RUTHFULLY YOURS

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.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/are-the-walls-closing-in-on-the-bidens/

Everyone paying attention to the latest revelations about Hunter Biden and his energetically supportive father knows that journalists and Republican officials have opened a vein, or “the walls are closing in.” Even so, the leftist media are trying to report as little of this damaging scandal material as they possibly can.

We can scarcely imagine the anxious political chatter inside pro-Biden newsrooms, but let’s imagine it sounds something like Jen Psaki’s MSNBC show. Psaki brought all her persuasive pressure on former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan to recant how he tweeted former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden were both unpopular and “both potentially face very serious legal troubles.” It should apparently be unthinkable to compare them. Psaki argued, “Hunter Biden is not in office, he’s not serving in government … not equivalent!”

New scoops are underlining this is a Joe Biden scandal. The New York Post reported Hunter Biden’s former business partner and friend, Devon Archer, will be testifying that he put Joe Biden on the phone with his business associates from Burisma at least two dozen times. That’s worse than the story of Hunter intimidating foreign clients by claiming his dad is in the room, listening in.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/what-really-happened-to-robert-malley-lee-smith

In late June, reports started circulating that White House heavy Robert Malley had been suspended from his job in the Joe Biden administration. That was surprising. Before he was pushed out, Malley had been seen as the visionary architect of the Democratic Party’s Middle East policy. He’d been Barack Obama’s conduit to Iran before Biden named him to do the same thing for his White House. For someone in his position to lose that job amid renewed talks with Iran was notable, but the most intriguing detail, hidden by the Biden team for months, was the reason why he was sidelined: He had reportedly mishandled classified documents.

So what was Malley doing that compelled the Bureau of Diplomatic Security to open an investigation on him before passing it to the FBI? Security clearances are a kind of currency in Washington and it’s unusual for a senior official to lose access to his colleagues’ secrets, especially a policymaker of Malley’s status. Had he been amassing boxes of documents in his home like former President Donald Trump? Had he taken classified documents from secure facilities and moved them to private work and residential spaces like Biden?

A large part of Malley’s work was to circulate information throughout the U.S.-based Iranian diaspora that eventually found its way to Tehran. According to Iran press reports that have foreign policy circles talking, those contacts are what got him in trouble. And the fact that the details about Malley’s suspension are coming from Iranian rather than U.S. media is a big clue that something big is missing from the White House’s highly minimized account.

At the beginning of July the Tehran Times, an Iranian regime English-language media outlet, published an article with insider details but no definite answer to the central mystery. According to the article, Malley’s clearance was suspended on April 21, two months before the news went public. Since then he’s met with CIA Director William Burns and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan to try to resolve his situation but, according to the article, has not yet been granted an audience with Secretary of State (and high school classmate) Antony Blinken.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/07/31/again-theres-another-glaring-error-in-justice-jacksons-affirmative-action-dissent-n2626414

We’re returning to the affirmative action case that sent liberal America into a tailspin. The late June ruling by the Supreme Court struck down the practice in higher education applications as unconstitutional, leading to a couple of days of rage from progressive commentators. It quickly died because not even black Americans supported the protocol; many Black Americans were not keen on the practice.

Overall, 63 percent of Americans oppose affirmative action procedures, with Asian Americans being one of the most vocal communities voicing their opposition. The liberal media hilariously tried to manufacture the narrative that Asians support affirmative action, despite 76 percent saying they don’t think race or ethnicity should be considered in the college application process.Yet, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent in the companion case— Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina—raised some eyebrows when she cited shoddy data to justify the affirmative action process. In short, namely that black babies will die if this policy for college applications is scuttled:

“It saves lives. For marginalized communities in North Carolina, it is critically important that UNC and other area institutions produce highly educated professionals of color. Research shows that Black physicians are more likely to accurately assess Black patients’ pain tolerance and treat them accordingly (including, for example, prescribing them appropriate amounts of pain medication). For high-risk Black newborns, having a Black physician more than doubles the likelihood that the baby will live, and not die.”

Association of American Medical Colleges, who filed an amicus brief in this matter, asked that a correction be issued because, mathematically, what Jackson said is impossible. Law professor Jonathan Turley added today that there’s another issue with the dissent: she cites how black doctors can better diagnose black patients regarding pain management.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2023/07/31/justice_sotomayor_uses_supreme_court_staff_to_sell_books_969348.html

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s taxpayer-funded staff helped organize events to sell her books, for which she has made $3.7 million since joining the court in 2009, according to an Associated Press investigation. Her salary on the court is $285,000.

In 2019, Sotomayor hosted an event at a Portland public library for her book “Just Ask!” Before the event, a Sotomayor aide emailed the organizers, informing them they had not bought enough books. “For an event with 1,000 people and they have to have a copy of Just Ask to get into the line, 250 books is definitely not enough,” said her aide, Anh Le, in an email, the AP reported.

Staff pushed books at other events as well. Before events at UC Davis Law School, University of Wisconsin, Clemson University, and Michigan State University, taxpayer-funded staff pushed organizers to buy books, or to buy more than their original order. Some books were shipped to the Supreme Court, where her staff brought them to her to sign in her chambers.

The court defended Sotomayor, saying in a statement that, “When [Sotomayor] is invited to participate in a book program, Chambers staff recommends the number of books (for an organization to order) based on the size of the audience so as not to disappoint attendees who may anticipate books being available at an event.”

What’s more, Sotomayor’s publisher, Penguin Random House, has had several matters before the court in which Sotomayor did not recuse herself.

“Justice Sotomayor would have recused in cases in which Penguin Random House was a party, in light of her close and ongoing relationship with the publisher,” the Supreme Court said in a statement. “An inadvertent omission failed to bring Penguin’s participation in several cases to her attention; those cases ultimately were not selected for review by the Court. Chambers’ conflict check procedures have since been changed.”