Sunday, May 1, 2022

Senator Tim Kaine Indicates Biden $33B Ukraine Dump Likely to be Packaged with Another $22B COVID Money


Joe Biden has asked congress for two supplemental spending packages, $33 billion for the Ukraine/NATO money laundering operation (supported by both wings of the DC UniParty), and an additional $22 billion to deal with COVID, ie the money DC will use to send to states for another round of mail-in ballots for the November mid-terms.

Hillary Clinton’s former Vice-Presidential running mate, Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, appeared on CBS Face the Nation to discuss.  As noted by Senator Kaine, the Senate will happily authorize the $33 billion for Ukraine; however, the COVID spending bill will more likely run into resistance from the Republicans in the Senate who want to extract some of their own Wall Street priorities.

The forward-looking solution, as it appears from the Kaine perspective, is for Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer to work out a deal where both spending packages are bundled. This approach gives cover to the DeceptiCon wing of the republicans to support the COVID mail-in ballot funding scheme, in order to keep their UniParty proxy war in Ukraine fully funded.  WATCH:



Are Democrats and Joe Biden up to their old election tricks?


Over the last 16 tortuous months of the Biden presidency, it’s become clear that the Democrats are running on empty.

They are not even trying to reset their electorally poisonous policies.

Politically this means they are heading for annihilation at the midterms. Yet they appear curiously relaxed, as if winning elections is no longer a priority.

One thing you know is that the Dems are not hiding under the duvet sucking their thumbs. Like the Fantastic Mr. Fox, they have a cunning plan.

They might not be any good at governing, but when it comes to seizing power by foul means or fair, they are world-class.

Which brings us to the thorny question of the 2020 election. Most Americans agree something wasn’t quite right about the new rules imposed under cover of COVID.

Forget Sidney Powell’s harebrained Kraken that never materialized.

There were lots of ways Democrats tried to tilt the playing field in their favor, some more successfully than others. Their pals in Big Tech censoring The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop coverage before the election was one triumph.

Now pesky evidence is starting to emerge of systematic schemes to subvert the electoral process — which must not be allowed to happen again if we are to restore faith in elections.

Following ‘mules’

The most compelling evidence to date has emerged in “2000 Mules,” the upcoming documentary by conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, who draws on research by election integrity group True The Vote to expose suspicious ballot harvesting.

Using cellphone geotracking and surveillance video, it shows a network of “mules” in battleground states busily collecting ballots from get-out-the-vote NGOs and stuffing them, a few at a time, into multiple drop boxes in the dead of night. 

The extent of the operation is jaw-dropping.

True the Vote bought three trillion geo-location signals from cellphones that were near drop boxes and also near election nonprofits, from Oct. 1, 2020, through to the election on November 3. In Georgia the end date covered the Jan. 6, 2021, run-off.

Then they went searching for “mules,” operatives who picked up ballots from election NGOs — such as Stacey Abrams’ outfit, “Fair Fight Action” — and then carried them to different drop boxes, depositing between three to 10 ballots in each box before moving to the next.

Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, chose the term “mule” because “it felt a lot like a cartel, it felt like trafficking . . . This is in its essence ballot trafficking . . . You have the collectors. You have the stash houses, which are the nonprofits. And then you have the mules that are doing the drops.”

Data analyst Gregg Phillips set a threshold for each mule to visit at least 10 drop boxes within a defined area and at least five visits to one or more NGOs. 

For example, in the Atlanta-metro area they drew a line around 309 drop boxes and bought all the cellphone data of people that had been near those drop boxes and NGOs.

That narrowed the search to 2,000 mules.

Then they went looking for public surveillance camera footage of those drop boxes. In all they found 4 million minutes across the country.

The results are stunning. When a mule is matched with video, you can see the scheme come to life.

A car pulls up at a drop box after midnight. A man gets out, looks around surreptitiously, approaches the box, stuffs in a handful of ballots and hightails it out of there. Then he goes to the next box, again and again.

