Ketanji Brown Jackson, Biden’s Supreme Court pick, reveals a lot with questions she won’t answer Jackson claims not to have formed a judicial philosophy she can describe, even after a decade as a judge: Andrew McCarthy

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/ketanji-brown-jackson-biden-supreme-court-pick-andrew-mccarthy

Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats incessantly remind us that the historic milestone marked by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination is that she would become the Supreme Court’s first Black woman.

Yet, how historically significant can it be if she can’t say what a woman is?

For all her appeal – and in 12 grueling hours of testimony on Tuesday, Judge Jackson’s intellect and charm were on full display – the nominee is dodgy. Though a highly accomplished – indeed, a historic – woman, she testified that she can’t “provide a definition” of what a woman is.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., even tried to help, spoon-feeding her the wisdom of an iconic progressive, the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that “physical differences between men and women … are enduring. The two sexes are not fungible.” But Jackson was unmoved – if there is a difference between men and women, she’s claims she is unable to discern it.

See what seven years at Harvard can do for you!

A Letter to the UConn Community Natalie Shclover

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/an-open-letter-to-the-uconn-community/?fbclid=IwAR3jcJQbIoVFiEkNYkM3ALQ-VQFI3SASsi4dynSgBHB3o6XTMt4ql38X02o

To my fellow students and members of the UConn community:

Those of you who know me personally know that, throughout my nearly four years here, I have always been a staunch advocate for free speech.

My parents grew up in the former Soviet Union, where they did not have the luxury of condemning the oppressive regime that governed their lives, and where they had the word “Jew” stamped under Nationality in their passports, defining who they could and could not be under a system of institutionalized discrimination. They fled to the US as refugees in the nineties so that I might have a chance at a better life. I have never taken this for granted. I was raised to speak up against injustice, and it’s been a part of who I am for as long as I can remember.

Like many of you, I have taken immense pride in being a part of a diverse and vibrant community here at UConn. Our university promises to encourage freedom of expression through civil discourse, stating that “debate surrounding discussion of difficult and controversial subjects is a key component to our university.” Throughout my nearly four years here, I’ve seen the administration deliver on this promise, voicing its support for many minority groups and encouraging tolerance among the student body.

However, in light of a recent series of experiences on campus, I am forced to call into question the University’s commitment to this promise and my fellow students’ understanding of it.

James Clapper is still a shameless liar Why would the Russiagate perpetrators change their modus operandi now?James W. Carden

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/james-clapper-conspiracy-theorist-russiagate/

Last week, the New York Times decided that now might be a good time, amid the cacophony of war abroad and soaring inflation at home, to come clean about the Hunter Biden laptop story.

On March 16, the Times published a report on the junior Biden’s messy tax affairs in which, a full twenty-four paragraphs in, they acknowledged the authenticity of the emails and files contained on the now-infamous laptop. It is worth recalling that when the New York Post first reported on the laptop and its tawdry contents — which included, among other things, indications of kickback schemes and influence-peddling involving Hunter and his father — fifty-one former high ranking members of the US intelligence community published a letter dismissing the story as having “the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Twitter and Facebook, essentially acting as surrogates for the Biden campaign, also banned the dissemination of the Post report in the run-up to the 2020 election.

Most of the fifty-one signatories of that letter, which included former CIA directors Leon Panetta, Michael Hayden and John Brennan, had no comment when reached by the Post last week. But one of the most prominent signatories, former director of national intelligence James Clapper, told the Post there would be no apology coming from him: “Yes, I stand by the statement made AT THE TIME, and would call attention to its 5th paragraph. I think sounding such a cautionary note AT THE TIME was appropriate.”

How will the battlefield stalemate end in Ukraine? The big fool here is Putin Charles Lipson

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/will-battlefield-stalemate-end-ukraine/

The simplest description of the war in Ukraine is this: stalemate, accompanied by constant, deadly bombardment.

For the Ukrainians, that bombardment is aimed at the Russian military. For the Russians, it is aimed mostly at civilian targets, a deliberate strategy that is also a war crime. Russian artillery shells, cluster bombs and cruise missiles are killing tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians and destroying their homes, schools and businesses. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s counterattack is imposing huge, irreplaceable losses on Russia’s army, killing soldiers, destroying their equipment and liquidating incompetent military leaders who come to the front to untangle the mess.

Russia’s initial war plan failed, abysmally. That plan was to seize Kyiv swiftly (expecting to be welcomed), decapitate the Zelensky regime and install a puppet government. Not only did they fail to seize the capital city, their brutal, unprovoked attack fostered a nationalist resistance so intense that neither the Russian army nor a puppet regime will ever be able to pacify the country. In fact, they don’t have the soldiers to take cities in house-to-house fighting (which takes about ten attackers for each defensive fighter), much less to hold those cities. Other than that, the plan is going just great.

“Dark Money” Affecting Elections in Revolutionary Ways by J. Christian Adams

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18354/dark-money-elections

In fact, dark money is being deployed in new and revolutionary ways to affect our elections.

