Monday, April 19, 2021

In Closing Argument, Prosecutor Tearfully Addresses Each Juror By Name, Phone Number, And Street Address


MINNEAPOLIS, MN—Prosecutor Steve Schleicher delivered powerful closing arguments today in the Derek Chauvin trial. In one especially touching moment, he made sure to individually address every member of the jury by name, phone number, and street address.  

"I call on you, [redacted] whose phone number is [redacted] and who lives at [redacted]," he said through tears. "Do the right thing and pronounce the defendant guilty. And you [redacted], who can be reached at [redacted] and usually comes home each night at 6pm, I implore you to do what's best for you and your adorable 2-year-old boy. It would be a shame if Antifa found out where he goes to school."

Media reports indicated the jury appeared very moved by the closing arguments, as they were all shaking and crying by the end of them.

In yet another touching gesture, Antifa has already shown up at all the addresses with bricks and Molotov cocktails to help protect them in case any fascists show up. 


Maxine Waters Demands Guilty Verdict in Derek Chauvin Trial, OR ELSE Violent Confrontation In The Streets


82-year-old Maxine Waters is one of the most vitriolic racial antagonizers in the nation.  During the George Zimmerman trial Maxine Waters demanded a guilty verdict.  During the investigation of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson she demanded a murder indictment based on the demonstrably false “hands-up, don’t shoot” claims.  After the 2016 election Waters demanded that people physically confront Trump officials in restaurants and gas stations, “get up in their faces” and make them uncomfortable; in short, Maxine Waters consistently demands political violence.

There is zero doubt in my mind that Obama’s crew of racial antagonists are orchestrating and manipulating events around the trial of Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd.  All political arrows are being deployed from the quiver of racial hate and division.  Even the racially driven comments by Meghan Markle on the eve of the trial beginning were not random.   The activated political leftists are once again drum-beating for violent confrontation.

Following her pattern, the California representative traveled to Minnesota’s riot-plagued Brooklyn Center last night and called for people to get even “more confrontational” if Derek Chauvin is acquitted. She is blatantly endorsing political violence and mob anarchy. “We’re looking for a guilty verdict” she said, adding “If we don’t, we cannot go away, we’ve got to get more confrontational.” WATCH:




Cause of Death for Officer Brian Sicknick Released, Major Blow to Media and Democrat Narrative


(Leah Millis/Pool via AP)

The official cause of death has been released for Officer Brian Sicknick, who was repeatedly claimed by the mainstream media — and even some on the right — to have been murdered on January 6th. According to the determination, Sicknick died of natural causes, having suffered two strokes later that evening after the unrest at the Capitol had subsided.

This per the Washington Examiner.

Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, whose death was initially believed to be caused by rioters during the Jan. 6 insurrection, succumbed to natural causes stemming from a stroke the day after the violence, according to the top medical examiner in the nation’s capital.

Francisco J. Diaz, the chief medical examiner for Washington, D.C., told the Washington Post that Sicknick died on Jan. 7 after suffering two strokes and he did not suffer an allergic reaction to any chemical irritants. irritants.

This is an undeniable blow to the assertions that Sicknick died as a result of something that happened to him on January 6th. Not only did he suffer multiple strokes, but those strokes also were not brought on by any chemical irritant such as pepper spray. That was a going theory by prosecutors until this point. The medical examiner determined the death was via natural causes and there appears to be nothing that connects the event to the crowd that day.

It is absolutely disgusting to think back to how the news media, Joe Biden, Democrats at large, and some Republicans used Sicknick’s death to score political points. And they did so without one ounce of evidence to do so. Sicknick lay in state at the Capitol under the guise that he had been murdered by Trump supporters. We now know that story was completely false. What now? Will there be apologies to the family for using their loved one as a political prop? Will there be apologies to those who wanted to wait and see what was actually true in regards to the claims of “insurrection” that day?


Guantanamo prisoners now getting COVID-19 vaccine

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay detention center can begin getting the COVID-19 vaccine as soon as Monday, a senior defense official told The Associated Press, months after a plan to inoculate them was scuttled over outrage that many Americans weren’t eligible to receive the shots.

The new timing coincides with President Joe Biden’s deadline for states to make the vaccines more widely available across the U.S. Beginning Monday, anyone 16 and older qualifies to sign up and get in a virtual line to be vaccinated.

