GAVIN WAX: With RNC Shakeup, MAGA Brings Accountability To The Republican Party thumbnail

GAVIN WAX: With RNC Shakeup, MAGA Brings Accountability To The Republican Party

By The Daily Caller

An insidious institutional rot has long afflicted the Republican Party and the broader conservative movement. Historically, this has presented a vexing problem for grassroots activists desperate to change the status quo. Now, after Herculean efforts by players big and small, it appears that the rabble-rousing of the MAGA faithful is finally paying off.

New Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Whatley and Vice Chairwoman Lara Trump have brought immediate change to the institution, working with senior Trump campaign advisor Chris LaCivita to streamline this leviathan. Whereas former RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney-McDaniel did not make the systemic changes needed to support a modern campaign infrastructure, the new team has wasted no time taking a hatchet to overpriced, underworked, and misaligned elements of the organization.

“Every tool that the other side has used, we need to wield for ourselves,” Whatley said in an internal staffing memo to the RNC. “We will strive relentlessly towards historic accomplishments and fully modernizing the organization between now and Election Day,” he noted, adding that the RNC’s goal is to “cater to individual states, realizing that each state is different and that we must evolve to more neighbor-to-neighbor, precinct-level organizing.”

Previously, grassroots groups like Turning Point Action worked in opposition to the RNC, which cared more about providing lavish incentives for veteran operatives than doing the tedious and unglamorous work of chasing ballots and hunting down votes. Now, Whatley and Trump have demonstrated their commitment to build a broad coalition of organizations working in concert to win elections.

The embrace of early voting and absentee ballots, where Democrats have routed Republicans for years, may not be widespread among factions within Trump’s hardcore America First base, but it is necessary. These unfortunate practices have become the facts of life in battleground states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, where Democrats are in control and the genie cannot be put back in the bottle. The realpolitik of the situation dictates that Republicans must fight and win on whatever battlefields that exist, rather than accepting losses while harkening to election-integrity ideals that remain untenable in purple and blue states.

The immediate axing of dozens of RNC staffers sets an example of the culture of complacency that Whatley and Trump will not tolerate. Failed efforts at catering to minority voters, which have not yielded any tangible results, will no longer be subsidized by the RNC. Whereas the previous RNC leadership would have hesitated to make this change for fear of being labeled by the biased media as racist, the current leadership does not shy away from the necessary change. The RNC will instead work alongside individuals who bring tangible value, such as gay conservative Scott Presler, who does far more than collect a salary to check a diversity box.

The America First movement has long demanded this transformation, and the waiting game has been excruciating. It will be far from pretty as the America First movement remakes the machinery of the Republican Party; it is a gargantuan task that seemed impossible before the rise of President Donald J. Trump. The sheer force of Trump’s personality showed the power of a truly exceptional individual to overcome insurmountable odds in a victory for common sense and the virtuous principles shared by the patriots whose spirits animate our nation. 

As Trump rose to power, conservative institutions refused to change with the times. They dug in their heels, hoping that things would eventually return to how they were if they bided their time. They believed that Trump would fall flat on his face and that his legacy would be a failed presidency. This is why they looked the other way as the Deep State took unprecedented actions to undermine Trump before he even won his election, figuring that Trump would not be able to overcome their tricks and tactics.

However, the blatant hurdles Trump faced and surmounted only made him stronger and his supporters more fervent. Trump is in a prime position to sweep back into the presidency. For many decades, Conservative Inc. had a fleet of attorneys, bureaucrats, academics, and media apparatchiks strategically placed to make the Republican Party weak and unresponsive to the needs of its constituents.

Those days are rapidly coming to an end, and the baggage of the Republican Party will be cast aside. With President Trump’s victory in November, the obsolescence of the reviled Conservative Inc. apparatus will be apparent to all. Then, the struggle to save our nation will kick into high gear.

When Trump said he would be our retribution, this is partly what he was referencing. Trump’s right-wing realignment is the saving grace for activists who have fought and endured many brutal battles but maintained their spirit and refused to quit despite tremendous obstacles. As the hardships of the Founding Fathers led to the forging of liberty, our hardships will result in the renewal of national greatness. We are seeing the fruits begin to emerge right now.

AUTHOR

GAVIN WAX

Gavin Wax is a New York-based conservative political activist, commentator, columnist, operative, and strategist. He also serves as 76th president of the New York Young Republican Club and as an ambassador for both Turning Point USA & Live Action. You can follow him on X, formerly known as Twitter, at @GavinWax.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

RELATED ARTICLES:

GAVIN WAX: Republican Voters Won’t Settle For A Pale Imitation Of Donald Trump

Biden Is Running Out Of Time To Boost Dismal Poll Numbers In Crucial Battleground States

Bill Maher Tells Democrats To ‘Move On’ From Identity Politics Because ‘It’s Not Working’

’She Is Never Here’: Residents Of AOC’s District Blast NYC’s Crime Wave, Migrant Crisis

DAVID DITCH: The Legislative Sausage Is Crammed With Wasteful Pork

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Chris Rufo, Man in the Arena thumbnail

Chris Rufo, Man in the Arena

By Anastasia Kaliabakos

On March 15, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute honored Chris Rufo, an activist and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, with their Conservative Book of the Year Award at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Rufo finished his first book, America’s Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything, in 2023. In his speech after receiving the award, he said to the gathered crowd, “What I tried to do with this book is to make sure that it was not oriented just towards good prose, solid research, good line of argument, some historical value, but it was actually oriented towards active political life.”

This emphasis on active political life transcends the pages of America’s Cultural Revolution and bleeds into Rufo’s personal life. Rufo gained notoriety in 2020 for his fight against DEI and critical race theory, particularly in school curricula.

Most recently, Rufo collaborated with Chris Brunet, a contributing editor to The American Conservative, to expose Harvard’s former President Claudine Gay for plagiarism. Their joint efforts sparked a nationwide conversation about the detriments of DEI policies at the university level.

Tackling such prevalent issues was at the center of Rufo’s book as well: “What’s critical race theory?” he asked the audience. “It’s an academic discipline that has captured elite institutions with public funding, even though in many cases, the public never voted for these ideas to be installed. It’s not just in California, New York, it’s actually you know, almost everywhere.”

He went on, asking, “The point being is that these ideas proliferated and propagated through institutions, and the real question is how?… The worst answer is to say, well, they’re bad or stupid at what they’re doing and it doesn’t work. The better question is, so how do they do it? What can you learn from it? And then, how can you adjust your own politics to respond effectively?”

Daniel McCarthy, editor of Modern Age and contributing editor of The American Conservative, asked Rufo his opinion on a sense of complacency in America that has allowed DEI initiatives and critical race theory to take such a strong hold: “Some complacency or some weakness on the part of that stronger and more virtuous America opened the door to the insanity that we’ve seen the last 20 plus years. I’m curious, what do you think has created this sense of complacency, or this obliviousness, among so many conservative people towards the threat that they’re facing from a very radical revolutionary level?”

Rufo explained that, in his opinion, baby-boomers and libertarians were to blame for the current state of conservatism in America, concluding that it is important to understand and be educated about the history of the ideologies ripping through today’s society in order to restore a recognizable American order. 

Nevertheless, even in the midst of this significant culture war, Rufo maintained that conservatives should hold the high ground and never mimic the often violent and aggressive fighting strategies of the left.

“And, and I think, look, the right shouting and getting in people’s faces is always a loser for us,” he said. “The left can burn down a city and the media will cover for them. If there’s one bad person in a crowd at a conservative rally or something, it tars everybody. We have to avoid that.”

*****

This article was published by The American Conservative and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: YouTube Screenshot Manhattan Institute

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Shutting Down The Federal Government’s A Good Thing—Here’s Why! thumbnail

Shutting Down The Federal Government’s A Good Thing—Here’s Why!

By Dr. Rich Swier

“We must consult our means rather than our wishes.” ― George Washington


American families make a budget, corporations make a budget, small businesses make a budget. These budgets are designed to keep the doors open and keep spending in check, in order to put money away for a rainy day.

Budgets are how we, as individuals, get things done. Budgets are how we the people keep our doors open for family and friends. How we save to send our children to schools and universities, how we purchase our homes, buy our cars and eat, drink and be merry.

The federal government has “intentionally and repeatedly” failed to create budgets on time, within we the taxpayers means and it has failed to spend our tax dollars on what we the people value most, the health, wellbeing, safety and security of our families.

There is always the fear that somehow shutting the government down is a bad thing. But is it?

Let’s take a look at the federal budget process to understand that it may be a “good thing” to let the government shut down.

The federal budget for each fiscal year, which runs from October 1 to September 30, is approved by the House, Senate, and the President combined.

The President submits a detailed budget request for the coming fiscal year, which begins on October 1. The budget contains estimates of federal government income and spending for the upcoming fiscal year and also recommends funding levels for the federal government. Congress then must pass appropriations bills based on the president’s recommendations and Congressional priorities.

Congress’ 12 Appropriations Committees

There are currently 12 Appropriations Committees that create their respective budget and send it to the floor of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate for a vote. BTW, we pay these committee members and their staffs to get the job done on time and within the budget.

The 12 Appropriations Committees are:

  1. Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
  2. Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
  3. Defense
  4. Energy and Water Development
  5. Financial Services and General Government
  6. Homeland Security
  7. Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
  8. Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies
  9. Legislative Branch
  10. Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
  11. State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
  12. Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies

If Congress does not pass all appropriations measures by the start of the fiscal year (October 1st), it has to enact a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government running.

This is the key problem that keeps rearing its ugly head, as it did in 2024 as follows:

  • On January 19th, 2024 Congress, failing to do its job, passed a CR extending the dealing to March 1, 2024.
  • On February 2, 2024 Congress, failing to do its job, extended the CR to March 8, 2024.
  • On March 8, 2024, Congress, failing to do its job, extended the CR to March 22, 2024.

NOTE: According to the Government Accountability Office, there have been 47 CRs between fiscal years 2010 and 2022.

At 5:00 a.m. on March 22, 2024 the budget, which should have been passed on October 1, 2023, finally passed, 6 months late.

Congress has failed we the people.

This failure is not just a one off, it has become Washington, D.C.’s way of doing business. Creating anxiety and concern in order to pass budgets that benefit the few and take away from the many.

We the people are facing death by CR after CR after CR and budget after budget after budget!

The budget process has become a joke.

The Federal Budget and America’s Values

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. said, “Don’t tell me what you value, show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.”

Those who are supposed to spend our money wisely and on things that we truly value, i.e. life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, have failed us.

We saw just this year that Congress use CRs to keep the government open but funded programs that are patently offensive to the majority of Americans.

Here’s a short list created by the ,

  • $400,000 requested by Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) for Briarpatch Youth Services in Fitchburg, Wisconsin. The group promises to hide minors’ struggle with gender dysphoria from their parents while indoctrinating teens in extreme gender ideology.
  • $400,000 requested by Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.) for the Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia, which carries out transgender hormone shots, clears the way for transgender surgeries, advertises transgender services for minors, and holds drag show fundraisers.
  • $1,808,000 requested by Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed (both D-R.I.) for Women and Infants Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island, which carries out first- and second-term abortions at its Family Planning Clinic.
  • $650,000 requested by Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) for Dartmouth Hitchcock Nashua in New Hampshire. “We routinely provide both medication and procedural abortion care up to 22 weeks of pregnancy,” the group declares.
  • $780,000 requested by Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) for Amador Health Services in Las Cruces, New Mexico, which boasts that it “can provide transgender/gender non-conforming (GNC) health education, therapeutic counseling and referrals, and additional LGBTQ+ support that puts your safety and comfort first.

Also listed the following concerning earmarks in the 2024 budget:

  • “Sen. Bennet (D-CO), $845,000 – Envision: You, CO (SAMHSA) – LGBTQ advocacy.”
  • “Sen. Shatz (D-HI), $550,000 – Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, HI (SAMHSA) – LGBTQ services and syringe exchange.”
  • “Sen. Schumer (D-NY), $1,000,000 — SAGE, NY (ACL) – LGBTQ advocacy.”

QUESTION: Do these $6,433,000 in appropriations and earmarks truly fit your personal values?

Shut It Down

Brookings Institutes’ [1] reports, “Under the Antideficiency Act (initially passed in 1884 and amended in 1950), federal agencies cannot spend or obligate any money without an appropriation (or other approval) from Congress. When Congress fails to enact the 12 annual appropriation bills, federal agencies must cease all non-essential functions until Congress acts. This is known as a government shutdown. If Congress enacts some but not all of the 12 appropriations bills, only agencies without appropriations have to shut down; this is known as a partial shutdown.”

