Chad Felix Greene is Absolutely on Fire!

I've been meaning to follow him, but wasn't sure if he was the genuine article. But after seeing this thread, I'm gobsmacked!

And it's now available on the Thread Reader App (which hasn't been banned yet by Big Tech). 

Here, "Chad Felix Greene":

Every person on the left believes they just survived the parallel to the rise of Nazism in Germany and they defeated it.

They stopped it.

They believe all Republicans are 1950's white racists.

They feel empowered to live out their Civil Rights warrior fantasies. They imagine themselves toppling Jim Crow and the Confederacy and the Nazi army in one swoop and every powerful authority is on their side.

They aren't silencing conservative speech.

They are eradicating violence, terrorism, racism and hate from the internet.

*****

They are *gleeful* we are vulnerable and scared of our voice being suppressed.

They think we are the people in old 1950's photos angrily shouting at black school children.

We are not people to them.

We are symbols of what they feel morally driven to remove from the world.

The most powerful people who influence technology see us the same way.

We aren't customers.

We aren't users.

We aren't people with real lives and families and businesses.

We are a problem to be solved and they've been trying to figure out how for years and finally can do it.

The reason free market ideals no longer work is because the market is controlled by fewer and fewer people who dominate all options.

And those people are ideologically driven to eradicate from society all sources of hate.

Its a religious crusade. And we are the target.

*****

We cannot reason with them. They see our pleas for fairness like you would imagine a segregationist doing so.

They believe - believe - that once we are gone the internet and therefore society will be cleansed, free, peaceful and able to heal FROM US.

I say 'us' because we are not the one's defining our place in this world.

We aren't white supremacists or nazis or bigots or violent insurrectionists.

But the powerful have segregated society into good and bad thought and their strict and narrow worldview has placed us here.

We are innocent.

But it doesn't matter to them.

They *hate* what they imagine we are.

They cannot be persuaded otherwise. You cannot convince them *you* are a good person wrongly categorized.

The only people with influence have made up their minds and don't care to change it.

The *only* option is a steady Civil Rights movement to make it illegal, step by step, to do this to us.

They won't voluntarily stop. They think they are the heroes of the story fighting for the good of humanity.

Each remaining GOP leader MUST begin NOW.

Legal action.

Now.

*****

This means adding Political Affiliation to anti-discrimination law in red states.

We no longer have the luxury of arguing against the idea of protected classes.

We are now a marginalized group.

You need to accept that and behave as such.

This is a Civil Rights movement. If you think you are exempt from this because you didn't vote for Trump or you defend businesses with 'they have a right to' you are not paying attention.

*You* do not define your status.

Its imposed onto you.

Just like every prior targeted group.

You are a minority now. You are targeted for what you believe, who you are associated with and - be very clear - your existence. You cannot change that fact.

This has been applied to you.

Enough bickering over the philosophical nuances.

You are a marginalized minority now.

1st step is adding Political Affiliation to anti-discrimination AND hate crime laws because the left targets us for physical violence.

Create the legal framework to force businesses and corporations to defend their discrimination policies.

Force them to second guess them. We don't need the federal level to do this.

We just need a solid foundation to force their hand legally.

This will not stop until it is illegal and enforced to stop.

You will not shame them into acting ethically or fairly.

Any GOP who refuses to act must be voted out. Eventually we must stop treating the internet as a fad and gadget we can just toss aside and move on from.

We must have an internet bill of rights.

Legal rights protecting all people from censorship and banning for who they are or what they believe.

This is a new world.

*****

Again.

I understand the traditional free market arguments, but they no longer apply.

Businesses are behaving collectively as they did in the 1950's Jim Crow era and joining together to discriminate against a single group in order to protect themselves from popular outrage. You are now in that group.

Your entire online life.

Your online communication.

Your digital currency.

Your job.

Your healthcare.

Your access to the world.

Its not 'just Twitter.'

It can be taken from you for nothing more than a photo or an association.

You cannot compete. People who believe your skin color, your sexuality, your gender identity, your faith and the core beliefs that make up how you engage in politics place you in a category deserving of discrimination and violence *control* your life right now.

Understand this.

Stop fighting it.

It is time to relentlessly legally fight back.

We don't like to do this. But its our only option to regain liberty.

******

Every act of racism, seismic, discrimination, religious discrimination - all of it must be treated like an LGBT person suing over a wedding cake.

I cannot repeat this enough. The powerful left **will not** voluntarily stop this crusade.

We must use available legal efforts now to overwhelm them with lawsuits and legal challenges to stop all forms of discrimination they feel entitled to now.

Political Affiliation too. I am a gay/trans man and a Jew.

I know what discrimination and marginalization is.

I know what its like to be hated for nothing more than who you are.

This is it.

This is real.

 

Katie Pavlich Calls Out Michelle Obama (VIDEO)

My wife called out Michelle Obama, lol.

But here's the lovely Ms. Pavlich's take, at Fox News:

Jason Whitlock Decries the Elites' Sellout of the American People

Following-up from yesterday, "The Elites Have Unmasked Themselves and Declared War."

See Jason Whitlock, at the Blaze, "Ignoring the concerns of Trump supporters will destroy America":

Ashli Babbitt's blood is on the hands of Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg as much as, if not more than, on President Trump's. That's why Dorsey and Zuckerberg rushed to silence Trump on their respective platforms, Twitter and Facebook.

Political tension and violence are fomented, planned, and monetized on Silicon Valley's social media platforms. Wednesday's "violence" hit the wrong target. The Capitol is where global elites exchange cash for influence and privilege. It's where $150,000-a-year politicians become multimillionaires building cozy relationships with Big Tech lobbyists and American corporations looking to curry favor with China.

