s General Assembly.

Republicans also gained a supermajority in the Louisiana House of Representatives in March after Democrat Rep. Francis Thompson switched party affiliations. Republicans now hold supermajorities in both houses of the Louisiana state legislature, potentially increasing their ability to override vetoes by Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards.

Republicans already held supermajorities in both houses of the West Virginia legislature. They gained 10 seats in West Virginia’s House of Delegates during the 2022 midterm election, moving the balance of power from a 78-22 Republican-controlled house to an 88-12 Republican-controlled house. Pritt’s party switch will thus have a marginal impact on the balance of power in the state legislature.

From NTD News

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Two-thirds of occupations across America could be partially automated by artificial intelligence (AI), Goldman Sachs economists have warned.

In a report published on April 5, economists Joseph Briggs and Devesh Kodnani said that a new wave of AI systems, such as ChatGPT, could have a “major impact” on employment markets across the globe, while advances in such technology could trigger shifts in workflows that could “expose the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs to automation.”

As part of their report, the two economists analyzed databases detailing the type of tasks performed in over 900 different occupations and estimated that about two-thirds of U.S. occupations are exposed to “some degree” of automation by AI.

In addition, they forecast that roughly a quarter to as much as half of the workload in the exposed occupations could be replaced by AI.

“Despite significant uncertainty around the potential for generative AI, its ability to generate content that is indistinguishable from human-created output and to break down communication barriers between humans and machines reflects a major advance with potentially large macroeconomic effect,” the economists wrote.

While they acknowledge concerns regarding advanced AI and possible job losses, Briggs and Kodnani note that not all automated work will definitely translate into layoffs.

“Although the impact of AI on the labor market is likely to be significant, most jobs and industries are only partially exposed to automation and are thus more likely to be complemented rather than substituted by AI,” the economists wrote.

‘Effects Could Be Profound’

“In addition, jobs displaced by automation have historically been offset by the creation of new jobs, and the emergence of new occupations following technological innovations accounts for the vast majority of long-run employment growth,” they added.

The Goldman Sachs economists did, however, point to the benefits of advanced AI making its way into business and society, such as enhanced productivity and sales efforts and improved manufacturing among companies, as well as better patient diagnosis in health care settings.

This, they say, could lead to an almost $7 trillion increase in global GDP.

“While much is unknown about how generative AI will influence the world economy and society, and it will take time to play out, there are clear signs that the effects could be profound,” the economists concluded.

The latest report comes after a March 27 research paper (pdf) by the University of Pennsylvania and OpenAI employees found that the majority of white-collar jobs in the United States can be completed more efficiently with the help of the artificial intelligence system ChatGPT.

Specifically, that study found that roughly 80 percent of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10 percent of their work tasks affected by the introduction of large language models like ChatGPT, while approximately 19 percent of workers could see at least 50 percent of their tasks impacted.

Amid the growing race to develop and deploy ever more powerful advanced AI systems, multiple industry experts are calling for increased caution, including Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google and its parent Alphabet.

Musk Warns of ‘Potential for Civilizational Destruction’

While speaking in an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” on April 16, Pichai warned that “every product of every company” will be impacted by the rapid development of AI, adding that he was left “speechless” after reviewing test results from a number Google’s AI projects such as “Bard.”

Elsewhere, Twitter CEO Elon Musk has addressed the potential threats posed by advanced AI technology.

During an interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson that aired in two parts on April 17–18, Musk said that AI poses potential “risks to society and humanity.”

“AI is more dangerous than, say, mismanaged aircraft design or production maintenance, or bad car production in the sense that it has the potential—however small one may regard that probability, but it is non-trivial—it has the potential for civilizational destruction,” Musk told Fox.

Last month, the industrialist joined more than 1,100 individuals, including experts and industry executives such as Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, Stability AI founder, and CEO Emad Mostaque, in signing an open letter calling on all AI labs to “immediately pause” training of systems more powerful than Chat GPT-4 for at least six months.

In their letter, experts warned that contemporary AI systems are “now becoming human-competitive at general tasks” and questioned whether or not we should “automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones.”

“Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete, and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? Such decisions must not be delegated to unelected tech leaders,” the letter stated.

The March 22 letter has so far been signed by more than 26,000 individuals.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Survivors alleging satanic ritual abuse (SRA) and their advocates are continuing a decades-long fight to advance their cases as media companies push a narrative that the type of abuse they allege is largely the creation of a social panic.

Last month, the South by Southwest film festival screened “Satan Wants You,” which “tells the untold story of how the Satanic Panic of the 1980s was ignited,” according to the festival’s website. Echoing years of skeptical news coverage, the description adds that “satanic rumors spread through panic-stricken communities across the world, leaving a wave of destruction and wrongful convictions in their wake.” Other “satanic panic” warnings can be found in recent coverage of cases in Scotland and Utah while the backlash against Sam Smith’s Grammys performance has prompted similar caution.

But for advocates like Cindy Metcalf, the “Satanic Panic” narrative is false and degrades the stories she encounters on a regular basis. In March, Metcalf’s newly formed group Relentless Hope held a meeting in the Salt Lake area for survivors to discuss potential legal options for pursuing allegations involving the Church of Latter-Day Saints (LDS).

Her event was just one of many in recent months to draw attention to the issue and, in advocates’ telling, fight back against institutional forces that would like stories of horrific abuse to fade away with time. “We have a lot of politicians involved in this and … high-ranking LDS members of the church that are also involved,” Metcalf said on a Feb. 8 podcast with Lisa Meister, who claims to have survived SRA as a child. “There is a benefit to them to shove it under the rug and hush people up.”

Joe Ward, who claims to have endured SRA as a child, told The Epoch Times: “Silence is [the perpetrators’] greatest weapon, exposure is how we combat it.” He, along with another self-described survivor, Jeanette Archer, run a Facebook page for survivors and are organizing a July conference in the United Kingdom as part of an effort to challenge SRA doubt. Ward added that “[b]rave victims are finally beginning to speak out all over the world again, and unlike the 70’s & 80’s, this time we refuse to be silenced.”

Kimberli Koen, who claims to have memories of SRA in an LDS context, also held an event at the University of Utah on Jan. 11. Dubbed the Restoring Freedom Summit, Koen’s conference focused on educating mental health professionals SRA while featuring discussions from therapists in the field. Last month, a Catholic exorcist, Fr. Chad Ripperger, similarly held a conference for educating mental health professionals on topics including SRA, which he says he’s come across during exorcism sessions.

While ritual abuse accusations cross denominations, recent events have drawn attention to the LDS church and Utah more specifically. Metcalf’s meeting came on the same day a Utah court approved bail for David Lee Hamblin, a former psychologist whom the Utah County Sheriff’s Office (UCSO) says was the target of a child abuse allegation corroborated by two witnesses.