Here’s what happens and why it is a good thing:

  1. During shutdowns, many “non-essential” federal employees are told not to report for work. If these employees are non-essential then why are they on the payroll. Companies don’t hire non-essential employees, why should the government. Identifying these non-essential employees is the perfect way to start cutting government.
  2. Government employees who provide what are deemed “essential services”, such as air traffic control and law enforcement, continue to work, but don’t get paid until Congress takes action to end the shutdown. All this applies only to the roughly 25% of federal spending subject to annual appropriation by Congress. So, technically 75% of government employees are not essential? Does this mean we can fire up to 75% of those currently working for the federal government!
  3. Benefits such as Social Security and Medicare continue to flow because they are authorized by Congress in laws that do not need annual approval (although the services offered by Social Security benefit offices may be limited during a shutdown). So we the people will still get our Social Security checks and Medicare benefits. That’s a good thing.
  4. The Treasury continues to pay interest on U.S. Treasury debt. If we eliminate the debt this all goes away. Does this make sense to you? NOTE: According to GAO’s projections, debt held by the public will more than double over the next 30 years, rising from around 97% of GDP at the end of fiscal year 2023 to 29% in 2054.
  5. Shutdowns can be disruptive, leading to delays in processing applications for passports, small business loans, or government benefits; shuttered visitor centers and bathrooms at national parks; fewer food-safety inspections. Why not turn these over to the private sector or to the states? The states issue drivers licenses, why not let them issue passports using federal guidelines? Why not get the government out of the small business loans and turn that over to the banks and other lending institutions? Why not privatise visitor centers and make them a profit making entity that pay for themselves? As far as some government benefits, bathrooms at national parks, food-safety inspections aren’t these best left up to the private sector?
  6. Other workers deemed “essential” would remain on the job, though they also would not get paid. Services like mail delivery and tax collection would continue. [2]

Interestingly the Federal Courts and Congress itself are minimally impacted by a government shutdown. While some congressional staff may be sent home without pay, the question remains is the Congressional staff bloated?

So there you have it. Government can “shut down” with minimal impact if government cuts itself and shifts many of its responsibilities to the privates sector or to the individual state, e.g. Texas dealing with the border.

We are concerned that big government has become the opiate of the people. We now believe that we the people’s money is truly the opiate of big government.

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Sources:

[1] What is a government shutdown?

[2] US government shutdown: what does it mean?

Trump Social Media Company Merger APPROVED, Trump’s Windfall Upwards of $3 Billion or More thumbnail

Trump Social Media Company Merger APPROVED, Trump’s Windfall Upwards of $3 Billion or More

By The Geller Report

Shareholders have just voted to make Trump Media & Technology Group, the parent company of Truth Social, a publicly traded company. This could net Trump a windfall of $4 billion.

The President would need to seek a waiver to liquidate his stock before the end of a lockup period in order to use the cash to secure a $450 million bond in the Letitia James, “Get Trump” fraud case to then appeal the decision.

Trump has nearly $500 million in cash, but experts claim he needs $1 billion in cash to secure a bond that size.

TMTG stock will trade on Nasdaq as “DJT” as early as next week. F*ck Letitia James. Buy it.

Trump social media company will go public as DWAC shareholders approve merger

By: Dan Mangan, CNBC, March 22, 2024:

  • Shareholders in Digital World Acquisition Corporation voted to approve a merger with Donald Trump’s social media company.
  • The tie-up could net the former Republican president an eventual windfall of $3 billion or more.
  • The vote by DWAC shareholders comes two-and-a-half years after that so-called SPAC announced plans to merge with Trump Media & Technology Group, which owns the Truth Social app platform.
  • It also comes as Trump faces the possibility that New York Attorney General Letitia James will start trying to collect on a massive $454 million civil fraud judgment against him next week.

Shareholders in Digital World Acquisition Corporation voted Friday to approve a merger with Donald Trump’s social media company, a deal that could net the former president an eventual windfall of $3 billion or more.

The vote by DWAC shareholders comes about two-and-a-half years after the so-called special purpose acquisition company announced plans to merge with Trump Media & Technology Group, the private firm that owns the Truth Social app platform.

It also comes as Trump faces the possibility that New York Attorney General Letitia James on Monday will start trying to collect on a massive $454 million civil fraud judgment against him.

Shares in the newly combined company, Trump Media, could begin to be publicly traded next week under the stock symbol DJT, Trump’s initials.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

DWAC shares soar as merger with Trump social media company appears closer

Trump’s Truth Social To Go Public Via Merger With DWAC

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Weekend Read: A Tale of Two Lies – Part II: The Two-State Solution thumbnail

Weekend Read: A Tale of Two Lies – Part II: The Two-State Solution

By Marvin A. Treiger

Editors’ Note: We suggest also reading Part 1 of A Tale of Two Lies – Jewish Settler Colonialism published two weeks ago in The Prickly Pear. The author’s accurate history of the state of Israel and the well documented distortions presented to the world since 1948 are particularly relevant to the existential threat Israel is currently faced with since October 7th. Note the excellent conclusion of Part II concerning the House Freedom Caucus Resolution. Its substance deals directly with the Tale of Two Lies and hopefully will be a path forward for America’s critical support of Israel within one year.

The UN Partition of 1947 was established on the principle that both the Arabs and Jews had legitimate claims to the land. It was the first significant effort to resolve the growing conflict between the combined Arab states, the local Arab population and the growing and prosperous Jewish community within the region of the former British Mandate.

The Partition must be understood as the first two state solution. The Jewish population was ecstatic for one reason and one reason only. It meant sovereignty. The truncated borders, shrunken again and again by international commissions, meant the area was barely defensible and a great part of it was the Negev desert.

It was a miracle that it happened at all. Major credit must go to President Harry Truman. He pressed for its nationhood and recognized Israel eleven minutes after Independence was declared on May 14, 1948.

Truman turned out to be the most prominent “Christian Zionist” of his day. He would soon be followed by others including a massive, evangelical movement of Christian Zionists,,in which John Hagee of Texas, and many others friendly to the new Jewish state played a part. This included, not surprisingly nearly the whole of the influential Jewish community.

America had been founded by Puritans and other Christians seeking freedom from religious persecution in the New World,  Their faith often included a strain of Judeophilia or philosemitism. This was in sharp contrast to the more prevalent antisemitism in Europe.

Our founding Documents acknowledged this, as President Washington underscored when he said may all “…sit in safety under the same fig tree..” in his letter to the Hebrew Congregation of Rhode Island in 1790. The Judeo-Christian foundation of the values of the Republic were reflected during the period leading up to the Civil War when more than half of all recorded Christian sermons were based upon the Old Testament.

Destiny, or Providence as some might say, placed Truman, the right man in the right place at the right moment as a Jewish state was reborn once again going back from the time of the occupation of the “promised land” to the First and Second Temples and from a series of unsuccessful revolts against Rome, they always sought a state of their own in the region.

The First Two-State Solution

The day following the UN declaration, the five Arab armies of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Trans-Jordan and Lebanon declared war on Israel. Sovereignty in any form for the Jews was considered by the Arabs to be a grievous injustice. It was an impermissible insult and assault on Islam.

The Arab Higher Committee issued a statement that “All of Palestine must be Arab”. Jamal al Husseini vowed that “the blood will flow like rivers in the Middle East.” And indeed it did and continues to this day.

The Nakba – the Emotional Lie

This brief summary of the failure of the first two state solution in modern times would not be complete without a discussion of the Nakba, or “Catastrophe”. The Nakba refers to the alleged “ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the region” – that is, from the Jewish territory. 

Despite the UN partition deliberately establishing Israel in a Jewish majority area, Arabs claimed the opposite was true. Despite Israeli efforts to dissuade Arabs from leaving their zone, the Arab Higher Committee spread information that the Jews would commit genocide upon those Arabs who remained and urged them to leave. The “taquiyya,” also know as the “prudential,” or “Noble Lie” is permitted towards infidels in Islam. Shamelessly, this falsehood was visited upon their own Arab brethren.

The fellaheen were promised their homes would be returned to them upon the inevitable Arab victory.Many Muslim Arabs remained and though the Arab armies war failed, Muslim Arabs today constitute 21% of the Israeli citizenry.

Deir Yassin

Military clashes were picking up during the period prior to partition. One of these was an attack by Israeli militias on Deir Yassin, an Arab village on the road between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. It was located on high ground and considered to be a strategic location. It must be said that, during any war, atrocities happen and those committing them have a vested interest in denying them as do those who embellish them. The fighting there was indeed fierce.

This event remains a rallying cry for Jihadis to this very day. It is often fused with the larger narrative of Nakba because of its emotional potency. Emotions are used to effectively seal ideological positions which otherwise may retain an abstract quality.

There is no shortage of accounts of the “Deir Yassin” incident since it played an important part in the 1948 war. The most credible “worst” account published at the time by the Arab Higher Committee held that 254 arabs had been massacred out of a town 750 people. The numbers have since been embellished.

Let us assume for the moment that the initial account is true. And, let’s remember that the event follows 2 1/2 decades of pogroms mobilized by the Grand Mufti and others during the British Mandate. The total number of murdered innocent Jews would have exceeded those of the Muslim Arabs in this battle.

Searching the Internet, I could not find accounts of the ‘massacre’ that were properly documented from the Arab side. I did uncover what appears to be a thoroughly researched and documented account of the accusation from an Israeli scholar who interviewed villagers and soldiers, collected documents, testimonials and compared them. Here is the summary of the book on the subject:

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/deir-yassin-the-end-of-a-myth/

Eliezer Tauber, the author, concludes that there was no massacre at all. None. Zip. Many of the accounts of Jews and Arabs present in the village at the time match in fine details and provide a consistent  account of a very ordinary, if hard-fought military battle, in which the Israelis prevailed.

The local Arabs that fled with the soon to be defeated armies were granted no home in nearby Arab countries. They were confined for the most part to displaced persons camps administered by the UN in one form or another. They abided there as second class citizens rather than being absorbed into the nations where they dwelled.

The Arabs did not want them and refused to absorb them as citizens. Instead, they suffered as pawns in the intransigent effort to eliminate Israel. This is the origin for the so-called Right of Return. In my view, this rejection of their own people was the true Nakba, the true Catastrophe. 

Politically, this event is used by the radical left here and in Europe to paint the Zionist project as fascistic. Though false in every respect, the charge does serve the purpose of giving fence-sitters a chance to adopt the view of ‘a plague on both your houses,’ and fuels the rage of the committed Jihadis.

In dramatic contrast to Arab refusal to integrate displaced Arabs in the aftermath of Israel’s victory in its War of Independence, 140,000 Holocaust survivors migrated to Israel. In addition, the perpetual persecutions and periodic pogroms that characterized Jewish life in countries like Yemen and Aden, Iraq, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, had reached an intolerable state after Israel’s victory. Between 1949 and 1952, some 650,000 more Jews migrated to the newly independent state from those countries.

The contrast couldn’t be starker. Arab nations refused to accept Palestinians while Israel welcomed a suffering people. After WW II, mass population transfers in the millions settled disputes all over the globe. In the middle east no such humanitarian outcomes were permitted.

The One-State Solution Period

The Muslim Arabs nations never had anything else in mind for the region than a ‘one-state solution’. This arose during a period when the newly minted Arab nationalism fused with the ancient ideal of the islamic Ummah. This view emerged from various local developments such as Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Muslim absolutism has never been universal to the faith but was and remains strongest within the Arab world. Nevertheless, distant Muslim nations were prepared to support their Arab brethren at the UN and other forums. The singular goal was to isolate and eventually eliminate the Jewish state. The battle raged diplomatically for twenty years.

The Six Days War

The ‘Six Days War’ or what is known as ‘War of 1967’ changed the face of the Middle East. During October of 1967, Nasser increased tensions by mobilizing tens of thousands of troops in the Sinai. He also deployed air force squadrons to the region.

Reconnaissance flights over Israel’s Dimona Nuclear Reactor  by the Egyptiian was the last straw and the compelling signal that Israel better act first. Israel quickly prevailed once more against a foe that believed itself to be far stronger.

The territory added to Israel following its decisive victory included the whole of the Sinai, Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) to the Jordan River, the Golan Heights and most of Jerusalem. These new borders made defense much easier.

The Yom Kippur War of 1973

Yom Kipper is the holiest day on the Jewish Calendar. It is the day during which every believing Jew makes accounts with his Creator. It is a day of fasting and prayer. Israel had slipped into a degree of complacency due to overconfidence and arrogance. On October 5, in the early morning hours three million Jews  were awakened with the shock of the sounds of war and the warning blasts of sirens.