The Capitol is sacred ground for elites. The way you might revere a church edifice is the way millionaires and billionaires revere the Capitol.

The NBA multimillionaires said they played with "heavy hearts" Wednesday night after seeing the Capitol desecrated. They made twisted, illogical analogies between nonviolent civil disobedience and the rioting, looting, and violence that occurred in Minneapolis, Atlanta, Kenosha, and across this country all summer.

"It reminds me of what Dr. Martin Luther King has said, that there's two split different Americas," Boston Celtics star Jaylen Brown told reporters. "In one America, you get killed by sleeping in your car, selling cigarettes or playing in your backyard. And then in another America, you get to storm the Capitol and no tear gas, no massive arrests, none of that."

Brown is right. There are two different American realities. There's the false reality world created by and for elites and their groupies. In this world, progressive elites feign concern for poor black people by championing the cause of a tiny handful of black resisting criminal suspects harmed by white police officers tasked with subduing them. The elites have no interest in the thousands of black men and boys killed annually due to random gang, street, and drug violence. Those black lives do not matter. Progressive elites live inside a social media matrix where they call the Crips and the Bloods to protect them from the police.

The rest of America lives in an alternate universe driven, at least partially, by reality, facts, and common sense. We don't see the norms of Western Civilization as the root of all evil. We have no interest in disrupting the nuclear family. We don't think the storming of the Capitol is analogous to the months of looting, arson, shooting, rioting, and anarchy we watched throughout 2020.

Philadelphia 76ers coach Doc Rivers, a man I greatly respect, lives in a different reality than I do. His interpretation of Wednesday's chaos baffles me.

"No police dogs turned on people, no billy clubs hitting people. People peacefully being escorted out of the Capitol," Rivers told reporters Wednesday. "So it shows you can peacefully disperse a crowd. It basically proves a point about a privileged life in a lot of ways. I will say it, because I don't think a lot of people want to: Can you imagine [Wednesday], if those were all black people storming the Capitol, and what would have happened? That, to me, is a picture worth a thousand words for all of us to see, and probably something for us to reckon with again."

What is he talking about? We've watched buildings burned to the ground this summer. We've seen "protesters" prowling the streets of Atlanta with semi-automatic weapons. We've seen protesters berate and spit on police officers. David Dorn, a 77-year-old, black retired cop, was assassinated. Parts of Portland have been under attack from Antifa and Black Lives Matter for months.

There have been no dogs, no billy clubs.

We don't have to imagine how law enforcement would react to black, lawless protesters. It has aired on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News all summer. The police have been remarkably restrained.

The media, athletes, and celebrities have treated black protesters as heroes. Politicians have taken knees and worn kente cloth to show allegiance with black protesters. Every national sportscaster and head coach has gone along with the facade that police pose a greater threat to black men than black men. We're inundated with television commercials promoting Black Lives Matter. The NFL has celebrated criminals involved in drive-by shootings. A laundry list of media personalities have taken turns rationalizing every violent, lawless action taken by Antifa or Black Lives Matter. No one cares that George Floyd stuck a gun in a pregnant black woman's belly or that Jacob Blake sexually assaulted a black woman. The New York Times commissioned a group of black female reporters to rewrite American history to fit the narrative of the critical race theory taught at our academic institutions.

The concerns propagandized by the ministers of black victimhood are a high priority in American society. Sinners are excommunicated from their employment. There is so much money, fame, and adulation from joining the Church of Black Victimization that white people such as Shaun King and Rachel Dolezal have disavowed their natural heritage to identify as black.

A Trump supporter? He or she is an American pariah. A racist. A coon. An idiot. A sellout. Someone to be silenced or ignored.

Trump supporters will not go away quietly or peacefully. It's their country, too. Their concerns are legitimate. The lawmakers they chased to the basement of the Capitol sold out the American working-class man and woman...

RTWT.

Where's the Actual Incitement?

Did President Trump "incite" an "insurrection" against the government of the U.S.? 

Actually, no. 

But see Ed Driscoll, at Instapundit, "THAT’S DIFFERENT BECAUSE SHUT UP."

Ann Althouse is linked there, "The 7 most violence-inciting statements in Donald Trump's speech to the crowd on January 6th":

There are places where he clearly talked about a peaceful protest march. He says: "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." And: "So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue... So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue."

But here are the 7 most violent statements. Please, if you can find anything more violent or more related to the idea breaking into the Capitol and physically disrupting the proceedings, let me know, and I'll add it to the list. This is what I've found and have put in order from least to most violent:

7. We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.

6. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal…. We will not let them silence your voices.

5. The Republicans have to get tougher. You’re not going to have a Republican party if you don’t get tougher.

4. [W]e’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed, and we’re not going to stand for that.

3. We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. 2. We’re not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.

1. Together we are determined to defend and preserve government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Not violent, at all. 

More at Instapundit.

'The Associated Press reported the Capitol Police turned down offers of help to deal with pro-Trump protesters from not one but two law enforcement agencies, opting to treat Wednesday's rally as if it were a free speech demonstration...'

I saw the A.P. story earlier and tweeted it. 

I'm coming back to this now, because a Capitol Police officer was killed yesterday in the line of duty. 

At USA Today, "DC riots live updates: Capitol Police officer dies from injuries; FBI offers $50K reward for pipe bomb suspect info":

WASHINGTON — A U.S. Capitol Police officer died Thursday after being injured when supporters of President Donald Trump raided the Capitol building on Wednesday, bringing the total number of fatalities to five.

