Previous month:
June 18, 2023 - June 24, 2023
Next month:
July 2, 2023 - July 8, 2023

LIAR, LEAKER, LAWYER ADAM SCHIFF: UNFIT FOR U.S. SENATE

AS

I find it amazing that liar, leaker, and falsifier of evidence Adam Schiff, a Harvard Law School-trained lawyer, repeatedly demonstrates his ignorance of the United States and California Constitutions and his disdain for due process and equality under the law.

Schiff's comments on the Supreme Court decision* overturning affirmative action and holding that colleges and universities can no longer take race into consideration as an express factor in admissions are especially egregious given that Schiff's State of California banned affirmative action in public education in 1996 and reaffirmed the ban in 2020.

As-aa

California ballot proposition 209, known as the California Civil Rights Initiative, is a 1996 California ballot proposition that amended the state constitution to prohibit state governmental institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in public employment, public contracting, and public education.

It was reaffirmed in 2020 with the defeat of California ballot proposition 16, which would have amended the Constitution of California to repeal California ballot proposition 209. 

The Censure

Whereas the allegation that President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 Presidential election has been revealed as false by numerous in-depth investigations, including the recent report by Special Counsel John Durham, which documents how the conspiracy theory was invented, funded and spread by President’s Trump’s political rivals;

Whereas Representative Adam Schiff, who served as ranking minority member and then Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives (the “Intelligence Committee”), occupied positions of extreme trust, affording him access to sensitive intelligence unavailable to most Members of Congress;

Whereas for years, Representative Schiff abused this trust by alleging he had evidence of collusion that, as is clear from reports by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, and Special Counsel Durham, never existed;

Whereas for years, Representative Schiff has spread false accusations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia;

Whereas on March 20, 2017, Representative Schiff perpetuated false allegations from the Steele Dossier accusing numerous Trump associates of colluding with Russia into the Congressional Record;

Whereas once again abusing his privileged access to classified information, Representative Schiff released a memo justifying the accuracy of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application on Trump associate Carter Page, of which was later found by Inspector General Horowitz to have 17 major mistakes and omissions, provoking FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer to state unequivocally that the Federal Bureau of Investigation “misled the FISC”;

Whereas as ranking minority member and Chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Representative Schiff behaved dishonestly and dishonorably on many other occasions, including by publicly, falsely denying that his staff communicated with a whistleblower to launch the first impeachment of President Trump;

Whereas as part of his impeachment efforts, during a hearing on September 26, 2019, Representative Schiff misled the public by reading a false retelling of a phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky;

Whereas on March 28, 2019, every Republican member of the Intelligence Committee signed a letter calling for Representative Schiff’s immediate resignation as Chairman;

Whereas Representative Schiff hindered the ability of the Intelligence Committee to fulfill its oversight responsibilities over the Intelligence Community, an indispensable pillar of our national security; and

Whereas these actions of Representative Schiff misled the American people and brought disrepute upon the House of Representatives: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That—

(1) the House of Representatives censures Adam Schiff, Representative of the 30th Congressional District of California, for misleading the American public and for conduct unbecoming of an elected Member of the House of Representatives;

(2) Representative Adam Schiff will forthwith present himself in the well of the House of Representatives for the pronouncement of censure;

(3) Representative Adam Schiff will be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the Speaker; and

(4) the Committee on Ethics shall conduct an investigation into Representative Adam Schiff’s falsehoods, misrepresentations, and abuses of sensitive information.

Bottom line...

Adam Schiff is unfit for office, should be expelled from the House of Representatives, and disbarred in any jurisdiction where he holds a license to practice law. Schiff is unfit for the U.S. Senate as a replacement for the retiring Senator Diane Feinstein. 

We are so screwed if this progressive communist democrat becomes a U.S. Senator.

-- Steve

Reference Links...

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS DECLARE BLACKS & OTHER MINORITIES "LESS THAN"

RACIST-BELIEVE

With the Supreme Court decision overturning affirmative action in college admissions, the Democrat race hustlers and race baiters are losing their collective minds.

The Supreme Court ruled that the affirmative action admission policies of Harvard and the University of North Carolina, which gave weight to a would-be student’s race, are unconstitutional.

Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC) are two of the oldest institutions of higher learning in the United States. Every year, tens of thousands of students apply to each school; many fewer are admitted. Both Harvard and UNC employ a highly selective admissions process to make their decisions. Admission to each school can depend on a student’s grades, recommendation letters, or extracurricular involvement. It can also depend on their race. The question presented is whether the admissions systems used by Harvard College and UNC are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

Because Harvard’s and UNC’s admissions programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful endpoints, those admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause. At the same time, nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life, so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university. Many universities have for too long wrongly concluded that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenged best skills built or lessons learned but the color of their skin. This Nation’s constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.