The defense official said all 40 men held at the Navy base in Cuba will be offered the vaccination to comply with legal requirements regarding the treatment of prisoners and to help prevent COVID-19 from spreading. Strict quarantine procedures had already sharply curtailed activities at the base and halted legal proceedings for prisoners facing war crime trials, including the men charged in the Sept. 11, 2001, attack.

“Obviously, we don’t want an outbreak of COVID on a remote island with the challenges that would present,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the effort ahead of an official announcement. 

 

 

The announcement in January that the military intended to offer the vaccine to prisoners sparked intense criticism, particularly among Republicans in Congress, at a time when COVID-19 vaccines were just being rolled out to troops and civilians at Guantanamo and were not widely available in the United States.

Several Republican members of Congress backed legislation that would have blocked Guantanamo prisoners from receiving the vaccine until all Americans had the opportunity to receive it.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy criticized the decision on Twitter. “President Biden told us he would have a plan to defeat the virus on day 1,” the California Republican said on Jan. 30. “He just never told us that it would be to give the vaccine to terrorists before most Americans.”

Though the decision to vaccinate the prisoners may still prove controversial, a key difference now is that the vaccine is now more widely available, both on the base and throughout the U.S. Half of all adults in the country have received at least one dose of the shot.

At Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, 56% of the total population of about 5,700 people, a mix of military personnel, contractors and dependents, has been vaccinated, and the shot is available to any adult who wants it, said Dawn Grimes, a public affairs officer for the base hospital.

 

 

There are about 1,500 people assigned to the task force that runs the detention center on the base. There have been no known cases of COVID-19 among them, nor among any of the prisoners.

Medical personnel have already discussed the vaccine with the prisoners. The military does not plan to disclose how many ultimately choose to accept it, the official said, citing medical privacy regulations.

The Biden administration announced in April that it could conduct a full review of detention center operations with the goal of eventually closing the facility, which opened in January 2002 to hold people suspected of links to al-Qaida and the Taliban after the Sept. 11 attacks.

At its peak in 2003, the detention center at the Navy base on the southeast tip of Cuba held nearly 680 prisoners, and it drew widespread condemnation over the treatment of the men held there, most without charges.

Closing it has proved a challenge because the U.S. has sought to continue holding and prosecute some prisoners, but Congress has prevented the transfer of anyone held there to facilities inside the country for any reason.

 

 Those still being held there include Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, who, along with four others, faces trial on charges that include murder and terrorism over the Sept. 11 attacks. The long-stalled case remains in the pretrial stage, and no hearings have been held in more than a year because of the pandemic.

 

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-us-news-coronavirus-pandemic-treatment-of-prisoners-cuba-4e088bd886fcf4508abadc65434a23a7?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter 

 

 


 

Inside the last matriarchy in Europe

 

Described as the last matriarchal society in Europe, the women on the Estonian islands of Kihnu and Manija are in charge of everything on the island.

But as Anne Helene Gjelstad documents in her photography book, the younger generation is moving away from the islands, putting this unique culture and identity at risk of getting wiped out.

 

 

The Joe Biden Who Never Was

Biden is proving the Biden he always was—as incompetent as Jimmy Carter, without the latter’s probity. He may prove as corrupt as Bill Clinton yet without his animal energy.


These are the most radical first three months of a presidency since 1933, the most divisive—and certainly the most dangerous. And its catalyst is the myth of ol’ Joe from Scranton who has unleashed furies and hatreds never quite seen in modern American history.

“Woke” Joe Biden

At an age when most long ago embraced a consistent political belief, late septuagenarian Joe Biden suddenly reinvented himself as our first woke president. That is ironic in so many ways because Joe’s past is a wasteland of racialist condescension and prejudicial gaffes. For much of the 1980s and 1990s, he positioned himself as the workingman’s Democrat from Delaware (or, as Biden once beamed, “We [Delawareans] were on the South’s side in the Civil War.”). In truth, he exuded chauvinism well beyond that of his constituents. 

Biden’s concocted working-man schtick meant praising former segregationists of the Senate like Robert Byrd and James O. Eastland. He would talk tough about inner-city predators, even as he pontificated about his support for tough drug sentencing. Kamala Harris, without any political traction other than her race and gender, once predicated her unimpressive and early aborted presidential campaign on the single strategy of knocking Joe out of the primaries for his purported innate racism that hurt victims of color, such as herself, the deprived child of two Ph.Ds. 

