Tag: hypocrisy

Ilhan Omar Deletes Juneteenth Post After Called Out for Present Day Slavery in Somalia

Somalia refugee Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) deleted a Juneteenth post on slavery Thursday after being called out for slavery currently being practiced in her home country. A different Juneteenth message by Omar that did not mention slavery remains online.

Omar originally posted, “160 years ago on June 19, 1865, slavery ended in this country. Today, we celebrate Black freedom, resilience, and achievement, and continue the work to root out systematic racism from our policies and institutions.”

At 1:10 p.m. EDT, MAGA poster Gunther Eagleman replied, “Somalia still has slaves. Ilhan should go fight to free her own people.”

Keep reading

“No Kings,” Except for the Bureaucrats

Over the weekend, thousands of anti-Trump advocates gathered for “No Kings” protests across the country, but their aims were not directed at constitutional norms; instead, they are engaged in a protest against the President’s authority over the Executive Branch. 

The chief issue in Washington since the second Trump inauguration is whether the commander-in-chief is empowered to control the Executive Branch, which houses nearly all federal agencies. 

The Vesting Clause answers that question with absolute certainty: The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. 

In response to the Trump administration’s efforts to abolish the government’s vast censorship apparatus, however, Democrats and judicial activists offer an anti-constitutional alternative for the country: The power to fire taxpayer-funded bureaucrats or reduce their funding shall be vested in no person.

In April, Secretary of State Rubio announced the closure and defunding of the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R/FIMI), formerly known as the Global Engagement Center (GEC). 

Under Rubio’s predecessor, Antony Blinken, the GEC was instrumental in silencing dissent, as it worked to “limit the reach of, the circulation of, and render unprofitable, disfavored press outlets by funding the infrastructure, development, and marketing and promotion of censorship technology and private censorship enterprises to covertly suppress speech of a segment of the American press,” according to one lawsuit. 

But this week, California District Judge Susan Illston upended the President’s control of the executive branch and ordered Secretary Rubio to halt the abolishment of R/FIMI. According to Judge Illston, not only is the Ministry of Truth permitted to censor Americans for alleged “disinformation,” such as the Hunter Biden laptop, the lab-leak theory, or natural immunity; but the Constitution actually prohibits the president from exercising control over the State Department. 

Unsurprisingly, the “No Kings” crowd offered no pushback to the judge’s defense of a censorious cabal’s entitlement to taxpayer funding. 

Keep reading

Ivy League Researchers Scaremonger About GOP Health Policy But Say Nothing About Similar Democrat Plans

Ivy League faculty members have a leftist bias — would you believe it?

That sarcastic conclusion comes from the latest example of rhetorical scaremongering over the budget reconciliation bill being considered by Congress. When Republican lawmakers decide to scale back health care benefits, the professoriate loudly proclaims that people in their legions will die. But when Democrat lawmakers do the same thing, these same commentators decide to join the Witness Protection Program.

Deaths Metric

On June 3, a series of researchers affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania’s Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and the Yale School of Public Health released a letter regarding the House-passed budget reconciliation bill. In it, they claimed that several specific provisions in the bill “would result in more than 42,500 deaths annually.” They further claimed that allowing enhanced Obamacare subsidies to expire at year’s end, as they are scheduled to do under current law, “will cause an additional 8,811 deaths,” meaning that “altogether, we project that these changes will result in over 51,000 preventable deaths.”

The letter leaves much to unpack. For starters, the idea that anyone can know with any level of certainty the precise number of deaths attributable to a specific policy — not 8,810 or 8,812, mind you, but exactly 8,811 — is absurd on its face. If the researchers know the specific number of people who will die due to one policy change, then why not tell us the names of said individuals, and where, when, and how those people will die, while they’re at it?

Second, the expiration of the enhanced subsidies at year’s end comes because of Democrats, not Republicans. When they controlled Congress and the presidency, Democrats passed provisions letting these subsidies expire. Democrats fully expected future Congresses to extend them but wanted to try to disguise their true cost, just like they tried to hide the full $5 trillion cost of the failed Build Back Bankrupt legislation. They should neither complain nor blame Republicans for not wanting to fix or extend Democrats’ bad law. (The same applies to Republicans when it comes to tax gimmicks they might include in reconciliation.)

Ideological Bias

But the real “tell” regarding this letter comes in the form of a question the researchers didn’t answer. I emailed the lead authors, Rachel Werner at Penn and Alison Galvani from Yale, with a simple question: “Do you plan on conducting similar analyses on the number of deaths associated with Gov. [Gavin] Newsom’s proposal to freeze enrollment of undocumented immigrants in MediCal, and charge existing undocumented enrollees a $100 monthly premium? Why or why not?”

Astute readers may not be surprised to learn that, even after following up, I received nary an acknowledgement, let alone a reply. The researchers might claim they never received my message or that they only published their letter in response to a request from Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for an analysis of the effects of the reconciliation bill. (Any Republican lawmakers in California reading this should please — please — ask the researchers for the type of analysis I requested, if only to highlight their hypocrisy.)

