Posted on

Coronavirus Only Magnifies Ongoing Struggle over American Morality Tale

The inspirational mantras we hear multiple times a day remind us repeatedly that “we’re all in this together” and “we’ll get through this together.”

It’s such a powerful and commonplace expression these days, seemingly rolling off the tongues of every commentator, commercial spokesperson, and social media user, that one would almost think Hillary Clinton had, in fact, actually been elected back in 2016, when her defining campaigning slogan urged us to see ourselves as “stronger together.”  Everybody’s saying it.

Woefully, she is not president.

And, woefully, while it is no doubt true that we are “stronger together,” the national aspirations encapsulated in the hope that “we’ll all get through this together,” have not quite materialized in our national behaviors.

The emergency efforts, such as the multiple relief bills the federal government has passed, were purportedly designed to address people’s and the economy’s most dire needs, just to “get us through” this time.

The efforts and ethos align with the one of the nation’s highest ideals, a cornerstone of the nation’s self-image, that of our unity and togetherness.

The implementation of the relief bills, however, has unfortunately aligned with a conflicting and countervailing individualist value dominant in—and validated by–American life and economy: the idea that in our competitive economy, individuals are entitled, expected, and compelled to grab for the biggest piece of the proverbial pie. And they are rewarded and praised for it.

Corporations such as Potbelly, Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Shake Shack, and others applied for and were granted tens of millions of dollars in largely forgivable loans.  Several of these companies have announced they will be returning the monies; and Trump administration has issued warnings that if such large companies do not give back the funds within two weeks, they will suffer “severe consequences.”

But these developments are largely because this gross behavior, satisfying greed and not the real desperate need Americans are experiencing, was spotlighted.

Indeed, the grab for the pie by the wealthiest, arguably experiencing the least need, was flagrant and orchestrated.  These companies were first in line, and guided by the big banks who knew best how to work the system.

J.P. Morgan Chase, for example, according to CNN, reportedly “hosted a nationwide conference call to inform their workers how to handle customers so that favored customers got special treatment. That special treatment . . . included allowing those customers to submit applications earlier than they would have been able to, a tactic that pushed other qualified loan applicants out of line for a loan.”

This is not behavior honoring need; it is not behavior consistent with the aspiration that “we will get through this together.”

Indeed, Harvard University, with likely the largest university endowment of all time, in the hundreds of billions, similarly got spotlighted accepting $9 million it has pledged to return.

Meanwhile, I work at a cash-strapped state university that serves students from among the lowest socio-economic brackets who otherwise could not access higher education, and we do much to lift to these students economically, and we received less than Harvard and still experience grave need.

And Mitch McConnell has blatantly asserted his opposition to providing funding to states suffering huge revenue losses due to the pandemic, straining their abilities to fund education and hosts of other vital services.

What we need to understand is that this struggle between slaking America’s insatiable greed and addressing our people’s most basic needs is not new.

What we see we these relief packages repeat the behaviors we saw with the bank bailouts during the Great Recession and with Trump’s tax cuts.

Trump’s tax cuts benefited the wealthy and did not trickle down, despite Trump’s promises that companies would invest in workers and not cut jobs. Companies like AT&T, Wells Fargo, and General Motors lobbied for them, promising to re-invest their tax savings in their workers and companies to the benefit off the nation as a whole. And yet all of these companies have engaged in massive layoffs or plant closings. AT&T has eliminated over 23,000 jobs since the tax cuts went into effect, despite receiving a $21 billion windfall from the tax cuts with the prospect of cashing in an additional $3 billion annually in tax savings. In November 2018, GM announced it would be closing five plants, eliminating 14,000 jobs in communities across Ohio, Maryland, Michigan, and Ontario, Canada, while buying back $10 billion in stock and earning a net profit of $8 billion on which the company paid no federal tax. Wells Fargo did raise the minimum wage of its employees, though the tax savings for the company were 47 times larger than the cost of that pay raise to the company; and the company announced its plans in September 2018 to eliminate 26,000 jobs, at the same time that it has raised health insurance costs for its employees.

Reducing the corporate tax rate from 35 to 21 percent and saving corporations some $13 billion in taxes was supposedly to spur economic growth, create more jobs, and induce companies to raise wages. While Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin trumpeted that 90 percent of working adults would experience an increase in pay tied directly to the tax cuts, in fact only 4.3 percent of workers in Fortune 500 companies have received either a one-time bonus or an increase in wages. Businesses have reaped nine times more in tax cuts than what they have passed on to workers.

