RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://thefederalist.com/2023/02/13/the-fbi-isnt-the-only-guilty-party-in-the-twitter-files-and-it-isnt-partisan-to-say-so/

Matt Taibbi took to Twitter on Saturday to express his frustration with the politicization of the “Twitter Files.” The fact that a considerable number of the responses to the “Twitter Files” has been right-wing political outrage and leftist “whataboutism” has turned it into a “partisan pissing match,” he said. Instead, he would prefer that outrage be directed at the “real targets” of his and his peers’ reporting, the federal bureaucracy and intelligence agencies.  

And whereas bureaucrats and spooks alike were exposed for engaging in actual fascism, a truth that Taibbi is clearly uncomfortable with remains: Everything the “Twitter Files” exposed indicates that the federal government and Big Tech colluded to further entrench a despotic regime in accordance with the Democratic Party’s political and ideological goals.

Taibbi’s statement is somewhat puzzling. After all, which political party overwhelmingly benefited from the “meddling” of the intelligence apparatus and Twitter? Which political party’s interests did this meddling explicitly serve? And what political party did the disenfranchised overwhelmingly belong to? 

The first installment of the “Twitter Files” revealed that Twitter and the Democrats collaborated to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story, which verifiably altered the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. In it, Taibbi noted that whereas Twitter did take specific content moderation requests from Republicans, the “system wasn’t balanced. It was based on contacts. Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation.”

https://issuesinsights.com/2023/02/14/to-counterpunch-smokin-joe-g-o-p-must-rebrand-as-government-of-the-people/

Stipulated: Feisty Joe Biden deceived, demonized and divided his way through his State of the Union thumper. But he also adeptly defied his Republican foils – cleverly cornering catcallers in an impromptu imbroglio.

And more important, deftly demagogued with a people-oriented pitch that may well set the stage for a surprise surge. The money line in suddenly-Smokin’ Joe’s populist appeal?

“Americans are tired of being played for suckers.”

Dang straight. The Scrantonite and his scribes are on to something in combating “junk fees” and other indignities heaped upon the non-upper crust.

Biden took on a Corn Poppish cornucopia of love-to-hate lowlifes: Health care hustlers. Old folk defrauders. Cable conmen. Cellphone scamps. Financial institution fleecers. Ticket tricksters. And most deliciously, airline over-chargers, whom he justifiably asserted “treat your child like a piece of baggage” in dinging families to travel in the same zip code as their toddlers.

This swift switch to common-guy champion packs all the more punch when contrasted with Wrong-Way Republicans’ stubborn staying of the course.

To wit: recent votes re-cementing into leadership three-election-cycle loser Ronna McDaniel as Republican National Committee chair and Establishment icon Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker. Followed by McCarthy’s disavowal of the national sales tax on which he promised conservatives, per conflicting reports, a vote or hearing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-junk-economics-of-junk-fee-politics-state-of-the-union-biden-overdraft-charge-credit-cards-credit-banks-31c6543b?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

President Biden is from the federal government, and his bureaucracy is here to help you. That’s the political subtext of all the President’s promises in his State of the Union address, notably his vow to remove what he calls “junk fees” from the economy. But the results are likely to harm the very people he claims to help.

There’s no dispute that customers shouldn’t be charged without their consent for products they don’t want. Nor that businesses should disclose add-on fees before consumers sign a contract or make a purchase. But Mr. Biden’s regulators are targeting common business practices that aren’t deceptive or unfair.

In recent years, more banks have begun offering free checking accounts and other services. To cover their costs, they charge fees to customers who overdraw their accounts. This is now a target of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which has issued guidance prohibiting “surprise” overdraft fees on debit transactions.

For example, an individual with $100 in his account might incur an overdraft fee if he has an $80 monthly cable bill automatically withdrawn and then uses his debit card to buy a $90 pair of sneakers. CFPB director Rohit Chopra calls this a “surprise” fee. But anyone who tracks his bank balance would know he doesn’t have enough money to buy the sneakers.