RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18088/dramatic-testimony-from-the-maxwell-case-will

You will be surprised to learn that the woman who was paid to find, bring and “groom” Carolyn was not Ghislaine Maxwell, although the above testimony was given at Maxwell’s trial. The older woman – who was well over the age of consent when she brought the 14-year-old Carolyn to Epstein – was Virginia Giuffre, the same woman who has falsely accused me of having sex with her, and who has also accused … other prominent people who have all denied the accusation.
Although Giuffre was a central figure in the Maxwell case, mentioned repeatedly throughout the trial, she was not called as a government witness. Why was she not called? Probably for two reasons: first she would be cross-examined by the defense about her own crimes in being paid to bring underage girls to Epstein; and second, she would be confronted with the numerous lies she has told under oath. Her own lawyers have disputed her and acknowledged that she was “wrong” in accusing prominent people. And her own emails, book manuscript and prior interviews with the FBI contradict her current accusations.
Moreover, prosecutors would have to explain why she is not being prosecuted for enticing a 14-year-old to have sex with Epstein…. Pursuant to the theory under which Maxwell was convicted, Giuffre is guilty of a felony carrying a long prison term.
The question is will she be indicted for perjury and enticing a minor, or will she get a pass because she may once have been victimized by Epstein? Does her alleged victimization excuse her for victimizing others? She has already been well compensated for any victimization. Estimates range between 6-10 million dollars she and her lawyers have received. Nor have those underaged girls who she helped victimize been compensated by her.
The testimony by Carolyn regarding Giuffre’s sordid role in victimizing very young girls cannot be ignored, especially since the government elicited it from their own witness in the Maxwell case. Nor can her rampant perjury, which can be proved through her own words. So, stay tuned. The truth will come out. And it may surprise you.

I wish you all a very happy, healthy and fruitful New Year.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18083/american-traitors-academics-working-for-china

China’s regime has bought America’s academic community and turned it against America.

“This case is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of what needs to be done by the U.S. government to penetrate and prosecute China’s co-option of America’s academia.” — Kerry Gershaneck, the author of Political Warfare: Strategies for Combating China’s Plan to “Win Without Fighting” and a professor in Taiwan, to Gatestone, December 2021.

“Scientists around the world, identified as leaders in areas of advanced research that are strategic priorities, are targeted by a well-funded sophisticated engagement that plays on their vanity, naiveté, and greed.” — Charles Burton, former professor at Brock University and now a leading expert on China’s infiltration of Canada, to Gatestone.

I am told there are “thousands” of professors on Beijing’s payroll in California universities.

Xi is serious about attracting talents like Lieber. In his September speech, Xi said he would “exhaust all means” to recruit foreigners.

In China’s official war on America — People’s Daily in May 2019 declared a “people’s war” on the United States — Americans working for Beijing, whatever their intention, are essentially traitors. Lieber, a traitor, has inflicted incalculable damage on America.

It took a federal jury in Boston less than three hours to return guilty verdicts on all six felony counts against Charles Lieber, the former chair of Harvard University’s Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology.

Lieber, “one of the country’s top research chemists” according to the New York Times, lied to the FBI about his participation in Beijing’s Thousand Talents Program, did not pay income tax on money from Chinese sources, and failed to report his Chinese bank account to the Internal Revenue Service.

The case against the Harvard academic was airtight. Nonetheless, members of America’s academic elite are up in arms that the Department of Justice prosecuted Lieber, and many are campaigning against law enforcement efforts.

China’s regime has bought America’s academic community and turned it against America.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/12/29/the-ungracious-and-their-demonization-of-the-past/

The last two years have seen an unprecedented escalation in a decades-long war on the American past.

But there are lots of logical flaws in attacking prior generations in U.S. history.

Critics assume their own judgmental generation is morally superior to those of the past. So, they use their own standards to condemn the mute dead who supposedly do not measure up to them.

