Kamala the Office Tart

An object lesson in how not to 

conduct yourself as the world burns.

by Elizabeth Fortunato for American Greatness

Kamala Harris can never seem to catch a break. She keeps making headlines for the wrong reasons. Her disastrous recent appearances in Europe and domestically have been the subject of much derision. Harris’ absence at the southern border has drawn intense scrutiny, especially since Joe Biden appointed her “border czar” and asked her to determine and remedy the root causes of the current migration crisis.  

She’s been plagued by high-level staff resignations, and, like her boss, she continues to be prone to gaffes and incomprehensible word-salad oratory. Her unique laugh, the product of ill-preparedness and stress, makes her appear vapid. She doesn’t appear to do much work, nor does she seem to care about it. 

Biden’s mental infirmity is more visible by the day. Harris’ ascension to our country’s highest office may be closer than anyone wants to acknowledge. In considering a potential Harris presidency, one must seriously consider what, if any, qualifications she actually possesses for the job. 

It is abundantly clear that Harris is the prototypical office tart who uses sexual favors as her most important qualification for advancement. Her tawdry relationship with former California Assembly Speaker Willie Brown was her introduction to politics and led to her election as San Francisco district attorney. 

She subsequently failed to distinguish herself as California’s attorney general, U.S. senator, or as a presidential candidate. In none of these roles did she demonstrate any administrative or executive acumen. 

If Harris is president by 2024, her most vital selling point is that she will be the first woman to hold the office, and a woman of color at that. Democratic Party leaders and all her endorsers, past and present, tout those superficial characteristics as reasons for supporting her. 

Accomplishments? None to speak of. 

Harris is particularly fond of promoting herself as a role model for little girls. In her victory speech as vice president, clad in suffragette white, she declared: 

But while I may be the first woman in this office, I won’t be the last. Because every little girl watching tonight sees that this is a country of possibilities, and to the children of our country, regardless of gender, our country has sent you a clear message: Dream with ambition, lead with conviction, and see yourself in a way that others might not see you, simply because they’ve never seen it before.

No loving parent, however, wants to see his or her daughter achieve success the way Kamala Harris did. 

While adults may sigh, “That’s just how the world works,” we need to worry about Harris as a role model for little girls, especially young girls of color. Impressionable young women are already overexposed to the predatory feminism of Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion, and are most at risk. Harris in the Oval Office necessitates a national discussion on integrity as an internal virtue, far more praiseworthy than physical attributes like race, sex, and beauty.

Second-wave feminism sought to portray the office tart as an object of male oppression, and in popular movies and TV shows such as the 1980 hit “9 to 5,” inspired the role of Doralee Rhoads played by Dolly Parton. Doralee is the subject of vicious office gossip from other female protagonists, because Doralee seems to get gifts in return for sexual favors. Her coworkers come to her rescue when they realize the relationship is not consensual. Feminism struggles to reconcile feminine charms and wiles when a relationship is voluntary.  

Such was Loni Anderson‘s Jennifer Marlow, a brilliant, beautiful, and buxom woman who used her assets to infantilize her intellectually challenged boss and run the Cincinnati radio station WKRP. Anderson expressed her empowerment this way, and Mr. Carlson, her married boss, encouraged it while remaining sexually unfulfilled and ostensibly faithful to his wife.   

Out of the radio station, Anderson’s character seduced wealthy men into performing charitable acts. One Christmas episode sees her lover fly her and a group of orphans to Bethlehem for a holiday. It’s all OK because no one was hurt. Anderson’s character, although an office tart, was a hooker with a heart of gold.

These portrayals were not without consequence, however. The Center for Work-Life Policy found in 2010 that 15 percent of women admitted to forming relationships with married male superiors for corporate advancement, and 37 percent knew a colleague who engaged in this form of corporate ladder climbing. 

The reality isn’t so simple. Competent women who won’t “put out” are passed over and discriminated against. The office tart sets up her successors to be sexually harassed by empowering her superiors to expect and make sexual demands. Recall, for example, Allison Gollust at CNN and her notorious “open-secret” relationship with ousted CEO Jeff Zucker. Is it any wonder Chris Cuomo, his brother Andrew, and others felt similarly empowered to demand favors from their subordinates?

