Enter your keyword

Friday, April 09, 2021

The Big Winner of Biden’s Green Energy Plan is His Energy Secretary’s Old Company

By On April 09, 2021
At the beginning of March, the CEO of ChargePoint rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange as it became the first publicly traded global electric vehicle charging network.

CEO Pasquale Romano told Forbes that he expected big things from the Biden Administration for the electric car business. He wasn’t alone. Investors had been pouring money into the green energy business ever since Biden was expected to take over running the United States.

Investors were waiting for the Biden Administration to go ahead with its push for 500,000 EV charging stations, and they were not disappointed. Biden’s so-called ‘American Jobs Plan’, despite its name, a series of hyperspending giveaways to China and special interests, called for those 500,000 charging stations, and ChargePoint’s stock, as expected, shot up on the news.

ChargePoint already controls as much as 70% of the EV charging market and is the likeliest beneficiary from Biden’s push to have taxpayers, many of them working-class and middle-class, subsidize wealthy Tesla and luxury electric SUV owners, with convenient charging stations for their urban and suburban lifestyles.

While Biden’s $174 billion electric car plan is bad enough, some estimates put the EV charger component cost as high as $50 billion. Higher end chargers can run to as much as $260,000. That means a single EV charger for rich Biden voters can cost over 10 times the price of a basic car. All of this is being done to benefit a car owner demographic with an average income of six figures, who tend to be younger, wealthier, and are already subsidized by working Americans.

Biden’s green plan means $260,000 EV chargers for the rich, higher taxes for everyone else.

Blue states already offer thousands of dollars in subsidies, often at the expense of working-class car owners, and the Biden administration’s plan adds to that massively.

But why is the Biden administration so obsessed with EV charging stations specifically?

“Electric vehicle revolution! The #AmericanJobsPlan will help us build a network of 500,000 EV chargers,” Secretary of Energy Granholm had tweeted excitedly.

When Biden picked Jennifer Granholm to be the Secretary of Energy, she, like many public officials, had a complex history of radical advocacy and special interest involvements.

But one part of her career has received very little attention even in light of today’s announcement. And that may be inevitable because asking the media to report on conflicts of interest involving Biden officials, instead of on his dogs, may be asking too much of journalism.

In 2016, Granholm was picked to serve on ChargePoint’s board of directors.

"Her expertise working with diverse stakeholders will help us expand EV charging infrastructure nationwide," CEO Pasquale Romano declared.

When joining ChargePoint, Romano had touted Granholm’s green history. There’s certainly a lot of green history for the former Michigan governor.

Two years ago, Richard Allen Short was let out of prison.

Eight years before that, Short had appeared at a press conference with Governor Granholm to tout him as the CEO of RASCO (Renewable and Sustainable Companies) who had won a $9.1 million tax credit to build a plant that would create hundreds of green jobs in Michigan.

Short had already spent 5 years in prison for embezzling money from a battery company and was on parole at the time. The whole thing fell apart when his parole officer saw him on TV.

A day after his Granholm press conference, the green energy tycoon was arrested. Again. A state spokesman said that it was unclear if the tax credit grants would move forward, and Granholm’s spokesman whined that, “It would be unfortunate if the program was in any way diminished by this incident.” It’s always unfortunate when a green energy scam falls apart.

Despite the attempts at spinning the latest green energy boondoggle as the exciting new thing, there is nothing new under the sun. Not even solar energy or any other green scam.

A decade ago, Granholm was pushing $1.84 billion in federal loans for A123 to make "Michigan the alternative energy capital of North America and the advanced battery capital of the world."

Obama ended up giving $249 million in federal grants to A123 and Granholm got it $141 million in state credits and subsidies. Two years later it had filed for bankruptcy and its assets were picked up by a Chinese Communist company along with those of Fisker, an electric car company that was approved for a $528 million loan by the Obama administration, and whose launch was touted by Biden. Michigan and American taxpayers got nothing from these deals.

“GlobalWatt literally left Silicon Valley in California to set up shop in an abandoned auto plant in Saginaw," Granholm had boasted. The solar energy company got $42 million and promised to bring $177 million and 500 jobs. Instead, GlobalWatt was selling solar panels on eBay made in India. A year later it was evicted from a Michigan plant that employed only a dozen people.

These are a few of a long list of green energy boondoggles trailing behind Granholm like a car with a busted muffler. Beyond green energy, Granholm also went big on Hollywood. Or tried to.

With the same results.

"And in Grand Rapids, it's Hangar42 film studios!" Granholm had declared. Hangar42 was supposed to be Michigan's first major film studio with 1,000 jobs on the largest soundstage in the world. A year later there were criminal charges in yet another case of fraud.

Granholm’s plan to turn Michigan into the new Hollywood worked as well as her plan to turn it into the green energy capital of the world. Some people made out like bandits, taxpayers lost.

With this kind of track record, you would think that there would be some scrutiny of Granholm.

Unfortunately the Senate was far more interested in Neera Tanden’s mean tweets about its members than in Jennifer Granholm’s horrible record. But Granholm had expertly reinvented her image, leaping from the board of Dow Chemicals to Al Gore’s leftist Current TV.

In the Current TV progressive basement, alongside disgraced former Governor Elliot Spitzer, and Cenk Uygur, who claimed that “the genes of women are flawed”, Granholm labored on her rants until Gore sold out to Al Jazeera which killed off her show. But didn’t finish off her career.

As a lefty TV pundit, Granholm was able to leave behind RASCO, A123, Webvan, Plastech, Hangar42, and the rest of her ugly record to gain serious prog credentials as a political soldier dedicated enough to follow Keith Olbermann on his Maoist long march down to Current TV.

Granholm's green energy business did nothing for Michigan, but won her consideration as an energy secretary by Obama in 2012, and was picked by Hillary Clinton as her energy adviser.

ChargePoint appointed Granholm to its board in August 2016. That was the same month that Granholm was named as co-chair of Hillary Clinton's presidential transition team which would have likely guaranteed her a cabinet position. With Hillary expected to win, ChargePoint was betting on what must have seemed like a sure thing.

As ChargePoint’s SEC filing notes, “ChargePoint also derives other revenue from regulatory credits. If government support of these credits declines, ChargePoint’s ability to generate this other revenue in the future would be adversely affected.”

ChargePoint, like other green energy companies, needs government subsidies.

The likely big winner of Biden’s 500,000 EV charger proposal is a company whose board his Secretary of Energy sat on. It’s a good thing that the media is too discreet to report on it.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Thursday, April 08, 2021

Iran Wants Over $3 Billion to Negotiate with Biden

By On April 08, 2021
After North Korea’s latest missile test and a threat from Kim Jong-Un’s sister that if the Biden administration “wants to sleep in peace for [the] coming four years, it had better refrain from causing a stink”, the administration had a firm and unyielding response to the threats.

Officials told the media that the Biden administration sees North Korean missile tests as "normal military activity" and that they "don’t want a situation where it is perceived that our door is not open to talk.”

North Korea knows that Biden’s barn door is wide open. The snarling threat by Lil Kim's sister was the first North Korean response to a month of diplomatic overtures from Biden.

That came after Biden's people had waged a desperate campaign of "diplomatic outreach" to everyone from North Korea's UN mission to Kim Jong Un's hairdresser.

Yet another senior Biden administration official claimed that they had been reaching out “through several channels", but "have not received any response from Pyongyang.”

The response finally came in the form of a missile launch and a vicious threat.

All of that is a long way from Biden’s tough talk on the debate stage when he attacked Kim Jong-Un as a “thug”, and vowed to meet with him only “on the condition that he would agree that he would be drawing down his nuclear capacity.” So much for that. Now Biden is begging the thug to talk on any terms and getting nowhere in that department.

Or in any other department.

Biden would like to get back into bed with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Not only was restoring Obama’s Iran nuclear sellout one of the biggest foreign policy pledges of his campaign, but the Democrat pol has been funded by the Iran lobby for much of his career.