After Dec. 23, 2020, Phipps noticed mules in Georgia started wearing gloves. He pinpoints the change to an indictment for ballot stuffing handed up in Arizona on December 22. “The way the FBI nailed them was fingerprints.” After that, mules started wearing gloves.

The data pattern is unmistakable, as D’Souza shows a spider web of routes taken by various mules between NGOs and drop boxes.

For each of the 2,000 mules the average number of drop box visits was 38, with an average five ballots deposited per visit. That’s 380,000 suspect votes.

D’Souza breaks down the numbers to see if they would have changed the outcome of the election.

In Michigan, 500 mules averaged 50 drop box visits, at five ballots per drop, giving you 125,000 suspect votes, not enough to overwhelm Biden’s 154,000-vote advantage over Trump. 

In Wisconsin, 100 mules averaged 28 drop box visits each, which gives us 14,000 suspect votes, 6,000 votes short of giving Trump the win.

But in Georgia, where 250 mules averaged 24 drop box visits each, we get 30,000 suspect votes, more than enough to overcome Biden’s 12,000 vote advantage. D’Souza moves Georgia’s 16 electoral votes into the Trump column.

In Arizona, 200 mules averaging 20 drop box visits makes 20,000 suspect votes, giving another 11 hypothetical electoral votes to Trump.

In Philadelphia alone, 1,100 mules averaged 50 drop box visits giving us 275,000 suspect votes which would flip the Pennsylvania result to Trump, giving him another 20 electoral votes.

“Shockingly, even this narrow way of looking at just our 2,000 mules in these swing states gives Trump the win with 279 electoral votes to Biden’s 259,” says D’Souza.

Focus on the future

There is no way to scrutinize those ballots now and see if they are fraudulent but if we must have drop boxes at election time, they need to be secure and under 24/7 surveillance.

Obviously something stinks. But the last thing Republican candidates — even the undeclared Donald Trump — should be doing on the campaign trail is focusing backward on their 2020 election loss. It makes them look like sore losers.

When I interviewed President Trump last year for my book “Laptop From Hell,” he kept bringing up the stolen election.

I told him I looked at it like a football game. Even if the umpire was biased and the game was rigged, it’s over. Best to put your efforts into winning the next game.

Trump didn’t like my analogy. “No,” he said, shaking his head. “It’s like Tiffany’s. They stole the diamonds, and we have to get them back.”

There’s no getting the diamonds back now. But we can stop the store being robbed again.

Housing migrants for votes

A fresh planeload of illegal migrants flew into White Plains Friday night and The Post followed a bus disgorging them in Yonkers and The Bronx. 

One of the residential complexes where a group was dropped off is affordable housing owned by the city.

The Department of Housing Preservation and Development is supposed to provide accommodation for the homeless and New Yorkers down on their luck. 

“In the midst of a housing crisis that is pricing New Yorkers out of their neighborhoods, it’s one of our best tools to keep people in their homes,” it boasts on its Web site.

But back in 2019, then-Mayor Bill de Blasio changed the rules to allow “undocumented” migrants to apply.

So New Yorkers will have to fend for themselves as they are displaced by a flood of non-citizens waved in by Gov. Hochul to help the Biden administration hide their self-inflicted border crisis. 

And now that New York allows non-citizens to vote in local elections, let’s not pretend they will keep separate voter rolls for state and federal polls. 

They are simply importing and pampering a new class of voters because the old ones got wise.

Joe running again? He doesn’t have a prayer

Joe Biden, who turns 80 in November, reportedly wants to run for a second term, presumably because his first term is going so swimmingly.

But at least one influential person apparently is not thrilled: his wife. Jill Biden has told family friends who say they don’t think Joe should run again in 2024: “From your lips to God’s ears,” meaning she hopes what they are saying is heard. 


X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- May 1st

 



Enjoy tonight's Nebraska rally! Here's tonight's news:


The Disinformation Governance Machine

It is critical that we stand up to and forthrightly reject the Biden Administration's unconscionable new assault on freedom.