Brian D. Sicknick "was injured while physically engaging with protesters" on Wednesday, USCP said in a statement. He returned to his division office and collapsed, then was taken to a local hospital where he died Thursday evening.

"The death of Officer Sicknick will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch, the USCP, and our federal partners," the USCP said in a statement.

Sicknick had been with the USCP since July 2008, and most recently served in the department’s First Responders Unit, officials said in a statement. ...

Before sunrise Thursday, the lawn in front of the Capitol was nearly deserted and silent, a stark contrast from the cheering and chanting of Wednesday's massive crowd that eventually devolved into chaos.

Thursday showed little evidence of the pro-Trump mob that breached the U.S. Capitol, forcing the certification of President-elect Joe Biden's victory to be postponed in an attack that left four demonstrators dead.

The Washington Post reported several dozen people arrested Wednesday made first appearances in court Thursday.

Also Thursday, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, whose department was severely criticized for its flawed response to Wednesday's attack, resigned abruptly.

The Associated Press reported the Capitol Police turned down offers of help to deal with pro-Trump protesters from not one but two law enforcement agencies, opting to treat Wednesday's rally as if it were a free speech demonstration.

The lack of preparation and support allowed rioters to breach the Capitol building with little resistance, endangering legislators and resulting in a mob scene that sent shudders throughout the world.

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser was among several critics who called the police's actions “a failure.”

But "many others" (the story continues) --- meaning in particular the far-left cable network pundits --- claimed "racism" in the alleged "disparate" response between Wednesday's events and the D.C. protests following George Floyd's death last year, and this (of course) was evidence of the "systemic" injustices that privileged "white supremacist domestic terrorism" over Black Live Matter "peaceful protesters."

Now, apparently, Democrats think is the winning message, damn the "unity" agenda the president-elect has been proclaiming this past two months. 

And don't let Bowser off the hook either. According to the Twitter chatter today, she apparently told the D.C. National Guard that only "unarmed" units would be allowed at the Capitol, and should they need more firepower, they'd have to return to their barracks and come back with the needed firepower later. She's on video saying "the Metropolitan Police Department has been deployed to assist the U.S. Capitol Police ... in restoring order..."

As Stars and Stripes reported, "The initial 340 [National Guard] troops activated earlier this week were deployed without firearms or other weapons and without body armor."

And also seen on Twitter, "In a letter to federal officials Monday, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser urged federal law enforcement to have a light footprint for Wednesday’s protests, seeking to avoid the type of show of force that inflamed tense situations last year."

And according to this report at Politico, President Trump had authorized acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller to "take any necessary steps to support law enforcement..."

Great call, Muriel!

This country is totally FUBAR. (*Eye-roll.*)

Video of Shooting Death of Ashli Babbitt (GRAPHIC WARNING)

This is a point-blank video, and again, you have been warned. 

At Legal Insurrection, "Video of Shooting Death of Ashli Babbitt Raises Questions About Use of Deadly Force."

That video is posted to Twitter, which no doubt will be removed for violating the platform's ever-changing "terms of service."

Fortunately, for truth and posterity, copies of the video have been made, and hosted on non-Google platforms. 

See Law Officer, "Videos show shooting of Ashli Babbitt during Capitol crisis."

And to remind you of how leftists have politicized her death, just one quick search on Google and this is among the first three articles to pop up, at NBC News (where else?): "Woman killed in Capitol was Trump supporter who embraced conspiracy theories: Social media profiles connected to Ashli Babbitt were almost singularly focused on radical conservative topics and conspiracy theories."

They're smearing her, a dead woman who cannot stand up to defend herself against such typical leftists demonization. 

Shame. Shame. Shame. 

I personally wouldn't have stormed the Capitol building. But I wasn't there, so I can't say if this woman acted recklessly or thought she was doing her patriotic duty. 

Either way, it's a tragedy. 

She was an Air Force veteran. She was loved. The L.A. Times has some background, "Woman fatally shot in U.S. Capitol was a San Diego resident, family says":

Business records show Babbitt was the CEO of Fowler’s Pool Service & Supply Inc. in Spring Valley. Her husband is listed as the company’s chief financial officer.

In an email Wednesday evening, Babbitt’s ex-husband, Timothy McEntee, called her “a wonderful woman with a big heart and a strong mind.” McEntee said he and Babbitt were married from April 2005 until May 2019. Her Facebook page indicates she remarried that year.

“I am in a state of shock and feel absolutely terrible for her family,” McEntee wrote. “She loved America with all her heart. It’s truly a sad day.”

McEntee and Babbitt served together in the U.S. Air Force while married. McEntee wrote that he instantly recognized Babbitt when he saw a photo of the woman who was shot.

"[I] immediately knew it was her but was unaware she was in town so I initially had doubts because she lives in California,” McEntee wrote. “But [I] reached out to a friend and he said she was in town for the rally.”

Her Twitter account included a photo posted in September of her in a “We are Q” shirt in front of a harbor, with hashtags that included #TrumpBoatParade2020.

The post also included the initialism WWG1WGA — “Where we go one, we go all,” — used by followers of QAnon, which promotes baseless conspiracy theories.

Yes. Baseless. (*Eye-roll.*)

U.S. Capitol on Lockdown!

I've postponed even turning on the news this morning, but the first thing I see on CNN is the pro-Trump protests against the Electoral College count.

It's gonna be a long day in U.S. politics, considering the Georgia results last night. 

I'm praying no one gets killed. 

