Tuesday, November 19, 2024

The Trump Dream Team


Trump and the swamp, illustration

The 1992 Summer Olympics in Barcelona was the first games in which professional basketball players were allowed to participate. Previously, college players competed against the professional national teams of the Soviet Union and other countries.

In 1988, the American team lost to the Soviets, settling for a bronze medal, their worst-ever performance in Olympic basketball.

Four years later, America sent the “Dream Team," a collection of the best NBA players at the time. Players included Michael Jordan, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, Larry Bird, Scottie Pippen, and Charles Barkley among others.

Opposing teams were overwhelmed, losing games by an average of 44 points. Sports Illustrated called it “arguably the most dominant squad ever assembled in any sport.”

Another Dream Team is being assembled in Washington, D.C., under Coach Donald Trump. It, too, is arguably the best (or worst) administration ever built, depending on one’s political persuasion and whether one might be in the crosshairs (figuratively, for the censorship cranks – I am not calling for shooting anyone) of administration officials or cabinet secretaries.

At the time of this writing, nominees include:

  • Secretary of State – Marco Rubio
  • Attorney General – Matt Gaetz
  • Director of National Intelligence – Tulsi Gabbard
  • Secretary of Defense – Pete Hegseth
  • Secretary of Homeland Security – Kristi Noem
  • CIA Director – John Ratcliffe
  • Secretary of Health and Human Services – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
  • Secretary of Veterans Affairs – Doug Collins
  • EPA Administrator – Lee Zeldin
  • Border Czar – Tom Homan
  • National Security Advisor – Michael Waltz
  • U.S. Ambassador to Israel – Mike Huckabee

By his own admission, Trump was the unlikely winner of the 2016 presidential election. He played nice with the Republican establishment by following their nominee recommendations. As a result, Trump got what he would describe as “stiffs,” like Reince Priebus, Jeff Sessions, Rex Tillerson, James Mattis, Christopher Wray, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Nikki Haley, Dan Coats, and Gina Haspel. 

Unlike in 2016, President-elect Trump now knows the players — the good and the bad — and has a plan. As he said in a pre-election interview:

"We have to get the right people. When I first came here, I was only in Washington 17 times in my life, all of a sudden, I'm President. I really knew nobody. Some were good, some were rhinos. We had some that we have to do better.

So we will work with a lot of people to get a lot of people in. I now know sort of everybody. I'm not having to rely on people I didn't know very well. I think we are going to have phenomenal people. I know the good ones, the bad ones, the weak ones, the strong ones. I think we are going to have great people."  

As Trump builds his Dream Team, one can gauge how dreamy this team is by watching the reaction from the left. As I was writing, I pulled up my X feed. Here are a few examples.

Elon Musk, the unlikely Robin to Batman Donald, responded to John Bolton calling Gaetz’s nomination “the worst nomination for a cabinet position in American history.” Musk replied, “John Bolton, who is a staggeringly dumb warmonger, being against someone is a great sign! Gaetz will be great.”

Congressman Robert Garcia whined: “RFK Jr. has no medical or scientific credentials and wants to gut the National Institutes of Health. And Marjorie Taylor Greene today cheered him on in our committee. This is outrageous and shameful.”

Jo, a trash-mouthed Democrat X shill in meltdown mode, shrieked: “Putting an anti-vaxxer in charge of public health is like putting the Unabomber in charge of the mail.”

These were the first three posts on my feed, and only the tip of the iceberg. Trump is obviously over the target, given the hair-on-fire response from the left.

Not only Democrats, but also some establishment Republicans are hyperventilating over Trump’s nominees. “They should be more experienced,” say those who cannot balance a budget.

Pete Hegseth is simply a Fox News commentator, not a 20-year decorated combat military veteran. He likely understands boots-on-the-ground military far better than the parade generals who led us in a failed 20-year war in the Middle East, a botched Afghanistan withdrawal, a Gaza bridge that fell apart faster than Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, and a DEI campaign that gave us Admiral Rachel Levine, a man who wears a dress.

The Beltway smart set says Matt Gaetz is a lightweight. We need a more experienced attorney or former judges like Janet Reno, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, Merrick Garland, Jeff Sessions, or William Barr. How did they work out for the Constitution and the rule of law?

