Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is being picked over by Progressive-Democrats because he recommended the firing of a misbehaving Department Inspector General. On that excuse, Pompeo’s private dinners are being looked into, in particular, one in which he hosted a collection of Kansas folks, including the retiring Kansas Senator Pat Roberts (R) and a few other State dignitaries.
Senator Bob Menendez (D, NJ), in particular, has taken notice.
What type of foreign-affairs work goes on in Kansas?
There’s that utter contempt for middle-America citizens that Progressive-Democrats have.
Is this dismissal of millions of Americans as beneath notice what we need running our nation?
The Associated Press has decided, from the depths of it Politically Correct garbage can, that “mistress” ought not be used anymore. Instead, folks should use “companion” or “lover” instead.
This means, of course, that Elvira, Mistress of the Dark, must be a companion to the Dark. Or maybe the Dark Lover.
A woman can no longer be Mistress of Ceremonies. Is it companions or lovers that ceremonies and rites have?
Nor can a woman be Mistress of her own home. No, the lady of the house must be her husband’s companion. Or lover. Either way, she’s no longer…mistress…of her fate, but merely an object for the man of the house.
Here’s what’s in the House “relief” bill, written in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D, CA) kitchen where she could have ready access to her special ice cream. The bill was written with zero Republican input, zero Republican amendments, carefully limited debate on the House floor, and passed almost entirely along party lines; although the bill did make 14 Progressive-Democrats choke to the point of voting against it, and one Republican was too timid to oppose it.
$1 trillion in funding for state and local governments
That’s what Dr Marty Makary, Professor of Surgery at Johns Hopkins Medicine, says. Broad lockdowns might have been justified at the outset of the present Wuhan Virus situation, but new information has arisen.
Since that time, we have data that has taught us that this infection is associated with public transit, with density, with mass gatherings, with city-to-city travel and it is associated with climate[.]
What we do know, [is that] there are safe ways to conduct activities in society if we use certain precautions and we probably need a targeted approach where we find areas where there is either an outbreak or an ongoing increase in cases, and use some of the more aggressive strategies in that particular location.
China has blacklisted four red-meat-processing plants in Australia, suspending beef imports from them.
According to one analyst interviewed by national broadcaster ABC, the three plants [in Queensland] combined produce some 35% of beef exports to China, Australia’s largest trading partner.
People’s Republic of China Ambassador to Australia Cheng Jingye, in April:
Maybe the ordinary people will say “Why should we drink Australian wine? Eat Australian beef?”
The Federal government is leading by example in withdrawing taxpayer dollars from People’s Republic of China businesses.
National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow and National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien have sent a letter (which was up on Scribd, but which has since been removed) to Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia instructing him to not allow Federal retirement funds—taxpayer dollars—to be invested in shares of stock in PRC businesses.
Scalia then relayed those instructions to Michael Kennedy, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Chairman. Scalia instructed Kennedy to reverse the board’s decision to move the TSP’s International Stock Index Investment Fund investments to match an international index that would explicitly include PRC companies in the mix.
As States reopen for business, and as increasing numbers of businesses reopen and customers patronize them against State government encouragements or outright diktats to the contrary, Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden is nattering on that President Donald Trump’s policies are undermining the core pillars of our economic strength. In the meantime, the NLMSM is focusing ghoulishly on body counts and not mentioning any other relevant information.
The following table looks at some data for three States mentioned in one Wall Street Journal article, another State mentioned in a different WSJ article, and two States mentioned byFox News.
As the journalism guild’s complicity in the General Michael Flynn travesty becomes steadily more apparent, some questions arise—again—about what an honest journalism industry (not guild—that’s beyond redemption) needs to do to have any credibility.
identify at least some the sources, rather than hanging an article’s thesis exclusively on the claims of anonymous sources
if an anonymous source refuses to be identified, show with concrete, measurable evidence the following:
the source actually exists
if the source exists, then
why the source should be believed, given that by speaking publicly, even if anonymously, he’s likely violating his terms of employment if not his oath of office
But it can’t possibly be the final answer; it doesn’t go nearly far enough. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has issued the final rule regarding college/university sexual harassment complaints and how colleges/universities must handle them. Along the way, DeVos revoked with finality the Obama DoEd rule that eliminated the rights of the accused.
It allows both the accused and accuser to submit evidence and participate in cross-examination in live proceedings, and both parties can also appeal a school’s ruling. Victims-rights advocates say the provision for cross-examinations could traumatize those alleging misconduct and potentially keep them from filing complaints at all.
It also allows institutions to choose one of two standards of evidence—”clear and convincing,” or the lower “preponderance of the evidence,” which just requires a greater than 50% likelihood of wrongdoing—as long as they apply the standard evenly for all cases
Oral argument on a 1st Amendment case was heard by the Supreme Court last Wednesday. The case centers on
whether or not a 1991 law that protects people from receiving unwarranted telemarketer calls is a violation of the First Amendment when applied to political organizations.
This strikes me as a no-brainer that never should have gotten out of any District court. The 1st Amendment bars the abridgment of political speech in the public square. It does not take away the right of private citizens to decide for themselves what speech they will hear from within their own, private property.