Rank hypocrisy…
Tag: hypocrisy
Senate Staffer Who Was Fired for Having Anal Sex in the Senate Hearing Room in a G-String Jock Strap Blames Fallout on Homophobia
Democrat staffer Aiden Maese-Czeropski shocked the nation when video was posted of him and his partner having anal sex at the US Capitol in the Senate Hearing Room. Little Aiden was was buck naked except for a g-string jock strap as he straddled the Senator’s desk in the hearing room and smiled for the camera.
Aiden Maese-Czeropski , the Democrat Senate staffer embroiled in a salacious scandal in the Capitol has announced plans to pursue legal action against what he calls defamatory allegations and a politically motivated attack on his character.
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Maese-Czeropski works as a legislative aide for Senator Cardin, handling foreign policy, tax, and trade issues. He graduated from the University of California at Berkeley with a B.S. in Society and Environment in 2020.
Maese-Czeropski has also worked for the Virginia Democratic Party as a field organizer and for the liberal environmental group Friends of the Earth.
Aiden was fired on Saturday after the video made the rounds on the internet on Friday night.
Now he is blaming the fallout on homophobia.
He’s the real victim.
Ex-FBI Intel Chief Who ‘Investigated’ Trump-Russia Collusion Gets 4 Years In Prison For Colluding With Russia
A former top FBI official who led the agency’s New York counterintelligence division, and played a key role in the Trump-Russia collusion probe, has been sentenced to 4 years in prison for colluding with Russia – and he may face an even longer sentence under a second indictment for hiding $225,000 in payments from a former Albanian intelligence officer.
Charles McGonigal, 55, was arrested in January and slapped with two separate indictments – one in New York and one in Washington, with the New York case related to taking nearly $200,000 in bribes from Russian oligarch Oleg V. Deripaska to investigate a rival oligarch, and the Washington case concerning the Albanian money.
Mr. McGonigal made at least $25,000 as an investigator for the law firm before directly working for Mr. Deripaska. He received an initial payment of $51,000 and then payments of $41,790 each month for three months from August 2021 to November 2021, the indictment said.
Prosecutors said Mr. McGonigal concealed his ties to the Russian oligarch by telling friends he was working for a “rich Russian guy” and stressed that his work was legal. In conversations about Mr. Deripaska, he would try to keep his employer’s identity a secret by referring to him as “the big guy” and “you know whom.” -Washington Times
McGonigal pleaded guilty in August after being hit with four initial corruption charges – including conspiring to evade U.S. sanctions, money laundering, conspiring to commit money laundering and conspiring to violate federal law against doing business with sanctioned individuals. Each count carried a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.
Florida Medical Marijuana Company Asks Court To Block Legalization Initiative That Would ‘Significantly Impact’ Its Business And Patients
A Florida medical marijuana certification company is seeking to block an adult-use cannabis legalization ballot initiative in the state Supreme Court, arguing that the reform “disproportionately prioritizes” profits from recreational sales and that it would “significantly impact our business operations and the well-being of our clients.”
My Florida Green, a service that connects patients seeking medical cannabis cards to doctors who can certify them, is asking the court to allow it to submit an amicus curiae brief in the case contesting the Smart & Safe Florida legalization measure that was brought by state Attorney General Ashley Moody (R).
The company says that it’s not opposed to adult-use legalization in principle, but it’s arguing that there are “potential consequences” of the 2024 constitutional amendment that could impact “patient care and public health.”
Poised To Lose Battle Over Gun Ads, City Bans All Advertising But Its Own
Spoiled brats upset at losing a game sometimes take their ball and go home so nobody can play, but can petulant politicians do the same with advertising venues? That’s the question as city officials in Flagstaff, Arizona, end advertising at the local airport rather than allow a firearms-related business to advertise its services to tourists. Well, they’re discontinuing advertising for everybody except a city agency that promotes select businesses. That’s unlikely to resolve the dispute.
Earlier this month I covered the case of Rob Wilson, who wanted to continue advertising his Timberline Firearms & Training to people visiting the high-desert community. “Officials rejected the ad, telling Wilson that its representation of shooting sports violated the city’s ban on displaying ‘violence or anti-social behavior’ and its new advertising policy against depicting guns,” I wrote.