As one might expect from a 6-3 decision, the dissenters, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, are all radical progressive communist democrats who appear to be race-baiters.

The Dangers of Affirmative Action in Education.

  1. Reinforcing Stereotypes: There is no doubt in my mind that affirmative action in education based on race or ethnicity reinforces negative stereotypes, mainly that minority students are somehow mentally or motivationally challenged when it comes to academic success. That elite minority students cannot succeed on their own merits is ludicrous.

  2. Diminished Meritocracy: Affirmative action policies lead to a devaluation of meritocracy in education, where those who successfully graduate face the false stigma that their accomplishments may be attributed to affirmative action rather than their abilities. To undermine the achievements of qualified individuals is abhorrent.

  3. Preordained Failure: To meet diversity targets, academic institutions often feel compelled to reduce standards of academic preparation and achievements that preordain dissatisfaction, frustration, and failure as minority admits cannot keep up with their peers. Diluting the learning environment serves neither the institution, the individual, or those the public may encounter professionally.

  4. Backlash and Resentment: Given that admission slots are finite, one of the most prevalent dangers of affirmative action is the potential for generating backlash and resentment among individuals who feel disadvantaged by the policy. When students perceive that others are receiving preferential treatment based on their race or ethnicity, it creates animosity, divisions and exacerbates racial tensions within educational institutions.

The Democrats support teachers’ unions over their minority constituents.

Instead of improving schools in inner cities governed by progressive communist democrats to increase admissions into elite institutions, teachers’ unions refuse to test teachers for teaching ability and subject-matter competency, reject charter schools and other competitive learning opportunities, and relax standards to hide decades of incompetence that features indoctrination over education. Teaching racist views that whites are the oppressors and minorities are the oppressed. Tolerating disobedience in the classroom and refusing to punish offending minority students to decrease the number of children being disciplined artificially and altering history to hide the fact that it was the Democrat Party that supported slavery, segregation, secession, Jim Crow, and the KKK.

It’s never about the children; that’s the convenient talking point. It’s always about political power and the money flowing into the union’s coffers.

The fury emanating from the racist cockroaches at the news that affirmative action in education has been struck down is only just beginning.

Liberals Outraged That Asian Students Will Finally Get A Fair Chance

Liberals and those on the left have spent the better part of Thursday morning lamenting that Asian students will finally get a fair chance at college admissions.

ABC News political contributor Donna Brazile called the ruling a “setback.”

When MSNBC’s Alex Witt specifically asked MSNBC contributor Al Sharpton how the ruling would affect the black community, Sharpton said it was “tantamount to sticking a dagger in our back.”

Democratic California Rep. Ro Khanna argued that the ruling will actually hurt Asian students, and then lamented the negative impact he expects it to have on black students.

“What isn’t being talked about enough is the harm this is going to do for students, not just black and Latino students, but white and Asian-American students,” he said. “Consider students going to Harvard who want to become the future political leaders in this country … do you think they’re going to have a better chance of doing that and doing that successfully if they’re in classes that don’t have adequate representation from African Americans and Latinos?”

Former federal prosecutor Paul Butler also weighed in, saying the ruling leaves the country at risk of “returning to those old days when black and Latinx and native folks, the people who built this country, are shut out of the opportunity to learn at some of our country’s best colleges.”  <Source>

What don’t they understand? Elite colleges should teach the best and the brightest regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, and gender.

Princeton professor: Affirmative action ruling will lead to ‘segregated’ higher ed

“We will return to elite institutions most specifically being the space for particular populations, for predominantly white and Asian students,” said Eddie Glaude Jr., a professor at Princeton University who is a regular contributor to MSNBC, during the network’s breaking news coverage of the SCOTUS ruling.

“We will begin to see a kind of segregated higher education landscape,” Glaude Jr. said. “The irony of course … this was just one remedy to the legacy of discrimination in admissions in American higher education. Only one remedy, and so here they’ve taken it away.” <Source>

Black Caucus says Supreme Court has ‘thrown into question its own legitimacy’ with affirmative action ruling

The Congressional Black Caucus in a scathing statement Thursday said the Supreme Court called its legitimacy into question with a ruling upending the use of affirmative action in college admissions.

