But the 51 former “intelligence” officials who cast doubt on The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop stories in a public letter really were just desperate to get Joe Biden elected president. And more than a year later, even after their Deep State ⁷⁷⁷⅞ has been shown again and again to be a lie, they refuse to own up to how they undermined an election.
The officials, including CNN pundit and professional fabricator James Clapper — a man who was nearly charged for perjury for lying to Congress — signed a letter saying that the laptop “has the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper claimed The Post’s Hunter Biden exposé was a “a Russian information operation.”
What proof did they have? By their own admission, none. “We do not know if the emails . . . are genuine or not,” the letter said. They’re just “suspicious.” Why? Because they hurt Biden’s campaign, that’s evidence enough.
Keep in mind this was written Oct. 19, 2020, five days after The Post published its first story. Neither Joe Biden nor Hunter Biden had denied the story, they simply deflected questions. Didn’t these security experts think that if this was disinformation, the Biden campaign would have yelled to the heavens that the story was false?
Meanwhile, though the letter was advertised as being signed by people who worked “for presidents of both political parties,” a majority of the officials were Democrats.
Politico picked up the letter and ran the false headline “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.” That headline is still online today, even though the letter clearly says they don’t know if it’s Russian disinformation.
That headline was tweeted out by legions of Democrats, including current White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki, as proof that it was all a con. That tweet also is still up despite being proven false.
Thus pure speculation by a group of biased officials became gospel among the media. This was “fake news,” and could be safely ignored.
Keep in mind that Twitter already had banned The New York Post a few days before. The rationale was that this was “hacked materials,” even though it wasn’t — and Twitter had no evidence to think it was. A Facebook official, meanwhile, said it wasn’t going to allow the sharing of The Post’s story until it was “fact checked” by a third party — a check that never happened.
Thus, Big Tech, former government officials, and the media conspired together to bury a story.
No, not just bury — create a false narrative that flipped the script to make Joe Biden the victim of a conspiracy.
In short, they peddled online disinformation to sway an election.
No one actually proved The Post’s reporting was wrong. Media outlets showed up at the doorstep of the computer repairman who had gotten the laptop, and he confirmed it. People who exchanged e-mails with Hunter Biden attested to their accuracy in the days and weeks that followed.
Only after the election was safely over did Hunter tacitly admit the laptop was his. Last year, a Politico reporter confirmed that the laptop’s materials were real. And now, the coup de grace: The Times said it’s “authenticated” material from the laptop.
There have been no consequences. Twitter and Facebook still censor information based on political bias, and Congress takes no action. Many of the letter signers continue to be used as “experts” by the media. Clapper, for instance, spent years on CNN calling Donald Trump a “Russian asset,” a lie invented and fed by political operatives of Hillary Clinton. He’s still there. Guess accuracy is not a condition of employment.
Do the officials who tried to flip the 2020 election feel any regret for their actions? The Post reached out to those who signed the letter. Most would not answer the question. A few doubled-down, including Clapper. No remorse. No shame. And no apologies:
Mike Hayden, former CIA director, now analyst for CNN: Didn’t respond.
Jim Clapper, former director of national intelligence, now CNN pundit: “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.”
Leon Panetta, former CIA director and defense secretary, now runs a public policy institute at California State University: Declined comment.
John Brennan, former CIA director, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didn’t respond.
Thomas Fingar, former National Intelligence Council chair, now teaches at Stanford University: Didn’t respond.
Rick Ledgett, former National Security Agency deputy director, now a director at M&T Bank: Didn’t respond.
John McLaughlin, former CIA acting director, now teaches at Johns Hopkins University: Didn’t respond.
Michael Morell, former CIA acting director, now at George Mason University: Didn’t respond.
Mike Vickers, former defense undersecretary for intelligence, now on board of BAE Systems: Didn’t respond.
Doug Wise, former Defense Intelligence Agency deputy director, teaches at University of New Mexico: Didn’t respond.
Nick Rasmussen, former National Counterterrorism Center director, now executive director, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism: Didn’t respond.
Russ Travers, former National Counterterrorism Center acting director: “The letter explicitly stated that we didn’t know if the emails were genuine, but that we were concerned about Russian disinformation efforts. I spent 25 years as a Soviet/Russian analyst. Given the context of what the Russians were doing at the time (and continue to do — Ukraine being just the latest example), I considered the cautionary warning to be prudent.”
