America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Thursday, June 8, 2023
THE NEO-FASCISM OF SPLC - Moms for Liberty Named Extremist ‘Hate’ Group by SPLC
SPLC Brands Parents’ Rights Groups Hateful ‘Extremists’ – Because They Promote Policies Majority of Americans Support
On Tuesday, the far-left activist Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) published its latest list of what it considers “hate and antigovernment extremist groups,” including parental rights groups because they want schools to stop teaching racist, anti-white propaganda and exposing young children to liberal sexual and gender ideology.
SPLC’s annual “YEAR IN HATE & EXTREMISM” report labels at least a dozen parental rights groups as “hate” groups or antigovernment extremists, mainly because they oppose schools exposing young children to transgender ideology propaganda and the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT).
SPLC has been harshly criticized for its anti-Christian bias and for employing “hate” and “extremist” labels to denigrate groups simply because they oppose liberal policies and agendas.
First, SPLC attempts to vilify parent’s rights groups by associating them with liberal-despised former President Donald Trump.
“Without Trump at the helm, activists have made a concerted effort to organize in the local arena, pursuing their agenda in venues where it is easier to gain power,” SPLC opines, launching into its condemnation of parental rights issues:
“Schools, especially, have been on the receiving end of ramped-up and coordinated hard-right attacks, frequently through the guise of ‘parents’ rights’ groups. These groups were, in part, spurred by the right-wing backlash to COVID-19 public safety measures in schools. But they have grown into an anti-student inclusion movement that targets any inclusive curriculum that contains discussions of race, discrimination and LGBTQ identities.”
SPLC then singles out “Moms for Liberty” as an example – because it does not believe public schools have the right to co-parent their children:
“At the forefront of this mobilization is Moms for Liberty, a Florida-based group with vast connections to the GOP that this year the SPLC designated as an extremist group. They can be spotted at school board meetings across the country wearing shirts and carrying signs that declare, ‘We do NOT CO-PARENT with the GOVERNMENT.’”
In a press release announcing the report, SPLC frames parents’ rights groups as “anti-student inclusion groups” and falsely claims the groups want to remove “any curriculum” discussing race and discrimination:
“Schools are a primary target for locally driven extremist mobilization, according to the report, with 12 anti-student inclusion groups leading a movement to gain power through school boards to attack public education, ban books, and remove any curriculum that contains discussions of race, discrimination, and LGBTQ+ identities. One group at the forefront of this mobilization is Moms for Liberty, a Florida-based group that the SPLC has designated as an anti-government extremist group in 2022.”
According to USA Today, the following parents’ rights groups are among those considered “extremist” by the SPLC:
However, national surveys reveal that majorities of Americans support the causes of parental rights groups, which are opposed to schools teaching divisive, racially-charged theories and transgender and sexual ideology, especially to young children.
Instead of teaching slanted views, such as Critical Race Theory, 68% of American adults said that schools should “teach students that the United States has a complicated history with ‘good and bad aspects,’” a Washington Examiner/YouGov survey of U.S. adults reveals.
“When it came to teaching students about sexual orientation and gender identity, the poll found widespread opposition to the teaching of such concepts in elementary school,” The Examiner reports:
“The poll found that 67% of respondents said they opposed such lessons to students in kindergarten through third grade, including 53% who said they strongly opposed it. Additionally, 59% opposed classroom instruction on the topics in fourth and fifth grade, with 44% saying they were strongly opposed.”
Likewise, a Summit Ministries/McLaughlin Group survey of likely general election voters found that 69% of voters with an opinion on the issue believe that Critical Race Theory curriculum that teaches that white culture is inherently evil further divides ethnic groups and races amongst American youth.
“70% of voters with an opinion said that public schools should be investing more classroom time in teaching standard curriculum like math, science, and grammar, rather than teaching cultural curriculum like critical race theory and sexual identity/transgenderism,” according to a press release by Summit Ministries.
64% of all voters, and 70% of those with children, called it a problem that parents don’t have enough say about what students are being taught in public schools.
