House Democrat Argues The Government Should Define ‘Truth,’ Americans Need to Be Censored

Democratic Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett, a non-voting delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, said the quiet part out loud while appearing on MSNBC’s ‘The Inside Interview’ with former White House mouthpiece Jen Psaki on Sunday.

The U.S. government should define for America what the “truth” is and censor those Americans who don’t agree.

“Well, you know, first of all, they wanna talk about censorship,” Plaskett said. “That anytime you point out untruths, you’re censoring, you’re stopping people from speaking. It’s not that we’re not stopping people from speaking [sic], people can speak, but we’re also going to give the American people the truth so that they can have science and facts and history against wild, outlandish claims that the Republicans are trying to get. That’s not only going to keep them from going to the polls or suppressing vote or telling untruths, but is also really very detrimental to the American people.”

In other words, the U.S. government is going to stop people from speaking what Stacey Plaskett and her Democrat colleagues call “the truth.” Numerous times in the past ten years, the Democratic Party and the media have misled the American people on the truth. Whether it was false claims about Covid vaccines to the Russia hoax or racially incendiary police shootings, the American people have been pushed to believe in a damaging political agenda.

Keep reading

How Democrats & Republicans ‘Stole’ Votes From the Greens, Libertarians in 2020

Many things that everyone knows, are not true. Sometimes, quite rarely, one of those widely-believed falsehoods not only turns out not to be true, but obscures the fact that the exact opposite is true.

Most people believe that small political parties siphon off votes from one of the two major parties. Mainstream media repeatedly declares, without bothering to cite evidence because its obviousness rises to the level of self-evident, that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the 2000 election (not true) and Jill Stein sucked away enough Democratic votes from Hillary Clinton to put Donald Trump in the White House (also not true).

Let us, for the purpose of this essay, set aside the usual counterarguments to the claim that you shouldn’t vote Green they’re just spoilers: no presidential election is decided by a single vote so you can’t possibly individually change any outcome, people who don’t live in swing states really have no reason to worry about tipping an election, parties ought to have to earn votes, voting for a lesser evil is still voting for evil, a little party will never become bigger until we stop overthinking our tactical voting and simply support that candidate and the party we like best.

But—are small parties really electoral succubi? First, a look at Republican losers who blamed third parties for their losses.

Running as a Progressive in 1912, a vengeful Teddy Roosevelt out to punish his former protege for deviating from progressive Republicanism is alleged to have sucked away votes from William Howard Taft. We did wind up with President Woodrow Wilson, a Democrat—a result cited as the ultimate example of a third-party candidate splitting a party.

But historians forget to mention that it was a four-way race. Wilson faced his own “spoiler,” from his left: Eugene Debs of the Socialist Party, who got six percent of the popular vote. Taft was such a weak candidate that neither Teddy nor Debs made a difference; Wilson would have won no matter what.

Pundits say Ross Perot created a big enough sucking sound of votes from George H.W. Bush in 1992 to hand the race to Bill Clinton. Pundits are mistaken: Perot pulled equally from the Democrats and the Republicans. Libertarian Gary Johnson is unfairly blamed for contributing to Trump’s defeat in 2020.

Similarly, left-leaning third-parties—since 2000, this has meant the Greens—have never poached from Democrats in big enough numbers to change the outcome. Green Party supporters tend to be leftists like me, who would otherwise not vote at all. If the only two parties on the ballot were the Democrats and Republicans, we’d sit on our hands.

Keep reading

Dems Try And Fail To Censor RFK Jr. At Censorship Hearing

House Democrats tried and failed to censor Robert Kennedy Jr., a Democratic Party candidate for president, at a hearing on censorship.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) moved to shift the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government hearing on Thursday to executive session “because Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly made despicable anti-Semitic and anti-Asian comments as recently as last week.”

The congresswoman cited a House rule against testimony that may tend to “defame, degrade, or incriminate” any person, which would allow the committee an aside to determine whether to allow the testimony at issue during the open hearing. In making her case, Wasserman Schultz cited, “among many other things,” comments Kennedy recently made about COVID-19, which the candidate says has been misconstrued.

“COVID-19, there is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately,” Kennedy claimed, according to The New York Post. “COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.”

Keep reading

Sen. Chris Murphy Wants the Government To Help You Make Friends

Is there any social issue that elected officials don’t think they can solve? Loneliness is a highly complex phenomenon, produced by an interplay of cultural components and personal psychological attributes. One senator thinks he can fix it with bureaucracy and “public awareness.”

