The Opposite of Courage

In a Just the News article centered on George Washington University Law Professor, and holder of the university’s Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, Jonathan Turley’s view that four Border Patrol agents have defamation and denial of due process cases (the four agents face administrative punishments even though the Customs and Border Protection’s Office of Professional Responsibility investigation found they’d done nothing wrong), JtN quoted National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd as saying,

…the president of the United States said that these individuals would pay, and the moment he said that, those investigators had no choice but to find some sort of fault—whether it was criminal or administrative.

On that I must disagree. There’s no doubt the “investigators” might have felt pressure to find a fault, but they also without doubt were not forced to do so. The most pressure that could have been applied would have been to cancel their jobs.

It would have taken a measure of courage to resist the pressure. Choosing their jobs, assuming such a threat was made or implied, over doing the right thing, however, took no courage.

In choosing between doing a right thing and doing a wrong thing, the opposite of courage is cowardice.

Conspiracy Pushing

The horror of Wisconsin citizens electing a Republican Governor this fall—current Governor Tony Evans (D) is possessed by it.

We will see elections change to the point where the Legislature makes the final decision and that should scare the living crap out of everybody in this room[.]

And

They (Republicans) will continue doing this until Donald Trump is 6 feet under.

Sure. And for those of the Left who might actually believe that, I might know of some beachfront property north of Santa Fe, NM, that might interest them. Good view of the valley below.

The conspiracy hysteria runs strong in this one.

Yet Another Reason…

…to stop doing business in or with the People’s Republic of China.

The China Securities Regulatory Commission is implementing changes to its rules governing publicly offered securities investment funds. These rules include requiring foreign-owned fund managers such as BlackRock and Fidelity to create Communist Party cells when operating in China.

And

In January 2021, HSBC executive Noel Quinn was unable to confirm to the British Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee that the bank had no party cells in its branches in Hong Kong and the mainland.

His own bank, and he doesn’t know how tied it is to the Chinese Communist Party.

The CSRC’s rules dovetail nicely with the PRC’s national intelligence law that requires companies operating inside the PRC to collect and deliver whatever intelligence information the intelligence community wishes (and companies domiciled in the PRC to go outside the nation to collect that information and deliver it).

It’s just not worth the national security risk to do any business with or within the PRC.

Excuses

On the matter of the disagreement between Elon Musk and Twitter over whether the former must buy the latter or the latter has failed to provide the data needed—for instance, to assess the level of bots doing Twitter’s tweeting—to properly assess the value of the purchase target, “data scientists” claim that the number of fake and spam accounts

isn’t easy to objectively determine.

And

Coming up with a precise, objective, and authoritative number of fake or spam accounts, where hundreds of millions of tweets are posted daily, is an impractical task.

It’s hard, so it’s impractical? And hiding behind the vagaries of “precise” (how precise? Five 9s precise? “Close enough” to illustrate the general magnitude of the number?)?

This is just “expert” fee seeking. “Not easy” means possible. It’s time for the obstructionists to stop obstructing, to stop manufacturing excuses, and to get to work.

The New Pen and Phone

Ex-President Barack Obama (D) infamously bragged that he had a pen and a phone available if Congress wouldn’t do his bidding. And he proceeded to use them to reign via diktat—diktats often overruled in court (and remember, this was before former President Donald Trump (R) was able to restore textualist sanity and restrain judicial activism).

Behold, the President Joe Biden (D) version of the pen and phone tool for ruling, rather than governing: the permanent “public health emergency.”

The Biden Administration claims the declaration provides critical regulatory flexibility.

You bet it does.