In any case, at the Hill, "Capitol placed on lockdown, buildings evacuated amid protests."

Check back for updates.

Added: 

Security personnel have drawn their weapons in an armed standoff at the door of the House floor, and Speaker Pelosi's office is literally "occupied"!

'Just think of Todd as a former — and current — Democratic Party operative, who gets quite cross when called on his leftwing bias, and it all makes sense...'

From Ed Discoll, at Instapundit, "CHUCK TODD MELTS DOWN: Liberal Media Scream: Smug Chuck Todd to senator, ‘I’ve had enough of hearing this!’"  

Will Trump Torpedo Republican Chances in Georgia?

We'll find out tomorrow, with luck, lol.

At the Cook Report, "One Day Out: Will Trump Torpedo Republican Chances in the Georgia Runoffs?"

RELATED: At LAT, "Georgia’s political change came fast but has deep roots," and NYT, "Georgia Is Getting More Blue. The Senate Races Will Tell How Much."

President Trump 'Could Ditch' Joe Biden's Inauguration

We'll see. I mean, it's not like "ditching" Biden's inauguration is going to bring down the American republic, despite the hysterical cries of the leftists everywhere.

At the Scotland Herald, "Donald Trump 'could ditch inauguration' with Turnberry trip'":

Speculation is mounting that US President Donald Trump could be planning to snub the inauguration of successor Joe Biden - by flying to Scotland.

President Trump has made no secret of his disdain for his election loss, and continues to dispute the result which saw his Democratic challenger elected to the White House by a record margin of votes.

Now Prestwick Airport has been told to expect the arrival of a US military Boeing 757 aircraft which has been occasionally used by Trump, on January 19 – the day before Mr Biden takes over.

This chimes with reports in the US that Trump will announce a 2024 re-election bid during a flight on one of the President’s official Air Force One planes on inauguration day.

Veteran NBC reporter Ken Dilanian tweeted: “Trump may announce for 2024 on inauguration day. Either way, he won’t attend the inauguration and does not plan to invite Biden to the White House or even call him.”

Every plane Trump flies in has a special call sign, including his own personal Boeing 757, which has the call sign Tyson 1.

Air traffic controllers receive details of the arrival of a plane with a US special call sign weeks in advance but are not told exactly which plane when the booking is made.

A source at Prestwick airport, who asked to remain anonymous, told the Sunday Post: “There is a booking for an American military version of the Boeing 757 on January 19, the day before the inauguration...

Still more.

I hope he does "announce for 2024," heh.

 

Hunter Biden’s Family Name Aided Deals With Foreign Tycoons

At WSJ, "Business dealings of Joe Biden’s son are at the center of a federal tax investigation and loom over the start of his presidency":

Hunter Biden ramped up business activities with European and Chinese tycoons as his father exited the vice presidency four years ago. For him it was a potential path to income; for the tycoons, the Biden family name promised to burnish their reputations.

The dealings got the younger Mr. Biden a discounted stake in a private-equity firm in China and consulting arrangements with a Romanian property magnate and overall allowed him to maintain a globe-trotting lifestyle, according to interviews, documents and communications reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. A Chinese energy tycoon gave Mr. Biden a 2.8-carat diamond, and entities linked to him wired nearly $5 million to Mr. Biden’s law firm, according to an investigation by Senate Republicans.

These arrangements now loom over President-elect Joe Biden. A federal criminal tax investigation into Hunter Biden’s business dealings is under way, with findings potentially trickling out in coming months. His business ties to well-connected people in China and other places could add to scrutiny of foreign-policy decisions taken by the Biden administration over possible conflicts of interest. All are likely to provide ammunition to Republicans.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), who has led the Senate Finance Committee whose Republican staff helped investigate Hunter Biden, has said he would continue to look into what he says are possible counterintelligence and criminal concerns related to Mr. Biden’s business dealings.

“Based on all the facts known to date, Joe Biden has a lot of explaining to do,” Mr. Grassley said recently. Hunter Biden has said he takes the tax investigation “very seriously” and is “confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately.” He declined to comment for this article and his lawyer, George Mesires, didn’t respond to questions. In 2019, Mr. Biden said he wouldn’t work with any foreign companies if his father were elected U.S. president. None of the Journal’s reporting found that Joe Biden was involved in his son’s business activities. The tax investigation doesn’t implicate the president-elect, according to people familiar with the matter. In a statement this month about the investigation, the president-elect said he is “deeply proud of his son.”

He told reporters Tuesday he had not and would not discuss the federal tax investigation with prospective attorney general candidates.

“The attorney general of the United States of America is not the president’s lawyer,” the president-elect said. “I will appoint someone who I expect to enforce the law as the law is written, not guided by me.”

Joe Biden also has previously said his family members won’t be involved in businesses that appear to create a conflict of interest and won’t have “a business relationship with anyone that relates to a foreign corporation or a foreign country.”

Some of Hunter Biden’s business deals appeared to go nowhere. Sometimes his contribution mainly consisted of making introductions to important people in business and government, according to people involved and documents.

Still, legal and consulting services he provided offered a way to generate income; the Senate Republicans’ report says the millions of dollars in wire transfers from entities linked to Shanghai energy entrepreneur Ye Jianming were described as payment for such services.

The tycoons who sought out Mr. Biden as a business partner were looking to build ties to the Washington establishment that Joe Biden inhabited for decades, and by doing so, smooth the way for major deals or ward off legal troubles, according to interviews, documents and communications. For businessmen in some countries, paying for introductions and getting close to people in power or their relatives is a normal part of doing business, and the son of a veteran American politician offered a potential trove of connections.

