RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/10/fbi-raids-home-nypd-sergeants-union-head-who-robert-spencer/

As Matt Margolis noted in July, the FBI is “corrupt and needs reform.” This reform became all the more urgent last week, when it was revealed that the feds were far more deeply involved in the January 6 insurrection-that-wasn’t-an-insurrection at the Capitol than had been previously known. But instead of moving to restore its shattered reputation and proving it hasn’t become little more than the far-Left’s muscle, the FBI on Tuesday raided the home of Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA) President Ed Mullins, a Trump supporter and outspoken critic of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.

According to the New York Daily News, the raid “also targeted the police union’s Lower Manhattan headquarters.” The FBI confirmed that it was “carrying out a law enforcement action in connection with an ongoing investigation” into the 13,000-member SBA. Said de Blasio: “All I have been told is the FBI has raided the SBA HQ and it’s in connection with an ongoing investigation, but we don’t have further details on that at this moment.”

The mayor couldn’t resist, however, kicking Mullins while he was down: “A lot of what he’s done has been really, really destructive — especially in the middle of a crisis where we’re trying to unify and we’re trying to get through together. I think he’s been a divisive voice. … All I hear is the FBI raid. I want to hear the details before I comment further.”

Mullins aroused de Blasio’s ire when he posted the arrest report of Chiara de Blasio, the mayor’s daughter, on Twitter; Chiara de Blasio was arrested in May 2020 during the George Floyd riots in Manhattan. According to the Daily News, Mullins was accused of “violating department rules” in disclosing Chiara’s private information, while his lawyer, Andrew Quinn, noted that the report had already been publicized and stated: “We see this case an attempt to chill Ed Mullins’s First Amendment rights.”

Amid the controversy, Mullins “vowed to continue speaking out whenever he believes cops are vilified or mistreated” and declared: “De Blasio’s City Hall has been at war with cops since his first days in office. Charges against union activism that City Hall doesn’t like — speaking truth to those who claim power — is sadly what we’ve come to expect from this administration.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/10/refutation_of_the_1619_project_is_right_there_in_the_creation_of_the_continental_congress.html

By accident, looking for something else, I stumbled on a provision in the 1774 Association Test, or, as it is known, The Articles of Association adopted by the first Continental Congress.

Most importantly for the contemporary accusations that the United States was founded in an original sin of slavery, the second article of the 1774 Association Test reads:

2. We will neither import nor purchase, any slave imported after the first day of December next; after which time, we will wholly discontinue the slave trade, and will neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our vessels, nor sell our commodities or manufactures to those who are concerned in it.

I had never heard of this provision before.

So, in one of the first collective acts of the political communities which would become the United States of America, there was a commitment to end slavery.

https://glennloury.substack.com/p/behind-the-new-york-times-megaphone?token=

How does writing for an extremely influential venue like the New York Times affect how you’re perceived? John McWhorter is finding out firsthand, as he continues to put out his outstanding twice-weekly Times newsletter. As you’ll see below, John doesn’t have much time to read through reader reactions. But a recent tweet thread from the historian Thomas Sugrue responding to his column about redlining sparked us to think about the complicated relationship between writer and audience.

Whatever your opinion of the Times, most writers, thinkers, politicians, and academics would jump at the chance to write for them. There’s no more efficient way to get your words and ideas in front of other influential people. But speaking through a megaphone that big naturally leads people to ask what gives you the authority to do so in the first place. An economist writing about the economy or a linguist writing about language may be all well and good. But when an expert in one area steps out of their lane, so to speak, people can bristle in interesting ways.

John and I discuss the complex dynamics of writing for the Gray Lady below. Check it out!

JOHN MCWHORTER: My column was replete with indications that racism still deeply affected the lives of the people—black people—who were redlined, that there was even some racism within who got a loan and who didn’t. I’m not saying that racism played no part. But I’m just saying that to think of socioeconomics as not meaningless and that the socioeconomics was not so insignificant as to be merely parenthetical or merely a footnote, that it mattered, that this stuff is complicated. And I wasn’t chased out of the room for saying this, but some of the response was rather vigorous, and I was especially surprised by Thomas Sugrue. Thomas Sugrue who’s written a really good book.

https://reason.com/2021/10/09/a-different-approach-to-anti-racism/

Chloé Valdary had an unusual childhood. She grew up in a Christian family, but one that celebrated Jewish holy days. She was raised in New Orleans, a city dominated by Catholicism and its symbols, but her church was anti-Catholic. She’s black, but her first steps into identity politics and activism were in opposition to antisemitism. And even with her religious upbringing, it was something an agnostic professor said that provoked her eureka moment.