What if Gaetz is part of a bigger play? If the Senate refuses to confirm him, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis can appoint Gaetz to fill Marco Rubio’s Senate seat, assuming he is confirmed as Secretary of State. Imagine Gaetz in the Senate, serving with those who voted against his nomination.

Or Gaetz could become AG via a recess appointment. This pathway has ample precedent: President Obama made 32 recess appointments, President Clinton made 139, and President George W. Bush made 171. If Trump makes a recess appointment, media shills will screech that it’s the first time any president has done such a thing.

Or perhaps Gaetz is a throwaway nominee, still finding himself in the Senate. Remember that Bill Clinton’s first two AG nominees, Zoe Baird, and Kimba Wood, were derailed over “Nannygate,” paving the way for Janet Reno, likely his ultimate choice, easily confirmed by an exasperated Senate.

Who might Trump nominate? Perhaps Wyoming Rep. Harriet Hageman, Texas AG Ken Paxton, or Missouri AG Andrew Bailey, all experienced attorneys.

As usual, Trump may be two steps ahead of his opponents now that he understands the political landscape in D.C.

The expert class criticizes RFK, Jr. for not having managerial experience. So what? His predecessor, Xavier Becerra, served in Congress, managing only his small staff and campaign contributions while presiding over crime-ridden California as the state attorney general.

I am delighted to see younger, less “establishment” nominees than other presidents’ selections. After all, these “smart and experienced” government officials are the ones who gave us a weaponized justice and intelligence system, endless wars, an open border, teenage genital mutilation, censorship, the COVID calamity, and a growing national debt of $36 trillion.

William F. Buckley, Jr. famously asserted, “I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Manhattan phone book than the entire faculty of Harvard.” Trump is filling his administration from the phone book rather than the faculty lounge.

This is a welcome change given how poorly the “credentialed class” has run the country for decades. The howling and shrieking from corporate media and the left confirm for me that Trump is doing the right thing.

Is this payback? Perhaps. I call it “the reckoning,” a necessary course correction that keeps America from descending into an Orwellian or Hunger Games dystopia.

Charlie Kirk summed it up well on X:

They spied on Trump.
So now they get Tulsi Gabbard.

They tried to lock up Trump.
So now they get Matt Gaetz.

They kept the border open.
So now they get Tom Homan.

They tried to ruin the country.
And they are getting what they deserve.

Trump’s second term will be transformative. He won the Electoral College, the popular vote, the House, and the Senate. A majority of Americans eagerly want change, and Trump will deliver. His Dream Team clearly indicates that Trump’s version of “hope and change,” also known as The Reckoning, is underway.

Squishy Senate Republicans had better tread carefully. These nominations may be a loyalty test. Do GOP senators confirm Trump’s cabinet choices, or do they spit in his face under the “advise and consent” umbrella?

Voters gave Trump a mandate, and crossing Trump and the American people may not work out well for Senate Republicans. Don’t believe me? Ask Mitt Romney, Jeff Flake, Liz Cheney, and others.

Trump is just getting started. Inauguration Day is two months away. Yet, every day offers delightful new surprises. Social media is a potpourri of laughs, given the left’s outrage over Trump’s election and nominees. Considering that Planet Earth is 4.5 billion years old, isn’t this a great time to be alive?



at

X22, And we Know, and more- Nov 19

 




Deep State Pushing War | On The Fringe
0:00 / 0:00

15 seconds

15 seconds

Badlands Daily - Tuesday November 19, 2024
0:00 / 0:00

15 seconds

15 seconds

Eye of the Storm Ep. 189 -10:30 PM ET-
0:00 / 0:00

15 seconds

15 seconds

Badlands Story Hour Ep. 92: 300
0:00 / 0:00

15 seconds

15 seconds

at

How Donald Trump Can Achieve His Second Most Important Accomplishment

President Trump’s signal accomplishment during his first term has to have been appointing and confirming judges who actually respect the Constitution. Now, he is moving quickly to set up an executive branch that will actually drain the Swamp. He’s rapidly naming people he trusts to do serious work. But along this path, his most important appointment has not been announced as of this writing: Secretary of Education.