In our ongoing American morality play, it’s Gordon Gecko’s morality of greed—and hence social divisiveness and antagonism–that seems to be winning and defining our dominant value system, not our aspiration of mutual aid and cooperation embodied in expressions valorizing togetherness.

When we come out the other side of this pandemic, we need to ask if we want a return to normalcy, to the ethos and behavior of the bank bailouts and Trump tax cuts, or whether we want to forge a new national morality, the advent of genuine spirit of cooperation.

Posted on

Federal judge says Mississippi church can hold drive-in services

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox. Sign up here.

A federal judge in Mississippi ruled Friday that the First Pentecostal Church of Holly Springs can stay open for drive-in services after police issued the pastor a citation for holding Easter services amid the coronavirus outbreak.

U.S. District Judge Michael P. Mills issued the order after the Thomas More Society, a conservative law firm, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the church, according to a press release.

The Thomas More Society claimed police had also disrupted a Bible study group 10 days after issuing the citation to Pastor Jerry Waldrop.

“These were outrageous violations of these parishioners’ rights,” Thomas More Society Senior Counsel Stephen Crampton said in a statement. “On both occasions, Holly Springs law enforcement personnel ignored the fact that all church members present were practicing social distancing and complying with all applicable health requirements. Bible study attendees were threatened with criminal citations for violation of Holly Springs’ Stay Home Order.”

He added: “Due to the threats and the citation of Pastor Waldrop, the church members were fearful of holding services on Sunday and exercising their constitutionally protected rights.”

DOJ iNTERVENES IN MISSISSIPPI DRIVE-IN CHURCH CASE, SAYS CITY’S ACTIONS ‘TARGET RELIGIOUS CONDUCT’

The complaint cited several secular gatherings that exceeded 10 people at the local Walmart and Cash Saver stores, claiming there was a double standard being applied to houses of worship that was stifling religious liberty.

The court said it “acknowledges that the First Amendment guarantee of the Free Exercise of religion is one of the most important ones set forth in the Bill of Rights, and, without question, it grants the Church, in this case, the right to assert certain rights which, say, a barbershop would have no right to assert.”

The first drive-in service is slated for Sunday.

This news comes less than two weeks after the Department of Justice (DOJ) intervened in another Mississippi drive-in worship case and sided with Temple Baptist Church.

In the statement of interest obtained exclusively by Fox News last Tuesday, the Justice Department said the U.S. regularly files statements of interest on “important issues of religious liberty in courts at every level, from trial courts to the Supreme Court of the United States.” It noted that Attorney General William Barr has “issued comprehensive guidance interpreting religious-liberty protections” under the Constitution.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

“Today, the Department filed a Statement of Interest in support of a church in Mississippi that allegedly sought to hold parking lot worship services, in which congregants listened to their pastor preach over their car radios, while sitting in their cars in the church parking lot with their windows rolled up,” Barr said Tuesday. “The City of Greenville fined congregants $500 per person for attending these parking lot services – while permitting citizens to attend nearby drive-in restaurants, even with their windows open.”

He added: “The City appears to have thereby singled churches out as the only essential service (as designated by the state of Mississippi) that may not operate despite following all CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and state recommendations regarding social distancing.”

Fox News’ Brooke Singman and Jake Gibson contributed to this report 

Posted on

Every Crisis an Opportunity

This week, the price of oil futures collapsed catastrophically. In fact, the prices collapsed into negative territory in the near term.

This bizarre situation, prompted by lack of consumer demand and lack of storage facility, led the irrepressible Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., to tweet: “You absolutely love to see it. This along with record low interest rates means it’s the right time for a worker-led, mass investment in green infrastructure to save our planet.”

This tweet was too dumb even for her—an extraordinary bar, given her past commentary—and she deleted it. But she then reiterated the point in a follow-up tweet, characterizing the rock-bottom oil prices as a “key opportunity” to “create millions of jobs transitioning to renewable and clean energy.”

>>> When can America reopen? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, is gathering America’s top thinkers together to figure that out. Learn more here.

Needless to say, investing in expensive green energy at a time when oil producers cannot give away oil is peak stupidity. But the Boston University economics major’s faux pas merely underscores an uncomfortable truth regarding this pandemic and its aftermath: For the most partisan, every crisis is an opportunity to push political priors.

