Unfair! University of California, Riverside Grant Funding Favors Illegal Aliens Over Americans

According to a report from Campus Reform, the University of California, Riverside’s Undocumented Student Programs offers up to $9,000 annually through its Butterfly Project Fellowship to “DREAMers, students from mixed-status families, and undocu allies,” while a comparable graduate research grant for U.S. citizen graduate students provides up to $4,000 per year.”

This program rewards lawbreakers while punishing American citizens, something which is entirely unfair.

“According to fellowship materials reviewed by Campus Reform, the Butterfly Project Fellowship provides up to $9,000 annually to illegal alien graduate students, with awards disbursed through the Financial Aid Office.”

There shouldn’t be incentives at American academic institutions for foreign nationals who break our laws, and the fact that there are is an outrage that rewards lawlessness.

Recipients of this insane “fellowship” are also given the opportunity to attend college and “Undocumented Student Programs events while continuing to advance their graduate research.”

“A comparable funding opportunity for American citizens available through UCR is the Dissertation Research Grant, administered by the university’s Graduate Division. The grant provides up to $2,000 per application during both the fall and spring quarters, allowing recipients to receive up to $4,000 annually.”

That’s a considerably lower amount than what illegal aliens get and shows a disparity.

Keep reading

DOJ Opens New Front in Second Amendment Fight Against California

It’s a pretty grand time to be a Second Amendment advocate. The right to keep and bear arms has been boosted by several recent court decisions, key among them being New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which changed the landscape of legal matters concerning the Second Amendment for good.

As a result of Bruen, several anti-gun laws and proposed laws have been, one might say, shot down. Now, in the latest, Harmeet Dhillon, United States Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, has announced a new lawsuit by the Justice Department (DOJ) challenging California’s Glock ban and handgun roster law.

The official press release, found here, states in part:

“The Civil Rights Division will defend law-abiding citizens from states that seek to disarm them illegally,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “This lawsuit is yet another example of this Justice Department enforcing the Second Amendment by protecting citizens against unconstitutional state regulation of firearms.”

California’s new law would ban the retail purchase of common handguns manufactured by Glock and guns with similar firing mechanisms. The state’s existing “Handgun Roster” further limits the types of handguns citizens can lawfully purchase in California. The United States Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense in Wolford v. Lopez. The Court reiterated that states cannot prevent citizens from using commonly used firearms for self-defense.

Yes, the right to keep and bear arms properly falls to the Civil Rights Division. People on the left, most of whom lack even a nodding acquaintance with the Bill of Rights, don’t get that, but the right to keep and bear arms, acknowledged (not granted) by the Second Amendment, is a fundamental civil right.

Keep reading

The Weirdest Campaign Strategy Ever Seen

Of all the ways to build an image while running for office, this has got to be the worst.

California State Senator Scott Wiener just helped to kill a bill that would have prevented registered sex offenders from holding office.

The Gateway Pundit reported,

California State Senator Scott Wiener helped kill a bill that would have barred registered sex offenders from running for or holding public office in California.

On Tuesday, Wiener’s Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee defeated Assembly Bill 2753 after the measure had sailed through the State Assembly unanimously.

Authored by Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria of Merced, the bill would have prohibited anyone required to register as a sex offender under California’s three-tier system from seeking or serving in state or local offices such as city council, school board, or the legislature.

The legislation was introduced after registered sex offender Rene Campos, who pleaded no contest in 2018 to a misdemeanor involving possession of child sex abuse material, announced a bid for Fresno City Council.

Soria had promised her constituents she would act to prevent sex offenders from running.

“It’s deeply disturbing that this issue is unfolding in my own backyard. The idea that a registered sex offender could run for public office in the City of Fresno is unacceptable,” Soria said in a press release announcing the bill. “This bill will ensure once and for all that registered sex offenders are prohibited from seeking public office in California, so voters can have confidence that those seeking to represent them meet the most basic standards of public trust.”

Wiener, who chairs the committee, opposed the bill and said he would support it only if amended to apply solely to lifetime Tier 3 registrants.

