RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://us20.campaign-archive.com/?u=2cf2a73e6220e59e3c1c4a60c&id=7845deb81f

It’s a legalized money laundering scheme.

It’s all legal and that’s the scandal.

Our report, Federal Funding of Fortune 100 Companies, drags this scheme into the sunshine.

It shows conclusive evidence that, over a four year period, Fortune 100 companies spent $2 billion lobbying Congress and received over $400 billion in federal grants and contracts — funded by the American taxpayer.

It’s no wonder that when new members show-up in Congress,  they quickly stop representing their constituents’ values. 

Their vote has been won by a higher bidder.

Our reporting on this critical subject has raised heads in the media, with features in the Washington Times, the Associated Press, C-SPAN, One America News, Newsweek, and The Daily Caller. 

The time is ripe for a bipartisan policy change. Remember, it’s YOUR money. 

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/540235-the-political-effort-to-limit-free-speech-attacks-our-own-values

English essayist Samuel Johnson wrote that “when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.” I thought of Johnson’s words in preparing to appear before a House committee exploring limitations on free speech, including a campaign by some Democratic members and activists to remove networks like Fox News from cable carriers. As someone who just came over to Fox News as a legal analyst from CBS and the BBC, the hearing concentrated my mind “wonderfully” on the future of free speech and the free press.

Increasingly, free speech in the United States is described as a danger that needs to be controlled, as opposed to the very value that defines us as a people. While I am viewed as a “free speech purist” by many, I maintain what once was a mainstream view of free speech. I believe free speech is the greatest protection against bad speech. That view is, admittedly, under fire and may even be a minority view today. But history has shown that public or private censorship does not produce better speech. It only produces more censorship and more controlled speech.

There is no disagreement that we face a torrent of false, hateful, extremist speech on social media and in other public forums. This speech is not without cost: It fuels those filled with rage, victimizes the gullible, and alienates the marginal in our society. It is a scourge, but not a new one.

The Constitution was written not only for times like these — it was written during times like these. Politics has always been something of a blood sport, literally. At the start of our Republic, the Republicans and Federalists were not trying to “cancel” one another in the contemporary sense; they were trying to kill each other in the actual sense, through measures like the Alien and Sedition Acts. There also were rampant false conspiracy theories about alliances with Great Britain, France, Spain, and other foreign powers. Newspapers and pamphleteers were highly biased and partisan.

Members of Congress are now pushing for public and private censorship on the internet and in other forums. They are being joined by an unprecedented alliance of academics, writers and activists calling for everything from censorship to incarceration to blacklists. For example, an article published in The Atlantic by Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith and University of Arizona law professor Andrew Keane Woods called for Chinese-style censorship of the internet, stating that “in the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong.”

 https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/26/joe-bidens-cabinet-nominees-prove-his-unity-claims-are-a-lie/

In his first address on Nov. 7 to the nation after being prematurely crowned “president-elect” by the legacy media, Joe Biden called for “a time to heal” and urged for “unity.” At his January inauguration, President Biden did the same.

“With unity we can do great things. Important things. We can right wrongs. We can put people to work in good jobs. We can teach our children in safe schools. We can overcome this deadly virus. We can reward work, rebuild the middle class, and make health care secure for all. We can deliver racial justice,” Biden said.

Then Biden signed the most executive orders (15) in his first day than any other U.S. President in history—notably eliminating the Trump administration’s 1776 Commission to properly educate students about America’s founding. His cabinet nominations also do not spell unity. They indicate the opposite.

Throughout this week, the secretary of Health and Human Services nominee Xavier Becerra sat before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Senate Finance committees for his confirmation hearings and notably dodged questions on his partial-birth abortion stance, and about suing nuns to force them into abortion coverage in 2017. The California attorney general is a far-left radical with zero public health experience or expertise.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/26/in-defense-of-multiracial-americanism/

To broaden its assault on traditional American culture and values, and to account for the large and growing number of conservatives who are not “white,” the Left has now come up with a new concept, “multiracial whiteness.”

This term sprang into prominence with a guest column by Cristina Beltran published in the Washington Post last month. Beltran acknowledged that Trump’s performance with Latino voters actually improved between 2016 and 2020. She also acknowledged the “clearly Latino or African American” faces showing up in the January 6 incident at the U.S. capitol. Everything Beltran claims in her column is designed to further castigate “whiteness,” while acknowledging there are significant percentages of nonwhites who, as she puts it, “fervently backed the MAGA policy agenda, including its delusions and conspiracy theories.”

For example, one of the favored targets of the “antiracist” movement in the United States is the Proud Boys, who Beltran describes as a “neo-fascist” group. Their leader, Enrique Tarrio, is Afro-Cuban, which makes him Beltran’s prime example of so-called toxic “multiracial whiteness.” She claims the appeal of multiracial whiteness to nonwhites is “politics of aggression, exclusion, and domination.”

This sort of message isn’t restricted to leftist academics anymore. Beltran, a professor of “social and cultural analysis” at New York University, and her cohorts throughout academia now have the entire weight of America’s establishment institutions behind them.