The most obvious agenda item for those on the political left has been the growth of government. Dan Balz, chief correspondent of The Washington Post, drooled while saying: “For the first time, many Americans are looking to government for their very economic survival. In time, that could make them look at government differently.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., wrote for The New York Times that the “unequal impact of the pandemic and economic collapse are forcing us to rethink the assumptions of our system.” Among those assumptions: the free market economy (Sanders terms the free market “the path of greed and unfettered capitalism”).

The New York Times termed the coronavirus a “new frontier in the fight for civil rights” and quoted race hustler the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who is calling for a government commission to investigate the “racism and discrimination built into public policies” that result in racial health disparities.

Precisely this attitude—that every crisis is a new weapon in the war for more expansive government, and in favor of a complete rethinking of the constitutional bargain—will lead more and more Americans to view shutdown orders with skepticism.

It is one thing to lock down populations on a bipartisan basis with clear goals—goals like preventing coronavirus patients from swamping the health care system. Most Americans will go along with that, and most Americans are willing to grant policymakers the benefit of the doubt.

But when politicians begin to reveal ulterior motives for such shutdowns, Americans begin to ask questions.

When politicians simultaneously take measures that obviously do nothing to combat the coronavirus—measures like locking public parks where people are social distancing, or banning Americans from buying gardening supplies but ensuring access to abortion remains fully available—Americans begin to wonder whether their politicians are trustworthy.

And when politicians meet such questions with hysterical accusations that the questioners simply don’t care about human life, Americans grow even more suspicious. 

Crises require trust in authority. But authorities must earn our trust with well-founded, sensible policy. They must be transparent about what they are doing and why they are doing it.

When authorities instead suggest openly that their agenda isn’t solely curbing the coronavirus but remaking America along the lines of their own political priors, they lose our trust. And they should.

COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

Posted on

County Puts Bag Recycling Before Grocery Workers’ Health

A liberal Maryland municipality caved to environmentalists and is sustaining a tax on single use plastic bags amid COVID.

American shoppers and grocers on April 11, 2020. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

Politicians nowadays are shutting down everything except their own virtue signaling. The COVID-19 pandemic is spurring restrictions and lockdowns across the nation. But one Washington area government showcases the shams behind some of the political rescue efforts.  

“Loco MoCo” is the nickname for Montgomery County, Maryland—one of the most zealous liberal jurisdictions in the nation. Unfortunately, the county of a million people is also a pandemic hotspot, with 2,868 cases and 110 deaths as of Wednesday.  

Until last month, federal health officials vigorously discouraged average citizens from wearing facemasks to curtail COVID. Surgeon General Jerome Adams even warned that wearing a mask could increase people’s chances of becoming infected. But almost overnight, wearing masks went from a dangerous indulgence to a legally commanded performance. 

On April 9, Montgomery County’s chief health officer, Travis Gayles, decreed that any grocery store customer who failed to wear a mask would be fined $500. Gayles discouraged local residents from acquiring and wearing the most reliable protection, such as surgical masks or N95 masks, which the county saidshould be reserved for health care workers.” At least Gayles did not threaten to send SWAT teams after any citizen who procured good masks. Gayles later rescinded the threat to fine individuals, but added new restrictions on grocery shopping in the county. 

Hundreds of grocery workers nationwide have been infected by the coronavirus and at least 30 have died. One of the biggest sources of contagions in grocery stores is ratty old recycling bags that customers drag along to tote their purchases home. New York Times science columnist John Tierney reported that a study of “supermarkets in Arizona and California found large numbers of bacteria in almost all the reusable bags—and no contamination in any of the new single-use plastic bags.” 

Meanwhile, the San Francisco Department of Public Health stated that it was plausible that “widespread use of reusable bags may cause gastrointenstinal infections if they are not regularly cleaned.”  

Dirty grocery tote bags put grocery workers in peril, and a Chicago union called for an “end to the disease-transmitting bag tax.” The evidence on the peril of reusable bags was so strong that San Francisco, the Valhalla for American leftists, banned customers from bringing their reusable bags to stores, and many other localities and states suspended their bag taxes or banned the use of reusable bags.  

LoCo MoCo, which imposed a tax on plastic grocery bags in 2011, momentarily lurched in the direction of sane health policy. Councilmember Will Jawando, a former Obama administration official, crafted a bill to suspend the grocery bag tax to “minimize risk” because “the health and safety of all Montgomery County residents must come first.” He quickly garnered five co-sponsors on the nine-member county council. Councilmember Nancy Navarrodeclared “it is critical that we do eliminate whatever kind of possibility of transmission there might be.”  