Keep reading

Creepy California State Sen. Scott Wiener Helps Kill Bill That Would Have Barred Sex Offenders from Public Office, Says ‘Some People Just Have Flaws’

California State Senator Scott Wiener helped kill a bill that would have barred registered sex offenders from running for or holding public office in California.

On Tuesday, Wiener’s Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee defeated Assembly Bill 2753 after the measure had sailed through the State Assembly unanimously.

Authored by Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria of Merced, the bill would have prohibited anyone required to register as a sex offender under California’s three-tier system from seeking or serving in state or local offices such as city council, school board, or the legislature.

The legislation was introduced after registered sex offender Rene Campos, who pleaded no contest in 2018 to a misdemeanor involving possession of child sex abuse material, announced a bid for Fresno City Council.

Soria had promised her constituents she would act to prevent sex offenders from running.

“It’s deeply disturbing that this issue is unfolding in my own backyard. The idea that a registered sex offender could run for public office in the City of Fresno is unacceptable,” Soria said in a press release announcing the bill. “This bill will ensure once and for all that registered sex offenders are prohibited from seeking public office in California, so voters can have confidence that those seeking to represent them meet the most basic standards of public trust.”

Wiener, who chairs the committee, opposed the bill and said he would support it only if amended to apply solely to lifetime Tier 3 registrants.

Keep reading

California’s Self-Inflicted Squeeze

Energy Island

Long time readers may recall the many articles we wrote over many years highlighting the madness of California planners and policymakers. We were born and raised in the land of fruits and nuts and lived and worked there for over four decades.

About four years ago, we made our California exodus. At the time, we thought our coverage of the Golden State’s self-destruction would continue. We still have family and friends there who we visit from time to time. But, as we’ve found, without a front row seat to the big show we’re less inclined to gawk at the insanity. Articles on California have diminished to a slow trickle.

Today, however, following a recent conversation with a friend and California resident, we aim our sights at our former home state. Once again, California delivers a rich example of what happens when central planning outweighs economic reality. Here the specific example involves extreme intervention in oil and gas markets.

Policymakers in Sacramento, over many decades, have operated under the assumption that if petroleum production, refining capacity, and fuel consumption were made sufficiently difficult and expensive, the market would rapidly transition to their preferred alternatives. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has been the principal vehicle for implementing this vision through increasingly stringent fuel regulations, emissions mandates, low-carbon fuel standards, permitting requirements, and compliance costs imposed upon refiners operating within the state.

Yet the result has not been the energy transition that was promised. Instead, California has become increasingly dependent on foreign suppliers for products it once produced itself. This trend is particularly problematic because California is effectively an energy island. Unlike much of the United States, California lacks extensive pipeline connections to the major refining centers along the Gulf Coast.

The state also requires unique fuel formulations that relatively few refineries outside California are equipped to produce. Consequently, California’s fuel market functions largely as a self-contained system. When local refining capacity disappears, replacement supplies cannot simply be redirected from Texas or Louisiana with the turn of a valve.

Keep reading

O’Keefe Media Group Catches California Election Fraud Again: Election Petition Worker Offers Cash for Fake Signature

The O’Keefe Media Group on Tuesday released undercover video of California election petition workers offering cash for a fake signature.

“Alright, so the name you’re gonna write is gonna be Timothy Adams,” the election worker said.

“I’m gonna give you a name, write it down, I’ll give you two bucks,” they said.

Earlier this year, James O’Keefe and his team of journalists went undercover on Skid Row in Los Angeles, posing as homeless people.

‘Petitioners’ told the undercover journalists that they are paid between $7-$10 per signature. Some of them earn up to $1,000 per day.

“California NGOs Encourage Fake Addresses To Homeless People To Sign Petitions & Register Voters, A State & Federal Felony. Footage Shows 28 Instances Of Cash Changing Hands For Ballot Signatures & Voter Registration Forms,” they said.

“Many of the petitioners had no understanding of the petitions’ purpose they were advertising. Circulators also instructed individuals to use fake addresses. “Oh, you can just fake an address.”” OMG reported.

“Weingart Center, which received hundreds of millions in public funding, is on tape directing people to where the fraudulent petitioners are located, and directing homeless individuals to petitioners & coaching plausible deniability,” OMG said.