Mr. Ye “would say if you find a strong partner, then opportunities can flow just from this relationship,” said a former subordinate.

Mr. Biden, in an exchange about putting together a venture with Mr. Ye, pointed to the value of his family name: “Just happens that in this instance only one player holds the trump card and that’s me. May not be fair but it’s the reality because I’m the only one putting an entire family legacy on the line,” he wrote in a 2017 text message to an associate in the venture and viewed by the Journal.

A graduate of Yale Law School, Hunter Biden was for a period a registered lobbyist in Washington. He also worked in boutique investment and property development firms along with American partners who sometimes tried to raise capital among the newly well-heeled in the former Soviet Union and China.

Mykola Zlochevsky was looking to raise the standing of Ukraine’s Burisma Holdings in Washington when Hunter Biden joined its board in 2014.

President Trump and some Republican allies have tried over the past two years to draw attention to Hunter Biden’s business activities—an effort that took off as Joe Biden emerged as a likely presidential challenger.

A particular focus was Hunter Biden’s board seat with Ukrainian natural-gas company Burisma Holdings. When he joined the board in 2014, Burisma’s founder Mykola Zlochevsky was looking to raise the company’s standing in Washington, as he parried legal inquiries abroad and at home where the government was vowing to clean up corruption. Mr. Biden was paid roughly $50,000 a month from 2014 to 2019. For the first three years, then-Vice President Joe Biden served as the Obama administration’s point man for international anticorruption efforts in Ukraine.

Mr. Trump and his allies have alleged corruption by the Bidens. Mr. Trump’s request to Ukraine’s president in 2019 to announce an investigation into the Bidens figured into Mr. Trump’s impeachment; the GOP-controlled Senate ultimately acquitted him.

Joe and Hunter Biden denied any wrongdoing...

 Still more.

America the Sick

I disagree with this guy's take, or mostly, his ideological stance and one-sided blame on Trump, blah, blah...

But he makes a good point here, at Der Spiegel, "A Land in Decay: Where Did America Go Wrong?":

America knows it is sick. It is showing all the symptoms. There are doubts about the legitimacy of elections, and confidence in political institutions has crumbled. The media have abandoned or lost their role as impartial observers. The country's predominantly white police force continues to deploy misguided violence against a disillusioned and outraged Black population. There are armed militias on the streets and it's become almost impossible to voice an opinion without getting overwhelmed by hateful comments on social media. To top it all off is a president who refuses to concede defeat, a society that has been battered by a pandemic that can only be contained by way of solidarity...

There's still more at that top link, FWIW.

The Buck Stops With Barr

A great piece, from Kim Strassel, at WSJ, via Memeorandum, "The Weekend Interview: William Barr: ‘One Standard of Justice’":

The U.S. attorney general is meditating on one of his frustrations with the modern Justice Department: The outside world keeps moving faster; the wheels of justice ever more slowly. “Nobody wants to take responsibility anymore,” William Barr says with a hint of incredulity. “They wring their hands and push issues around the bureaucracy and trade memos for months.” His response: “Bring it to me! I’ll make the decision. That’s what I’m here for!”

If Mr. Barr, 70, dominated headlines over the past two years, it’s because he made a lot of tough calls. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s constitutionally dubious claims that President Trump committed obstruction of justice? No. An investigation of the 2016 Russia-collusion probe and the dismissal of charges against Mike Flynn ? Yes. New oversight of sensitive political investigations and surveillance of U.S. citizens? Yes. A criminal referral about Mr. Trump’s call to the Ukrainian president? No. Repeated demands—from the left and the right—for his department to engage in politics? No, no, no.

Consequential decisions have a way of annoying people—Democrats, Republicans, the staff, one’s boss—but Mr. Barr, who’d been attorney general before, from 1991-93, knew that going in. “I’m in a position in life where I can do the right thing and not really care about the consequences,” he told senators during his January 2019 confirmation hearing. In a 90-minute phone interview Tuesday—less than 24 hours after the announcement of his resignation, effective Dec. 23—he sounded his usual spirited self.

He reminds me why he took the job in the first place: “The Department of Justice was being used as a political weapon” by a “willful if small group of people,” who used the claim of collusion with Russia in an attempt to “topple an administration,” he says. “Someone had to make sure that the power of the department stopped being abused and that there was accountability for what had happened.” Mr. Barr largely succeeded, in the process filling a vacuum of political oversight, reimposing norms, and resisting partisan critics on both sides.

Mr. Barr describes an overarching objective of ensuring that there is “one standard of justice.” That, he says, is why he appointed U.S. Attorney John Durham to investigate the FBI’s 2016 Crossfire Hurricane probe. “Of course the Russians did bad things in the election,” he says. “But the idea that this was done with the collusion of the Trump campaign—there was never any evidence. It was entirely made up.” The country deserved to know how the world’s premier law-enforcement agency came to target and spy on a presidential campaign.

Mr. Barr says Mr. Durham’s appointment should not have been necessary. Mr. Mueller’s investigation should have exposed FBI malfeasance. Instead, “the Mueller team seems to have been ready to blindly accept anything fed to it by the system,” Mr. Barr says, adding that this “is exactly what DOJ should not be.”

Mr. Durham hasn’t finished his work, to the disappointment of many Republicans, including the president, who were hoping for a resolution—perhaps including indictments—before the election. Mr. Barr notes that Mr. Durham had to wait until the end of 2019 for Inspector General Michael Horowitz to complete his own investigation into the FBI’s surveillance. Then came the Covid lockdowns, which suspended federal grand juries for six months. Mr. Durham could no longer threaten to subpoena uncooperative witnesses.

