RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/05/at_least_for_now_trump_s_dhs_blocks_harvard_s_international_student_money_mill.html

According to Grok, roughly 27% of Harvard’s student body—or around 6,800 students—consists of people from overseas. Given that they pay full fare (no federal student loans, grants, or scholarships for them), that works out to around $400 million in tuition revenue annually (6,800 x $57,000). Grok also estimates that, of those 6,800 foreign students, roughly 15% come from China.

You can see, then, how important those foreign students are to Harvard. And that’s why it was such a devastating blow when, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem wrote to Harvard this afternoon informing it that, because it refused to abide by its Civil Rights obligations, despite two warnings, the United States government was revoking its privilege (not its right, but its privilege) to host foreign students and workers:

Here’s the letter’s text, in case you can’t get the attachment to open:

I am writing to inform you that effective immediately, Harvard University’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification is revoked.

As I explained to you in my April letter, it is a privilege to enroll foreign students, and it is also a privilege to employ aliens on campus. All universities must comply with Department of Homeland Security requirements, including reporting requirements under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program regulations, to maintain this privilege. As a result of your refusal to comply with multiple requests to provide the Department of Homeland Security pertinent information while perpetuating an unsafe campus environment that is hostile to Jewish students, promotes pro-Hamas sympathies, and employs racist “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies, you have lost this privilege.

The revocation of your Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification means that Harvard is prohibited from having any aliens on F- or J- nonimmigrant status for the 2025-2026 academic school year. This decertification also means that existing aliens on F- or J- nonimmigrant status must transfer to another university in order to maintain their nonimmigrant status.

This action should not surprise you and is the unfortunate result of Harvard’s failure to comply with simple reporting requirements.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2025/05/21/joe-biden-cognitive-decline-biggest-scandal-modern-history/

News of former president Joe Biden’s prostate cancer diagnosis prompted Americans of all persuasions to offer prayers and sympathy. Human decency like that, transcending political differences, is laudable. Whatever our political differences, Biden and his family deserve our compassion.

What’s unusual is the scepticism – indeed, cynicism – surrounding the announcement, which came just before the release of a major book about Biden’s cognitive decline and its cover-up. There have been questions about whether officials knew about the cancer while he was in office and hid that from the public. Those doubts have been voiced by numerous specialists, including physicians who held high positions in Democratic administrations.

This cynicism is the bitter fruit of four years of the Biden administration’s deceit on countless basic issues, including the former president’s health. Americans were repeatedly told that “the president is mentally sharp and incredibly energetic”. That simply wasn’t true, and everyone knew it.

Still, some Democrats are attempting to downplay everything that happened over the past four years, as if it is old news that can be safely buried now that Donald Trump is in the White House. They won’t get away with it. The scandal surrounding Biden’s cognitive decline is the biggest in modern US political history.

In fact, there are three scandals, each reinforcing the other two. First, and most obviously, there is the blunt fact of the former president’s fading mental capacity. Second, there was the concerted cover-up, both by Democratic politicians and the mainstream media. The third is the still-unanswered question: who was actually making presidential decisions? Who controlled the auto-pen that signed almost every order from the Oval Office? To rephrase Senator Howard Baker’s pointed question during the Nixon-Watergate hearings: “What did the president not know? And when did he not know it?”

https://issuesinsights.com/2025/05/22/everybody-rejoice-paul-krugman-is-predicting-a-recession/

“We are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight.” – Paul Krugman, November 2016

“Joe Biden will eventually preside over a soaring, ‘morning in America’-type recovery.” – Paul Krugman, November 2020.

“Slower growth is certain. For 2025, I see little or no GDP growth, rising unemployment, and persistent inflation.” – Paul Krugmann, May 2025

If you want an accurate gauge of future economic conditions, look no further than Paul “Nobel-Prize-Winning-Economist” Krugman. He has a solid record of being exactly wrong, as the above quotations show.

So, the fact that he is now predicting stagflation should give everyone a boost of confidence that we are headed for a second Trump boom.

Krugman’s new prediction comes, in fact, just as signs are looking up.

The stock market is back in positive territory since President Donald Trump took office, and is up 7% compared with a year ago.

https://amgreatness.com/2025/05/22/are-some-racist-slurs-okay/

One reason why the public turned on DEI was its insistence that roughly 70 percent of the country was stereotyped as victimizers by virtue of their skin color.

In contrast, the other “diverse” 30 percent were de facto considered the victimized.

In such absurd binaries, the left returned to the old “one-drop” rule of the antebellum South, suggesting that anyone with any nonwhite ancestry was a minority victim.

And once that Marxist-inspired dichotomy was institutionalized, a corollary was established that the self-declared racially oppressed cannot themselves be racist oppressors.

But human nature is universal and transcends race.

One lamentable characteristic of our species is that we are all prone to excess and crudity if not deterred, especially once civilizational restraint is lost.

We are now witnessing examples of what follows when anti-white stereotyping and racism are given a pass—as long as the purveyors can claim their victimhood entitles them to bias.