On Tuesday, Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy announced the introduction of his “National Strategy for Social Connection,” a bill that would create “a federal office to combat the growing epidemic of American loneliness, develops anti-loneliness strategies, and fosters best practices to promote social connection,” as Murphy put it.

The idea that the federal government can solve loneliness is naive and laughable. If there is an “epidemic of loneliness” in America—a big if—its causes are surely so diverse that no group of bureaucrats is going to dislodge it. And certainly not with the silly solutions Murphy proposes.

Murphy’s bill would create an “Office of Social Connection Policy to advise the president on loneliness and isolation,” order federal agencies to implement a “national strategy on social connection,” and start a public awareness campaign to educate people about fostering connections.

“Similar to existing national guidelines on nutrition, sleep, and physical activity, the Office would issue research-based best practices on how to better engage and connect with our local communicates,” Murphy’s summary of the bill states.

U.S. nutrition guidelines, of course, have a long history of being ridiculously unscientific and plagued by cronyism. And whatever one thinks about nutrition and physical activity guidelines today, there’s no denying that Americans are massively overweight and way too sedentary. So, I’d hardly call these things models of efficacy.

In fact, national guidelines on how to be less lonely are bound to work about as well as nutrition and physical fitness guidelines have: not at all.

Keep reading

Lawmakers Slip Censorship Provisions Into Pentagon Spending Bill

The biennial Pentagon budget reauthorization usually presents ample opportunities for wasteful spending, as lawmakers slip provisions into routine legislation that compels the government to purchase unnecessary and overpriced military equipment.

But this year, lawmakers have also quietly pushed changes to the National Defense Authorization Act that aim to silence military personnel and purge the internet of certain information.

One particularly alarming provision comes from Rep. Mike Turner, a Republican from Ohio, which prohibits the Department of Defense from engaging with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), a civil rights group advocating for the separation of church and state.

MRFF represents service members of all religions and denominations, helping them report instances of inappropriate proselytizing and the presence of religious symbols in official military affairs. The organization has previously succeeded in having crusader imagery removed from a Marine squadron and a Bible taken down from display at the F.E. Warren Air Force Base near Cheyenne, Wyoming.

“It is unprecedented in American history that Congress has ever tried to basically extinguish or assassinate a civil rights organization,” said Mikey Weinstein, an attorney, and former Air Force officer who founded the group in 2005.

Under this provision, not only is Defense Department staff prohibited from communicating with MRFF or Weinstein, but the military is also barred from taking any action in response to “any claim, objection, or protest made by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation without the authority of the Secretary of Defense.”

In an interview, Weinstein raised concerns about the impact on a current case involving a Jewish cadet or midshipman at a major military academy, questioning where they would turn for assistance. He emphasized that filing a grievance or simply contacting MRFF by phone could potentially result in a court-martial.

Weinstein believes that Turner holds a grudge against MRFF ever since the organization petitioned for the removal of a Bible from Wright Patterson Air Force Base, which is located in Turner’s Ohio district. The amendment was added to the NDAA without any debate and received unanimous consent from the committee, indicating support from House Democrats as well.

The bill passed the House last Friday and now moves to the Senate, where lawmakers aim to exploit this must-pass legislation to advance another broad restriction on speech.

Senators Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota, and Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, are preparing to introduce an amendment to the NDAA that would grant lawmakers extraordinary powers to censor a wide range of information on the internet.

Keep reading

Jen Psaki and Dem Lawmaker Peddle New Conspiracy Theory: Biden Investigators are Captured by Foreign Agents

Former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki and House Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), two key perpetrators of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, had another conspiracy theory to peddle on Psaki’s CNN show on Sunday.

On MSNBC, the interlocutors bantered about the baseless speculation that House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) was an asset of foreign agents, due to his investigations into alleged Biden family corruption.

“I want to ask about the work of the Oversight Committee, because you and Congressman Dan Goldman sent a letter to Oversight Chair James Comer this week requesting that he hand over any information he’s received from Gal Luft, with the man who the GOP claimed, for those who haven’t been following this in detail, he had evidence of corruption by the Biden family — who was charged with arms trafficking, sanctions violations, and acting as an unregistered agent for China,” Psaki said. “It is almost like part of a movie that is happening right now. According to an indictment on sale this week. What information are you seeking about James Comer’s involvement with Luft and what do you want to know?”

