RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/08/03/anything-democrats-dont-like-is-now-a-threat-to-democracy/

When a handful of Democrats introduced a bill to impose a progressive wealth tax on millionaires and billionaires, they didn’t just say that income inequality was bad. They called it a threat to democracy. Apparently, anything and everything the left doesn’t like is now a threat to democracy.

Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Barbara Lee, Summer Lee, and Jamaal Bowman – four of the most far-left lawmakers in Congress – introduced the OLIGARCH Act (we won’t bother spelling out the acronym) to “tax extreme wealth, reduce inequality, and combat the threat to democracy posed by billionaires.”

“The bill ensures accountability and is an effort to restore democracy,” the press release states.

Tlaib says “billionaires are threatening our democracy.” Not to be outdone, Barbara Lee calls them a “major threat to democracy.”

How exactly do the rich threaten Democracy?

Summer Lee claims that “the 400 richest Americans have 22,000 times the political influence of the bottom 90%” – citing the conclusion of one research paper published 14 years ago.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-lefts-poison-of-accusation

Among all the instances of elite projection and cynical opportunism over the past few years—the censoring Left sees fascism everywhere; the concept of systemic racism offers a blessed distraction from the purges of #MeToo; the agenda-driven media deplores Donald Trump’s bending of the truth—Joe Biden’s demagoguery has got to be the most glaring. It’s bad enough that the self-appointed savior of indebted students is the same man who, as a U.S. senator from Delaware, was instrumental in passing legislation that made it impossible for students to discharge student debt through bankruptcy; Delaware, after all, is where the credit-card empires have their headquarters. Now we have Biden decrying the country’s “divisions,” even as he multiplies them himself. He has gone from disdainful opponent of busing—Biden in 1975: “I oppose busing, it’s an asinine concept”—to bold defier of “Jim Crow 2.0.”

The latest example of truth-bending and rabble-rousing comes from deputy White House press secretary Andrew Bates. Bates was responding to a comment by Greg Gutfeld, a Fox News host who was discussing a section in the Florida Standards for Teaching Black History that addresses, as the Standards state, “various duties and trades performed by the slaves.” The Standards advise teachers to instruct students in “how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.” Referring to Viktor Frankl’s classic work on the Holocaust, Man’s Search for Meaning, Gutfeld said, “Frankl talks about how you had to survive in a concentration camp by having skills. You had to be useful. Utility! Utility kept you alive.”

The Biden White House/campaign apparatus leaped. Bates thundered to CNN: “What Fox News allowed to be said on their air yesterday—and has so far failed to condemn—is an obscenity. In defending a horrid, dangerous, extreme lie that insults the memory of the millions of Americans who suffered from the evil of enslavement, a Fox News host told another horrid, dangerous and extreme lie that insults the memory of the millions of people who suffered from the evils of the Holocaust. Let’s get something straight that the American people understand full well and that is not complicated: there was nothing good about slavery; there was nothing good about the Holocaust. Full stop. Americans deserve to be brought together, not torn apart with poison.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/08/the-case-for-a-special-counsel-to-investigate-the-bidens/?utm_source=recirc-

To save the DOJ’s rapidly deteriorating reputation, it is high time for Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel.

Consider this clarion call for a special counsel:

There are certain extraordinary moments of crisis when the people’s faith in the integrity and independence of their elected officials is caused to waiver [sic]. These scandals tarnish the view that the Attorney General is an independent executive official who can be trusted to enforce the criminal law in the high offices of the government. To restore the utmost public confidence in the investigation of criminal wrongdoing by high-ranking government officials, the appointment of a special prosecutor then becomes necessary.

It did not come from Senator Charles Grassley or Representative James Comer, even though both men continue to diligently investigate allegations that Biden administration appointees either slow-walked or interfered with Justice Department probes into Hunter Biden’s alleged crimes. Nor did it come from Republican presidential-primary candidates who have called for a special counsel after the collapse of Hunter’s sweetheart plea deal, apparently designed to grant immunity from very serious felony charges.