But the Sierra Club and other environmental groups vehemently objected. The Sierra Club warned that suspending the tax “will erode the County’s significant progress in addressing plastic pollution.” The environmental group fretted that suspending the bag tax will leave “the public with a false sense of security in encouraging single-use plastic shopping bags” which “are difficult to clean.” Yo, Sierra Club! That’s why they are called “single-use” bags.  

The County Council quickly capitulated to the environmentalist backlash. Instead, they offered a farcical Solomonic solution—at least as far as sawing off a chunk of grocery workers’ life expectancy. The bag tax was sustained but, as Jawando announced in a press release, chief health officer Gayles will encourage people to wash reusable bags after each visit to the grocery store. Jawando also revealed that the local “Department of Environmental Protection has agreed to work on a campaign and resources to remind consumers to wash their reusable bags that can be posted at grocery stores and retail establishments.”

These efforts will be as effective as an edict requiring all shoppers to hop through grocery stores on their left foot while holding their breath. A veteran grocery clerk at a large chain store scoffed when I told him the county would urge shoppers to wash their battered bags. A University of Arizona study found that “97 percent of people never washed their reusable bags, thereby turning them into petri dishes of bacteria growth,” as Tierney noted. But “wash your bags after every shopping trip” finger-wagging permits liberals to pretend to give a damn about grocery store clerks.

Maryland officials predict that the coronavirus epidemic will peak in the coming days—long before county education efforts on grocery bags get rolling. I asked the health department how many local residents “currently use proper sanitary methods with their reusable bags,” but got no response. The health department also failed to provide “an estimate of how many additional cases of COVID-19 may result from residents bringing contaminated bags to the grocery store.” Similarly, Councilmember Nancy Navarro did not respond to my emailed question: “How many additional COVID-19 infections should Montgomery County be willing to accept or tolerate to signal the county government’s support for recycling?” 

Perhaps the only thing more sacred in Montgomery County than environmentalist posturing is government revenue. County Councilmember Hans Riemer, who co-sponsored Jawando’s initial bill, said that suspending the bag tax was “too complicated … expensive, and [addressed] a minimal health issue.” Riemer also noted that suspending the tax, “would have cost the county hundreds of thousands of dollars to implement,” the DCist noted. Riemer explained: “A lot of councilmembers just thought it wasn’t worth the effort.” 

Besides, any grocery clerks who perish as a result of tainted reusable bags were probably not major campaign donors anyhow. Maybe Montgomery County and the Sierra Club could formally consecrate grocery store clerks who die of COVID as martyrs in the recycling wars. The MoCo grocery bag tax flip flop helps explain why so many Americans scoff at Pandemic Security Theater.

James Bovard is the author of Lost RightsAttention Deficit Democracy, and Public Policy Hooligan. He is also a USA Today columnist. Follow him on Twitter @JimBovard.

Posted on

Biden wants a new stimulus ‘a hell of a lot bigger’ than $2 trillion

But stimulus is a subject close to his heart, and he passionately contrasted his own management of President Barack Obama’s $800 billion Recovery Act in 2009 with President Donald Trump’s approach to the trillions of dollars flowing out of Capitol Hill.

The Obama stimulus was wildly controversial, but it won bipartisan praise for its strict oversight and unusually low levels of fraud. In the interview, Biden was at his most indignant when he recounted how he recruited a gruff law enforcement veteran and government watchdog named Earl Devaney to oversee the Recovery Act in 2009, and how President Donald Trump fired the Pentagon inspector general who had been selected to oversee the CARES Act almost immediately after he signed it.

“I wanted to bring in the toughest son-of-a-bitch in the country—I really mean it, I’m not joking—because we wanted to make sure we did it by the numbers with genuine oversight,” Biden said. “Right now, there’s no oversight. [Trump] made it real clear he doesn’t have any damn interest in being checked. The last thing he wants is anyone watching that $500 billion going to corporate America, for God’s sake.”

The Trump campaign said it would not comment on the firing of Pentagon inspector general Michael Atkinson beyond the president’s public comments on April 4, when he attacked Atkinson for giving Congress the original whistleblower report about his call with the Ukrainian president that eventually led to his impeachment. “I thought he did a terrible job. Absolutely terrible,” the president said at the time. “He took a fake report and brought it to Congress, with an emergency. Okay? Not a big Trump fan—that, I can tell you.”

