All of these attacks serve two purposes.

Firstly, it demoralizes Christians. For those not paying attention, the narrative might stick and the disappointment of watching a well-known Christian prove to be a hypocrite can shake the community. This could lead to feelings of isolation or even a loss of faith. It also teaches Christians that they should stay quiet lest they become targets of the mainstream-driven mob as well.

Secondly, it reinforces the idea to the rest of the populace that anyone outside the mainstream, especially their most notable members, are all raging hypocrites and that staying with the sane mainstream figures and believing what they believe is the right move.

This is how they paint the sane and logical as the fringe and make the fringe look sane and logical.

It’s how they move the Overton window, normalize insanity, and ultimately turn society into a hellscape. It might be a long, slow process but it’s one that they’ve been at for a very, very long time, and it’s definitely had its effect. It’s imperative that these lies get called out, but just as importantly, it’s important that these strategies are understood and well-known.

The fight for the culture has to include knowledge of the enemy’s playbook. Knowing your enemy is the first step in any battle. //

Cafeblue32 The Real John from Jersey
2 hours ago
And your are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. -Jesus.

Notice where the gates are. They ain't on the church. The church is supposed to be kicking in the gates of hell not the other way around.

mopani Cafeblue32
7 minutes ago edited
I've never seen gates get up and march into battle.

The question is, what is the battle over?

I agree with all of the above, but i think we Christians need to remember that this is first of all a spiritual battle, and if we only fight this on the political level we will become what we are fighting against, or worse.

Pray for your enemies. //

Free American
20 hours ago edited
Prayer and exposure are the counter attack strategy. Often though one has to fight fire with fire. Alinsky's tactics work both ways. //

nebraskared
2 hours ago
This article did an excellent job of not falling into the trap of fighting fire with fire. While preventative burns and backfires work when done right I have never seen fire put out a fire in a house. Going head to head with leftists by using Alinsky tactics is unwinnable for conservatives because the tactics (Alinsky's rules for radicals) run contrary to many of the common political principles of conservatives. Back in the 70's I was part of a conservative organization that chose to use the "successful" tactics of "community organizing" put forth by Alinsky and in a few months the organization was reduced to a remnant of bitter, angry, and obnoxious people. Aggressive and explicit exposure of the tactics behind leftist words and actions will eventually cause them to eat there own, until of course they pop up again.

Threats against the judiciary did not come suddenly. The slouch toward selective law enforcement and politicized violence has a history. //

The violent bear it away. That title of Flannery O’Connor’s 1960 novel still resonates. Some relentless atavism is at work in our culture, a monstrous irrationality that awakens what O’Connor called “the stuff of which madmen and fanatics are made.” Violence, no longer shunned, is now an accepted political tool.

The attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh—preceded by U.S Attorney General Merrick Garland’s refusal to enforce federal law against protesters at justices’ homes—exposed the fragile divide between constituted order and willed anarchy. In effect, the attorney general’s inaction acquiesced to mob intimidation and signaled a willingness to risk further lawlessness.

The descent into Third World-like threats against the judiciary did not come suddenly. The slouch toward selective law enforcement and politicized violence has a history. By whatever name we call it—wokeism nowadays—adversary culture has been loosening essential restraints for some six decades. Like the lifecycle of a parasite, the passion for repudiating established order mutates and reappears in successive stages. Today’s recurrence of the New Left virus keeps the inherited infection alive in a new generation of hosts. //

In “Notes on Nationalism” (1945) George Orwell wrote that the key to political judgments—who is guilty? who is the victim?—is apt to lie in the identities of the parties involved instead of in the nature of the wrongdoing: “Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage … which does not change its moral when it is committed by ‘our side.’”

His comment was a counter ahead of time to Jean-Paul Sartre’s glorification of “Wretched of the Earth.” In his preface to Fanon’s text, Sartre spoke for the revolutionary side: “No gentleness can efface the marks of violence; only violence itself can destroy them.” He made a romance of it: “irrepressible violence” against a perceived enemy is “man recreating himself.” //

Frederic Kremer
19 days ago
It is a necessary condition for the victims to sanction the supposed morality of their destroyer in order for a culture such as ours to be swept into the library of failed cultures. Guilt is a powerful dis-arming tool. The intellectuals have led the charge to impose guilt, destroy defense and lay open the field to violence by convincing those susceptible to guilt that their destroyer is more moral than they themselves are.