Yet, the biggest issue created for corporations and governments is when an infamously incompetent worker promotes to high levels on the couch. Kamala Harris presents such an issue. She was drafted based on her appearance, sex, and race. Activists on both sides raised questions about her professional competence and integrity during her rise, but it was all for naught. Now the country is suffering and will continue to suffer the consequences. 

All parents can do is use Harris as an example of how not to conduct yourself as the world burns.

Christian Patriot News, And we Know, and more- May 6

 

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

Roe Ruling: Making Protest Lawful Again

Will pro-abortion protesters who disrupt the Senate be charged with felony obstruction?

by Julie Kelly for American Greatness

On Wednesday, Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, announced criminal charges against another American related to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Joshua Colgan of Maine entered a set of open doors that afternoon and walked around the building; he exited shortly thereafter. Capitol Police officers standing near the entrance did not attempt to block or arrest Colgan or hundreds of other protesters at the time who were unaware they were committing any crime.

Nonetheless, Graves charged Colgan with four misdemeanors including “parading” in the Capitol building. Graves’ office is in the process of prosecuting at least 800 people and counting for their involvement in the four-hour disturbance that occurred 16 months ago.

After he took over the office last fall, Graves changed the official name of the investigation from “Capitol breach” to “Capitol siege.” His prosecutors routinely request—and receive—prison sentences for those who plead guilty to the “parading” charge, a petty offense never before applied on such a broad scale.

As Graves presumably cheered his success in rounding up yet another Trump supporter, his wife was leading a rally outside the Supreme Court to protest the draft ruling that would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Fatima Goss Graves, head of the far-left National Women’s Law Center based in D.C., told a group of pro-abortion demonstrators on Wedneday afternoon that “abortion care is a matter of equality, dignity, and freedom in this country and that will never change.”

The night before, Graves, who has a history of making anti-Trump, anti-Republican remarks, participated in an emergency conference call with other activist groups and warned they must “engage in ways that we may not have thought we would have had to in our lives.” In a tweet that same evening, Graves called the draft ruling a “shameful and insidious attack on those who face discrimination” and insisted she would “not let up.”

Now, none of what Graves said is illegal or even out-of-bounds. Pledges to engage in vigorous political activity—even social media posts that predict those protests could become unruly—are protected speech.

Or at least it was until Graves’ husband and the Biden regime concluded that same conduct associated with the Capitol protest on January 6 rendered one a domestic terrorist.

In a matter of hours, inflammatory rhetoric on social media, threats to stop a constitutionally protected proceeding, demands for nationwide demonstrations, and promises to take any action necessary to attain political goals came back in fashion. The rules applied to Capitol trespassers were quickly scuttled.

Americans gathered outside a federal building after the leaked ruling was published on the evening of May 2 did not result in the use of nonlethal munitions such as flashbangs, tear gas, and rubber bullets by riot gear-clad D.C. Metro police. The media did not collectively suffer a nervous breakdown over attempts to “overthrow democracy” or “undermine the Constitution” that night.

Moving forward, undoubtedly, it won’t be considered a criminal “conspiracy,” a charge faced by dozens of January 6 defendants, to make plans to travel with others to Washington and participate in any future protest. Demonstrators who interrupt court business in advance of the final decision will not be charged with a felony count of “obstruction of an official proceeding” and tossed in solitary confinement for 317 days like Jacob Chansley.

No one will be hauled off to a special prison and denied bail for over a year awaiting trial.

Vice President Kamala Harris won’t be branded an “insurrectionist” for encouraging activists “to fight for women and our country with everything we have.” 

Ditto for Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). In an unhinged tirade outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning, Warren riled up a small crowd by shrieking her plan to “fight back” against “extremists” on the Court. The failed Democratic presidential candidate told CNN that the Senate would undermine the pending ruling by voting to codify the tenets of Roe into federal law. Congress, Warren said, has the “final word” on abortion. “We need to organize people across this country to help us do that.”

Later that night, pro-abortion activists clashed with police in Los Angeles. Rioters smashed police vehicles and assaulted law enforcement officers, prompting a declaration of unlawful assembly.