Biden repeatedly unloaded on big business and big banks, noting that “this is the second time we’ve bailed their asses out,” accusing the Trump administration of managing the stimulus for their benefit. He railed about banks like Wells Fargo that are “only alive because of the American taxpayer” giving their large corporate clients the first shot at CARES Act aid intended for small businesses. Over the last month, 26 million Americans have lost their jobs, and Biden said many of those jobs could be gone for good if mom-and-pop operations get left behind.

“We knew from the beginning that the big banks don’t like lending to small businesses,” Biden said. “I’m telling you, though, if Main Street businesses don’t get help, they’re gone.”

The CARES Act and three smaller coronavirus relief bills have all passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support, and Biden was careful to avoid criticizing Pelosi and Schumer even as he criticized the results of the compromises they negotiated. He said he’s “in constant conservation” with both Democratic leaders, letting them know his priorities without interfering with their negotiations; he credited them with securing major increases in unemployment benefits and other improvements to Republican proposals that were initially skewed even further towards big business.

He was clearly disappointed that Pelosi and Schumer failed to secure any new aid to states in this week’s $484 billion package, but he suggested that could work out politically, because in the next round they’ll be able to blame Trump and other Republicans for looming state budget cuts and layoffs of first responders.

“They got what they could get,” Biden said. “I’ve been in too many negotiations to second-guess anybody else’s.”

Still, Biden suggested that after four rounds of legislation designed primarily to stanch the economic bleeding, the next round should include more forward-looking investments that could help the economy start to recover and grow once the virus is contained. He suggested a “trillion-dollar infrastructure program that can be implemented really rapidly,” as well as “dealing with environmental things that create good-paying jobs.”

Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have suggested that “green stimulus” would be a non-starter with Republicans, but Biden said investments in light rail, clean drinking water, and half a million electric vehicle chargers on the nation’s highways could help retool the economy for the future.

Biden also argued that long-term growth initiatives are America’s only hope to rein in a budget deficit that has suddenly ballooned to an unprecedented $4 trillion, and is sure to continue to expand as Washington continues to spend. He said that repealing the bulk of Trump’s $2 trillion tax cut would help limit the red ink—“It wasn’t worth the powder it will take to blow it to hell”—but ultimately, restoring jobs and investing in the future is “the only thing that grows the economy back so the deficit doesn’t eat you alive.”

Biden has loved talking about stimulus ever since he ran the Recovery Act, and he sounded comfortable returning to the topic from his Delaware home, although there were a couple of typically hard-to-follow tangents, and one brief coughing interruption that he attributed to swallowing a peanut the wrong way.

His main theme was the contrast between his legendary harassment of the Cabinet secretaries, governors and mayors in charge of spending Recovery Act dollars—he reminded me that he spoke with every governor except Alaska’s Sarah Palin, most of them repeatedly—and “the malpractice of this administration.”

“There’s no coordination. There’s no accountability. Come on, the guy waits to hold up money because he wants to make sure his name is on the checks!” Biden said.

Biden has been firing off a steady stream of tweets attacking Trump for failing to make sure America has enough tests and protective equipment, for complaining about his media coverage, and most recently for suggesting that drinking bleach might help cure the virus. But while Biden clearly hopes to persuade some 2016 Trump voters to back him in November, he also needs to make sure that progressive Sanders and Warren supporters don’t stay home.

This week, Biden has taken flak from the left for including the corporate-friendly Democratic economist Lawrence Summers on internal calls. But on Friday night, he denounced corporate America as “greedy as hell,” echoing the structural critiques of the modern economy that fueled the Sanders and Warren campaigns.

He called for stronger assurances that small-business loans will go to small businesses, and that aid to larger corporations will come with strings prohibiting stock buybacks, executive bonuses or worker layoffs. But he also went beyond policy prescriptions, saying the pandemic might convince Americans that grocery clerks “and all the other folks out there saving our rear ends and risking their lives for eight bucks an hour” deserve a better deal. He thinks there could be a backlash against big corporations who have poured their profits into buybacks and dividends rather than worker training and research and development. He thinks the virus could deal a blow to short-term economic thinking and anti-government political thinking.

“I think there’s going to be a willingness to fix some of the institutional inequities that have existed for a long time,” Biden said. “Milton Friedman isn’t running the show anymore.”

Posted on

New York Times Reporter Complaint to YouTube Prompted Takedown of Bio-Tech Firm’s Video on UV Light Treatment for Coronavirus Patients




New York Times Reporter Complaint to YouTube Prompted Takedown of Bio-Tech Firm’s Video on UV Light Treatment for Coronavirus Patients






















Tap here to add The Western Journal to your home screen.