After 9/11, he thought a fit response would be to send a $200 million check to Iran.

He picked Rob Malley, the lead negotiator for the Iran deal, as his envoy to Iran, and a guy who loves Islamic terrorists almost as much as Biden loves groping protesting women.

With that kind of political pedigree, you would think that Tehran Joe could get a mullah or two on the phone. Unfortunately for Joe, even the mullahs have higher standards.

Iran's foreign ministry turned down informal talks with the Biden administration, while the Bidenites pleaded for another chance.

"While we are disappointed at Iran’s response, we remain ready to reengage in meaningful diplomacy,” Biden’s White House pleaded.

Nobody else seems very interested in a meaningful diplomatic relationship with Biden that will include long walks on the DMZ beach, sipping champagne from radioactive warheads, and holding conferences that have no purpose except to make him appear competent.

Maybe that’s because they know that Biden’s meaningful diplomacy is meaningless.

Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, who had often met with Senate Democrats and top Obama officials during the Trump administration, initially suggested that Iran might agree to consider an “informal meeting ... in which the United States is not a member, but is invited.”

That would have been the most awkward date ever, even by the standards of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr, a guy who likes smelling strange women’s hair in public, and Kamala Harris, who built her political career by dating a married politician twice her age.

But the Iranians decided that they couldn’t even participate in a meeting at which a United States representative was present, even if that rep, like Rob Malley, was really representing everything and everyone but America, possibly from George Soros to his father’s Egyptian Communist Party, unless there was money in it for Tehran in the form of direct sanctions relief.

Iran wants to be paid to even sit at the same table or it’s not coming. That’s not diplomacy: it’s prostitution. The only date Biden can get with Iran will cost billions of dollars. That’s a lot even for a five-star restaurant near the UN patronized by the corrupt diplomats of Turtle Bay.

How many billions will Biden’s blind date with terror cost? More than a billion. Or three billion.

Biden had told CBS's Face the Nation that he was not going to lift sanctions on Iran to get it to negotiate with him. As usual, he was lying. Behind the scenes, the Biden administration was looking for a way to get sanctions relief to Iran without making it public.

Obama had illegally airmailed pallets of foreign currency on unmarked cargo planes. The Biden administration told South Korea that it could send a billion to Iran in exchange for releasing a tanker that it was holding hostage. But that’s still not good enough for Iran. It wants more.

After that initial $1 billion, the Islamic regime announced that the Biden administration had approved the release of $3 billion from South Korea, Oman, and Iraq.

Still not good enough.

Iran wants the full $7 billion from South Korea, some estimates place it at $8.5 billion, and there’s another $6 billion sitting in Iraq. It’s unclear how much of the money has been released yet, with Biden’s people vocally claiming that all of these reports are wholly and entirely false.

Iran's Central Bank governor Abdolnaser Hemmati however has said, “The payment will be in cash which will be transferred to our banks.”

That’s more convenient than Obama’s pallets of foreign currency on unmarked planes.

But whatever amount Iran has been paid hasn’t been enough to get it to sit at the same table with a bunch of Bidenites. That’s going to cost more than a mere $3 billion.

As long as Biden keeps paying, Iran will negotiate over whether to attend an informal negotiation as a prerequisite to a formal negotiation to return to an accord that it won’t keep.

And if you think that’s absurd, Biden has paid out $3 billion without even getting his foot in the door. It’s going to cost a lot more than $3 billion to go to the actual formal negotiations and then to a renewed agreement which the Iranians will violate while laughing all the way to the bank.

Meanwhile, Biden can’t fulfill his campaign promise to revive the Iran Deal because the Iranians won’t even start negotiating with him on the best way to get America to pay for its nuclear program, until the Democrats start presenting the cash to the terrorists up front. Or no deal.

Having gotten nowhere with Iran on its nuclear weapons program, the Biden administration proposed resolving the mess in Afghanistan by asking "the United Nations to convene Foreign Ministers and envoys from Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, India and the United States to discuss a unified approach to supporting peace in Afghanistan". Too bad that 4 out of 6 of those countries actually benefit from an ongoing war in Afghanistan and want us to bear the brunt of it.

Iran is behind much of the terrorism on the planet: including in Afghanistan. Why would it want to work with Biden on bringing peace to Afghanistan when it can bring terror and death instead?

The Biden administration can’t answer that or anything else. Its solution to everything is to call some sort of multinational conference. The wave of proposed multinational conferences is as staggering as it is silly and pointless. Biden wants to partner with China on denuclearization for North Korea. But why would China want to relieve the pressure on America and South Korea?

That’s about as likely as Iran relieving the pressure on America.

When Biden ended support for the campaign against the Houthis in Yemen, the Iranian-backed Jihadist group whose motto is “Death to America” responsed by ramping up its attacks.

“Tragically, and somewhat confusingly for me, it appears that the Houthis are prioritizing a military campaign ... over suspending the war and moving relief to the Yemeni people,” State Department special representative Tim Lenderking wondered.

Only a madman, an idiot, or a diplomat would think that it’s unexpected for an Islamic terrorist group to respond to appeasement by “prioritizing a military campaign” rather than providing relief for a famine that it had caused to begin with. But Democrats insist on being surprised by the obvious and the inevitable all the time. They’re surprised that Iran is demanding cash for negotiations and they’re surprised that their meeting with China was an even bigger disaster.

They’re surprised that North Korea isn’t interested in a meeting either.

Biden begs America’s enemies to negotiate and is then surprised when they demand that he pay for the privilege. And that makes sense. If the Democrats want North Korea or Iran to waste its time pretending to negotiate with them, there had better be a carrot or a stick involved.

Whether there’s a carrot or a stick won’t change the pointlessness of the negotiations. But if there isn’t a stick, then the dictators, tyrants, and terrorists want to be paid for their time.

That’s not unreasonable.

If Biden wants to date Iran, the mullahs warn him that he’s going to have to pick up the check.

There’s only one enemy country that wants to talk to Biden and it’s the world power that Democrats use as both a pretext and a model for domestic repression in America.

The Trump administration had refused to renew the START treaty that limited America's military capabilities while allowing Moscow to cheat as much as it wanted. The Russians had asked for at least a one-year extension, while the Trump administration had demanded a tougher deal.

Biden offered a five-year extension, no questions asked, and the Russians happily took it. Unlike Iran, they didn’t even make Biden pay them to humiliate his own country and undermine its national security. Now that’s what a good diplomatic relationship looks like to a Democrat.

Democrats may be striking out with North Korea and Iran, but they’ll always have Russia.

At least until they have to blame whatever horrible thing Hunter Biden did this time on Moscow.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Tuesday, April 06, 2021

Biden Intel Report Reboots Russia Hoax to Censor Hunter Corruption Stories

By On April 06, 2021
Democrats never give up beating a dead horse until it’s lying in pieces in the gutter. Senate Democrats are back to demanding that the FBI investigate Justice Kavanaugh’s high school years, and the Biden admin is rebooting the Russia hoax to protect Hunter and the Big Guy.

Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines presided over the release of the latest report, which claims to offer an intelligence analysis, but reads like a synthesis of Biden campaign talking points, right down to its absurd insistence that, Putin was helping Trump because he "probably also considers President Biden more apt to echo the idea of American Exceptionalism."

Finally we’re getting an intel product that makes the Steele dossier seem credible.

The intelligence analysis also claims that the Hunter Biden thing is a Russian smear and that while the Russians tried to interfere in the election, nothing they did changed the outcome.

That’s convenient. Really convenient.

But Haines isn’t an intelligence professional. She’s an Obama lawyer who was brought in to politicize intelligence at the CIA and then as a legal adviser to the National Security Council.

"To safeguard the integrity of our intelligence community, the DNI must insist that, when it comes to intelligence, there is simply no place for politics ever,” Haines had told the Senate.

But that was her confirmation hearing. This is the reality of the job that she was picked to do.

“Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections” is a stew of Democrat leftover talking points which never veers from its political agenda even if the result is self-contradictory gibberish.

The report's first judgement insists that no "technical aspect of the voting process" was altered, while its second judgement contends that Putin authorized "influence operations aimed at denigrating President Biden's candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting President Trump", but then backtracks to clarify that "unlike in 2016, we did not see persistent Russian cyber efforts to gain access to election infrastructure."

If Putin wanted President Trump to win and Biden to lose, why didn’t he hack the election? If he could do it in 2016, why couldn’t he do it in 2020? Did he develop carpal tunnel syndrome?

Before the election, Democrats had insisted that Russia would redouble its efforts to help Trump, and hack the election, but now they argue that Putin tried to help Trump, but stopped short of interfering with the results. There’s no consistency here as an intelligence analysis, but it’s entirely consistent with the political agendas of Democrat talking points which simultaneously seek to silence any suspicions about the election, and yet continue pushing their Russia hoax.

Why did Russia support Biden? According to Biden’s intel report, Moscow was threatened by Biden’s belief in American Exceptionalism. There have been all sorts of conspiracy theories floating around the country, but none less plausible than Biden’s American Exceptionalism.

There’s more evidence that Freemason UFOs are terrorizing kangaroos in the outback than that any Democrat, let alone Biden, believes that America is the greatest country in the world.

Obama, Biden’s old boss, had argued that every country believes it’s exceptional. Biden’s pick for Secretary of State has announced that America First would no longer guide our foreign policy. Biden’s response to 9/11 was proposing to send a $200 million check to Iran.

There was a guy on the ticket running on Make America Great Again. His name wasn’t Biden.

But the report argues that Moscow "placed increasing emphasis on undermining the candidate it saw as most detrimental to its global interests."

The Russians had been pleading with President Trump to extend their scam arms accord, which allowed the Russians to cheat while restricting our weapons programs, for at least a year. Trump turned them down, while Biden offered a 5-year extension with no preconditions.

And that was before the election.

The Biden intel report convolutedly tries to explain the arms accord by arguing that "Russian leaders preferred that former President Trump win reelection despite perceiving some of his administrations' policies as anti-Russia."

If you’re keeping track of this string of random lies thinly disguised as an intelligence report, the Russians preferred Trump because he was good for its global interests, even though he was actually bad for its global interests, but it all makes sense because… look a squirrel!

The Biden intel report isn’t operating in the real world. Instead it’s an attempt at rebooting the Russia smear to cover up the Hunter Biden scandal. And so the Biden report pushes claims that the Hunter Biden scandal is a Russian plot. Even though it’s the FBI that’s investigating him which must mean that it’s another arm of Moscow along with Hunter’s old business partners.

The report claims that the Russians not only "published disparaging content about President Biden, his family", including, "stories centered on his son", but they also tried to convince "left-leaning" voters that both Biden and Trump were just as bad.

How would this “intelligence report” have read any differently if it had been written by Biden’s campaign advisers? Then again, Haines had been one of Biden’s campaign advisers.

Take the China section which claims that the People's Republic of China believed that Biden would "pose a greater challenge over the long run because he would be more successful in mobilizing a global alliance against China and criticising China's human rights."

Any intelligence analyst worth his salt knows that Beijing lives in terror of someone criticising its human rights record. Just ask the tank guys in Tiananmen Square. Or the Chinese thugs beating up protesters in Hong Kong. And San Francisco. Not to mention Cornell University.

Xi is probably shaking in his boots because Biden might criticise his human rights record.

Politicised intelligence is a bad thing and this is badly politicised intelligence that sends the very clear message that Biden and the Democrats are not putting their Russian hoax to bed. Instead they’re going to shut down reporting on Hunter Biden by labeling it Russian disinformation.

Before the election, Facebook and Twitter had unilaterally censored stories about Hunter Biden by falsely labeling them as Russian disinformation. But this censorship was unilateral and had no backing from intelligence officials. Now Big Tech will have all the backing from D.C. it needs.

“Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections” isn’t a report: it’s a smear and a cover-up.

The intelligence report seeks to transform Democrat talking points about Biden and Trump into facts by embedding them into an official government document. That’s yet another fundamental abuse of national security by the leftovers of the Obama administration who did more to abuse national security in 8 years than the entire national security industry had ever done on its own.

And it’s a warning that the politicisation and abuse of national security is the new normal again.

Biden and his appointees will have no shame about abusing national security to attack political opponents and exonerate political allies. This is only the first shot, but expect more of Obama’s old habit of using the NSA to spy on political opponents under the guise of national security.

Now that “Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections” has labeled stories about Hunter Biden as a Russian conspiracy and a threat to free elections, expect Big Tech to censor them, and the intelligence services to treat anyone researching them as a foreign election threat.

In 2016, the Democrats began claiming that free speech was the greatest threat to free elections. Biden’s intel hacks have built an entire report around that argument.

“Denigrating Biden”, as the report puts it, is a national security threat. And will be treated the way denigrating dictators is handled by the intelligence services of Russia and China.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Sunday, April 04, 2021

Fauci Blames Coronavirus on Our Failure to Live in 'Harmony With Nature'

By On April 04, 2021
"There's a lot of folks who think that, due to climate change and due to the globalization in general, it is inevitable that we’ll deal with more and more viruses like this," Dr. Fauci told Meet the Press.

The "lot of folks" in question include the patron saint of the pandemic.

In addition to appearing on every single news show on the planet, Fauci occasionally co-authors papers. But "Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19" in the journal Cell is less of an academic paper and more of a survey and an advocacy editorial. It might not be all that significant except that its co-authors are David M. Morens, the Senior Scientific Advisor at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Fauci who heads it.

If you didn’t know that its authors are prominent figures in the scientific community, you might mistake its contents for the ravings of hippies at an Earth Day rally a generation ago.

"There are many examples where disease emergencies reflect our increasing inability to live in harmony with nature," Fauci's paper insists. "Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes.”

It goes without saying that the proper way to live in harmony with nature would be to live in caves, hunt buffalo for food, and die at an average age of 38. Fauci’s $2 million D.C. house with its 5 bathrooms and 6,500 square foot lot size, is not in harmony with nature.

His Wesley Heights neighborhood was one of the country’s first “planned communities”: it’s described as “desirable” and “affluent”, and originally banned Jews and black people.

But living in harmony with nature and radical changes are for other people.

The paper lays out a bold prescription for "rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces" to "prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases". The idea that we can change human behavior by transforming infrastructure is one of the basic ideas of Socialism. From the old Socialist utopian communes to the Soviet Union’s initial efforts to remove kitchens from apartments through Bauhaus and the housing projects of the United States, it ends badly.

But the two NIAID bigwigs essentially argue that every modern human behavior is a disease risk. Imagine lockdown and mask ‘safetyism’ culture applied to every facet of civilization.

“Some, and probably very many, of the living improvements achieved over recent centuries come at a high cost that we pay in deadly disease emergence,” Fauci and Morens contend.

But the agenda goes beyond some nebulous call for less dense living and working conditions to the much more ambitious and politically safer realms of the boilerplate wishlists of the Left.

The paper calls for "minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming" and "ending global poverty".

But the only way to end global poverty is through industrialization and urbanization.

Fauci can have environmental purism or he can have less global poverty, but he can’t have both. And indeed, the coronavirus pandemic, like a number of previous outbreaks, came out of China which has dramatically reduced poverty by moving its rural population into cities.

The paper tiptoes around the China question. Nature appears repeatedly through the paper, even though it’s used as a vague and unscientific term, but China only appears twice.

Fauci calls for an end to “intensive animal farming", but that’s why we don’t randomly eat wild animals from wet markets like the kind that may have caused the pandemic. We have massive herds of cattle, instead of bat soup, because we reacted to past famines with herding, while China learned to eat anything and everything that was available. Including wild bats.