Unfortunately Ben Franklin’s warning, though taken seriously by those who wanted to change from a republic to an elitist pretense of limited democracy, was not taken seriously by those who wanted a republic of limited democracy. The mob is fueled by their righteousness as they swallowed it from the vomit of the intellectuals. The citizens who made possible the environment the mob operates in is without intellectual heroes and like Achilles, hobbled.

Our politicians, with rare exceptions, are most assuredly products of the culture and totally without capability to protect a limited democracy. Heck, they would not even understand the concept. They are the last persons to correct this slide into violence, they are encouraging it. They too will eventually be on the receiving end. So, my question is: why wait? Where is the decency in giving your executioner time and resources to prepare for your slaughter? As Bonnie Tyler put it: where have all the good men gone?

The New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) revealed last week what it really thinks about parents. In a 15-second YouTube advertisement, the NJEA smeared thousands of parents across the country who want to protect their kids from poisonous ideologies, calling them “extremists” who should “take [their complaints] somewhere else.”

These parents are now part of the ever-growing number of alleged “extremist groups” who question the left’s authority.

Coming, as it does, at the beginning of a new school year, this ad reveals that one of the true goals of the establishment is to remove parents from the educational process altogether. In essence, New Jersey’s educrats have declared war on New Jersey families.

In a shocking report, the U.S. Census Bureau recently admitted that it overcounted the populations of eight states and undercounted the populations of six states in the 2020 census.

All but one of the states overcounted is a blue state, and all but one of the undercounted states is red.

Those costly errors will distort congressional representation and the Electoral College. It means that when the Census Bureau reapportioned the House of Representatives, Florida was cheated out of two additional seats it should have gotten; Texas missed out on another seat; Minnesota and Rhode Island each kept a representative they shouldn’t have; and Colorado was awarded a new member of the House it didn’t deserve.

These harmful errors also mean billions in federal funds will be misallocated. Funding for many federal programs is distributed to the states based on population. Overcounted states will now receive a larger share of federal funds than they are entitled to, at the expense of the undercounted states. //

The 2020 errors were discovered through the “2020 Post-Enumeration Survey.”

After each census, the bureau interviews a large number of households across the country and then compares the interview answers with the original census responses. The 2020 survey showed that the bureau overcounted the population in Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Utah. The largest mistake was in President Joe Biden’s home state of Delaware, which was overcounted by 5.45%.

The states whose populations were undercounted were Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Texas. The largest error in the undercount was in Arkansas, where the population count was off by 5.04%.

The original census reported that Florida needed only 171,500 more residents to gain another congressional seat. Yet the survey shows that Florida was undercounted by over three-quarters of a million people. The bureau also said that Texas needed only 189,000 more people to gain another congressional seat. The survey shows that Texas was undercounted by 560,319 residents.

Minnesota, according to the original census report, would have lost a congressional seat during reapportionment if it had 26 fewer residents; the survey shows the state was overcounted by 216,971 individuals. Similarly, Rhode Island would have lost a seat if the Census Bureau had counted 19,000 fewer residents. It turns out that the state was overcounted by more than 55,000 individuals.

The famous monkey meme is, in order, “see, hear, speak,” but my monkeys aren’t holding back on “evil” — they’re suppressing the truth because it doesn’t fit the narrative.

Phineas Fahrquar
@irishspy
·
Follow
Shorter Times: "Democrats believe in approved speech, Republicans believe in free speech."

The New York Times @nytimes
Several states run by Democrats are pushing for stiffer rules on the spread of false information, while Republican-run states are pushing for fewer rules. In this deeply polarized era, even the fight for truth breaks along partisan lines. https://nyti.ms/3Row0N9
4:43 PM · Jul 11, 2022

Remember all these catastrophes are self-induced. They are choices, not fate. The U.S. has the largest combined gas, coal, and oil deposits in the world. It possesses the know-how to build the safest pipelines and to ensure the cleanest energy development on the planet.