Add up what Joe has said about race and it is hard to find any major political figure of either party who has been so overtly race-obsessed. His corny Corn Pop fables positioned Joe as the white working-class everyman. Indeed, he took on supposed gang bangers from the ghetto, standing them down, no less, with his own custom-cut chain. 

On the paternalistic flip side, Joe kindly allowed young African-Americans at poolside the chance to stroke their heroic lifeguard’s shimmering golden leg hairs, or so he tells us. 

As vice president, Biden condescendingly warned an audience of successful black professionals that a rather meek Mitt Romney had the superhuman ability to “put y’all back in chains.” 

Indeed, he warned them in a fake black patois, reminiscent of Hillary Clinton’s grating “I don’t feel no ways tired.” In Bidenland, donut shops are full of Indians and the sum total of Barack Obama is the fact he was supposedly “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” 

We assume then that Joe was suggesting that Shirley Chisholm and Jesse Jackson could barely speak, were unkempt, and perhaps ugly in comparison to Barack Obama. The latter, other than his diction, fastidiousness, and appearance, apparently to Joe had not much to offer the country. 

It is hard to accept that these crazy musings were only the stuff of pre-woke Joe Biden. Last week in a joint press conference with the Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, Biden true to form referred to the 29-old Masters golf champion Hideki Matsuyama as the “Japanese boy,” as in “You got a Japanese boy coming over here . . .” 

For the hyper-Left, one-strike-and-you’re-out, take-no-prisoners, media, racialist—and now president—Biden presents a dilemma: hammer him for what would have imploded other presidents? Stay mute and keep taking the hit as journalistic hypocrites and sycophants? Leak and whisper that he is to be excused on the grounds he is non compos mentis? Or leak and whisper it’s past time proof that Kamala Harris must now assume her birthright?

Joe, remember, was quarantined in the 2020 campaign. His rare communiques were prepped and edited by a cloister of handlers. No matter: even then he still managed to go full racist Joe and write off two media hosts with racial put-downs—one with that now progressive signature, condescending inner-city slang, as he announced “You ain’t black.” 

When asked about his own cognitive issues, Biden snapped back at African-American CBS reporter Erroll Barrett: “ That’s like saying you, before you got on this program, you take a test where you’re taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie?” 

The irony, of course, is that his African-American interlocutor fit neither of Joe’s stereotypes, but his own son, drug-addled Hunter, most surely did.

Joe has been exempt from any scrutiny because he is metamorphosed into a hard leftist and thus was still useful, despite Barack Obama’s earlier prescient warning to peers, “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f— things up.” Obama later repeated with emphasis that straight talk with fatherly advice about a possible Biden presidential run in 2020: “You don’t have to do this, Joe, you really don’t.” But he really did, despite clairvoyant Barack’s fear of something like Biden’s first public 100 days. 

Biden ironically benefits from the cognitive issues that surround his public appearances as though he were an equal-opportunity, reckless loudmouth, without regard to race or gender. For example, on the campaign trail, Biden called a young New Hampshire co-ed at a town hall a “lying dog-faced pony soldier.” He ridiculed an Iowa town hall white male questioner as a “damn liar” and “fat.” If a politician is crazy enough to smear strangers as liars and obese, then he can say anything, anywhere, anytime to anyone, black or white?

Joe Biden, Uniter

The message of the Biden campaign was one-dimensional: good ol’ Joe was the antidote to Trump’s tweets and leaked Oval Office trash talk. He would “unite” us. Yet, there was no proof that Biden was ever a uniter. (Remember his dishonest ad hominem interrogations of Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork?) When he boasted on two occasions of taking Trump behind the proverbial gym bleachers to beat him up, he was channeling his earlier repertoire of he-man stories of slamming faces into lunch counters and such. 

But by staying incommunicado and absent from the national media’s daily photo-ops, Biden still remained everyman from Scranton. And the media agreed that in comparison to the hard-Left sorry Democratic field—Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke—Biden’s decaying conservative pupa offered possibilities.

If unity is defined as achieving record-low minority unemployment, or enhancing the entry-level wages of working Americans by curtailing massive illegal immigration or raising middle-class incomes after years of stagnation, then Biden will not be a uniter. 

Calling opponents Neanderthals, chumps, dregs, and racists, and denigrating those who support modest requirements of presenting an ID to vote with slurs like Jim Crow are not lowering the temperature but vintage Biden.  