Posted on

Schiff Blocks Release Of Declassified Russia Probe Transcripts, Keeping Americans In The Dark

The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Rep. Adam Schiff is keeping the truth from the American people. He doesn’t want anyone – beyond those in Congress and the Intelligence Community – to have access to the closed door transcripts of witnesses that have been already been declassified regarding the FBI’s Russia probe.

Frustrating is mounting against Schiff, D-CA, and so is patience among those in the administration, Congressional lawmakers and intelligence community who believe the American people have a right to see for themselves the testimony given by 53 witnesses behind closed doors during Congressional investigations into the FBI’s handling of the Russia probe.

Schiff obviously wants to control what people see in a desperate bid to keep the discredited Russia collusion narrative alive

There’s a reason Schiff is fighting back, despite the unanimous bipartisan vote to release the transcripts in the fall of 2018. Schiff doesn’t want you to know the truth. The truth will destroy his credibility and the deceitful disinformation campaign he worked so hard to spread against President Donald Trump and his administration for years. This is the major reason why he has fought so diligently against his own committee’s vote and why he has scrambled behind the scenes on Capitol Hill to keep the documents, which should have been made public within weeks or months of the vote, from every seeing the light of day.

Many sources in the administration, who are familiar with the process, have said the same.

“It’s really concerning Adam Schiff is negating the bipartisan vote to release these transcripts to the public,” said an administration official, with knowledge of the declassification process. “He’s even going against his own prior statements about transparency. Schiff obviously wants to control what people see in a desperate bid to keep the discredited Russia collusion narrative alive.”

Schiff’s narrative, which is already laden with holes, will completely fall apart if the transcripts of the 53 witnesses in the FBI’s ‘so-called’ Russia collusion probe go public. According to sources, 43 of the transcripts have already been declassified. Ranking Republican member Devin Nunes has pointed the finger at Schiff, saying he is acting as a blockade in preventing the release of the documents. Nunes, who was a guest on the Sara Carter Show last month, also stressed the importance of making public the secret testimony of former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, in which he discussed his controversial handling of the so-called whistleblower complaint regarding Trump and Ukraine. Nunes said, like the transcripts regarding the Russia hoax, Schiff is fighting to keep Atkinson’s testimony secret. Nunes, along with other senior Republican lawmakers, have an ongoing investigation into Atkinson. Without sharing details, Nunes said Atkinson either lied to members of Congress or he needed to ‘seriously’ clarify his statements.

Some of the testimony being kept from the public includes former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, longtime Trump friend Roger Stone, as well as former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. There’s also testimony of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Perkins Coie lawyers Michael Sussman, a former DOJ lawyer who passed along alleged details about Russian interference to former FBI general counsel James Baker. Moreover, there is Don Jr’s testimony, former White House aide Hope Hicks and Marc Elias, the chairman who was the Clinton campaign’s general counsel that hired the embattled research firm Fusion GPS to investigate the debunked theory that Trump conspired with Russia.

Those transcripts have been kept from the public by Schiff, D-CA, because it is damaging to their “impeachment scam,” said Nunes on the podcast.

But pressure is mounting and more and more against Schiff.

Last week, John Solomon with Just The News, published a letter Schiff sent in 2019 to then DNI Dan Coats.

The letter specifically ordered that the witness transcripts not be shared with President Trump, nor the White House lawyers. He made this clear, even if the declassification process required sharing, Solomon noted.

“Under no circumstances shall ODNI, or any other element of the Intelligence Community (IC), share any HPSCI transcripts with the White House, President Trump or any persons associated with the White House or the President,” Schiff wrote in a March 26, 2019 letter to then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.

“Such transcripts remain the sole property of HPSCI, and were transmitted to ODNI for the limited purpose of enabling a classification review by IC elements and the Department of Justice,” Schiff added.

On Friday, a senior intelligence official told the The Washington Examiner that “Schiff is thwarting the will of the House Intelligence Committee as expressed in the bipartisan vote in September 2018 to make these transcripts public. He has appointed himself arbiter of what the public should see and has refused to allow the White House to review its own equities, making declassification of 10 of the transcripts impossible. It’s difficult to imagine any motive other than Schiff is still trying to control the narrative on Russia collusion.”

Schiff, on the other hand, is deflecting and instead has attempted to accuse acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell of ‘undermining critical intelligence functions.’ Nothing could be further from the truth, as I recently reported.