No, the above quote comes from President Biden himself, in a 1987 article in the North Carolina Law Review defending independent counsels, who at that time possessed far more powers than do today’s special counsels. Writing as Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Biden argued that the executive branch could not be trusted to investigate and prosecute its own members. Instead of allowing DOJ to conduct such investigations, he argued, Congress could override the normal separation of powers and create independent prosecutors with unlimited budgets and no accountability

Biden strongly supported the appointment of an array of special prosecutors to investigate those involved in the Iran–Contra scandal — cabinet members, DOJ officials, and even expanding to include Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. In a January 1987 interview, Biden stated that the Reagan DOJ, “at a minimum, gives the appearance of attempting to prevent certain information from coming to the fore,” and that, at worst, “someone tried to actively suppress an investigation.” In 2003, Biden and other Democratic senators sent a letter to President George W. Bush demanding a special counsel in the leak case involving CIA officer Valerie Plame. “We do not believe that this investigation of senior administration officials, possibly including high-level White House staff, can be conducted by

On Tuesday, the Biden Administration deliberately chose to not refill the strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) after depleting it to combat a surge in gas prices last year.

According to the Daily Caller, the report from Bloomberg said that the administration considered it to be “too expensive” to refill the vital reserve supply, as the current price of a barrel of oil is roughly $80. The SPR is still at a record low level after Biden released at least 180 million barrels in 2022, in an effort to reduce historically high gas prices prior to the 2022 midterm elections.

“The [Department of Energy (DOE)] remains committed to its replenishment strategy for the SPR, including direct purchases when we can secure a good deal for taxpayers; exchange returns; and cancellation of planned sales where drawdown is unnecessary, in coordination with Congress,” a DOE spokesman said in a statement.

The Biden Administration had previously said it would consider buying back oil to replenish the SPR once the average barrel price falls between $62 and $72, but the average price has instead been on the rise in recent months. On Tuesday, the price of Brent oil crude futures closed at $85.

The decision on Tuesday marked the fourth round of bids to refill the SPR, a crucial reserve supply that had previously only been meant for emergencies such as wartime. Biden’s decision to raid the SPR for the simple purpose of reducing domestic gas prices, so that he and his party would not suffer the consequences in an election, was widely criticized.

DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm said in July that the Biden Administration would seek to refill the SPR, but admitted that the task may have to wait for a second term.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/desantis-invites-kamala-harris-to-florida-to-settle-benefits-of-slavery-drama/

Florida governor Ron DeSantis on Tuesday invited vice president Kamala Harris to Florida to debate her claims that the Sunshine State’s history curriculum endorses slavery.

“Over the past several weeks, the Biden administration has repeatedly disparaged our state and misinformed Americans about our education system,” the 2024 GOP candidate wrote in the letter.

Harris and other Democratic politicians have accused Florida’s  African American history curriculum of teaching that “enslaved people benefited from slavery.” Teachers’ union, the Florida Education Association, and the NAACP branded the standards “an attempt to bring our country back to a 19th century America where Black life was not valued, nor our rights protected.”

The curriculum includes 191 lessons emphasizing the punitive nature of slave codes, the economic undercurrents of the slave trade, as well as the post-abolition era of segregation and racism. Behind progressives’ hysteria, however, is one item instructing junior-high-school classrooms to “examine the various duties and trades performed by slaves (e.g., agricultural work, painting, carpentry, tailoring, domestic service, blacksmithing, transportation).” An appended “Clarification” adds that students should consider “how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.”

Harris tweeted last week that “extremists” in Florida erased African-American history. She then announced she’d visit Jacksonville, where she delivered remarks blasting the standards. DeSantis asked her to come back for another visit to settle the misunderstandings around the curriculum.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/great-men-are-unconstitutional/

One of the Democrats’ favorite smears of Republicans is to accuse them of political hero-worship. Ever since Donald Trump took up residence in the NeverTrumpers’ brains, his constituency, especially the MAGA base, have been ridiculed as unsophisticated rubes with low-brow sensibilities and fascist inclinations, while clinging to their tin-pot hero, forgiving all his sins and cheering for “racist dog-whistles.”

In other words, Republicans are inherently vulnerable to political “great men,” the charismatic (to weak-minded “deplorables”) demagogues whose flashy, duplicitous rhetoric easily brushes aside the feeble critical faculties of hoi polloi. That’s why the progs abuse the question-begging epithet “fascist”––it crudely evokes despots like Mussolini or Hitler or Franco, while studiously ignoring totalitarian mass-murderers like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Castro.

And who can forget the Dems’ “slobbering love affair,” as Bernie Goldberg put it, with Barack Obama? Nothing MAGA fans have ever said about Donald Trump comes close to the cringing, creepy encomia of Obama’s acolytes. According to numerous “brights” among our intelligentsia Obama was a “rock star,” the Democrats’ “Tiger Woods,” a politician “it’s hard to be objective when covering,” “so impressive, so charismatic,” “something special,” graced with “chiseled pectorals” and a “keen analytical intelligence,” “prodigious talents,” an “amazing legislative agenda,” and “huge achievements”––that’s just a small sample of the cult-like accolades redolent of the propaganda more typical of totalitarian regimes than of free sovereign citizens.