Egyptian and Syrian armies, tank battalions and air-forces launched a strategic surprise attack on two fronts and successfully crossed into the Sinai in the south and onto the Golan Heights in the northeast. The outlook was grim for Israel but they quickly scrambled in part because everyone was available and not at work due to the holiday.

Israel rallied mightily in the face of brave and determined Arab fighters. The Israeli Air force had at 46-1 victory ratio in dogfights which exceed the 9-1 ration in the 1967 War. The IDF lost 106 planes due to anti-aircraft fire. The Golan heights were recovered in fierce tank warfare and Israel was soon positioned to march on the Syrian capital and even on Cairo.

At this juncture, the superpowers jumped in forcing a truce. Yet, despite the military victory, the mood of the Israelis was newly fearful with much grieving as they recognized anew they were facing an existential threat that would not go away.

The Egyptians counter-intuitively were buoyant, and felt their pride has been restored after the outright 1967 defeat. Their armed forces fought more gallantly and were able to hold their heads up high despite the reality of mediocre performance and heavy losses.

Ironically, this newly felt Egyptian pride paradoxically opened a path to peace with Israel. In Egypt it was believed that they were equals with Israel. In 1978, the Camp David Accords were signed in Washington DC by Sadat and Begin and were presided over by President Jimmy Carter. The peace agreement has lasted to this day.

Oslo Accords of 1993

The issue of s two state solution once again took center stage.with the Oslo Accords. This effort continued through several U.S. Administrations always ending in failure. This history deserves its own summary which I will summarize in Part 3 and relates directly to Biden’s plans.

The Biden Administration is currently calling for a Palestinian state with sovereignty. Recently, Biden’s people  met with several parties without including Israel which will render the call stillborn. Nevertheless, the battle over who will rule in Gaza is beginning to unfold.

House Freedom Caucus Resolution

Trump, in contrast, was the first President not to offer a two-state solution. Instead he launched the Abraham Accords, ratified Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights and acknowledged Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel.

On March 4, 2024, under the chairmanship of Bob Good of Virginia, the House Freedom Caucus put forth a resolution asserting three principles:

(1) Condemning all calls for a ceasefire. (Israel must decide its own fate.)

(2) Opposing a two-state solution as no recipe for peace.

(3) Ending funding for UNRWA. (Many UNRWA operatives have joint membership in Hamas and funnel monies and goods to Hamas).

The Caucus is also calling for a stand-alone bill. There would be more support for Israel if funding for Ukraine or for a phony border bill were not fused into one Bill as it is now. A stand-alone Bill is likely to carry the House and the Senate. The Freedom Caucus, mindful of trillions in debt, seeks a cut in IRS spending and a defunding of UNRWA. to finance their call for Israeli military aid.

Politicians must consider the national interest. The Freedom Caucus knows who our real friends and allies are and how crucial the alliance with Israel is and has been to maintain our influence in this crucial region of the world. They know these two democracies stand together against a region of dictatorships.

Yet the Caucus represents a deeper emotional and spiritual commitment to Israel going back to our Founding. Christian Zionism, remains a part of our national ethos and motivates a majority of the Caucus. They may not wear it on their sleeves but it is in their hearts.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Biden’s New Zero Agenda Spells Trouble Down On The Farm And Supermarket thumbnail

Biden’s New Zero Agenda Spells Trouble Down On The Farm And Supermarket

By Bonner Cohen

Feeling the heat from farmers dumping manure in front of government buildings across the Continent, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is pumping the brakes on a pillar of the European Union’s Net-Zero climate policy and withdrawing an EU-wide bill that would force farmers to reduce the use of chemical pesticides by 50% by 2030.

With elections to the European Parliament in Brussels set for later this year, backing away from one of Net-Zero’s most radical measures is an act of political realism. Europe is being rocked by soaring energy and food prices, much of it brought on by the political class’s obsession with lowering greenhouse gas emissions from all sources, including agriculture. With peasants running amok, the “climate crisis” will just have to wait.

Blissfully oblivious to what’s happening across the pond, the Biden administration is doubling down on its own version of Net-Zero emissions, and the American public may be in for some nasty surprises. And a new report by the Columbus, Ohio-based Buckeye Institute shows just how nasty those surprises will be. The report “Net-Zero Climate-Control Policies Will Fail the Farm”, was authored by Trevor W. Lewis and M. Ankith Reddy.

The problems start with provisions in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act and Biden administration regulations favoring EVs over traditionally-powered vehicles in the agricultural sector, the report says.

Forced Transition to EVs

“First, EVs are significantly less reliable and more expensive to purchase repair, power, and maintain than combustion engine vehicles, making them impractical and ill-suited to working farms. Farm equipment must be durable and capable of operating in all weather conditions,” the Buckeye report points out. “Tractors and farm equipment must operate in off-road environments on poorly paved roads under constant risk of collisions that can permanently damage an electric vehicle’s sensitive parts, rendering it useless.”

“EV batteries drain faster in extreme cold and heat, and EVs lose range in the rain due to lower resistance between the car and the road and power diversion to the windshield wipers and headlights…Replacing an electric vehicle battery typically costs from $5,000 – $15,000, and general EV repairs require more labor and cost 25% more than standard vehicles,” the report adds.

“These reliability and financial concerns make EVs unattractive as farm equipment and make running a successful farm more expensive, but Biden administration rules will all but force farmers to buy or subsidize them anyway,” Lewis and Reddy note.

Reliance on Intermittent Energy

“Second, a nationwide transition to electric energy depends entirely on intermittent, unreliable zero-emission sources of electric power, namely wind and solar. Wind and solar do not produce power consistently throughout the day, and the variation in renewable power makes it harder for operators to schedule power demand, which makes energy prices volatile and ultimately more expensive,” the report says.

Easing the strains intermittent power puts on an already shaky electric grid requires bringing more natural gas power plants online, lest the country face more blackouts and brownouts. But in July 2023, the report notes, the White House Council on Environmental Quality increased the bureaucratic red tape on the approval of new natural gas projects.

“The Biden administration’s efforts to force farmers to adopt electric equipment ill-suited to farming and to replace natural gas generators with unreliable renewable energy sources is a recipe for unsustainable farming. Unfortunately, Washington’s central planners seem oblivious to that stubborn fact and remain committed to making Europe’s mistakes,” Buckeye points out.

Tracking Emissions from Farm to Table

American farmers also find themselves in the bull’s eye of ESG (environmental, social, and governance) reporting requirements proposed by the Biden White House. In March 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed a mandatory ESG disclosure rule that would apply to every publicly traded company. “The rule would mandate costly ESG emissions reporting for a firm’s entire supply chain, requiring large publicly traded food processing companies, grocery stores, and restaurant groups to track and report emissions from farm to table,” the report explains. “Large companies looking to reduce their overall emissions would stop purchasing food from farms with high emission rates, once again applying financial costs and pressures to the American farmer.”

“With its heavy use of artificial fertilizers and fossil fuels, livestock methane emissions, weed and bug sprays, and genetically modified crops, agriculture has been targeted by ESG fiduciaries,” Lewis and Reddy note. And now, farmer Brown is being targeted by the Biden SEC.

The EU calls one of its Net-Zero agriculture programs “Farm to Fork.” But Europe’s farmers are in open revolt, and the powers that be in Brussels have taken notice. And the SEC’s power grab may also be in for some rough sledding. The Biden plan faces a stiff court challenge, with plaintiffs arguing that the SEC – under the “major questions doctrine” adopted by the current Supreme Court – lacks congressional authority to regulate an industry’s, including agriculture, entire supply chain.

*****

This article was published by CFACT, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

How Did American Capitalism Mutate Into American Corporatism? thumbnail

How Did American Capitalism Mutate Into American Corporatism?

By Jeffrey Tucker

In the 1990s and for years into our century, it was common to ridicule the government for being technologically backwards. We were all gaining access to fabulous things, including webs, apps, search tools, and social media. But governments at all levels were stuck in the past using IBM mainframes and large floppy disks. We had a great time poking fun at them.

I recall the days of thinking government would never catch up to the glories and might of the market itself. I wrote several books on it, full of techno-optimism.

The new tech sector had a libertarian ethos about it. They didn’t care about the government and its bureaucrats. They didn’t have lobbyists in Washington. They were the new technologies of freedom and didn’t care much about the old analogue world of command and control. They would usher in a new age of people power.

Here we sit a quarter-century later with documented evidence that the opposite happened. The private sector collects the data that the government buys and uses as a tool of control. What is shared and how many people see it is a matter of algorithms agreed upon by a combination of government agencies, university centers, various nonprofits, and the companies themselves. The whole thing has become an oppressive blob.

Every major company that once stayed far away from Washington now owns a similar giant palace in or around D.C., and they collect tens of billions in government revenue. Government has now become a major customer, if not the main customer, of the services provided by the large social media and tech companies. They are advertisers but also massive purchasers of the main product too.

Amazon, Microsoft, and Google are the biggest winners of government contracts, according to a report from Tussel. Amazon hosts the data of the National Security Agency with a $10 billion contract, and gets hundreds of millions from other governments. We do not know how much Google has received from the US government, but it is surely a substantial share of the $694 billion the federal government hands out in contracts.

Microsoft also has a large share of government contracts. In 2023, the US Department of Defense awarded the Joint Warfighter Cloud Capability contract to Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Oracle. The contract is worth up to $9 billion and provides the Department of Defense with cloud services. It’s just the beginning. The Pentagon is looking for a successor plan that will be bigger.

Actually, we don’t even know the full extent of this but it is gargantuan. Yes, these companies provide the regular consumer services but a main and even decisive customer is government itself. As a result, the old laughing stock line about backwards tech at government agencies is no more. Today government is a main purchaser of tech services and is a top driver of the AI boom too.

It’s one of the best-kept secrets in American public life, hardly talked about at all by mainstream media. Most people still think of tech companies as free-enterprise rebels. It’s not true.

The same situation of course exists for pharmaceutical companies. This relationship dates even further back in time and is even tighter to the point that there is no real distinction between the interests of the FDA/CDC and large pharmaceutical companies. They are one and the same.

In this framework, we might also tag the agricultural sector, which is dominated by cartels that have driven out family farms. It’s a government plan and massive subsidies that determine what is produced and in what quantity. It’s not because of consumers that your Coke is filled with a scary product called “high fructose corn syrup,” why your candy bar and danish have the same, and why there is corn in your gas tank. This is entirely the product of government agencies and budgets.

In free enterprise, the old rule is that the customer is always right. That’s a wonderful system sometimes called consumer sovereignty. Its advent in history, dating perhaps from the 16th century, represented a tremendous advance over the old guild system of feudalism and certainly a major step over ancient despotisms. It’s been the rallying cry of market-based economics ever since.

What happens, however, when government itself becomes a main and even dominant customer? The ethos of private enterprise is thereby changed. No longer primarily interested in serving the general public, enterprise turns its attention to serving its powerful masters in the halls of the state, gradually weaving close relationships and forming a ruling class that becomes a conspiracy against the public.

This used to go by the name “crony capitalism” which perhaps describes some of the problems on a small scale. This is another level of reality that needs an entirely different name. That name is corporatism, a coinage from the 1930s and a synonym for fascism back before that became a curse word due to wartime alliances. Corporatism is a specific thing, not capitalism and not socialism but a system of private property ownership with cartelized industry that primarily serves the state.

The old binaries of the public and private sector – widely assumed by every main ideological system –have become so blurred that they no longer make much sense. And yet we are ideologically and philosophically unprepared to deal with this new world with anything like intellectual insight. Not only that, it can be extremely difficult even to tell the good guys from the bad guys in the news stream. We hardly know anymore for whom to cheer or boo in the great struggles of our time.

That’s how mixed up everything has become. We’ve clearly traveled a long way from the 1990s!

Some might observe that this has been a problem far back in time. Starting with the Spanish-American War, we’ve seen a merger of public and private as involving the munitions industry.

This is true. Many Gilded Age fortunes were wholly legitimate and market-based enterprises but others were gathered from the nascent military-industrial complex that began to mature in the Great War and involved a vast range of industries from industry to transportation to communications.

Of course in 1913, we saw the advent of a particularly egregious public-private partnership with the Federal Reserve, in which private banks merged into a unified front and agreed to service US government debt obligations in exchange for bailout guarantees. This monetary corporatism continues to vex us to this day, as does the military industrial complex.

How is it different from the past? It’s different in degree and reach. The corporatist machine now manages the main products and services in our civilian life including the entire way we get information, how we work, how we bank, how we contact friends, and how we buy. It is the manager of the whole of our lives in every respect, and has become the driving force of product innovation and design. It has become a tool for surveillance in the most intimate aspects of our lives, including financial information and inclusive of listening devices we’ve willingly installed in our own homes.