60% of voters said there’s too much of a focus on race in public schools.
60% of voters said public schools are “overly accommodating transgender policies.”
79% of parents said they felt either “extremely concerned” (46%) or “very concerned” (33%) about “what’s taught in public schools.”
Finally, as The Daily Signal notes, the SPLC uses hyperbolic, sweeping terms to characterize parental groups as “hateful” and “non-inclusive” – but, it fails to provide the specific details of what parents object to in schools:
“The SPLC report does not once mention the Left’s aggressive promotion of sexualized material for children in schools and at other venues. It does not mention the ‘Drag Queen Story Hour’ movement or the fact that many of the books which parents demand removed from school libraries include pornographic content.
“It does not mention how many on the Left champion the idea that children should be able to identify with a gender opposite their biological sex, hide that identity from their parents, and even obtain life-altering drugs without parental consent. Instead, it acts as though the parental rights movement emerged in a vacuum, or worse, is motivated by hatred.”
Moms for Liberty Named Extremist ‘Hate’ Group by SPLC
Parental rights groups across the country were labeled "hate groups" in the latest edition of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s "hate map," which includes the Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazi groups.
The groups include Moms for Liberty, a conservative nonprofit that advocates for parents’ rights in schools and government across the country. The SPLC, which publishes the map to discredit conservative and Christian organizations as hateful, called the group "antigovernment."
The map details 1,225 groups, up from 733 in 2021.
"Moms for Liberty is a far-right organization that engages in anti-student inclusion activities and self-identifies as part of the modern parental rights movement," the SPLC said in its page on Moms for Liberty.
The SPLC accused the group of "opposition to public health regulations" and said it "opposes LGBTQ+ and racially inclusive school curriculum."
Moms for Liberty opposes "woke indoctrination" of students and policies like vaccine requirements and mask mandates.
It's the latest example of the left attacking parental rights advocates. Democratic governor Roy Cooper (N.C.) last month declared a state of emergency over a Republican plan to fund school choice, which would give parents and students a say in where they attend school.
A Nevada Democratic lawmaker in April said she wishes "she could legislate what parents do."
Warfare requires deception. The federal government habitually lies to the American people. Consider that an admission that it sees itself at war with those it claims to serve.
You might have noticed that the word "propaganda" has been somewhat retired from polite conversation. Occasionally, some State-allied news corporation will apply the term to a public statement coming from inside Russia, but otherwise, the idea that governments promote falsehoods cloaked as official truths has quietly disappeared.
Instead, ordinary information enjoyed and shared among regular people is now targeted for classification. An alliance of national governments, international institutions, and propaganda engines disguised as disinterested nonprofits has sprung up to toss "unacceptable" thoughts into garbage piles for "mis-," "mal-," and "dis-" information trash bins. As with everything else in modern society, the cult of expertise has even given us "disinformation experts" to decide what knowledge belongs where.
The small coterie of "disinformation experts" recognized and promoted by governments then monitor what the common people are saying among themselves, cast their nets around anything "unacceptable," and stigmatize those words and thoughts as deserving of censorship. Perhaps one day soon there will be academic degrees in "disinformation" or special licenses distinguishing State-approved professionals as qualified to tell the rest of us what is real. As a rule of thumb, if you want to know what kinds of knowledge governments fear their citizens possessing, look to the subjects that require numerous layers of authority validation before access is granted or titles are conferred. Now the knowledge that governments fear their citizens possessing is simply information outside their control.
In this way, officials have flipped the script on propaganda. Rather than the people calling out governments for their lies, governments pre-emptively defame their citizens as liars. How do governments know when their citizens are "lying"? Easy. They just isolate anybody who contradicts publicly announced official truths. Like a puff of smoke vanishing in the wind, government propaganda disappears because anyone who recognizes it as such is guilty of spreading "mis-," "mal-," or "dis-" information.