Inflation was a deliberate Biden choice. For short-term political advantage, he kept printing trillions of dollars, incentivizing labor nonparticipation, and keeping interest rates at historical lows—at a time of pent-up global demand.

The administration wanted no border. Only that way can politicized, impoverished immigrants repay left-wing undermining of the entire legal immigration system with their fealty at the ballot box.

Once esoteric, crack-pot academic theories—“modern monetary theory,” critical legal theory, critical race theory—now dominate policymaking in the Biden administration.

The common denominator in all of this is ideology overruling empiricism, common sense, and pragmatism. Ruling elites would rather be politically correct failures and unpopular than politically incorrect, successful, and popular.

Is that not the tired story of left-wing revolutionaries from 18th-century France to early 20th-century Russia to the contemporary disasters in Cuba and Venezuela?

The American people reject the calamitous policies of 2021-2022. Yet the radical cadres surrounding a cognitively inert Biden still push them through by executive orders, bureaucratic directives, and deliberate Cabinet nonperformance.

Why? The left has no confidence either in constitutional government or common sense.

So as the public pushes back, expect at the ground level more doxxing, cancel culture, deplatforming, ministries of disinformation, swarming the private homes of officials they target for bullying, and likely violent demonstrations in our streets this summer.

The Biden administration has initiated steps that undermine former President Donald Trump’s decision to establish the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, media reports suggest.

The Biden State Department has set up a separate diplomatic office for the Palestinians in Jerusalem. With this move, “Washington is reversing a Trump administration policy on U.S.-Palestinian relations ahead of President Joe Biden’s possible visit to Israel” set to take place in July, The Associated Press reported Thursday.

The Biden administration’s decision seeks to rollback President Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the State of Israel. The Washington Free Beacon, citing former U.S. diplomats, described the Biden administration’s move as “the first step to walking back the United States’ historic recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.” //

Senator Bill Hagerty
@SenatorHagerty
I unequivocally oppose this plan. It's inconsistent with the full & faithful implementation of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 & suggests the Admin is again trying to undermine America’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s eternal & undivided capital.
dailymail.co.uk
Biden reverses Trump by beefing up diplomatic mission to Palestinians
6:05 PM · Jun 10, 2022

they’re looking for power, and they’re trying to get it all via Cloward-Piven:

The Cloward-Piven Strategy: Orchestrating A Crisis So Government Can “Solve” It
https://conduitforaction.org/the-cloward-piven-strategy-orchestrating-a-crisis-so-government-can-solve-it/

Last Thursday, something extraordinary happened: A senior HSBC banker, Stuart Kirk, told the world that climate change, though real, is not something financial markets need worry about. “Unsubstantiated, shrill, apocalyptic warnings are ALWAYS wrong,” one of Kirk’s presentation slides read.

The reaction was instantaneous. Christiana Figueres, former head of the United Nations climate secretariat, denounced Kirk’s remarks as “abhorrently outrageous,” words that might well describe Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine — but a banker’s presentation analyzing climate financial risk for what it is?

Four hundred years ago, people were burnt at the stake for believing the wrong things about religion. Today, they get fired for questioning the climate-change catechism.

Figueres demanded HSBC immediately cleanse itself of Kirk’s remarks and fire the climate heretic. “I do not agree — at all — with the remarks made at last week’s FT Moral Money Summit,” bank chief executive Noel Quinn duly declared, avoiding any mention of Kirk by name. “I am determined that our team won’t be distracted by last week’s comments.” On Monday, it emerged HSBC had suspended Kirk.

Kirk’s problem is that he is telling the truth, one contrary to the central tenet of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing — which holds that it is the duty of finance and business to save the world from a planetary catastrophe. In his presentation, Kirk complained about his team being buried in an avalanche of climate-risk reporting.

Article 2 of the 2015 Paris climate agreement has the objective of “making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low” emissions. As a result, central banks and financial regulators are using every regulatory weapon in their armories to suppress investment in fossil fuels and direct capital flows toward renewables like wind and solar.