Andy Liepman, former National Counterterrorism Center deputy director: “As far as I know I do [stand by the statement] but I’m kind of busy right now.”
John Moseman, former CIA chief of staff: Didn’t respond.
Larry Pfeiffer, former CIA chief of staff, now senior advisor to The Chertoff Group: Didn’t respond.
Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didn’t respond.
Rodney Snyder, former CIA chief of staff: Didn’t respond.
Glenn Gerstell, former National Security Agency general counsel: Didn’t respond.
David Priess, former CIA analyst and manager: “Thank you for reaching out. I have no further comment at this time.”
Pam Purcilly, former CIA deputy director of analysis: Didn’t respond.
Marc Polymeropoulos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.
Chris Savos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.
John Tullius, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
David A. Vanell, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.
Kristin Wood, former CIA senior intelligence officer, now non-resident fellow, Harvard: Didn’t respond.
David Buckley, former CIA inspector general: Didn’t respond.
Nada Bakos, former CIA analyst and targeting officer, now senior fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute: Didn’t respond.
Patty Brandmaier, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
James B. Bruce, former CIA senior intelligence office: Didn’t respond.
David Cariens, former CIA intelligence analyst: Didn’t respond.
Janice Cariens, former CIA operational support officer: Didn’t respond.
Paul Kolbe, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.
Peter Corsell, former CIA analyst: Didn’t respond.
Brett Davis, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
Roger Zane George, former national intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
Steven L. Hall, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
Kent Harrington, former national intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.
Don Hepburn, former national security executive, now president of Boanerges Solutions LLC: “My position has not changed any. I believe the Russians made a huge effort to alter the course of the election . . . The Russians are masters of blending truth and fiction and making something feel incredibly real when it’s not. Nothing I have seen really changes my opinion. I can’t tell you what part is real and what part is fake, but the thesis still stands for me, that it was a media influence hit job.”
Timothy D. Kilbourn, former dean of CIA’s Kent School of Intelligence Analysis: Didn’t respond.
Ron Marks, former CIA officer: Didn’t respond.
Jonna Hiestand Mendez, former CIA technical operations officer, now on board of the International Spy Museum: “I don’t have any comment. I would need a little more information.”
Emile Nakhleh, former director of CIA’s Political Islam Strategic Analysis Program, now at University of New Mexico: “I have not seen any information since then that would alter the decision behind signing the letter. That’s all I can go into. The whole issue was highly politicized and I don’t want to deal with that. I still stand by that letter.”
Gerald A. O’Shea, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.
Nick Shapiro, former CIA deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to the director: Didn’t respond.
John Sipher, former CIA senior operations officer: Declined to comment.
Stephen Slick, former National Security Council senior director for intelligence programs: Didn’t respond.
Cynthia Strand, former CIA deputy assistant director for global issues: Didn’t respond.
Greg Tarbell, former CIA deputy executive director: Didn’t respond.
ADVERTISEMENT
David Terry, former National Intelligence Collection Board chairman: Couldn’t be reached.
Greg Treverton, former National Intelligence Council chair, now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: “I’ll pass. I haven’t followed the case recently.”
Winston Wiley, former CIA director of analysis: Couldn’t be reached.
Steve Deuce: we’re not a nation of laws but of wills.
DEMS Set New Standard: If they can sue over this so-called ‘lie’ by Fox broadcasters then people can sue all day for innumerable DEFINITE lies from Russian Disinformation to you name it. CNN, MSNBC and the like are now set up for an onslaught of lawsuits based on this Dominion lawsuit.
Dominion- Dem Shakedown of FOX-GOP:
Just because the Dominion lawsuit Was settled doesn’t mean Dominion Voting machines weren’t corrupted during the 2020 election. As usual, The dems and dominion had the media and courts on their side so GOP-Fox was never able to fairly prove their side. Unlike in 2016 when the Dems and media were all over the Trump win calling the 2016 election ‘rigged and illegitimate .’ No doubt Soros, the Dems et al fully supported Dominion in this lawsuit. Why do Dems get away with it but not GOP? Call it Goliath vs David @dbongino for 21 min segment on Dems decrying Voting machines, and Time Mag : CNN admits to the ‘Secret History of a Shadow Campaign ‘ 2017?