Remember the date: April 27, 2022

That’s when the mask came off the creaky Orwellian juggernaut that is the Biden Administration. 

The senile rictus disappeared and something far more threatening took its place. 

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell called the enforcement mechanism of his totalitarian propaganda regime the “Ministry of Truth.” Appearing before the House Appropriations Subcommittee, the ironically named Department of Homeland Security was slightly more subtle. 

Too many people have read Nineteen Eighty-Four. Calling a government-funded effort to suppress criticism of the regime the “Ministry of Truth” would cause people to worry and complain. Instead, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced the creation of the “Disinformation Governance Board.” 

No, I am not making that up. 

I sympathize with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who said he wondered whether this new assault on free expression was a “belated April Fools’ joke.

Unfortunately, it’s not.  

Granted, it is as preposterous as an April Fools’ Day prank. So is its director, Nina Jankowicz, a 33-year-old anti-Trump hack, who is described—God help us—as an “internationally recognized expert on disinformation.” You can judge how expert by looking up her truly embarrassing videos on the subject (among many other subjects). 

So what will the Disinformation Governance Board actually do—besides, I mean, provide fodder for standup comics and incredulous commentators? In one sense, it is a little hard to say for sure since its actual duties and extent of its powers have yet to be spelled out.  

But one doesn’t need fine print to know that this new police force will have essentially two jobs.  

One job will be to suppress criticism. Former U.S. Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) is right. This is exactly the sort of thing, she told Fox News, one expects to see in dictatorships, not in free countries. The board, she said, amounts to a “department of propaganda” promulgated by a government that is afraid of its own people. Did someone discover that the president’s son had a laptop full of compromising, and probably criminal, information?  

Come down like a ton of bricks on anyone with the temerity to publicize that fact, especially if the discovery was made just before a presidential election.  

Now that Elon Musk has tendered his $44 billion offer to buy Twitter, that company may not be quite so reliable an ally of the totalitarian agenda of the Democrats.  

In 2020, Twitter froze the New York Post’s ability to share its content on the site and suppressed anyone who dared to comment on Hunter Biden’s laptop until the 2020 election was safely over. That might not happen now. People are wising up. Last year’s woke corporation might just be this year’s watchdog for genuine transparency.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson cut to the chase when he observed that neither Mayorkas nor the administration he serves wants freedom. What they want, Carlson said, is “power and to get power, they plan to control what you think.” 

Ponder what Mayorkas told the House subcommittee last week: 

We have so many different efforts underway to equip local communities, to identify individuals who very well could be descending into violence by reason of ideologies, of hate, false narratives, or other disinformation and misinformation propagated on social media and other platforms.

Translation: some people may disagree with us because of things they see or read or hear.  

Therefore, we need to tamp down the sources of those competing ideas. 

Which brings me to the second task of the Disinformation Governance Board.

Suppressing ideas the regime doesn’t like is only one part of the job. The other part is disseminating narratives pleasing to those in power. One hand is busy pulling out and poisoning what they regard as weeds. The other hand is nurturing the delicate shoots of the approved narrative. 

And it’s that part of the story that makes the name of this new agency so brilliant. Not only will it be on the lookout for contrary ideas to stamp out—governing, as it were, “disinformation”—but it will also need to foster and disseminate competing disinformation.

Hillary Clinton and her myrmidons in the media, the FBI, and the intelligence services did a fine job with the Russia collusion hoax. But think how much more effective an official, government-sanctioned service will be. No more amateur-hour stuff, no more wiping servers “with a cloth,” no more lying lawyers, no more leaked fabrications. Now the people in charge will have the full coercive power of the state behind them.  

Tucker Carlson said that the creation of this new chamber of the government’s department of anti-freedom drew “a line in the sand.” I hope he is right. The Biden Administration’s Orwellian assault on individual freedom is patent as daylight. It is critical that we stand up to and forthrightly reject this unconscionable assault on freedom.  

