Biden, Menendez, And Michelle: Birds Of A Bribery Feather

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/09/28/biden-menendez-and-michelle-birds-of-a-bribery-feather/

Q: What is the difference between what Sen. Bob Menendez is charged with, what President Joe Biden is being investigated for, and the speech Michelle Obama gave in Germany on Monday?

A: Only the dollar amounts.

Just as Democrats were ramping up calls for Menendez to step down over bribery charges filed against him, and as House Republicans started their impeachment inquiry into whether Joe Biden used son Hunter to bribe foreign officials, Obama was reportedly getting paid an obscenely large amount of money for a one-hour talk on “diversity.”

These are all variations on a theme. Call it bribery, or extortion, or abuse of power, or whatever you want. This is how Democrats get rich these days. They expand the size and power of the federal government, then sell access and favors to the highest bidders.

Think about Michelle’s speech for a minute. According to the Daily Mail, she was paid $741,000, which means that by the time she was six minutes into her speech, she’d made more money than 50% of households in the United States make in a year.

This reported fee is also more than three times the already criminally large amount she normally gets paid to read words someone else wrote for her.

So, what makes Michelle suddenly three times more valuable? Did she discover a cure for cancer? A limitless, free, source of clean energy? An end to world hunger? Did she unlock the secrets of faster-than-light space travel? Or announce a plan to bring world peace?

Hardly. She is a talentless woman who happens to be married to a former president. The organizers of the event and 5,000 people in attendance most likely have already forgotten whatever it was she said.

The one and only reason she commanded that price is because of the current buzz that she might run for president next year, given that Biden seems unlikely to last until November 2024, let alone January 2029. The organizers of the event were buying political influence, not insights.

How is this different from what Biden was doing when he was selling access through his drug-addled son?

How is it any different from what the money-grubbing Clintons were doing with their bogus “Clinton Foundation,” which saw donations skyrocket when people thought she might be the next president. As we reported when we were with Investor’s Business Daily, donations to the Clinton Foundation cratered as soon as Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump in 2016.

The second GOP debate was furious and messy — with no clear winner The real victor was the candidate with a commanding lead who wasn’t on stage” Charles Lipson

The worst job in America on Wednesday was trying to moderate the second Republican debate. With seven candidates on stage struggling for airtime, moderators Dana Perino, Stuart Varney and Ilia Calderón did a creditable job under impossible conditions. They asked the right questions, but couldn’t stop the candidates from talking over each other, or returning to previous questions which they wanted to answer but hadn’t been asked. The moderators’ job was like being the referee with seven boxers in the ring. 

None of the fighters won, and none failed. They all put forward their best arguments in the sliver of time they had for each question. Unfortunately for voters trying to decide among them, that sliver wasn’t enough to say more than canned slogans. There were simply too many voices on stage to give each of them more time. With most polling in single digits, they knew this might be their last chance to make their case before being tossed out of the ring.  

Even the strongest candidates didn’t have time to flesh out important positions on major policy questions, to say much more than “I did it right in my home state” and “Joe Biden, bad.” 

The stringent time limits helped the most vapid among them, Vivek Ramaswamy, who could toss out unworkable ideas like confetti, knowing other candidates wouldn’t have time to expose their emptiness and the moderators wouldn’t have time to press for details. He’s slick enough to convince some voters and outrageous enough to convince others. But he shouldn’t be on the same stage as serious candidates with a genuine understanding of difficult policy issues and the background to actually implement solutions. 

The Retail Theft Rampage Gets Worse Target closes nine stores in four states because of crime, as looters run riot in Philadelphia.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/philadelphia-looting-target-store-closing-retail-theft-crime-1ee6de3c?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

You may have heard that a mob of teenagers looted stores in downtown Philadelphia on Tuesday night, and Target said the same day it is closing nine stores in four states because of rampant crime. Rack up more victories for progressive prosecutors.

The mobs in Philly hit Apple,Lululemon and Foot Locker stores in Center City, which ought to be a safe space for civilized commerce. The Foot Locker store was “ransacked in a coordinated attack,” said police. Police have made more than 50 arrests and are investigating property damage and theft elsewhere in the city. Some 76 incidents have been reported.

and Foot Locker stores in Center City, which ought to be a safe space for civilized commerce. The Foot Locker store was “ransacked in a coordinated attack,” said police. Police have made more than 50 arrests and are investigating property damage and theft elsewhere in the city. Some 76 incidents have been reported.