Education? Why is that second in importance only to judges? I’m glad you asked. Because sometimes things are so obvious that we look right past them.

Let’s begin with the kerfuffle that led to Glenn Youngkin being elected governor of Virginia. The Loudoun County school board went coco-loco with its transgender policies, leading to sexual assaults that the school board covered up. Don’t try to understand why they wouldn’t want to protect the kids in their schools. Nothing the left does makes sense.

Many observers of our socio-political landscape comment that “politics is downstream from culture.” They then bemoan two streams of cultural change: “Hollyweird” and “Higher Education.” We may largely discount the entertainment stream because it suffers from the “Go woke, go broke” disease.

Disney is in free fall after its big-budget movies, such as the late Star Wars franchise offerings, have lost serious money. It’s even shopping its many divisions to prospective buyers to stop the bleeding. Who knows? You might be able to pick up a sports entity like ESPN or a failing network like ABC for cheap.

For the rest of us, the question at hand is, “How do we fix our broken education system?” There are two parts to this question. The first has to be teaching the four Rs: readin’, ‘ritin’, ‘rithmetic, and responsibility.

Since the teachers’ unions are uninterested in actually teaching these core subjects, the public is doing an end-run around them with homeschooling and school choice. Trump’s Education Secretary can give great vocal support for full state financial support for all the alternatives.

Notice that I did not say “federal support.” The feds do an awful job, moving us down from being leaders when Carter started the DOE to our present world ranking in the 40s. Meanwhile, simply eliminating the heavy federal hand on local schools would be of great benefit to students. The bully pulpit has been vastly underused.

Second, moving up to “higher education,” many schools are graduating unemployable student loan debtors with degrees such as Puppet Arts, EcoGastronomy, and Costume Technology. The list is long, but most of the even marginally useful skills are actually better learned at apprentices or at trade schools.

Why would I need a college degree to be a farrier (shoeing horses), arrange flowers, or enjoy leisure studies? Most kids in my generation picked up their leisure “skills” at leisure without the benefit of a Federally Insured Student Loan or Pell Grant. Most of those skills would come faster on the job than in a structured four years paying the freight for worthless tenured professors.

But I digress. The major function of colleges today is to turn out radical leftists who emote rather than think. They are completely unaware of basic facts. They don’t know that science is a method, not an answer. They have no understanding that the money that paid for their underwater basket-weaving courses came from taxpayers who actually worked to earn it. So, when they can’t pay back the loans they were encouraged to get by colleges that didn’t educate them, we have to ask the eternal question: Quo bene?

Sutton’s Law tells us to follow the money. Students enticed into perpetual debt will naturally cry out for relief. They ask legislators to continue fleecing the taxpayers who paid for them to go into debt in the first place. And those CongressCritters will “righteously” cry out that “education is a right” and “everyone should have a right to go to college.”

Of course, the colleges are the real beneficiaries and quietly cheer this on because they are in the market of selling extended schooling, not education. Most colleges simply do not care what happens after you leave their premises. You showed up, put money in their pockets, and then they shooed you out the door. “Next!”

The Higher Education Act provides the Secretary of Education with the tools to fix this problem. Title IV of the Act provides for rule-making authority. Since the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard decided that it is unconstitutional to discriminate based on race, every DEI program is unlawful.

And because the First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech, any campus speech code, “safe spaces” rule, or DEI indoctrination class is likewise unconstitutional when financed by the taxpayer. Allowing any protest on campus that interferes with the right of any person to freely attend class or any speaker to come to present ideas is similarly impermissible. By extension, spending federal money on unconstitutional activities is itself unconstitutional.

The Secretary can simply follow the Administrative Procedures Act and, on January 21, propose a new rule implementing these legal principles. Schools can do whatever they want, but if they violate any of those rules, the federal government will no longer be legally able to send them money through FISLs or Pell Grants.

The fallout would be immediate. The rule would be fully implemented by summer, and most schools would dump their DEI coursework because that would be forbidden under the new rule. All those coddled skulls full of mush would suddenly lose their feather beds. A few might even discover the value of cooking French fries at McDonald’s.

