RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/benbartee/2023/05/01/bffs-celebrated-leftist-hero-noam-chomsky-and-child-sex-trafficker-jeffrey-epstein-n1691787

A bombshell report from the Wall Street Journal (demonstrating that Murdoch’s media empire outside of Fox News is still capable of decent work) establishes previously unknown ties between Jeffrey Epstein (that mysterious suicide) and numerous figures of cultural import.

Among them is celebrated leftist academic Noam Chomsky. If you have not traveled in leftist circles, Chomsky may be a fringe figure or perhaps even totally unknown to you.

But to the Social Justice™ left, he’s a literal demigod.

Will the antifa people have the moral integrity to change their tune when they discover his deep and longstanding connection to Epstein?

Let’s not count on it.

Via Wall Street Journal:

Leon Botstein, the president of Bard College, invited Epstein, who brought a group of young female guests, to the campus. Noam Chomsky, a professor, author and political activist, was scheduled to fly with Epstein to have dinner at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse in 2015.

None of their names appear in Epstein’s now-public “black book” of contacts or in the public flight logs of passengers who traveled on his private jet. The documents show that Epstein arranged multiple meetings with each of them after he had served jail time in 2008 for a sex crime involving a teenage girl and was registered as a sex offender. The documents, which include thousands of pages of emails and schedules from 2013 to 2017, haven’t been previously reported.

What business, one might ask, does a wonky MIT academic have with a pedophilic mass groomer?

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/05/01/lefts-plan-hostile-takeover-supreme-court/

“If successful, the Left’s hostile takeover of the Supreme Court will destroy the independence of the judiciary that is necessary for our liberty.”

Democrats in Congress, together with their allies among left-wing groups and in the media, are attempting a hostile takeover of the Supreme Court. Their current tactics demonstrate what “by any means necessary” really means.

In the system of government America’s Founders gave us, limits on government are necessary to achieve its purpose of protecting liberty. Those limits include the separation of powers, federalism, a written Constitution, and a judiciary that will follow—rather than control—that Constitution.

Limits like those help keep too much power from ending up in too few hands.

The Left, however, is after power rather than liberty and, therefore, sees limits on government as obstacles to be overcome. They especially want to control the Supreme Court because it’s the final interpreter of the Constitution, the “supreme law of the land.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/prosperity-requires-a-stable-dollar-federal-reserve-fomc-rates-easing-2024-vivek-bdfed87b?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

With a recession looming, and on the heels of recent regional bank failures, the Federal Open Market Committee meets this week. The standard account for the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and now First Republic is that the Federal Reserve held interest rates too low for too long, only to hike rates too high too quickly. The deeper problem, however, is how the Fed has tried to achieve its mandate.

Attempting to balance low inflation and full unemployment—trying to hit two targets with one arrow—has proved to be disastrous since the Phillips Curve cult gained prominence at the Fed around 2000. If elected president, I will return the Fed to a narrower scope: preserving the U.S. dollar as a stable financial unit to help prevent financial crises and restore robust economic growth.

Beginning in the 1980s and lasting through most of the 1990s, the Fed governors, including Vice Chairman Manley Johnson and Wayne Angell, used a framework first adopted by Paul Volcker in 1982 to stabilize the dollar. The idea was to consider the dollar’s value in terms of commodities, letting it serve as a reference point for other nations’ floating fiat currencies. This provided financial stability for two decades following the stagflation of the 1970s.

Beginning in the late 1990s, the Fed’s scope drifted to include “smoothing out” business cycles. This was a mistake, since business cycles serve a healthy function by transferring the assets and employees of poorly run companies to more capable management. Even worse, the Fed’s actions often exacerbated business cycles by creating transitions that create boom-bust-bailout cycles instead. The Fed now typically tightens when an economic slowdown is impending, engineering a downturn of liquidity that catalyzes a profit downturn, leading to a credit-cycle downturn in which credit events—bankruptcies, credit spreads and financial-institution failures—prompt cries for bailouts. This was the pattern in 2000, 2008 and—so far—2023.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme-court-ethics-reform-hearing-senate-democrats-john-roberts-clarence-thomas-ketanji-brown-jackson-sonia-sotomayor-d0304d65?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Senate Democrats are holding another hearing on “Supreme Court Ethics Reform” on Tuesday, and it’s important to understand that this isn’t about ethics at all. This is another front in the political campaign to delegitimize the Supreme Court, with a goal of tarnishing its rulings and subjecting it to more political control.