Interim Police Commissioner John Stanford said police are looking into whether “there was possibly a caravan of a number of different vehicles that were going from location to location.” He added, “Everyone in the city should be angry.”

Anger is justified in particular toward District Attorney Larry Krasner, who waves away property crime. His office reports 424 retail theft charges so far in 2023—compared to more than 1,500 by the same date in 2017, the year before he took office. Reports of retail theft in Philly have increased by more than 30%—to 13,330—compared to a year ago, according to the city’s latest weekly crime report.

Giving Donald Trump a Pass at the GOP Debate The other Republican presidential candidates largely left the front-runner off the hook.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-presidential-debate-reagan-library-donald-trump-ac835016?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

The Republican Presidential candidates not named Donald Trump squared off for the second time on Wednesday, and they put on a good show that gave voters an insight into how they think and what they believe. But their main oversight continues to be that with rare exceptions they are giving Mr. Trump a pass.

The candidates are all fighting to become the alternative to Mr. Trump, who is leading in the polls by 30 or more points over his nearest challenger. They are looking to stand out from the pack, and that means promoting their records and making a contrast with the others on the stage. The debate over Ukraine was especially sharp and revealing, and we’ll have more to say about that in coming days.

But all of them also court irrelevance if they can’t cut into Mr. Trump’s commanding lead. And no one is going to become a credible alternative fighting about curtains at the United Nations. Sooner or later the candidates have to persuade voters that they would be better as the Republican nominee than Mr. Trump, with a better chance of winning and then governing for four years more effectively than the chaotic former President.

Yet there was precious little contrast with Mr. Trump on stage Wednesday night at the Reagan presidential library. The main exceptions were Chris Christie and Ron DeSantis, who hit Mr. Trump for not showing up to debate. Mr. Christie was effective on the point that Mr. Trump’s absence shows disrespect for voters, while Mr. DeSantis scored by noting that the former President doesn’t want to appear and have to defend his recent comments criticizing the Florida Governor for signing the state’s ban on abortion after six weeks.

Michelle Obama got $750,000 for a single speech in Munich By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/09/michelle_obama_got_750000_for_a_single_speech_in_munich.html

Debate is raging about whether Michelle Obama will step in to save the day for Democrats if both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are yanked from the top of the ticket. Meanwhile, though, Michelle isn’t letting any grass grow under her feet. Instead, she jetted off to Munich to give a single speech, in exchange for which she collected 700,000 euros, which is equivalent to over $740,000. Given how rich the Obamas are, one has to wonder about her price tag…although I have some guesses.

I’m not a Michelle Obama fan. She came from an affluent black Chicago family; got into the Ivy Leagues (probably through affirmative action, given the childishly poor quality of her bachelor’s thesis); obtained jobs for which she was not qualified and that required no work but nevertheless paid her very, very well; and ended up as America’s First Lady for eight years. Along the way, she and her husband amassed at least $70 million, a wealth package that includes three mansions, one in D.C., one in Martha’s Vineyard, and one in Hawaii.

That level of wealth is impressive when you consider Barack Obama’s considered opinion that “I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.” But of course, for leftists, enough is never really enough. The richest people in the world are leftists who squirreled away a bit of money for themselves—e.g., Hugo Chavez, Yasir Arafat, every Soviet dictator, Fidel Castro, and, now, the Obamas. Oh, and let’s not forget Bernie Sanders, who used to inveigh against millionaires and billionaires until he became a millionaire. Then, he only had a problem with billionaires.

But back to Michelle. Here’s the reason I don’t like her: Despite her wealth and prestige, Michelle Obama is a woman who feels that life has done her wrong. She’s a race hustler who waves her skin color around like an angry flag. If you don’t worship at her feet, it’s not because you dislike her values or her personality. It’s because you’re part of a systemically racist, capitalist, American system that offends her to the core, despite her having benefitted from that same capitalist, American system in a way few people ever have or will.

Equal Injustice: Menendez Indictment Does Not Prove Equal Justice by Alan M. Dershowitz

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19999/menendez-indictment

In both the Menendez and Trump cases, prosecutors are engaging in the questionable tactic of seeking to influence the jury before trial.

Both show and tells [Menendez’s gold bars and Trump’s documents] are wrong. Both are intended to prejudice potential jurors and witnesses and to try the case in the court of public opinion before it is subject to the adversarial process to the courts of law.

Two wrongs do not make a right — nor do they cancel each other out. They simply compound the injustices and demonstrate that this Justice Department — and several others that came before it — are willing to violate the spirit if not the letter of the law, Justice Department regulations and legal ethics.