Disruptive protesters would be rounded up and given three hots and a cot overnight at the local crossbar hotel. Professors of social justice and critical race theory would have to find a livelihood elsewhere because their employers could no longer afford them. And the beat goes on.

Over 90% of professors at public universities are hard lefties. With many of them suddenly becoming supernumerary, another class of public nuisances will be removed from places of influence. Students will have an easier time hearing both sides of political and social issues, making them better prepared citizens.

Will these changes cure everything? No, but as the expression goes, we have to pick the low-hanging fruit first. With this complete, the next step will become easier to see.



at

Can Trump Accomplish His Lofty Goals?


It’s the dawn of a new era for the Federal Government.  At least, we hope so.  Donald Trump has been re-elected, and Republicans control all three branches of government.

Thus far, it looks as though Trump is off to a strong start.  His staff is already preparing a deluge of executive orders to undo much of the damage Joe Biden did by the same process.  Trump’s Cabinet is also taking shape.  From what I have seen, it may contain the youngest, most capable group since President Kennedy’s famed Whiz Kids in the 1960s.

The question is whether the Trump administration can accomplish any of the lofty goals it has set for itself.  Let’s look at some of them.

Reforming the Federal Government

This may be the most challenging yet most necessary objective of them all.  Federal bureaucrats have slowly usurped Congress’s power and established themselves as an unelected and uncontrollable fourth branch of government. 

It is time for these people to go.  Enter the temporary Department of Government Efficiency, which I have nicknamed the Canning Factory.  If there is waste in the government, hopefully, Trump’s two manic revolutionaries, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, will be able to expose it.  Then it is up to Trump and Congress to do something about it.

The goal is to cut two trillion dollars out of federal spending.  Unfortunately, I doubt they can do it.  As many others have suggested, the reason is that most of the money is tied to Social Security, Medicare, interest on the debt, and the Defense Department.  Many other pet programs and pork projects could run into resistance from Congress.  Unless Trump is willing to tackle entitlements, the goal may be unreachable.

I would rate their chances at cutting $250 billion at 90%, $500 billion at 50%, and $1 trillion at 10%.

Lowering Prices and Improving the Economy 

It isn’t just the economy, stupid.  It is price increases caused by inflation caused by excessive government spending and attempts to phase out fossil fuels.  Interest rates were then intentionally raised to fight inflation, making things worse.

Trump can do several things to ease inflation.  He can impound unspent money from the various Democrat spending programs and ask Congress to cancel others, reducing government spending. 

He can also end the war on fossil fuels and encourage drilling for oil and natural gas, hopefully increasing supply and lowering the price.  Since fossil fuels are utilized in almost every part of our economy, lowering the price of fuel, fertilizer, and petrochemicals helps reduce the cost of nearly everything else.  Once inflation is under control, the Federal Reserve Board can lower interest rates.

The only problem is that Trump’s plan to drill, baby, drill won’t increase supplies in the short term.  To do this, he will need help.

Unlike Joe Biden, Trump has maintained cordial relations with most world leaders.  The key player here is Prince Mohamed bin Salman, the leader of Saudi Arabia.  If Trump can persuade MBS to increase Saudi oil production, prices will decrease faster than if the U.S. tries to do it alone.  This could also reduce the influence of Iran in the Middle East, which is something the Saudis may support.

Another tenet of Trump’s economic policy is using tariffs or import taxes as part of economic policy.  He clearly understands the power of money.  Why use military force when you can use financial power to get what you want?  The one thing you don’t want Trump to have when negotiating a deal is leverage.  With tariffs, he can control access to the world’s richest commercial market, the United States, which means he has tremendous leverage.

Critics say tariffs will raise prices and fuel inflation.  However, that occurs only if they are implemented.  The threat of tariffs is usually enough to get other countries or businesses to do what Trump wants, including removing their tariffs on our products.  He plans to reduce the business tax rate to 15% and then threaten tariffs to persuade businesses to manufacture products in the U.S. and rebuild our industrial base.

I would rate the probability of reducing prices at 50%, rebuilding the economy at 90%, and levying tariffs on someone at 99%.