“We’d like people to understand that these kinds of cases do happen, that ritualistic abuse does occur,” Sgt. Spencer Cannon, who serves as public information officer for the UCSO, told The Epoch Times. Cannon said UCSO would prefer Hamblin stay incarcerated but would “comply with the orders of the court.”

Last Fall, the UCSO accused Hamblin of ritualistic abuse while omitting a satanic aspect due to the nature of that specific incident. But victim statements from Utah’s Provo Police Department appear to show Hamblin’s own family members accusing him of systematic child sexual exploitation—including pornography, molestation, and prostitution—that spanned decades, included prominent members of the LDS community, and featured satanic rituals.

One of the alleged perpetrators was former Utah County Attorney David Leavitt, who has denied allegations he engaged in cannibalism and other horrific acts. The Church of Satan, which is named throughout the victim statements, also told Lifesite News it categorically opposed child abuse and that their records didn’t show Hamblin being a member.

A Satanic ‘Panic’? 

SRA testimonies often feature fantastical elements such as MK-Ultra programming at military bases, satanic ceremonies at Masonic temples, being prostituted to prominent politicians, and developing psychic or paranormal abilities. Others’ claims are more limited to, for example, local covens but include similar descriptions of child abuse and occult rituals.

The allegations are so severe that even survivors will acknowledge they are hard to believe. Nonetheless, victims’ testimonies often feature the same—sometimes obscure—perpetrators, tactics for abuse, and locations; as was the case with the hundreds of pages of victim statements naming Hamblin and others.

Alleged victims say that for years, they have encountered doubts and outright gaslighting over their own abuse. The doubts reach beyond local communities and into national media outlets, which blanket individual testimonies with warnings of a “satanic panic”—a purported social delusion that somehow fabricates memories on a society-wide level.

Annie Fukushima, who leads the gender-based violence consortium at the University of Utah and authored a book about migrant trafficking, told The Epoch Times: “Sort of turning [this] into a myth is very common when we talk about all forms of violence.”

“People say that about sexual violence,” added Fukushima, who helped host the Restoring Freedom Summit. “They say that about general forms of human trafficking. And I think that because something hasn’t happened to us in particular … a person hasn’t experienced something directly, it doesn’t mean that it hasn’t happened to somebody else.”

After the UCSO requested tips on ritual abuse last May, media outlets followed by suggesting the whole episode was a form of hysteria in line with the “Q-Anon” conspiracy theory.

Cannon said he was “disappointed” in some of the coverage. He told The Epoch Times that “to say that this is hysteria and that it’s conspiracy-based—I find that at least mildly offensive that we have victims who come forward and they get the courage up to disclose something that happened to them.”

Since Cannon’s office requested tips in May, authorities have reportedly received at least around 150. The total number of SRA victims, however, is notoriously difficult to gauge as survivors and their therapists claim to encounter both intimidation for coming forward, as well as trauma so severe that it creates amnesic barriers to accessing that part of victims’ stories. It’s questionable whether researchers will ever reach a close estimate, but reporting from those who interact with alleged victims has offered limited insight into the problem’s scope.

The University of California, Davis tried studying the issue by surveying various entities that interact with victims. In 1995, it published a study (pdf) identifying 412 alleged ritual abuse cases reported from municipal law enforcement agencies, departments of social services, and district attorneys. Researchers surveyed clinicians and social workers, finding 387 child ritual cases and 674 for adult survivors.

Former FBI agent Ted Gunderson has been derided as a conspiracy theorist after giving speeches in which he alleged, among other things, widespread satanic abuse. Critical perspectives, like that of former FBI agent Kenneth Lanning, have noted a broader lack of evidence for the type of widespread, interconnected abuse often alleged by people claiming to be victims. For example, the UC Davis study concluded there wasn’t enough evidence to prove thousands of ritual abuse cases. The authors similarly said there was insufficient evidence of organized satanic networks abusing children.

Nevertheless, the authors noted the existence of physical evidence such as “tattoos, drawings, scars on a child’s or adult’s body, film, photos, ritual dolls, masks, costumes, etc.” Those types of details, along with accusations of similar abuse and locations, are the ones that victims and their therapists cite when discussing SRA allegations. The issue was apparently substantial enough for the Justice Department to promote two documents with information on the topic as well—a “Satanic Cult Awareness” guide and “Investigators’ Guide to Allegations of Ritual Child Abuse”

Metcalf, the advocate, told The Epoch Times that her clients have named some of the same locations and perpetrators within the state. About 35 percent of her cases, she said after five years of working with victims, have involved victims being taken to military bases. As with the Provo, Utah, victim statements, Metcalf’s victims tell stories of specifically satanic abuse. According to her, they reference invocations of demonic entities like Molech, Baal, Satan, or Lucifer.

When asked about allegations that victims were fabricating stories of abuse, Metcalf said: “I have talked to people all across America that this has happened to— they don’t know each other, they don’t communicate with each other, but they tell me the exact same things. Right down to the robes, to the candles, to the cannibalism, drinking the blood.”

She noted that stories typically involve memories of similar rituals, including resurrection ceremonies, “marriages” to Satan as Koen noted at her summit, and mock baptisms.

Abusive rituals aren’t just symbolic either—at least according to Fr. Ripperger, an exorcist who discusses SRA in his book released last year on spiritual warfare. In an email to The Epoch Times, Ripperger’s case manager Kyle Clement claimed that during exorcisms, victims will manifest demons who, speaking through the victim, will identify the ritual whereby they entered a victim. Victims who allegedly endured rituals have told The Epoch Times of demonic entrance through rituals as well.

Clement noted alleged similarities in SRA in different parts of the world. Although there appear to be separate sects of satanism and occult practice, Clement argues that there are universal aspects reported by victims.

“In the same way that the Catholic Church is universal, there are universal aspects to satanism … the continuity of what a rural satanic ritualistic abuse case in Honduras says matches exactly with what an affluent New York City satanic ritualistic abuse case—they’re describing precisely the same rituals and rites and activities,” he said.

The History of SRA in Utah

Debate over a “panic” stretches back decades as have SRA allegations in both Utah and other parts of the world.

Within the LDS community, a memo leaked in 1991 showing Bishop Glen Pace claiming that he met with 60 victims—45 of which claimed to have witnessed or participated in human sacrifice. “[W]hen sixty witnesses testify to the same type of torture and murder, it becomes impossible for me, personally, not to believe them,” Pace wrote.

The memo appears to lend credence to SRA’s existence and the concept of repressed memory, which has been intensely scrutinized by the now-defunct False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF). Elizabeth Loftus, who recently testified for Ghislaine Maxwell’s defense team, served on the board of the FMSF. In 1994, she published “The Myth of Repressed Memory” and has argued that there is scant evidence exists for the concept of repressed memory. Instead, like a relatively recent BBC documentary, she’s emphasized the role of purportedly manipulative therapists or interviewers.