Recently, WNBA basketball stars Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark got into one of their now-characteristic on-court rivalries. But this time around, Reese mocked Clark as a “White gyal [sic] running from the fade.”

Reese assumes that her status as a Black star grants her immunity from backlash—a privilege unlikely to be extended if the roles were reversed.

Or is her crassness a simple reflection that 60 years after the Civil Rights movement, it is deemed cool or deservedly acceptable to use the word “white” derogatorily?

After all, loose-cannon Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), in one of her accustomed racialist rants, recently went after her party’s big Democratic donors, who raised a record amount of money for Kamala Harris’s short-lived campaign.

Crockett played the race card when claiming that Democratic insiders were already backing the next party nominee as the “safest white boy.”

Her racist irritation is puzzling. After all, two out of the last four Democratic presidential nominees have been African-Americans.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/donald-trump-force-conservatism-doge-deportations-higher-education

Conservatism has two modes: peacetime and wartime. When the social order is stable and healthy, conservatives seek to cultivate and maintain institutions. In times of chaos, a different kind of conservatism emerges, focused not on preservation but reform.

Donald Trump is a wartime conservative. Since his first presidential campaign, he has argued that America is in decline and requires drastic measures to restore its national greatness. In the opening stretch of his second term, he has focused on three policies—mass deportations, cost-cutting through DOGE, and higher education reform—that are aggressive and have caused distress across the political spectrum. Some center-right critics have fretted about the president’s potential “overreach,” while the usual voices on the left have accused him of “fascism” and “authoritarianism.”

Neither analysis is correct, but both gesture at the same thing: Trump is using force. American culture has changed to such a degree that these measures, none of them unprecedented, now appear radical. Elites have become so habituated to highly regulated, feminized environments that any hint of force causes apprehension.

Educated Americans have trouble imagining the use of force, largely because they have isolated themselves from it. Ivy League faculty members cannot fathom, say, putting their hands on an MS-13 gang member and physically ejecting him from the country. The educated classes have become so inured to the physical world that many perceive a pink slip or reduced research funding as an act of genuine violence.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/when-sharia-gets-a-tax-break/

In America, tax-exempt status isn’t a loophole. It’s a privilege—one meant to serve the public good, not undermine it.

Under 26 U.S. Code § 501(c)(3), that privilege is reserved for institutions that are religious, charitable, educational, or scientific in nature. But the law is explicit: these organizations may not promote criminal conduct, engage in substantial political lobbying, or advocate ideologies that undermine the U.S. Constitution.

Yet that’s exactly what many Islamic nonprofits are doing—with the IRS’s blessing, and in some cases, with taxpayer funding.

These groups hide behind “religious freedom.”

What they’re really advancing is Sharia—a totalitarian legal system that stands in direct opposition to American law and values.

They preach that man-made laws are illegitimate.

That Islam’s legal code is supreme.

And American citizens are subsidizing it.

Take Zaytuna College in Berkeley, California. Marketed as America’s first Islamic liberal arts college, it presents itself as an academic institution committed to interfaith dialogue and scholarship.

But behind the polished branding lies a very different reality.

Zaytuna’s curriculum includes Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller)—a classical Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that is explicitly anti-Western in its rulings.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/liz-peek-biden-cancer-announcement-has-my-sympathy-my-skepticism

Former President Joe Biden announced over the weekend that he had just recently been diagnosed with stage 4 prostate cancer. A statement from the former president’s office identified the cancer as “aggressive” but also “hormone sensitive,” indicating the possibility of “effective management.”

The news generated an outpouring of sympathy from friends and foes alike. President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social, “Melania and I are saddened to hear about Joe Biden’s recent medical diagnosis. We extend our warmest and best wishes to Jill and the family, and we wish Joe a fast and successful recovery.” We share that concern and optimism; we hope the former president beats the disease.

But, like much of the public, our initial sympathy has turned skeptical. Doctors say that it is highly unlikely anyone could be “suddenly” diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Especially one which, according to Biden’s statement, had metastasized into his bone.

Nearly every man over 50 gets checked regularly for prostate cancer. Certainly, a U.S. president, and especially one under close surveillance for age-related illnesses, would have been examined rigorously for a disease that strikes one in seven men during their lifetime.

Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel, an oncologist and Democrat policy-maker, told Joe Scarborough on MSNBC, that Biden had certainly had the disease for “more than several years.” “He did not develop it in the last 100, 200 days. He had it while he was president. He probably had it at the start of his presidency in 2021. I don’t think there’s any disagreement about that.”

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2025/05/19/the-real-criminal-behind-joe-bidens-health-cover-up-n4939953

For four years, Americans watched Joe Biden stumble—literally and figuratively—through his presidency, while his inner circle and media allies insisted everything was just fine. Any attempt to question his physical or mental decline was met with accusations of “ageism” or dismissed as wild conspiracy talk. This, from the same Democrats who once obsessed over Donald Trump’s mental fitness, but spent most of Biden’s term parroting absurd claims that he was “sharp as a tack,” “a beast,” or “running circles around his staff.” Videos of Biden looking lost on stage or mumbling were dismissed as “cheap fakes” by the Biden White House, and the media enthusiastically echoed that talking point.

