RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?e=a9fdc67db9&u=9d011a88d8fe324cae8c084c5&id=9c163aa19e

It was back in September 2019 that there sprang into the news the story of Hunter Biden and his million-dollar-per-year gig as a board member for Ukrainian energy company Burisma. Hunter’s gig began in April 2014 — shortly after his dad Joe, then sitting VP, took on the role of “point man” as to U.S. policy toward Ukraine. The gig then ran until some time in 2017 — shortly after Joe had left office. It just happened that Burisma had gotten the lion’s share of Ukraine oil and gas lease deals under ousted (and Russia-aligned) President Viktor Yanukovich, and had strong reason to fear prosecution under a new Ukrainian President and chief prosecutor. In early 2016 VP Joe Biden got the new prosecutor fired, and later was caught on tape bragging about it.

Essentially the entire story about these events in the state media since 2019 has been the story of minimization and/or suppression of the facts and their significance. The suppression went to a whole new level a year later, in October 2020, when the New York Post broke the story of a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden that had been abandoned at a computer repair shop in Delaware. This was now just a few weeks before the 2020 election, with Joe Biden the Democratic candidate for President. The laptop contained extensive emails and other documents detailing Hunter’s business dealings in places where his father had major influence on U.S. foreign policy, including not just Ukraine, but also China, Kazakhstan, and other countries, as well as father Joe’s involvement in same.

Promptly, some 50 former U.S. intelligence officials issued a letter stating that the laptop had all the “earmarks” of “a Russian information operation.” The state media adopted that line as gospel. Most shamefully, all of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube (Google) explicitly suppressed the story by either banning any information about it or minimizing its distribution on their platforms.

https://dianebederman.com/canada-the-culture-of-death-and-the-death-of-culture/

Population control used to be the result of nature: natural disasters like hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, disease. Thomas Malthus gave us The Malthusian Theory of Population: the theory of exponential population and arithmetic food supply growth. Nature has its own ways of keeping a check on the increasing population. It brings the population level to the level of the available food supply. When the increasing population rate is greater than the food supply, disequilibrium exists. As a result, people will not get enough food even for survival. People will die due to a lack of food supply. Adversities such as epidemics, wars, starvation, famines and other natural calamities will crop up which are named as positive checks by Malthus because they increase mortality rates, thus keeping the population in check. They are countered by man-made “preventive checks,” which also control the population by reducing fertility rates; preventive checks include birth control and celibacy.

We have fired up preventive checks with a culture of death. In my view, this culture of death began with the promotion of abortion. Abortion started as safe and rare to safe and always. Change your mind in the third trimester – no problem – we can get rid of that fetus. Change your mind at birth – not a problem – you can have abortion at birth. I heard one young woman say that she felt it was kinder to abort a baby with severe deformities later in term than have the baby suffer at birth. Really? Does she know that the fetus is torn limb from limb to remove the baby; especially if performed by Planned Parenthood who harvest organs for sale? She had no concept of holding the baby and saying goodbye, lovingly with care and compassion. How did that happen? How did we get here?

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19171/san-francisco-discrimination

The City of San Francisco is a state actor that is constitutionally prohibited from disqualifying job applicants on the basis of race. That is precisely what occurred here, despite the phony claim that Arntz can reapply for his job.

There is one important benefit to the San Francisco decision — at least as compared to university admissions decisions. The San Francisco panel did not try to disguise the racial criteria they are employing, whereas most universities go to great length to deny that race alone is often a dispositive factor in ranking applicants. This will make it easier for the courts to hold Arntz’s firing as a clear violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

In the bad old days, race was often used to discriminate against Black applicants. Today race is often used to discriminate in favor of Black applicants. I guess that is some sort of progress. But real progress will be achieved only if and when race is no longer a factor that trumps meritocracy. Only then will Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of how his children and ours should be judged become a reality.