Settlement is chump change for Fox and they’re not admitting guilt…just something the lawsuit-happy Dems think they can hang Trump on. Losers all the way around. Anyone who knows this stuff knows its a farce. GoP ratherbdonconatructive things rather than spend their lives in courts. And Dominion didn’t really want to go thru either, just a little nothing power play for them/Dems
How quickly and conveniently the Dems forget 2016 (and 2002 when they called Trump’s WIN ‘ illegitimate and rigged’ > https://mikeonline.com/montage-of-democrats-denying-2016-presidential-election-results/ And it’s not like c n n and m s n b c have never been sued and lost to, e.g., conservatives Rittenhouse and Sandman
DONT LET DEMS UNFAIRLY OVERPOWER FOX -Fox DID NOT Purposely Try to Defame Dominion voting systems. Dominion is backed by Dems and Dem media who are trying to turn ‘Fake news’ tables on Fox.
Hope Fox won’t ‘settle’ and thereby make Fox look no different than fake news mainstream media. We’re now in a position where anybody with enough money can sue somebody and try to put them out of business. Stand up Fox! Or this will be a big blow to FREE SPEECH and conservative media crafted by corrupt , big money Dem media backers. Those quoted Tucker Carlson texts were out of context at moments of frustration, admitted by Carlson or Trump would have never sat down again with Carlson.
This is definitely worth your time to read! You may agree or disagree. Your choice.
This editorial is right on the button. It tells how he got where he did and how the country is now suffering.
“When injustice becomes law, then resistance becomes duty.” Thomas Jefferson
Finally, the Washington Post speaks out on Obama! This is very brutal, timely though. As I’m sure you know, the Washington Post newspaper has a reputation for being extremely liberal. So the fact that its editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama in its newspaper makes this a truly amazing event and a news story in and of itself. At last, the truth about our President and his obvious socialist agenda are starting to trickle through the protective wall built around him by our liberal media.
A WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE ABOUT OBAMA
By Matt Patterson (columnist – Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job? Imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberal Dom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass – held to a lower standard – because of the color of his skin.
Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) “non-threatening,” all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon – affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow
Liberals don’t care if these minority students fail; liberals aren’t around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self-esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin – that’s affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn’t racism, then nothing is.
And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.
And what about his character?
Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our past president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
And now Obama is back, with his hand up Biden’s ass moving his demented mouth…….. the USA is in real trouble…..
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama’s oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people – conservatives included – ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that’s when he has his Teleprompters in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it’s all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.
And what about his character?
Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
Join an exclusive market research program! Share your opinion and internet usage activity to help brands create better products. https://afflat3e1.com/lnk.asp?o=21148&c=918277&a=145549&k=0D198C6BE009F60E6ED8B0450A3B217E&l=22084
I feel sorry for people who would rather spend hours watching a ‘show trial’ Where a one sided ‘star chamber’ would accuse Trump and his supporters for ‘killing’ a police officer (initials ‘BS’ which is exactly What this was), where a well-known habitual liar (whose initials ‘ AS’ could use another S ) is trotted out for a third time in five years to continue his longtime vendetta in lambasting Trump at any cost while purposely eliminating Trump’s words to protestors to go ‘PEACEFULLY and patriotically’, but worst of all, a complicit media that would cover another sham hearing in prime time with not a drop of evidence showing Trump orchestrated the January 6 riots (no mention that it was Trump who called in advance for National Guard to protect the capitol-an order that was ignored repeatedly by Pelosi And D.C. mayor Bowser). The same media would rather cover this McCarthy-istic programming than cover real news like the assassination attempt on New York congressman Lee Zeldan and imminent release from jail without bond of the accused attacker. (Such coverage might have suppressed coverage of ‘the hearing’)
I hope that if the GOP takes the house this Fall we might finally see a legitimate two-sided hearing(s) that the media can’t obfuscate. Otherwise, it’s same old devisive politics and media run amok like never before in my long lifetime.