Stopping the Russia-Ukraine War

By inauguration time, this war will have been raging for almost three years.  As Trump suggested, there is a way to stop the war.  First, you tell Ukrainian president Zelensky that the U.S. will cut off all weapons and funding if he is unwilling to negotiate.  Then you tell Russian president Putin that the U.S. will give Ukraine all the weapons and funding it needs if he is reluctant to end the war.

Another factor could be oil prices.  What works to stimulate the American economy works against the Russian war machine.  The lower the oil price, the less money Putin has for weapons and other materials.  Again, Saudi Arabia’s help could be critical.

One sticking point may be Putin’s demand that Ukraine stay out of the NATO military alliance.  The problem is that it leaves Ukraine vulnerable to further Russian aggression in the future.  So far, the Ukrainians may have destroyed as many as 9,000 Russian tanks and inflicted over 700,000 Russian casualties.  They did this with virtually no air force, primarily old Soviet tanks, and modern shoulder-fired anti-tank weapons, while revolutionizing drone warfare in the process.  They deserve to be in NATO.

I rate the chances of a negotiated peace at 80% and the probability of Ukraine joining NATO at 40%.

Deporting Illegal Aliens

The soft invasion of America sponsored by the Biden/Obama crowd needs to end.  It costs the country way too much to house and feed these people.  Plus, they are straining our healthcare and education systems, not to mention threatening American lives and property.

How many illegal migrants are there?  There was believed to be anywhere from 10–20 million in the U.S. before Trump’s first term.  More came in while he was president, and 8–10 million more arrived on Biden’s watch.  So Trump might have to deal with 25–30 million people. 

Fortunately, securing the border and removing the invaders is a matter of time and the will to do it.  First, close the border, stop the incentive programs, and re-implement the Remain in Mexico program.  Start removing known gang members, criminals, the military-age Chinese who are here, and illegals who have already been ordered to leave the country.  Complete the border wall.  Process the rest.

Congress also needs to act.  Chain migration and birthright citizenship for children of illegals need to end.  A path to citizenship should be provided for those already established in the U.S. who have lived here as productive members of our society.

Even now, Democrats are claiming they will oppose efforts to deport these people.  To thwart this, Trump can pick one of his most vociferous opponents.  Then he can tell Governor X or Mayor Y that he will not bother illegals within their jurisdiction until perhaps 2026.  When illegals realize they can escape deportation for maybe a year or more, where will they go?  When Governor X or Mayor Y faces an invasion by the modern version of the Golden Horde, what will they do?

I rate the chances of completing the border wall at 99%, deporting the worst of the worst at 85%, and deporting 5,000,000 illegals by the end of 2026 at 50%.



at

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 


Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


at

Anti-Gun Freakout Over Suppressor Sales Much Ado About Nothing


Suppressors terrify a lot of people. Often called "silencers," suppressors reduce the noise level of a gunshot. They don't silence it – hence why I tend not to call them silencers – but they suppress it.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation pushed to make the process easier, which the ATF did with an electronic application process, and it turns out a lot of people are taking advantage of it. The NSSF is celebrating it, which is just irking the anti-gunners at the Everytown-run Smoking Gun:

This past April, the NSSF “praised new data” revealing that NFA processing wait times had “significantly dropped following direct NSSF advocacy efforts among lawmakers in Washington, D.C.” The NSSF also stated that it began pushing for the ATF to process NFA applications electronically as far back as 2013. In that April blog post, the NSSF’s senior vice president and general counsel, Larry Keane, said, “We’re pleased to see industry efforts to reduce these wait times have been successful for our association members and for lawful firearm owners.”

More recently, when the NSSF’s research director, Salom Fatohi, announced that Americans owned nearly 5 million silencers, he claimedthat silencers are now “as normalized among the shooting and hunting community as TikTok is with Gen Z. What was a rarity as recently as a decade ago, it is now a normal occurrence to find a suppressor-equipped firearm at a local range or hunting camp.”

According to Fatohi, shooters and hunters who “previously dreaded [the] long wait time to purchase” a silencer are now being drawn to buying them. “As a result, silencer registration metrics are off the chart.”