How? 

Carlson quotes Max Blumenthal, editor of The Grayzone, who responded with admirable forthrightness to a threatening letter from a government proxy. “Do you,” Blumenthal asked, “seriously expect us to grovel for approval from the same tentacle of the national security state and financial oligarchy that has rated CNN as a highly credible news source and whose board of advisors is a grotesque gallery of corporate propagandist spooks, documented liars, and war criminals who’ve never faced a scintilla of accountability for their actions?”

The answer, of course, is yes. That’s exactly what they expect.  

We must do everything in our power to disappoint them.


In the Pandemic Aftermath, Government Chooses Bread and Circuses


For his weekly monologue today, GBNews host Neil Oliver notes how government officials are now globally focused on stupid personality issues as a distraction from the complete mess they created.  Ironically, I just watched a Canadian parliamentary session yesterday where the most urgent policy for their assembly was ‘menstrual equity.’  Yes, you read that correctly.  It left me with that same bread and circuses thought as outlined by Oliver today.

Political leaders, not just in the U.K., are snipping and snarking at each other over the most ridiculous issues and personality points.  Do we really care about what kind of car the energy secretary drives and the hypocrisy it may represent?  Is there a purpose to the insufferable banality of it?  Indeed, they want us to move along, move past the issues they created with the pandemic nonsense.

They need us to participate in the great new pretense where consequences are inconsequential, discussion is disinformation.  We are to listen to their square dance music and participate gleefully, while pretending our economic barn isn’t burning down around us.  As the flames spread, we are supposed to ignore and forget the gasoline drums the politicians placed in the loft and just keep dancing….  However, most of us normal folk can’t ignore that it’s getting really hot in here.  WATCH:


(TRANSCRIPT) – We need some grown-ups in the room – and pronto. As things stand in this country, right this moment, we’re being governed by what appear to be outsized school children intent only on picking fights with one another in the playground, calling each other names.

As far as anyone can tell, the party of government and those of the opposition are interested only in themselves and each other. Life in a goldfish bowl has apparently given them five-minute memory spans. Round and round they swim, seeing nothing beyond the glass and having the same tiny fights with their fellow inmates again, and again, and again.

It’s narcissistic nonsense from a political class that demonstrably feels entitled to treat us proles with out-and-out contempt while they set about the petty business of personal point-scoring. This internecine squabbling is apparently supposed to keep us happy, thrilled by their clever verbal sparring. As if. More than anything else, the carryings on of Johnson, et al take me all the way back to my own days at school – watching the members of the various self-important cliques sniping at one another in hopes of being briefly seen to have come out on top.

Partygate, Cakegate, Beergate, Raynergate, Porngate – it’s one childish tantrum and spat after another. And we’re supposed to care who’s winning. Events on the green benches of the Commons this week just past have been like an episode of 80s comprehensive school drama, Grange Hill.

Zammo got caught in class with a copy of Razzle magazine stuffed down his trousers.

Tricia Yates was in bother again, on account of her skirt not being deemed appropriate for school and serial clown Tucker Jenkins was, as per usual, caught up in one hilarious scrape after another. How we didn’t laugh.

If their antics aren’t from the school playground then it might as well be Carry On Up The Dispatch Box. It’s nothing more or less than embarrassing and to a great extent the joke really is on us – because we give these characters our votes.

Of course – none of it is really funny at all. It’s pathetic, when you get right down to it. And we’re paying for this skit-show.

Sometimes you have to wonder if what we’re seeing – what we’re being treated to as some sort of amateur dramatics slapstick comedy – isn’t deliberate distraction. Feeding us full of popcorn at the circus is hardly an original tactic from MPs who need the peasants to look the other way. History is awash with times when the rulers of this state or that found themselves so out of their depth they had to fall back on the time honoured trick of giving the plebs something else to look at while the fires burned out of control elsewhere.