It took a humiliating debate meltdown to finally make it clear they could no longer cover up the obvious. Only then did Democrats admit what everyone else had known for years: Joe Biden was neither physically capable nor mentally fit to serve as president. The charade is over—but the damage is done.

But, now, in light of the revelation of Joe Biden’s cancer diagnosis, Congress needs to subpoena Joe Biden’s White House physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, to answer questions.

In 2023, shortly before Biden announced his reelection campaign, O’Connor called Biden a “healthy, vigorous 80-year-old male” fit for the presidency. Everyone knew it was laughable. Biden was visibly deteriorating—stumbling through speeches, forgetting names, and needing direction just to exit a stage. The signs were there for anyone willing to look, and even then, some insiders were quietly admitting behind the scenes that there were serious concerns. Yet, a year later, O’Connor doubled down. In February 2024, he wrote, “The President feels well and this year’s physical identified no new concerns.” 

These claims were lies. Biden’s mental and physical struggles were evident daily, and insiders were already leaking concerns. O’Connor’s medical authority made his deception worse than political spin. 

His health reports gave everyone cover. Without him, the deception couldn’t have happened.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/leon-county-florida-school-board-gender-identity-littlejohn-case

The social contagion of gender confusion among American teenagers has been worsened considerably by educators. In many cases, school officials, most notably at public schools, have socially transitioned children, while deliberately concealing this information from parents.

One such case arose in Leon County, Florida (Tallahassee), where the school board established a comprehensive Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Gender Nonconforming and Questioning Support Guide. That guide specifically instructed educators that they should not tell parents when a child announces a transgender identity, and that children have a legally protected right to keep from their parents information regarding their gender identity and any steps the district takes to affirm that identity.

Operating on this guidance, administrators met secretly with January and Jeffrey Littlejohn’s 13-year-old daughter in the fall of 2020 to develop a “gender support plan” that allowed the child unilaterally to decide which name and pronouns to use, which restroom to visit, and with which sex she would lodge on overnight trips. The document also indicated that school staff would use a new name and “they/them” when referring to the child at school but would use the child’s given name and “she/her” when talking to her parents.

The Littlejohns sued in federal court, alleging violations of familial privacy and of their constitutional rights to direct the upbringing of their children and to make medical and mental-health decisions for them. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in a 2-1 split decision.

The appellate panel held that even if the Littlejohns alleged that defendants intentionally violated their constitutional rights, they had to allege further that the defendants’ conduct “shocked the conscience.” That “shock-the-conscience” requirement, per the majority, doesn’t apply to challenges of legislative actions, but it does apply to all claims that executive actions—like those of school officials—violate fundamental rights.

The decision was admittedly in tension with at least three other circuit precedents, each of which says that plaintiffs may win by showing either that the executive officials’ conduct violated their constitutional rights or that it shocked the conscience, but not necessarily both. Though he joined the majority because he felt bound to do so, Judge Kevin Newsom called the outcome “totally bizarre.”

https://amgreatness.com/2025/05/19/the-fbi-washington-headquarters-wont-be-missed/

Current FBI Director Kash Patel is closing down the agency’s Washington, DC, mothership office and moving at least 1,500 employees out of the DC area to regional offices.

The decision was not just Patel’s.

During the Biden Administration, it was determined that the 50-year-old Hoover building headquarters was structurally decrepit. More germanely, no prior FBI director had ever explained why nearly a third of the FBI workforce was centered in offices in Washington, far from where most of the serious crime in America occurs.

The news is welcome for reasons well beyond the safety of agents in an apparently unsafe headquarters.

It is no exaggeration to state that most of the FBI scandals of the last decade were born in the Hoover building headquarters, suggesting that the agency had long become top-heavy, politically weaponized, and deeply embedded in and compromised by the Washington apparat.

Former FBI Director, later appointed as special counsel, Robert Mueller ran a media-driven, 20-month, 40-million-dollar legal circus chasing the unicorn of “Russian collusion.” His left-wing legal team—replete with political conflicts of interest and scrubbed cell phones—was dubbed by the obsequious, giddy left-wing media as the “army,” “untouchables,” “all-stars,” “dream team,” and “hunter-killer teams.”

When called to testify about his investigation that had found no Russian-Trump collusion, Mueller implausibly denied any knowledge of the Steele dossier or FusionGPS. Yet they were arguably the very catalysts for his own special counsel appointment.

Two of his Washington FBI investigators were fired—the amorous Peter Strzok and Lisa Page—who had co-texted a deep personal antipathy toward Trump, the object of their investigations, and a desire to see him not become president, referred to as an “insurance policy.” Note that either the FBI or Mueller’s team also mysteriously lost the requested recorded texts and calls on the duo’s phones.