I grew up in an era when media automatically covered both or all sides of news stories . In fact , I remember my journalism teacher getting after me if I didn’t interview people on both sides of stories . (I remember how this helped get me out of my shyness.) Walter Cronkite, despite being very liberal in his private life, was one of the last ‘fair and balanced’ journalists. When he left us news coverage began to spiral down to the same Russian-style news propaganda for which we used to criticize the communists in the 1950s
Following the Kennedy an MLK assassinations, their became a void in leadership with failing Presidents like Johnson and Nixon and the media , perpetuated by My own generation’ s new anti-establishment, liberal values, seemed to take over the power void as journalism became partisan politics- and now its been that way for over 50 years with no sign of change. My journalism teacher Mrs. MURPHY as well as Walter Cronkite- and even Tim Russert- must be spinning in their graves.
Where were we last night? At a much more enjoyable, a-politcal, timeless music concert, listening to the ageless Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons at the classic San Jose Civic Auditorium. The only mention of politics this night was Valli’s casual aside that he didn’t care much for government intrusion of any kind.
Maybe Victor David Hansen is correct in his recent assessment on the ‘death of wisdom.’ > https://roadtosuccess.us/victor-davis-hanson-joe-biden-and-the-destruction-of-wisdom/
There used to be an agreed-on body of wisdom, which both Left and Right, Republicans and Democrats, generally accepted. Heated arguments and invective centered on implementations and methods of solving problems, which at least both sides agreed were problems. Both ideologies accepted a common core of wisdom, despite their radical differences in interpreting it. https://thenewamericanist.com/victor-davis-hanson-joe-biden-and-the-destruction-of-wisdom/
Victor Davis Hanson: Joe Biden And The Destruction Of Wisdom
✪ The Biden regime is decoupled from both the past and reality, and quite capable of destroying Americans’ lives as they have known them…
There used to be an agreed-on body of wisdom, which both Left and Right, Republicans and Democrats, generally accepted. Heated arguments and invective centered on implementations and methods of solving problems, which at least both sides agreed were problems. Both ideologies accepted a common core of wisdom, despite their radical differences in interpreting it.
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and especially Biden’s strange cabinet of loud Jacobin amateurs, reject the very hallowed knowledge upon which civilization is based. In that sense the public has begun to recognize them as nihilist and anarchist. Nearly two out of three Americans in some polls hold unfavorable views of the Biden Administration. They fear that it is decoupled from both the past and reality, and quite capable of destroying their lives as they have known them.
Nuke Nuttiness
Since late August 1949, a consensus emerged that nuclear powers, for good or evil, were treated differently in matters of global tensions than non-nuclear powers, given the chance of a nuclear conflagration. Arcane rules, but rules, nonetheless, grew up in the Cold War between the Soviet Union, China, the United States, Britain, France and a few other nuclear states about the trip wires surrounding conventional conflicts.
The agreed upon wisdom from the Hungarian Revolution and Korean War to the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Middle East wars was to ensure such confrontations did not escalate to nuclear exchanges.
No longer. In the last five months, there has been more idle talk and threats about nuclear warfare than in the 73 years since the Soviet Union got the bomb. In a rational world, there would be two Western agendas amid the Ukraine war: first, how to aid the Ukrainians to resist Russian aggression without destroying their entire country; second, how to do so without either provoking or allowing Russia to use a nuclear weapon, or to encourage other powers like China to consider such alternatives.
Not now. In the zeal to protect the Ukrainians from Russian aggression, Joe Biden has talked about removing Russian President Vladimir Putin from office, without details about how or when such an intervention would work. Former National Security Advisor John Bolton has boasted on television of his own experiences in planning successful coup d’états, once a taboo subject. Pentagon officials have leaked in braggadocious ways the use of American intelligence that has aided Ukrainian assassination teams to kill high-ranking Russian generals.
Bureaucrats, media strategists, and congressional leaders have openly boasted about selling Ukraine the necessary weaponry to bring the war home to nuclear Russia, whether that would entail raids inside Russia to destroy energy and logistical depots or sinking the Russian Black Sea Fleet through American-made, long-range shore-to-ship missiles. In response, Russian leaders, including Putin himself, have talked in Strangelovian terms about using nuclear weapons, in efforts to portray their aggression as victimhood worthy of a stronger, and apparently nuclear retaliation.
The ancient idea that in the nuclear age you cannot always do what is desirable to bad nuclear powers is considered passé and apparently deemed in need of a 2022 update.
Blowing Up The Border
Civilization used to accept that all nations in the modern era had borders, within which unique customs, traditions, language, history and culture were nourished to promote a common civic identity.