Warren, however, won’t be blamed for “inciting a mob.” Her colleagues will not seek her removal from office. When Warren says, “fight like hell,” she’s a feminist warrior. Those same words uttered by Trump on January 6 justified his second impeachment

A sitting U.S. Senator blasting the Supreme Court majority as “Illegitimate” and “stolen” isn’t censored by Big Tech or denounced as perpetuating a “Big Lie.” Using those exact descriptions about the 2020 election, however, could land one in Twitter prison or as evidence by prosecutors to argue for real prison time.

Fencing erected outside of the Supreme Court will be viewed as an effort to quash free speech and assembly, not a safety measure needed to protect those inside from “white supremacist violent extremists.” Anyone who breaches the fencing and tries to enter the building will be commended as a patriotic hero, not condemned as a “domestic terrorist.” Local news reporters will post glowing profiles of community activists instead of dark missives alerting neighbors to the “traitors” lurking in their midst.

Instigators planning to harass justices at their homes won’t be hunted down by the FBI and subjected to pre-dawn raids with dozens of armed agents and SWAT vehicles. FBI Director Christopher Wray won’t designate “Ruth Sent Us” a threat to national security for encouraging protesters to stalk the homes and families of the six Republican-appointed justices next week. Or for harassing Catholics in church this Mother’s Day. (Samuel Alito, who authored the draft majority opinion, canceled a speaking engagement this week presumably amid security concerns.)

And this is just getting started. Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced Thursday that the Senate will vote next week on a bill to codify Roe. It’s safe to assume the capital will be overrun with activists on both sides of the question.

Will protesters who disrupt the Senate be charged with felony obstruction? Will scuffles with police result in long pre-trial detention and even longer prison sentences? Will calls to reverse the pending ruling or intimidate justices into reversing their opinion be deemed a “threat to democracy?”

WIll U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves apply the same charges to left-wing protesters, some of whom will heed the calls of his wife, that he has to Capitol protesters for similar conduct?

It’s safe to assume the answer to all of those questions is no.

Five Ways Biden Is Destroying National Security

Five Ways Biden Is Destroying National Security

AMAC Exclusive – By Claire Brighn

Joe Biden’s presidency has been replete with foreign policy disasters, from a botched Afghanistan withdrawal that left 13 American servicemembers dead, to an embarrassing diplomatic flub with longtime American ally France, to the complete sellout of American interests in an effort to return to the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal. Yet despite these failures, the Biden administration continues to pursue the same losing approach to national security that has undermined American interests at every turn. Here are just a few examples.

1. Biden Has Precipitated the Worst Border Crisis in History

Arguably the most immediate threat to national security precipitated by the Biden administration is the ongoing crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border, where millions of completely unvetted foreign nationals are escaping or are simply being released into the interior of the country. Each successive month continues to set new records for border encounters, with more than 220,000 in March of this year alone. In addition, Biden’s failure at the border has paved the way for a massive increase in drug smuggling and human trafficking, bringing untold suffering to families and communities in Latin America and the United States.

Recent data released by the Department of Homeland Security also shows that 42 individuals on the terror watch list have been apprehended at the border since Biden took office. In a hearing on the DHS budget last week, DHS Secretary Mayorkas couldn’t say if any of these terrorists had been released or provide any assurances that more people on the terrorist watch list hadn’t escaped detection and entered the country.

Yet in the midst of the worst border disaster in history, Biden is plowing ahead with repealing Title 42, a move that border experts warn would exacerbate the already unmanageable situation at ports of entry.

2. Biden Abandoned Energy Security to Pursue a Radical Climate Agenda

On January 27, 2021, while signing executive orders that would cut oil and gas production, Biden said that “climate change will be at the center of our national security and foreign policy.” This is one promise Biden has certainly made good on, with Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby sayingin October that the threat of China and climate change are “equally important.” Last month, Biden also vowed to make the U.S. military “climate-friendly.”

But the disastrous consequences of those policies have been made all too clear for working Americans as gas prices have reached all-time highs. Now, Biden has resorted to begging OPEC for oil, leaving the U.S. at the mercy of hostile foreign powers.

3. The Military’s New Chief Concern: Going Woke

As China grows more aggressive in the South Pacific, Russia is on the move in Eastern Europe, and American adversaries in the Middle East threaten more attacks on American soil, the Biden administration is preoccupied with wokeifying the military instead of gearing up to face down threats to the country.