Yet 21st century critics rarely acknowledge their own present affluence and leisure owe much to history’s prior generations whose toil helped create their current comfort.

And what may future scolds say of the modern generation that saw over 60 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, even as fetal viability outside the womb continued to progress to ever earlier ages?

What will our grandchildren say of us who dumped on them over $30 trillion in national debt—much of it as borrowing for entitlements for ourselves?

What sort of society snoozes as record numbers of murders continue in 12 of its major cities? What is so civilized about defunding the police, endemic smash-and-grab thefts, and car-jackings?

Was our media more responsible, professional, and learned in 1965 or 2021? Did Hollywood make more sophisticated and enjoyable films in 1954 or 2021? Was there less or more sportsmanship among professional athletes in 1990 or 2021?

Was it actually moral to discard the “content of our character” and “equal opportunity” principles of the prior Civil Rights movement of 60 years ago? Are their replacement fixations on the “color of our skin” and “equality of result” superior?

Would America have won World War II with the current labor participation rate of only six Americans in 10 working? Would our generation have brought all American troops home and quit World War I, in fear of the deadly 1918 Spanish flu pandemic?

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/12/30/vice-president-kamikaze-harris/

After more than 11 months in office, with inflation skyrocketing and the country’s superpower status plummeting, Americans can’t stand either President Joe Biden or his vice-presidential-beneficiary of-affirmative-action, Kamala Harris.

Every time Harris tries to help herself, she hurts herself. As border czar who for three months avoided visiting the Mexican border, Harris relented only after plans were made known of former President Donald Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott traveling to the frontier – and then she briefly visited only a border patrol station about nine miles from the actual border, far removed from where masses of illegal migrants have been crossing.

To humanize her disastrous public image and connect with ordinary people, she staged a ludicrous fake meeting with child actors to tout space exploration. She chose to own Biden’s catastrophic Afghanistan withdrawal by telling the world she was the “last person in the room” when he formulated his policy. And her office has been hemorrhaging senior staff.

But on Sunday, the vice president outdid herself in self-destructive stupidity, and made it crystal clear she is unqualified to assume the presidency should the ever-more-enfeebled Biden become incapacitated or, God forbid, pass on to his eternal reward.

Appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” she began by sounding, more even than Joe, like big, dumb, dangerous government personified. “Everyone has to get vaccinated,” Harris insisted at a time when the federal government’s approach to COVID is more discredited than ever, both among the populace and within the medical community, adding that “they’ll save your life.”

https://www.city-journal.org/eric-adams-and-the-promise-of-pragmatism?skip=1

In his victory night speech in New York City, an electrified Mayor-elect Eric Adams reserved his most scathing criticism not for his Republican opponent but for outgoing mayor Bill de Blasio. “This city betrays New Yorkers every day, especially the ones who rely on it the most,” said the incoming 110th mayor. Such pointed criticism might be expected when a candidate from one party succeeds an officeholder from the other party, but it sounds strange coming from one Democrat following another. After eight years of governance that placed ineffective progressivism over pragmatism, could the Adams administration represent the possible emergence of a moderate, results-oriented faction in New York’s nearly hegemonic Democratic Party?

November’s inflection point was reminiscent of others in Gotham’s more recent past. Following Rudy Giuliani’s winning reelection bid in 1997, the New York Times opined that his success signified “a triumph of nuts-and-bolts pragmatism over the ideology and party loyalty that once ruled elections in New York.” But Bill de Blasio’s 2013 victory saw the pendulum swing back. The Times suggested that this election marked a “forceful rejection of the hard-nosed, business-minded style of governance that reigned at City Hall for the past two decades and a sharp leftward turn for the nation’s largest metropolis.”