Dark money refers to money injected into the process from anonymous sources. Somebody somewhere knows where the money came from, but that information is not public. Usually, the source is a tightly guarded secret.

Dark money is used to fuel television advertisement campaigns and organizations. It is used to buy newspaper advertisements and pay the rent at 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations.

Dark money often works like this. A source with deep pockets is interested in an issue. The issue might be green energy, gun rights, Israel, national defense or any of hundreds of other issues affecting the American debate. The source wishes to remain anonymous and wires money to a donor-advised fund. A donor-advised fund is a non-profit that pools funding and decides how to distribute it. They are not required to disclose their own donors.

The donor-advised fund then might distribute the money to the ultimate recipient — a charity, a foundation or even a traditional media campaign. That’s the most common model for moving “dark money.”

But there is even darker dark money. The institutional left has developed models in the last decade that dispenses with any pretense of charitable purpose. They essentially create hyper-funded businesses structures whose only purpose it to spend money on issues. The dark money is even darker because there are utterly no disclosure requirements from start to finish. Remember, in the previous, more familiar, charitable example, the ultimate charitable recipient has to disclose to the IRS the sources of larger donations, even if that information is not available to the public.

But this darker dark money — with funding streams wholly outside of the charitable or tax-exempt world — faces no disclosure obligations. The owners, or members in the case of a limited liability corporation, would be liable for any taxes flowing from net profits. But rest assured, these dark money-fueled businesses spend every last dime as a business expense, so there might be no tax liability in the end.

Secretly-funded efforts fueled the American Revolution. The founding of this country was supported by an 18th Century version of dark money. Anonymous pamphlets, postings and newspaper columns funded and published without attribution rallied patriots to take up arms against the King of England. Anonymity of donors is an important part of the American legacy of liberty, and in 2021, the Supreme Court, in Americans for Prosperity v. Bonita, recognized the importance of anonymous donors.

In March 2022, the 65 Project launched a new dark money-funded campaign to disbar lawyers who work on voter fraud issues or represented President Trump in post-election litigation. Dark money will fuel an organization filled with lawyers who will file over one hundred bar complaints against conservative lawyers. Their self-confessed goal is to shrink the talent pool of lawyers who are willing to fight for election safeguards.

The 2020 election was characterized by a revolutionary new funding stream in which private money flowed into government election offices, and the donors told the government election offices how to run the election. Characterized as “Zuck Bucks” because the majority of the money came from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, this money made the difference in 2020. Urban election offices in Philadelphia, Detroit, Lansing, Phoenix, Atlanta, Milwaukee and Las Vegas were converted into turnout machines. City officials went door to door collecting votes, all legally because they were city officials. Ad buys were made on urban and Spanish-language radio stations. Voting centers were set up inside urban areas rich in Biden votes. And it was all legal. Zuck Bucks drove Trump’s defeat, while many Republicans were distracted by confusing voting machine technology. The use of private money — much of it dark money — to fuel election-office policy was the single most revolutionary and effective characteristic of the 2020 election.

Lastly, no discussion of dark money is complete without mentioning ballot-harvesting. Because of the unprecedented rush to mail-in voting in 2020, dark money flowed into structures designed to go out and collect ballots at voters’ homes. I had seen this on a smaller scale when I was a lawyer at the Department of Justice Voting Section, where politically-connected collectors would go into minority communities and actually fill in ballots in the voter’s home, and, tragically, with the voter’s consent. In 2020, dark money was on the ground fueling ballot-harvesting on a massive scale. Unless we had video footage in every home where this occurred, it is impossible to say it was illegal. That is the problem with ballot-harvesting: it goes on behind closed doors, out of sight of election officials.

The question is whether opponents of these efforts can be as imaginative, and whether even a fraction of the funding used in the last two years can be mustered to stop it.

Kentanji Brown Jackson’s anti-constitutional, pro-child predator views By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/03/kentanji_brown_jacksons_anticonstitutional_prochild_predator_views.html

Today was the second day of hearings on the nomination of Kentanji Brown Jackson, a person Joe Biden nominated to the Supreme Court because she’s a leftist Black woman. It revealed that she is anti-constitutional, anti-White, and has a weird fondness for child sex predators.

Democrats’ statements today boiled down to three things: (1) We are so excited that you’re a Black female. (2) Republicans are racist for daring to inquire into your credentials and views. (3) Regarding those racist questions, we would never treat a Supreme Court nominee as disrespectfully as the Republicans are treating you. (Their disgraceful treatment of Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Comey Barrett, Clarence Thomas, and Robert Bork has been memory-holed.)

The real focus was on Jackson’s disturbing views about child sexual predators, the Constitution, and race. Her answers revealed that she’s either very dumb or very dishonest.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R. Mo.) already tweeted out last week Jackson’s history of demanding and imposing lesser sentences and other punishments for people convicted of pedophilia or child pornography. His questions focused on an 18-year-old man facing ten years in prison to whom she gave a three-month sentence. The man possessed hardcore stuff:

Videos included those showing a 12-year-old male committing a sexual act, about which Hawley said. “I’m not gonna I’m not gonna read exactly what it was,” because of the graphic nature of the content. There was another video showing an 8 year old “committing a sexual act,” and still others, showing 11-year-olds, the rape of children by adult males, and “very lengthy and include numerous images, numerous views, sometimes collages, sometimes multiple victims, you see the act and progress, the government goes on to describe some of the masochistic images,” Hawley said.