O’Keefe Media Group reporters encountered “28 instances of petitioners offering cash, cigarettes, and marijuana for signatures on petitions.”

“See they say ignorance is no excuse for the law. But a lot of times, I have to say ‘I didn’t know, I had no idea,’” a Weingart Center employee told the undercover journalist.

Keep reading

FIGHT THE OLIGARCHY? Rep. Ro Khanna Reportedly Lives in a Luxury Home With a Four-Story Elevator, Owns Three Private Golf Courses

Rep. Ro Khanna of California is part of the leftist coalition that is supposedly all about fighting the oligarchy. He’s just doing it from the comfort of a luxury home with a multi-floor elevator, while driving an SUV that cost about $200,000.

This is no different than Bernie Sanders flying private jets all over the country as he demands that we ‘tax the rich’ more than we already are. Of AOC driving a Tesla, as she complains about Elon Musk.

They all love to complain about the evils of wealth. Except their own, naturally.

Check out this eye-popping report from the Washington Free Beacon:

‘Ro’ Me the Money! How Progressive Class Warrior Ro Khanna Lives Like the Oligarchs He ‘Fights,’ With In-Home Elevator, $190K Range Rover, and Family-Owned Golf Courses.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.) has emerged as a potential contender for the Democratic presidential nomination while denouncing the ultra-rich who “hoard wealth and engage in financial speculation.” But the progressive, Silicon Valley congressman and his family live a life of staggering luxury, fueled by dynastic wealth they did not earn and protected by the same thicket of trusts, anonymous corporations, and foundations that Khanna condemns.

Khanna lives in a $6 million, 8,000-square-foot luxury home with a four-story elevator and so much premium marble that even the two laundry rooms have marble counters. The Northwest Washington, D.C., home is now for sale, as the Khanna family prepares to move to an even larger, more expensive house a few miles away in the Northern Virginia suburbs.

Khanna’s two children, who are minors, have large ownership shares in three private golf clubs, a significant stake in a $65 billion wealth management firm, and investments in hedge funds that focus on distressed debt, of which Khanna has been critical. Khanna’s wife drives a $190,000 Range Rover she was so displeased with that she sued the dealer.

A Washington Free Beacon investigation into Khanna’s finances finds that the progressive truthteller’s lifestyle is funded by his wife, Ritu Ahuja Khanna, an heiress to her father’s Cleveland auto parts fortune.

Anyone surprised?

Keep reading

Newsom Scrubs ‘$100 Million’ Slippery Slope From National ‘Billionaire Tax’ Pitch – And He’s Coming After Inheritance Too

California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) on Friday called for a national tax on billionaires. Except, in the original version, it was anyone with a net worth of at least $100 million – as quoted by multiple outlets, citing a post from Newsom’s Substack account. 

As originally reported by Politico:

His plan to address the country’s yawning wealth gap includes “a true minimum tax on billionaires and those with a net worth of $100 million” and creating a national public equity fund to give all Americans a stake in the economic gains created by artificial intelligence companies. 

The post now reads:

“So here is what I support: A national billionaires’ tax. A true minimum tax on billionaires — a modern Buffett Rule — that ensures the people at the very top pay at least the tax rate their own workers pay.”

Bitch please. 

Newsom also wants to tax inheritance – writing “We also need to rewrite our inheritance rules. Over the next twenty years, this country will live through the largest intergenerational wealth transfer in human history, with roughly $124 trillion changing hands. If we do not act, that transfer of wealth among the ultra-wealthy will lock in a permanent American aristocracy of inherited wealth, with all the political consequences the founders warned us about.”

Notice he cites the massive wealth transfer, but not the level of inheritance he’s targeting – as most slippery slopes begin.