But it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to recognize the real reason for the disparate treatment. The letter was a headline — “Republican bill will kill X people per year!” — in search of a story and a justification. That’s why Wyden and Sanders requested it, and that’s why the researchers gladly complied. But when it comes to attacking Newsom, or Democrat Govs. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois or Tim Walz of Minnesota, all of whom have proposed scaling back taxpayer-funded coverage of illegal immigrants — not because they believe such benefits should go only to citizens, mind you, but because of skyrocketing costs — they suddenly become mute.

Keep reading

Top FDA Official Admits She Refused the Covid-19 Vaccine While Pregnant

One of the most powerful figures at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has admitted she refused the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine while pregnant—even as her agency promoted it as “safe and effective” for all pregnant women.

Dr Sara Brenner’s explosive disclosure, made on 15 May 2025 at the MAHA Institute Round Table in Washington, DC, is as revealing as it is troubling.

A preventive medicine physician, Brenner has worked at the FDA since 2019. As the FDA’s Principal Deputy Commissioner—and briefly its Acting Commissioner—Brenner was at the centre of decision-making.

Prior to that, she was Chief Medical Officer for diagnostics and was detailed to the White House to support the Biden administration’s Covid-19 response. She didn’t just participate in the pandemic response, she helped shape it from within.

“Knowing what I knew—not only about nanotechnology, about medicine, about the medical countermeasures—but also having a very strong and firm grounding in bioethics…there were many things that were not right,” she told the audience.

That someone with her seniority and access to internal data privately rejected the vaccine, while her agency promoted it to millions of pregnant women, presents a profound ethical dilemma.

Keep reading

About That White Guy Laughing in the Face of a Black Mom Trying to Get to Work…

I mean, I wish I could say you can’t make it up, but the Left has become so unspooled that nothing shocks. It doesn’t mean it makes it any less entertaining, however. There are anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protests and riots popping up nationwide. There’s bound to be shenanigans at this ‘No Kings’ event today, especially in Philadelphia. We’ll keep you abreast of that, but remember that anti-ICE protest in New York City? A horde of white liberals blocked the road, which prevented a black mother from getting to work. They laughed at her face and told her illegal aliens’ kids were more important.

Well, that guy in the video is reportedly a Black Lives Matter activist, Trevor Britvec, who got a six-figure settlement from the city during the 2020 summer of mayhem.

Keep reading

Democrat Governors Are Rolling Back State-Funded Healthcare for Illegal Aliens – Why is the Left Not Protesting Them?

Some liberal Democrat governors are starting to roll back state (taxpayer) funded healthcare for people who are in the country illegally. Why is the left not protesting them? Could it be simply because the left gives Democrats a pass? Do they even know this is happening?

Under Gavin Newsom in California, the state is so broke that they are being forced to do this because there’s simply no money for it and the program came in costing billions of dollars more than people were told.

The same thing is now happening in Minnesota under Tim Walz and Illinois under JB Pritzker, all far left Democrats.

NBC News reports:

Democratic governors seek to roll back state-funded health care for undocumented immigrants

A trio of states with Democratic governors viewed as potential 2028 presidential candidates have taken steps in recent weeks to freeze or cut government-funded health care coverage for undocumented immigrants.

Democratic Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Tim Walz of Minnesota have largely attributed the proposals to budget shortfalls stemming from original plans to expand health care to immigrants without legal status.

But the moves also occur against the backdrop of broader debate within the Democratic Party over how to handle immigration, an issue that dragged it down in the last election and that President Donald Trump and the GOP have continued to try to capitalize on…

The latest development came in Minnesota on Tuesday, after both chambers of the Legislature passed a bill to end state-funded health care for undocumented adults…

Newsom’s plan in his 2025-26 budget has called for freezing enrollment for undocumented adults to receive the full scope of the state’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal…

Keep reading

Key GOP Congressmen, Including Pro-Marijuana Legalization Member, Defend Effort to Ban Consumable Hemp Products

Key GOP congressional lawmakers—including one member who supports marijuana legalization—don’t seem especially concerned about provisions in a new spending bill that would put much of the hemp industry in jeopardy by banning most consumable products derived from the plant.

In interviews with Marijuana Moment, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH) and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glen Thompson (R-PA), as well as Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA), weighed in on the hemp language in the large-scale bill that cleared the the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies on Thursday.

Under the measure, hemp would be redefined under federal statute in a way that would prohibit cannabis products containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC or “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects) on humans or animals” as THC.

While Joyce backs legalizing and regulating cannabis for adult use, he said the language from the 2018 Farm Bill that federally legalized hemp and its derivatives “has been the stepping stone for the gas station delivery of intoxicants, whether that’s hemp or chemically manufactured [products] or whatever other shit it is that they sell at gas stations.”