Wet markets are much more in harmony with nature than the cattle herds of Wyoming.

Trapping and killing wild animals, and reselling them at fairs, is more natural. It integrates man with the existing natural ecosystem, rather than attempting to impose our own priorities on it.

And it may have helped cause the pandemic Fauci is exploiting to call for a return to nature.

Ending factory farming would make it harder for Fauci to get the burgers from Chef Geoff's, grilled steak quesadilla from Millie's, and barbecue pork rib tortellini from Sfoglina Van Ness that he loves so much, but living in harmony with nature is for other, less important people.

Fauci isn’t practicing science. This is touchy-feely hippie dogma from a man who is being paid a small fortune to act as a leading health expert and instead sounds like an aspiring leftist guru.

After sprinkling some sage and rosemary, Fauci’s paper warns that, “our increasingly extreme alterations of the environment induce increasingly extreme backlashes from nature”.

So much for science. Instead, Fauci tells us that Mother Nature is angry with us.

But what ‘backlash from nature’ caused the coronavirus pandemic? While the media and the expert class have tried to laboriously connect the pandemic, like everything else from higher crime rates and illegal migration, to global warming, they’ve done so with no evidence.

A paper in February finally managed to laboriously argue that global warming might have helped forests in China grow resulting in more bats which might have led to the pandemic.

In contrast to the usual environmental dogma, this theory blames global warming for not killing enough forests and bats. The logical conclusion must be that, in contrast to Fauci, we should be cutting down more forests and killing more animals to compensate for global warming.

Earlier in their paper, Fauci and Morens argue that, “Gaining a better understanding of the enormous reservoir of bat coronaviruses has been an urgent priority since the 2002 SARS epidemic, and remains so today. Considerable surveillance and phylogenetic and experimental work remains to be done. In 2020, it is among our most urgent research priorities.”

And that might be exactly the problem.

Some months before Fauci's paper, President Trump had ordered the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to cut off all funding to the EcoHealth Alliance which under Obama had provided grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to study coronaviruses in bats.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology houses China's only Level 4 lab handling some of the most dangerous viruses around. That, as many non-experts have noted, is quite a coincidence.

An edgy maxim by a medieval Franciscan friar would suggest that the likeliest explanation for a global virus outbreak centering around a virology lab would probably be that very same lab.

Rather than Fauci’s theory of a backlash from Mother Nature.

But Fauci might favor the ‘Mother Nature is Angry at Foolish Mortals Over Cheap Burgers’ theory over the Chinese virus lab theory because the grants were funded by the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases which he heads. There had been chatter about the lack of safety and precautions at the Wuhan Institute of Virology well before the pandemic.

The expert class and the media have dismissed such talk as an “unscientific conspiracy theory” in favor of the much more scientific theory that we’re experiencing a “backlash from nature”.

It’s easier to tell other people to live in harmony with nature from your D.C. mansion than acknowledge the possibility that your organization’s decisions may have been disastrous.

"Science will surely bring us many life-saving drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics; however, there is no reason to think that these alone can overcome the threat of ever more frequent and deadly emergences of infectious diseases," Morens and Fauci's paper concludes.

The top NIAID figures are telling us that drugs and vaccines won't work. Science is futile in the face of Mother Nature's wrath, the expert class, borrowing from a horror movie, lectures us.

We must repent of our wicked industrial ways.

Or perhaps Fauci and Morens should resign, move to Vermont, and live off the land.

"The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder," Fauci's paper insists, "that in a human-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences."

Science can't help us, scientists at the organization that may have caused the disaster, insist.

We're accused of provoking "the latest examples of a deadly barrage of coming coronavirus and other emergences" that will bring us to our knees if we don't bow to Mother Nature.

"COVID-19 is among the most vivid wake-up calls in over a century. It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature," the paper concludes.

Collectively and creatively are two things that don’t go together. Neither do credentialed experts who want to be treated like scientists, but insist on rambling about nature like hippie gurus. A scientific argument actually tries to reason out its own understanding of the world. Babbling about harmony with nature never requires any such exercises in logic.

The coronavirus pandemic was either caused by a wet market, the living embodiment of Fauci’s call for harmony with nature, or by the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was funded by Fauci’s own organization. Either way, Fauci’s preferred answers to the pandemic are its likely cause.

Instead of blaming civilization for the pandemic, Fauci might consider a mirror.

And Americans might want to consider whether the people they’re paying to act as their leading scientists, but who dismiss science in favor of nature’s wrath, ought to be replaced by scientists.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Friday, April 02, 2021

Kamala’s Husband Hosts the Virtual Passover From Hell

By On April 02, 2021
After twenty minutes of dead air, Biden's Virtual Passover got underway. Biden, who can only be counted on to remain coherent for short stretches of time before launching into a random tirade, only showed up briefly. And that was the only good thing about Virtual Passover.

Virtual Passover, like the Biden administration, makes no sense. But the Biden administration can’t be expected to ruin every aspect of our lives, without also ruining Passover.

Kamala Harris had been delegated to take over the border crisis, and so her husband, Brentwood entertainment lawyer, Douglas Emhoff, took over the job of ruining Passover.

Dubbed a “Virtual Passover Celebration”, it was not a celebration, it had nothing to do with Passover, but it was virtual. The one thing that the Biden administration can be relied on is to be virtual. And by being virtual, to offer nothing real. Passover wasn’t going to change that.

Hosted by “Second Gentleman Douglas Emhoff”, also known as the father of Kamala’s obnoxious stepchildren, his scripted speeches proved that everything he knows about Judaism he learned from leftist anti-Israel radicals and late night reruns of The Nanny.

Emhoff started out by touting Sharon Brous and IKAR.

Brous is an anti-Israel leftist who heads up IKAR, dubbed by Variety as a "trendy, progressive congregation" whose members include Steven Spielberg. If your synagogue is profiled in Variety, it’s pretty bad: if it’s “trendy and progressive”, it’s even worse. That means IKAR is also exactly the kind of synagogue a Brentwood entertainment lawyer like Emhoff would promote.

Then, Emhoff gave an insider’s wave to his own mention of IKAR.

Brous had delivered the inauguration prayer for Obama and the inaugural prayer for Biden calling for "a justice driven, multiracial democracy.” Now she was back to ruin Passover.

Sharon Brous is a member of the councils of J Street, and the New Israel Fund: because the only clergy with Jewish last names that are allowed at Biden events are anti-Israel.

When Jews came out against the antisemitic and pro-Farrakhan leaders of the Women’s March, especially Linda Sarsour, Brous falsely claimed that the criticisms were, “a deliberate smear campaign from the far right to delegitimize the march itself.”

“A much greater problem would be if the Jewish community stepped out of activism because we’re afraid that someone on the stage has a position on BDS different than our own,” she complained. To Brous, it would be a “much greater problem” to treat the efforts to destroy the Jewish State as more important than her extremist politics which align her with antisemites.

When Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Rashida Tlaib were barred from entry to Israel, Brous spewed a hateful unhinged rant, falsely claiming that American Jews "have spent years in hive mentality, pouncing on indications of anti-Semitism among Israel’s critics", accused the Jewish State of a "52-year military occupation of millions of Palestinian people" and ranted that American Jews must "hear Palestinian voices and see what the Israeli government is so intent on members of Congress not seeing." A terrorist spokesman couldn’t have said it any better than Brous.

Having Brous attend a Passover celebration is like inviting a medieval blood libeler to a seder.

Literally.

Brous signed on to a letter attacking Israel for banning a JVP BDS activist, a hate group that provided space for antisemites, including activists associated with claims that Jews drink blood.

It’s hard to think of anyone that belongs at a seder less than Brous: except maybe Pharaoh.

But before Brous could spew all over the non-seder, Emhoff began by lecturing attendees at a virtual event about the importance of socially distancing and wearing masks.

Nothing says freedom like telling people what to do.