This country – this world, in fact – is a damned mess now … teetering on the brink of chaos. Here at home our elected representatives have pushed us with the cattle prods of their emergency laws into a swamp of financial ruin. Two years ago they locked us down, deliberately and knowingly bringing the juggernaut of the economy to a stuttering, juddering halt. They sprayed trillions of pounds of fake money, money they didn’t and never will have, in every direction – including straight into the pockets of chums and also right down the drain. Desperate voices cried out that lockdown was madness – guaranteed to cause every kind of harm. But those voices were silenced and our leaders carried right on, ignoring their own rules while force marching the population along a trail of tears to where we are now.

Trust me when I say I know I sound like a broken record on all this – ceaselessly banging away, week after week, about the same old stuff. But the fact remains no one is being held to account for any of it. Far from it – with every day thar passes it seems like more and more people are just too worn down to care anymore. Those decision-makers, who ignored warnings and calls, like the Great Barrington Declaration, for other, better ways of handling the situation, plainly think they’re off the hook.

A court ruled last week that the decision to send elderly patients from hospital to care homes was unlawful – and yet all former Health Secretary Matt Hancock seems intent on doing in the aftermath is pushing his self-serving memoirs to anyone who’ll listen.

Without so much as an acknowledgment of error, or wrongdoing, far less any sort of apology for stubborn disregard of warnings of hellish consequences for millions of silenced, essentially invisible people, those responsible have moved on, leaving the broken unheeded in their wake. And we’re letting them away with it for no better reason but that we’re tired of it all and have been handed, by the same people, even more to worry about instead. No one is more tired of thinking about this stuff, hearing this stuff and talking about this stuff than I am.

But if they think after two years that I will just call it quits, and meekly watch the rubble swept under the carpet, they can think again. For as long as I live I will not forget, far less forgive, this disaster of our leaders’ making.

There’s certainly a palpable desperation to see us us all move on, though.

“Don’t bother about that,” they say, “that’s old news! Bother about this! Look at her legs, check out the porn site on the screen of his mobile phone! Miss, Miss – he ate a cake – and him over there … he drank a bottle of beer!”

All of it shows they felt they had nothing to fear – and just went ahead and did as they saw fit while telling us something entirely different.

You know they call England the Mother of Parliaments? This shaming debacle, this parcel of rogues, hissing and spitting at each other like cats in a sack – this is the bunch we’re supposed to trust to navigate the great ship of state through the storm ahead … and without a doubt there’s a storm coming.

They’re calling it a cost of living crisis, of course, but it sounds more like financial ruin to me. Spiking, spiralling prices for anything and everything. Rising inflation … rising interest rates. Disrupted supply chains … dependence on other people’s energy. Shortages of this, that and the other. Let’s not forget, either, the mental and physical health tsunami for young and old alike. The NHS that was the focus of all efforts – the church that was to be saved at any cost – can’t meet the needs of untold numbers of the sick and dying. Every day, more questions are asked about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines – and with good reason – and yet still they push their concoctions – boosters, jabs for children and babies.

Lockdowns compromised young immune systems, impacted early development, robbed many of their educations … and yet no one is brought to account for any of it. Before long they’ll have the temerity to say we all made our own choices, personal responsibility and all that.

Now there’s war in Europe; talk of nuclear weapons being brought to bear for the first time since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. An energy crisis – caused not by war but by the madness of Net Zero and the lack of reliable domestic energy supply – might soon see the lights going out all over that continent.

Would-be authoritarians are skuttling around laying the foundations of Digital IDs and social credit systems that might create a world of human bondage. Allied with programmable digital currencies controlled by central banks we might be en route for lives in which privacy, let alone personal freedom, are consigned to the dustbin of history.

No matter where you look there’s trouble and strife and more on the way. And what are our lot up to? What are our elected representatives focussing all their attention upon – and thereby trying to focus our attentions too?

A months-old “he said she said” still rumbling on.

Yet more rank hypocrisy from Sir Beer Starmer, who turns out to have downed a few indoors with chums while simultaneously berating the PM for not placing harsh enough restrictions on the lives and loves of the electorate.