Military personnel under President Biden have been subject to dischargeon account of refusing the vaccine and forced to embrace left-wing ideologies like Critical Race Theory. As if that weren’t enough, under Biden’s FY2023 budget proposal which claims to be “one of the largest investments in our national security in history,” military funding would not keep pace with inflation, and over the long haul would allow China to close the defense spending gap.

Biden’s budget would also cut thousands of personnel across all branches and shrink the size of the United States Army to its lowest point since 1940. Moreover, after Biden’s disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal saw his administration turn its strategic attention to the Indo-Pacific region, the budget would ultimately lead to a smaller naval fleet – even as China and Russia build ships at a frantic pace.

4. Biden’s Economic Policies Have Left the Country Vulnerable to Economic Warfare

As events of recent years from the COVID-19 pandemic to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine have shown, economic security is national security. In an increasingly interconnected global economy, great power struggles are now often decided in financial markets or trade wars, rather than on battlefields with tanks and rifles.

Donald Trump understood this, and ensured U.S. national security by creating a strong national economy. But less than two years into Biden’s presidency, failed Democrat economic policies have led to record high inflation and falling real wages. Consumer sentiment is now at a decade low, and the share of small businesses reporting inflation as their top problem is the highest it’s been since 1981 – and yet Democrats still want to spend trillions more.

The drastic implications of this economic downturn for U.S. national security are clear; in recent weeks, China’s President Xi has signaled that his country aims to outpace U.S. economic growth this year. Already, according to April’s IMF World Economic Outlook, China is on track to do just that. The stronger China’s economy grows relative to the U.S. economy, the more the country is at the mercy of the Chinese Communist Party.

5. Biden Has Done Nothing to Secure Supply Chains and Food Supplies

It comes as no surprise that data trends show a strong economy and food security go hand in hand. But Biden recently warned of “real” food shortages following sanctions on Russia, highlighting a serious national security issue that his administration has failed to solve here at home. Fertilizer, glyphosate, and diesel prices – critical elements of crop production – are exorbitantly high, a trend which Biden appears powerless to stop.

Already, the USDA forecasts that “all food prices are now predicted to increase between 4.5 and 5.5%” in 2022 – and that’s after an expensive 2021. Food banks are also increasingly turning up empty shelves across the country.

Notably, other countries around the world are already kicking off a wave of protectionism to secure their own food supplies. But in the United States, Biden is doing nothing of the sort, and is instead proposing a new death tax which would, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation, be “devastating to American agriculture and the broader U.S. economy.” Moreover, it would reduce GDP by an estimated $100 billionover ten years.

The most important job of any leader is to protect his or her people, which in turn helps build a strong and confident nation. On both counts Biden has failed spectacularly, and his polling numbers have reflected as much. Should Biden actually want to fulfil his sworn duty to the American people, he would do well to look to the strength displayed by past U.S. Presidents in times of crisis – particularly his most recent predecessor.

Claire Brighn is the pen name of a conservative researcher and writer with previous domestic and foreign policy experience in the Executive Branch.

---

The Great Betrayal of American Democracy

The American people will have their chance to hold Joe Biden and his party accountable in November.

by Christopher Schorr for American Greatness

The Biden Administration is aiding and abetting an invasion of the United States. 

Let’s review the facts. As a candidate, Biden precipitated the crisis with several campaign promises: 

• Amnesty and citizenship 
• Halting construction of the southern border wall 
• Suspending deportations
• Abandoning successful asylum fraud prevention efforts like the “Remain in Mexico” policy and “safe third country” agreements with Central American nations. 

Upon taking office, Biden swiftly implemented these promises, escalating the crisis. He reinstituted the Obama-era policy of releasing migrants apprehended at the border into the interior of the country, pending hearings they often skip. His Department of Homeland Security secretly transported migrants across the country in the dead of night to avoid public scrutiny. Confronted with a court order to reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy, Biden passively refused to comply. 

In March, monthly border encounters hit a new record of 221,303, beating the previous record (also set by Biden) of 213,953 in July. Biden has funneled 1 million illegal aliens into the United States in just over a year. 

Last month, Biden announced his plan to end Title 42, a public health authority under which 1.8 million migrants have been turned away at the border. By the administration’s own estimates, this could swell border incursions to 18,000 per day. Ending Title 42 eliminates the last vestige of American control over the southern border. With 19 months remaining before the 2024 election, Biden could add another 10 million illegal aliens to the United States. The number could be lower—the planet might run out of economic migrants posing as asylum seekers—or it could be much higher. In any event, American law would no longer govern entry into the United States. 