The campaign is on full display in the press, with reporters at multiple publications suddenly searching for supposed ethics violations or conflicts of interest. Our writers have examined and debunked these reports highlighting Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch in recent weeks.

It’s useful to expose for the record how thin these accusations are. But it’s also a mistake to assume that the facts matter to Democrats and their media researchers. This is a political project, and hyped accusations will continue to be asserted as if they are serious.

***

“Ethics” is a time-honored political weapon in Washington, and it’s being used now against the Court because conservatives have a majority that is cleaning up some of the legal mistakes of recent decades. It has sent abortion policy back to the states (to the political benefit of Democrats in most places), expanded protections for the Bill of Rights, and is slowly restoring constitutional guardrails on the administrative state. Most of all, the Court is no longer a backstop legislature for progressives to impose policies they can’t get through Congress.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-constitution-under-fire/

An awakening is sweeping across the land causing more and more people to recognize their welfare and that of the United States are in deep trouble, with increasingly visible forces destroying the country, the family, and the people’s security and standard of living.

America is now in a war—not a shooting or kinetic war—but one with many fronts. Assaults on the spiritual, cultural, and informational fronts are the most important because they shape what happens downstream in politics and economics.

Enemies of the American Republic are found both inside and outside the United States—and they advance by deceiving,  demoralizing, and dividing the American people. Their goal is to nullify the Constitution. If the latter succeeds it will bring a swift end to the United States as we have known it, and make recovery all but impossible.

When we connect the dots, we can see that the manipulation of public opinion and the creation of narratives is directed at undermining traditional institutions such as law enforcement, the family, church, schools and other “carriers” of civility, tradition, and continuity.

War has been declared on average Americans through the Biden administration’s southern border policies that have resulted in unprecedented illegal entries—including criminals, terrorists, and human, child, sex, and drug trafficking cartels, a development that hurts American families by overwhelming law enforcement, schools, and the healthcare system.

Traditional families are being attacked in other ways and from every direction.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fake-history-and-a-profile-in-courage/

A culture-war squall occurred recently over a Netflix series about Cleopatra, who is played by a black actress. The biggest protest came not from ancient historians calling out fake history, but from Egypt, where a lawyer filed a complaint with the public prosecutor alleging that the casting promotes “the Afrocentric thinking . . . which includes slogans and writings aimed at distorting and erasing the Egyptian identity.”

It seems that Egyptians, rightfully proud of their ancient civilization and its Greco-Roman history, don’t appreciate “cultural appropriation” and “stolen legacies”––crimes that “woke” identity-politicians and activists are so quick to caterwaul about––any more than the “woke” Stasi do. I guess like free speech, for the “woke” it’s “cultural appropriation” for me, but not for thee.

Behold the “woke” egregious double standards, and the fake history like the “1619 Project” that has corrupted academic history for political power and financial gain. A similar offense was committed against Israeli actress Gal Gadot a few years ago, when the Wonder Woman star was cast as Cleopatra. Her offense? Being “bland” and “too pretty,” and especially “white.” One “journalist” despicably Tweeted, “shame on you, Gal Gadot. Your country steals Arab land & you’re stealing their movie roles”––two lies in one smear.

So, an Israeli can’t portray a descendent of Macedonian Greeks, who were typically fairer than southern Greeks, because a historically challenged “journalist” thinks Cleopatra was an Arab? Christian, Greek, and Roman Egypt didn’t become an Arab nation until 645 A.D. with the Muslim conquest and subsequent occupation of Egypt, which continues to this day.

Usually I wouldn’t bother with such patent ignorance, but it reminds me of an early example of “cancel culture” and fake history: the vicious public assaults on Wellesley College classicist Mary Lefkowitz for challenging and exposing the historical distortions and racialist politicization wrought by Afrocentrism.