Infantile, degrading nonsense about the crossing and uncrossing of a woman’s legs, did she or didn’t she, and whether or not the PM was distracted by the scissoring.

Time out for a tax-payer funded perusal of porn on the green benches of the Commons.

The world is in flux as never before in our lifetimes. Pestilence, War, Famine and Death. The gang’s all here and back in Westminster it’s cake and skirts and Internet porn. Someone’s fiddling, right enough, and coming from somewhere not far away, there’s a smell of smoke.” (link)



The Cost of Student Loan Cancellation Would Be Higher Inflation, Say Experts

The Cost of Student Loan Cancelation Would Be Higher Inflation, Say Experts

(AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

There are many principles involved in canceling all or part of the $1.4 trillion in student loan debt, not the least of which is the moral hazard in forgiving debts freely assumed. But since the words “leftist” and “moral” rarely roll off the tongue in the same sentence, there are other principles involved that make forgiving student loan debt a terrible idea.

There is the question of fairness. Most of that student loan debt is being held by graduates more than able to pay it back.

The Hill reports that “The field with the most loan forgiveness per borrower is dentistry, where the average borrower would offload $250,000 of debt onto taxpayers. Borrowers in the field of medicine would have an average of $174,000 forgiven. And borrowers in law would have an average of $119,000 forgiven.”

The moral hazard and the unfairness of student loan forgiveness pale in comparison to the practical reason not to forgive the debt: several experts point to the likelihood that inflation would get a boost with student loan forgiveness.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), says that “debt cancellation may be an extremely appealing political talking point, but it is not good policy.”

Fox Business News:

“It is costly, inflationary, poorly targeted, and fails to address the root problems in our higher education financing system,” MacGuineas said in a statement Thursday. “Full debt cancellation would be a massive hand-out to rich doctors and lawyers, would worsen our inflation crisis, and would cost almost as much as the entire 2017 tax cuts.”

“Even partial debt cancellation would be costly, regressive, and inflationary,” she continued. “Forgiving $10,000 per person of debt would cost as much as universal pre-K or a full extension of the expanded ACA subsidies.”

“Either the President is serious about reducing deficits and getting inflation under control, or he is not. The White House can’t have it both ways,” MacGuineas added. “We need to be focusing on a serious and effective agenda that prioritizes sound policies, not poorly targeted political giveaways.”

Student loan debt is an easy target for far-left radicals like Senator Elizabeth Warren. But she’s playing a shell game with the economy in proposing it.

Do any Democrats ask what the inflationary impact would be of canceling hundreds of millions of dollars in student loans?

Noah Weinrich, a spokesperson for Heritage Action, the campaign-side sister organization to conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital that canceling student debt “would raise inflation by up to 20%.”

“Make no mistake: this is a handout to wealthy, educated voters that will come at the expense of higher prices for food, gas, and energy for working American families who won’t see a dime of relief — not to mention higher taxes,” he continued. “This is an absurd election-year gimmick that punishes most Americans.”

Manhattan Institute senior fellow Brian Riedl was less emphatic about the inflationary impact of canceling the debt. He thinks its impact on inflation would be negligible. But that doesn’t make it good policy.

“The problems with student loan forgiveness are that the policy would transfer these liabilities over to the taxpayers (raising deficits and ultimately taxes), disproportionately benefit upper-income attorneys and doctors, and also send a signal to current and future college students that they should borrow even more on the expectation of future loan forgiveness programs,” he added.

That’s it, exactly. Unless there is massive, radical reform of student loan programs — not just the major programs like Pell Grants and Sallie Mae — we’re going to be right back where we started 20 years from now.

And radical lefties — maybe Senator Warren’s kid — will once again be blaming the crisis on greedy bankers and the rich.