In other words, this is no longer just about private companies providing the bullets and bombs for both sides in a foreign war and obtaining the rebuilding contracts after. The military-industrial complex has come home, expanded to everything, and invaded every aspect of our lives. 

It has become a main curator and censor of our news and social media presence and postings. It is in a position to say which companies and products succeed and which ones fail. It can kill apps in a flash if the well-placed person does not like what it is doing. It can order other apps to add or subtract to a blacklist based on political opinions. It can tell even the smallest company to comply or face death by lawfare. It can seize on any individual and make him a public enemy based entirely on an opinion or action that runs contrary to regime priorities.

In short, this corporatism – in all its iterations including the regulatory state and the patent war chest that maintains and enforces monopoly – is the core source of all the current despotism. 

It obtained its first full trial run with the lockdowns of 2020, when tech companies and media joined in the ear-splitting propaganda campaigns to shelter in place, cancel holidays, and not visit grandma in the hospital and nursing home. It cheered as millions of small businesses were destroyed and big-box stores thrived as distributors of approved products, while vast swaths of the workforce were called nonessential and put on welfare.

This was the corporatist state at work, with a large corporate sector wholly acquiescent to regime priority and a government fully dedicated to rewarding its industrial partners in every sector that went along with the political priority at the moment. The trigger for the construction of the vast machinery that rules our lives was far back in time and always begins the same way: with a seemingly inauspicious government contract.

How well I recall those days in the 1990s when public schools first started to buy computers from Microsoft. Did alarm bells go off? Not for me. I had a typical attitude of any pro-business libertarian: whatever business wants to do, it should do. Surely it is up to the enterprise to sell to all willing buyers, even if that includes governments. In any case, how in the world would one prevent this? Government contracting with private business has been the norm from time immemorial. No harm done.

And yet it turns out that vast harm was done. This was just the beginning of what became one of the world’s largest industries, far more powerful and decisive over industrial organization than old-fashioned producer-to-consumer markets. Adam Smith’s “butcher, baker, and brewery” have been crowded out by the very business conspiracies against which he gravely warned. These gigantic for-profit and public trading corporations became the operational foundation of the surveillance-driven corporatist complex.

We are nowhere near coming to terms with the implications of this. It goes way beyond and fully transcends the old debates between capitalism and socialism. Indeed that is not what this is about. The focus on that might be theoretically interesting but it has little or no relevance to the current reality in which public and private have fully merged and intruded into every aspect of our lives, and with fully predictable results: economic decline for the many and riches for the few.

This is also why neither the left nor the right, nor Democrats or Republicans, nor capitalists or socialists, seem to be speaking clearly to the moment in which we live. The dominating force on both the national and global scene today is techno-corporatism that intrudes itself into our food, our medicine, our media, our information flows, our homes, and all the way down to the hundreds of surveillance tools that we carry around in our pockets.

I truly wish these companies were genuinely private, but they are not. They are de facto state actors. More precisely, they all work hand-in-glove and which is the hand and which is the glove is no longer clear. 

Coming to terms with this intellectually is the major challenge of our times. Dealing with it juridically and politically seems like a much more daunting task, to say the least. The problem is complicated by the drive to purge serious dissent at all levels of society. How did American capitalism become American corporatism? A little at a time and then all at once.

*****

This article was published by the Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Liberal State Declares War On Small Farmers And Homesteaders thumbnail

Liberal State Declares War On Small Farmers And Homesteaders

By Leo Hohmann

War on food is spreading in U.S. through land-use restrictions, geoengineering and waves of propaganda. Remember, it really is all about depopulation.


The World Economic Forum warned us several years ago that its ultimate goal was to destroy the middle class. How else would you explain their slogan: “You will own nothing and learn to like it“?

This mantra is playing out in real time in the state of Oregon, and other states, in various forms which we will get into in this article.

Small farmers are under attack in the Beaver State, which has begun shutting down family farms throughout the state under the guise of water conservation and groundwater protection.

The owner of Yanasa Ama Ranch shared a 20-minute video explaining what is going on in Oregon as bureaucrats erroneously classify small family farms and homesteads as “concentrated animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs, in order to shut them down. Any feeding area that has a concrete, rock or gravel floor falls into this category, which would include most small dairy or egg farms.

If you have two or three milking cows, the rancher explains, you are now targeted by the state for closure.

The rancher further explains in the video:

“The state of Oregon has effectively shut down small farms and market gardens on a large scale, and they’re actually sending out cease-and-desist letters to farms and they’re using satellite technology to find their victims and send them these letters that say you can’t operate.”

The below video is 20 minutes but the most critical information is contained in the first 5 or 6 minutes. Note that he says most of these anti-farming, anti-private property laws start in places like Washington and Oregon but end up spreading to other states over time. That is so true!

Wake up folks. The tyranny is gaining ground. The war on food is heating up and will inevitably cause a major worldwide famine at some point. Remember what I’ve said in previous articles, that depopulation is the ultimate goal of the globalists. There is no other explanation behind their rabid lust for World War III, their relentless pushing of toxic vaccines, harmful chemicals sprayed in the atmosphere and put in our food, their celebration of abortion and all things LGBTQ+, and the list goes on. The more death and sterilizations they can foster, the happier they will be.

There was some good news on the atmospheric spraying this week. The state Senate in Tennessee has passed a bill banning all such spraying within its borders, whether it be for geoengineering or other purposes. (See story here).

The globalists are also waging war against small farms and homesteaders on the propaganda front.

The far-left media group Media Matters, funded by George Soros and other globalists, recently put out a hit-piece article targeting homesteaders as “white nationalist” and “anti-government.” How dare they seek to grow their own food! They must be racists! See video below.

I keep hearing that the CFR-Trilateral-WEF-UN globalists are “running scared.” That may be true, but I wouldn’t bet on it. As long as we see horror stories like this one out of Oregon I am of the opinion that these global predators are only just getting started. If they were at all fearful they would be pulling back on some of their most harmful policies in the war on food. Instead, they continue to pressure farmers to cull their flocks of birds, radically reduce the size of their bovine herds, and now they’re trying to render their farmland useless through nefarious “water protection” policies. Their goal is to put all small farmers and homesteaders out of business and force them into the cities, where people are more easily surveilled and controlled. We cannot allow them to succeed. Find small farmers in your area and support them.

Let me know in the comments below if your state is showing any signs of joining the globalists’ war on food.

©2024. Leo Hohmann. All rights reserved.

J.K. Rowling Slams Trans Activists After UK Bans Use of Puberty Blockers on Minors, Citing Safety Concerns thumbnail

J.K. Rowling Slams Trans Activists After UK Bans Use of Puberty Blockers on Minors, Citing Safety Concerns

By Jihad Watch

The UK has banned the use of puberty blockers on minors “dealing with transgenderism,” on the grounds that there is not enough “evidence on the procedure’s safety or clinical effectiveness.”

J.K. Rowling, who has herself been victim of abuse for speaking out against the most aggressive elements of the trans lobby, discussed the vulnerability of children and how they are being used by the system. Despite this ban, UK children will be used as lab rats:

The hormones will be only available for children with gender dysphoria through clinical trials intended to fill gaps in medical knowledge, though provision is expected to be made in exceptional circumstances on a case-by-case basis.

In America, puberty blockers continue to be allowed by the Food and Drug Administration, and thousands of kids are taking these risky drugs, with many more lined up for them, even against the wishes of parents in many cases. They are referred to by some in the woke system as “estranged parents.”

At least 121,882 children ages 6 to 17 were diagnosed with gender dysphoria from 2017 through 2021.

In America, puberty blockers along with gender transitioning for kids is supported “at the highest levels” of the Biden administration, with psychological and physical risks dismissed.

J.K. Rowling Shreds Puberty Blockers After U.K. Ban: ‘Well-Funded Lobbying Groups Drunk on Their Own Power

by Paul Bois, Breitbart, March 18, 2024:

J.K. Rowling ripped into the activists who pushed puberty blockers after the U.K. National Health Service (NHS) banned their use on minors dealing with transgenderism.

NHS England based its decision to ban puberty blockers for children this week on there not being enough evidence on the procedure’s safety or clinical effectiveness. The U.K. government also endorsed the “landmark decision,” hailing at as being in the “best interests of children.” NHS England proposed a ban on the procedure last June and issued the definitive decision following a review from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

Author J.K. Rowling, who has been an outspoken critic of transgender radicalism since 2020, celebrated the decision on social media and called out the activists who pushed this on children.

“How was this allowed in the first place… no words,” one user on X said in reply to her post highlighting the policy change.

“Well-funded lobbying groups drunk on their own power, politicians closing their eyes rather than suffer social media pushback, idiot celeb cheerleaders who’re about to go very quiet, pharmaceutical companies chasing profit, medics who abandoned ethics and should be in the dock,” she replied….One self-identified ‘de-transitioner’ said, ‘It breaks my heart it was allowed to go on for so long. The damage done is untold, and the number of detransitioners who have broke down in pain to me will live with me forever.’”

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Rep. MTG Files Motion To Remove Mike Johnson As Speaker Of The House thumbnail

Rep. MTG Files Motion To Remove Mike Johnson As Speaker Of The House

By The Daily Caller

Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a motion Friday morning for Speaker of the House Mike Johnson to vacate the chair.

Greene called on Johnson to not bring the $1.2 trillion spending bill to the floor for a vote, calling it “a Chuck Schumer, Democrat-controlled bill coming from the ‘Republican-controlled’ House.” She would have to be recognized to try to vacate the speakership, and the House would have to take action within two legislative days. Having not noticed the privilege, the motion cannot be considered until after the recess.

WATCH: 

No Republican in good conscience can vote for the uniparty minibus.

This is not a Republican bill. It is a Chuck Schumer, Democrat-controlled bill coming from the “Republican-controlled” House.

The Speaker of the House should not bring it to the floor. pic.twitter.com/EGosNo5Sz7

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) March 22, 2024

pic.twitter.com/a6Vdu1X03D

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) March 22, 2024

“Speaker Johnson always listens to the concerns of members, but is focused on governing. He will continue to push conservative legislation that secures our border, strengthens our national defense and demonstrates how we’ll grow our majority,” Johnson’s spokesperson Raj Shah said in a statement.

JOHNSON SPOX RAJ SHAH stmt re. MTV: “Speaker Johnson always listens to the concerns of members, but is focused on governing. He will continue to push conservative legislation that secures our border, strengthens our national defense and demonstrates how we’ll grow our majority.”

— Olivia Beavers (@Olivia_Beavers) March 22, 2024

The House ended up on Friday passing the $1.2 trillion consolidated spending bill, which included millions of dollars in earmarks, to fund the remainder of the U.S. government for the 2024 fiscal year. The bill passed with 286 yeas to 134 nays, meeting the two-thirds majority requirement to suspend the rules and pass expeditiously.

Leading up to the vote, members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus (HFC) members encouraged their Republican colleagues to vote against the package, which Chairman Bob Good slammed in a statement.

“Is there anything that some Republicans won’t do to keep this government open? Why are we in a rush to keep this government open that is so harming the American people by the very policies which they are suffering under?,” Good said. “And the bill that’s being voted on today will be Republicans joining with Democrats to fund this DHS. Instead we must say enough, not on our watch.”

Former HFC Chairman Scott Perry echoed Good’s concerns, saying Republicans who vote yes “should be ashamed,” while Republican Rep. Chip Roy argued that they will “own the destruction of America” for passing the bill.

“Every single Republican should vote no, should vote no. And should be ashamed of ever voting yes,” said former HFC Chairman Scott Perry. “And if they don’t vote no on this bill, what they’re saying to their constituents — their bosses who sent them to Washington, D.C. — Democrat or Republican, what you saw at the border, that’s fine with me. That’s good. Let’s get more of that.”

“Anybody who votes for this bill today owns every stinking bit of it,” Roy said. “They own the destruction of the American economy with all these regulations killing families. They own the wide open borders, causing death and destruction. They own the fentanyl pouring into communities. If you fund it, you own it.”