John Arntz has held the job of San Francisco’s director of the Department of Elections for two decades. He has been repeatedly praised for his excellent performance at this increasingly important job — important because of so many election challenges and doubts. Just two years ago, the election commission commended him for his “incredible leadership.” But now they are essentially firing him because he is apparently of the wrong race to satisfy their “racial equity plan.”

https://amgreatness.com/2022/11/27/was-trump-our-captain-queeg/

The Left, the NeverTrump Right, and many independents are tiring of Donald Trump’s recitations of prior, however justified, grievances at the hands of the media, the Democratic Party, the administrative state, and hard-core Left.

The conventional wisdom runs that Trump’s whines and victimization recitations reveal deep paranoias, and increasingly to an obsessive degree. We are told that his near neurotic obsessions with the unfairness of his critics are alienating the independent voter, who finds Trump’s strolls down 2020-21 memory lane the same-old, same-old ad nauseam.

True, Trump’s occasional recklessness contributed to many of his misadventures. At least at some point, friendly critics suggest, he might have realized that his nationalist/populist agenda, his orphaned outsider status, his lack of prior political experience, and his estrangement from the Republican political hierarchy, bipartisan Washington, D.C. media and government fixtures gave him no margin of error—despite what prior presidents and our current commander-in-chief have been accorded.

The haters would have hated Trump regardless, But his tweets and ad hominem retorts served to disguise their peremptory venom while instead highlighting his own retaliatory crudity.

“Fact-checkers” doted on every Trump statement, nitpicking them to find some exaggeration, or untruth. Fine. But then these same hypercritics simply went comatose during the Biden Administration, with little care that Biden spins fantasies daily, from a son lost in the Iraq War to insulting claims that he passed his student loan amnesty in the Congress by a close vote, and on and on. With Trump, voters got real achievement with coarseness, with Biden utter failure with near senility.

The media lied about supposed felonious behavior of the two Trump sons during the Russian collusion mania. The same reporters snoozed when Hunter Biden all but served up a guilty writ of felonious behavior on his laptop. Yet Hunter and the Biden accomplices were given de facto exemption by the Department of Justice and “50 former intelligence officials” who were willing to lie about the laptop’s authenticity rather than risk the chance of seeing Trump reelected.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/11/the_coupattempt_party.html

A political light bulb went on regarding Adam Schiff’s remark on CNN’s “State of the Union” as reported by Breitbart’ s Pam Key.  In the interview, Schiff again mentioned the Russia hoax he has promoted for five years, if not longer.  (Note that Dana Bash did not call Schiff on this huge lie.).  With Schiff continuing to assert this gross falsehood, the Democrat Party has, for years, switched from being a loyal opposition party to priding itself as a party of the permanently-attempted coup.

How dumb of me not to have taken seriously the Democrat cries of “Resistance,” as of the Trump inauguration, January 20, 2017 — but I then understood such cries to be figurative and fanciful references of a politically romantic nature.

But where were the Republican political experts like House Speaker Paul Ryan back in early 2017 when the “Resistance” was gearing up?   Alas, the anti-Trump Ryan was silently supporting the Resistance.  How could the Democrats have succeeded with the Mueller probe if Ryan had spoken out forcefully against what was apparently a coup attempt to oust the legitimately-elected president?

CNN published a list of Democrats who announced that they would boycott the Trump administration.  The late Rep. John Lewis, citing, in effect, the Russia hoax, refused to accept President Trump’s legitimacy.  Rep. Zoe Lofgren accepted the fact Trump was president, but still, would not attend his inaugural, and went on to become one of the Nine Members of the phony-baloney House Select Committee Against President Trump.