Nina Jankowicz, Biden’s ‘Disinformation Board’ Chief, Must Be Placed in an Ankle Monitor

Nina Jankowicz, Biden’s ‘Disinformation Board’ Chief, Must Be Placed in an Ankle Monitor

Charles W. Cook - National Review

Nina Jankowicz(@wiczipedia/Twitter)

Linguistically, the name of the Department of Homeland Security has always sounded a little off to me — a little . . . well, Russian. So I suppose that it is only fitting that it should be the DHS, and not, say, the Post Office, that will house America’s newest Ministry of Truth. Per Secretary Mayorkas, his already-sprawling agency will be adding a “Disinformation Governance Board” to its offerings, the better to fight the “huge threat to our homeland” that is free American citizens saying things that the federal government doesn’t like.

At the head of this new venture will sit an extremely strange woman named Nina Jankowicz, who, if her other activities are any indication, was apparently asked to choose between agreeing to the role at DHS and being turned down after yet another audition for the musical Wicked. A cursory look at Jankowicz’s social-media history suggests that, while she is certainly interested in disinformation, her passion is dressing up as Liza Minnelli. In one video, Jankowicz adapts the tune of “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious” to convey that “Information laundering is really quite ferocious / It’s when a huckster takes some lies and makes them sound precocious.” In another, she offers up that pornographic twist on the Harry Potter books for which we’ve all been clamoring. “I helped him solve the mystery of the egg,” she warbles. “But I’d like to solve the mystery between his legs.” Her canon is limited in scope, but what I’ve seen of it is enough to test even the most committed civil libertarian in his opposition to casual waterboarding.

Fielding questions about the move, Jen Psaki told reporters yesterday that “it sounds like the objective of the board is to prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country in a range of communities,” before adding, “I’m not sure who opposes that effort?” As it happens, I can help Psaki out here: I do. I oppose it, because it’s grotesque and indefensible. If by “prevent disinformation and misinformation from traveling around the country” Psaki means that the federal government intends to censor its critics, then Jankowicz and her friends will immediately find themselves in court. And if she doesn’t mean that — if she means that Jankowicz and her team will act as PR agents for the Department of Homeland Security — then there is no need for anything as lofty as a “Disinformation Governance Board” in the first instance. The DHS already has a press office.

Given the manner in which Jankowicz’s appointment has been received by pretty much everyone, we are likely to see some backtracking over the coming days. But at this point, it’s too late for all that. Instead, we need some guarantees. At the very least, Americans ought to know what Jankowicz and Co. are up to at every point their “board” is in action. Her meetings must be taped; her emails must be made public; her phone calls must be recorded; and, as a modest prophylactic measure, she ought to wear a bodycam whenever she is carrying out her duties. This is the United States of America, not Cuba, and, as a matter of elementary principle, we ought not to have anything called the “Disinformation Governance Board of the Department of Homeland Security.” If, for whatever reason, the president disagrees with that principle, he must be made to account for it. Adding 24/7 surveillance and closely monitored ankle bracelets to figures such as Nina Jankowicz is the minimum the citizenry can demand in return.

All told, it will be tough to find a more perfect example of Modern American Progressivism than this for a good while. It exhibits an entirely undeserved epistemological self-confidence. It is driven by a niche moral panic that begins and ends online. It is unabashedly authoritarian in concept and in tone. It involves the addition to the public payroll of one of the silliest people in all the land. And, like so much that the contemporary Left ends up doing, it has pushed the vast majority of psychologically normal voters into paroxysms of derisive laughter. One of the most remarkable features of our age is that the more het up about an issue the American Left seems to be, the less serious its saviors seem to become. David Harsanyi is correct to argue that the very idea of “the state putting an imprimatur on ‘truth’” is both “dangerous to freedom” and “laughable,” but I wonder if he is perhaps overestimating the extent to which the Democratic Party and its chums will ever be able to control America’s national conversation. We are told that we are in the midst of a chronic “information crisis,” and yet the best progressives can do to fight it is promote Brian Stelter, Taylor Lorenz, Jen Psaki, and Nina Jankowicz.

It’s almost as if . . .