To find out what is "true," good citizens are expected to respect the authority of government "disinformation specialists" who target what the people say but never what the government promotes. Accordingly, government propaganda flows forcefully yet invisibly because nobody is allowed to call it what it is. The liars have constructed a system in which only they may identify lies.
The question is how long Americans will silently consent to any government dedicated to public deception.
The longer I have been around to witness how small lies can cause tremendous damage, the more convinced I have become that there is no more precious calling than to seek, protect, and spread truth. Finding truth is often (if not always) difficult. Sometimes what we think is true turns out to be false, and we are forced to adjust our understanding of the world accordingly. Even when gold-tinted "truths" prove pyritic, the search for truth remains priceless.
One of the most effective ways of measuring a man's (or government's) character is not to decide whether he is right or wrong about some matter, but rather to determine whether he is committed to pursuing truth or eager to sacrifice it. A virtuous man will adjust his worldview when confronted with conflicting yet convincing evidence; an unethical man will push falsehoods, no matter how irrational or unreasonable.
The truth-seeker understands that the process of pursuing truth is valuable, even when it provides an incomplete understanding of the world. In contrast, those who push falsehoods embrace a lie that incomplete knowledge eliminates the possibility for truth. Honest people see the pursuit of truth as its own reward; dishonest people see its manipulation as a means for scamming honest people. When the government empowers itself to decide what is true and uses that authority to tell flagrant lies, it wages an information war against its citizens.
This war directed against Americans' minds has been raging for quite some time. What is different today is its pace and brazenness. Lies about Russia collusion, COVID, vaccine effectiveness, climate change, Biden family corruption, impartial justice, biological sex, American history, border security, debt sustainability, crime rates, gun safety, banking solvency, military engagements, racial disparities, religious doctrine, Western civilization, childhood development, healthy obesity, government surveillance, hydrocarbon energy, human slavery, acclaimed literature, anthropology — no topic is off limits for those who manipulate the public for a living.
Increasingly, the question is not whether the government is lying, but rather how malicious its intentions are. Did bureaucrats mandate mRNA injections that were neither safe nor effective because they are bad at science? Because they needed an alarming reason to rig the 2020 election with mail-in ballots? As a means of rewarding pharmaceutical companies and the politicians they own with windfall profits? As an opportunity to accelerate the World Economic Forum's "Great Reset"? As a way to condition people to think of property, free speech, and personal liberty as "selfish" and instead submit to the national security surveillance State?
Do extraterrestrial UFO stories confirm that the government has long covered up an important truth, or are they hoaxes meant to distract the public from something else?
Only the "disinformation experts" know.
Government monopolies over "truth" are evil. They elevate "narratives" over news. They protect the politician's spin over facts. They champion the bureaucracy's needs over the public's. They preserve the State's power at the expense of the people's. Whenever governing authorities articulate "official truths," it means the actual truth is being smothered. Whenever governments claim the need to control information, it means that they are losing control over their citizenry. Propaganda and censorship are tools of the weak. They are the last resort of political systems no longer capable of successfully competing in the marketplace for ideas.
There is no kind of government immune from corruption. All eventually tilt toward tyranny. The best we may do to protect ourselves is to construct safeguards against this inevitability. Separation of powers, limited federal authority, diffuse state and local jurisdiction, expansive personal liberties, and effective self-defense all serve to thwart government-sanctioned injustice. Perhaps no more important safeguard exists than a strong cultural commitment to freedom of speech — long a centerpiece of American civic virtue precisely because it serves as an inherent check against State-imposed religion, ideology, and propaganda.
Every one of these counterweights to government corruption recognizes that public officials cannot be trusted. The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights are predicated on a pessimistic reality that government power attracts cutthroats and liars who must be kept under constant scrutiny, lest their deviant natures be let loose. No matter how principled a nation's founders, criminals will eventually run the government. Written constitutions restraining those criminals' worst impulses represent humanity's best efforts at minimizing the damage.