Jared Powell, a Utah-based therapist who spoke at the Restoring Freedom Summit, said that victims may experience distorted memories while processing the lingering effects, such as heightened arousal, of years-old trauma. “Memory isn’t designed to capture things exactly as it happened,” he said. “It’s designed to be adaptive and to help us prepare for whatever sort of risks and dangers surround us.”

Still, Powell says some clients have received some sort of “corroboration” for their memories. The victim statements from the Provo police department contain redactions but appear to come from multiple members of Hamblin’s family corroborating elements of each others’ stories, as well as the idea of a broader satanic ring operating within the LDS community.

Juab County Attorney Ryan Peters, who is prosecuting the most recent case against Hamblin, told this reporter last year that one of Hamblin’s daughters and “any other possible victims” had no “desire to comment or give an interview for this matter or any other.”

Like Powell, Tennessee-based therapist Amy Pfeffer generally scoffs at the idea that alleged victims are making up their abuse. In a statement to The Epoch Times, Pfeffer said: “Within my counseling practice and now my life coaching practice, I have seen anywhere from 30 to 40+ percent of my caseload include some aspect of mind control programming or Satanic ritual abuse. Believe me, these individuals would prefer their personal stories did not include this level of depravity.”

Richard Mull, who runs a ministry in Florida for SRA victims, told The Epoch Times that he was skeptical about its reality but came to be more certain after treating individuals from across the country. “[E]ven a skeptical care giver like myself would find it hard to not become fully convinced,” Mull told The Epoch Times. “There is no other explanation for these same experiences.”

However limited survivors’ memories may be, they often contain troubling recollections of purported abuse by usually trusted authorities who might be responsible for holding perpetrators accountable. Leavitt, for example, would have presumably been responsible for prosecuting Hamblin had he won his primary election last year.

Metcalf, echoing copious victim testimonies, said in the podcast interview that some “police are actually involved in these rituals. They keep watch, they make sure the wrong people don’t get into the building or to the house.” Troublingly, Bishop Pace also noted in his 1990 memo: “Not only do some of the perpetrators represent a cross section of the Mormon culture, but sometimes the abuse has taken place in our own meetinghouses.”

Clement has also indicated that SRA perpetrators have included Catholic clergy. He told The Epoch Times that victims offer details pointing to specific politicians and clergy.

“Usually, they don’t name names,” he said. “What they’re doing is describing a person to a specificity that you recognize who they are. Oftentimes, they don’t know who they’re talking about … It’s the same with regard to [the] Church but to clergy and to hierarchy. There are priests, bishops, and cardinals involved in satanic ritualistic abuse and satanic worship.”

Hamblin’s accusers go further than Pace in naming a series of alleged figures who were prominent in the LDS community. That includes Leavitt, who, during prior interviews, has acknowledged the existence of ritual abuse and said that Hamblin was his elder’s quorum president.

Alongside Koen in January was her own bishop, Jim Greene, who expressed his belief that SRA existed during an interview with The Epoch Times. “I don’t have a hard time believing that there are people who are serving as bishops that are involved or could be involved,” he said.

He added that “I don’t have any evidence or anything personally that I’ve experienced that says [the church] has not been handling this well.” When asked about the LDS church handled investigations into cases of SRA, he said: “I have seen nothing but compassion and a desire to be transparent.”

Metcalf, meanwhile, has alleged that LDS officials have thwarted and disrespected her victims’ attempts to get answers and justice. She’s currently exploring legal options for pursuing LDS officials and says multiple victims have named some of the same “high-ranking” individuals within the church.

“Based on my experience, the LDS church has not handled these cases well at all—even to the point of threatening victims with removal of endowments, removal of callings … and [removal] financial assistance,” she said. “Victims have been told to remain quiet and told not to speak about what happened to them.”

The LDS church did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

TUESDAY PDB – The infiltration of Communist Chinese (CHICOM) spies and operatives in the U.S. is unprecedented, according to the FBI. NOW – US alleges secret Chinese police post in NYC, online tracking of dissidents. Two New York residents were arrested, and dozens of Chinese national police officers were criminally charged.

THAT’S A LOT OF CHICOM COPS/SPIES IN NYC.

MEANWHILE, CHICOM TECH IS SPYING ON ALL OF US – Hikvision: Chinese surveillance tech giant denies leaked Pentagon spy claim. It has denied it is illegally disguising its products sold to the US government to enable Chinese espionage.

BUT OF COURSE, IT IS.

AND JUST WAITING FOR THE SPARK – US sails warship through Taiwan Strait after China’s drills. It is the first such transit made public since China carried out massive military drills.

Nimitz carrier strike group back in South China Sea, Chinese carrier still on Pacific patrol. The Nimitz Carrier Strike Group is in the South China Sea and the USS Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group is operating in the Sulu Sea.

THEN THERE ARE CHINA’S DEEPENING TIES WITH RUSSIA – Chinese minister’s tour underscores closer ties with Russia. China’s defense minister has toured the top Russian military academy on a visit to the Russian capital.

FOR YOUR EYES ONLY – Here’s a roundup of other developing stories.

Not the President’s Daily Brief, but almost as good – PAUL’S DAILY BRIEFING – the PDB:

NATIONAL SECURITY

HOW WOKE WILL BIDEN GO? – Joint Chiefs shuffle: Biden’s top contenders to replace Trump’s military leaders. Besides the chair, the Pentagon could also see new leaders for the Army, Navy, Marines and possibly the Air Force this year.

PUSHBACK AGAINST BIDEN’S RADICAL GREEN AGENDA – Pentagon sounds alarm over Biden plan for offshore wind sites. It has raised concerns about East Coast areas earmarked for new wind farms in a setback for the fledgling industry.

US eavesdropped on UN secretary general, leaks reveal. It gathered intelligence on Secretary General António Guterres, shedding light on his interactions with top U.N. officials and world leaders.

HOMELAND SECURITY

After leak, Pentagon purges some users’ access to classified programs, launches security review. The review findings are due in 45 days.

US officials have examined whether alleged doc leaker had foreign links. The investigators have considered every avenue as they struggle to understand the leaker’s motivations.

RUSSIA THREAT – UKRAINE WAR

Putin rallies his troops with 2nd Ukraine visit in 2 months. Russian leader Vladimir Putin visited command posts of the Kremlin’s forces fighting in Ukraine in an apparent effort to rally his troops as the war approaches its 14th month and Kyiv readies a possible counteroffensive with Western-supplied weapons.

Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 419. Moscow said Wagner mercenary units captured more areas of Bakhmut as fighting continues in the ruined eastern city. Russian recruiters in Crimea are using prop guns and grenades to entice people to join the military.