“Passover,” Emhoff then intoned with the dead smile and lifeless cadence of a late-night infomercial host making an unconvincing pitch for a supplement made out of dried kangaroos, “has always been one of my favorite holidays.” Then he relived memories from Nanny reruns of attending a seder in Brooklyn with “plastic cushion covers” and “gelatinous gefilte fish”.

With the obligatory Jewish stuff out of the way, Emhoff shifted over to the “power of the Passover story” in the fight for justice. Naturally, not in the modern day Israelites trying to keep the aspiring killers of their sons from the Gazan vicinity of Egypt from getting to them.

Emhoff insisted that Passover is about the “search for justice”. It’s not. If he had opened a Bible, or a Haggadah, the traditional text of the Passover seder, he would have noted a lack of calls for social justice, and a lot of praises of G-d for liberating the Jews from bondage through miracles.

But attendees at IKAR can’t be expected to actually know anything about Judaism.

In the theology of Tikkun Olam, every Jewish experience and holiday must be universalized, with the relentlessness of Marxist dogma, into class struggle and identity politics. Passover, like Purim, Chanukah, Yom Kippur, and Thursday must be about the search for justice. Emhoff, whose Judaism consists of distant memories of gefilte fish can’t be expected to know any better.

In his opening address, Emhoff failed to mention G-d, but made Women’s History Month the focus of his talk. He complained that Judaism neglected the “midwives who saved Moses” by refusing to implement Pharaoh’s sex-selective post-partum abortion decree. Had those midwives been in California, Kamala Harris and Xavier Becerra would have locked them up.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, had made a special point of targeting Jewish families, had addressed the KKK and counted future Nazi eugenicists among her supporters, warning that if "the sickly and weak" are "allowed to propagate”, they will “produce a race of degenerates.”

Pharaoh couldn’t have said it any better than Kamala’s favorite infanticide organization.

But Emhoff was just reading from talking points prepared by the National Council of Jewish Women which, as I exposed in a previous article, has, like Brous, a history of supporting Sarsour, and other antisemitic leftists. His conclusion is that Passover is about “unsung heroes”, just like “the pandemic”. But there’s just one unsung hero in Emhoff’s speech. G-d.

Douglas Emhoff may not believe in G-d. His daughter’s spokesman has insisted that, “Ella is not Jewish.” But then it might be nice if Doug would spare us all the tales of gefilte fish and plastic seat covers while mangling the beliefs of a religion he has no connection to beyond his last name, and using it to promote some of the worst enemies of the Jewish people.

When Moses first confronts Pharaoh, the Egyptian tyrant declares that he does not know of a G-d. Emhoff doesn’t seem any more aware of the existence of a higher power than Pharaoh.

Then Brous came on, all but screaming at the camera that the mission of the seder was to “imagine a more just and loving world”. But there wasn’t much love on the menu. Passover, the radical cleric insisted, was a “political story”. I doubt that Brous believes that there’s an apolitical story anywhere in the world and, like her ilk, can’t think of religion in other than political terms.

Brous’ religion is politics, her deity is social justice, and her messiah is a community organizer.

And so there followed an extended bout of yelling at the camera about justice and oppression, interspersed with meaningless New Age Obamaisms with an audience of one potted plant.

Not Biden. He hadn’t joined the zoom seder yet.

“We all belong to one another,” Brous declared.

That’s the opposite of Passover which is instead the story of the birth of a particular nation through the belief, not in Emhoff’s “all faiths”, but the faith in a particular G-d.

G-d doesn’t just take the Jews out of slavery, but to bring them to Israel. It’s understandable that Brous seems less interested in addressing that awkward part of the Passover story.

But we can be thankful for one small Passover miracle, at least Brous didn’t repeat her Yom Kippur rant in which she falsely claimed that, “The treatment of the Palestinian people, the restriction of their rights, the daily humiliations and the stubborn expansion of settlements threatens to destroy not only Zionism, but to make a mockery of Judaism.”

The only one making a mockery of Judaism is Brous and her extremist political agenda.

The virtual celebration that celebrated nothing closed with Kamala Harris showing up to thank Brous for “all her work”. It was unclear if she meant her work supporting Sarsour or Omar.

The Passover from Hell echoed everything that Jews had come to expect from Obama’s Jewish events, from the anti-Israel clergy to the exploitation and erasure of Jews from their own religion. From Emhoff to Brous, there’s only ever one message, which is that thousands of years of Jewish religion, history, and thought are reducible to the 19th century ideology of the Left.

Pharaoh had set out to kill the Jews. The Left has done plenty of killing, but it also erases Jews. And, worse still, it makes Jews complicit in that erasure. Pharaoh did not allow the Jews to forget that they were slaves. Their modern enslavers convince many Jews that freedom is slavery, and that slavery is freedom, that survival is death, and that suicide is Jewish morality.

Passover is the celebration of G-d’s redemption of the Jews from slavery to freedom. The Biden virtual seder is a call for the Jews and for all Americans to leave behind freedom for slavery.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Wednesday, March 31, 2021

When Black Mass Shooters Kill Asians, It’s Not a Hate Crime

By On March 31, 2021
"Those Asian officers who stand by and observe everything I previously mentioned," Christopher Dorner wrote in his manifesto. "You are a high value target as well."

The black mass shooter's first target was Monica Quan, the Asian-American daughter of Randall Quan, the first Chinese-American to become an LAPD captain.

Monica was shot three times in the back of the head. Afterward, Dorner called her father and told him that he "should have done a better job of protecting his daughter."

The media coverage of Dorner’s shooting spree focused on the racist rants about white police officers (or caucasians) in his manifesto, but there was very little discussion of his hatred for Asian-Americans even though he had named them as targets in his hateful screed.

When black mass shooters kill Asian people, the media tries to gloss over it.

Colin Ferguson's mass shooting in the 90s on a New York train is remembered largely for the decision by his radical leftist lawyers, William Kunstler and Ron Kuby to use the “Black Rage” defense. Shortly before his death, Kunstler argued that black people are entitled to rage.

But what is often forgotten is that two of the six people whom Ferguson murdered were Asian.

Maria Theresa Tumangan Magtoto was the daughter of an official with the Philippine Senate. Mi Kyung Kim, a Korean-American, had been working as a library assistant at Columbia.

A third of the men and women whom Ferguson killed were Asians.

This wasn't a coincidence. Notes in Ferguson's pockets were scribbled with rants about white people, "Uncle Toms", and "Chinese" people. None of the Asian-Americans he shot were actually Chinese, but the racist gunman didn't seem to care.

“When Louis Farrakhan mentioned Mr. Ferguson at a New York rally on Dec. 18, his audience erupted in an ovation”, “The Hate That Hate Begot”, a New York Daily News article, noted.

“God spoke to Colin Ferguson and said, 'Catch the train, Colin, catch the train’”, the Nation of Islam’s Khalid Abdul Muhammad declared at Howard University.

When John Allen Muhammad went on his rampage, his victims included Hong Im Ballenger, a Korean immigrant who ran a beauty supply store. As the D.C. sniper’s last name showed, he had been a member of Farrakhan’s black supremacist Nation of Islam hate group.

The Nation of Islam believes that non-black people were created through a eugenics program by a mad scientist from the original black race. “Asians want to know if we are targeting all Asian business. We know Asians have targeted Black communities to exploit. The JIG IS UP," Jeffery Muhammad, the Nation of Islam leader in Dallas, had warned.

This sort of anti-Asian hate extends into the highest reaches of the Democrats and the media.

Before Al Sharpton was an MSNBC host, a Democrat presidential candidate with a DNC speaking slot, and a Democrat kingmaker, he was leading boycotts of Korean stores.

Sharpton had supported the infamous Family Red Apple boycott at which racist mobs had called the owners, "yellow monkeys" and chanted, "Koreans, go home." The Freddy’s Fashion Mart protests, led by Morris Powell, head of the Buy Black Committee at Sharpton’s National Action Network, later turned lethal, culminating in the murders of seven people.