Government apparatchiks are therefore the absolute last group of people in any society who should be trusted with deciding what is true. Their vested interest in maintaining power distorts their reasoning and their fiendish natures preclude honest observation. In a just society, at least half would be serving time in prison for insider trading, criminal negligence, misappropriation of funds, or dereliction of duty. Instead, we let them print money, sell votes, play with nukes, and lock up their political enemies.
No government at war with its people can long endure. Make no mistake, any government that embraces lies and deploys public deceptions is most definitely at war.
Image: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center via Flickr, CC BY 2.0 (cropped).
EXPOSING THE DEMOCRAT PARTY RULING CRIME FAMILIES AND THEIR ASSAUILT ON DEMOCRACY
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER AND GEORGE SOROS’ RENT BOY GAMER LAWER TONY BLINKEN AS WELL AS CON MAN ADAM SHIFF). BRIAN C JOONDEPH
James Comer: FBI Doc Alleges ‘Business Person from Ukraine’ Sent ‘Substantial Bribe’ to VP Biden
The FBI’s informant file of a $5 million bribery scheme allegedly linked to President Joe Biden concerns the family’s business deals in Ukraine, House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) revealed Monday.
In May, Comer and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) made bombshell claims after reviewing an FBI FD-1023 form that documented the informant’s allegations of an alleged bribery scheme involving an exchange of money for policy decisions between now-President Joe Biden and a foreign national. Comer disclosed the informant tip is dated June 30, 2020.
“Yes, it is Ukraine,” Comer told The Just the News. “This form 1023 involves a business person from Ukraine, who allegedly sent a bribe, a substantial bribe to then Vice President Joe Biden.”
The Biden family frequently visited Ukraine for its respective business. Then-Vice President Joe Biden served as the Obama administration’s Ukrainian “point person” on U.S. foreign policy. He visited Ukraine six times while serving as vice president.
Hunter Biden joined the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma in April 2014, two years before Joe Biden stated he forced the firing of Ukraine prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who investigated the company. Joe Biden approved an official statement about Hunter’s Burisma board position, emails show.
Despite Hunter’s lack of experience in Ukraine or the energy sector, he earned $83,000 per month from the energy company or $1 million per year.
While his son was a member of Burisma’s board, Joe Biden threatened towithhold $1 billion from Ukraine if the Ukrainian government did not fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma. In 2017, Hunter’s salary was cut in half when Joe Biden left the White House.
According to former Obama White House stenographer Mike McCormick, Joe Biden allegedly promoted U.S. support for Ukraine’s natural gas industry only days after Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board.
Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss refuses to allow McCormick to testify before his tax and gun probe into Hunter Biden, McCormick toldNew York Post.
Where did he come from? That question is being increasingly asked in Democrat circles as they watch Robert F. Kennedy Jr. rise in the public’s consciousness just as President Joe Biden tries to ignite his push for a 2024 return to the White House.
The Hill reports the aspiring Democratic Party presidential candidate is doing unexpectedly well in some polls and garnering increasing media attention as a result.
He’s received the backing of as much as 20 percent of Democratic-leaning voters in a handful of recent polls — an unexpected figure for anyone challenging an incumbent president, even more so for one from the same party.
The scion of the Kennedy political dynasty has also been on a press tour this week that included a Twitter Spaces discussion with Elon Musk, a digital town hall with journalist Michael Smerconish and a trip to the the U.S.-Mexico border on Monday night and early Tuesday morning, as Breitbart News reported.
Exclusive : Robert F. Kennedy Jr. meets local official at the U.S.-Mexico border
Robert F. Kennedy
0 seconds of 1 minute, 6 secondsVolume 90%
The Hill report sets out some of the Democrat fears, with detractors noting Kennedy Jr. is considered to be “a problematic fringe candidate who freely spreads conspiracy theories.”
Even so his profile as well as his media-ready image as an heir to the famous political dynasty – the 69-year-old is the son of assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy – have caused some to worry he could gain steam and potentially distract from the task of reelecting Joe Biden in 2024.
“Democrats would be foolish to mock or belittle RFK Jr. Every time we make fun of those who hold fringe positions, we lose,” said Michael Ceraso, a Democratic strategist and former campaign aide to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “The Democratic Party acting smug never works.”
Democrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. named former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) as his campaign manager. https://t.co/5LudxXpZGY
The report goes on to note a recent Fox News survey placed Kennedy at 16 percent support among registered voters while a CNN poll released Friday shows him with 20 percent of support among Democratic and Democratic-leaning respondents.
“Take RFK seriously, Biden,” Ceraso said. “If you don’t, we can create a stronger Republican Party that beats us in 2024. Like Bernie did in 2016, RFK has the potential to activate fringe anger if we mock them.”
Kennedy Jr. has never been shy to not only espouse his anti-establishment views and has willingly turned on enemies in his own party who seek to stymie his chances, as Breitbart News reported.
“There is no time in history where the people who were censoring speech were the good guys,” Democratic presidential candidate @RobertKennedyJr told Breitbart News Sunday. https://t.co/TW5H1X1chq
After he declared his candidacy for president as a Democrat, Kennedy slammed the Democrat National Committee (DNC) on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Sunday for having a “rigged” primary system, with no debates and moving voting in South Carolina ahead of New Hampshire on the calendar.
“The DNC, at this point, has taken the official position that there will be no debate, and I think that’s unfortunate… I think what the DNC did to New Hampshire is also unfortunate,” Kennedy Jr. said to the host, Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Joel Pollak, addressing what the DNC is doing to the primary system.
DEPORT MAYORKAS' ASS BACK TO GITMO WHERE HE CAME FROM!
EXCLUSIVE – Sen. Tom Cotton: JCPA Media Cartel Bill Will ‘Sideline Conservative News’
As the Senate Judiciary committee prepares once again to resurrect the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA), a bill that would create a cartel of legacy media companies empowered to collude with Silicon Valley, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) is reminding Republicans of the bill’s many flaws.
“Democrats want you to believe this bill would protect ‘journalism,'” said Sen. Cotton in an exclusive comment to Breitbart News.
“What they don’t tell you, of course, is that it would largely benefit left-wing outlets while leaving independent conservative media out in the cold.”
(Photo by Shuran Huang for The Washington Post via Getty Images)
“Republicans shouldn’t fall for this latest attempt to sideline conservative news.”
The JCPA was added to the markup agenda for this week’s meeting of the Senate Judiciary Committee, meaning the Committee is like to vote on an updated version of the bill next week.
The bill aims to transfer wealth from Silicon Valley to the discredited and distrusted corporate legacy media. Beyond the financial payouts, the bill allows media companies to form a “joint negotiating entity”—a cartel, immune from antitrust law—to negotiate with Big Tech companies on the “terms and conditions” for carrying their content.
Legacy media companies already receive billions of dollars in voluntary payments from the tech companies, while their competitors in the independent media are frequently demonetized and suppressed by those same companies simply for discussing controversial topics.
Not only does the bill force even more handouts from Silicon Valley to the legacy media, it also enables even more censorship of their competition.
Sen. Cotton has been one of the staunchest opponents of the JCPA as Democrats and their RINO allies tried repeatedly to pass the bill throughout the 177th Congress. His opposition helped prevent a last-ditch effort by JCPA proponents to attach it to last year’s annual defense spending bill.
“[The JCPA] certainly shouldn’t have been used as the Democrats were trying to use it, as a negotiating chip for ending the COVID vaccine mandate on our troops,” said Sen. Cotton shortly after the NDAA effort failed.
In previous comments to Breitbart News, Sen. Cotton rebutted the media lobby’s argument that this is simply a bill to help small newspapers.
“It would empower anything but small companies, like companies that are reporting on genuine local news — crime, courthouse, school boards, and local sports. It would empower the Big Tech companies and these left-wing outfits that are really just designed to push ideological goals, not to promote news gathering in our communities across the state of Arkansas.”
A Venezuelan national is accused of murdering a migrant woman in El Paso, Texas, just one day after President Joe Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released him into the United States.