So it’s perhaps unsurprising that her approach to anti-racism is different from that of best-selling leftist consultants such as Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo. Instead of pushing people to feel guilty and complicit in everything from minor slights to systemic racism in workplace trainings, Valdary’s company, Theory of Enchantment, wants participants of every background to learn to be more curious about and compassionate toward those who are different from them. “This attempt to correct injustice is laudable,” she wrote last year in USA Today of the protests over the police killing of George Floyd that erupted across the country, “but the work of anti-racism must be rooted in the moral ethic of love and acknowledge the profound sacredness of human beings.”

Valdary uses popular culture to teach about age-old ideas. Unsurprisingly, many people seem to prefer her positive curriculum over ones that insist they feel shame for having been born and raised a certain race. Valdary is frequently asked to speak at universities and corporations. In July, she spoke with Reason’s Nick Gillespie via Zoom about the problems with most modern “diversity, equity, and inclusion” programs and why she thinks her alternative stands a better chance of breaking down barriers.

Reason: What’s the elevator pitch for Theory of Enchantment?

Chloé Valdary: Theory of Enchantment is a startup. It’s my company, and we teach anti-racism in the corporate boardroom and beyond. We have a very specific approach to this particular practice that combines popular culture, the arts, with a kind of mindfulness understanding of how to fight against and combat prejudice and bigotry.

What is the landscape in corporate offices? Is racism afoot? Is it like a wildfire? Is it a muted smoldering? In other words: How bad is the problem that you’re talking about?

This is actually a challenging question for me. Because on one level, it’s not as if companies are being bombarded with the spirit of Jim Crow, right? That’s not what we’re talking about here. And to that point, as I’m sure you know, there’s been a giant proliferation of diversity and inclusion programs over the past year and a half, due to some of the events of last year.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17856/financial-assault-america

Far more destructive that most Americans could ever imagine, the nation’s multi trillion dollar deficit now being advocated by progressive socialists in Congress would place our future on a collision course with catastrophic bankruptcy.

Which may just be the outcome some in Congress are seeking to achieve.

Democratic Senator Joseph Manchin told Associated Press he won’t support even half of Biden’s multi-trillion dollar progressive wish list. He has been joined by fellow Democratic Senator Kyrsten Sinema in seeking to avert Washington’s march to become a global pauper. Theirs is a courageous stand and one that will be recorded by historians as last ditch actions taken by a literal handful to prevent America’s self-directed destruction.

We would be wise to… recognize that America’s deficit is more than a number. It is a nation-destroying weapon.

If the tragic day ever comes when America’s global leadership is but a distant memory it will not be because of a nuclear strike, a searing pandemic, or even a crippling cyberattack.

No.

It will be from a self- inflicted mortal wound called “the deficit.”

Far more destructive than most Americans could ever imagine, the nation’s multi-trillion dollar deficit now being advocated by progressive socialists in Congress would place our future on a collision course with catastrophic bankruptcy. Such an event would destroy the very foundation of our financial system, the savings of every hard-working middle class family, and our country’s very ability to defend democracy.

Which may just be the outcome some in Congress are seeking to achieve.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17857/garland-memo-parent-protests

The memo acknowledges that “spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution.” …. Nothing wrong with that. But no similar memo was directed against Black Lives Matter and other far-left groups that not only threaten violence against public officials and private citizens, but also engage in a considerable amount of criminal conduct, such as arson and destruction of property.

As a result of this timing, context and apparent lack of concern for the Black Lives Matter type of protests, many parents are understandably worried that the Justice Department may be engaged in selective investigations and ultimately selective prosecutions.

The most distressing aspect of this memorandum is its apparent focus on right-wing activities, as distinguished from equally dangerous left-wing activities. The rule of law must always pass the “shoe on the other foot test.”

In the past, the ACLU vigorously protected the rights of Klansmen, Nazis and other right-wing thugs with whom they fundamentally disagreed. They worried about the chilling effect that government threats could have…. These concerns seem to have been subordinated to partisan and ideological considerations.

I like Merrick Garland. I supported his nomination to the Supreme Court. And I think he was a good choice for Attorney General. It is in this spirit that I call on him to clarify his memorandum in two respects: (1) by making it clear that law enforcement will not investigate or prosecute raucous protests that fall on the protected side of the Constitutional line; and (2) that whatever standards law enforcement does apply must be applied equally to protests by left-wing agitators.