No more. Sometime in 2021, the Biden Administration blew up the entire hallowed concept of a border. It allowed what will soon be 3 million illegal aliens during a pandemic to enter unaudited, untested, unvaccinated, without English, without any background checks and without consequences for violating federal immigration law. Biden ignores that millions of doses of toxic drugs are pouring across his nonexistent border, along with sex traffickers and cartel drug lords enriched by scalping transit fees.
The president never states how the nation will pay for a massive influx of dependents, much less how small communities near the border will have adequate social services for their own taxpayers under such massive pressures. As a rule, those destroying the border live far from the border. And they brand as racist any who object to the policies from whose deleterious consequences, they are exempt.
Why did Biden erase the southern U.S. border? Did a waning Democrat Party want new dependent constituents? Were corporate and business interests demanding new cheaper workers? Did the identity politics movement seek to replenish their assimilating ranks? Were unhinged globalists eager to reify their nihilist ideas of destroying all borders to establish a Davos-like ecumenical world overseen by transnational guardians such as themselves?
Who knows and who cares? The damage is the same, regardless of the motivations of the nihilists.
Modern Monetary Madness
Ancient wisdom also held that too much circulating money chasing too few goods resulted in an inflated currency. Hyperinflation ensured radical damage to a nation’s very lifestyle, as it descended into a Hobbesian war of all hiking prices and wages against all forced to pay them.
So what? Biden took a recovering economy, one fueled by massive deficit spending by three prior presidents, pent-up consumer demand coming after a nearly two-year lockdown, a labor force crippled by government-subsidized nonparticipation, COVID fears, and long-COVID disabilities—and printed new trillions of funny-money dollars.
Biden would have printed even more trillions had not Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) saved for a spell his own party from its nihilist madness. The creepy modern monetary theory behind such lunacy held that either money was a construct and the more of it printed the more people could spend it with retained value, or that any ensuing inflation would aid those without money and hurt those who had (ill-gotten) money.
So it went, and now American currency is being devalued at an annual rate of 9.1 percent. Retirement accounts have seen 20-40 percent losses, and years of annual contributions have gone up in smoke. The huge national debt cannot be serviced at the interest rates necessary to curb inflation without huge sums cut from entitlements or key elements of the budget.
The current self-created mess was foreseen and warned about by both Democrats and Republicans and ignored as racist, or elitist, or irrelevant by the Left. In other words, Biden’s lunatic economic advisors believed they were either exempt from ancient realities or that their careers hinged on insisting they were so exempt.
The Green New Debacle
Over the last 20 years, a consensus began to arise surrounding fossil fuel energy. While it was no longer so toxic, given radical improvements in emission reductions, the heat itself of nearly clean-burning fossil fuels might be contributing to “global warming.”
Therefore, gradually new technologies would for decades augment fossil fuels, then slowly they would supplant them. Finally new energies would replace coal, oil, and natural gas with renewable or other non-heat-producing energies—all at an affordable cost for the middle class and with plenty of warning and time to make the necessary adjustments.
Joe Biden simply blew up that paradigm. For a year during the campaign, in his half-educated shouts, he foolishly lectured the country that he would end all fossil fuel use, cancel pipelines, and put vast swaths of rich energy fields off limits.
Biden did just that the moment he entered office, as well as lecturing lending agencies and financial groups not to loan to the pipeline builders, frackers, and the horizontal drillers. In truth, they were a heroic bunch who had made America energy independent, free from any need of an optional war in the energy-rich Middle East, much stronger vis-à-vis its two rivals Russia and China, and empowered by affordable transportation and industrial power.
Critical Legal Lunacy
Since ancient times, laws were seen as a response to human nature, often modulated by religion and government, sometimes imperfectly in the case of autocrats, theocrats, and dreamy utopians. Nonetheless, civilization accepted that stealing anything, assaulting anyone without cause, or destroying the property of others were crimes by nature. Punishment prevented their recurrence, since their repetition would lead to mass disobedience and ultimately the unwinding of civilization.
Critical Legal Theory subverts those ancestral wisdoms. It is embraced by many in the Biden Administration, who ignored massive riots, arson, and looting in summer 2020. States such as California defined theft as a mere unpunishable mistake.