Their weapon of choice is the spurious but plausible-sounding notion of climate-related financial risk. In reality, modern economies are remarkably resilient against extreme weather. “How Bad Are Weather Disasters for Banks?” a November 2021 paper by Federal Reserve Bank of New York staff asked. The answer: “Not very.” Federal Emergency Management Agency-level disasters over the last quarter-century had insignificant or small impact on banks’ performance.

In a rational world, this finding would be welcomed. But that would be to miss the point. It is not the reality of climate resiliency that matters but the use of climate risk to push financing flows in the direction of net zero. “There’s a lot to like about climate stress tests,” Federal Reserve chair Jay Powell exclaimed at a Green Swan conference of central bankers and regulators last year. //

The need to hype up climate alarm to drive investment flows to net zero comes at a bigger cost than Stuart Kirk’s job. Painfully high oil and natural-gas prices are hurting consumers and businesses and pushing up the cost of food. Normally, high prices would trigger more investment and more output that would help bring prices down. Not this time. Wall Street — with the full support of the Fed and bank regulators — is stomping down on investment in oil and gas. That’s not just hurting the little guy. It’s hurting the Biden administration and the Democrats.

Two months ago, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm was begging oil executives to invest. “I hope your investors are saying these words to you as well: In this moment of crisis, we need more supply,” Granholm told them. “Right now, we need oil and gas production to rise to meet current demand.”

It could well be that woke bankers on Wall Street — backed to the hilt by purveyors of scary climate scenarios in the Fed, financial regulators and the media — help sink Democrats’ election hopes in the November midterms.

There was a time not long ago when liberals at least pretended to support free speech. Those days are gone, and never coming back. //

None of the people who now claim Musk’s ownership of Twitter is a huge problem saw any problem at all with Twitter’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 presidential election — a major case of actual misinformation that arguably affected the outcome of the election.

You cannot get them to admit this, though, in part because they will not admit it to themselves. Epistemic closure on the left makes it impossible for someone like The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer, for example, to understand the Musk takeover of Twitter as a potential victory for authentic free speech. For Serwer, the entire debate about free speech on Twitter is a canard, “a disingenuous attempt to frame what is ultimately a political conflict over Twitter’s usage as a neutral question about civil liberties, but the outcome conservatives are hoping for is one in which conservative speech on the platform is favored and liberal speech disfavored.”

That pretty much sums up what the left is telling itself about all this. Allowing conservatives to speak their minds on Twitter about, say, transgenderism or abortion or critical race theory, can’t possibly be considered “free speech.” To them, it’s just “hateful conduct” conservatives engage in as part of a power dynamic, which in turn warrants censorship.

Know-nothing pundits and politicians have been communicating to Americans that inflation is, like the weather, a mystery they can’t control. That’s simply not true, write three economic commentators in a soon-published book, “Inflation: What It Is, Why It’s Bad, And How to Fix It.” On the contrary: inflation is a direct result of governments cheating their people, and solving it is pretty simple, if politically difficult.

In the book, businessman Steve Forbes, economist Nathan Lewis, and business journalist Elizabeth Ames give laypeople a concise, readable introduction to monetary policy. They also lay out easy-to-understand policy and personal prescriptions for responding to an inflationary economy such as today’s. The book is short and immensely useful for those of us who are not economic experts or finance minds and just want politicians to stop stealing our hard-earned money and endangering our nation’s security. //

In an inflationary economy, the winners are the rich, the well-connected, and the corrupt. The losers are the poor, the middle-class, and those who work hard and play by the rules. Thus, an inflationary economy is inherently an unjust system. This is the top reason it should be combatted.

Not surprisingly, then, the rich and powerful often insist some inflation is a good thing. Maintaining a consistent level of inflation is in fact the Federal Reserve’s open policy goal. But even a “low” level of inflation such as The Fed’s (often wildly missed) target of 2 percent a year effectively steals significant income from especially the working and middle class. For someone earning $50,000 a year, 2 percent annual inflation is a $1,000 pay cut every year. That can be the difference between saving and not saving.