Remember this embarrassing catalog the next time you hear a progressive mock MAGA idolatry, and recall that postwar political hero-worship has always been a bad habit of the Left and progressives. Who is the conservative version of the psychotic, bumbling Che Guevara, whose famous photograph is an obligatory leftist icon? How is it that communism, a failed ideology responsible for 100 million dead, still retains its allure for cognitive elites, while Nazism, responsible for one-fifth of that toll, is universally condemned except by a tiny fringe of cranks?

But fanatically following a “great leader” transcends party or ideology. Historically, for centuries it was the default form of leadership. The mass of people were the mere subjects to aristocratic elites whose power was a function of their descent from the gods, their innate abilities, legendary myths, and personal charisma. They ruled because of who they were, accountable to no other mortal, but only to fate and their fellow gods.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/08/01/kamala-harris-quotes-as-motivational-posters-to-help-you-be-unburdened-by-your-brain-cells-part-3/

As Harris reminds us, may we all do what we do — and what we have been doing, every day, in the present moment, together.

https://nypost.com/2023/08/01/who-are-the-six-co-conspirators-in-trumps-latest-indictment-on-election-interference/

Former President Donald Trump was indicted in federal court on Tuesday for allegedly making “knowingly false” claims of voter fraud and sending rioters to the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 in a desperate ploy to remain president despite losing the 2020 presidential election.

While Trump is the only person charged in the crimes so far, the 45-page indictment includes references to six unnamed “co-conspirators.”

Special counsel Jack Smith said Tuesday the six individuals remain under investigation for their role in the former president’s attempt to overthrow the election he lost.

“Since the attack on our Capitol, the Department of Justice has remained committed to ensuring accountability for those criminally responsible for what happened that day,” Smith said during a brief press conference Tuesday.

“This case is brought consistent with our commitment and our investigation of other individuals continues.”

While Smith has not disclosed the names of those under investigation, The Post identified the most likely individuals listed as co-conspirators in the indictment using previously known facts about Trump’s circle of cronies in the months following the November 2020 election.

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/08/02/if-he-was-bribed-biden-must-go-ii-tipp-poll/

As the Biden corruption probe broadens, and more evidence comes to the fore of possible bribery of the Biden family by foreign powers, a question arises: What do Americans think should be done if the allegations are true? The overwhelming response: Biden should leave or be removed from office and not run again, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.

In an earlier story we wondered: “If any of these charges are shown to be true, can Biden weather the ensuing political storm? Or will he face a choice of impeachment or resignation, a la Richard Nixon, and thereby force the Democrats to find a new standard bearer in 2024?”

In our online poll of 1,341 adults taken from July 5-7, with a margin of error of +/-2.7 percentage points, we answered that question: Biden is not likely to weather the political storm.

A strong majority of 63% in our poll suggested that President Joe Biden should either be impeached (33%) or resign immediately (30%) if the charges prove true. Just 20% said Biden should “Stay in office and run again in 2024, if he wishes.” Another 17% said they weren’t sure.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-indictment-2020-election-jack-smith-january-6-fraud-e0068c4f?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Donald Trump’s post-election behavior in 2020 was deceitful and destructive, and his malfeasance on Jan. 6, 2021, was disgraceful, but was it criminal? That’s the claim in the extraordinary indictment issued Tuesday by a federal grand jury established by special counsel Jack Smith.

Democrats have long sought an indictment related to Jan. 6, but on that score what’s striking is what’s not in the 45-page document. There is no evidence tying Mr. Trump to the Oath Keepers or Proud Boys who planned to, and did, breach the U.S. Capitol that day. That was the worst offense against democracy, and more than 1,000 people have been prosecuted in connection with it.

Yet the indictment offers no new evidence to establish a connection between the riot and Mr. Trump beyond his well-known tweets and public statements. Surely Mr. Smith would have added this to his conspiracy charges if he had found such evidence. Mr. Trump is also not charged with encouraging an “insurrection,” which is the word and charge leveled by the press corps and Democrats.

***

Instead the indictment charges one obstruction and three conspiracy counts related to what it claims was a broad effort to overturn the 2020 election based on “dishonesty, fraud, and deceit.” The indictment concedes that Mr. Trump “had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won.”