That policy hadn’t even been approved yet. “The City’s Facility Advertising Policy remains in draft form,” Flagstaff Public Affairs Director Sarah Langley told me via email. It was scheduled for consideration at the November 14 council meeting. Langley added that part of the city’s objection is that Timberline’s new advertisement is a video, unlike the rotating still images used in past ads. Arizona’s Goldwater Institute, which represents Wilson, denies any such change and shared with me a video identical to the current one and date-stamped August 13, 2019.
Not that still vs. moving images should make a difference.
It quickly became clear that Flagstaff’s city government didn’t want Wilson’s business, or gun-related businesses in general, advertising at its facilities and was scrambling to come up with a justification. But government agencies are limited in their ability to pick who can and can’t speak on public property.
Elites Meet: 70,000+ Attendees Flying to Dubai for COP 28 Climate Summit
Ladies and gentlemen, please return your seats and tray tables to an upright position, fasten your seatbelts and prepare for landing… That is the order more than 70,000 people will hear as they arrive mostly by private and commercial jets to attend the COP 28 climate conference that begins Thursday in Dubai.
The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP28, in the United Arab Emirates is expecting close to a record turnout for the annual gathering of the globalist elites to vent their never-ending call for international climate action.
King Charles will be flying in especially to deliver the opening address as he joins tens of thousands of others who have eschewed the benefits of video conferencing in favour of boarding carbon-spewing aircraft for their travels even as flying creates more carbon emissions than any other form of transportation.
According to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the massed 70-000-plus attendees will be double the number of COP21 delegates in Paris, the landmark summit during which the Paris Agreement was adopted.
AOC Ripped for Calling NYC Unaffordable for Working-Class
The New York Post editorial board ripped Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., after she complained that New York City was too expensive for “working-class people.”
The board agreed that the lawmaker was right but pointed the blame at her for pushing the very policies that have made the city too expensive.
The editorial, published Tuesday, began by stating, “For once, AOC is right: ‘They can’t afford to live here anymore,’ she said Monday of working-class Gothamites. The thing is, it’s the policies that she and her progressive allies want more of that have made the city so expensive.”
Ocasio-Cortez made her comments during a town hall meeting this week, arguing that it wasn’t the rich who were feeling the heat of the expense but working-class people.
“The people who are moving out of the city are not by and large the wealthiest people. They’re the working class. They can’t afford to live here anymore,” she said, while making a pitch to tax the city’s rich more.
Tiny Fraction Of Global Elites Emit As Much Carbon As Bottom Two-Thirds Of Humanity
Critics who rail against the hypocrisy of wealthy global elites jet-setting on carbon-spewing private planes while pontificating about the need for the rest of us to cut our climate footprints just got a boost from a new study.
It turns out that the world’s richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world’s poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.
This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.
The study also estimates that it would take roughly 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99 percent to produce as much carbon as the wealthiest billionaires do in just one year.
The study was based on research compiled by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and examined the emissions of various income groups up to 2019. In summary, it suggested that the private jet-setting class of global leaders and policymakers, who take private planes to lead summits addressing the assumed dangers of climate change, may warrant charges of hypocrisy.
The analysis was published as global leaders prepare to meet for climate talks at the COP28 summit in Dubai later in November, where, much like other climate conferences, some elite participants will likely pontificate on the need for ordinary folk to end their reliance on cheap fossil fuel energy to make their ends meet.
Professors: Free Speech And Intellectual Diversity Are Not Essential To Higher Education
In “The Indispensable Right,” I discuss how academics are now leading an anti-free speech movement on campuses that challenges the centrality (or even the necessity) of free speech protections in higher education. The latest such argument appeared this month in the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Two Arizona State University professors — Richard Amesbury and Catherine O’Donnell — wrote that free speech concerns yield too much to the “right wing” and that free speech should not be given the protection currently afforded by universities and colleges. Indeed, they argue that free speech may be harming higher education by fostering “unworthy” ideas.