NORTH KOREA THREAT

US, allies stage drills as North Korea warns of security crisis. U.S. and South Korea also launched separate bilateral drills on Monday that will continue through April 28.

IRAN THREAT

Iranian commander sentenced to 13 years for shooting down Ukrainian passenger plane. An Iranian court convicted as many as 10 Iranian military personnel for their involvement in the shooting down of Ukrainian Airlines Flight 752 in 2020, according to Iranian news service.

SPACE THREAT

Keeping watch on aggressor satellites key challenge for US Space Force. It is trying to safeguard the country’s satellites from foreign threats, as Russian and Chinese satellites engage in disruptive maneuvers and follow other nations’ spacecraft in orbit.

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

NICE FLIP-FLOP SINCE U.S. GIVES EGYPT BILLION IN AID – Egypt nearly supplied rockets to Russia, agreed to arm Ukraine instead, leak shows. Egypt made detailed plans to export rockets at Moscow’s request, but after pressure from Washington, later approved artillery for Kyiv.

US diplomatic convoy fired on in Sudan as UN aid workers assaulted. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the convoy in Sudan was fired on in what he called a “reckless” and “unacceptable” attack amid deepening violence in the country.

QUID PRO QUO – US approves F-16 upgrade after Turkey eases stand on NATO. The U.S. agreed to sell Turkey $259 million in software to upgrade its F-16 fighter fleet. State Department approval of the sale comes about two weeks after Turkey dropped its objections to Finland joining NATO.

KIWIS ARE WEAK – Australia, New Zealand sign army cooperation deal. The two announced plans for the allies’ armies to work more closely together as New Zealand looks to ‘big brother’ for ‘help reinvigorating an armed forces battling worker shortages.’

US MILITARY

Pentagon spends $1 billion a year on laser and other energy weapons. From Star Trek to Star Wars, weapons firing lasers that can vaporize their targets are the stuff of science fiction and James Bond villains. It’s also a military technology that American taxpayers are paying to develop — today.

DARPA’s combat drone buggy completes first round of off-road testing. Scouting: there’s a drone for that.

DON’T LET YOUR DAUGHTERS JOIN THE ARMY – Another female soldier died at Fort Hood. The base said nothing. In the wake of Vanessa Guillen’s death, Army officials promised that the base would increase transparency. But at least one recent death went undisclosed.

END of PDB

SOURCE: American Liberty News

National Public Radio left Twitter recently because it says the social media company’s decision to label it as “state-affiliated media” hurts its “credibility” and unfairly questions its editorial independence.

As much as this appears to be a tempest in a social media teapot, the question about the state media label Elon Musk‘s private company attached to NPR comes down to money:

Twitter…revised its label on NPR’s account to “government-funded media.” The news organization says that is inaccurate and misleading, given that NPR is a private, nonprofit company with editorial independence. It receives less than 1 percent of its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

So 99 percent of its funding is from private sources. That’s good. NPR could avoid the government-funded label entirely if it decided to drop that one percent and go completely private.

It wouldn’t be easy – giving up a big funder is never easy for a nonprofit organization, media, arts or otherwise.

But it would make NPR genuinely, wholly, and completely independent of any strictures government may decide to impose on its contribution. After all, taking even a small amount of government money comes with enormous strings. NPR, of all organizations, should understand this.

And if they don’t, then they could just as easily interview Twitter owner Elon Musk, whose various businesses, not the least of which are Tesla and SpaceX, are creatures of government handouts:

SpaceX is, after all, primarily a government contractor, racking up $15.3 billion in awarded contracts since 2003, according to US government records. Its most important businesses are launching astronauts and scientific missions for NASA, and flying satellites for the US military.

Musk may quibble that payments for goods and services aren’t government subsidies but he owes the existence of the company to NASA. If the US space agency hadn’t backed the rocket-maker with a critical contract in 2008, the company likely would have failed.

As for Tesla, government grants, subsidies and tax breaks have long been a part of its bottom line. The company devotes a lot of digital ink to explaining how potential electric car buyers can get federal, state and local tax incentives for their purchases.

Of course, Musk and his companies are hardly the only private entities reliant on government largesse. That list is long and growing.

But few have called them “government-funded enterprises.” At least so far. The more common terms are “crony capitalists” who get “corporate welfare” to feed their bottom lines. All thanks to taxpayers, who have little to no choice in the matter.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

While law-abiding gun owners and sellers nationwide are targeted by the FBI and Justice Department over paperwork errors, at least one politically powerful gun owner may have gotten special treatment from the agency after his firearm was illegally left in a public trash can.

The non-profit public interest law firm Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for FBI records about a gun owned by President Joe Biden‘s 53-year-old son Hunter Biden, that reportedly was tossed in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store.

“The FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Multiple media outlets reported in October 2020, weeks before the presidential election between Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by his girlfriend, Hallie Biden, also the widow of his brother Beau.

Hallie Biden, fearing what Hunter may do with the gun, threw it in a trash can across the street from a high school.  Realizing what she did, she later returned to retrieve the weapon but found it missing.

Delaware police began investigating, fearing the illegally-disposed weapon may have been taken by a high school student, or could be later used in a crime.

But the case took a different turn when the Secret Service showed up.

Rather than investigate the Bidens for illegally disposing of a weapon or helping track it down, Secret Service agents showed up at the store where it was purchased and seized all paperwork connecting Hunter Biden to the gun, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.

Judicial Watch filed suit after the FBI did not comply with a January 30, 2023, FOIA request for “all records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.”

In a separate FOIA lawsuit, Judicial Watch received records from the United States Secret Service implicating the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.

In response, Judicial Watch also asked for “all records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm,” which may detail an effort to cover up any potential Biden family crime.

Included in those Secret Service records is a response to a February 2021 email from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.”

“Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation,” Schreckinger wrote.

Judicial Watch also uncovered a March 2021 email from New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli, who reached out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop.

“It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings,” Mongelli wrote.

“We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?,” replied a person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted.

Mongelli responds, noting the involvement of the FBI and Secret Service:

The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing. This is what one text message says:

“She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.“

Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”

SOURCE: American Liberty News

The Office of Special Counsel found that Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra violated the Hatch Act when he publicly supported the election of Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., in September 2022.

Becerra advocated for Padilla’s candidacy when he spoke “in his official capacity” during the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute’s annual awards gala.

Special Counsel Henry J. Kerner sent a letter to President Biden relaying the findings on Tuesday, as The Washington Post reports:

“The Hatch Act prohibits federal employees from using their official authority or influence to affect the outcome of an election,” Kerner said. “In delivering his speech, Secretary Becerra impermissibly mixed his personal electoral preference with official remarks. While federal employees are permitted to express support for candidates when speaking in their personal capacity, the Hatch Act restricts employees from doing so when speaking as a government official.”