The Politics of Dismantling U.S. Sovereignty 

Biden has determined that displacing Americans with foreigners is in the long-term interest of his party. No other explanation makes sense. 

Consider the invasion’s short-term politics. Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling of immigration by 57-35 percent. By 51-34 percent, most Americans believe that Biden is “purposefully encouraging illegal immigration.” Facing a midterm rout, vulnerable Democrats are rebelling, but Biden seems intent on punishing his party and the voters it claims to represent: low-wage earners, blacks, and Latinos.

A humanitarian crisis did not necessitate Biden’s invasion, but it has caused several, including:

• A migrant rape crisis. Human traffickers reportedly rape 60-80 percent of migrant women and girls. This is the true face of open borders: Central American parents giving their pre-teen daughters birth control, expecting the worst.
• Making Cartels Great Again. Biden’s invasion enriches Mexican drug cartels, fueling violence and corruption in Mexico.
• China’s new Opium War against the American people. Mexican cartels funnel Chinese fentanyl through border security gaps they create by tying down U.S. Border Patrol with migrants. Fentanyl is the leading cause of death for Americans ages 18 to 45. 
• American families under siege. Cartels (and migrants) destroy property, threaten families, and burn homes to the ground. 

These are some of the invasion’s costs. What are its benefits? 

Following the publication of The Emerging Democratic Majority in 2002 by John Judis and Ruy Teixeira, conventional wisdom has held that rising diversity (driven by immigration) ensures the long-term dominance of the Democratic Party. Obama-era Democrats came to believe their coalition of “ascendant” voters freed them from any need for Clintonian centrism aimed at retaining support from the party’s traditional, white working-class base (“bitter clingers”). 

This narrative suffered a blow in 2016 when exit polls revealed deep losses with working-class whites and substantial losses among racial minorities. Subsequent polling and elections confirmed impressive GOP gains with black and Latino voters. The Democratic coalition is fracturing, and a multiethnic, working-class Republican coalition is rising to take its place.

Yet it remains the case that Democrats perform better with poor people, immigrants, and racial minorities. Democrats are hemorrhaging Latino support but only now, after generations of assimilation—and, to be sure, woke excesses and pro-crime policies. The Democrats’ simple solution to their voter problem is to flood the country with millions of poor immigrants and bet on future amnesty and citizenship to replenish their ranks. 

The Great Betrayal of American Democracy 

Whatever the invasion’s political expediency, it breaks faith with the American people. Article IV of the Constitution requires the federal government to defend the states from invasion. Article II requires the president to faithfully execute the laws. Our system of government is predicated on a social contract between the American people and their representatives. Those representatives are morally obliged to put the interests of Americans first. They are permitted to reject “America First” as a slogan, but not in practice. 

By violating the Constitution and prioritizing foreigners over Americans, Biden has broken the social contract and betrayed the American people. 

This great betrayal also betrays American democracy. Consider, as an analogy, the problem of gerrymandering: drawing congressional districts for partisan advantage. In a democracy, voters should choose their representatives, not the reverse. 

Biden’s invasion is an attempt to gerrymander the nation itself. He is redrawing the boundaries of American nationality (its people) for partisan gain. Under Biden, the American government has decided to represent someone else, giving the lie to so much preening rhetoric of defending democracy. Democracy without popular sovereignty is a farce. 

Will it work?

It is not obvious that Biden’s invasion will help Democrats, even in the long run. 

Biden’s polling numbers are so catastrophic that strategists on the Right see their side’s total victory just over the horizon. To be fair, such claims have a terrible track record. Just as Judis and Teixeira were predicting a perma-blue future, Grover Norquist predicted the opposite, speculating that the Democratic Party might soon be reduced to pacifism, “tree-hugging,” and “weird sex.”Neither side was correct. Moreover, with 1-in-5 Gen-Z Americans identifying as LGBTQ, Norquist clearly underestimated the popularity of weird sex!

Still, one can hope and pray that there will be a heavy price to pay for the great betrayal. “One hundred seats and one hundred years” seems appropriate. The American people will have their chance to hold Biden and his party accountable in November and in the ensuing months when impeachment is on the table. For the sake of American sovereignty and self-determination, let’s hope they do. 