Making it harder to put money aside essentially forces middle and working-class people to depend on welfare rather than their own industry. Inflation thus erodes the middle class that is the bulwark of all free societies. So when it increases, societies tend to experience chaos. More people stop working and creating, and start trying to steal from others, either through government or through crime.

It should go without saying that an unstable society and economic chaos are threats to national security. These invite aggression from foreign enemies and hinders a nation’s ability to respond. This should make policymakers take inflation seriously, but like usual, so far politicians are mostly playing the blame game instead of solving the problem. //

Today, the Federal Reserve essentially passes on federal debts and deficit spending to American consumers by creating more money without also creating new value. It is now one of many Western central banks that “effectively financ[es] their [government] deficits by buying their debt.”

In very simple terms, inflation is the result of governments spending far more than they can openly tax from citizens, then attempting to hide their shenanigans with financial gimmicks. So it is absolutely fair to think of inflation as a tax, and as the direct fault of shady government behavior: “Moderate inflation results from short-term ‘stimulus;’ hyperinflation comes from regular money printing to pay the government’s bills…The United States has not begun directly financing itself with large-scale money printing. Unfortunately, that may already be changing.”

Joseph Moore
5.0 out of 5 starsVerified Purchase
A kick in the pants to those of us who are still drifting along sedated by nostalgia
Reviewed in the United States on June 25, 2020
Brian Niemeier‘s 90-page book Don’t Give Money to People Who Hate You, is a kick in the pants to those of us who are still drifting along sedated by nostalgia, still paying for the privilege of a front-row seat to the mutilation and ultimate destruction of our own culture, willfully oblivious to the contempt and hatred of those who have appointed themselves our betters. I needed that kick – while I have long since revoked access to my wallet to Hollywood movies, and have never been much for games and comics, I still sometimes click on mainstream news articles and shop with major corporations. As explained below, these are now as much of the problem as the direct culture war waged in films and print. Many major corporations do all in their power to prove their hatred for me and mine and everything we believe and love. Don’t give them your money. Don’t give them your clicks.

So if you still are paying to consume blockbusters, comic book movies, video games, mainstream books and comics, or patronizing sports teams, retail outlets and ‘news’ media that have gone way, way out of their way to let you and the entire world know they hate you and everything you love – read this book. Now.

DGMTPWHY provides a quick tour through the who, when, where, what, and why of our current state of all but unwatchable, unreadable and unplayable ‘entertainment. The creators of mainstream entertainment have gotten converged, and, despite the hit to their corporate wallets, are now purveyors of nihilist propaganda masquerading as movies, comics, books, and games.

They must subvert and destroy what we, the sheep they despise, love. Manly men trying to be honorable, heroic and manly, and feminine women trying to be honorable, heroic and feminine, are right out – they are tools of the patriarchy, the cultural hegemony of oppression under which we sheep labor, and from which our purple-haired, nose ringed genderfluid betters are going to save us – or make sure we die from their trying. A character as complex as Rick in Casa Blanca, or even Luke in Star Wars, is to be simplified for the purposes of the cause. If you are so unwoke as to like such complex characters, well, our betters plan to fix that – by stories with no heroes and no villains, which leaves them with no plots or even logic. So things blow up.

And, of course, this all boils down to hatred of God. I’ve long held that all heresies are denials of the Incarnation. The basic ingredients of the dogma are a transcendent yet merciful God, creator of the Universe, Who, in an unfathomable act of humility and love, becomes one of us, suffers for us, and saves us. He defeats evil, and gives us hope. The purveyors of modern culture reject and mock each of these ingredients one by one, specifically. There is no God, nor any evil to defeat, nor good to defend. There can be no heroes, and no villains. Nothing is created from love, which is a lie. Humility is stupid; suffering is pointless. Only power matters, if anything matters.

There is no hope.