“And there’s no age limit on it. So you’re handcuffing the regular cannabis industry that has strict standards that they have to meet everywhere, and yet this industry has flourished,” he said, adding that problems with the current law have been “exacerbated by people because there are some allegations that [intoxicating hemp products are] cannabis. It’s not hemp anymore.”

The congressman also seemed to endorse a push in Ohio to make it so intoxicating hemp products could only be sold to adults at licensed marijuana dispensaries. He said he told Gov. Mike DeWine (R) that, regardless of his views on the issue, the problem is the “gas station stuff that the kids are getting that all these people are up in arms about.”

That said, Joyce said while he does feel the 2018 Farm Bill’s hemp provisions included a “loophole” that’s been exploited, he hasn’t read the text of the latest legislation yet.

“I’m all for regulating the industry… It has to be regulated so that only adults are getting it,” he said.

Keep reading

Deep State Villain John Brennan Suddenly Worried About Politicization of Intel Agencies Under Trump

John Brennan is suddenly worried that the intel agencies might be politicized under President Trump. Funny. He didn’t seem to have that concern during all the years he and others used the deep state to repeatedly attack and smear Trump.

What’s more likely is that Brennan is trying to plant seeds so that he can complain anything that’s found out about him is merely politically motivated.

These people are evil liars.

From the Western Lensman on Twitter/X:

John Brennan, Russiagate Conspirator and Laptop Hoaxer, is worried that the CIA and FBI won’t be “apolitical” under Trump —

— and will no longer attract “principled individuals.”

“It is just so similar to the totalitarian regimes that I saw overseas in terms of making sure that the security services are doing the bidding of the political leader.”

“That’s why I think that the FBI is going to have a tough time attracting individuals that have that type of principled approach to government service.”

Keep reading

Maxine Waters Nailed: Whopping Campaign Finance Violation – 400% Greater Trump ‘Violation’ That Got 34 Felony Counts

Honest, genuine question: What good are congressional Democrats?

Yes, yes, most are aware that they’re really good at enriching themselves, quite skilled at unilaterally opposing anything and all things President Donald Trump, and have a knack for taking belittling cheap shots at paraplegics, but what do they bring to the table that isn’t some horribly partisan nonsense?

Dems like to claim that they bring integrity and honesty — two things they often accuse Trump of lacking, ironically — but that’s an odd claim to make when they’re busted breaking the rules all the time.

And no example of this hypocrisy crystallizes all of that better than the mess that blowhard California Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters currently finds herself in.

A Federal Election Commission report released Monday revealed that the California rep had violated several campaign finance rules that totaled over half a million dollars.

The report laid out the violations as such: “(1) misstatements of receipts and disbursements ($262,391 in receipts and $256,165 in disbursements); (2) acceptance of excessive contributions ($19,000); and (3) unlawful cash disbursements ($7,000).”

In total, that’s a clean $544,556 worth of campaign finance violations.

And Waters’ team all but admitted guilt by agreeing to pay a $68,000 fine over it.

“The Committee does not deny the allegations,” the report said of Waters’ team. “Instead, the Committee states that any errors it made were accidental, that the Committee has taken steps to both ameliorate the situation and prevent it from occurring again, and it requests that the Commission either take no further action or refer the matter to the Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution (‘ADRO’).

Keep reading

Who Really Are the Lawless and the Dictatorial?

The left is in its usual sanctimonious but schizophrenic mood.

The media claims daily that the Trump administration has usurped power. It is supposedly destroying democracy. It tramples on the rule of law and thus has created a virtual dictatorship.

Yet at the same time, Democrats high-five the most recent district court judge who has put a stop to the current Trump executive orders—which the Trump administration abides by as it files appeals.

There are two clear conclusions from the flurry of the lower-court liberal justices’ orders: 1) Trump has obeyed their record number of interventions as the appeals go forward; and 2) rarely in the history of the republic has a pool of some 300-400 left-wing district judges exercised such nationwide control over the executive branch and indeed the entire nation.

Yet consider the array of double standards.

Donald Trump is accused of improperly dictating to private elite universities who choose to apply for and receive federal funds. At least, lower court cherry-picked justices predictably rule so.

But please spare us the district courts’ sermons on truth, justice, and the American way, given their lodestar is often ideology, not principled adherence to the law.

After all, Trump is only following the precedents of the Obama administration. With legal impunity, it had threatened fines and worse to public and private universities that did not fully implement Title 9 to Obama’s subjective standards.

Indeed, the Obama Department of Education Office of Civil Rights, in an unconstitutional fashion, habitually threatened colleges and universities (“Dear Colleague…”) with a cutoff of federal funds if they did not comply with its weird version of addressing charges of campus sexual harassment. For the “constitutional lawyer” Obama, gone was the American creed that Americans accused on campus were innocent unless proven guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Keep reading