The Reason for the Special WH 'Stage' for Joe Biden Is Finally Revealed

Nick Arama reporting for RedState 

There’s been an intriguing question hanging out there in the wind for months now about Joe Biden and the White House: why did his team create a whole new “stage” in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the West Wing, rather than simply filming him from the Oval Office when he needs to make a statement, like everyone before him?

Now, we did share thoughts on the reasoning, speculating that the reason that they had to set up a stage that way was to accommodate Joe Biden’s significant deficits — that it’s just too hard and not enough space to remake the Oval Office with teleprompters, so that he could see what he’s supposed to say at any given time. So they needed essentially a “reality show” to provide a place where they could stick all those things to help him. Talk about the reality show guy — it wasn’t Trump, it’s Joe Biden. Trump didn’t need such help or such a stage.

That was, I think, a reasonable guess, based on Joe’s obvious issues.

But now, those thoughts have just been confirmed, tucked away in a Politico story about a possible rematch in 2024 between Biden and President Donald Trump — that Biden “permanently” needs a teleprompter. How humiliating is this?

From Politico:

And the White House has largely abandoned using the Oval Office for press events in part because it can’t be permanently equipped with a teleprompter; Biden aides prefer the fake White House stage built in the Old Executive Office Building next door for events, sacrificing some of the power of the historic backdrop in favor of an otherwise sterile room that was outfitted with an easily read teleprompter screen.

So, there it is — they’re admitting that they can’t put all that gear in the Oval Office, and they need constant help for Joe Biden that he can easily read.

We can see it’s a common problem they have when he’s on the road. Biden is constantly squinting and tripping over what it says on the teleprompter, in part because he’s confused, but also in part because he seems unable to see it.

Here’s one example of Joe vs. the teleprompter earlier this week. Hint? The teleprompter won.

They can only control so much at the White House and then, on the road, it’s more of an issue. And he’s getting worse, so there is only so much they can do.

Tim Ryan was once pro-life.

Tim Ryan was once pro-life. 

Now he’s an extremist in defense of abortion

Washington Examiner 

 May 04, 2022 01:44 PM

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH) used to be a pro-lifer, but now his party has dragged him to the extremes. 

Ryan's new position is that he wants to enshrine a national right to late-term abortions, even on babies who could survive perfectly fine outside of the womb. That’s the central provision of the “Women’s Health Protection Act,” which Ryan voted for this year and has proudly endorsed. 

The WHPA would also preempt many state abortion regulations — for example, 24-hour waiting periods, informed consent, and health-and-safety minimum standards for abortion providers. 

Ryan also supports taxpayer-funded abortion. He proudly endorsed the “Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act,” which would have Medicare, Medicaid, federal employee health plans, and all federally funded health insurance programs pay for abortions. 

Ryan gets 100% scores every year recently from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, two organizations that oppose any restrictions on abortion. To earn that perfect score, Ryan had to support federal subsidies for Planned Parenthood and vote to strip out conscience protections for doctors or nurses who do not wish to abort babies or assist in their abortion. 

These are extremist positions that Ryan holds on abortion. 

In the latest poll, nearly two-thirds believed that abortion should be illegal after 15 weeks, with a majority believing abortion should be illegal after the first trimester. A 15-week ban on abortion is precisely what is before the Supreme Court right now. Ryan stands not merely with the minority (35%) who believe abortion should be legal through two trimesters, but by calling to codify Roe v. Wade, Ryan stands with the small minority (23%) that believes abortion should never be forbidden. 

Ryan didn’t merely go from pro-life to pro-choice. He went from pro-life to being a radical defender of abortion on demand. This is what it means to be a Democrat in the 2020s.

Biden likely to avoid IRS audit that could’ve revealed if he made made money from Hunter’s deals

Biden likely to avoid IRS audit that could’ve revealed if he made made money from Hunter’s deals

Steven Nelson - New York Post

A whistleblower has claimed that President Biden owes upwards of $127,000 in taxes. NICHOLAS KAMM.AFP via Getty Images

President Biden is likely to avoid an audit that could reveal whether he made money from his son Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings — because the Internal Revenue Service has rejected a whistleblower complaint that alleged he owes at least $127,000 in taxes, The Post has learned. 