Fatohi noted that the NSSF is continuing to push for bills like the Hearing Protection Act, which would remove silencers from the NFA and allow them to be sold like any other firearm, and the Tax Stamp Revenue Transfer for Wildlife and Recreation Act, which would “reallocate the funding generated from suppressor tax stamps” so that 15 percent of the revenue “would go to the ATF’s NFA division to fund and further improve the processing” of silencer applications.

Why is this a bad thing?

Well, it's not.

Suppressors aren't like in the movies. They don't make it whisper-quiet. They just reduce the noise to a level where you're less likely to incur hearing damage, especially if you're not the one shooting it. In fact, it reduces it to a point where gun ranges would have less issue with the neighbors getting bent out of shape because people are shooting.

But that's not good enough for the anti-gunners. Neither are a lot of other things:

Attempts at silencer deregulation are often pitched as helping protect the hearing of gun owners, but shooting a silencer-equipped firearm without hearing protection can still cause permanent hearing damage.

In an infographic, the NSSF claimed that silencers “make shooting and hunting safer and more enjoyable,” and that there were “only 15 federal cases involving the use of a suppressor in the commission of a crime from 1995 to 2005.” But the source the NSSF cited actually states that there were significantly more cases — 153 — during that decade in which “evidence suggests a silencer was used for a criminal purpose.”

Yep. You got them. They should have said 15 per year during that span, which is exactly what the source says. They goofed, but anyone remotely honest intellectually would have been able to see that. Call them on it? Sure, that's fine, but don't pretend there was dishonesty at work.

Then we have this:

Additionally, that small window of time does not include the use of silencers in recent mass shootings — like those that occurred in Virginia Beach in 2019 and Monterey Park in 2023 — or cases involving armed robbers, drug traffickers, terrorists, anti-government extremists, and people who have attacked police, as cataloged in this Violence Policy Center report. The ATF states that it recovered and traced nearly 300 silencers from crime scenes in 2022 alone.

OK, so first of all, the Monterey Park killer used a homemade suppressor, which means it was illegal. Illegal suppressors have absolutely nothing to do with the NSSF's take on the increase in suppressors being purchased lawfully.

Second, 300 suppressors being "recovered and traced" doesn't mean much.

First, that's 0.006 percent of the 5 million suppressors the NSSF says are in private hands. That's not statistically significant.

Second, those numbers don't differentiate between lawfully purchased suppressors and those stolen or obtained illegally through some other manner.

Finally, we must remember that "recovered and traced" at a crime scene doesn't necessarily mean they were used in a crime. They could have been found at the home of someone who lawfully purchased them but was accused of a completely different crime. It also doesn't mean the owner was the one accused of a crime, necessarily. For example, if my guns are taken and traced by police because my wife is accused of something – purely hypothetical here because my wife is a saint. She puts up with me, after all – then that would show up in those numbers, too.

So all in all, we have an anti-gun outlet losing their minds over suppressors while simultaneously showing just how little cause for concern suppressors actually are.



at

Trump's Incoming FCC Chairman Warns the Censorship Industry That Their Grift Is Ending


streiff reporting for RedState 

Incoming Federal Communications Commission chief Brendan Carr (see NEW: Trump Announces Who Will Become Chairman of the FCC) has sent a very explicit letter to CEOs of so-called Big Tech companies, giving them a choice of reducing their reliance on fact-checking sites, such as NewsGuard, which seek to censor content on the internet or facing increased regulation by the FCC. The letter specifically calls into question whether "moderation" decisions based on information provided by third parties could pass muster as "good faith" when that information is, itself, bogus or corrupt.

I am confident that once the ongoing transition is complete, the Administration and Congress will take broad ranging actions to restore the First Amendment rights that the Constitution grants to all Americans — and those actions can include both a review of your companies' activities as well as efforts by third-party organizations and groups that have acted to curtail those rights.

 For now, I am writing to obtain information from you that can inform the FCC's work to promote free speech and a diversity of viewpoints. As you know, Big Tech's prized liability shield, Section 230, is codified in the Communications Act, which the FCC administers. As relevant here, Section 230 only confers benefits on Big Tech companies when they operate, in the words of the statute, "in good faith."