While the motive there was antisemitism and the victims were mostly young Latino women, the fire was followed by threats of violence against Korean stores in Harlem.

And Powell had cut his teeth on black supremacist boycotts of Asian businesses.

In a previous boycott incident at the Victory Fish Market, he had allegedly fractured the skull of Kim Soo Yea: the wife of the store owner.

The National Action Network has since been addressed by every top Democrat from Obama to Biden to Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris.

The Democrats have jumped eagerly on the spa shootings. Their media insists that the shooter could not have been a sex addict motivated by his own disorder, as he said, but that he must be a racist who hated Asian people, while refusing to make a reckoning with the publicly stated hatred for Asian people of black mass shooters like Colin Ferguson and Christopher Dorner.

The spa shootings emerged as a convenient distraction from the protests over the escalating criminal assaults on Asian people in California and New York by mostly black perpetrators.

“The perpetrator in some cases has been African American,” San Francisco Mayor London Breed had said. “And as an African American woman, as the mayor of your city, I am here to hold everyone accountable.”

That was not the media’s agenda.

Back in February, Time was scolding Asian-American victims and telling them that they needed to figure out “how to tackle anti-Asian violence without relying on law enforcement institutions that have historically targeted Black and brown communities”.

After the spa shootings, headlines like "Advocates Discourage Anti-Black Sentiment Amid Violence Against Asians" and the clumsy attempts to falsely ascribe attacks by black men on elderly Asian people to President Trump and whiteness ("This violence is caused by a system that makes working people compete against each other for scraps of what the wealthy possess," Oakland City Councilwoman Carroll Fife) gave way to political relief for Democrats.

The media spread the false claim that a police spokesman had dismissed the attack as a case of the perpetrator having a “bad day”. Even though neither the police nor the FBI had found a racial motive, the media spread its racism narrative without even the tiniest trace of evidence.

It makes little difference to the actual case. Even now, at the peak of the Democrat pro-crime policy wave where criminals are let loose for slashings and robberies, a mass murderer is never going to set foot outside the prison system whether or not he’s charged with a hate crime.

But there’s a great deal politically at stake for the Democrat media which is seizing the opportunity to deflect a politically problematic crisis back into politically safe waters.

Racist killers don’t make a big secret of their hate. White supremacist mass shooters like Dylann Roof at the Mother Emanuel church in Charleston and Robert Bowers at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, or black supremacist shooters, like Micah X. Johnson in Dallas or David Anderson at the Kosher market in Jersey City, left their ugly beliefs in public view.

Dorner and Ferguson had notes and manifestos.

The media spends a lot more time talking about politically convenient mass killers than inconvenient ones. It’s why Robert Bowers got so much more coverage than David Anderson. It’s also why Colin Ferguson and Dylann Roof received a very different reception.

It is wholly possible to be an evil person without being a bigot. The average serial killer is not a racist. He’s just wholly devoid of empathy and enjoys the pain and suffering of others. Not every crime needs to be viewed through the narrow academic lens of prejudice: let alone ‘whiteness’.

But much as Communists couldn’t see the world in any terms other than class, Wokies can’t understand any event except by shoving it into their identity politics prism. Some things fit into that prism, others can be made to fit with enough fake news, and still others will never fit and have to be ignored, covered up, and buried at midnight in the media graveyard of dead stories.

The media is no longer in the business of reporting stories, but of politically reconciling them in the same way that Pravda reporters had to reconcile events with Marxism-Leninism. The media politically confronts events, and tries to understand them, before distilling their understanding.

Journalism has become an academic enterprise of grad students treating every event like an opportunity to unload critical race theory lectures so that the public can be properly educated.

But now that the media is suddenly interested in mass shooters who target Asians, it might want to revisit Ferguson and Dorner who actually targeted Asians and wrote about doing it, instead of trying to ascribe a racial motive to a monster who left behind no evidence of being a bigot.







Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Tuesday, March 30, 2021

When Cuomo Was Accused of Sexual Harassment 20 Years Ago, Dems Defended Him

By On March 30, 2021
"I Started to Think This is a Bad Guy": Andrew Cuomo's Biographer on the Governor's Brutish History," a Vanity Fair headline blares.

The biographer, Michael Shnayerson, is the author of The Contender, a biography of Cuomo, of which the author on his site writes, “I think the picture that emerges is ultimately a positive one.”

In the recent article, he however fusses, “I discovered that much of Cuomo’s M.O. and many of his character flaws… have been evident for years.”

Just not so evident that anyone in the media would actually write honestly about them.

In Vanity Fair, Cuomo’s biographer mentions the time that his subject was accused of sexual harassment. “HUD’s inspector general, Susan Gaffney, was a woman who dared to speak up, so she became a target,” he writes. Gaffney did indeed speak up and became a target. And The Contender followed the usual Cuomo line of treating her allegation of sexual harassment as absurd nonsense. The suggestion that Gaffney had gone over the edge goes unchallenged.

"To the astonishment of all in the Cuomo camp, Gaffney soon after filed a formal complaint against Andrew and most of his inner circle, accusing them of sexual harassment and discrimination," Shnayerson dismissively writes. "Exhibit A: the wink."

The real reason that the story is explosive isn’t just because twenty years ago, for the first time, Cuomo was accused of sexual harassment, it’s that Democrats vigorously backed Cuomo up.

At a Senate hearing in which Gaffney made her case, warning of Cuomo's campaign of dirty tricks, Senator Susan Collins and Senator Fred Thompson, both Republicans, were supportive. Meanwhile Rep. Tom Lantos appeared to be cooperating with the Cuomo smear campaign.

Rep. Henry Waxman, aggressively defended Cuomo, accusing Gaffney of "nit-picking," and "petty" complaints that "defy logic and reason".

Rep. Elijah Cummings demanded an investigation of Gaffney.

There was something bigger at stake in the Cuomo-Gaffney case than sexual harassment.

Gaffney and her people had been digging into some shady behavior by Andrew Cuomo.

Heading up HUD had been a consolation prize from Bill Clinton to the Cuomo family. Mario Cuomo, Andrew’s father, had been projected as the leading Democrat presidential candidate. After Mario chose not to run, Andrew Cuomo and the Clinton administration had been negotiating over a Supreme Court seat for his father which never came to pass.

The HUD job wasn’t glamorous, but it offered all kinds of useful opportunities including allegedly a developer who acted as a major financier for Cuomo in his personal and political life. Some of Cuomo’s decisions back then would help put the country on track to the subprime crisis.

Destroying Gaffney became a major priority not only for Cuomo, but for Democrat elected officials because she had touched the third rail of the Democrat patronage machine by investigating housing fraud. Cuomo and his Democrat cohorts launched an unprecedented campaign to smear an inspector general of their own agency as a vicious racist.

At its peak, a Cuomo crony declared that Gaffney "is under investigation by the FBI and members of Congress, that a dozen of her employees have made racial complaints against her, that the bipartisan U.S. Conference of Mayors has passed formal resolutions on a pattern of racism by the IG and that Deval Patrick, the former associate attorney general for civil rights, is now investigating her on the most serious charges of racism in the department's history."

The accusations of racism, like the push by Lantos and Cuomo to investigate the IG's office for downloading porn, were garbage, but they accomplished their goal. Gaffney came off as unhinged and running a scandalous office. Enough mud was thrown that some of it stuck. And by then no one was paying attention to any investigations coming out of the IG’s office.

Cuomo won. America lost.

The tactics that Cuomo previewed against Gaffney would be utilized to secure the governor’s mansion and suppress critics and accusers. All of that could have been prevented, but the Democrats chose to stand against an inspector general, who had been appointed by Bill Clinton, and with Andrew Cuomo, who had a political future in New York and maybe D.C.

Why would any Democrat take on a possible future senator, governor, or even president?