I disapprove of teaching captive student from the “critical legal studies” playbook, precisely because it is not critical or objective. It tends to be propaganda rather than education. But I will defend protests against both views with equal vigor, because the First Amendment does not distinguish between protected and unprotected protests based on content, and neither should the Justice Department.

Attorney General Merrick Garland recently released a memorandum addressing “a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff….” The actual words of the memorandum – the lyrics – seem appropriate on their face, but the music is discordant with the First Amendment.

The memo acknowledges that “spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution.” It then goes on to direct the FBI to come up with strategies for addressing illegal threats against these public officials. Nothing wrong with that. But no similar memo was directed against Black Lives Matter and other far-left groups that not only threaten violence against public officials and private citizens, but also engage in a considerable amount of criminal conduct, such as arson and destruction of property. Some protesters have intimidated and threatened people who disagree with them. Although no specific mention was made of parents’ protests against teaching critical race theory and comparable ideological content to school children, or against mandatory masking requirements, it is clear from the context and timing that these are the protests that generated this memo.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/10/suicide-bomber-who-murdered-13-americans-had-just-robert-spencer/

More of the wonderful effects of having Joe Biden pretend to be president of the United States were revealed Wednesday, when it came to light that the Islamic State jihadi who murdered 13 American service members and numerous Afghans as well in a suicide bombing at the Kabul airport in August had just been released from prison at Bagram Air Base, the center of American operations in Afghanistan until the U.S. precipitously and irresponsibly abandoned it in July.

CNN reported that the bomber, Abdul Rehman Al-Loghri, was part of “ISIS-K,” that is, the Islamic State’s Khorasan group in central Asia, and that he had “been released from a prison near Kabul just days earlier when the Taliban took control of the area, according to three US officials.”

Al-Loghri held been held in the Parwan prison at Bagram Air Base, along with around 5,000 other prisoners, including several hundred members of ISIS, as well as Taliban and al-Qaeda jihadis. Back in July, according to the Associated Press, “the U.S. left Afghanistan’s Bagram Airfield after nearly 20 years by shutting off the electricity and slipping away in the night without notifying the base’s new Afghan commander, who discovered the Americans’ departure more than two hours after they left.”

When the Taliban rolled into Kabul, they entered Bagram without encountering any significant opposition and opened the gates of the Parwan prison. Al-Loghri and many other jihadis walked free. Then on August 26, al-Loghri blew himself up at the Kabul airport, murdering eleven Marines, as well as one member of the Army and one of the Navy.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/11/our-representatives-not-j6-protesters-defile-the-sacred-u-s-capitol/

When politics is your religion and government is your God, a public building is your church.

The four-hour disturbance at the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, according to Beltway aristocracy and the media, wasn’t a legitimate protest that turned violent in some areas—it was a sacrilege. Never mind that the building itself sustained minimal damage—early reports estimated $30 million for repairs but the actual figure is around $1 million—the real vandalism occurred when thousands of Americans wearing MAGA hats invaded the cathedral of government power occupied by America’s political deity.

And the alleged apostates are paying a dear price.

Since January 6, lawmakers, judges, and federal prosecutors have routinely described the Capitol building as holy ground. “To those who engaged in the gleeful desecration of this, our temple of democracy, American democracy, justice will be done,” Pelosi said after the breach. Representative Mario Díaz-Balart (R-Fla.) tweeted on January 6 that “the Capitol building is the center and sacred symbol of democracy.”

After the joint session reconvened later that evening, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) mourned how “this sacred place was desecrated by a mob today, on our watch. This temple to democracy was defiled by thugs who roamed the halls.” Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) thanked the first responders who protected “this sacred Chamber.”

Here is how Joe Biden’s Justice Department recently described the actions of Robert Reeder, a Maryland man whose life has been ruined since he was charged with four misdemeanors related to his participation in the January 6 protest: “The attack on the U.S. Capitol . . . was one of the only times in our history when the building was literally occupied by hostile participants,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Joshua Rothstein wrote in an August filing. “The Defendant chose to be a part of the desecration of the Capitol rotunda. The Defendant stood in the center of the rotunda, where Ruther (sic) Bader Ginsburg, John Lewis, Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Abraham Lincoln, among others, lied in state. What the Defendant chose to record and celebrate at that place, at that time, was antithetical to the events that most Americans associate with the Capitol rotunda.”