Grenell is in the process of restructuring the DNI. It is something that should have happened years ago. Further, Grenell has been overseeing changes that have had consequences for U.S. national security after numerous classified leaks have found their way to the media after private briefings to congressional members.

Grenell argued in a recent letter to Sen. Mark Warner, D-VA, that leaks to the media after classified intelligence briefings with lawmakers on foreign election interference have presented serious concerns and mounting challenges for the intelligence community. Grenell noted that those leaks give “our adversaries unnecessary advantage during a critical time for our nation,” stated the letter which was first published by SaraACarter.com. 

In fact, it is presumed that Schiff has leaked significant information and even lied about that information to the media. He manipulates information that public can’t see for themselves.

On one side, he argues for having access to more classified information but on the other side he wants to keep information that’s already been declassified from the public. All you have to do is ask why?

For nearly four years the Democrats and former senior officials from the Obama administration have done everything in their power to create a narrative that has divided our country and destroyed lives. Those officials have tainted agencies like the FBI, CIA and other intelligence services by weaponizing the system against political opponents.

Schiff has played a significant role in aiding those officials, like former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey and others to do so.

If Schiff has nothing to hide and nothing to worry about then he needs to move out of the way. If he does have something to hide, he will continue to fight to keep the American public in the dark.

Here’s my message to Schiff: If you want transparency Chairman let’s have it, release your blockade on the 53 transcripts and let the American people decide for themselves.

Posted on

Former Hillary Adviser Calls Biden To Drop Out: ‘We Lose All Moral Authority’ If We Don’t Take Tara Reade Seriously

Peter Daou called Saturday for former vice president and presumptive 2020 Democratic nominee Joe Biden to drop out of the race.

Citing new evidence of possible sexual misconduct, Daou — who had previously advised both former Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry — argued that the party could not afford for Biden to not take the accusations of former aide Tara Reade seriously. (RELATED: Biden Accuser Tells Us New Video Evidence Proves Her Allegations Are True)

Daou began by saying that “BIDEN SHOULD WITHDRAW,” noting that, while he respected the will of the American people, “Credible rape accusations are disqualifying or we have NO moral standards.”

Predicting “potential catastrophe in Nov.,” Daou went on to suggest that any number of candidates who had already bowed out of the race could come back to replace Biden — or that Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders could simply press play on his paused campaign.

Calling a Biden withdrawal both “the ethical position AND the smarter strategy to beat Trump,” Daou went on to say that Democrats would “lose ALL moral authority if we embrace ‘the lesser of two accused rapists.’”

Daou followed his initial thread with several addendums, the first of which addressed his position on sexual assault accusations regardless of the party affiliation of the accused. Arguing that #MeToo could not be partisan if it were to have any meaning, he said that the same standard should be applied to former President Bill Clinton.

The second addressed Sanders and the fact that he was calling for Biden’s withdrawal on moral grounds rather than an effort to promote the Vermont senator. “This is about RED MORAL LINES. Sexual assault is unquestionably one of those lines,” he tweeted.

Daou’s overall assessment was that a campaign based on the “lesser of evils” would result in failure. “If you really want to win, DO NOT COMPROMISE BASIC MORAL STANDARDS. It is a sure formula for losing,” he explained.

Daou concluded with an attack on Democratic leadership in Congress, naming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer specifically and blaming them for allowing a number of President Donald Trump’s policies to get through.

Daou joined a number of people on both sides of the aisle in sharing the hashtag #DropOutBiden in the wake of the most recent information about Tara Reade’s alleged sexual assault.

Posted on

Hollywood Has Full Meltdown Over Trump Disinfectant Injection Comments

Hollywood went into full meltdown mode over President Donald Trump’s comments on Thursday about possibly using ultraviolet light and a disinfectant to treat coronavirus.

As per usual, the Hollywood liberals used fake news to attack President Trump, claiming that he had advocated for the use of household cleaners like bleach for treatment—which he didn’t actually do.

During Thursday’s press conference, Trump was responding to comments made by Dr. Bill Bryant, head of the Science and Technology Directorate at the Department of Homeland Security. The expert had just discussed new government research that concluded that COVID-19 did not survive long under solar light, warmer temperatures, and more humid conditions. He went on to say that disinfectants had been effective in treating the virus.

“So I asked Bill a question some of you are thinking of — if you’re into that world, which I find to be pretty interesting,” President Trump said, according to Breitbart News. “So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said, that hasn’t been checked but you’re gonna test it. And then I said, supposing it brought the light inside the body, which you can either do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you’re gonna test that too, sounds interesting.”