OSC says Sect. Becerra violated the Hatch Act. pic.twitter.com/Cyh5wWIA06April 18, 2023

In a response to the findings, Becerra said he regretted what he described as an “inadvertent violation.”

“While I did not realize at the time that my off-the-cuff remarks concerning my personal voting intentions were in violation of the Hatch Act, I now understand why they were not permitted,” he said.

Becerra added that he had received “additional counseling” on the Hatch Act from his department’s ethics division and that he would “work hard to ensure that there are no future violations.”

Passed in 1939, the Hatch Act limits the political activity of federal employees while on duty.

The president and vice president are exempt from its restrictions.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

ANALYSIS – Déjà vu all over again. Just like the establishment back in the 1960s and 1970s facing a massive Soviet nuke buildup, Team Biden and his top general, Mark Milley, are simply throwing their hands up in despair.

“We are probably not going to be able to do anything to stop, slow down, disrupt, interdict, or destroy the Chinese nuclear development program that they have projected out over the next 10 to 20 years,” said the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recently at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee.

“They’re going to do that in accordance with their own plan.”

Sound familiar?

Yes, this is the same top general who has overseen a cascade of woke policies at the Pentagon and thought the Capitol riot was about “white rage.”

Well, under (sometimes) conservative president Richard Nixon and his Machiavellian national security advisor, Henry Kissinger, the U.S. stopped our nuke arms race so the Soviets could catch up.

Jimmy Carter then bent over backward to appease the USSR. According to our establishment ‘nuclear luminaries’ then, nuclear parity was more stable than U.S. superiority.

Is Joe Biden hoping to do the same with China now? If not, Milley needs to wake up.

At least one expert believes America can do something to slow down the rapid rise of China’s war machine, and it doesn’t involve us unilaterally surrendering.

Gordon Chang, a respected academic, China hawk, and the author of “The Coming Collapse of China,” argues that economic warfare is America’s trump card (no pun intended).

His advice, similar to Ronald Reagan’s approach against the Soviet empire, is simply – “bankrupt China.”

Chang writes in the Daily Caller:

Milley is wrong about China’s nuclear weapons ambitions. He is, unfortunately, expressing the same pessimism that pervaded the Nixon, Ford and Carter years, when the American foreign policy establishment took the Soviet Union as a given and therefore promoted détente.

America can stop China’s nuclear weapons development and other monumental programs. The Chinese Communist Party needs America for, among other things, money, and the U.S. does not have to provide it.

Like Reagan and the Soviets before him, Chang focuses on the severe economic conditions plaguing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that are hiding in plain sight.

While in hindsight we all now accept that the USSR was a third-world country with a huge military, few see analogies with the modern, vibrant and growing Chinese economy. One that is allegedly either equal to or rapidly closing in on the United States.

But many argue China’s economy is a house of cards. Specifically, Chang identifies China’s lack of cash or liquidity.

He quotes Gregory Copley, the president of the International Strategic Studies Association and editor-in-chief of Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy as saying:

“The one resource which Xi Jinping‘s ambition has overreached is cash. Beijing cannot, in the short term, provide the cash needed to dominate the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and other places.”

Chang adds: “The fundamental problem for the audacious Chinese ruler is that China’s economic growth is stumbling. China’s official National Bureau of Statistics reported that gross domestic product last year grew 3.0%, well below the regime’s announced target of ‘around 5.5%.’”

This is especially salient as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been steadily taking much larger slices of the Chinese economic pie. Last year, China’s military budget, according to official sources, increased 7.1% while the economy, ‘officially,’ grew only 3.0%.

The reality is likely far less.

The PLA needs more cash to keep growing. But the Chinese economy isn’t growing nearly fast enough, if at all.

That’s China’s dilemma and its Achilles heel.

Chang goes on to describe myriad factors in China’s economic stagnation before issuing his verdict: “In sum, the Chinese economy is anemic.”

“China, therefore, needs factory orders from abroad and foreign investment.”

He then makes his case for economic warfare against Beijing: “The American president can crimp both of these lifelines by, among other things, using his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 and by joining or liberalizing free-trade agreements with other countries.”

He adds a few other policy proposals to hit Beijing where it hurts – its pocketbook.

They may not have an immediate impact, but with a little time, they will hold China back.

Chang writes:

In the short term, therefore, China can afford its nukes, but the budget of the Chinese central government is strained because of Xi Jinping’s other grand ambitions, such as his building and maintaining an enormous surveillance state — this costs more than the Chinese military — and his Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) worldwide infrastructure-building program.

The China hawk notes: “Xi has diverted the state’s resources for nuclear weapons. He can do that for a time, but soon the cash will run out.”

Chang concludes: “So here is a message for General Milley: There is a lot America can do to stop China’s fast buildup of its most dangerous arsenal, and in any case Americans must not under any circumstances fund, with trade and investment, the weapons pointed at them.”

“President Ronald Reagan bankrupted the Soviet Union by reducing the flow of cash to Moscow. It is now time to bankrupt China.”

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Washington, D.C. – A group of prominent economists Thursday urged congressional leaders to reject the Biden administration‘s FY 2024 proposal, calling it “irresponsible” and suggesting that, if adopted, it would set the nation on a path to economic disaster.

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., the economists lamented the “anti-growth tax increases and unsustainable budget deficits” the administration put forward in its latest budget document.

Instead of enacting the Biden budget, the 434 economists who signed the letter called for Congress to focus on the process of “reducing the federal government’s unsustainable and dangerous fiscal imbalances.”

The president’s 2024 budget plan continues the disastrous policies that have nearly half of all American – 41% in a February 2023 ABC News/Washington Post poll – saying they are worse off economically than they were two years ago when Biden came into office.

The letter, organized by economist James Carter, accuses the Biden administration of believing “the solution to America’s economic woes is more federal spending and higher taxes,” adding that polling by pollster Scott Rasmussen shows the American people concur.

Carter cites a recent national survey conducted by Rasmussen that found 76% of Americans believe the federal “government spends too much.” Only 17% believe the government “doesn’t receive enough money.”

“The bottom line,” Carter said, is that “the U.S. cannot afford to continue with policies that simply do not work.

The letter is as follows:

April 13, 2023

Dear Speaker McCarthy and Leader Schumer: 

We, the undersigned economists, urge Congress to reject the anti-growth tax increases and unsustainable budget deficits put forward by the Biden Administration. 

Our economy is still suffering the lingering effects of excessive government spending, massive increases in regulation, and the 40-year high inflation crushing American families. With consumer sentiment languishing and 41% of the American people saying they are worse off economically than they were two years ago, the recent failure of three banks will further shock our economy.