If the GOP House leadership did not recognize, five years ago, that it was opposed by the coup-attempt party, the leadership has no excuse now for failing to see the Democrats for the permanent coup-attempt party they have become.  And how well to understand, now, that when the Democrats accused Russia of “sowing chaos and discord” in the U.S., the Democrats were (falsely) projecting their own bad conduct.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/11/some_will_run_and_some_will_stay.html

A lot of clear-eyed, hardworking, patriotic Americans are down in the dumps right now.  Understandably so.  The midterms were an utter disappointment.  Midnight mail-in ballot hauls have completely upended elections, transforming almost certain MAGA victories in Arizona and elsewhere into uphill legal battles likely to suffer slow strangulation in Establishment-coddling courts.  If America had properly functioning democratic elections where only legal citizens voted secretly and securely after first establishing their identification, Republicans would have a hundred-seat margin in the House.  Instead, centrist dullard McCarthy will “lead” a threadbare majority ripe for rancor and future Democrat flipping.  

In the Senate, globalist shill Turtle McConnell succeeded in manipulating Alaskan election law to ensure that despicable Democrat Lisa Murkowski — and not Alaskans’ actual Republican nominee — retained her aristocratic sinecure in the U.S. Senate.  Predictably, after corporate Republicans’ “little tent” electioneering shenanigans, a red state that President Trump won by over ten percent in 2020 now has a Democrat representing it in the House and Leftist Lisa reinstalled for six more years of conservative backstabbing in the Senate.  What fetid nonsense RINO, Inc. hath wrought!

In a remarkable display of chutzpah (even by their own insane standards), the same Uniparty Republicans that went out of their way to tank “America First” campaigns of outsider candidates by choking their funding and turning a blind eye to Democrats’ extensive mail-in ballot manipulations then turned around to blame lackluster results on the energetic base of MAGA Americans who actually outvoted the Democrats by millions across the country.  When Paul Ryan (whose 2012 campaign ticket with holier-than-thou, prissy patrician Romney lost a winnable election to Obama by more than five million votes) argues that he and his kind of corporate sycophants should take back the party from Donald Trump and the New Republicans’ MAGA coalition (who won fifteen million more votes than any other Republican candidate in history — and ten million more than Obama’s 2012 total!), then Ryan’s RINO rump obviously lives obliviously in cloud cuckoo land, where cuckservatives’ delusions of stale grandeur still reign supreme!

https://www.frontpagemag.com/former-cia-analyst-on-cnn-this-freedom-of-speech-is-just-nonsense/

Former CIA analyst and current CNN intelligence and security analyst Robert Baer appeared on CNN on Friday in order to explain to us all how very terrible it is that Elon Musk is beginning to restore the freedom of speech on Twitter. As it turns out, rolling back Twitter’s usefulness as a tool for the Leftist establishment’s propaganda and allowing dissident voices once again to be heard is just playing into the hands of the Left’s all-purpose bogeyman, Vladimir Putin. That’s right: if the Left loses its hegemony over the American public discourse, Ukrainians will die. That’s what passes for analysis today on CNN, and apparently in the CIA as well.

Maintaining a straight face, Baer declared: “Putin is going to be all over Twitter if there’s no regulations on this, fake accounts, spoofed accounts, the rest of it. This is a great opportunity for him. And so when he’s talking about the popular voice, Musk, he’s really talking about Russian intelligence. Um, you know, the Russians are waiting for something like this. They need a propaganda campaign against the United States and against our support for Ukraine, and they’re gonna be all over Twitter. I guarantee this. Supporting the far right, plans, demands to stop arming Ukraine. Just wait.”