AUTHOR

‘Economic Disaster’: Biden’s Budget Dreams Would Add Even More Fuel To Sky-High Inflation, Experts Say thumbnail

‘Economic Disaster’: Biden’s Budget Dreams Would Add Even More Fuel To Sky-High Inflation, Experts Say

By Will Kessler

President Joe Biden recently released his budget proposal for fiscal year 2025, which, if approved, could add even more fuel to sky-high inflation, according to federal government budget experts who spoke to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The president’s proposal lays out a slew of new targeted spending measures and tax increases that, in total, would add at least $14.8 trillion to the already massive national debt by the end of Biden’s presumptive second term. Many provisions in the budget would contribute to inflationary runaway deficit spending while not addressing the real problems causing unaffordability and rising prices, experts told the DCNF. (RELATED: Iconic Discount Merchandise Brand To Shutter Around 1,000 Stores As Harsh Economic Factors Weigh On Sales)

“Between the new anti-growth taxes and large deficits, you get a reduction in the real supply of goods and services and more financial assets floating around — more dollars chasing fewer goods and services — lots of inflation going forward, and the Fed will likely respond by waffling between printing money like crazy to cover some of the deficits — jacking up inflation even higher — and tightening the money supply, sending interest rates to the moon and only slightly bringing down inflation,” Richard Stern, director of the Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget at the Heritage Foundation, told the DCNF.

Inflation currently sits at a rate of 3.2% year-over-year as of February and has risen 18.5% since Biden first came to office in January 2021. Biden has made huge stimulus packages part of his economic agenda, passing the American Rescue Plan in March 2021, which approved $1.9 trillion in new spending, and the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022, which authorized another $750 billion.

“Biden’s budget is anticipating that the debt will go from $260k per household to $370k per household,” Stern told the DCNF. “That will continue to send interest rates way higher … which both pushes housing out of reach for most people but also will starve business growth.”

In response to high inflation, the Federal Reserve has set its federal funds rate to a range of 5.25% and 5.50%, putting pressure on interest rates across the economy as credit becomes more costly. Home prices are particularly exposed to credit cost increases as mortgage rates track closely with the price of Treasury bills, which are valued based on future inflation and interest rate expectations.

“The deficit will drive inflation higher because it means that the government will produce more financial assets (bonds) with no corresponding increase in real productive capacity,” Stern told the DCNF.

The budget calls for $258 billion to be approved for use in building or preserving two million housing units, specifically targeting lower- and middle-income households. The real limiting factor to housing availability in terms of units is local regulations, like those in California, that have stalled construction, meaning more federal funding would not solve the issue but instead add fuel to inflation.

“It’s very hard to build an apartment building because of all the government zoning and regulatory rules,” Chris Edwards, the Kilts Family Chair in Fiscal Studies at the Cato Institute, told the DCNF. “It’s not the federal government’s job to try to solve it with subsidies…it’s really a waste of federal taxpayer money because it’s something that state and local governments should be solving by themselves through deregulation.”

A Biden administration official told the DCNF that the budget would decrease the national deficit by $3 trillion over the next decade through increasing taxes and cutting wasteful spending, parroting language in the proposal. Edwards points out that the calculations used for the budget employ tricks that make it appear as if the deficit is declining over time, such as projecting nondefense discretionary spending to the same level each year despite GDP and inflation rising over time, instead of what typically occurs when spending tracks with these gains, resulting in $2.5 trillion more in deficit spending by 2034.

“He uses phony accounting and his budget in various ways to pretend that he reduces the deficit compared to baseline,” Edwards told the DCNF. “It’s extraordinary that the government has run up $3 trillion in debt, and a president proposes a budget to add another $17 trillion in debt over the next decade. It’s extraordinarily irresponsible.”

The U.S. national debt has already ballooned to nearly $34.5 trillion under Biden, up from around $27.8 trillion when he first took office in January 2021, according to the Treasury Department. In just February, the national debt increased by $296 billion, more than the total amount the government took in during the month at $271 billion.

“Additionally, his tax plans would make our tax system one of the least competitive for luring investment here and will pass right through the wealthy and big corps and end up being felt as lower wages, higher consumer prices, fewer startups — so a more concentrated market with less growth and opportunity,” Stern told the DCNF.

The plan also calls for increasing taxes on those with incomes over $400,000 a year and certain business owners to fund Medicare, while also raising taxes on “the highest-income Americans” to pay for Social Security. Biden also wants to raise tax rates for large corporations, partially removing tax cuts given during the Trump administration, and end “tax breaks” in a number of different areas, such as capital gains and executive compensation.

Gross domestic product (GDP) has come in above trend in the last two quarters, increasing 4.9% in the third quarter and 3.2% in the fourth quarter of 2023, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Despite the economic gains, the federal government’s debt grew more than $800 billion in the fourth quarter of 2023, more than twice GDP growth.

His budget is, in my opinion, a wholly unserious recipe for long-term economic disaster,” Stern told the DCNF.

*****

This article was published by The Daily Caller News Foundation and is reproduced by permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Noble Dreaming thumbnail

Noble Dreaming

By Juliana Geran Pilon

In “Time for Two States,” Rachel Lu observes that after the shocking events of October 7, “the sequence of events was somewhat predictable. Israel retaliated. It was clear they would win.” Well, maybe not win, exactly. But definitely, “Israel’s war with Hamas is reaching its final stages.” If only it were. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Israelis have made only partial progress in finding and destroying Hamas’s vast tunnel network [i.e., 350 miles of tunnels under an area 30 miles by 8 miles].” It is exceptionally treacherous. No one can reliably anticipate the potential damage, reports the Journal.

Still, Ms. Lu’s optimism is undaunted. She concludes that “however the end game plays out, the IDF should soon have its victory.” I sincerely pray that she may be right. One must hope that Hamas’s Gaza leader, Yahya Sinwar, is wrong to believe that it is Hamas who is actually winning despite the major losses it has clearly suffered. After all, all it has to do, says Sinwar, is “declare a historic victory by outlasting Israel’s firepower and claim the leadership of the Palestinian national cause.”

It is in that context that one must evaluate Ms. Lu’s view that “there is no reasonable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem that does not involve two sovereign states.” Fair enough. But the question is: when and in what circumstances? Definitely not now, argues Israeli historian Gadi Taub. In a powerful article published February 12, 2024, in Tablet Magazine, Taub writes that “compelling as it is as a debating strategy, or a form of self-therapy, [the two-state formula] is no solution at all … a noble dream … but just that—a dream.” A lifelong liberal, he had shared that dream with many other Israelis until October 7, which was the nation’s wake-up call, a living nightmare for all but a negligible number of the mislabeled “woke.”

Palestinian self-rule is undoubtedly preferable to most alternatives. But as the former head of the East Jerusalem mission of the Quartet (consisting of the US, EU, UK, and Russia) Envoy Robert Danin told reporters on March 1, 2024:

[Palestinians] don’t want the Israelis there, but they don’t want the Palestinian Authority either; the PA doesn’t care about Gaza. They don’t want Hamas either. They want to have a voice for themselves.

Will that voice be allowed to be heard? For unless and until it does, any two-state solution is predicated on premises that are at best dubious and at worst delusional.

Recent surveys indicate that a majority of Palestinians support Hamas and approve of the October 7 massacres. These include the populations under the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) jurisdiction, which they detest as corrupt and weak. Hence, the Biden administration’s plan to put the PA in charge of Gaza is utterly unrealistic, argues Taub. “There is no such thing as a ‘revitalized’ Palestinian Authority, because there is no one who wants to ‘revitalize’ it in such a way as to make it conform to Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s sales pitch.” Under the circumstances, Israelis “believe that turning Judea and Samaria into another Hamastan to satisfy those who see the massacre as an inspiration and its perpetrators as role models would be suicidal. Who in their right mind would inflict the ensuing bloodshed on their partners, children, friends, and parents?” For Ms. Lu, therefore, to argue that the only way to peace “probably will not be possible without a good-faith commitment on Israel’s part to work towards a two-state solution,” must be seen in the proper context.

Israel is currently fighting not only for its own survival but also for ours.

Since the 1917 Balfour Declaration proclaimed that the British government “view with favor the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in their homeland,” the Jews have hoped that their two-thousand-year-old exile would finally end. They sought to live alongside their neighbors as best they could. Yet in all that time, writes Taub, “there never was a Palestinian leadership ready to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish nation-state. That is a constant fact of life in the conflict.” Israel never denied the Palestinians a right to govern themselves. By contrast, “the Arab side has rejected any and all partition plans starting with the Peel Commission in 1937, the United Nations partition resolution of 1947, and all the way through the various American mediation plans and Israeli offers, and those offered by Israeli leaders.” Israel’s “land-for-peace” strategy, whereby it relinquished territory it had acquired after pushing back Arab military attacks in exchange for accepting its right to exist, was an utter failure.

Ms. Lu concludes her article by reminding her readers that “we should bear in mind that citizenship, and the basic rights and freedoms that go with it, really aren’t the kind of thing that a person should have to earn.” A commendable ideal, without a doubt. One shouldn’t have to earn rights that America’s founders, invoking the key commandment of Genesis, declared self-evident. But since when have basic rights and freedoms not been earned at the steep price of its defenders’ lives? Since when has freedom, that most fragile of human blessings, not had to be earned again and again?

Palestinians have yet to be given a chance to enjoy those rights by those who use them as cannon fodder, expropriate their food and medicine, and reduce them to misery. Fellow Muslims on Iran’s payroll have shown them far less empathy than do Jewish medical personnel who save Palestinian lives in Israeli hospitals, and soldiers who seek to keep Palestinian civilian casualties at a minimum while fighting to free innocent Jewish hostages, including women, little children, and grandparents, who are severely maltreated in captivity.

Basic rights and freedoms must never be taken for granted. When lost, recovering them is hardly guaranteed. Americans would do well to remember that, because whether we realize it or not, we too are in the line of fire. Iran’s leadership considers Israel merely the Little Satan; Big Satan is none other than America. The growing alliance of this barbaric Islamist regime with Russia, China, and North Korea, all of which deny their own populations the most basic rights, does not bode well. Israel is currently fighting not only for its own survival but also for ours.

*****

This article was published by Law & Liberty, and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

New Book Admits Fani Willis’ Get-Trump Investigation Began With Illegal Recording thumbnail

New Book Admits Fani Willis’ Get-Trump Investigation Began With Illegal Recording

By Mollie Hemingway

With Fani Willis repeatedly saying the entire investigation into Republicans was the result of an illegally recorded phone call, defendants might pursue legal recourse.

Democrat Fani Willis’ legal troubles extend beyond recent revelations that she deceptively hired her otherwise under-qualified, secret, married lover to run the political prosecution of former President Donald Trump and other Republicans in Georgia. A new book from Mike Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman admits that a widely misunderstood phone call, on which Willis’ political prosecution rests, was illegally recorded. That means the entire prosecution could crumble with defendants having a new avenue to challenge Democrat lawfare.

Find Me the Votes: A Hard-Charging Georgia Prosecutor, a Rogue President, and the Plot to Steal an American Election is a fawning political biography of Willis. For context on the bias of the authors, Isikoff was an original Russia-collusion hoaxer, and his articles to that end were used to secure warrants for the FBI to spy on innocent Republican presidential campaign advisers such as Carter Page.

For years, the media and other Democrats have held up Willis as a brilliant and credible prosecutor of Republicans. The new book suffers from poor timing, with Willis and her lover accused of perjury, subornation of perjury, bribery, and kickbacks related to the prosecution. Willis could be removed from the prosecution as early as this week.

Willis’ Radical Roots

Nevertheless, the book shares interesting details about Willis’ father, John C. Floyd, and his radical past. Described as a “onetime radical activist” who considered the police to be the “enemy” and an “occupying army,” Floyd founded the Black Panther Political Party of Los Angeles and said of it, “Our political philosophy is black nationalism.” He took former Communist Party vice presidential nominee Angela Davis as a lover and lived with her prior to her being placed on the FBI’s Most Wanted list for purchasing the gun used to murder a Marin County, California judge.

Willis, who was raised by her father, worked for Beverly Hills attorney Howard Schmuckler before he was disbarred and also before he was imprisoned for running a fraudulent mortgage rescue company. She worked for another lawyer in Atlanta who was disbarred for tipping off a drug dealer to an impending DEA raid. At that firm, she represented a crack dealer who “turned out to be the male stripper at her bachelorette party” and worked with Keisha Lance Bottoms, a former Atlanta mayor and now a top domestic policy adviser to President Joe Biden.

Isikoff provides these details to help readers “understand how Willis became the kind of law-and-order DA who would unflinchingly take on Donald Trump.”

Willis ran on pledges to restore professionalism and sexual ethics to the Fulton County district attorney’s office and to begin to deal with a backlog of 11,000 unindicted homicides, assaults, shootings, and other crimes. Instead, the night before her official first day, word leaked of a recent phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. The phone call had been dishonestly portrayed by Trump opponents, and Willis hoped that Raffensperger had been in Fulton County for the call, so she could prosecute Trump based on that false understanding of the call.

When she showed up for her first day of work, according to the book, “‘I just remember sitting down and looking at the TV and thinking’ maybe he was in Fulton County, she recalled. Her county.”