No one should rush to judgment before all the evidence is seen and heard. Nor should Menendez be compelled to resign his seat in the Senate based on allegations, photographs and the kind of one-sided testimony that is heard by grand jurors. The presumption of innocence means just that: at this point in time, Menendez should be deemed no more guilty than other officeholders who have been accused of wrongdoing.

One irony of the Justice Department’s publication of prejudicial photographs clearly intended to influence the jury and potential witnesses is the fact that the same Justice Department is seeking to impose a gag order on Trump, in part because of the claim that he will try to influence jurors and witnesses against the government.

Both Trump and Menendez have the constitutional right – under the 1st and 6th Amendments – to defend themselves in the court of public opinion. The government, on the other hand, has no constitutional right to try to influence jurors or witnesses. Its only legitimate role is just to seek objective and fair justice. In that regard, the Justice Department is starting off on the wrong foot in both the Menendez and Trump cases.

Many Democrats are claiming that the recent indictment of Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) proves that the current Justice Department provides equal justice to Democrats and Republicans. Although it is necessary to wait for the evidence to emerge before judgment is passed on this most recent indictment, what appears so far may be closer to equal injustice.

In both the Menendez and Trump cases, prosecutors are engaging in the questionable tactic of seeking to influence the jury before trial. The photographic display of gold bars and cash in the Menendez case is an image that will remain with everyone who saw it. The same is true of the contrived photographic display by the Justice Department of allegedly classified documents spread on the floor. This “show and tell “was produced by the Justice Department and published in virtually every media outlet in the country.

A Student Wants to Join West Point. But He’s the Wrong Race The people who took down affirmative action at Harvard are coming for the military. by Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/a-student-wants-to-join-west-point-but-hes-the-wrong-race/

B is a high school student with a 4.2 GPA. One of his grandfathers fought in the Army on D-Day. Three of his family members are currently serving in the military. He would like to attend West Point Academy and continue a proud family tradition of military service, but there’s one problem.

He’s white.

The United States Military Academy is highly selective, but not in the way that it should be.

In 2019, Vice President Mike Pence addressed the graduates, hailing them as “the most diverse class in the history of the United States Military Academy” with the “highest number of Hispanic women graduates”. He told them that, “I couldn’t be more proud to stand before the graduating class of 2019 that includes the highest number of African American women cadets in the history of the United States Military Academy!” That’s been the emphasis at West Point for too long.

Earlier this year, West Point put out a press release boasting of its 38% minority enrollment as part of what a new lawsuit alleges is a practice of achieving its “desired percentages … of blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities” through systemic discrimination in admissions.

As the lawsuit filed by Students for Fair Admissions on the behalf of B, the anonymous student, lays out, “West Point sets benchmarks for the percentage of each class that should be filled by ‘African Americans,’ ‘Hispanics,’ and ‘Asians,’ and it meticulously tracks its compliance with those figures down to a tenth of a percentage point.” The problem is too many white people.

During the Biden administration’s defense of racial discrimination in Harvard’s admissions policies, the federal brief complained that, “white service members are 53% of the active force, but 73% of officers.” West Point’s goal is to match the percentage of officers to the number of enlisted men and so there needs to be only 53% white officers. The white officers must go.

Hunter Biden Received $260,000 in Wires From China. Guess Where They Were Sent. By Matt Margolis

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2023/09/26/hunter-biden-received-260000-in-wires-from-china-guess-where-they-were-sent-n1730134

It looks like the House Oversight Committee has found another juicy nugget that is going to complicate Joe Biden’s impeachment defense.

According to subpoenaed bank records, Hunter Biden received wire transfers totaling roughly $260,000 from communist China, and these transfers listed Joe Biden’s Delaware residence as the beneficiary address for the funds.

“As part of the investigation, Comer subpoenaed financial records related to a specific bank account and received records of two wires originating from Beijing and linked to BHR Partners,” Fox News Digital reported Tuesday evening. “BHR Partners is a joint-venture between Hunter Biden’s Rosemont Seneca and Chinese investment firm Bohai Capital. BHR Partners is a Beijing-backed private equity firm controlled by Bank of China Limited. Hunter Biden reportedly sat on the board of directors of BHR Partners.”

The first wire transfer sent to Hunter Biden, dated July 26, 2019, was for $10,000 from an individual named Ms. Wang Xin. There is a Ms. Wang Xin listed on the website for BHR Partners. It is unclear if the wire came from that Wang Xin.