The IRS allows people to inform on fellow taxpayers and win a slice of the proceeds — prompting Chris Jacobs, a former Republican staffer on Capitol Hill, to submit complaints against Biden and his accountant, though he said he didn’t want any financial reward.

Jacobs shared with The Post a reply from the IRS titled “denial” that explained that the government didn’t use his information.

Tax law expert Bob Willens, who teaches at Columbia University’s business school, said the rejection means Biden is likely to run out a three-year statute of limitations, meaning Republican claims that Biden owes up to $500,000 in taxes are unlikely to be resolved.

“It looks like the question of whether the president underpaid his Medicare taxes will never be aired,” Willens told The Post.

The dispute concerns more than $13 million that Joe and Jill Biden routed through S corporations in 2017 and 2018 to avoid paying a 3.8 percent Medicare tax on most of the haul by declaring a small part of it as “salary.” Many wealthy people use S corporations to lower their tax bills and the IRS pursues relatively few cases of lowballing the amount of income that counts as taxable.

The audit could’ve found if the President made money off his son Hunter’s overseas business deals. 

Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The income is believed to be linked to Biden book sales and speaking fees after he left office as vice president. Experts say income that is the direct result of a person’s labor generally should count as subject to the Medicare tax and ethics experts are calling on Biden to reveal the precise sources amid scrutiny of the president’s links to his son Hunter Biden’s overseas business relationships.

Jacobs did not specifically seek information on the first son’s links to his father, but an IRS audit would necessarily require a review of how Biden earned various income streams.

University of Minnesota law professor Richard Painter, who was chief White House ethics lawyer for then-President George W. Bush, told The Post recently that without the corporate returns, “you don’t know where the money’s coming from.”

“This exactly why it’s better to disclose — then every card is face-up on the table,” he told The Post last month. “Otherwise, people have no idea what’s in there … and that undermines public confidence in the government.”

IRS auditor Tresa Williams wrote to Jacobs in a reply dated April 22: “Under [IRS rules], an award may be paid only if the information provided results in the collection of tax, penalties, interest, additions to tax, or additional amounts based on the information provided. Therefore, you are not eligible for an award.”

“Although the information you submitted did not qualify for an award, thank you for your interest in the administration of the internal revenue laws,” Williams wrote. 

Jacobs filed two separate complaints: one in February against Biden and another last month for Tax Day that mentioned both Biden and his accountant. The IRS notified Jacobs on March 31 that it received his February complaint — before writing 22 days later to say it would not act on the tip. He has not received a reply to his most recent complaint, but the underlying facts are nearly identical.

Columbia University tax law expert Bob Willens believes that the Republican’s claim that Biden owes up to $500,000 in taxes is likely to remain unresolved. 

Samuel Corum/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The IRS generally has a three-year statute of limitations to go after back taxes, so long as the evasion isn’t a willful non-reporting of income.

“Here, without any interest on the IRS’s part in bringing an enforcement action, there’s no way for Mr. Jacobs, that I’m aware of, to prosecute the case himself,” Willens said. “So, clearly, there will be no whistleblower award here because the [IRS] indifference to the information he provided, means there will be no ‘proceeds’ out of which these awards are ordinarily paid.”

Willens said that the three-year statute of limitations hits on either the anniversary of Biden’s 2018 tax filing or the filing deadline in April 2019 — meaning the clock’s probably up already or will be in the near future. Biden released an amended copy of his 2018 tax return dated July 7, 2019, and it’s unclear when he initially filed.

“The only other statute of limitations extension that I’m aware of is where the taxpayer ‘fails to report gross income in excess of 25 percent of the gross income he or she reported on the tax return.’ In those cases, there is a six-year statute of limitations imposed. However, here, I don’t think the president failed to ‘report’ his gross income. Instead, what he may have done is ‘mischaracterize’ a portion of his income,” Willens said.

“If the income is merely mischaracterized, rather than omitted, the six-year statute is not operative.”

Willens added: “Of course, filing a ‘false’ return with ‘an intent to evade tax’ means that the statute of limitations never expires, but I don’t think anyone expects the IRS to make that assertion with respect to the president’s tax return(s)… the dispute here, regarding what is ‘reasonable compensation for services actually rendered,’ probably doesn’t rise to that level since the question of reasonable compensation is a factual, rather than a legal, question.”