NeverTrump conventional wisdom that Joe Biden would govern as a moderate four-year caretaker, restoring “decency” to the office and “normal discourse” had no support in anything Joe had said or done in the past. 

Some of us warned that Joe Biden might well become something far more than just a one-term president. Rather than holding off the revolutionary Left for a term, Biden, already a resentful sort, more likely would see his presidency as a chance to be the 21st century’s FDR—and a former underappreciated understudy’s final backhand to Barack Obama who talked of, but never delivered, the progressive dream.

Joe is liberated, not shackled, by his age and fragility. Just one term, the chance that he might lose the entire Congress in 2022, the left-wing, unhinged venom of the New Democratic Party—these were never reasons to reach out or find compromise. 

Rather they were urgent goads to accelerate and ram through as many structural changes that would not just move the country leftward now, but become hard to undo in the future—even without a mandate, without a majority in the Senate, without a safe margin in the House, and without an agreeable Supreme Court. The more beat-the-clock extremism now, the more left-wing canonization later.

So far the Uniter is trying to federalize all voting laws to more or less make Election Day an abstraction and to ensure that early and mail-in ballots always have an authentication rate of 99.9 percent. 

He wants to pack the court, admit two new states, end the filibuster, trash the Electoral College, keep the border open, and explore reparations and cash payments to illegal immigrants. “He” of course is also a construct. Biden has outsourced all these initiatives to “experts.” They understand that a president who wishes to be remembered as great for something won’t worry much about the nuts and bolts of the operation. 

Competent Joe Biden

Joe Biden was never stable or steady. Robert Gates notoriously emphasized his ubiquitous ineptitude when he said Biden has “been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

 A “Biden Plan” usually is a contorted mess (cf. his oversight of “shovel-ready jobs” and “cash for clunkers” in 2009, the latter being a program he now wishes to resurrect). The Biden idea to trisect present-day Iraq was a prescription for a new Middle East Balkans. He gave loud support for interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya—only to orphan them when the news cycle pronounced them lost. 

In just 100 days, Biden is determined to destroy the prior calm of the Middle East by resurrecting a near-comatose Iran, as he yearns to reenter the Iran deal and all the appendages of that disaster, such as empowerment for Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. 

Yes, Putin is a thug, but a peculiar sort of one with over 7,000 nuclear weapons. So when Biden nonchalantly calls him a killer and announces he “will pay a price,” such thugs do two things: they get angry at being called what they are, and they investigate whether their offender has any clout to back up the invective.  

Putin assumes that Biden, our “point man” on Ukraine from 2009-2016, was familiarly corrupt, given his braggadocio about firing a prosecutor who looked too closely at his shady family’s concessions in Ukraine. Biden was in charge during the “reset” years, when the United States forbade the sale of offensive weapons to Ukraine, following the Russian aggrandizement in Eastern Ukraine. 

Biden was a status quo advocate of the pre-COVID China policy: urge Wall Street and corporate America to partner with Beijing, outsource and offshore, and claim the resulting bicoastal elite financial bonanzas would “democratize” China. Chinese state syndicators surely would soon emulate real capitalists in action and absorb their Davos wokeness and corporate panache. The richer China got, and the poorer the deplorables became, then the more China would become Carmel or Martha’s Vineyard, or Tom Friedman’s utopian Solar City and high-speed rail heaven. 

Upright Biden

Biden dropped out of two prior presidential runs for being accused of past plagiarism and biographical misrepresentation. When it was disclosed that Hunter Biden’s laptop turned up with reference to the “Big Guy’s” 10 percent cut, and when a participant in the discussions of the corrupt Biden family syndicate’s machinations over how to divide its quid pro quo spoils explained the scam on national television, Biden swore the laptop was “Russian disinformation.” 

A corrupt media and a more conniving social media monopoly squashed the story. As insurance, Biden wheeled out dozens of compromised former national security mediocrities to swear he was a victim of “the Russians.” And now Hunter himself admits that he cannot quite deny that the laptop was his. That Biden slur of “the Russians did it” became even more resonant than the earlier affronts that Trump appeased them as they put bounties on U.S. troops in Afghanistan or he colluded with Putin to rig the 2016 election. 