Keep reading

California’s Voting System is Designed to Prevent Detection and Prosecution of Election Fraud

The recent Los Angeles mayoral primary placed California’s election mechanics under an unforgiving light. On election night Spencer Pratt held a clear path to the runoff against Karen Bass. Late mail ballots then arrived in batches that favored Nithya Raman so heavily that she overtook Pratt and finished with a 3,113-vote lead. NBC Los Angeles recorded one Friday update in which Raman received twice as many votes as Pratt, followed by continued narrowing on Saturday and the final overtaking on Sunday. Bass’s share stayed roughly stable at 34.68 percent while Raman climbed to 27.12 percent and Pratt fell to 26.69 percent. Observers noted that the arithmetic required for Raman to erase Pratt’s lead demanded an unusually large share of the remaining ballots, a distribution bordering on a mathematical impossibility under normal variation. The early leader’s margin collapsed only after the delayed counting of mail ballots from skidrow voters that California law permits counties to process for up to thirty days after election day.

This sequence did not occur in a vacuum. It unfolded inside a system built since 2020 on a series of deliberate policy choices. Assembly Bill 37 made permanent the practice of mailing a live ballot and return envelope to every registered voter before every election. In the 2024 general election California reported 22,595,659 registered voters and 13,034,378 mail ballots that were ultimately counted. That left roughly 9.56 million ballot packets that were printed, mailed, and never returned as counted votes. Those packets move through ordinary mail, apartment mailrooms, and forwarding addresses that may be years out of date. California law allows any person to return a completed ballot so long as the person is not paid on a per-ballot basis. The sole front-end control is a signature comparison performed on the identification envelope.

That comparison rests on standards that deliberately favor acceptance. Senate Bill 503 instructs officials to begin with the presumption that the signature is the voter’s own, to accept similar characteristics rather than an exact match, and to reject only when two officials determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the signature differs in multiple, significant, and obvious respects. No witness attestation is required. No photograph or other documentary identification is demanded at the point of return. If a question arises, the cure process allows the voter or a third party to submit a replacement signature by mail, email, fax, or other remote means, and some cure signatures may update the voter’s record for future elections. Once the envelope is accepted, the ballot is separated from it to protect secrecy. From that moment forward, any error or impropriety in the acceptance decision cannot be corrected without destroying the secret-ballot guarantee.

Keep reading

California’s $20 Million Attempt To Silence Medical Speech

In a trial set to begin June 24, California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta is asking a court to do something that should alarm every American, regardless of where they stand on abortion: punish nonprofit organizations with ruinous fines for speaking about a lawful medical treatment.

The target is not fraud. These charities offer their services for free.

It is not patient harm. There is no evidence of any patient being harmed.

It is not even illegal conduct. The underlying treatment remains perfectly legal.

The target is speech.

Heartbeat International and Real Options are pro-life nonprofits that provide information and care to women who first take the abortion drug but regret that choice and want to continue their pregnancies. California wants to impose penalties approaching $20 million because these charities have dared to tell women that another option may exist.

Twenty million dollars. That number alone should tell us what this case is really about.

No reasonable observer can believe that bankrupting charities is a proportionate response to truthful and non-misleading statements about a free service designed to help a woman exercise her constitutional right to continue her pregnancy. This is not consumer protection. It is political warfare conducted through the machinery of a government that wishes to silence speech it does not like.

What’s most remarkable is what California cannot prove.

After years of investigation, subpoenas, discovery, and litigation, the attorney general has failed to identify a single woman harmed by APR treatment. Not one. No parade of victims. No evidence of widespread deception. He set up a website practically begging for complaints and still could not muster a single woman claiming she was misled or harmed.

Instead, seven women have publicly shared the stories of how Heartbeat International and Real Options helped them successfully reverse their abortions. Three mothers are slated to testify from the stand about their joy at reversing their unwanted abortions.

Still, the state asks the court to punish the very charities who helped these women continue their wanted pregnancies simply because government lawyers disagree with their viewpoint on the scientific evidence regarding APR.

That is a dangerous precedent.

Scientific disagreement is not fraud. If it were, much of modern medicine would not exist. Medical consensus is not handed down from on high. It evolves. Researchers debate. Physicians challenge prevailing views. Studies are published, criticized, replicated, and revised.

The proper response to disputed science is more debate, more research, and more evidence – not government censorship backed by eight-figure penalties.

Yet that is precisely what California seeks.

Keep reading