Eddy Jose Ortega Alvarado, a 34-year-old Venezuelan national, was arrested and charged this week in El Paso for allegedly murdering 40-year-old Carmen Unilda Navas Zuniga of Honduras on May 21 — the day after he was released into the United States interior through Biden’s expansive Catch and Release network.
According to law enforcement, Alvarado and Zuniga crossed the border at the same time on May 20 and were subsequently released into the United States interior. The two ended up in a motel room in downtown El Paso.
The following day, first responders received a request to do a welfare check on Zuniga. After entering her motel room at around 1:30 p.m. they found her unresponsive and she was pronounced dead. Alvarado, police said, had already fled El Paso for the Dallas-Forth Worth, Texas, area.
Police tracked Alvarado down and met with him, finding probable cause that he allegedly murdered Zuniga and then stole her money.
Alvarado is now being held at the Tarrant County Jail on a $2.5 million bail.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
NYC Mayor Eric Adams calls for illegal border crossers to be sheltered in private homes
Mayor Eric Adams now wants to start paying every day New Yorkers to shelter migrants in their own homes – as the Big Apple struggles to find beds for the thousands of asylum seekers still flooding into the city.
In his latest attempt to battle the ongoing migrant crisis, Adams on Monday floated a half baked “private residence” plan, which could possibly see local homeowners getting compensation to put up asylum seekers.
Hizzoner put forward the proposal as he revealed religious leaders had agreed to start housing adult male migrants overnight at 50 places of worship scattered across the five boroughs next month.
“There are residents who are suffering right now because of economic challenges. They have spare rooms. They have locales,” the mayor said, arguing his private residence proposal could put money back in the pockets of taxpayers.
He sounds like he thinks this was a one-off natural disaster. Actually, this is an extended problem which he's failed to solve because he refuses to solve it.
Instead of demanding that Joe Biden enforce the border, end catch-and-release, and put a stop to abuse of U.S. asylum laws, he's happy to be left holding the bag for Joe Biden's open borders; forced to house and feed the invaders with no perceivable benefit to his city.
Already he's spent $4.3 billion on them -- and all he's got is more migrants.
Instead of demanding that New York's city council drop its absurdly generous "right to shelter" law, he's now asking New York's taxpayers to take care of the problem in their homes, as if resolving the housing problem this way wouldn't encourage more illegal migrants to come to New York City, which it will.
He's tried many workarounds around this problem of tens of thousands of migrants flooding his city with their hands out -- from shipping the migrants to other cities in New York state, to calling for more federal funding to compensate the city for its self-imposed "right to shelter" free housing for illegally present foreigners; to housing the migrants in five-star hotels (which has battered the tax base); to moving the migrants to warehouse dockyard housing; to moving the migrants into public school space for housing -- and not once does he imagine that maybe this willingness to be the patsy for Irresponsible Joe and the clowns on the New York city council is the actual root of the problem.
Nor does he propose to ask the migrants to pay for their own housing, which is what everyone else does who travels to a foreign country. The migrants currently in New York have already demonstrated that they have plenty of money in the products they purchase, while studies have shown that the people who migrate for economic reasons are typically members of their countries' lower middle class, rather than the poorest people.
Now he's proposing to drop the problem onto the laps of New Yorkers themselves, on the grounds that many have spare bedrooms in their homes to house strangers.
And stranger is right. By their very nature, illegal immigrants are unvetted foreigners. We've already seen that some are flash mob criminals, raiding Macys on one of their excursions.
We'e also seen how they treat New York's five-star hotel rooms, trashing them like rock stars, apparently valuing the rooms for about as much as they paid for them.
Sure, some of the migrants may be ethical and industrious immigrants whose asylum claims are valid. But it's obvious that many are not. They are products of the slums of places such as Caracas and San Pedro Sula, with full underclass values.
Which would probably present quite a risky deal for New Yorkers who might take Adams up on his offer to house the migrants for the city.