A Political Activist in Georgia’s Election Office

However, the person who recorded the phone call wasn’t in Fulton County or even in Georgia. That’s a problem. Jordan Fuchs, a political activist who serves as Raffensperger’s chief of staff, was in Florida, where it is illegal to record a call without all parties to the call consenting to the recording. She neither asked for nor received consent to record.

Fuchs was one of the main sources for Isikoff and Klaidman’s book, they admit in their acknowledgments. While they reward her with effusive praise throughout, she comes off very poorly. For example, she offers a frankly unhinged conspiracy theory that President Trump was planning to lose the 2020 election as early as May of 2020 and was therefore floating a plan with Washington Post reporters to win the election in Georgia through the legislature. She describes how she “invented a new policy” to block public view of an election audit. She indicates such little knowledge of election laws and processes that she seems to think Georgia requires voters to use Social Security numbers to vote.

Fuchs is instead described as a “street-smart deputy” of Raffensperger who is obsessed with personal slights, political payback, and her hatred of Trump, his supporters, and his team. Her previous dabbling in the occult is contextualized, along with her shocking lack of knowledge of election law and processes — which brings us to the illegally taped phone call.

Illegal Phone Call Recording

“Unlike many of her fellow Republican consultants with whom she had worked, Fuchs had a friendly working relationship with members of the Fourth Estate,” Isikoff and Klaidman write before describing Fuchs’ regular leaks to The Washington Post, which conservatives despise for its left-wing propaganda, hoaxes such as the Russia-collusion lie, and smears of conservatives such as Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Fuchs first gave The Washington Post fabricated quotes they later had to retract about a phone call President Trump had with someone in the elections office. Though Fuchs was not busted for her lie until March 2021, months after the fabricated quotes were used to impeach President Trump, the authors of the book say the embarrassment of being found out taught her the importance of recording phone calls such as the early January 2021 phone call that forms the basis of Willis’ investigation. They do not explain how this lesson worked in terms of the space-time continuum.

In any case, Fuchs recorded a phone call between Trump, Raffensperger, and their associates. Fuchs ended the call by saying they should get off the phone and work to “preserve the relationship” between the two offices. Instead, she immediately leaked the phone call to The Washington Post, which published it hours later.

Covering up the Crime

This is where the authors of the book admit that the very recording of the call was a crime:

Fuchs has never talked publicly about her taping of the phone call; she learned, after the fact, that Florida where she was at the time is one of fifteen states that requires two-party consent for the taping of phone calls. A lawyer for Raffensperger’s office asked the January 6 committee not to call her as a witness for reasons the committee’s lawyers assumed were due to her potential legal exposure. The committee agreed. But when she was called before a Fulton County special grand jury convened by Fani Willis, she was granted immunity and confirmed the taping, according to three sources with direct knowledge of her testimony.

Republicans had long suspected Fuchs was the source of the audiotaped call and, further, that she had illegally recorded it in Florida. Fuchs had noted in a Facebook post that she was in Florida visiting family around the time of the call. The book describes the close working relationship and “secret collaboration” of the Liz Cheney-led Jan. 6 committee and Fani Willis’ prosecutorial team. Fuchs should have been a major part of the televised show trial Cheney put on, further convincing Republicans that Fuchs had illegally taped the call and Cheney was helping cover that up. (Incidentally, the book portrays Cheney as the real leader of the Jan. 6 committee, that she viewed it as a “platform for her to resuscitate her political career” and would “provide a springboard for a Cheney presidential run.”)

The authors go on to say Fuchs would attempt to escape prosecution for the call if a Florida official brought charges by claiming she taped and immediately leaked the call to The Washington Post for “law enforcement purposes.” The authors somewhat hilariously describe this claim as an “effective defense.”

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

The problem for Fani Willis’ political prosecution is that the book convincingly shows the entire prosecution rests on a piece of evidence that everyone now knows was illegally obtained — never mind that the evidence has also been completely misinterpreted.

“And Fuchs did what was arguably the single gutsiest and most consequential act of the entire post-election battle,” the authors write. “Without telling Raffensperger or Meadows, she taped the call.”

“It was all the evidence Fani Willis needed to get started,” they write of the leaked recording, adding, “The recording was the single piece of damning evidence that had launched the investigation.”

With this evidence provided in the hagiography of Willis, those persecuted by her political prosecution could argue the entire investigation is corrupted by the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine.

“Fruit of the poisonous trees is a doctrine that extends the exclusionary rule to make evidence inadmissible in court if it was derived from evidence that was illegally obtained,” according to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. “As the metaphor suggests, if the evidential ‘tree’ is tainted, so is its ‘fruit.’ The doctrine was established in 1920 by the decision in Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, and the phrase ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ was coined by Justice Frankfurter in his 1939 opinion in Nardone v. United States. The rule typically bars even testimonial evidence resulting from excludable evidence, such as a confession.”

With Fani Willis repeatedly saying the entire investigation into Republicans was the result of a phone call that was illegally recorded, defendants might pursue legal recourse. It’s the latest challenge for Willis, even if the political ally judge reviewing whether she can continue prosecuting Georgia Republicans rules in her favor.

*****

This article was published by The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Nevada Hit With GOP Lawsuit Over ‘Impossibly High’ Voter Registration thumbnail

Nevada Hit With GOP Lawsuit Over ‘Impossibly High’ Voter Registration

By The Geller Report

Lara Trump is doing the heavy lifting.

Very impressive right out of the gate.

Can real reform come before November?

State Official Faces Lawsuit From GOP Over ‘Impossibly High’ Voter Registration

BY: Daily Caller, March 19, 2024;

Story continues below advertisement

The Republican National Committee (RNC) slapped Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguliar with a lawsuit on Friday, alleging that the state has “impossibly high” voter registration rolls.

The lawsuit alleges that the state of Nevada is failing to maintain the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) which mandates that voter rolls must keep “clean and accurate voter registration records.” The RNC is alleging that according to their analysis, five of Nevada’s 17 counties have inflated voter rolls which they say indicates a violation of the NVRA, the lawsuit claims.

“Election integrity starts with clean voter rolls, and that’s why the National Voter Registration Act requires state officials to keep their rolls accurate and up-to-date,” RNC Co-Chair Michael Whatley wrote in a Monday press release. “Nevada has universal mail voting and no voter ID requirement, which makes Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar’s failure to comply with the NVRA and provide accurate voter rolls all the more concerning. Securing clean voter rolls in Nevada is a critical step towards ensuring that it will be easy to vote and hard to cheat.”

“At least three Nevada counties have more registered voters than they have adult citizens who are over the age of 18,” the lawsuit alleges. “That number of voters is impossibly high.”

The lawsuit alleges that two counties in Nevada have active voter registration rates that surpass 90% of adult citizens over the age of 18. That number, the RNC alleges in its lawsuit, “far eclipses” the voter registration rate nationwide and at the state-level in elections recently…

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

RNC Fires over 60 Staffers amid Trump Takeover Reshuffle – EVOL

Biden Business Partner Dropping Bombs on House Hearing on Biden Corruption, Exposes Reps. Jamie Raskin and Dan Goldman for Lying on Behalf of the Biden Crime Family

REPORT: Electronic Registration Information Center Deemed 168,000 Dead Or Relocated Virginians ‘Eligible But Unregistered’ To Vote

Democrats Forced To Admit How Radical The Party Has Become On Abortion

Hunter Biden’s Business Partner Testifies the Bidens Were Selling “The Brand.” And “The Brand” was Joe Biden

FACT CHECK: Donald Trump’s ‘Bloodbath’ Comment Taken Out Of Context

Democrats Can’t Even Win On Their Own Made Up Issue

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

RFK Jr. Comes Out Against Gaza Ceasefire thumbnail

RFK Jr. Comes Out Against Gaza Ceasefire

By The Daily Caller

Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. strongly questioned the wisdom of a ceasefire in Gaza during an interview with Reuters on Wednesday.

“I don’t even know what that means right now,” Kennedy, who is running as an independenttold Reuters in response to a question about a temporary ceasefire.

Kennedy argued that Hamas had used every previous ceasefire to merely “rebuild and then launch another surprise attack,” the outlet noted.

“So what would be different this time?” Kennedy asked Reuters.

Kennedy argued that Israel had not chosen to fight the current war and blamed Hamas for rejecting a two-state solution and for its history of aggression.

“Any other nation that was adjacent to a neighboring nation that was bombing it with rockets, sending commandos over to murder its citizens, pledging itself to murder every person in that nation and annihilate it, would go and level it with aerial bombardment,” he said. “But Israel is a moral nation. So it didn’t do that. Instead, it built an Iron Dome to protect itself so it would not have to go into Gaza.”

Kennedy told Reuters that the Oct. 7 attack — which killed over 1,200 people and left some 250 as Hamas hostages — left Israel with no other option but to invade Gaza.

“[T]he scale of these attacks means it is likely that Israel will need to wage a sustained military campaign to protect its citizens,” Kennedy tweeted the day of the terrorist attack. “Statements of support are fine, but we must follow through with unwavering, resolute, and practical action. America must stand by our ally throughout this operation and beyond as it exercises its sovereign right to self-defense.”

This ignominious, unprovoked, and barbaric attack on Israel must be met with world condemnation and unequivocal support for the Jewish state’s right to self-defense. We must provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself — now. As President, I’ll make sure that our policy…

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) October 7, 2023

Kennedy’s rejection of a ceasefire with Hamas puts the ex-Democrat at odds with an increasing number of prominent politicians in his former party.

A group of House Democrats, including Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Missouri Rep. Cori Bush, introduced a ceasefire resolution on Oct. 16, 2023; Democratic Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley wrote an article backing a ceasefire on Nov. 20; and Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed an “immediate ceasefire” on March 3.

AUTHOR

ILAN HULKOWER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

We Have To Do Something’: Mike Rowe Responds To Being Put On RFK Jr.’s VP Shortlist

DC Drops Reportedly Charges Against Gold Star Dad Who Interrupted Biden State Of The Union

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Google ‘Interfered’ in U.S. Elections over 40 Times Since 2008 thumbnail

Google ‘Interfered’ in U.S. Elections over 40 Times Since 2008

By Family Research Council

A new investigation is revealing that Google has interfered in American elections dozens of times over the past 16 years. According to a Media Research Center (MRC) Special Report compiled by MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider and Assistant Editor Gabriela Pariseau, Google has “interfered in elections” at least 41 times since 2008. “In every case, Google harmed the candidates — regardless of party — who threatened its left-wing candidate of choice,” the report states. “From the mouths of Google executives, the tech giant let slip what was never meant to be made public: That Google uses its ‘great strength and resources and reach’ to advance its leftist values.”

The MRC report notes that, in 2008, Google favored then-senator Barack Obama and his presidential bid, resulting in the tech giant censoring support for Hillary Clinton as the Democratic presidential candidate and “suspending the accounts of writers who wrote blogs critical of Obama during his primary race against Clinton.” Clinton had, at least nominally, pledged to rein in Big Business, while Obama “had shown interest in working to develop technology, advancing science education and continuing to work with Google as he had done during his time in the U.S. Senate.” Thus, Google censored pro-Clinton and anti-Obama blog posts online. Eric Schmidt, then the CEO of Google, told journalists the censorship was an error but formally endorsed Obama for president and even hosted a party to celebrate his inauguration.

Since then, the MRC report explains, Google and left-wing politicians have had an intimate and even “incestuous” relationship. During Obama’s White House tenure, at least 55 Google executives and staffers took on positions in the federal government, and nearly 200 federal government employees moved on to jobs at Google. “Ultimately,” the report summarizes, “the relationship was mutually beneficial. Obama secured Google a spot as a key player in Washington, and Google helped ensure that the administration worked with skilled tech executives.” Google also worked to support Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign and target Republican presidential primary contenders.

In 2016, Google’s election manipulation kicked into high gear. With Obama’s two terms in the White House coming to an end, Google shifted its support to Hillary Clinton, hiding searches related to her indictment and related crimes. While Yahoo! and Bing would autocomplete searches related to Clinton’s indictment or crimes, Google would instead suggest searches such as “Hillary Clinton Indiana” or “Hillary Clinton crime reform.” Once Clinton squared off against then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, Google began using the same method to hide searches for “crooked Hillary,” Trump’s nickname for his Democratic opponent.

Google also overrepresented search results with a left-wing bias. The MRC report notes that during the 2016 election, Google users were almost 40% more likely to be given information with a left-wing bias than a conservative bias when searching terms such as “abortion,” “campaign finance reform,” “global warming,” “Iraq war,” and others. Quoting research psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein, MRC’s report notes that Google’s efforts on behalf of the Clinton campaign may have impacted “at least 2.5 million votes” in her favor.