Cuomo’s allies included numerous House Democrats, and Deval Patrick, the future governor of Massachusetts, and Obama’s favored presidential candidate. And some journalists speculated at the time that Cuomo’s campaign had the tacit approval of the Clinton administration. It would be rather surprising if it did not when you consider its sheer scope.

If the Clintons had signed off on the campaign, it would not have been the worst abuse by a corrupt clan that counted Jeffrey Epstein among its friends, and which had been accused of sexual assault and victim intimidation. Bill Clinton had described Cuomo’s father as a mafioso in a conversation with Gennifer Flowers. Clintonites in the media attempted to claim that the conversations were fake, with George Stephanopoulos eventually admitting that they were real, but arguing that “they were selectively edited in a way — to create some — some impression.”

What better qualification could there be for a position as a top journalist at ABC News?

Whether it was Clinton’s abuses or Cuomo’s abuses, the media has a history of denying the obvious for as long as possible until it becomes politically opportune to finally tell the truth.

The truth won't mean reporting honestly on Cuomo’s nursing home death toll or his role in the subprime mortgage crisis. Cuomo is one of those unique politicians who did more damage to the country than any dozen natural disasters and tops the casualty toll from some wars. And yet the only thing the media wants to topple him for is his recent history of sexual aggressiveness.

That too doesn’t come as much of a surprise in a state where a Cuomo predecessor, Governor Elliot Spitzer, was accused of having a thing for choking women. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who was being touted as a potential governor down the road, resigned after being accused of choking and threatening to kill a number of women. There’s a pattern here.

And this kind of thing is practically a requirement for Democrat politicians in Albany.

In some cases, such as Jeffrey Epstein, the #MeToo issue is the issue. But with politicians, whether it’s Bill Clinton or Andrew Cuomo, it’s the topper on a layer cake of much worse crimes. Bad people abuse power in proportion to how much of it they have and top elected officials have a lot more scope for abusing power than movie producers or hedge fund tycoons.

The media is determined to help Democrats cover up for Cuomo, even as they’re trying to bury him by concentrating on the set of #MeToo allegations that are the least damaging to the Dems. That way the Sandernistas who are trying to take down Cuomo can smoothly step into his place. The party gets a shakeup, but the same old dirty business can continue on in Albany.

#MeToo is only a symptom of the sociopathic abuses of power by Cuomo. The bigger issues, the bodies and the dollars, would do too much damage to the same corrupt Democrat system that had enabled Cuomo all these decades. And the system is protecting itself even now.

No one knew anything for decades, but now everyone always knew everything. Like old Stalinists after Khruschev’s speech, the former Cuomosexuals line up to denounce him.

The truth is that they all knew. And what they still know is a lot worse than what they’re telling.

After all this time, the media still won’t touch Cuomo. Not where it could hurt the Democrats.






Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Passover - From Slavery to Freedom

By On March 30, 2021

As the first days of another Passover conclude with the echoes of "Once we were slaves and now we are free" and "Next year in Jerusalem" recited at the Seder nights ringing in our ears, we know that freedom is a lot more than being able to board a plane and fly off to Jerusalem.

Slavery did not end with the fall of Pharaoh. Since then we have become slaves again, lived under the rule of iron-fisted tyrants and forgotten what the very idea of freedom means. And that will likely happen again and again until the age of oppression ends. What is this freedom that we gained with the fall of a Pharaoh, his drowning armies, and the last sight of his pyramids?

Freedom, like slavery, is as much a state of mind as a state of being. It is possible to be legally free, yet to have no freedom of action whatsoever. And it is possible to be legally a slave and yet to be free in defiance of those restrictions. External coercion alone does not make a man free or slave. 

Slavery, as all our ancestors learned at one time or another, is a state of mind.

What is a slave? A slave is complicit in his own oppression. His slavery has become his natural state and he looks to his master, not to free him, but to command him. He does not want to be free and he resents the very idea of freedom. The Jews in Egypt were not merely restrained by chains and guards. If they had been, then the task of their liberation would have been much simpler. But just as an addictive drug crosses the barrier from physical to psychological dependency, they were enslaved not just with external, but internal chains. They moaned not at the fact of slavery, but at the extremity of it. When their taskmasters complained to Pharaoh, it was not about being enslaved, but of not being given the straw with which to build the bricks that had become their duty.

The worst slavery is of the most insidious kind. It leaves the slave able to think and act, but not as a free man. It leaves him with cunning, but not courage. He is able to use force, but only to bring other slaves into line. And most hideously, this state of affairs seems moral and natural to him. This is his freedom.

The true slave has come to love big brother, to worship at the foot of the system that oppresses him. It is this twisted love that must be torn out of him. It is this idolatry of the whip before which he kneels, this panting to know who his superiors and who his inferiors are, this love of a vast order that allows him to be lost in its wonders, to gaze in awe at the empire of tomorrow which builds its own tombs today, that must be broken. These are his gods and he must kill them within himself to be free.

The Exodus is not the story of the emergence of free men who were enslaved, but the slow painful process by which slaves became a nation of free men, a long troubled journey which has not yet ended. That is why we celebrate Passover, not as an event of the past, but as of a road that we still travel on our long journey from slavery to freedom. Not just the journey of the Jews, but of humanity.

Having escaped from Pharaoh, the Jews built a glittering calf, and having left the desert behind, they sought out a king. Every idol and tyrant was another token of slavery, a desire to put one's ear up against the doorpost and become slaves for life. The idols have changed, but their meaning has not. There is still the pursuit of the master, the master of international law, of a global state, the expert gods of the superstate who rule over the present and the future and dispose of the lives of men.

There are far too many synagogues that worship the Democratic Party, rather than G-d, that bow to the ghost of FDR, and whose scriptures are to be found in the smeared ink of the New York Times. And in Jerusalem far too many eyes look longingly to Washington and to Brussels, to the cities on the hill which offer order, truth and peace.

It is easy to slip into this kind of slavery. The pyramids are grand, the slogans are clever and the future seems assured. It is only when the dusty messenger comes along to whisper that "He has remembered". that those who have not forgotten gather and some among those who have forgotten, remember that they are slaves.

In Egypt the system of the state had to be smashed, not just smashed, but discredited. The war between slavery and freedom could not end until the system of slavery had become ridiculous, until Pharaoh appeared a buffoon and his power no more than organized madness. And yet even so for a generation liberated from slavery, this majestic system, the only one they had ever known, remained their template, and in times of crisis, their immediate instinct was to retreat back to the only civilization they had known.

The slavery of the present is a more subtle thing. It grips the mind more tightly than the body. It still remembers that men enslave themselves best. It knows also that true power comes from making all complicit in its crimes so that they are also complicit in their own degradation. The system only asks that each man enslave himself and kill his own children. And once he has done that, he will only feel it right to demand that everyone else do likewise.

Do it for the environment, for social justice, for the Pharaoh of every age and his ideology. Enslave your mind. Kill your children.

This is the slavery of the system. It requires few whips and many words. It nudges men to be their own taskmasters and to reach out their hands to the new Pharaoh in the hope that he will save them. It is this slavery which is so pervasive, which Passover wakes us from, if it has not already been perverted into the Passover of the slave, into civil rights seders and eco-matzas with donations to Planned Parenthood which will do what the midwives did not.

"Once we were slaves," the ancient words call on us to remember that we have been freed. That it is no longer Pharaoh who enslaves us, but we who enslave ourselves. "Now we are free men." But what is freedom really? Is it the freedom to worship G-d or to worship the system? The system proclaims that it is god. And that is the great lie which ends in the death of the system and its slaves.

Like the slaves of ancient Egypt, we are shaken, dragged out of our everyday routine and commanded to be free. But how do you command men and women to be free? You can lead them through the habits of free men and women who think of themselves as kings and queens, who drink wine while reclining, who sing loudly in defiance of all oppressors, who boldly proclaim "Next year in Jerusalem" while the pharaohs and czars of D.C. and the EU bare their teeth at the Jews living in Jerusalem.