It is in this context that I am writing to obtain information about your work with one specific organization — the Orwellian named NewsGuard. As exposed by the Twitter Files, NewsGuard is a for-profit company that operates as part of the broader censorship cartel. Indeed, NewsGuard bills itself as the Internet's arbiter or, as its co-founder put it, a "Vaccine Against Misinfortnation." NewsGuard purports to rate the credibility of news and information outlets and tells readers and advertisers which outlets they can trust. As the U.S. House Committee on Small Business 2024 Staff Report stated, "[t]hese ratings, combined with NewsGuard's vast partnerships in the advertising industry, select winners and losers in the news media space." NewsGuard does so by leveraging its partnerships with advertising agencies to effectively censors targeted outlets.

...

But NewsGuard's own record raises questions about whether relying on the organization's products would constitute "good faith" actions within the meaning of Section 230. For one, reports indicate that NewsGuard has consistently rated official propaganda from the Conununist Party of China as more credible than American publications. For another, NewsGuard aggressively fact checked and penalized websites that reported on the COVID-19 lab leak theory. For still another, the Small Business Committee and multiple Media Research Center studies detail numerous instances where NewsGuard apparently does not apply its own rating system in an even-handed manner. The list goes on.

NewGuard is a rather odious company that works hand-in-glove with organizations that seek to stymie the free exchange of ideas online. Representative James Comer's Committee on Oversight and Accountability also has NewGuard in its crosshairs (James Comer Launches Investigation Into Major Censorship Operation). The Twitter files, which Carr referenced in his letter, showed that federal agencies, such as the CIA and Department of Defense, worked with NewsGuard and other similar groups to shut down conversations they did not like; see Matt Taibbi Releases Remarks Ahead of Weaponization Subcommittee Hearing on the Twitter Files. Teachers relied on NewGuard to determine what information their students were allowed to see; see Teachers Union Partners With Progressive Organization to Further Indoctrinate Children. NewGuard has even targeted RedState specifically:

It’s still happening, and it makes even less sense than before. There are certain topics that we get our hand slapped if we cover in a way Big Tech doesn’t like. By “hand slapped” I mean “money taken out of our wallet,” and by “cover in a way Big Tech doesn’t like,” I mean covering the topics truthfully. Currently, some of those topics are climate change, COVID/COVID vaccines, trans issues, and the 2020 election – to name a few.

In just the past week, these articles were flagged by Big Tech:

Yes, MrBeast’s Friend Chris Tyson Abandoned His Wife and Son When He Identified as a Woman

Riley Gaines Defends Women’s Sports, Calls out Lia Thomas ‘Mansplaining What It Is to Be a Feminist’ in Senate Hearing

Seriously. Covering a woman’s Congressional testimony about sexual harassment on a college campus is “dangerous and derogatory.” Standing up for a child whose family life is being ruined by a destructive fad is “dangerous and derogatory.”

...

Anyone who’s read RedState for any period of time knows that being labeled as “dangerous and derogatory” by the types of people who run Big Tech companies doesn’t discourage us or offend us; it fuels us and inspires us to be even more dangerous and derogatory.

Unfortunately, in addition to labeling us and using mean words, Big Tech hits us in the wallet for that “dangerous and derogatory” content, or as it’s more accurately defined by people with two brain cells to rub together, “the truth.”

Big Tech Calls Us 'Dangerous and Derogatory' - a Badge of Honor

Some free speech organizations have been trying to push back (see Free Speech Group Launches Offensive Against NewsGuard), but those groups simply don't have the legal clout that the FCC does.

It's great to see the incoming FCC chairman putting the forces of censorship on notice that their comfortable grift of preventing free people from speaking out against injustice and tyranny may be coming to an end.



at

The Left's Media NPCs Are Bending the Knee One By One All Thanks to One Thing


This dynamic duo have, like many of their peers, been referring to Trump and his supporters as the epitome of evil for the better part of a decade. You and Trump have been compared to Nazis so many times you've likely forgotten more times than you can remember. The "Morning Joe" crew is one of those places the accusations sailed in from. 


But if Trump was the height of all that was wrong in this world, a Nazi, an international terrorist, and the man who will bring about the destruction of the Western World, why would the Scarborough's be flying to his house to kiss his ring? 

Easy. They were defeated. Not by Trump, mind you. 

By capitalism. 