Keep reading

Onetime guest on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘pedophile island’ donates nearly $700K to Biden campaign fund

A joint fundraising committee raising dollars for President Biden’s re-election effort received a large donation from a tech billionaire revealed to have once traveled to pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean.

LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman dumped $699,600 into the Biden Victory Fund war chest, a joint fundraising committee authorized by the Biden campaign, in April, federal election records show.

The donation came one week before The Wall Street Journal reported Hoffman had visited the late serial sexual predator’s US Virgin Islands compound in 2014.

The close timing of the donation and the article was first reported by Fox News on Sunday.

Hoffman, 55, had reportedly planned on returning to the island with Epstein later in 2014 before traveling to Boston to raise funds for MIT on behalf of fellow island trip attendee Joi Ito, a then-media lab director at the institute.

Keep reading

The Supreme Court ‘Ethics’ Scandal Is The New Russia-Collusion Hoax

Senate Democrats are advancing a doomed Supreme Court “ethics” bill that would withhold $10 million in funding from Chief Justice John Roberts until the Supreme Court has “put into effect a code” for all justices.

The Senate doesn’t have the power to dictate how the Supreme Court conducts its business — any more than SCOTUS has the power to prescribe rules for the Senate. They know it. Then again, the effort to intimidate and delegitimize the court is meant to corrode constitutional governance, so perhaps the bill makes a certain amount of perverse sense.

Of course, turning to the likes of Sheldon Whitehouse and Dick Durbin for ethical guidance is much like seeking truth from Adam Schiff. And much like the Russia-collusion hoax, the effort to destroy the Supreme Court is a highly coordinated partisan scheme.

First, anti-court left-wing activist groups cook up some ethics “scandals.” These accusations are then laundered by complicit or credulous leftist media outlets for public consumption. Then, the bogus scoops are held up by partisans as proof of alleged wrongdoing. Everyone, other than perhaps the most gullible partisan hysteric, understands what’s happening.

Each week another ethics “scandal” emerges, one dumber than the next. The stories are divvied out among numerous outlets to saturate the news and create a perception of widespread wrongdoing. Some, such as ProPublica, are paid by pack-the-court groups. Others, such as Politico, Slate, and The New York Times, do it for free.

A recent Guardian hit piece on Clarence Thomas, for example, offers a good example of how all this works. The justice, the paper excitedly reports, received “seven payments” through Venmo accounts in November and December 2019 from lawyers who had once clerked for the justice. Though the amounts were not disclosed — one strongly suspects the minuscule sums would make the story even more preposterous — The Guardian explains that “the purpose of each payment is listed as either ‘Christmas party’, ‘Thomas Christmas Party’, ‘CT Christmas Party’ or ‘CT Xmas party.’”

Keep reading

Boston mayor Michelle Wu under fire after sending list of critics and protesters to police

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, a Democrat, is facing criticism for “Nixonian tactics” after her administration admitted to creating a list of her most vocal critics and providing it to local authorities.

“The list was made in response to a request from the Boston Police Department after the Mayor had been harassed and physically intimidated by individuals for several months outside her home, at city functions such as the annual neighborhood parks coffee hours, and at other public events,” Wu spokesman Ricardo Patron said in a statement to the Boston Herald.

The acknowledgment by the administration that it had compiled the document came after the list was uncovered in an email obtained through a public records request by Wu’s opponents, the outlet noted.

Keep reading

Dem bill in California would mandate judges to consider race when doling out prison sentences

A Democrat-backed bill making its way through the California Legislature would require judges in the state to consider a convicted criminal’s race when determining how long to sentence them to prison.

Assembly Member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, the Democratic chair of the California Assembly’s Public Safety Committee, quietly introduced Bill 852 in February. The Assembly went on to pass the little-known legislation in May, and the measure is currently being considered in the state Senate. 

The bill would add a section to the Penal Code of California requiring courts, whenever they have the authority to determine a prison sentence, to “rectify” alleged racial bias in the criminal justice system by taking into account how historically persecuted minorities are affected differently than others.

“It is the intent of the Legislature to rectify the racial bias that has historically permeated our criminal justice system as documented by the California Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans,” the proposed new section to the Penal Code reads. “Whenever the court has discretion to determine the appropriate sentence according to relevant statutes and the sentencing rules of the Judicial Council, the court presiding over a criminal matter shall consider the disparate impact on historically disenfranchised and system-impacted populations.”

Keep reading