You can unroll the scroll of history and show them how they were taken out, but all this routine is useless unless they understand and are sensible that they are free. Free not in their habits, but in their minds. Ritual is the gateway to a state of mind. A ritual of freedom only succeeds when it invokes a state of mental freedom. Otherwise it is a rite, a practice, a habit whose codes may help some future generation unlock its meaning, but which means little today.

Passover is the beginning and the end. It is the start of the journey and the end of it and we are always in the middle, on the long road out of Egypt, discovering that there are more chains in our minds than we realized a year earlier or a hundred or a thousand years ago. Each step we take toward freedom also reminds us of how far we still have to go.

It is the ritual that reminds us that we are still on the journey, that though we have been lulled by the routine of the system, the trap of the present that like the soothing warmth of an ice storm or the peaceful feeling of a drowning swimmer, embraces us in the forgetfulness of the dying moment, concealing from us the truth that the journey is not over. The desert still lies before us.

This journey is the human journey. It is the recreation of what mankind lost when it defied G-d, when it turned with weapons on each other, when it built towers, created systems and tried to climb to heaven on the backs of slaves and pyramids. It is a transformative road that requires us to not only endure, but to learn.

Surrounded by willing slaves who preach the creed of slavery, we must speak for freedom. Though few seem to remember the journey or the chains, it is our duty to remind ourselves. The message of Passover fully begins only when the holiday ends and its habits carry over into our daily lives. 

Once we were slaves, now we are free.

Friday, March 26, 2021

After 9/11, Bush Let the Al-Issa Family Into America. Now 10 Americans Are Dead.

By On March 26, 2021
Two years ago, Ahmad Al-Issa shared a post titled, “Why refugees and immigrants are good for America.” On Monday, the Syrian Muslim immigrant shot up a supermarket killing ten Americans.

Biden declared that he was "still waiting for more information regarding the shooter, his motive, the weapons he used. The guns, the magazines, the weapons, the modifications that have apparently taken place to those weapons that are involved here."

Why do the modifications to the Syrian immigrant's weapons matter more than his motive?

Obama joined in, demanding that it is, “long past time for those with the power to fight this epidemic of gun violence to do so.”

Guns don’t kill people. Muslim terrorists do.

Ahmad Al-Issa spent much of his time in America accusing his classmates and everyone around him of being ‘Islamophobes’. He repeatedly got into furious confrontations with the Americans whom he claimed were disrespecting his Islamic religion.

The media is spinning this as a mental illness, but if hating non-Muslims is a mental illness, then it’s a common one in his home country.

While Ahmad Al-Issa came to America at a young age with his family, the Al-Issa clan originated from Raqqa. The name of the Syrian city may not mean much to most Americans, but it was the former capital of the Caliphate of the Islamic State.

Or ISIS.

And that was after it had been previously taken over by the Al Nusra Front, linked to Al Qaeda, and by Ahrar al-Sham, which had coordinated with ISIS. Multiple Jihadist units and groups used the name ‘Raqqa’ to symbolize their determination to stake a claim to the Syrian city and region.

Raqqa has a sizable Sunni Islamist base even beyond ISIS.

While Al-Issa grew up in America, his family would have likely maintained an extensive network of family connections with Raqqa. Family members insist that Ahmad Al-Issa was not a radical, but he was clearly a committed Muslim and his Facebook page, since taken down, is filled with Islamic content, and with attacks on President Trump and on America over ‘Islamophobia’.

Colorado took in a sizable number of migrants with multiple charities, religious and secular, springing up to help the alleged refugees. And once again Americans are reeling from a terror attack because Democrats and some Republicans refuse to secure our immigration system.

There were plenty of warnings that Ahmad Al-Issa’s hatred for America and obsession with Islamophobia could turn violent. In 2017, he assaulted a fellow student claiming that he had made fun of his identity. The Syrian immigrant got off with a misdemeanor, probation, and community service. Just imagine if the system had done its job and locked him up instead.

The angry outbursts and claims of Islamophobia are now being spun as mental illness.

But the most obvious explanation for why a Syrian Muslim immigrant whose family comes from the capital of ISIS would shoot up an American supermarket isn’t mental illness.

Nor is the solution gun control.

Democrats and the media had attacked President Trump for suspending the migration of Syrians into America. When Biden overturned the suspension, the media cheered.

“Beyond contravening our values, these Executive Orders and Proclamations have undermined our national security," Biden had falsely declared.

The bodies of ten dead Americans show what national security with terror migration looks like.

In 2016, Judge Posner had prevented Governor Pence from blocking Syrian refugees. Posner bizarrely claimed that Pence's attempt to protect Americans from Islamic terrorists was the equivalent of forbidding "black people to settle in Indiana."

The Trump administration’s moves would not have stopped the Al-Issa clan from coming here in 2002, but it would have prevented future terrorists from taking more American lives.

Biden and the Democrats responded to the King Sooper shootings by preaching “common sense gun control”. But their gun control has yet to work in Chicago or New York. Meanwhile what Americans need isn’t fewer guns, but fewer immigrant and refugee terrorists.

The tragedy of the Al-Issa family arriving here in 2002, after September 11, is a case study in the obstinate refusal of our political elites to reckon with even the worst terror attacks.

President George W. Bush had postponed the Presidential Determination for the number of refugees imported into America because of the September 11 attacks. But he nevertheless went ahead and issued it in November 2001 which allocated 70,000 refugee slots.

And, insanely, boosted the Near East/South Asia category from 10,000 to 15,000 which had been set at 4,000 under Clinton. In 2001, some 3,000 had already been referred to through Syria, Jordan and Turkey. These numbers may sound technical, but they show the terrible policy decisions that led directly to the brutal murder of ten Americans in an ordinary supermarket.

The American victims of Ahmad Al-Issa's rampage included grandparents and employees, an actress, and a police officer who charged the Muslim shooter and paid for it with his life.

Colorado Democrats clamor that this shooting didn’t have to happen. They’re right, but not because of gun control. It didn’t have to happen if we just reformed our immigration system.

Ahmad Al-Issa grew up in America and hated every minute of it. He hated his host country, his classmates and his peers. Over the years, his hatred grew until it consumed him. Then it consumed in his victims in a murderous rampage aimed at non-Muslim Coloradans.

In 2019, Al-Issa had fashionably tweeted, #istandwithrefugees. It's the sort of thing that many in Boulder, in Colorado, and across America have irresponsibly tweeted.

And it’s a hashtag that kills.

Bush’s decision to let in the Al-Issa family after September 11 killed ten Americans. It was a tragic decision that he might not have seen buried in the numbers. But it happened anyway.

There’s really no excuse for it today after two decades of continuous Islamic terrorism.

Every day that we keep our border open, that we welcome in more migrants from terror states, we are pointing a loaded gun at our own heads and pulling the trigger. Most of the time the chamber is empty, but every now and then, the immigration gun fires and people die.

Biden and the Democrats would like to talk about Al-Issa’s weapon modifications after opening the border to gang members and terrorists. They want to push restrictions on Americans owning guns, instead of restrictions on their own resettlement agencies bringing in terrorists.

The problem is not that a Syrian immigrant from the capital of ISIS had a gun. The problem was that a Syrian immigrant from the capital of ISIS was in Colorado and in America.

The authorities and the media will go on lying to Americans. They will blame mental illness, as they do with every Muslim terrorist, and depict Al-Issa as the victim of Islamophobic bigots. The Democrats will turn the killer into the victim and his victims into the perpetrators as they have done so many times. They will tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, and that Al-Issa’s religion and his family origins in the capital of the ISIS Caliphate should be ignored.

And even in the midst of so many burning issues, we must not give up the fight on this one.

There are hard, cold truths about Islamic terrorism that decades after September 11 we seem to be no closer to understanding than Bush was in November 2001.

We can stand with the terror refugees killing us. Or we can stand with their American victims.





Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.


Popular

Categories

Follow by Email