President Biden’s budget proposal continues these disastrous policies by calling for trillions of dollars more in taxes and spending over the next 10 years. These proposals would lock in government spending at nearly 25% of our gross domestic product compared to the less than 21% it has averaged over the last 40 years. As government commands more of the economy, private sector investment has less room to facilitate long-term growth. Meanwhile, federal receipts totaled 19.2% of national output last year, the fourth-highest total in our Nation’s history. We do not have a revenue problem; we have an enormous spending problem.

It is time for Congress to ensure we avoid future high inflation resulting from the federal government’s unsustainable fiscal path. The consequences of allowing federal debt to accumulate at its current and projected pace—with spending demands vastly outstripping the country’s ability to meet them—would be disastrous for the well-being of the country and especially for the most vulnerable Americans.

Families and small businesses have already been struggling for too long under the weight of high inflation, rising borrowing costs, crippling labor shortages, and damaging economic uncertainty. We urge Congress to reject President Biden’s irresponsible budget proposal and work together to address the country’s short-term needs while also committing itself to take steps toward reducing the federal government’s unsustainable and dangerous fiscal imbalances.

In addition to Carter, who directs the Center for American Prosperity at the America First Policy Institute, it is also signed by former presidential Council of Economic Affairs Chairman Kevin Hassett and former National Economic Council head Larry Kudlow.

Other prominent economists who signed include economist and former House Majority Leader Richard K. Armey, the Heritage Foundation’s Diana Furchgott-Roth, Johns Hopkins University’s Dr. Stephen Hanke, Trend Macrolytics Donald Luskin, the Center for Freedom and Prosperity’s Dan Mitchell, Duke University’s Michael Munger and Brian Westbury of First Trust Advisors L.P.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Washington, D.C. – The Democrats lost another elected official Monday as West Virginia State Delegate David Elliott Pritt left the party and joined the GOP.

The move was announced in a statement issued by West Virginia Republican Chair Elgine McArdle welcomed Pritt, who represents Fayette County in the legislature, into the GOP.

“I want to welcome Delegate Elliott Pritt to the Republican Party. Like so many West Virginians, Delegate Pritt has recognized that the Democratic Party of today is not the Democratic Party that our parents grew up with,” McArdle said.

With Pritt changing parties, Republicans now occupy 89 of the House of Delegate’s 100 seats to the 11 the Democrats hold.

In fact, there are now more committees in the House of Delegates than there are serving Democrats, which may help explain why Pritt was the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Fire Departments and Emergency Medical Services while serving as minority vice-chair of the Committees on Education, Jails and Prisons, and Pensions and Retirements as well as a member of the Committee on Economic Development and Tourism before he switched.

Pritt is the second West Virginia Democrat to switch in the last year. In December, Sen. Glenn Jeffries, who represents parts of Kanawha and Putnam counties, changed his political affiliation from Democrat to Republican.

Another prominent party switcher is Gov. Jim Justice, who was elected as a Democrat but changed parties midway through his first term. He won his second term as a Republican and, because he is term-limited, is believed to be given considerable thought to running for the seat in the U.S. Senate currently occupied by Democrat Joe Manchin.

An electoral battle between the two men, both of whom were popular West Virginia governors, would be considered by many analysts to be a marquee race in 2024.

West Virginia Democrats, meanwhile, were not pleased by Pritt’s decision.

“The only thing you can be sure of with Elliott Pritt is that there’s nothing he won’t do in the name of political expediency. There is no line he won’t cross, no ideal he won’t reverse and no principal (sic) he won’t violate if he thinks it will help him at the ballot box. In the end, the only thing you can count on with Elliott Pritt is that you can’t count on him,” West Virginia Democratic Party Chair Mike Pushkin said in a release.

Over the last several months, state legislators in North Carolina and Louisiana have also crossed the aisle, creating GOP supermajorities in the lower chambers of both legislatures.

SOURCE: American Liberty News

Four million black people have emigrated to the United States since the 1960s—and tens of millions more would if they could. Are they all fools?

A generation of Americans is being raised on half-truths and lies about the history of slavery in America. They are given the impression that America was uniquely bad and that American slavery was uniquely bad. They learn nothing about slavery elsewhere. Among the many lies they are told are that “black slaves built America” and that America is systemically racist.

Since the only mortal enemy of the Left is truth, here are some truths about slavery.

America’s Slavery Compared to Slavery Everywhere Else

If you are interested in morality and committed to truth, you do not ask, “Who had slaves?” You ask, “Who ended slavery?”

Who had slaves?

Every civilization throughout history had slaves: Asian societies, Africans, Native Americans and other Indigenous peoples around the world, and the Muslim/Arab world, which may have had the most slaves of all.

Who ended slavery?

There was only one thing unique about slavery in the West: It raised the issue of the morality of slavery, ferociously debated it and finally abolished it there, before it was abolished in any other civilization. If you care about moral truth rather than, for example, promoting America-hatred, you must recognize — and you must teach — that America was one of the first slave-holding societies to abolish slavery. This even includes Africa. Cornell professor Sandra Greene, a black scholar of African history, notes, “Slavery in the United States ended in 1865, but in West Africa it was not legally ended until 1875, and then it stretched on unofficially until almost World War I.”

The Numbers of Slaves

According to the authoritative SlaveVoyages.org, the total number of black slaves imported from Africa into America was 305,326. The number of black slaves other countries imported from Africa into the rest of the New World — i.e., into the Caribbean and South America—was 12,521,337. In other words, other countries imported 41 times the number of black slaves into the Western Hemisphere than the United States did including the years before American independence). Yet, the American Left never mentions this important moral point—because the Left-controlled education system suppresses facts it finds inconvenient, and the Left is not interested in morality or truth, but in vilifying America.

And then there is Arab/Muslim enslavement of blacks. Professor Paul Lovejoy, in his “Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa” (Cambridge University Press, 2012), reveals that from the beginning of Islam in the 7th century through the year 1600, the estimated number of Africans enslaved by Muslims was about 7 million. After 1600, it was about a million per year. Do American students ever learn about the Arab/Muslim slave trade? How many know, for example, that a great percentage of the African male slaves were castrated so that they could not have families?

Black Slaves Built America

This is another lie of the Left.

Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th-century — the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.

But University of Illinois professor of Economics, Deirdre McCloskey, answered this:

“Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

“The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.”

But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.

First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).

Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported four million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically? Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?

“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.

America is Systemically Racist

This is the Great Left Lie.

Four million black people have emigrated to the United States since the 1960s—and tens of millions more would if they could. Are they all fools? Why would anyone move to a country that is systemically bigoted against them? Did any Jews emigrate to Germany in the 1930s?

Blacks have emigrated to the United States because they know what Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the black woman who fled her homeland of Somalia and who now writes and lectures in America, knows:

“What the media do not tell you is that America is the best place on the planet to be black, female, gay, trans or what have you.”