Historians will one day argue over the moment when the #MeToo hysteria and deductive “believe women” mantra faded out. Was it the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation zoo, Christine Blasey Ford’s demonstrable sworn untruths, and the deification of the felonious Michael Avenatti? Or was it the assertions of Tara Reade that candidate Biden had sexually assaulted her years earlier with impunity?  

But whereas no one, despite Avenatti’s antics, could point to a Kavanaugh pattern of teen sexual rough-housing, Biden himself had been caught both on tape and by the public accusations of a number of women, that he is too handsy, that he hugs too hard, that he blows in the ears of the resistant, that he seems to swarm underage girls and to violate the private space of women without their permission—all to be written off as the perennially overly affectionate Uncle of a simpler, happier time gone by.

In his earlier caterpillar stage, Biden trumped Hillary Clinton’s “super predators” of the inner-city, with his own “racial jungle” talk. Now in his final moth manifestation, he retains the same racial slurs but has inversed his targets as he damns the new purveyors of “Jim Crow.” What stays the same is the signature Biden venom and the hyperbole—and his habit of projecting onto others his own tribalism.

Biden is proving the Biden he always was—as incompetent as Jimmy Carter, without the latter’s probity. He may prove as corrupt as Bill Clinton yet without his animal energy. His narcissism matches that of Al Gore and John Kerry, but without even their thin veneer of assumed authority. He is a greater racial divider than Barack Obama but without Obama’s smooth contextualizations. 

And the media that hated Trump and hyped his coarseness, worships Biden’s as it masks his far greater crudity.


Governor DeSantis Discuss Illegal Alien Crisis, Reckless ICE Policies + Current Legislative Moves


Florida Governor Ron DeSantis appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the current crisis at the border and how reckless the ICE and Border Patrol policies are by the JoeBama administration.  DeSantis points out the issues with criminal aliens not being deported and how sanctuary cities are a dangerous incentive for more illegal migration.

The Florida governor discusses how lawsuits by Florida are progressing and gives an update on the election reform bill currently going through the Florida Senate.  Of note, DeSantis stresses the importance of signature verification and ID to vote in elections as well as the efforts underway to prohibit ballot-harvesting.  Additionally, DeSantis talks about the battle against multinational corporations influencing legislation and the Big Tech censorship issue.

The governor reemphasizes the intent of Florida law to block vaccination passports and drawing “a line in the sand” based on privacy; while highlighting the effective COVID controls instituted by his administration.   Overall, a strong policy interview, WATCH:


Corporate media continue to attack Ron DeSantis because they know the risk he represents to the far-left agenda they support.

The Federal Reserve Should Not Finance Insane New Spending

 

Article by Jon N. Hall in The American Thinker
 

The Federal Reserve Should Not Finance Insane New Spending

Since the onset of the pandemic, Congress has been spending more money than ever. The pandemic hit when it was already projected that in fiscal 2020 the federal budget deficit would once again top $1 trillion. On October 16, however, USA Facts reported that the 2020 deficit was $3.1 trillion. That’s more than twice as much as the previous record of $1.4T set in 2009 in the wake of the financial crisis. On April 12, the Fiscal Times reported that the deficit for just the first six months of fiscal 2021 was $1.7T: “In March alone, the deficit came to nearly $660 billion, driven in large part by $339 billion in pandemic-relief payments to individuals.”

On top of that, the feds just enacted a $1.9T stimulus bill, and on March 31, Pres. Biden proposed his “infrastructure bill” that will run to $2.3T in new spending, and more new spending is promised. A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon Americans will be thinking that no one in D.C. cares about the federal deficit anymore, and that the “deficit hawk” is no longer an endangered species but is extinct. Nor could your average sentient lifeform conclude that our federal lawmakers have a clue about the immutable Law of Supply and Demand.

In other eras, some claimed “We are all socialists now” or “We are all Keynesians now.” Today, some might claim: “We are all MMTers now.” The “MMT” there is for Modern Monetary Theory, which says that we shouldn’t worry about deficits, because the Federal Reserve can safely “print” much more money than it has been. The Fed creates new money when it buys things, and the main thing the Fed buys is U.S. sovereign debt, i.e. U.S. securities, a.k.a. treasuries.

There were times when the Fed bought treasuries “directly” from the Treasury. In 2014, Kenneth D. Garbade posted a short history for the Federal Reserve Bank of New York headlined “Direct Purchases of U.S. Treasury Securities by Federal Reserve Banks.” For the last 40 years, the Fed has not bought treasuries directly from the Treasury. But the Fed can still buy new treasuries at auction in the primary market, which is the way the Fed creates money for Congress. When the Fed buys treasuries in the secondary market, such as in quantitative easing, Congress doesn’t get the proceeds.