Modernism, of which this whole cultural war is the current manifestation, battles to defeat the good, the true, and the beautiful, even in such seemingly trivial forms as comic books and movies. But popular entertainment, from Homer to Shakespeare to Star Wars, is the way a culture is defined, nourished, and passed along. Just because it’s Batman and Thor getting the Social Justice treatment instead of (for the moment) Bach and Dante, doesn’t make it less dangerous Indeed, a lot more people have their morality formed by Superman and Harry Potter than by Milton and Flannery O’Conner. In a sane, healthy society, the popular culture and the highest high culture are formed by, share and communicate the same moral messages. For a century or more, that has not been the case in the West: our high culture is a cesspool of nihilism, while, up until the last 50 years, popular culture was still dominated by the theme of good versus evil – and the now novel idea that it’s better if good wins.

Brian published this work in April, before the rioting and the Antifa/Black Lives Matters psyops took over the ‘news’, and wrote it, I imagine, before the COVID hysteria and lockup. These are of a piece: the same people who show their hatred of you in movies and books have broadened their channels, and now show their murderous intent through the flexes and humiliation rituals of the lockup and masks and ‘social distancing’ (a phrase no one had heard of 4 months ago that is now treated like the Wisdom of the Ages), and by their apologetics, encouragement, and approval of those who would literally burn our country down. They destroy statues as phase one of an effort to memory hole anything that doesn’t conform to their contempt. I exaggerate not one iota when I say: Antifa and BLM dream of getting to kill you and your family. They are driven by the Marxist fantasy that bad people on the Wrong Side of History are all that stand in the way of paradise on earth. That paradise is the glorious End that justifies any means, including the slaughter of all who, in the minds of the Marxists, oppose it. Stalin and Mao, with their purges and Great Leap Forward, are not seen as history’s greatest criminals, but as role models. You and I are those bad people. They want us dead.

Don’t believe me? Read what they have to say for themselves.

The companies that even today are bending the knee and falling all over themselves in their rush to issue statements, not in condemnation of wanton property destruction and threatened and real physical harm up to and including murder, but rather in support of the rioters and vandals. The very idea that there are significant numbers of ‘peaceful protesters’ was always ludicrous: useful idiots and bored, antsy teenager of all ages, sure. Large numbers of people who take to the streets for weeks on end because a fellous thug who once robbed a pregnant woman at gunpoint while she pleaded for her life got himself killed by an out of control cop who is in jail awaiting trial?

That’s not what’s happening.

Back to the book. I know what Brian is talking about. Star Wars came out the summer after my freshman year in college. My girlfriend at the time kept raving about this movie we had to go see, even though she’d seen it several times already. I, a callous sophisticate as only a 19 year old can be, remained cool.

Then we hit the theater – with a line around the block. From the first scene, I was hooked. Awesome, and so much fun! So, of course, went back several times, and saw the sequels also several times each in the theaters, and got the videos as soon as they came out, and did my best to wear them out. So, yea – I get it.

Even after the road kill that was the prequels, with dread in my heart, I went to see the Force Awakens – and was mildly entertained. BUT – never felt the slightest urge to see it again, or get the DVD. Upon reflection, the movie got worse and worse: the pageantry and special effects – and the still-not-bone-dry well of good will earned by the original trilogy – distracted me from the cardboard characters, the utter lack of character development, the stupid, derivative plot, the relentlessly nonsensical motivations (or lack thereof) driving what little story they had. Rather than Luke’s textbook hero’s journey, we get a total Mary Sue; rather than family, honor, and friendship invigorating the characters, we had – what, exactly?

I’ve seen none of the subsequent movies. Since Brian first mentioned his rule – never give money to people who hate you – a few years ago, my inchoate disgust got a name and a focus, and rather than just avoiding movies because I didn’t want to feel used, I began avoiding them on principle – the principle of this book.

Now, we need to expand the field in which this dictum operates to include all corporations and businesses that have kowtowed to BLM and Antifa: No, Corporate America, you do not need to prove you aren’t racist by anything beside treating all your customers with respect, providing good value for the dollar, and hiring and promoting people based solely on how well they do those first two things. Pandering to bullies earns my contempt, not my dollars; actively supporting people who want me and mine dead gets me fired up to look for and promote alternatives to anything you might offer

Sometimes a newspaper story is just a story about someone. And sometimes the story inadvertently reveals far more about the newspaper itself.