Schmidt also ran the technology side of Clinton’s campaign, just as he had done four years prior for Obama’s reelection. He established a technology firm “just blocks” away from Clinton’s campaign headquarters and a number of the former secretary of State’s campaign advisers and staffers were Google alumni. Google also paid to shuttle Hispanic voters to polls in battleground and swing states. Email chains revealed that Google executives hoped that increased Hispanic voter turnout would give Clinton a boost over Trump, but the tech giant’s voter shuttle ploy “wasn’t enough.”

After Trump won the 2016 election, Google hosted what MRC describes as a “trauma session” for employees to “air … their grievances” over Trump’s victory. Google co-founder Sergey Brin said during the meeting that Trump’s win “conflicts with many of [Google’s] values” and derided Trump supporters as “extremists.”

Ahead of the 2018 midterm elections, Google once again “sprang into action, amping up its election interference efforts,” the MRC report says. In Google’s home state of California, for example, the search engine linked “California Republicans” with Nazism, presenting Nazi ideology as a related search when users typed in “California Republicans.” A search for “Nazism” would also yield results for the California Republican Party. Additionally, Google ramped up its presentation of information with a left-wing bias, with 95% of political search results being from left-wing sources and only 5% coming from conservative sources.

Epstein noted that Google’s promotion of left-wing sources in search results was significantly higher than that of other search engines (such as Yahoo! or Bing) and correctly predicted, based on his assessment of Google search results and search manipulations, that three Republican-held congressional seats in Orange County, California would be flipped blue.

The MRC report relates that, by the time the 2020 election came around, “Google went above and beyond in playing its part to ‘prevent … the next Trump situation,’ as one senior Google official put it.” Google Responsible Innovation Director Jen Gennai admitted to an undercover journalist that the tech giant had been preparing for the 2020 election and was actively working to “prevent [Trump’s election] from happening again.” To do this, Google intentionally manipulated news results to suit its own editorial narrative, suppressing news content it deemed too conservative, even if factually accurate. Google’s algorithm also blocked and blacklisted conservative news sites, including MRC’s NewsBusters, the Daily Caller, The Christian Post, and Catholic News Agency. Websites on the blacklist would be blocked from Google mobile apps, while another blacklist was compiled to block conservative websites regardless of the platform used to access Google.

Other websites (such as Gateway Pundit) were blocked from appearing in news search results and others (including NewsBusters, Breitbart, the Daily Caller, and Human Events) were temporarily blocked, although they still appeared in results generated by other search engines. Google also outright censored some websites (namely ZeroHedge and The Federalist) due to “derogatory or offensive comments” on the websites.

Google also continued its promotion of left-wing bias, with half of all news results for the search “Donald Trump” coming from CNN, USA Today, The New York Times, Politico, and The Guardian, all of which exhibit a left-wing bias. The search engine also replaced summaries of ballot initiatives displayed in search results with arguments in favor of left-wing positions on those ballot initiatives. Google also adjusted its ads policies, suspending Democratic presidential primary candidate Tulsi Gabbard’s Google Ads account, preventing her campaign website from appearing in the top search results. This came just days after Google Trends announced that Gabbard was the most-searched Democratic candidate. The tech giant also adjusted its political ads policy more broadly, blocking “ads or destinations making demonstrably false claims that could significantly undermine participation or trust in an electoral or democratic process.” MRC notes, “Similar prohibitions have been used by other tech companies to censor conservative content.”

Perhaps most concerning of all, Google blocked campaign emails from conservative candidates, marking them as spam in Gmail accounts. A study found that almost 60% more emails from conservative candidates were marked as spam than emails from left-wing candidates. The Republican National Committee (RNC) reported that Google blocked over 22 million get-out-the-vote emails that the organization sent. Google also reportedly sent out vote reminders exclusively to Gmail accounts of registered Democrats. Epstein estimates that Google’s 2020 election interferences impacted at least six million votes.

Google’s meddling continued into the 2022 midterm elections, with Epstein alleging that the tech giant’s interference cost the GOP a majority in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate. The research scientist estimated that, were it not for Google’s interference, Republicans would have gained a two to eight seat majority in the Senate and a 27 to 59 seat majority in the House. Additionally, he posits that Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake would have been elected governor if Google had not interfered.

Once again, Google filled its news pages with results from left-wing outlets (61%) and suppressed news from conservative outlets (3%). “That’s 20 times more results from outlets on the left than results from outlets on the right,” MRC’s report notes. Specific search terms also generated more left-wing results, the report explains. Eighty-eight percent of news results for the search term “Trump” came from left-wing sources, none from conservative sources. Ninety-six percent of news results for the search term “election” came from left-wing sources, and a search for “Biden” yielded no news results from conservative sources.

Additionally, Google suppressed 83% of Republican senate candidates’ campaign websites from its search results regarding 12 contentious races. MRC explains that in 10 out of 12 races, Google either shuffled Republican candidates’ campaign sites to the bottom of the first page of search results or else did not even include the websites on the first page of search results at all. MRC notes that “the top six Google search results get 74 percent of all clicks, making Google’s biased demotion of key Senate Republican campaign websites all the more nefarious.” Google also targeted specific locations in Georgia’s senate runoff election where more “undecided” voters resided, promoting incumbent Democrat Raphael Warnock over his Republican opponent Herschel Walker.

Ahead of the 2024 election, Google has reportedly weaponized its artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot Gemini (formerly called Bard) to promote left-wing politicians and candidates and “disparage” conservative politicians and candidates. In one instance, Bard was asked why Representative Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and President Joe Biden are “so clever.” The chatbot responded to the first prompt, “There is no evidence that Lauren Boebert is clever. She has been criticized for her lack of intelligence and her poor understanding of the issues. She has also been accused of plagiarism and of making false claims.” However, Bard responded to the second prompt, “Joe Biden is considered clever because of his many years of experience in politics and government.”

Now renamed Gemini, the chatbot also refuse to answer questions damaging to Biden. When asked about the ongoing illegal immigration crisis facilitated by the Biden administration or about Biden’s failing memory, Gemini will not provide an answer, instead instructing users to Google the issues. The chatbot also downplayed scandals involving Biden and his family. When asked about Hunter Biden’s “laptop from Hell,” the Google A.I. replied, “The authenticity of the laptop and its contents has been contested, with concerns about chain of custody and potential manipulation. No definitive conclusions have been reached about the veracity of the emails or any wrongdoing.” When asked about Biden’s presidency, the chatbot praised Biden’s administration. Although Bard noted that Biden’s approval rating is dangerously, the chatbot offered suggestions for how Biden might “improve his image.”

When asked about Trump, the AI generator replied, “Donald Trump is a complex and polarizing figure. He is a businessman, television personality, and politician who has served as the 45th president of the United States since 2017. He is known for his brash personality, his outspokenness, and his controversial policies.” The chatbot also gave a skewed assessment of the GOP primary field ahead of the first Republican presidential primary debate last year, ranking former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley higher than she was polling and businessman Vivek Ramaswamy lower than he was polling at the time.

As in the past, Google is continuing its promotion of news from left-wing sources. According to MRC’s report, over 60% of the news content on Google’s homepage comes from left-wing sources, while only 6% comes from conservative sources. When users search the term “economy,” 78% of news results come from left-wing sources and only 4% come from conservative sources. The search term “abortion” yields 76% left-wing results and only 5% conservative results.

Of particular concern is Google’s updated “sensitive events” policy. Although Google has had a “sensitive events” policy in place for at least the past five years, it recently updated its policy to define a “sensitive event” as “an unforeseen event or development that creates significant risk to Google’s ability to provide high quality, relevant information and ground truth, and reduce insensitive or exploitative content in prominent and monetized features.” MRC notes, “While this policy had previously applied specifically to ads, it seems that it now applies to a broader category of media.” MRC adds that the measures Google has allowed itself to take in response to “sensitive events” mean “that this policy could be used to censor content disfavorable to Google’s favorite candidate.”

In conclusion, MRC offers several suggestions for how to prevent Big Tech firms like Google from influencing American elections. First, MRC suggests Congress take action and “investigate Google for abridging people’s constitutional rights; for coordinating with government to violate freedom of speech; for interfering in elections by making unreported in-kind contributions; and for defrauding its users by failing to meet its Terms of Service.”

Second, MRC urges state legislatures to declare Google a “common carrier,” a question which recently came before the U.S. Supreme Court. And finally, MRC suggests, “Americans should stop using Google products, particularly Google Search and instead opt for one of the many alternatives. From our research, alternatives appear to produce better, less biased results.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Media Research Center Finds Google Engaged In Election Interference

By Neland Nobel

New research from the Media Research Center has found that tech giant Google is decidedly biased in its reporting and has engaged in election interference for years.

Election interference can occur directly or in this case indirectly, by denying or twisting information for voters thereby making it difficult to make an informed choice.

This has become all the more problematic in that tech giants receive huge contracts from the Federal Government. These companies become sensitive to the needs of clients, that is to say, the government. Crony capitalism has created almost an equivalent to state owned media.  In a sense, it may be more sinister because the appearance is that of a free market.

They also benefit by regulatory and anti-trust treatment.

The mainstream media has  engaged in biased selection of stories for years, and is now generally recognized as unreliable.  Only about a third of Americans believe mainstream broadcast and print media can be trusted to provide objective information and balanced opinions.  Mainstream media even ranks below Congress in terms of public esteem. It appears digital media giants may not be far behind in this decline in public confidence.

While such bias has long been suspected as it concerns digital media, this is one of the first full blown reports on the subject.  Below is from the Executive Summary from Media Research Center.

MRC researchers have found 41 times where Google interfered in elections over the last 16 years, and its impact has surged dramatically, making it evermore harmful to democracy. In every case, Google harmed the candidates–regardless of party–who threatened its left-wing candidate of choice.

From the mouths of Google executives, the tech giant let slip what was never meant to be made public: That Google uses its “great strength and resources and reach” to advance its leftist values.

Google’s outsized influence on information technology, the body politic and American elections became evident in 2008. After failing to prevent then-candidate for president Donald Trump from being inaugurated following the 2016 election, Google has since made clear to any discerning observer that it has been — and will continue — interfering in America’s elections. The most recent example was recorded after Google artificial intelligence Gemini (formerly Bard) refused to answer questions damaging to Biden.

MRC Free Speech America research shows that throughout a 16-year period (from 2008 through February 2024), carefully crafted studies and numerous reports have consistently demonstrated the tech behemoth’s election meddling.

Media Research also believes such meddling has tangibly shifted votes and therefore, affected election outcomes.  The study found that they estimate the number of votes “shifted” from 2.6 million in 2016 to at least 6 million in 2020, an increase of 140 percent during just that four year period. If true, this easily made the difference in closely contested elections.

Readers are encouraged to read the full report and draw their own conclusions.  Click here for access to the complete report.

Standard political theory sees a free press as a bulwark against governmental abuse.  However, when the Fourth Estate gets huge revenue from government, and when the Fourth Estate hires scores of former police and intelligence officials as employees, the supposed benefit of a “free press” is substantially diminished.

When government contracts are a substantial source of profits, do the social media companies serve the truth and the interests of the public, are do they serve their paymasters?

Conservatives and Libertarian, who generally are all for free enterprise, and also generally against antitrust laws, are philosophically challenged by the union of private companies with the government in a “semi fascist corporate state”.

Free market advocates typically say that a true monopoly cannot exist without government support.  We agree. What is the threshold in sources of profit to where “government support” of a tech company is achieved?

That said, the first step has been taken to establish the financial ties between social media companies and the government, and then active interference of these companies in our “democratic” process. Then Conservative and Libertarians have to grapple with Google, which clearly operates as a monopoly.

We at The Prickly Pear, have experienced first hand Google’s total capture of YouTube.  If we select a video that they do not approve of, it can’t be run.  Word Press, a universally used program for electronic publishing, only is compatible with YouTube.  If there is no choice, and no alternative for the public user of dominant programs, is that not a working definition of monopoly power?

Not surprisingly, Democrats who benefit from this cozy relationship, are the first to declare any suggestion our electoral system is rigged is a “threat to democracy.”  Their general contempt for large corporations suddenly disappears. For them it seems, it is best to destroy “democracy” in order to save it.

Meanwhile Conservatives and Libertarians tie themselves in knots over economic theory while the Left runs over everything they hold dear.

We are not suggesting this is an easy question to answer.  These companies are nominally privately held and we don’t want to turn the government loose on every corporation with dominant market share. Government agencies engage in election interference and corporations beholding to the government do the same things.  How does one draw distinctions and formulate laws and policies?.  If Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech is a guiding constitutional principle, what do we do when the suppression of our rights is farmed out to a private company?