Being “Less White”

A notorious and very recent example of institutionalized corporate anti-whiteness is a training seminar Coca-Cola posted for its employees, featuring tips on “how to be less white.” One of the slides (since taken down) stated that to “be less white” Coca-Cola employees (the white ones) should “be less oppressive, be less arrogant, be less certain, be less defensive, be less ignorant, be more humble, listen, believe, break with apathy, break with white solidarity.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2021/02/26/breaking-john-durham-is-leaving-his-post-as-us-attorney-n2585424

U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham has resigned from his post, but will continue his Special Counsel investigation into the origins of the Russia probe and spying on President Trump’s 2016 campaign. His final day as U.S. Attorney is February 28. 

“My career has been as fulfilling as I could ever have imagined when I graduated from law school way back in 1975,” Durham released in a statement Friday. “Much of that fulfillment has come from all the people with whom I’ve been blessed to share this workplace, and in our partner law enforcement agencies.  My love and respect for this Office and the vitally important work done here have never diminished.  It has been a tremendous honor to serve as U.S. Attorney, and as a career prosecutor before that, and I will sorely miss it.”

Durham was appointed Special Counsel in December 2020 by former Attorney General Bill Barr. President Joe Joe Biden has indicated Durham will be able to complete his work. 

“The Special Counsel is authorized to investigate whether any federal official, employee, or any other person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller,. III,” Barr said at the time. “If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from his investigation of these matters.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-censorship-party-11614296803?mod=opinion_lead_pos4

Imagine if a pair of Donald Trump’s allies in Congress had sent a letter to cable company CEOs in 2017 blasting CNN and other progressive media outlets and asking why their content is still broadcast. Then imagine that a GOP-run committee in Congress staged a hearing on the societal menace of fake news and the need for government and business to rein in the hostile press.

The media would have treated that as a five-alarm political fire, an existential threat to a free press, the First Amendment and political norms, and a step toward authoritarian rule. “Democracy dies in darkness,” and all that. Yet that’s exactly what Democrats in Congress did this week, targeting conservative media outlets, but the media reaction has been silence or approval.

On Monday Democrats Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney sent letters pressing 12 cable and tech CEOs to drop contracts with right-of-center media outlets including Fox News. Two days later the Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing about “disinformation and extremism” in conservative media. The only notable extremism on display was the majority party’s appetite for regulating and policing the free press.

Rep. Mike Doyle, chair of the subcommittee on communications and technology, declared in opening remarks that “it is the responsibility of this subcommittee to hold these institutions”—meaning press outlets he doesn’t like—“to a higher standard.” He said later that “more free speech just isn’t winning the day over the kind of speech that we’re concerned about.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-and-allies-stoked-vaccine-fears-11614295867

President Biden has proposed an “unprecedented” information campaign to persuade people to get Covid-19 vaccinations. Why, when a pandemic has killed 500,000 Americans, does the public need to be convinced? In part because Mr. Biden and his allies spent 2020 stoking fear for political reasons.

The Biden campaign and scientists allied with it impugned the Food and Drug Administration’s independence and integrity. Kamala Harris maligned President Trump’s claims about the speed of vaccine development and questioned its safety and effectiveness. New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo cast doubt on FDA evaluations of Covid-19 vaccines and said states should conduct their own reviews. An Aug. 27 letter from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention asking governors for help setting up vaccine distribution elicited a statement from Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer questioning the safety of the vaccines in development. Media “fact checkers” said rapid vaccine development would take a “miracle.”

Between April 1-14 and Nov. 25-Dec. 8 the share of Americans who told pollsters they were likely to consent to vaccination declined from 74% to 56%, even though Pfizer and Moderna released strong vaccine safety and effectiveness results prior to the second survey. The decline occurred in both sexes and all age groups, education levels and racial groups. Many medical workers, including nursing-home staff, are also hesitant to be vaccinated.

Medical authorities were complicit in stoking these fears. Although June FDA guidance confirmed the agency wouldn’t “cut corners” and that expedited development would proceed “without sacrificing our standards for quality, safety, and efficacy,” a Sept. 10 editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association claimed that “some” were concerned that political appointees would “insist” on authorizing a vaccine “over the recommendation of FDA career scientists.” The concerned “some” were never named, and no citation was given.

https://dianebederman.com/islamophobia-cancel-culture-and-the-silencing-of-the-lambs/

We are living in a time when many of us are being censored – silenced for making statements or asking questions that may offend some. At a time when we have social media – an opportunity to learn from others all over the world, expand our horizons, ask more questions of people we would never have had the opportunity to meet in person, we are being bullied into silence; on social media! Not only bullied into silence but erased; literally canceled. Cancel culture, today, reminds me of Islamophobia. Both of them operate on the same level. They try to shame and bully us into silence. And they use fear, especially the fear of being called a racist, to suppress opposition to their ideologies. RACIST – the one word that enforces silence.

The terms Islamophobia and cancel culture are left wing ideologies working hand in hand to undermine and destroy the West by vilifying critical thinking.

Let’s start with the amazing success of Islamophobia.

First the definition.

This is from Canada:

“Islamophobia – Includes racism, stereotypes, prejudice, fear or acts of hostility directed towards individual Muslims or followers of Islam in general. In addition to individual acts of intolerance and racial profiling, Islamophobia can lead to viewing and treating Muslims as a greater security threat on an institutional, systemic and societal level.”