Amesbury teaches religious studies and O’Donnell teaches history at ASU. They wrote an article titled “Dear Administrators: Enough with the Free Speech Rhetoric! It Concedes Too Much to the Right-Wing Agenda.”
The two academics challenge the long-held view of the centrality of free speech to higher education. Notably, many of us have been alarmed by the erosion of free speech on our campuses, but Amesbury and O’Donnell seem to worry that there is still too much protection for opposing views. Worse yet, they suggest that the free speech objections are often part of a right-wing funded agenda.
In fairness, to the two professors, they do not reject the overall value of free speech, but challenge “the assumptions that free speech is a cardinal virtue of higher education, and that colleges should aspire to a diversity of opinions.” They insist that higher education is about finding truth and that means that false ideas are inimical to our mission as educators. Indeed, they question the need for “intellectual diversity”:
Our contention is that calls for greater freedom of speech on campuses, however well-intentioned, risk undermining colleges’ central purpose, namely, the production of expert knowledge and understanding, in the sense of disciplinarily warranted opinion. Expertise requires freedom of speech, but it is the result of a process of winnowing and refinement that is premised on the understanding that not all opinions are equally valid. Efforts to “democratize” opinion are antithetical to the role colleges play in educating the public and informing democratic debate. We urge administrators toward caution before uncritically endorsing calls for intellectual diversity in place of academic expertise…
A diversity of opinion — “intellectual diversity” — isn’t itself the goal; rather, it is of value only insofar as it serves the goal of producing knowledge. On most unanswered questions, there is, at least initially, a range of plausible opinions, but answering questions requires the vetting of opinions. As some opinions are found wanting, the range of opinion deserving of continued consideration narrows.
As a threshold matter, what is so striking about this argument against intellectual diversity is that it is made at a time with little such diversity in most departments. Seeking a wider range of viewpoints on departments does not “concedes too much to the right-wing agenda.” It acknowledges a growing problem across higher education, It is an educational agenda that has prompted many of us to raise the reduction of intellectual diversity.
How to Make Society Accept and Embrace Genocide ‘With This One Simple Trick’
In a glaring display of hypocrisy that has become all too common in the partisan theater, many on the right, who once proudly wore the badge of anti-war, have pivoted their stance amidst the bloody conflict in Gaza. Their anti-war voices, once loud against interventions and regime change wars, have muted, revealing a troubling inconsistency. The invasion of Gaza by Israel following the horrific attack on the Jewish state by Hamas has been met not with calls for peace and diplomacy but with a hawkish embrace of military aid, interventionist policies, and the wholesale embrace of genocide — a significant departure from their previous calls for non-intervention.
This flip-flop is a stark illustration of the power of party lines to cloud judgment, to turn the rational into zealots for causes they once denounced. It’s a phenomenon we at The Free Thought Project have documented extensively over the years, highlighting the cognitive dissonance that grips individuals when party loyalty eclipses principle and rational thought. The abrupt shift from advocating fiscal responsibility and caution in foreign entanglements to endorsing further indebtedness and military support for Israel reflects the influence of partisan lines over these easily dismissed principles. It clearly indicates how easily the masses can be swayed by party loyalty, even when it contradicts their previously held values.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the recent escalations in Gaza. The same individuals who once cried foul over foreign entanglements now stand idly by or, worse, cheer as Israeli forces launch devastating attacks on Gaza, claiming the lives of thousands. The death toll, a harrowing figure predominantly composed of civilians, women, and children, seems to be just another statistic to those who’ve traded their anti-war ethos for a seat at the partisan table. The Ministry of Health in Gaza has released chilling numbers that paint a picture of a population under siege: over 11,100 Palestinians have been killed, with a disproportionate number of the victims being children and women. 1 out of every 200 Palestinians is now dead — which is nothing short of genocide — and instead of decrying it, many are begging for more.
This about-face isn’t limited to war either. For years, Republicans lambasted the left for its rabid intolerance toward opposing viewpoints, decrying the ‘cancel culture’ that silences dissent. Yet, in a disheartening twist, these cries for free speech seem to vanish into thin air when it comes to the defense of Israel’s actions. Any criticism of Israeli policy is met not with debate but with attempts to silence and discredit—a tactic they once condemned.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.