“I understand people’s frustration over the timing, and there are prosecutors who break more china, so to speak,” Mr. Barr says. “But they don’t necessarily get the results.” Mr. Durham will, and is making “significant progress,” says Mr. Barr, who disclosed this month that he had prior to the election designated Mr. Durham a special counsel, to provide assurance that his team would be able to finish its work. The new designation also assures that Mr. Durham will produce a report to the attorney general. Mr. Barr believes “the force of circumstances will ensure it goes public” even under the new administration.

The biggest news from Mr. Durham’s probe is what he has ruled out. Mr. Barr was initially suspicious that agents had been spying on the Trump campaign before the official July 2016 start date of Crossfire Hurricane, and that the Central Intelligence Agency or foreign intelligence had played a role. But even prior to naming Mr. Durham special counsel, Mr. Barr had come to the conclusion that he didn’t “see any sign of improper CIA activity” or “foreign government activity before July 2016,” he says. “The CIA stayed in its lane.”

Mr. Barr says Mr. Durham’s probe is now tightly focused on “the conduct of Crossfire Hurricane, the small group at the FBI that was most involved in that,” as well as “the activities of certain private actors.” (Mr. Barr doesn’t elaborate.) Mr. Durham has publicly stated he’s not convinced the FBI team had an adequate “predicate” to launch an investigation. In September, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified a document showing that the FBI was warned in 2016 that the Hillary Clinton campaign might be behind the “collusion” claims.

Mr. Barr says Mr. Durham is also looking at the January 2017 intelligence-community “assessment” that claimed Russia had “developed a clear preference” for Mr. Trump in the 2016 election. He confirms that most of the substantive documents related to the FBI’s investigation have now been made public.

The attorney general also hopes people remember that orange jumpsuits aren’t the only measure of misconduct. It frustrates him that the political class these days frequently plays “the criminal card,” obsessively focused on “who is going to jail, who is getting indicted.”

The American system is “designed to find people innocent,” Mr. Barr notes. “It has a high bar.” One danger of the focus on criminal charges is that it ends up excusing a vast range of contemptible or abusive behavior that doesn’t reach the bar. The FBI’s use “of confidential human sources and wiretapping to investigate people connected to a campaign was outrageous,” Mr. Barr says—whether or not it leads to criminal charges.

Also outrageous, in Mr. Barr’s view, was the abuse of power by both the FBI and the Mueller team toward Mr. Trump’s associates, especially Mr. Flynn...

Keep reading.

Joe Biden's Wife, Soon to Be First Lady, Should Drop the 'Dr. Jill Biden' Ruse

Heh.

This is hilarious, at WSJ, "Is There a Doctor in the White House? Not if You Need an M.D.":

Madame First Lady—Mrs. Biden—Jill—kiddo: a bit of advice on what may seem like a small but I think is a not unimportant matter. Any chance you might drop the “Dr.” before your name? “Dr. Jill Biden” sounds and feels fraudulent, not to say a touch comic. Your degree is, I believe, an Ed.D., a doctor of education, earned at the University of Delaware through a dissertation with the unpromising title “Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students’ Needs.” A wise man once said that no one should call himself “Dr.” unless he has delivered a child. Think about it, Dr. Jill, and forthwith drop the doc.

I taught at Northwestern University for 30 years without a doctorate or any advanced degree. I have only a B.A. in absentia from the University of Chicago—in absentia because I took my final examination on a pool table at Headquarters Company, Fort Hood, Texas, while serving in the peacetime Army in the late 1950s. I do have an honorary doctorate, though I have to report that the president of the school that awarded it was fired the year after I received it, not, I hope, for allowing my honorary doctorate. During my years as a university teacher I was sometimes addressed, usually on the phone, as “Dr. Epstein.” On such occasions it was all I could do not to reply, “Read two chapters of Henry James and get into bed. I’ll be right over.”

I was also often addressed as Dr. during the years I was editor of the American Scholar, the quarterly magazine of Phi Beta Kappa. Let me quickly insert that I am also not a member of Phi Beta Kappa, except by marriage. Many of those who so addressed me, I noted, were scientists. I also received a fair amount of correspondence from people who appended the initials Ph.D. to their names atop their letterheads, and have twice seen PHD on vanity license plates, which struck me as pathetic. In contemporary universities, in the social sciences and humanities, calling oneself Dr. is thought bush league.

The Ph.D. may once have held prestige, but that has been diminished by the erosion of seriousness and the relaxation of standards in university education generally, at any rate outside the sciences. Getting a doctorate was then an arduous proceeding: One had to pass examinations in two foreign languages, one of them Greek or Latin, defend one’s thesis, and take an oral examination on general knowledge in one’s field. At Columbia University of an earlier day, a secretary sat outside the room where these examinations were administered, a pitcher of water and a glass on her desk. The water and glass were there for the candidates who fainted. A far cry, this, from the few doctoral examinations I sat in on during my teaching days, where candidates and teachers addressed one another by first names and the general atmosphere more resembled a kaffeeklatsch. Dr. Jill, I note you acquired your Ed.D. as recently as 15 years ago at age 55, or long after the terror had departed...

Too good, lol. 

And the fallout (the inevitable leftist hissy-fit), at the Wrap, "Wall Street Journal Slammed as Sexist for Op-Ed Calling Jill Biden ‘Kiddo’ and Urging Her to Drop Doctor Title."

George Gascón, New Los Angeles District Attorney, Brings His Foot Down

Gascón's a real fifth column asshole. 