When other buyers, like private citizens or foreign concerns, purchase treasuries, they do so with pre-existing dollars. The concern with the Fed buying treasuries is that it involves creating new money, thereby inflating the number of dollars. With more dollars out there, prices tend to rise. And that gets us into what was the Fed’s original mission -- preserving the buying power of the U.S. dollar.

Unfortunately, the Fed’s core responsibility of protecting the value of our currency has been diluted. With the Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, Congress heaped a new responsibility on the Fed: to promote maximum employment. Though it’s said that the Fed has a “dual mandate,” it actually performs a bunch of necessary services that should give one pause when considering ending the Fed, as some urge. Rather than ending the Fed, it should be reformed by ending its second mandate of maximizing employment.

In June 2020, right as the pandemic was raging, American Institute for Economic Research ran “It’s Time to End the Fed’s Dual Mandate” by Alexander Salter. The article is fairly short, quite readable, and this writer recommends it:

Ben Bernanke made it clear the Fed would take no part in the General Motors bailout. Janet Yellen nixed the idea of the Fed rescuing Puerto Rico.

While both of these ex-Fed chairs can hardly be called models of restraint, they were nonetheless correct on these issues. Their prudence was highly commendable. Alas, Jerome Powell seems to lack this prudence. And now that the precedent is set, we know it is only a matter of time before the money printer gets fired up again, for completely mistaken reasons. […]

For better or worse, the Fed is a creature of Congress. It must be Congress that reins it in. The American people can and must ask their representatives to end the dual mandate. It is time to refocus the Fed on what it is good at (aggregate demand stability) and away from what it is bad at (everything else).

It’s doubtful that the Congress under Chuck and Nancy will “rein in” the Fed in any way whatsoever as the Fed works pretty much the way they want it to. You see, tax hikes can’t begin to pay for all of the Democrats’ massive spending. So Congress must finance its imprudent improvident new spending by going further into debt. And since the “lender of last resort” has a printing press, the Dems can rely on a limitless supply of “helicopter money” courtesy of the Fed.

Salter, however, is right that the Fed’s dual mandate should end. Maximizing employment is the proper province of Congress, not the Fed, and it should be accomplished with fiscal policy, not the Fed’s monetary policy of money creation. Even so, Congress expects the Fed to come up with the cash for its spending. So if anything is going to rein in the Fed, it’ll probably be done by the Fed itself.

To appropriate Salter’s language, Chairman Powell should “make it clear” that the Fed will “take no part” in bailouts of California, Illinois, New York City, and other mismanaged governments. Powell also needs to put the quietus on any hopes that the Fed will bail out underfunded pension plans, especially the “defined benefit” pensions of government employees and unions. The Fed needs to stand up on its hind legs and say “No” to Congress: no more bailouts, no more money printing for insane new programs, no forgiveness of student debt, no, no, and no. If they think it’s a good investment, then let other lenders use their (pre-existing) old money to buy new treasuries.

I’m suggesting that the Fed resist Congress; that the Fed not buy the new debt being floated to pay for Chuck and Nancy’s wasteful new spending programs that have little to do with stimulus and infrastructure, (this brief editorial elegantly explains the fraud). Fed governors need to ask themselves if they really want to risk being the agents of the destruction of the currency.

MMTers aren’t so idiotic that they think that the Fed could, for instance, print a trillion dollars for each and every American citizen without affecting the buying power of the dollar. Even MMTers recognize limits. However, MMTers do seem to think that the “experts” in government can step in at just the right moment to head off inflation, and that we therefore don’t need to worry our pretty little heads off about the trillions being added to the deficit. But are the government experts really that competent? I have my doubts that they are, and think the Fed needs to err on the side of caution.

The Fed has no mandate to debase the currency just because Congress can’t control itself. It would be pathetic if the end of the American experiment were brought about by too much money. The Fed must change.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/04/the_federal_reserve_should_not_finance_insane_new_spending.html





Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage


Mystery Surrounding Ashli Babbitt’s Shooter Deepens as Curious Details About “Capitol Police” Emerge



On January 6th, an unarmed 14-year vet and American patriot by the name of Ashli Babbitt was murdered inside the US Capitol.

