RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/when-your-house-burning-down-grab-fire-don-feder/

There is one overriding issue in this campaign. It’s not abortion, immigration or judicial nominations, as important as they are.

​When your house is on fire, don’t make plans to redecorate. There’s a fire raging in America which could consume our country. This isn’t hyperbole. It’s reality. If the revolutionaries seize control, nothing else will matter in the long run.

​We’ve seen it time and again. We saw it in the streets of Paris in 1789, in Moscow in 1917 and in Germany the early 1930s – the marches and sloganeering, the rage, the murderous violence, the attacks on authority, the chaos, and the insistence that only a revolutionary vanguard understood the will of the people.

​The enemy was aristocratic privilege, or an antiquated monarchy, or “capitalist exploitation” or the Jews. This time, it’s carefully orchestrated charges of institutional racism, police brutality, and an unjust economic system.

​We used to say it can’t happen here. That’s what some Germans told themselves during the Weimar years. How could a country so educated, so cultured — the center of scientific research and medical advancement — elect a gang of murderous cretins? They did. 

In the 18th century, France epitomized refinement in art, architecture and literature. French was the language of most European courts, the language of diplomacy. Then came the guillotine. 

And America?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/10/10_joe__from_grandfather_to_godfather.html

We thought Joe Biden was the grandfather. It turns out he’s more like the godfather.

It’s the big reveal in the Hunter Biden story.

Until now, we thought Hunter, the “f—ked up addict that can’t be trusted” (in his own words) who sent not one but three laptops full of incriminating material in for repairs – an act so stupid that even crack can’t be blamed – was the one taking advantage of his father’s position to enrich himself. 

(Compounding the idiocy, despite repeated notifications, he failed to pay the $85 bill to reclaim the one salvageable laptop, so that after 90 days it became the legal property of the repair shop.)

What we learn from the laptop is that Joe (referred to as “the big guy”) was to get a 10% cut of the loot from a deal with a now defunct Chinese energy company with strong ties to the Chinese government (the email outlines an equity split including “20 for H” and “10 held by H for the big guy.” That makes “10% Joe” analogous to the Godfather, the capo dei capi, the boss due his share of the family’s enterprises.

So Biden is  getting “his beak wet,” as former NYC Mayor and current Trump advisor Rudy Giuliani points out in a damning video describing the “Biden crime family’s payoff scheme.”

There’s more.  Hunter tells his daughter Naomi in a 2018 text-message exchange: “I hope you all can do what I did, and pay for everything for this entire family for 30 years and it has been tough. It’s really hard but don’t worry, unlike Pop, I won’t make you give me half your salary.”

In any conversation that you might have in the next few days with folks who don’t know the history of Dems and the Supreme Court, you might be informed by this Editorial as to the truth. Not the Chuck Schumer/ Nancy Pelosi false propaganda and twisted narratives,  but the actual facts.These judicial appointments are perhaps President Trump’s (and Leader McConnell’s) greatest achievements.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/breaking-judicial-norms-a-history-11600639835

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is widely reported to have told his Democratic colleagues on Saturday that “nothing is off the table for next year” if Republicans confirm a Supreme Court nominee in this Congress. He means this as a threat that Democrats will break the filibuster and pack the Court with more Justices in 2021 if they take control of the Senate in

So what else is new? Democrats have a long history of breaking procedural norms on judges. While packing the Court would be their most radical decision to date, it would fit their escalating pattern. Let’s review the modern historical lowlights to see which party has really been the political norm-breaker:

• The Bork assault. When Ronald Reagan selected Robert Bork in 1987, the judge was among the most qualified ever nominated. No less than Joe Biden had previously said he might have to vote to confirm him. Then Ted Kennedy issued his demagogic assault from the Senate floor, complete with lies about women “forced into back-alley abortions” and blacks who would have to “sit at segregated lunch counters.” Democrats and the press then unleashed an unprecedented political assault.

Previous nominees who had failed in the Senate were suspected of corruption (Abe Fortas) or thought unqualified (Harrold Carswell). Bork was defeated because of distortions about his jurisprudence. This began the modern era of hyper-politicized judicial nominations, though for the Supreme Court it has largely been a one-way partisan street.

There are so many reasons why the Dem positions on due process and a host of other issues are completely unacceptable to Americans who value checks and balances and the dispersion of power (rather than rule by the elite social engineers). And why, in practical impact, there really are no “moderate Dems” currently operating as brakes on the woke mob. This piece will help keep these issues in mind these next two crucial weeks…..

https://www.city-journal.org/biden-v-courts-title-ix

“Any number of federal constitutional and statutory provisions reflect the proposition that, in this country, we determine guilt or innocence individually—rather than collectively, based on one’s identification with some demographic group,” wrote U.S. Appeals Court Judge Raymond Kethledge in a late June opinion. “That principle has not always been perfectly realized in our Nation’s history, but as judges it is one that we take an oath to enforce.”

Kethledge’s words revived a lawsuit filed by an Oberlin College student who claimed that his school had unfairly found him guilty of sexual misconduct. Over a 100-day period this summer, four appeals courts, including the Sixth Circuit in the Oberlin case, issued rulings expressing concerns that universities, however well-intentioned, had discriminated against an accused student on account of his sex, in violation of Title IX. The decisions, applying to 23 states, represent the latest fallout from the 2011 and 2014 federal guidance pressuring colleges to respond aggressively to what the Obama administration considered a national epidemic of campus sexual assault. The recommended procedures, however, too often denied accused students a meaningful chance to defend themselves. Obama administration officials threatened to withdraw federal funding from schools that resisted these directives, “strongly” discouraging cross-examination and urging colleges to handle Title IX cases without a hearing and through a “trauma-informed” approach that presented virtually any behavior as consistent with the accused student’s guilt.