Asked about how to discern truth from “disinformation,” Baer answered: “Well, that’s why the pre-Musk Twitter had 7,000 people going through these accounts. You can pick ‘em out with algorithms, you can pick ‘em out by looking at ‘em, uh, you can check IP’s and the rest of it. And you simply block ‘em. And it’s, it’s, it’s not right. And you know, this freedom of speech is just nonsense ‘cause you can’t go into a movie theater and yell ‘fire.’ It’s against the law. And what Putin’s gonna to do and the Russians, is they’re going to use this as a vehicle to, to save himself in Ukraine. And, y’know, whether it’s gonna work or not, I don’t know, but we’re gonna see, as soon as these restrictions come off, we’re gonna see the Russians all over, as I just said.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-trump-special-counsel-is-another-clinton-payback/

When Bruce Wasserstein, a billionaire backer of the Clintons, provided a $25 million donation to Harvard Law, future Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, then serving as dean, welcomed it. The gift built on the Wasserstein Fellows Program already established at Harvard Law which brought “outstanding public interest lawyers” to Harvard and provided them stipends of up to $24,000 to meet with and influence students toward social justice at the prestigious law school.

When Jack Smith became a Wasserstein Fellow, even while, unironically, serving as head of the Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section, seemingly soliciting and accepting a

grant funded by a leftist billionaire (but who watches the integrity of the head of the Public Integrity Section) he joined a list of leftist activist lawyers working for the ACLU, Earthjustice, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Soros’ Open Society, Catholic Charities and the UN.

The mission of the Wasserstein Fellows was to gather “a diverse group of accomplished public interest lawyers who are enthusiastic about sharing their passions with law students on how to utilize their legal education to promote social justice.” Those passions included illegal migration, letting criminals get away with committing crimes and dismantling America.

How the DOJ’s Jack Smith would go about promoting social justice was a question that was answered twice. At least twice in public view where everyone could see and hear it.

The latest came when Attorney General Garland picked Smith as the Special Counsel to go after Trump. But before that anyone wondering what Jack Smith did to be chosen as a social justice lawyer would have had to be paying close attention to the IRS scandal that took place a year before he was made a Wasserstein Fellow.

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/11/28/after-getting-in-bed-with-tiktok-will-biden-ignore-its-national-security-threat/

‘I think Donald Trump was right, I mean, TikTok is an enormous threat.”

That was Sen. Mark Warner — a Democrat — talking about the popular Chinese-owned social media app. Warner, along with an increasing number of national security experts, says that the innocuous-seeming video-sharing service poses the dangers to national security that Trump warned about years ago.

“The ability for China to have undue influence is, I think, a much greater challenge and a much more immediate threat than any kind of actual, armed conflict,” Warner said.

FBI Director Christopher Wray told Congress earlier this month that he’s “extremely concerned” about TikTok’s threat.

“Under Chinese law, Chinese companies are required to essentially — and I’m going to shorthand here — basically do whatever the Chinese government wants them to do in terms of sharing information or serving as a tool of the Chinese government,” Wray said.

Last week, the FCC banned China’s Huawei and ZTE Gear because those could spy on military sites. Before that, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr called for a ban on TikTok.

Even the reliably liberal NPR is suddenly starting to sound Trumpian on this issue, noting that “there are concerns about China’s ruling Communist Party using this broad authority to gather sensitive intellectual property, proprietary commercial secrets and personal data.”

https://goudsmit.pundicity.com/26581/gaslighting-is-no-small-matter

lindagoudsmit.com http://goudsmit.pundicity.com

When politicized medical absurdities are accepted as medical science, atrocities are committed in the name of science. Changing the names of things does not change the objective reality of that thing, it changes the minds and hearts of individuals responding to that thing. So, when parents surrender their authority and common sense to the “experts,” and are convinced that biological sex is fluid and gender is a choice (absurdities), the parents commit atrocities against their children with the help of their doctors and therapists who are ideologues, not doctors or therapists.

If parents understood that this is psychological warfare, they would be empowered to hold onto their common sense, their authority, and protect their precious children. They would reject any ideology that denies objective reality, because its purpose is destruction. Bertrand Russell articulated the plan in 1952 in his book The Impact of Science on Society:

Education should aim at destroying free will so that pupils thus schooled, will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished. . . . Influences of the home are obstructive; and in order to condition students, verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. . . . It is for a future scientist to make these maxims precise and to discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for more than one generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen. – Bertrand Russell