Prisons were emptied. Most lawbreakers were not arrested. Most arrested were not indicted. Few among the indicted were convicted. Most of the convicted were not punished. The result is an epidemic of murder, assault, rape, theft, and chaos in our major cities, a return to the chaos of the 1970s as the streets after dusk are ceded to criminals who mock those who appease and empower their criminality.
Critical Race Theory, another campus parlor pastime of the academically incompetent and unproductive, posits that racism defines America. It can be cured only by endless and enduring reverse racism.
Ancient truths in the process were entirely ignored, namely that humans are tribal and like fish or birds can naturally flock together by tribal, religious, ethnic, or racial affinities.
Only a nation state can supersede such innate characteristics by infusing a common civic identity that makes superficial appearance or creed incidental rather than essential to a citizen. Biden too has blown up that concept entirely by promoting identity politics and tribalism.
The result is a growing fear that once the government encourages tribalism, then all must revert to the protection of their own tribe—or perish.
Diversity—a euphemism for disunity—is our creed. We have taken all the abuses of the pre-Civil Rights era in the South—racial obsessions, one-drop fixations, segregated spaces and ceremonies, hiring and admissions by race, ignoring merit in favor of race, and racial demonization—and rebranded them as critical race theory. Apparently, the Bidenites believe in the folly that 2022 reverse-racist man is inherently smarter and knows better than his racist predecessors—and thus can be a good racist rather than just a racist, which always means a bad racist.
Transgendered Fantasies
For centuries civilization agreed that there were two sexes. Scientists and doctors since antiquity, of course, accepted that in very rare cases, some men and women seemed dysphoric. To differing degrees, a tiny minority cross-dressed to mimic the nature of the opposite sex or more seriously felt trapped in their own bodies. Vocabulary from transsexualism to transvestism roughly identified a range of these rare disconnects.
But no one believed that these maladies were common, or that one born with the primary and secondary sexual characteristics of one gender was in fact by his or her volition able to fully become the opposite gender, or to construct a third, entirely separate gender identity.
Not now. The country is torn apart by the insistence that there can no longer be just male or female restrooms, that biological males can rebrand themselves to their true nature as females and dominate women’s sports, and teens and even pre-teens can be given extremely dangerous and often carcinogenic drugs, as well as radical life-threatening surgeries, without their parents’ consent, and without firm medical knowledge of the eventual psychological and physical harmful aftermaths of such still experimental regimens.
The Biden Administration has insisted that gender dysphoria is a national epidemic, that there are three sexes, and that males and females must concede that sexuality is a construct—and to the degree everyone in society must radically change their lives from learning new pronouns to expecting young athletes with male genitalia to undress in female locker rooms with their daughters.
Each time Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Merrick Garland, Antony Blinken, Deb Haaland, Janet Yellen, Lloyd Austin, Pete Buttigieg, Alejandro Mayorkas, or Jennifer Granholm speaks to the public, the people concludes two things: these people are either crazy, incompetent, or ignorant of ancient human nature, and they were appointed to their positions for reasons that have nothing to do with either experience or competence.
And the result is the rapid destruction of most wisdom as we once knew it. ✪
- ORGANIZE YOUR EMAIL, get rid of spam, and EARN MONEY while you make life easier with the worlds’ largest (FREE) viral email program – check out: http://vib.cm/burtkauf
TOP ADVERTISING CHOICES - Internet - Email Marketing , Website Development, Text Marketing
In its 2010 study, we learned that Internet Marketing has replaced the old, traditional print (newspaper and phone book ) along with broadcast TV and radio , as the top ad media of choice by business and consumer alike - and more cost-effective (Ad-ology), with direct mail a close second. . Now , within the top-ranked INTERNET, Ad-ology has broken down the internet by category, showing email marketing still leads the way, along with website development (SEO) and mobile marketing coming on strong. Coupon Country and YellowPagesCoupons.net feature these top marketing platforms at unbelievably low rates 1-888-422-6876.
According to Ad-ology’s survey, the top places where small businesses will put their marketing dollars in 2011 are e-mail marketing (72.7 percent in 2011 vs. 56.6 percent in 2010) and company website development (70.5 percent in 2011 vs. 57.7 percent in 2010). CouponCountry does it all… or call 1-888-422-6876 GREAT GIFT IDEA!