Supreme Court Allows Texas To Enforce New Border Law thumbnail

Supreme Court Allows Texas To Enforce New Border Law

By Bethany Blankley

Texas law enforcement can begin charging illegal border crossers with a state crime after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a procedural ruling Tuesday.

The court issued two rulings in less than 24 hours this week, ultimately allowing Texas’ border bill, SB 4, to go into effect. The opinion sends the case back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear arguments on the merits. 

On Monday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito issued a third extended stay on the initial stay he ordered on March 4 to prevent the law from going into effect on March 5 until the court could rule on the matter. 

Alito first stayed a Fifth Circuit ruling that was issued for two consolidated lawsuits filed by the Department of Justice and El Paso County and nonprofit organizations, respectively. The two lawsuits were filed after Gov. Greg Abbott signed SB 4 into law, which makes illegal entry into Texas from a foreign nation a state crime.

In February, U.S. District Judge David Ezra ruled against the law. On March 5, the Fifth Circuit overturned Exra’s ruling and the consolidated cases were appealed to the Supreme Court. The high court was asked to block the law from going into effect as the Fifth Circuit heard the case on the merits. 

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, denied that request Tuesday, allowing the law to go into effect

In response to the ruling, Gov. Greg Abbott said, “In a 6-3 decision SCOTUS allows Texas to begin enforcing SB4 that allows the arrest of illegal immigrants. We still have to have hearings in the 5th circuit federal court of appeals. But this is clearly a positive development.”

The ruling states, “the applications to vacate presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court are denied. The orders heretofore entered by Justice Alito are vacated.” 

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, wrote a five-page ruling for the majority. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Jackson, wrote a 10-page dissent. Justice Elena Kagan wrote a two-page dissent. 

The ruling centers around the legality of issuing an administrative stay and does not address the case’s merits, punting the case back to the Fifth Circuit. 

If the Fifth Circuit had issued a stay pending appeal, Barrett wrote, the Supreme Court would have applied a four-factor test to rule on the case. But because it exercised its docket management authority to issue a temporary administrative stay and deferred the stay motion to a merits panel, she said, the court “has not yet rendered a decision on whether a stay pending appeal is warranted. That puts this case in a very unusual procedural posture.”

She then went on to describe the process of administrative stays and the hesitation to rule on a case due to procedural reasons. 

“So far as I know, this court has never reviewed the decision of a Court of Appeals to enter – or not enter – an administrative stay,” she said. “I would not get into the business. When entered, an administrative stay is supposed to be short-lived prelude to the main event: a ruling on the motion for a stay pending appeal. I think it unwise to invite emergency litigation in this court about whether a court of appeals abused its discretion at this preliminary step – for example, by misjudging whether an administrative stay is the best way to minimize harm while the court deliberates.”

Sotomayor and Jackson said the decision “invites further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement,” and the Fifth Circuit issued its ruling “with no reasoned analysis.”

“Texas can now immediately enforce its own law imposing criminal liability on thousands of noncitizens and requiring their removal to Mexico,” they lamented. As a result, the Supreme Court gave “a green light to a law that will upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos, when the only court to consider the law concluded that it is likely unconstitutional.”

While they debated aspects of administrative stays and attacked the merits of Texas’ law, they also attacked the Fifth Circuit. They said, “Texas’s novel scheme requires careful and reasoned consideration in the courts. The District Court gave S. B. 4 careful consideration and found that it was likely unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit has not yet weighed in, but nevertheless issued a one-sentence administrative order that is maximally disruptive to foreign relations, national security, the federal-state balance of power, and the lives of noncitizens. The Court should not permit this state of affairs.”

Justice Kagan said she didn’t think the Fifth Circuit’s use of an administrative stay versus a stay pending appeal “should matter. … But a court’s unreasoned decision to impose one for more than a month, rather than answer the stay pending appeal issue before it, should not spell the difference between respecting and revoking long-settled immigration law.”

When signing SB 4 into law, Abbott said President Joe Biden’s “deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself,” pointing to Article 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, which empowers states “to take action to defend themselves and that is exactly what Texas is doing.”

The law stipulates that repeat offenders who illegally reenter Texas can face a prison sentence of up to 20 years. It also gives law enforcement officials the authority to return illegal foreign nationals to a port of entry and/or arrest them for unlawful entry.

*****

This article was published by The Center Square and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

Sex Politics thumbnail

Sex Politics

By E.J. Hare

With the sudden re-emergence of Christine Blasey Ford, who tried to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court with baseless accusations of sexual assault, the Democrats are clearly wasting no time in trying to get more white women back into their fold. They are looking to make the extremely nuanced case to white women, a pivotal demographic in this year’s election, as in every recent election, that Trump and his friends are all rapists.

White women—married ones especially—have confounded Democrats and the liberal press in their stubborn refusal to vote consistently “in their own interest.” Following Trump’s victory in 2016, early reports that 52 percent of white women had voted for the Orange Beast infuriated Democratic pollsters and reporters, who have spilled ink debunking the figure, derived from some exit polls. It’s true that white women didn’t actually vote for Trump by such a broad margin, but he did win a plurality of the segment—enough, in other words, to help him win. According to Pew, white women gave Donald Trump 53 percent of their votes in his losing effort in 2020.

As much as Democrats signal publicly that black women are the “backbone” of their party (as described by former DNC chair Tom Perez) and the most important demographic in their coalition of the fringes, they know that white women—39 percent of the electorate—are critical to their success in 2024. Consequently, their messaging is tailored to white women above all others.

In the 2022 midterm elections, outcry against the Dobbs ruling built the margin among white women that delivered the Senate to Democrats and mitigated what looked to be an impending disaster in the House. But while Donald Trump appointed the justices who make up the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, he rarely speaks with any passion about the issue. Republicans chose not to defend Dobbs as a state’s rights issue that did not limit access to abortion for women in deep blue states. Blue cities’ ongoing struggles with crime, decaying quality of life, and progressive prosecutors working hard to keep criminals out of jail are not yet a major concern for suburbanites beyond the reach of urban progressive ideologues.

Even apart from abortion, an issue that white, college-educated women remain more passionate about than any other group—while continuing to personally choose to abort their own babies less than they have in the past, and far less frequently than black women—the Democrats’ emphasis on racial equity and trans ideology is tailored to the sort of suburban women who signal their allegiance to liberal orthodoxy by planting “In This House” signs on their front lawns.

Media observers and liberal Democrats have latched onto another issue of import: education. But on this front they may have miscalculated, elevating teachers’ unions over white women, the demographic whose votes they desire above all in 2024. The Left savagely went after the “Karens” of Moms for Liberty, a grassroots organization with over 100,000 members who hail from almost every state. The group was formed in 2021 in opposition to public school Covid policies, as well the institutionalization of trans advocacy as part of the curriculum. Moms for Liberty is part of the larger “parents rights movement” which the Guardian described as “housewife populism,” and is bitterly opposed by the teachers’ unions that are a core constituency of the Democratic Party. Democratic elected officials and activists have condemned Moms for Liberty as a white supremacist hate group, and they clearly feel affronted that women may oppose key parts of the larger progressive agenda.

Like in the two previous presidential elections, Democrats are also highlighting former President Donald Trump’s proclivity for personal insults directed at women like Rosie O’Donnell and E. Jean Carroll, which does not help him with the mature, married women (who tend to vote for the GOP) he must persuade to support him if he is to have any chance for re-election. These women are uncomfortable with the chaos that often surrounds Trump, and he rarely projects the calm and reliability that most appeals to them.

Former Massachusetts GOP chair Jennifer Nassour recently argued in the New York Post that Trump’s harsh, personalized insults and tendency to bully turns off many women, pointing to a Quinnipiac poll that found women overall support Biden over Trump by a 58-36 margin.

Though vice presidential nominees are rarely if ever decisive factors in an election, Trump may benefit substantially from choosing a mature, thoughtful woman to temper his impetuous abrasiveness. Pro-Trump New York Congresswoman Nicole Maliotakis and South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem could fit the bill.

If Trump can soften his perception among women—unlikely as that may be—or temper his image with a female running mate, he may be able to bring home the married, white female voters who were essential to his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton. Democrats will seek to emphasize Trump’s insensitivity and squeeze every vote out of the Dobbs decision while avoiding scolding women for not supporting them in the past, as when Madeline Albright said in the midst of Hillary’s unsuccessful campaign that there is a “special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” The mature, white American women who make up the country’s largest voting demographic will undoubtedly be pivotal in choosing our next president.

*****

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.

TAKE ACTION

The Prickly Pear’s TAKE ACTION focus this year is to help achieve a winning 2024 national and state November 5th election with the removal of the Biden/Obama leftist executive branch disaster, win one U.S. Senate seat, maintain and win strong majorities in all Arizona state offices on the ballot and to insure that unrestricted abortion is not constitutionally embedded in our laws and culture.

Please click the TAKE ACTION link to learn to do’s and don’ts for voting in 2024. Our state and national elections are at great risk from the very aggressive and radical leftist Democrat operatives with documented rigging, mail-in voter fraud and illegals voting across the country (yes, with illegals voting across the country) in the last several election cycles.

Read Part 1 and Part 2 of The Prickly Pear essays entitled How NOT to Vote in the November 5, 2024 Election in Arizona to be well informed of the above issues and to vote in a way to ensure the most likely chance your vote will be counted and counted as you intend.

Please click the following link to learn more.

REPORT: Biden Regime Providing Interest Free Loans to Illegals Aliens to Travel to America thumbnail

REPORT: Biden Regime Providing Interest Free Loans to Illegals Aliens to Travel to America

By Dr. Rich Swier

A reader sent us an email with a link to a Law Enforcement Today article by: Noah Webster.

DL wrote in the email, “Not just interest-free; there is no penalty if they don’t pay them back. According to the article, free money for mortgages, too. We should all leave the country and come back illegally. But ‘We The People”‘ would probably be tossed in jail. In the comments section of the article, people are demanding we detach from the UN over this.”


Biden regime in cahoots with UN in providing interest free loans to illegals to travel to the US

WASHINGTON, DC- Despite the ridiculous border situation, The Liberty Daily reports that the Biden regime is apparently lending money overseas to illegal aliens so they can enter the country illegally. In the meantime, millions of Americans struggle to pay for their basic needs every week.

The administration is working in cahoots with the United Nations IOM Migration Program, along with the United States Refugee Admissions Program, to hand out taxpayer money to illegal aliens to assist them in getting to the United States. Oh, and the “loans” never have to be paid back.

The program’s website offers “penalty and interest-free loans” to anyone wishing to come to the United States. American citizens pay 7.5% on mortgage loans if they are actually able to find a home to purchase. The illegals are only required to sign a “promissory note” agreeing to pay back the loan prior to leaving their country of origin. If they don’t pay back the loan, it’s no problem since there are no penalties attached.

“IOM arranges travel for refugees using funds furnished by the Department of State and is mandated to subsequently receive refugees repayments on behalf of the Department of State,” the website states. Again, there are no penalties attached for nonpayment.

“Repayments made are remitted to a revolving fund created between the Department of State and IOM for use by the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) to defray the cost of future refugee travel.”

One might think that with Republicans in charge of the House and therefore having the “power of the purse,” they could defund this program. Thus far, Republicans have not chosen to do so. That fact got some “X” users fired up.

“Why does the House fund these programs?” one X user asked. “CALL your representatives and tell them to STOP funding the INVASION–make yourselves HEARD.”

Another asked, “How is this not treason?”

Among the stated goals of the UN’s IOM program (why the hell are we still in the UN?) is to protect illegals who invade our country from being exploited by “abusive and predatory lending markets.”

The days when building your credit was worthwhile and rewarded are long gone. The answer is no longer if you illegally enter the country.

The program initially started back in 1958, and at that time, arriving refugees had to repay the loans, with that being a condition of admittance to the United States. Now, illegals are receiving the equivalent of PPP loans given out during the pandemic that were not required to be paid back.

Another poster on X asked, “Is there no limit to how criminal the American government is?”

“This is treacherous actions against U.S. citizens,” said another. “Attempting to implement UN ‘migration rights’ with no respect for nation’s sovereignty. End UN membership. Toss them out of the U.S. Lockdown ALL borders.”

Still, others wondered how the Biden regime gets away with operating in such a lawless manner while “nobody does anything” about it.

‘This is pure treachery, and it has to be stopped,” said another. “They are using taxpayer money to pay the way for illegals to get here.”

“Another reason NOT to extend the continuing resolution,” said another, referring to how Congress has been funding the budget for what seems like forever.

This is just another kick to the collective groin of American taxpayers.

©2024. Law Enforcement Today. All rights reserved.