At LAist, "LA's New DA George Gascón Ushers In Sweeping Changes, Less Punitive Approach to Crime."

Erick Erickson Just Wow!

Erickson's got a big "substack" piece up, and it's a revelation, dang, "How the F— Am I the Sane One?":

I used to be a super political animal and now I am less so and find I am surrounded by people who have become more political. The 24/7 news cycle, social media, the atrophication of in-person social networks, the political demands resulting from a small base of persuadable voters turning America into an “us v them” society, the realization that much of the media really does hate conservatives and Christians — it has all turned into a perfect storm of polarization, politicization, and theological supplementation. As I was disentangling from a lot of it, a lot of people were getting tangled up in it.

I stepped back and realized so little of it does matter and so little of it does change and a lot of people stepped forward for change they could believe in or change from that. But the reality is neither side is really changing much in Washington anymore.

Now I get yelled out by both sides — from the one for not going down the stolen election rabbit hole or sufficiently genuflecting and from the other for still actually being a Christian conservative. It was a rude awaking for some new followers to find out I actually really do believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God and yes, transgenderism is a mental issue and Ellen whatshername can call herself whatever she wants, but I won’t be bullied into thinking it is normal, healthy, or right.

On the other side, I have a lot of people yelling at me for refusing to accept the election was stolen. Frankly, I don’t even think the Trump team really believes it. His lawyers sure as hell don’t or they wouldn’t have screwed up so may cases with late filings, missing paperwork, missing fees, and erroneous affidavits. I know of a call wherein they told some folks I am very familiar with that they really were just going to scream and holler and refuse to concede. It is all payback for 2016. They’ve lost about 50 lawsuits and in their latest, in state court in Georgia, they forgot to pay the court filing fees and fill out the right paperwork. That got their lawsuit thrown out.

That’s not even considering the batshit crazy lawsuit from Sidney Powell and her insane claims. I’m sorry some people take that stuff seriously. I’m sorry some people really believe Ware County, Georgia had machines seized. I’m sorry there are up and coming grifters on the right who don’t really believe it but get clicks, followers, and money by convincing you that they do. I’m sorry some people will take at face value the claims of some without thinking through or seeking rebuttal.

I’m really concerned with the crazy on my side, or at least what should be my side. I’m not even sure I have a side anymore. I just tell people I’m a conservative who thinks the GOP has failed on the debt and a bunch of issues and the Democrats are going full bore socialist secularists who’ll eventually get their own Mao and deny it while trying to silence people like me. I’m a Christian who thinks a lot of Christians have turned politics into religion. I’m a husband who wants to take care of my wife. I’m a dad who just wants to raise my kids to love Jesus and improve their community.

It’d be far easier for me, as a conservative talk radio show host to just get on the crazy train and tell you all exactly what you want to hear even though it is not true even though you are epistemically convinced it is true. It’d be far easier and less stressful and more financially lucrative for me to sound like everyone else on the right, right now.

But I think it would be wrong...

Still more.

 

After 2020 Losses, Some Democrats Question Party’s Health-Care Focus

Didn't some former (infamous) political advisor proclaim, "It's the economy, stupid"? 

Well, that infamous person then was a Democrat and the stupid thing now is the Biden 2020 campaign (and all the stupid Squad-type associated losers).

At WSJ, "Some former candidates and strategists say Democrats should have focused more on people who were losing their jobs and struggling to pay rent":

After suffering losses in congressional races across the country, some Democrats are pushing the party to re-evaluate its focus on health care and prioritize the economy ahead of two key Senate races in Georgia.

Health care was the most-mentioned issue across all Democratic presidential and Senate television ads, airing nearly 1.5 million times, in the 2020 election cycle, according to data from political ad tracker Kantar/CMAG. Democrats made defending the Affordable Care Act a top issue in Supreme Court confirmation hearings weeks before the election and promised repeatedly on the campaign trail to protect the law.

Democrats took the House majority in 2018 after centering their campaigns on the Trump administration’s efforts to chip away at the health law. But after the party lost multiple House seats and underperformed in several Senate races this year, some former candidates and strategists who worked on 2020 campaigns say Democrats should have focused more on people who were losing their jobs and struggling to pay rent during the pandemic.

“I think that the message needs to shift more towards the economy,” said Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, who lost her race in November in a Miami-Dade County district that swung toward President Trump after voting overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

“There’s a lot of fear that many people here will not be able to get back to work, that they don’t know where they’re going to be able to find their next paycheck,” she said.

Following the election, Ms. Mucarsel-Powell wrote an opinion column that in part argued Democrats need to focus on the economy to win back support among Florida Latinos. Democratic lawmakers have also squabbled in private calls over what policies to run on.

President-elect Joe Biden won after campaigning heavily against what he described as Mr. Trump’s mismanagement of the pandemic, which has killed more than 276,000 people in the U.S. Mr. Biden said getting the virus under control was necessary for businesses and schools to get back to normal operations and to rebuild the economy. He made other economic promises, such as raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour and forgiving some student-loan debt, but they were not as prominent in the general-election campaign.

Chris Meagher, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, said the party’s messaging was successful: “We took back the House in 2018, we continue to have the majority in 2020 and we beat an incumbent president on that message.”

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll the month before the election found the economy was the most important issue to voters, followed by the coronavirus and health care. Voters said they trusted Republicans most to deal with the economy, while they gave Democrats the lead on health care. In Georgia, where two runoff races will decide the majority in the Senate, Democratic candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock have brought up the virus repeatedly in their ads in recent weeks and tried to address both health care and economic concerns related to the pandemic.