That’s the case of The New York Times’ Thursday piece on Hunter Biden. What the discerning reader learns about the Times is far more important than anything disclosed about the president’s scheming son. //

The one bit of actual news is that Hunter Biden took out a loan to pay the federal government as much as $1 million in back taxes as part of a continuing criminal probe about his business ventures with foreign corporations and individuals.

But that fact, which comes in the very first paragraph, is dwarfed by the Times’ bombshell acknowledgment later on. Much later on.

It’s not until the 24th paragraph that the story mentions e-mails involving Hunter Biden and his associates in those deals, followed by these two sentences: “Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.”

Heart be still. It took the Gray Lady nearly 17 months to grudgingly concede even a fraction of what New York Post readers learned in October 2020. Of course, Times readers would have learned all that too if their paper was still in the news business instead of being a running dog for Democrats. //

The reason for that coverup was simple: Many of the e-mails to and from Hunter Biden implicated Joe Biden in the international influence-peddling business run by Hunter and Joe’s brother, Jim Biden.

If the whole country knew then that Joe Biden was corruptly using his office to help his family cash in, we would now be in the second year of Donald Trump’s second term. That’s a fact because 8% of Biden voters told pollsters they would have supported Trump had they known about the bombshell contents of the laptop. //

And now the Times has the gall to act as if it did heroic digging by claiming Thursday the e-mails “were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.” Oh, please.

Unlike the Times, The Post didn’t rely on anonymous sources, saying openly that Rudy Giuliani gave the paper a copy of the laptop’s hard drive. Giuliani said it came from a repairman in Delaware, whom The Post also interviewed. He said a man who signed his name as Hunter Biden dropped the laptop off for fixes and never retrieved it. //

As I have written, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping know everything about these deals, including how many millions were wired from oligarchs and Communist-tied companies to bank accounts controlled by the Bidens. They also know what the Bidens did for the money.

The only people who don’t know all the facts are Americans. And for that, you can thank The New York Times and its corrupt ­co-conspirators.

Clarence Thomas’s influence must not be reduced to his race because that characterization inherently contradicts everything he stands for. //

The Washington Post’s attempt to smear Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for thinking like a white man is a completely incorrect interpretation of the justice’s legal legacy. //

It’s fair to say that after the justice’s more than 30 “distinguished” years on the bench, The Washington Post’s interpretation of Thomas is all wrong. Thomas’s thinking has shaped the way all conservatives today think, regardless of their race. He is a great thinker who is not only admired in conservative circles but has inspired them. Thomas’s influence cannot and should not be reduced to his race because that characterization inherently contradicts everything he stands for.

Jennifer Sey

I turned down $1 million severance in exchange for my voice. //

The red tag on the back pocket of the jeans I handed over to the Russian girls used to be shorthand for what was good and right about this country, and when I think about my trip to Moscow, so many decades ago, I still get a little choked up.

But the corporation doesn’t believe in that now. It’s trapped trying to please the mob—and silencing any dissent within the organization. In this it is like so many other American companies: held hostage by intolerant ideologues who do not believe in genuine inclusion or diversity. //

I’ll always wear my old 501s. But today I’m trading in my job at Levi’s. In return, I get to keep my voice.

Contrarians can be useful! Yes, we’re very rude people, but sometimes we can help you avoid making a mistake. There’s a reason why the Catholic Church, when considering whether somebody should be made a saint, used to bring in a Devil’s Advocate.

The Catholic Church of liberal wisdom is The New York Times. But if you work at the Times, you probably exist in an epistemological safe space into which no adverse information ever flows. You may never even hear about certain true things; the information doesn’t penetrate the media outlets you read, the dinner parties you attend or the podcasts you listen to at the gym. //

Bennet lives in a world where everyone “knew” Palin’s team had a “clear” link to the shooting. He had probably read so many left-wing columns and blogs blaming Palin that he simply internalized the information and didn’t bother to check it. The fact-checker glossed over the false assertion also, because she was too overworked to do her job. (“I was checking things fast on deadline … my reading of it led me not to have looked at that specifically . . . I did the best of my ability in the time that I had.”) //

Funnily enough, when I worked at People magazine, where a team of hatchet-faced fact-checkers who made IRS auditors look like friendly Labradoodles would spend my Monday nights haranguing me over every adjective and preposition [.... ] anything that had previously been reported in the New York Times was considered a “red check,” i.e., unassailable truth.