Ashli was shot in the neck by a federal officer. The DC coroner listed the cause of death as a “homicide.”

And since that fateful day, Ashli’s murder has been shrouded in mystery.

Unlike other high-profile police incidents, like George Floyd and Daunte Wright, Ashli’s killer-cop has never been named. We have no idea who he is. All we officially know about this federal officer is that he will not be charged with Ashli’s murder.

During an investigation that appears to have been conducted under a cloak of extreme secrecy, it was determined there wasn’t “sufficient evidence to support criminal prosecution.”

Isn’t that convenient?

From The Wall Street Journal:

The police officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol won’t face federal criminal charges in connection with her death, the Justice Department said Wednesday.

Federal prosecutors examined video footage on social media, interviewed the officer and other witnesses, gathered evidence from the scene and studied autopsy results, officials said.

“Based on that investigation, officials determined that there is insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution,” the Justice Department said in a statement announcing the closure of its probe.

It’s a baffling conclusion when you look at the criminal justice circus we’re watching unfold in Minneapolis with the Derek Chauvin trial. That officer is facing a murder charge involving a man who ingested enough Fentanyl to kill a herd of elephants.

The fact that we don’t know this officer’s name is concerning enough, but what’s equally concerning is that we don’t even know what agency he belongs to.

Was this officer part of the Capitol Police force?

Well, the secrecy surrounding the case would suggest that yes perhaps he was, but we’re only speculating.

Everything is a mystery when it comes to the Capitol Police because they operate under a totally different set of rules.

Thanks to their buddies in Congress, the U.S. Capitol Police do not follow the same public reporting or transparency protocols that most other major police forces do.

For example, if someone is shot outside the Capitol by a DC police officer, the department is required by law to release the names of the officers involved in the shooting.

The Capitol Police force is not required to release the names of officers involved in any shooting, and most-often times they choose to withhold that information from the public.

Not to mention, Capitol Police are also under no obligation to respond to FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests.

The Capitol Police are part of the Legislative Branch and are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. That means if a journalist or watchdog group asks for records on police misconduct or inspector general reports, they’ll come up empty because Capitol Police are not required under the law to comply.

Not very “transparent” policing, is it?

If the man who shot Ashli Babbit is not in fact a member of the Capitol Police, is it possible that authorities are studiously hiding his agency affiliation in order to avoid FOIA requests which don’t apply to Capitol Police but could for other agencies (say, the Secret Service).

Some more facts. Unlike most major police departments, Capitol police are not equipped with body cameras.

Honestly, it’s mind-boggling that Democrats are demanding a nation-wide discussion on police reform and transparency, yet the officers who are sworn to protect them have almost no transparency and no accountability whatsoever to the public who pay their salaries.

One can’t help but wonder if the lack of “transparency” within the Capitol Police force is not only about covering up questionable police activity, but also protecting the privacy of politicians. Just imagine what we’d find out about our sacred political figures if we had access to police reports and body cam footage from inside the Capitol?

Prior reporting on the Capitol Police does not exactly inspire confidence either. Even by government standards their historical incompetence is enough to give pause.

Capitol Police say that the commander of officers on the House side of the Capitol left his service weapon unattended in a bathroom where it was discovered by another officer.

A spokeswoman for the department told Roll Call that Lt. Mike Byrd will be investigated after his Glock-22, which has no manual safety to prevent unintended firing, was found “during a routine security sweep” by another officer in a bathroom on Monday.

Monday’s incident appears to be the first unattended service weapon involving Capitol Police reported since 2015, when the department faced a rash of similar incidents including on where an officer’s loaded weapon was found on a toilet seat cover holder.

In another case that same year, a young child found an unattended gun in the bathroom of then-Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) office. That incident too involved a weapon without a traditional safety mechanism preventing unintended firing. [The Hill]

The American taxpayers who fund this “police force” are left with a million unanswered questions, growing suspicion and a lack of trust in their government officials.

Who was this officer that killed Ashli? Is he part of the Capitol Police, or is he a member of another government agency?

Apparently, we’ll never know.

If Democrats want to have a nation-wide talk about “law enforcement transparency and reform” then we need to start at the top with the Capitol Police. That way we can help make sure no other American citizen ends up like Ashli Babbitt, and that no other family is forced to go through this sort of hell on earth.