RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/12/15/bidens-build-back-better-lie-revealed-5-tril-isnt-zero/

President Joe Biden and other Democrats have smugly responded “zero” or “nothing” when asked what the massive Build Back Better plan will ultimately cost. Not to be rude, but this is an outright lie, as a new government analysis clearly shows.

“My Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars,” Biden tweeted on Sept. 25 from his White House account. “Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes and tax evasion for big corporations and the wealthy, we can make a once-in-a-generation investment in working America. And it adds zero dollars to the national debt.”

In the ensuing weeks, that lie got repeated by others. That includes White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki, who told gullible leftists in the mainstream media that the bill would cost nothing, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who added the novel twist that the massive bill is “fully paid for.”

Since the lie went out over official social media, it wasn’t a slip of the tongue or the accidental hyperbole of a man in obvious age-related mental decline. It was an official White House policy statement, one that makes Biden’s whole administration look profoundly foolish, dishonest and deceitful.

No person with any schooling in basic math, economics, statistics or, alternatively, simply having plain common sense, would believe that spending trillions of dollars on nonproductive programs would actually result in zero net costs without massive added tax hikes. It’s simply not real.

That’s where the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) enters the picture. As it turns out, estimates for Biden’s plan from the CBO, the nonpartisan congressional think tank that officially “scores” new legislation for what it would cost the U.S. Treasury, show it would be the largest spending program ever undertaken by the U.S. And no, its costs aren’t zero.

The CBO concludes that the Build Back Better bonanza would add $3 trillion to U.S. deficits by 2031, an amount most would agree is a bit north of “zero.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/12/14/a-compendium-of-hate-crime-hoaxes-jussie-smolletts-was-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/

There are opinions, announcements and news events that the media hivemind suppresses through news blackouts believing that if a news event is not reported then it is not news, and people will not know, similar to the philosophical conundrum of, if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around to hear, has it made a noise? One of these taboo topics is hate crime hoaxes, since it jars with the media hivemind’s goal of convincing people, particularly blacks, of the idea of “systemic racism” in our society as a means of promoting a race war and peddling CRT.

Over recent years, I have cataloged a large number of hate crime hoaxes involving Muslims, gays, and blacks (I have also compiled a long list of fraudulent accusations of rape, but that is a topic for another time). The reason I have done so stems from my research background: I prefer data (i.e., facts) as opposed to verbosity. If I write an eloquent essay stating that hoaxes are common, a leftist can counter with an equally eloquent essay stating that they are rare (this has occurred in other topics with sophists writing that the media hivemind is impartial and that there is no censorship in universities). But, if I cite facts, a leftist’s verbal diarrhea is ineffective.

Here, then, are some of the participants in the Oppression Olympics:

At Emory University, a black employee vandalized vending machines and wrote racist graffiti and swastikas before being discovered. The university did not disclose the race of the employee.

A black woman pretended to be a 6-foot-tall white Klansman and sent death threats to her neighbors.

A black student at East Carolina University posted a racist invitation to a fraternity party that read, “No blacks.”

https://amgreatness.com/2021/12/13/justice-department-moves-to-conceal-police-misconduct-on-january-6/

After months of foot-dragging, Joe Biden’s Justice Department is preparing for the first set of trials related to its sprawling prosecution of January 6 defendants: Robert Gieswein, who turned himself in and was arrested on January 19 for his involvement in the Capitol protest, is scheduled to stand trial in February.

A week after his arrest, Gieswein, 24 at the time, was indicted by a federal grand jury on six counts including “assaulting, resisting, or impeding” law enforcement with a dangerous weapon that day. He has been behind bars ever since, denied bail while Judge Emmet Sullivan delayed his trial on numerous occasions. Gieswein is among 40 or so January 6 defendants held in a part of the D.C. jail system solely used to detain Capitol protesters.

Federal prosecutors accuse Gieswein of using a chemical spray against police officers and carrying a baseball bat. Clad in military-style gear, Gieswein climbed through a broken window shortly after the first breach of the building. He told a reporter on the scene that “the corrupt politicians who have been in office for 50 or 60 years . . . need to be imprisoned.” Democratic politicians, Gieswein complained, sold out the country to “the Rothchilds and the Rockefellers,” a remark the FBI investigator on his case described as an “anti-Semitic” conspiracy theory.

Ahead of Gieswein’s trial, the Justice Department asked Judge Sullivan to strictly curtail how Gieswein can defend himself. A motion filed earlier this month argued Gieswein should not use self-defense against law enforcement as a reason for his actions on January 6. (Prosecutors also stated that Gieswein should not blame President Trump for his alleged criminal behavior,  claiming it is “objectively unreasonable to conclude that President Trump could authorize citizens to interfere with the Electoral College proceedings,” a legal torpedo to the Democrats’ nonstop accusations that Trump “incited” the events of January 6.)

“[The] Defendant will not be able to put forth any evidence that he had a reasonable belief that his actions were necessary to defend himself against the immediate use of unlawful force,” Matthew Graves, the new U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, wrote in the December 1 filing. “Through his words and actions, the Defendant made plain his intent. The Court should exclude any testimony and evidence purporting to assert a claim of self-defense.”

Preventing Gieswein from telling a jury exactly what happened on January 6 is the Justice Department’s latest attempt to cover up pervasive police misconduct. Gieswein’s alleged offenses coincided with the time frame when Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan Police officers started attacking thousands of protesters assembled outside the building on January 6. 

Law enforcement deployed explosive devices known as “flashbangs,” which emit a powerful burst of light and sound to temporarily stun the intended victim, into the crowd around 1:15 p.m. on January 6, just moments after Trump finished up his speech at the Ellipse less than two miles away. Police also used rubber bullets, tear gas, batons, and in some cases, their own fists to assault protesters.

Prosecutors know this is fact—and it’s precisely why the Justice Department is desperate to keep any video footage or testimony that portrays these vicious assaults out of the public eye. As I have reported, the Justice Department and U.S. Capitol Police want roughly 14,000 hours of surveillance video captured by security cameras on January 6 to remain under protective orders. The trove is considered “highly sensitive” government material by Biden’s Justice Department; even defendants are strictly limited as to how they can view this classified footage used as evidence against them.