“And I then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute, and is there a way you can do something like that by injection inside, or almost a cleaning,” Trump added. “Because you see it gets in the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that.”

The context of Trump’s remarks did not stop the liberal elites of Hollywood from using complete lies to attack him.

“Anyone who still listens to trump and takes his ‘medical advice’ should, in fact, inject bleach to fight the corona virus,” said “The Social Network” star Armie Hammer in a tweet, even though Trump neither offered medical advice nor advocated for the use of bleach.

Comedic actor Kumail Nanjiani called the president “breathtakingly stupid.”

“Two and a Half Men” star Jon Cryer also pushed the lie that Trump had called for Americans to inject themselves with cleaning fluid.

Comedian Chelsea Handler went so far as to call for Trump to be injected with coronavirus and for his family to then be exposed to it.

Not wanting to miss out on the fun, deranged Trump-haters Bette Midler and Kathy Griffin got in on the action as well.

Finally, “Star Trek” actor George Takei said that he wouldn’t mind seeing Trump inject himself with disinfectant.

Hollywood liberals don’t care about facts when it comes to Trump, as they have let their hatred of him consume them so much that they are willing to use any lie to take him down. The average American is not buying what they’re selling, however, so they should not kid themselves that their tantrums are accomplishing anything when it comes to Trump’s reelection chances.

This piece was written by PopZette Staff on April 25, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
Trumps snubs press at Friday virus briefing, walks out
Michigan to strip governor of reopening powers
Trump walks out on fake news reporters

Posted on

SCOTUS refuses to block Trump’s “public charge” rule

Back in January, the Supreme Court cleared the way for a new public charge rule put in place by the Trump administration. The rule allows US immigration officials to consider a broader spectrum of public assistance programs, such as food stamps and Section 8 housing when considering whether or not green card applicants are self-sufficient. Several blue-state attorneys general sued to have the rule blocked, gaining victories in four lower courts. But by January, the matter seemed settled in favor of the White House.

A different group of attorneys general, led by New York State, had asked the court to revisit the ruling in light of the current coronavirus pandemic. That request apparently didn’t carry enough weight because the justices rejected the request without comment yesterday. (The Hill)

The Supreme Court on Friday denied a request to block the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule during the coronavirus health crisis.

A group of state attorneys general had asked the court to issue an injunction against the rule, which links a migrant’s eligibility for legal status with the likelihood that he or she will rely on public assistance.

The court had decided earlier this year to allow the rule to go into effect, but the group of state officials, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), had asked the justices to revisit the decision in light of the ongoing pandemic.

The court did not publish an opinion on its decision not to grant the request, nor did it publish a vote tally for the move.

The curious part about this decision was that the court didn’t reveal the results of the vote and offered no explanation of the decision. They simply passed on the request. This does, however, leave the door open for the plaintiffs to continue their attempt in the Southern District of New York, which has rarely seen an attempt to Resist the Bad Orange Man that wasn’t approved.

There are a few states involved, but the effort is being headed by New York Attorney General Letitia James. As you may recall, she ran for office in 2018 not on a promise to enforce the laws of the Empire State and keep New Yorkers safe, but to Resist President Trump at every turn. And she’s been good to her word, filing all manner of lawsuits against the White House, many of which are barely related to the specific needs of New York.

Well, to be fair, that’s not all she’s done. Ms. James as also been a vocal proponent of criminal just reform and bail reform laws in New York, as well as the ongoing efforts to “empty the jails.” That’s really worked out fabulously thus far, at least if you happen to be a criminal.

Looking at the supposed basis for this suit, we see yet another elected official who never lets a good pandemic crisis go to waste. Having failed to stop the Public Charge Rule on its merits, she and her cohorts are now claiming that the novel coronavirus crisis makes it imperative that everyone, legal or illegal, has full access to medical care to prevent them from infecting anyone else. That argument would hold a lot more water if, (a) hospitals weren’t already required to provide medical care to anyone presenting themselves, no questions asked, and, (b) some areas in New York City are still seeing so many cases that you might not be able to get an ICU bed even if you have the best health insurance in the world.

But as I said, this is the authoritarian nature of executive branch elected officials during a crisis. We’ve been seeing it from officials in both parties ever since the virus really got its legs under it and shot off to a running start. Whether it’s closing down businesses, ordering people to stay home, or restricting freedom of movement, everyone is getting in on the act. And in this case, Letitia James is trying to use the pandemic as a lever to force the courts in a direction that’s already been rejected.