Unlike the 1990s and 2000s, when Republican candidates could win major mayoral elections, Democrats today possess almost unilateral control over most large American cities. New York is chief among them. That may change someday, but in the meantime it’s important to recognize the influx of some 1.5 million more residents since the Giuliani days, many of them educated and motivated professionals who tend to identify as liberal and dislike the national Republican brand. Buoyed by these voters, New York’s Democratic Party sanctioned measures to close Rikers Island, end pretrial detention for many defendants, shift $1 billion of the NYPD’s budget to other services, and impose higher taxes on wealthier citizens.

One might conclude that New Yorkers’ everyday priorities are tilting ever leftward, but that would be mistaken. A closed primary erodes the benefits of remaining Republican or Independent, leading many moderates to break ranks. Last year, 67,965 unaffiliated voters and 20,528 Republicans switched allegiances in the Empire State to become newly minted Democrats and thereby participate in the now all-important primary. The vastly lopsided ratio of Democratic to GOP voters doesn’t necessarily reflect the shared ground that underlies most urban voters’ preferences and concerns.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/12/29/the-left-doesnt-own-minority-voters/

Demographic transitions present political opportunities, but do not protect politicians from their own folly. The shift in most Western countries to a more racially and ethnically diverse demographic has been widely seen by left-wingers as an opportunity to cement their ascendancy.

Yet after early successes with this strategy, the parties of the left have witnessed the departure of some minority voters – Hindus in Britain, Asians in Australia, and Asians and Hispanics in the United States. In some cases, minorities are opting out of the intersectional bandwagon, which includes certain cultural attitudes, imposed progressivism in schools, and an increasing tolerance of crime.

Sadly, racialism and constant campaigns to address ‘systemic racism’ have driven a certain element of working-class whites not only in Trumpian America, but also in France, Britain, Germany and even Scandinavia, towards nativist, even openly racist, politics. As Michael Lind among others suggest, the fashionable focus on ‘white privilege’ and assigning original sin based on someone sharing DNA with settlers and slave owners also doesn’t work with the majority of Americans, who come from families who came to America after the Civil War. Meanwhile, crowing about ‘the end of white America’ might be popular in ethnic-studies departments, but it does not translate into a better life for most minorities.

Racial minorities’ shift to the centre and the right represents a healthy step, as it undermines the racialist, us-versus-them rhetoric shared both by the nationalist right and the intersectional left. Once politicians begin addressing people as people, with their own interests, and not as artefacts of their own heritage, we can look to employ diversity not as a weapon, but as an asset.

When you ask them, most people of colour do not generally share the politics of the faculty-lounge racialists. Nor do most Americans. The overall PC agenda, built around identity politics, is rejected by 52 per cent of Americans, according to a recent NPR poll. Opposition to PC is even greater among Latinos. The vast majority of all races, noted a 2018 survey, reject the woke anti-racist meme, even as it is widely adopted by the billionaire class and corporate HR departments.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/watch-out-academia-has-declared-war-military-history-198117

Fewer and fewer major universities promote world-class work in the military history field.

Here’s What You Need To Remember: In today’s great power competition, knowledge, critical thinking and prudent judgment are as vital as military hardware, artificial intelligence, and powerful economies. In our hyper-competitive world, we need all hands—and brains—on deck.

Distinguished war historian Max Hastings recently lamented, “In centers of learning across North America, the study of the past in general, and of wars in particular, is in spectacular eclipse.” This created a bit of a buzz among “classically” educated national security professionals—i.e., those who learned the blocking-and-tackling basics of their field through the study of history.

But this “buzzing” matters little. While they would like history to be used to help keep America safe, free and prosperous, these folks don’t control how history is taught and propagated. That’s controlled by American academia, American universities have no intention of fixing the problem. Instead, they are unilaterally disarming America’s knowledge base.

Crisis! What Crisis?

Fewer and fewer major universities promote world-class work in the military history field. There are probably two basic reasons for that. One is that, in this field, universities mostly function to produce scholars for other universities. As the demand for such academic scholars dissipates, so do universities’ investments in the field. And it’s a field particularly unattractive to foreign “investors.”

