RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/02/25/dems-covid-bill-takes-waste-fraud-and-abuse-to-a-whole-new-level/

President Joe Biden recently defended his $1.9 trillion COVID bill by asking critics of the plan: “What would they have me cut? What would they have me leave out?” The easier question would be, what’s worth keeping?

The bill is riddled with spending unrelated to the COVID crisis, gifts to big unions, bailouts to states that don’t need them, and bad economic policies. It is, in short, a monument to Democratic-style political corruption bought with money borrowed from our children and grandchildren.

We have already exposed the many lies being used to justify this spending monstrosity. The details now available in the House bill add insult to injury.

While Democrats claim the need is urgent, almost $700 billion of of the funds won’t get spent until sometime over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

This is particularly true when it comes to money for education and labor – which includes dollars for schools, colleges, child care, and the $15 minimum wage. Less than 10% of the $293 billion thrown at these programs will go out this year, according to the CBO. More than a third won’t get spent until after the next presidential election!

https://www.wsj.com/articles/supersizing-obamacare-subsidies-11614210175?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

EXCERPT:

Provisions of the $1.9 trillion bill moving through the House make Affordable Care Act subsidies more generous and available even to the affluent. Buying an ObamaCare policy makes sense if a subsidy shields you from fearsome premiums and out-of-pocket costs; more than 85% of enrollees receive such a subsidy. But those who earn too much to qualify for government subsidies have been fleeing the exchanges. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Servicessaid last fall that unsubsidized enrollment dropped 45% between 2016 and 2019.

Instead of making the underlying product better or less expensive, Democrats now want to pass more of the cost onto taxpayers.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/pelosis-capitol-riot-commission-11614210098?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

Nancy Pelosi wants a “9/11-type” commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, and there’s a case for doing it—if the goal is truly to find out why America’s seat of government was so poorly protected and how much of the violence was planned. Is that what Mrs. Pelosi is after?

There’s reason to doubt it, since she pushed to make the commission a partisan body. Her initial plan was to have seven members appointed by Democrats and four by Republicans. This is impossible to justify, especially in a country so closely divided. Democrats have 51% of House seats and Republicans have 49%, and the Senate is 50-50. Why, then, would Democrats get to appoint 64% of a Jan. 6 commission?

The only way an inquiry can defang disinformation and conspiracy theories, like the idea that the Capitol rioters were antifa agitators in disguise, is if the country thinks the effort is factual and fair. An even partisan split is crucial for credibility. Otherwise a sizable share of Americans will suspect it’s a political weapon designed to find President Trump guilty of incitement to insurrection, more or less, after a failed impeachment trial.

Mrs. Pelosi should want an inquiry that delivers a unanimous outcome, not one that breaks down on party lines. Heed the veterans of the 9/11 commission, which she invokes. Its Democratic vice chairman, former Rep. Lee Hamilton, told Politico that Mrs. Pelosi’s proposal “does not sound to me like a good start; it sounds like a partisan beginning.” Its GOP chairman, former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, said that without equal representation, “the report won’t have as much confidence from the American people.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/23/biden-a-dark-money-puppet/

Liberal dark money groups spent a record-breaking $145 million to get Joe Biden elected, and now they are cashing in. These groups are pushing President Biden to nominate dark money appointees and pass their extreme left-wing policies.

From top to bottom, Mr. Biden’s staff is filled with people affiliated with dark money. His chief of staff, Ron Klain, was a board member of the dark money group CAP Action Fund before joining the Biden administration.

Similarly, Gina McCarthy, the White House National Climate Adviser, led the Natural Resources Defense Council, a climate action dark money group that has received millions from the Sixteen Thirty Fund and the New Venture Fund.

Those two funds come underneath the massive dark money umbrella of little-known Arabella Advisors, which moves half-a-billion dollars per year to left-wing organizations involved in policy and political campaigns.

Another example is Jennifer Granholm, President Biden’s nominee for secretary of Energy. Ms. Granholm chaired a dark money think tank whose sister organization spent $60 million to help elect Mr. Biden.

Mr. Biden is already delivering for his dark money donors on a policy level. He canceled the permit for the Keystone pipeline, eliminating thousands of good-paying union jobs, and he is breaking all the promises of moderation he made in 2020.

Democrats love to chide Republicans about their dark money ties, but Mr. Biden is truly the first dark money president.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2021/02/24/the-morning-briefing-thank-god-merrick-garland-isnt-on-the-supreme-court-n1427780

Justice Garland Would Have Been a Nightmare

When looking at Joe Biden’s various appointments and nominations here in the first month of the Grandpa Gropes Traveling Sham Presidency Circus, one gets the feeling that former President Barack Obama is running a staffing agency these days. Or a recycling center. Team Biden-Harris has been stocking up on Obama administration retreads. Perhaps Ol’ Joe doesn’t remember most of these people and his empty head thinks they’re all fresh blood.

While Merrick Garland wasn’t really a member of the Obama administration, he is, of course, closely associated with it thanks to The Lightbringer’s lame-duck nomination of him for the Supreme Court in 2016.

Garland’s performance during his confirmation hearing this week has clearly illustrated that the United States really dodged a bullet in keeping him off of the Supreme Court.

The world is so screwed up right now that this guy is going to be the chief law enforcement officer in the land, but at least that’s not an appointment for life. At least not yet. The Democrats are all about fundamentally overhauling America and they’re clearly fans of one-party rule, so this administration may be around longer than we’d like.

I will share just a couple of the lowlights that Garland offered forth under questioning this week.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/dr-faucis-interventions/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=second

Dr. Anthony Fauci’s interventions continue to lose coherence and connection from reality.

We are now at the point where Fauci seems to be implying that normality will never come back, and where reasonable people may draw the inference that getting vaccinated is vaguely socially irresponsible.

Take his comments this week, from a report at Business Insider:

“There are things, even if you’re vaccinated, that you’re not going to be able to do in society,” Fauci said on Monday during a White House COVID-19 press briefing. “For example, indoor dining, theaters, places where people congregate. That’s because of the safety of society.”

“We hope that when the data comes in, it’s going to show that the virus level is quite low and you’re not transmitting it,” Fauci said, cautioning: “We don’t know that now. And for that reason, we want to make sure that people continue to wear masks despite the fact that they’re vaccinated.”

The first thing to ask is: What planet are you living on? People are dining indoors and going to movie theaters right now. Many schools are open and are managing to keep transmission very low.

Now, the background to Fauci’s comments is that, with some diseases, vaccination may reduce the incidence of serious disease and death, but may not stop people from contracting and transmitting the virus.