Blacks emigrating to America know what Algerian writer Kamel Daoud, writing in Le Monde and Le Point, knows:

“It is forbidden to say that the West is also the place to which we flee when we want to escape the injustice of our country of origin, dictatorship, war, hunger, or simply boredom. It is fashionable to say that the West is guilty of everything.”

As regards American slavery and everything else, always remember this: Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value. It is not a left-wing value.

SOURCE: American Greatness

Chicago’s Democratic mayor-elect Brandon Johnson excused the actions of hundreds of juveniles who smashed windows, beat bystanders, and fired weapons Saturday night, saying the city needs “spaces for youth to gather safely” and that the perpetrators have been “starved for opportunity.”

“In no way do I condone the destructive activity we saw in the Loop and lakefront this weekend. It is unacceptable and has no place in our city,” Johnson said Sunday. “However, it is not constructive to demonize youth who have otherwise been starved of opportunities in their own communities.”

Nine adults and six teens were arrested after the events on Saturday, which resulted in two people shot and others beaten.

The event, which was deemed so unsafe by the city that media outlets were told to leave, was advertised on social media for teenagers. A 16- and 17-year old were shot and are in “fair condition.” One woman said her husband was beaten by teenagers who jumped on their car and smashed windows. 

The response is further evidence of Johnson’s soft-on-crime policies. A supporter of the “Defund the Police” movement, Johnson was the only candidate who opposed filling the 1,600 vacancies in the Chicago Police Department. He said in 2019 that the city should “go to neighborhoods and provide supports to community, not just with law enforcement.”

Chicago’s homicide rate has skyrocketed nearly 40 percent since current mayor Lori Lightfoot (D.) took office in 2019, watchdog Wirepoints reported. A George Soros-backed prosecutor is also refusing to bring charges against violent criminals, resulting in a 27 percent decrease in convictions and a 54 percent jump in dismissed cases. 

Walmart last week announced the closure of four Chicago stores, affecting hundreds of workers and tens of thousands of residents who already face difficulty in obtaining food. The company said revenue losses “nearly doubled in just the last five years” and that collectively the city’s Walmarts have not been profitable in the last 17 years. 

Yet the crime-ridden city will be the site of next year’s Democratic National Convention, where President Joe Biden is expected to take the nomination and outline his agenda for the country. Democrats did not mention the city’s violence and unruliness in their announcement of the choice, instead focusing on unions and pro-abortion policies. 

Illinois ranks second in the nation for most residents leaving, with one resident leaving the state every 3 minutes and 43 seconds. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Democrats are dismissing Monday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing in New York City on the city’s exploding crime as “political” and “the bidding of Donald Trump.”

Republicans are hosting several speakers on crime in the city, which saw major crimes rise 22 percent last year. New York officials reportedly urged Republicans to cancel the hearing, and C-SPAN is refusing to carry it live. 

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.) dismissed the hearing as the “bidding of Donald Trump” because the area is under the authority of Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought charges against Trump earlier this month for alleged hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels. 

Nadler and Democrats are focusing on gun control and mass shootings while Republicans brought speakers detailing harrowing crime experiences in the city, including a woman whose boyfriend was murdered and a bodega owner who was arrested for defending himself against an attacker. 

NYPD officers are fleeing the “unfixable” city and Democrat officials are telling store owners to ban face masks to help catch shoplifters. Left-wing advocates have said shoplifters are poor individuals trying to get by in one of the country’s most expensive cities, but new data show nearly a third of shoplifting cases in the city are committed by a small group of organized thieves. 

Republicans are probing Bragg and his office after this month’s arrest of Trump. Bragg is suing Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) to stop his subpoena of a former Bragg staffer who left the office over the Trump case. Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records on April 4. 

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Professor Kirsten Bradbury now backtracking on question she says was “too stale to use.” 

A University of Texas psychology professor is apologizing to her students after including a question on a quiz that stated “wealthy white men” are “most likely to repeatedly violate the rights of others.”

The quiz was a part of Professor Kirsten Bradbury’s Personality Psychology course and asked students which demographic is most likely to be diagnosed with Antisocial Personality Disorder.

After stipulating the disease itself is “a racist diagnosis in the way that it has been applied,” Bradbury’s quiz stated: “Neither race nor gender is determinative in Antisocial Personality Disorder. However, if we must go there, which sociodemographic group is most likely to repeatedly violate the rights of others in a pattern of behavior that includes violence, deceit, irresponsibility, and a lack of remorse?” The answer: wealthy white men.

After distributing the quiz to students, Bradbury, who has been celebrated as one of the university’s most outstanding teachers, then backtracked, telling students that “given the current rate of sociocultural and scientific change” the quiz had “grown too stale to use.” She did not indicate what scientific changes had rendered the quiz obsolete or what scientific research had at one point served as the basis for the question.

Bradbury did not respond to a request for comment.

Bradbury was the recipient in 2017 of the University of Texas Board of Regents’s highest teaching honor, which comes with a $25,000 cash prize. Her biography on the university’s website indicates that her academic interests include “parenting stress,” “firearms and firearm safety,” and “firearm-related parenting.”

The syllabus for her Personality Psychology course, University of Texas-Austin’s psychology 309, indicates that the class aims to teach students about the “normal and abnormal development of personality across the life span” and includes open-note quizzes and self-graded “experiential writing assignments” at the conclusion of which students assign themselves a “journaling grade.”

It also includes a diversity statement voicing the department’s commitment to “a journey of inclusion and justice for all students from groups that are marginalized or minoritized.” It goes on to state, “Our department is in the process of diversifying and creating identity safety for all students.”

“In keeping with the department’s values, I am committed to creating a learning environment that is safe and supportive of the identities and perspectives of all marginalized and minoritized people,” Bradbury wrote.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Two justices on the Illinois Supreme Court refused to recuse themselves from a case challenging Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s gun ban despite having received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Pritzker and another defendant.

The Supreme Court is set to hear state representative Dan Caulkins’s (R.) challenge to Illinois’s ban on assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines, which Pritzker signed into law in January. Caulkins’s attorney, Jerry Stocks, filed a motion late last month to disqualify Justices Elizabeth Rochford and Mary O’Brien from the case, arguing that the judges’ “unreasonably large campaign contributions” from Pritzker and Illinois House Speaker Chris Welch (D.)—key defendants in the case—”undermine public confidence” in the judiciary.

Pritzker gave $1 million each to Rochford and O’Brien during their November 2022 campaigns. The justices also received “six-figure donations” out of a campaign fund controlled by Welch, Just the News reported. On Friday, both justices gave formal statements explaining why they refused to recuse themselves.

“That contributors to my campaign committee might appear as counsel or parties before this court does not require my recusal from this case,” Rochford said Friday. “Our supreme court rules specifically allow a judicial candidate’s campaign committee to solicit and accept reasonable campaign contributions and public support from lawyers.”