U.S. universities rake in billions in foreign investments. China alone averages a billion dollars a year. Pretty much all of it goes to hard science and engineering. Military history goes empty-handed.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2021/12/29/the-morning-briefing-dems-will-take-an-even-harder-run-at-destroying-america-in-2022-n1545096

Let’s get back to the Dems and their antics now.

As I am often given grief for frequently reminding people, we’re still less than a year into Biden’s God-awful tenure in the Oval Office and what potential relief we have on the horizon is still almost a year away. I mentioned in yesterday’s Briefing that eleven months could very well feel like eleven years. I sincerely hope that’s not the case but I’m a realist.

One thing I know for certain is that the Dems are in an all-around panic about next November. Sure, a lot can happen between now and then but, look around, this Biden mess most likely won’t be cleaned up by then.

Democrats are more focused on the long game than Republicans, however. Just because they’re down in the dumps at the moment doesn’t mean that they’re taking their eyes off of the various insane leftist prizes that they want.

My latest column dissects an Op-Ed that appeared in The Hill yesterday, and it perfectly illustrates just how focused the Dems still are. Here’s an overview:

A professor of politics named John Kenneth White has penned an opinion piece for The Hill titled “The Constitution isn’t working.” It’s an odd article because White actually gets a couple of things right at the beginning but eventually veers off into a boilerplate regurgitation of the leftist fever-dream wish list: nuke the Electoral College, JANUARY 6, reform the filibuster…yeah he had a ghostwriter from the Democratic National Committee working with him on this.

There were some valid points that professor White could have explored differently and given readers some real food for thought. It’s nigh on impossible for any Democrat to do something like that, however, because they are all basically automatons when it comes to the approved messaging. Here’s a snippet from near the end of White’s article that I didn’t include in mine:

It won’t be enough merely to reform the filibuster, add more justices to the Supreme Court, change presidents or surrender presidential powers to Congress. A document written in 1787 is inadequate for the 21st century. The Electoral College is poised to create more misfires, with popular vote winners not becoming president, as has happened twice already this century. Territorial expansion has resulted in 16 percent of the U.S. population controlling half the seats in the U.S. Senate.

He not only wants to blow up the Constitution, he then wants to blow it up a second time just to make sure.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/12/28/the-everlasting-covid-crisis/

In 1972, three black men, Melvin Cale, Louis Moore, and Henry D. Jackson, Jr., hijacked Southern Airways Flight 49, demanding $10 million and safe passage to Cuba. The hijacking lasted nearly 30 hours and involved multiple stops throughout the United States, Canada, and eventually, Cuba. In the process of negotiating with the FBI, the hijackers threatened to ram their aircraft, a Douglas DC-9, into the High Flux Isotope Reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee if their demands weren’t met.

Until that point, American airlines had resisted installing metal detectors in airports, worried that treating Americans like common criminals to board a plane would wreck their burgeoning industry. But that threat of nuclear attack, and the 130 other hijackings between 1968 and 1972, convinced the government to take a stand at last. In 1973, the FAA used its bureaucratic and administrative powers to make passenger screening mandatory. In 1974, Congress validated the requirement, ignoring passenger rights’ groups that protested the intrusive screening of luggage and persons in order to board aircraft. 

There is an important lesson here: Once the modern American state imposes surveillance measures it never relaxes them, even when the threat no longer exists. That’s why, even after American troops have left Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden was killed, and ISIS has been destoyed, Americans are still removing their shoes in airports, treated like would-be terrorists for traveling. The humiliating X-ray machines that force grandmothers, children, and ordinary businessmen alike to stand like felons with their hands up while probing machines attempt to peek under their clothes at their naked bodies is the height of ritual humiliation.

The seeming elimination of this surveillance network’s reason to exist doesn’t mean these leftover policies of the war on terrorism are over—far from it! My children and grandchildren, barring some dramatic political shift, will be subject to the same post-9/11 security measures I grew up with.