Some Republicans claim that Biden owes at least $500,000 in taxes. 

Carolyn Kaster/AP

Jacobs said he’s concerned about the IRS decision to deny his claim.

“It seems highly curious that the IRS could spend five months processing a simple change to fix a typographical error made by one of my clients, and yet dismiss a complaint regarding Joe Biden’s conduct in just three weeks,” Jacobs said. 

“If Republicans win back control of Congress next year, they should conduct rigorous oversight as to why the IRS has reportedly spent a decade auditing Donald Trump, yet does not want to scrutinize what tax experts of both parties have called Joe Biden’s legally questionable conduct.”

Republicans, indeed, are vowing to investigate Biden’s tax situation next year if they retake control of Congress and accuse him of hypocrisy in urging the wealthy to pay their “fair share.” Biden last year proposed legislation to close the tax loophole and boost IRS enforcement.

Democrats say that Biden used a common tax strategy and that there’s no directly analogous case that indicates he was wrong in his calculations.

The White House did not offer comment for this article, but Biden spokesman Andrew Bates noted last year in a statement to the Washington Post that House Republicans weren’t eager to review Trump’s tax records. The former president, unlike Biden, refused to release his tax returns, saying that they were under audit.

“[Biden] has released over 22 years of tax returns and is proud to have restored the bipartisan tradition of being transparent with the American people about the personal finances of the chief executive,” Bates said.

Republicans are vowing to investigate Biden’s taxes next year if they retake control of Congress. 

Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

“After a four-year hiatus, he also welcomes this born-again support for that critical tradition from congressional Republicans, and congratulates them on their 180,” Bates added. 

“With the Build Back Better agenda, the President is fighting to ensure our economy delivers for middle class families — not just those at the top — which means the wealthy pay their fair share and the IRS is given the resources they need to crack down on wealthy tax cheats. He encourages his GOP colleagues to reverse themselves on that, as well.”

Republicans such as Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana say Biden may need to pay a half-million-dollar tax bill. Banks last year requested a report from the Congressional Research Service on what constitutes “reasonable compensation” for S corporations.

Although no cases identical to Biden’s were documented by the CRS report, Banks said that “according to the criteria CRS provided to my office, he owes the IRS and the American people hundreds of thousands of dollars in back taxes” and “every American should know about Joe Biden’s tax hypocrisy.”

Banks told Fox News last year that “when we take back the House in 2022, Oversight [Committee] Republicans won’t forget about Biden’s legally dubious tax avoidance schemes.”

Willens told The Post last year that each case is unique and that “the question remains whether the compensation [Biden] exacted from his corporation was ‘reasonable.'” But Willens said that “in my view, the case can easily be made that reasonable compensation should be multiples of $300,000,” referring to the 2018 figure that Biden deemed as subject to the Medicare tax. 

Willens later told the Washington Post that “I don’t have any problem with what he did. In fact, he would have been almost derelict had he not channeled his earnings through an S corporation.”

Political debate over the use of S corporations has raged for decades, impacting other politicians, including 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).

John Bogdanski, a former member of the IRS Commissioner’s Advisory Group and a professor at Lewis & Clark law school, told The Post last year that Biden would not have to pay Medicare taxes for the share of income made off the labor of other people, which can be complicated to determine. He said people generally make assumptions in their own favor and get away with it.

The IRS has a three-year statute of limitations to go after back taxes.

Alex Brandon/AP

“There are millions — literally millions — of S corporations. So there might be a half a million S corporations that are playing this game. And the IRS doesn’t have anywhere near enough of a budget to bring a half a million cases every year,” he said.

Bogdanski added that he thinks it’s “quite rich” for Republicans to focus on Biden’s taxes when Trump never released his own tax returns.

David Gamage, a tax law professor at Indiana University Bloomington, said “the general view among tax experts is that it’s quite easy for taxpayers to get away with this form of tax planning to the point of it being very abusive.”

“This is not the sort of tax planning that should be going on as a matter of tax policy, but it’s very hard for the IRS to police,” Gamage told The Post. “I would hope that increased attention to this issue, whether that be through focus on a President Biden using this form of tax planning or more generally, would increase the case for reform.”