MSNBC isn't doing so hot. Since the election, its viewership has dropped dramatically. According to Fox News, it hasn't seen viewership this low since 2016: 

MSNBC averaged only 599,000 total viewers on Wednesday, November 13, for its smallest Wednesday audience since June 29, 2016. By comparison, Fox News Channel averaged 2.3 million total viewers on Wednesday this week. 

MSNBC averaged 991,000 total viewers on weekdays during 2024, so the network shed 40% of its usual audience on Wednesday this week. 

During the primetime hours of 8-11 p.m. ET, MSNBC’s primetime line-up of "All In with Chris Hayes," "Alex Wagner Tonight" and "The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell" drew only 929,000 total viewers on Wednesday this week for a 43% drop from its 2024 average of 1.6 million. 

MSNBC isn't the only network feeling the hurt in a post Trump-win era. As I reported last week, all of corporate media seems to be feeling the need to repair relations with Trump supporters, or in this case, half of America. It knows that, with such a huge popular win, continuing to attack Trump is likely going to drive away too much viewership, and as such, things need to be changed in a big way. 

The View is reportedly looking for pro-Trump cohosts, and the L.A. Times is looking to add conservative voices as well. All around you, corporate America seems to be experience a rabid search for some sort of middle ground after furiously leaning left for years and years. 

(READ: Corporate Media Is Finally Figuring Out Ideological Diversity Is Important, but It Might Be Too Late)

And it's not because they're any less left. Many of these people believe everything they said. These producers and executives hate the right, and they hate Trump, but they love money way more than they hate anything, and the best way to get money is to be friendly with Trump and his supporters. 

The 2024 election sent a very loud and clear message; the culture has changed. The old fearmongering isn't working anymore. Nobody wants to hear about your panic-inducing predictions, no one believes he's going to make it all come crashing down, and the media's reputation is so ruined that it's left many unable to figure out what the point of them is anymore. 

That's money walking out the door. That's ad dollars burning in a pile right in front of them. 

So, with all the principles of a stripper, they begin dancing to a different tune. With friendlier voices that no longer grate on people's ears, and a bit of trust won back, maybe the money will begin raining again. 

But will it? 

Probably not, or at least not in a large way. 

As I wrote previously, the corporate media suffered from two big problems. The first was its insane partisan bias, but the other was its slow, lumbering, corporate process. The number one place for news in the world is X, a social media platform where news is delivered immediately. You log on, see the post, and you're informed. You can even discuss it or see it be discussed live with others who are more in the know than you. Expert, or at least informed opinion, is literally right there with the post. 

With the corporate world, the news is received, the segment is written, the guests are booked, and then at the allotted time, the news is given. By that time, that particular piece of news could be well out-of-date, and the opinion of the expert they booked already given by someone else. 

But that's capitalism, baby. It's true progress. 

If these networks follow through with their pro-conservative inclusions, then I see them getting a slight boost in popularity and viewership, but I don't see them turning the entire ship around. There's no going back to the way things were. 

We've moved on. 



at

Ratio’d | Justin Trudeau finally COMES CLEAN on mass immigration

Justin Trudeau released a video on his YouTube account Sunday in which he attempts to explain away his immigration policy and blame everyone but himself. 

Trudeau explains that Canada was in a labour shortage after the pandemic to justify his open border policies. He also blames corporations and lobbying groups for the mess he made.

Crucially at the end of the video, Trudeau admits that high temporary immigration triggered a rise in rental costs for Canadians.

https://tnc.news/2024/11/18/rhf-trudeau-mass-immigration-2/

Watch the latest episode of Ratio’d with Harrison Faulkner in Comments! 


at

Mika and Joe Went to Mar-a-Lago So They Could Declare, “Look at Me”


The internet was abuzz yesterday with discussion of the insufferable Mika Brezenski and Joe Scarborough traveling to Mar-a-Lago to meet with the person they called “Hitler” repeatedly.  As they tell the story, their intent was to “mend fences” and seemingly remain relevant.

When facing undeniable irrelevance, egoists always move toward the spotlight; because if there is one consistent truth within all human psychology, it’s the constant need for narcissists to find new supply.  WATCH:



at