At the Times itself? You can call one of the most prominent political figures an accessory to attempted murder, and the only sound you’ll hear is people shrugging.

For all The Times stories bemoaning that Americans increasingly live in “bubbles” of “misinformation,” it never seemed to look at the bubble inside its own newspaper. //

Hey, I just thought of someone who’d be perfect for the job: experienced in daily journalism, familiar with Times protocols, yet disinclined to automatically believe every vicious assertion about anyone on the Right: Her name is Bari Weiss. Maybe give her a call.

Legacy media is trying to memory hole the attack on the Freedom Convoy because it doesn’t fit the narrative.

These are not merely rhetorical questions. Well over a hundred political prisoners are being held by the Biden Justice Department for their role in the January 6 disturbance at the US Capitol, or, to describe it the way the RNC did on Friday, “persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.” The conditions at the DC jail are squalid and brutal, their ability to consult with attorneys very limited, their accessibility to medical care nearly non-existent. The only reason that retirees are being held in confinement for what are essentially jaywalking tickets is that they committed an act of disrespect toward the liberal-progressive power structure that pointed out its illegitimacy. Keep in mind that Jake Angeli, the so-called “MAGA shaman,” will serve about half as much time in prison for sitting in Nancy Pelosi’s chair as Montez Lee will serve for burning a building and killing a father of three.

The difference is that the Biden Justice Department sees Montez Lee and his friends as allies and is fully in agreement with their goals. The January 6 people, on the other hand, represent the traditional order and are a threat to the norms Biden/Garland are trying to impose upon the rest of the nation.

We can’t exist with a legal system the left is trying to inflict upon us, one that was overthrown by the English barons at Runnymede when they forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. That would be a system where your political affiliation determines your punishment, not the law and not precedent.

Many people aren’t buying the violence allegations. GiveSendGo is allowing the convoy to fundraise on its website. As of this writing, nearly $5,000,000 has been raised for the Canadian Freedom Convoy. //

Anyone who wants to harm former president Donald Trump, including Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, Michael Cohen, noted FBI liar Andrew McCabe, and the “Handmaid Resistance Vigil,” were among those Leftist causes allowed to raise money on gofundme. //

Now, here are a few who weren’t. See if you can spot a pattern.

Kyle Rittenhouse supporters were not allowed to fundraise on the website. Defending oneself against attacks by the Left’s pet protesters, it turns out, is not allowed. When Rittenhouse jumped to GiveSendGo, Discover credit card cut off the ability to give money to that fundraiser. You might want to make a note of that.
A “Save America” rally fundraiser by a conservative couple to oppose COVID-19 mandates was cut off.
Matt Walsh of The Daily Wire set up a fundraiser for Congresswoman Alexandria Cortez’s grandmother to buy a new ceiling. But it was cut off when “someone” informed the fundraising platform that AOC’s abuela wouldn’t accept the funds.
A so-called “militia” group whose members possess guns and patrol the southern border were tossed off gofundme for being hateful.
Colleague Robert Spencer who runs the influential anti-terror website Jihad Watch was de-platformed on gofundme. Being against terrorism is punishable by the Left.
Christian bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein were thrown off gofundme because they wouldn’t make a cake for a same-sex wedding.
Baltimore police officers involved in the death of Freddie Gray were cut off from raising defense fund money from the site. Eventually, charges were dropped against all the officers involved in the case of the heroin dealer’s death.
The effort by a Texas nurse to raise money for an anti-COVID-19 mandate lawsuit was de-platformed over what the site claimed was “misinformation.”
And, of course, the anti-vaccine mandate fundraiser by the Canadian truckers was cut off.
There are many other examples.

The playbook they’re running against Joe Rogan is obvious, recognizable, and requires new defensive weapons.