Representatives for their campaigns said they are trying to balance both messages.

“Especially in the throes of this pandemic, you really can’t shortchange either one of those ideas,” said Howard Franklin, an Atlanta-based Democratic strategist, who said more Democrats need to intertwine the health-care and economic messages.

Brad Woodhouse, executive director of the health-care-focused Protect Our Care, said his group’s surveys have shown coronavirus relief as the top issue for voters. He said protecting people with pre-existing conditions and the Affordable Care Act are “not as resonant at this very minute,” though he said Democrats can still link those issues to their response to the pandemic.

In addition to the pandemic, Democrats campaigned on a lawsuit from GOP-led states seeking to invalidate the 2010 health law. The Supreme Court heard arguments Nov. 10 and a decision is expected before June. After health care and coronavirus, jobs and unemployment was the No. 3 issue in Democratic ads, while it was the second-most-mentioned issue in Republican ads.

Health care was the top issue mentioned in Republican ads as well, as they criticized Democratic candidates for a push in the progressive wing of the party to end private insurance and extend Medicare to all Americans. Mr. Biden and many other Democrats didn’t support that, instead backing an expansion of Obamacare by adding a public-insurance option.

Kansas state Sen. Barbara Bollier, a former anesthesiologist who lost her race for the U.S. Senate, said it didn’t matter that she opposes Medicare for All—people said she supported it anyway...

Still more.

Rania Khalek on Biden's Cabinet

Ms. Rania's further to the kooked-out left than Max Blumenthal, but she's a killer performance artist, and hot. 

The 4-Year-Long Campaign Against Trump: Infographic

At Zero Hedge.

Thanksgiving Pardon for Retired United States Army Lieutenant General Michael Flynn

Leftists destroyed this man's life as a political vendetta. He was convicted on a "process" crime with no substantial underlying linkage to the allegations of electoral collusion with the Russians. 

Now he's received a presidential pardon, but how does someone rebuild one's life --- a life of patriotism and exemplary national service --- after a diabolical ideological smear campaign like this?

Thank goodness for President Trump. 

Background at NPR, "Trump Pardons Michael Flynn, Who Pleaded Guilty to Lying About Russia Contact, and at NYT (with fear and trepidation, lol), "Trump’s Pardon of Flynn Signals Prospect of a Wave in His Final Weeks in Office." 

And for the analysis, see Grim's Hall, "Michael Flynn Pardoned":

It is my Great Honor to announce that General Michael T. Flynn has been granted a Full Pardon. Congratulations to @GenFlynn and his wonderful family, I know you will now have a truly fantastic Thanksgiving!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 25, 2020

In a particularly grueling miscarriage of justice, retired general Michael Flynn had to be pardoned for a crime of which he was innocent. Investigated by the FBI at the behest of President Obama, who decided for some reason that Flynn was a Russian spy, Flynn was cleared of all charges as a result of the investigation. The FBI closed the case. 

He was prosecuted anyway by a politicized Department of Justice, which nevertheless failed to produce the only piece of evidence it allegedly had against him. That evidence would have been the original "302" form showing that the FBI agents who interviewed him thought that he'd lied to them -- about a case in which the FBI had already cleared him. No such 302 was ever produced, allegedly being lost, but we do have one that we happen to know was edited long after the fact by disgraced liar and political agent Peter Strzok. We know this because he discussed it in unencrypted text messages with his lover, also-married disgraced former prosecutor Lisa Page. 

After a financially ruinous prosecution in which the FBI/DOJ produced almost none of the exculpatory evidence that the law requires them to produce -- including the record of the investigation that completely cleared him on all charges -- Flynn's sorry lawyers convinced him to plead guilty. This was done in such a way that the DOJ and his sorry lawyers (perhaps motivated by one of their partners, a former Obama attorney general) made an illegal deal to hide the agreement not to prosecute Flynn's son from the judge! Not only did the judge lack the information he needed to discern whether the guilty plea was coerced, anyone against whom Flynn later might have testified as a result of the deal would have been denied their constitutional right to know of the deal so they could raise it as a defense against the value of his testimony. 

That judge -- a personal friend of Obama's, it turns out -- wasn't upset about the fact that the law firm and the DOJ conspired to hide these facts from him in violation of the law. His ire was for Flynn, whom he accused of selling out his country even though the DOJ had never even attempted to charge Flynn with that. What they charged him with was perjury for "lying" to the FBI (in the vanished 302), and a paperwork violation for which the FBI investigation had already cleared him. 

(They cleared him of the FARA violation because he had in fact filed paperwork with the government under another act, on the advice of lawyers he hired specifically to help him meet the legal reporting requirements -- thus, he had not tried to hide his lobbying work for a NATO ally, and clearly they could not s how criminal intent. DOJ knew all of that and made him plead guilty to it anyway, if he wanted them not to send his son to prison on trumped-up charges too.) 

Then we spent a year while Flynn's new lawyer, Sidney Powell, managed to get all the exculpatory information illegally hidden from him in the first place. None of it convinced the judge one bit to let Flynn withdraw the coerced guilty plea, nor to accept the DOJ's determination that it should probably actually drop those baseless charges after all. Ordered to drop the charges by the DC Court of Appeals in a three-judge ruling, the judge instead sought en banc approval to continue the case. He was granted it, provided he would dispose of the matter with "dispatch." That was now several months ago, and instead of disposing of the case he has been dragging it out towards an obvious intent to sentence Flynn in spite of his innocence. 

What this case shows is how completely distorted our system has become...

Still more.