The second wire transfer sent to Hunter Biden, dated Aug. 2, 2019, was for $250,000 from Li Xiang Sheng — also known as Jonathan Li, the CEO of BHR Partners — and Ms. Tan Ling. The committee is trying to identify Ling’s role.

The beneficiary for the wires is listed as Robert Hunter Biden with the address “1209 Barley Mill Rd.” in Wilmington, Delaware. That address is the main residence for President Biden.

How Biden’s Record Contradicts his Pro-Union Braggadocio What pro-China policies and aggressive electric vehicle mandates really do. by Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/how-bidens-record-contradicts-his-pro-union-braggadocio/

President Biden likes to boast that he is “the most pro-union president in history.” To underscore his claim, the president has decided to join the United Auto Workers picket line in Michigan for a photo op, which will provide him with the opportunity to secure the endorsement of the UAW.

However, Joe Biden has hurt labor in the United States over the years by being a longtime leader in advocating the normalization of trade with China, beginning with his strong support for China’s admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. Labor unions in the manufacturing sector opposed China’s admission to the WTO out of concern that cheaper labor in China would entice U.S. companies to eliminate many well-paying jobs in America and use less expensive Chinese workers instead. The unions were right. Joe Biden got it wrong.

According to a study published in January 2020 by the Economic Policy Institute, “The growth of the U.S. trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2018 was responsible for the loss of 3.7 million U.S. jobs…Three-fourths (75.4%) of the jobs lost between 2001 and 2018 were in manufacturing (2.8 million manufacturing jobs lost due to the growth in the trade deficit with China).”

Donald Trump recognized the massive loss of jobs to China, which exploited and violated the rules of the WTO to its advantage. Mr. Trump confronted the devastating consequences for American workers during his presidency. Although he was unable to stop China’s unfair trade advantages completely, at least he tried to protect U.S. workers’ jobs. Mr. Trump imposed stiff tariffs and other measures that brought China to the negotiating table, resulting in more balanced terms for trade between the two countries.

Joe Biden, on the other hand, has done nothing of the kind. To the contrary, he has long downplayed the threat that China poses to the American economy.

From Transgender Homecoming Queen to Transhumanism Can only an apocalypse save us? by Jason D. Hill

https://www.frontpagemag.com/from-transgender-homecoming-queen-to-transhumanism/

Last week, a biological male named Tristan Young who “identifies” as a female beat out several young ladies for the title of “homecoming queen” at Oak Park High School in Kansas City, Missouri.

In July, the Netherlands crowned a biological male identifying as a woman as its first transgendered Miss Netherlands.

Leaving aside the question of who is spearheading this annihilative agenda, we should be clear on what is the intended goal of the perpetrators. When a biological male who looks like a man in drag is crowned as homecoming queen, the adults behind this agenda are sending a clear message that this is a socially endorsed beauty contest. And further, that teenage boys should find male homecoming queens attractive and even sexually alluring.

There are two issues here to consider. One is the normalization of transgenderism. Its mainstreamed nature will brand as a homophobe or transphobe anyone who claims not to be attracted to trans “women” since they are to be regarded as actual women. The perception of discrimination, and discrimination associated with transwomen of color will increase. America will be viewed as less tolerant, more systemically racist and—if heterosexual men reject biological male transwomen—as irredeemably misogynistic.

The second factor to consider is that a form of socio-sexual eugenics is spreading like an epidemic in our society.  Boys who normally would not have been attracted to biological male trans-women will be increasingly attracted to such persons. The result will be a further increased segment of the copulating population incapable of reproducing. According to a recent survey of over 1,000 members of generation Z, 27% don’t want to have kids. When asked why, 89% of generation Z women said they enjoy the flexibility in their lives of not having children and 70% responded that they value their alone time.

Since it is women who both grant access to sex and determine if children come into the world, one can imagine a scenario in which an already declining U.S. population could precipitously slip further into an irreversible decline if a significant portion of transwomen become the partners not of gay men (not likely) but of re-socialized and sexually re-engineered heterosexual males.

The other factor to consider is that the agenda has as its end goal—the elimination of the male pronoun, men as we know them and any memory of a term such as heroic masculinity. Think about it: a biological male/ trans-woman is a feminized woman; a trans-man (biological female identifying as a biological male) looks often like a diminutive male with none of the primal and elemental raw masculinity of men. Although we live in a culture that problematizes the definition of women, it is men who are being erased.