Rochford further said previous precedent “cautioned that courts must consider whether attacks on a judge’s impartiality are ‘simply subterfuge to circumvent anticipated adverse rulings.'”

Illinois appealed a Macon County judge’s ruling that the gun ban was unconstitutional, bringing the case before the State Supreme Court. The hearing is set for mid-May.

“The optics don’t look very good,” state representative Brad Halbrook (R.) said. “This just lessens the trust that people place in government and the judiciary.”

Pritzker’s gun ban will likely face more legal battles in the near future, as the Illinois State Rifle Association and other groups have said they intend to sue. Dan Eldridge, a board member at the Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, said the law is “not going to last.” More than two dozen sheriffs said they will not enforce the law.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Just 327 people were responsible for a third of all retail crime arrests in New York City last year, the New York Times reported Saturday, a statistic that raises new questions about the repercussions of New York State’s far-left bail reform law.

Those 327 thieves, some of whom use “shoplifting as a trade,” were “arrested and rearrested more than 6,000 times,” according to New York Police Department commissioner Keechant Sewell.

The thieves were likely able to keep stealing because of New York’s 2019 bail reform law, which banned judges from setting bail for almost all misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies. While the state in 2020 changed the law so that judges could set bail for some additional crimes, it still prohibits bail in most instances of retail crime.

Shoplifting complaints have nearly doubled since New York passed the bail law, making for “one of the main drivers of the city’s overall crime rate.”

The Times report comes as “organized shoplifting crews” target stores in primarily Democrat-run cities across America. According to a retail association official, “organized retail crime is more than petty shoplifting, and the economic impact has become alarming,” the Washington Free Beacon reported last year. “Professional thieves and organized criminal rings are building a business model by stealing and reselling products,” the official said.

New York Republican representative Elise Stefanik, who has said that bail reform created a “revolving door of criminals,” directly blamed the reform laws for the Big Apple’s crime spike. Stefanik also pointed the finger at far-left Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg (D.), who has announced that his office will not prosecute many nonviolent crimes.

The Empire State is “the epicenter of the catastrophic crime crisis happening across our country,” Stefanik told the New York Post.

Stefanik’s fight against bail reform has garnered some bipartisan support from Democratic New York mayor Eric Adams. The mayor has called on the State Legislature to toughen the law and said that “we are not going to stand by and let criminals undermine our economy.”

Most Democrats, however, want “no changes to the state’s bail laws,” the Times reported last month. At the same time, one California Democrat went so far as to wave aside burglaries as “basic city life experiences,” the Free Beacon reported.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

POTUS still scared to fire Xavier Becerra (because he’s Hispanic)

What’s happened: Xavier Becerra, the embattled Health and Human Services secretary, was implicated in a damning New York Times report on the Biden administration’s failure to stop the widespread exploitation of immigrant children.

What they’re saying: Becerra has been described as an “incompetent and out to lunch” health secretary—a role for which he lacks the “relevant qualifications.” The Times report appears to confirm this view.

• “Again and again, veteran government staffers and outside contractors told the Health and Human Services Department, including in reports that reached Secretary Xavier Becerra, that children appeared to be at risk.”

• “Under the law, the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for vetting sponsors to ensure they will provide for children’s well-being and protect them from trafficking or exploitation. But as shelters filled with children, the department began loosening some vetting restrictions and urging case managers to speed the process along.”

• “At least five Health and Human Services staff members filed complaints and said they were pushed out after raising concerns about child safety.”

• “We are pulling humanity out of ‘Health and Human Services,'” a group of HHS employees wrote in a memo to their superiors earlier this year.

Warnings ignored: “I feel like short of protesting in the streets, I did everything I could to warn them,” said Jallyn Saulog, the HHS official formerly in charge of the department’s response to unaccompanied migrant children. “They just didn’t want to hear it.”

HHS moved Saulog to a different position in 2021, several months after she filed a complaint with the agency’s internal watchdog.

Why it matters: It’s another scandal that raises serious questions about Becerra’s capacity to serve as health secretary. He has also been criticized for “passive” and “low profile” leadership styles, as well his botched handling of COVID-19 and the monkeypox outbreak of 2022.

Affirmative inaction: Becerra almost certainly would have been fired by now if he wasn’t Hispanic. The Washington Post reported in January 2022 that White House officials were “loath” to get rid of him because they feared “the ire of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and other grass-roots groups that pressed Biden to appoint more Latinos to his Cabinet.”

New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns revealed that some Democrats thought Becerra was a “baffling” choice for health secretary when Biden was assembling his cabinet. It was actually a “panicked” and “hasty” pick by an administration attempting to “calm” dissent from Hispanic lawmakers and assemble “the most diverse cabinet in history.”

Throughout the “fraught” nominating process characterized by “hurt feelings and [racial] grievance,” Martin and Burns report, Biden chief of staff Ron Klain grew “weary” of the Democratic coalition’s insistence on “treating the cabinet as an identity-politics Rubik’s Cube.”

Some context: A former congressman and state attorney general, Becerra had at least some relevant experience before Biden nominated him for health secretary. In 2018, for example, Becerra sued the Little Sisters of the Poor in order to compel them to pay for employee contraceptive coverage despite their stated religious objections.

READ MORE: ‘Serious Disregard For These Children’s Welfare’: Biden Admin Policies Could Place Migrant Kids in Homes With Sex Offenders

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

A federal appeals court on Monday overturned a California city’s first-in-the-nation ban on natural gas hookups in new buildings, saying it violates federal law.

The three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal sided with a coalition of California restaurants, who argued that the City of Berkeley’s ordinance essentially bans gas appliances in violation of a 1975 directive that gives Congress control over restrictions on appliances. The unanimous ruling is a major blow to California Democrats’ green energy push, and could clear the way for legal challenges to similar bans around the country.

Democrats have increasingly moved to ban gas stoves while attempting to downplay their efforts. New York is poised to become the first state to ban gas stoves, and California is working towards a statewide ban of its own. The White House has denied that President Joe Biden supports banning gas stoves while the Energy Department works to restrict their sale. Blue state attorneys general and environmental groups lined up to support the ban in court, in a sign of the case’s national implications.

The California Restaurant Association claimed Berkeley’s ban violated the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act , which gives the federal government final say over restrictions on energy appliances.

Judge Patrick Bumatay wrote that even though Berkeley lawmakers didn’t specifically ban the use of natural gas appliances, they reached the same result “circuitously” by changing their building code to ban gas piping—a policy that renders “the gas appliances useless,” he said.

This preemption would apply to state policies as well, he added.

“States and localities can’t skirt [federal preemption] by doing indirectly what Congress says they can’t do directly,” he wrote.

California conservatives cheered the decision. Carl DeMaio, chairman of the conservative political action group Reform California, said the decision will not only apply “to these mandates on new construction, but will also block the costly home retrofits that a number of cities and counties have been implementing.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon