RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/04/13/the_great_awokening_americas

One of the most striking features of American history is its periodic waves of religious fervor. We are in the midst of another today, stripped of its references to God but filled with the same passionate desire to be reborn, absolved from past sins.

What sins need absolution now? America’s history of slavery and Jim Crow segregation. Those “original sins” continue, say the movement’s leaders, in a new (and vaguely defined) form: “structural racism.”

Revivals like this have been called “Great Awakenings” since the first one, in the 1740s. Today’s acolytes use similar language, so this one might be called the “The Great Awokening.” Just as slavery and abolition were central to the Second Great Awakening of the 1850s, so race is central now. In both cases, the message is that white Americans must act decisively to correct historical wrongs and pay penance for them.

Today’s progressive politicians also offer a measure of absolution. It is a costly one, a whole series of race-based policies, massive government spending, centralized controls (including new rules for voting), and economic redistribution, plus “reimagining” local law enforcement.

Who are the sinful “whites” in this account? In practice, they are everyone except descendants of enslaved African Americans. In this reframing, Americans of Chinese, South Asian, Korean, or Cuban ancestry are all considered privileged and, in a political sense, “white.”

https://www.saveservices.org/2021/02/police-investigative-misconduct-railroaded-an-innocent-catholic-priest/

In September, 1988, Keene, New Hampshire sex crimes detective James F. McLaughlin received a letter from Ms. Sylvia Gale, a New Hampshire child protection social worker. Ms. Gale’s letter reported third-hand information that Catholic priest, Gordon J. MacRae, had once been a priest in Florida “where he molested two boys, one of whom was murdered and his body mutilated. The case is supposed to be still unsolved.”

According to Sylvia Gale’s letter, the information was passed to her by an unnamed employee of New Hampshire Catholic Social Services who claimed that she had been told this information by her employer, Monsignor John Quinn, on condition that she would be fired if she ever divulged it.

Detective McLaughlin skipped the logical first steps that such a letter might have set in motion. He did not consult the priest’s personnel file – which revealed nothing about his ever being in Florida. And he did not consult Monsignor John Quinn, the named originator of the story.

Instead, armed with the explosive Florida murder-molestation letter, McLaughlin set out to interview dozens of parents and their adolescent sons who had prior contacts with MacRae. Within a week, the entire community was in a state of alarm about the murderous lecher-priest in its midst.

Among those McLaughlin interviewed about Ms. Gale’s letter in 1988 were four young adult brothers, Jonathan, David, Thomas, and Jay Grover, the adopted sons of another state social worker, Ms. Patricia Grover, a colleague of Sylvia Gale. According to McLaughlin’s 72-page report, she vowed to question each of her sons about their interactions with MacRae. None of them reported knowing or suspecting anything of a criminal nature.

McLaughlin’s report on this investigation was filled with innuendo, but no substance. He repeatedly attributed untrue information about MacRae to unnamed “informants” and other “subjects.” Toward the end of the report he finally quoted a “Sgt. Smith” from an unnamed Florida police agency.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/04/tuckers_magnificent_statement_about_democrats_disenfranchising_americans.html

The words “epic” or “magnificent” are becoming cliched because they’re constantly used as clickbait headlines for things that are anything but “epic” or “magnificent.” That’s a shame because both words apply with their original force to Tucker Carlson’s opening monologue on Monday night. He brought both logic and passion to explaining that the Democrat party’s open borders policy is deliberately intended to import people who will vote for Democrats. In hindsight, what he said is completely obvious but too few people think about illegal immigration in the terms Tucker did. [Full transcript below.]

More must do so if we are to preserve our liberty-oriented, merit-based, constitutional republic.

The genesis for Tucker’s monologue was a discussion he had with Mark Steyn on Thursday, during which he noted, accurately, that the Democrats are encouraging illegal aliens to enter because they see them as a replacement for Americans who refuse to vote for Democrats. He explained, rightly, that this statement is not racist because the old voters who are being rendered obsolete through this illegal activity aren’t just whites. In many ways, the people most affected are Blacks. Every American who is a legal citizen, regardless of race, is affected.

The usual crowd of leftists instantly assaulted Tucker as a rabid white supremacist who should instantly be taken off the air. I wrote yesterday about how Jonathan Greenblatt, an Obama-era hack who is now head of the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism, tried to claim that Tucker was speaking in code to anti-Semitic white supremacists. Greenblatt’s statement was completely dishonest.

One of the things I like about Tucker, who is fortunate to have the weight of the Fox News company behind him, is that he cannot be bullied into backing down from his principles. Unsurprisingly, then, he came back swinging against this latest charge of white supremacy.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/04/12/indefinite-incarceration-for-protesters-with-wrong-politics/

Joe Biden’s Justice Department wants to keep Richard Barnett in jail—indefinitely.

The Arkansas man, photographed showboating inside House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office on January 6, has been behind bars for more than three months. Barnett occupied Pelosi’s office for six whole minutes; he absconded with a piece of mail and left her a note that read “Nancy, Bigo was here, you Bitch.”

The desk belonged to a Pelosi aide, not the speaker herself. Several reporters and photographers who also happened to be in Pelosi’s office at the very same time prompted Barnett to sit at the desk and “act natural” as they took a series of photos.

Death threats against Barnett’s family immediately started when a press photograph of Barnett went viral that afternoon; Pelosi’s daughter tweeted the picture right after it was taken. Upon his return home, Barnett met with FBI investigators without an attorney present, allowed for a search of his home, and turned himself in.

He was taken into custody on January 8 and charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct, and possession of a “deadly or dangerous weapon,” to wit, a walking stick that also can be used as a stun gun. He never used it.

A local judge authorized Barnett’s conditional release a week later but federal prosecutors, as they’ve done in many cases, immediately appealed to the chief judge of the D.C. district court, which is handling every Capitol breach case, to deny Barnett’s release.