The New York Times finds Russia collusion in its own back yard By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/03/the_new_york_times_finds_russia_collusion_in_its_own_back_yard.html

One of the things that makes life easy for true conservatives is that their principles are fixed so they don’t often get tripped up on their past stands. That’s not true for leftists, for whom the ends always justify the means, so the means can do a 180 in an instant. When one enterprise New York Times reporter tried to attack Candace Owens as a Russian stooge for repeating Russian propaganda about Ukraine, Owens politely, and helpfully (very helpfully) explained that all her information about Ukraine came from…the New York Times.

Owens tweeted out the exchange, writing,

Received an email from The NYTimes asking for comment regarding me “advancing ideas that Ukraine is a corrupt country”—similar to Russian state TV.

I replied informing them that I actually got my ideas from the New York Times, and provided them links to their past articles. 😂

She included the receipts in the form of the email a New York Times writer sent to Owens stating, “We note that you advanced the idea that Ukraine was a corrupt country, which matched comments we’ve seen from Russian state media.” Subtext: Gotcha! You’re a secret Russian asset.

Net-Zero and ESG Are Worsening the Energy Crisis—and Weakening the West By Rupert Darwall

https://amgreatness.com/2022/03/22/net-zero-and-esg-are-worsening-the-energy-crisis-and-weakening-the-west/

The West’s capital is being deployed to create an artificial shortage of oil and gas produced domestically and reward non-Western oil and gas producers such as Russia and Iran with higher prices.

The day after Joe Biden announced that the United States would ban imports of Russian oil and gas, a group of 11 powerful European investment funds that includes Amundi, Europe’s largest asset manager, outlined plans to force Credit Suisse, Switzerland’s second largest bank, to cut its lending to oil and gas companies. The juxtaposition of these two events dramatizes the fundamental disunity of the West. At the same time as the Biden Administration is sanctioning Russian oil and gas producers, Western investors are sanctioning Western ones. Under the banner of ESG (environmental, social and governance) investing, the West’s capital is being deployed to create an artificial shortage of oil and gas produced domestically  and reward non-Western oil and gas producers such as Russia and Iran with higher prices. In doing so, the West is undermining its own security interests.

Before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, energy markets were already extremely tight. In the past, high oil and gas prices stimulated a supply-side response leading to increased output and to prices falling back. This relationship has broken down. According to analysts at JP Morgan, capital spending by S&P Global 1200 energy companies peaked in 2015 at just over $400 billion and shrank to around $120 billion last year—less than half its previous trough of $250 billion in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, even though global demand is now around 15 percent higher than it was then.

The Coming Disaster Welcome to the most dangerous two years in American history. By Dan Gelernter

https://amgreatness.com/2022/03/22/the-coming-disaster/

Nations change course slowly, like giant ocean liners. True disasters take a long time to unfold. If you think things look terrible now, you’re not using your imagination. The Biden Administration has only been in power for a little over a year. They got their crowbar in the door early with COVID, but we’ve barely tasted what the professional political class has in store for us.

Imagine gas at $10 a gallon, or $15. Imagine food staples so scarce you have to buy them with a ration card (displayed in a government-mandated phone app that tracks your family’s consumption). Imagine a new pandemic with a pathogen much deadlier than COVID, that actually kills a substantial number of the people it infects. Imagine an infrastructure attack that erases peoples’ bank accounts. Imagine a real, global war.

I’ve already written in support of Ukraine here, and I have been warning about the danger of a Russia-China alliance for a long time. But something about this Ukraine business rubs me the wrong way: All the people who updated their profile pictures with vaccination status to posture and to shame their friends have now updated their profile pictures again with Ukrainian flags. The mainstream media is in lockstep support. We’re bombarded with ridiculous stories about the “Ghost of Kiev” and Ukrainian farmers dismantling Russian tank columns. Last Friday, former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush visited a Ukrainian church together to lay flowers.

Something is definitely wrong here.

When we see the real establishment out in such force, it should set alarm bells off in our brains: We may not understand the nature of the lie, yet. But we can be certain they are lying to us.

Trump Scores Victory In Stormy Daniels Case — She Owes Him Almost $300,000

https://truthpress.news/news/trump-scores-victory-in-stormy-daniels-case-she-owes-him-almost-300000/

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a victory for former President Donald Trump in his legal feud with pornographic actress Stormy Daniels.

The 9th Circuit just issued a final ruling in the Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) frivolous lawsuit case against me brought by her disgraced lawyer, Michael Avenatti, upholding the lower court ruling that she owes me nearly $300,000 in attorney fees, costs, and sanctions (not including appeal costs).