Will they be on their own if their homes get robbed by the migrants? Will the city pay for property damage brought on by migrants bringing propane stoves in the bedrooms and other fire-hazard activity that's already been seen in the five-star hotel rooms? What happens if the migrants turn the homes into a trash heap and refuse to clean up after themselves? What happens if the stipend paid by the city is not enough to cover the damage?
Given the entitlement mentality seen in some of the migrants such as the Venezuelans who recently demanded free permanent housing in New York, it could get even riskier than monetary damage. What happens when the migrants refuse to leave the private homes, and insist on staying permanently? What happens if the migrants demand squatting rights on the private homes, knowing that the laws and the prosecutors will protect them?
Just the example of parents of public school students protesting Adams' use of public school gymnasiums to house migrants pretty well tells us what the public response is likely to be to this proposal by Adams.
Many observers, on Twitter and even at the New York Post, have asked Adams if he's got some spare bedrooms at Gracie Mansion to start.
In other words, You First.
That won't happen, and this plan to house the migrants in private homes probably won't be met with open arms either.
What Adams needs to do is take a good look at the problem, which isn't housing, it's federal and local policy. New York City evolved the way it did because of market forces, buttress by rule of law. Migrants and their government enablers know no law, nor do they pay attention to market forces. That leaves Adams with the problem. Maybe he should wake up.
According to internal documents reviewed by Vice, the Department of Homeland Security in 2018 sought to develop a method for assigning “risk scores” to social media users, in a program to identify “disinformation” efforts named “Night Fury” by the DHS.
The DHS worked with the University of Alabama to develop the “Night Fury” system, the concept of which bears a striking resemblance to the Chinese “social credit” scores assigned to citizens to measure their compliance with the regime.
Vice began its investigation in order to learn more about Custom and Border Protection (CBP)’s efforts to learn more about arrivals at the border, but seem to have stumbled across a key part of the government’s sprawling social media censorship machine in the process.
“The Contractor shall develop these attributes to create a methodology for developing a ranking, or ‘Risk Score,’ associated with the identified accounts. The Contractor shall develop tools to automate the identification process, documenting performance measures and metrics related to automating the identification process,” one of the documents reads. DHS said it stopped work on the project in 2019.
The news signals DHS’ continued focus on analyzing social media for a variety of purposes. These new documents come after Motherboard reported Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was using an AI-powered tool called Babel X to analyze travelers’ social media at the U.S. border.
According to the documents reviewed by Vice, the DHS ceased the program in 2019. But elsewhere, the government’s efforts to address “disinformation” on social media — a priority that only rose to the fore after the election of Donald Trump — proliferated.
By the 2020 election, a vast network of censors had sprung up, encompassing deep state agencies, NGOs, academics, journalists, and the silicon valley tech giants themselves. This “censorship-industrial complex” virtually erased any semblance of free speech on social media during the 2020 election and beyond.
The Biden Administration is intervening to prevent the release of documents revealing the extent to which deep state actors and their third party allies interfered in the 2020 presidential election by pushing social media censorship.
Journalist Lee Fang has obtained emails showing lawyers from the Justice Department corresponding with Kate Starbird, who led the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, one of the four organizations that made up the EIP.
In the emails, the Justice Department asks which CISA documents have been subject to public records requests, so they can determine whether to block their release.
“We’ve heard from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) within the Department of Homeland Security that the Daily Caller News Foundation has requested documents from the university, which may include documents that belong to CISA,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Annalisa Cravens of the Western District of Washington in an email to Kate Starbird, a computer science professor at the University of Washington (UW).
“Could we please see a copy of any relevant CISA documents that you may plan to produce?” Cravens, the assistant U.S. attorney, wrote in her email to Starbird. “[W]e would also ask to have an extension of time before the records are produced so that we can have time to review them and assess whether we’ll have to file suit to protect them from disclosure.”
Faced with multiplelawsuits, as well as the Twitter Files, the full picture of the federal government’s obsession with censoring social media platforms after the election of Donald Trump in 2016 has emerged. All that remains is for the lawsuits to run their course
No comments:
Post a Comment