The CBC called that decision “radical” and argued it could hurt the chances of minority students from getting opportunities to advance themselves.

“By delivering a decision on affirmative action so radical as to deny young people seeking an education equal opportunity in our education system, the Supreme Court has thrown into question its own legitimacy,” the statement said.

“Unfortunately, we have seen backlash to progress many times throughout our nation’s history. … We didn’t stop fighting for equality then and we won’t stop now because too much is at stake to allow extremists to turn back the clock on progress,” it continued.

What else would you expect from an overtly racist cabal of progressive communist democrats whose pockets are lined with money and voter support from the teachers' unions?

Bottom line.

Want to shut down the progressive communist democrats? Ask if the person would have been happier if the Supreme Court ruled that Harvard was free to discriminate against Americans based on race. Should Harvard also discriminate on the basis of sex and gender? Do you realize that the lawsuit was brought by a minority group -- where highly qualified Asians were being eliminated from admissions because they were Asians. What if they were Jews?

Do they want to apply the same criteria to athletics where the ability to compete at a high level is the prime requirement? 

I firmly believe that you cannot fundamentally alter human nature and natural laws, and using affirmative action in education that improperly attempts to address historical inequalities and promote diversity is a fool's errand.

Those minority cultures that dismiss or denigrate academic achievement need to be internally reformed.

Government efforts such as affirmative action to achieve statistical parity are damaging and dangerous. As is the big lie of disparate impact that suggests that racial inequities can be statistically evaluated. No natural law or heuristic finding posits that minority success must be admitted to educational institutions in numbers proportional to that minority’s percentage in the general population and that any lesser admissions are a sign of blatant racism. In reality, some individuals are strong and weak, abled and non-abled, competent and incompetent, intelligent and less intelligent – and you cannot change human nature by government decree.

In the final analysis, affirmative action was never about redressing historical inequalities and promoting diversity; it was about the progressive communist democrats pandering to a significant minority voting bloc to gain or maintain political power.

Ask yourself why African Blacks or Caribbean Blacks have better life outcomes than American Blacks. Could it be that the U.S. government infantilizes and makes excuses for American Blacks – and the Democrats promise to redress genuine or imagined grievances in return for political power? Could it be that the Democrat-governed inner cities are deliberately run as racial enclaves to preserve a voter block while politically-connected special interests siphon off billions in aid?

Look around; the progressive communist democrats are attempting to re-segregate American society along divisions created by their philosophy of identity politics. 

To say we are screwed is an understatement.

-- Steve

Reference links…

Supreme Court: Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

TRUMP MAY LOSE BIG IF HE KEEPS RAMBLING

Trump would rather shop for lawyers and advisers who mirror his thoughts at the moment he hires them, then totally disregard their advice and continue to ramble and repeat whatever is on his mind at the next moment.

The fact that Trump has nearly 100% name recognition indicates he should keep quiet about legal issues and treat his foot-in-the-mouth disease immediately.

(1)  Trump must hammer the progressive communist democrats to get out the message the media is suppressing.

(2)  Trump needs to use Twitter and put the failing Truth Social on the back burner.

(3)  Trump must fight the Democrats, not bloviate about the past – which nobody can change.

Trump-fighting-himself

Bottom line…

It's time for a saturation campaign to target the Democrats and the new heir apparent, California Governor Gavin Newsom.

Not “Ron DeSanctimonious,” Gavin Newsom.

Newsom is telegenic, articulate, and fully capable of saying nothing substantive. He appears to be the real threat. Most people outside of California do not know how he crippled the state with the help of his uni-party of progressive communist democrats.

Messaging must be hard-hitting and repetitive to sink in.  The progressive communist democrats are running out of the clock on Joe Biden -- springing Newsom at the last minute where last-minute attacks lose effectiveness.

It's time for Trump to act. Not mourn the past and puff up his chest. 

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

WE ARE SO SCREWED

Many readers have commented that I end most political blog posts with the statement, “We are so screwed,” and wanted to know why?

Primarily. it is an indication of my mindset at the time I wrote the blog entry.

It derives from my observations of the current political scene and my opinion regarding the outcomes associated with the current trend.

My reasoning starts with the phrase, “It is what it is,” which reflects my mindset of reality and acceptance of existing conditions. It acknowledges my acceptance that the current circumstances cannot be changed or controlled by me, and it emphasizes the importance of coming to terms with the reality at hand.

Continuing with the theme of reality and acceptance, the phrase, “we are so screwed,” expresses my current pessimistic and resigned outlook regarding political affairs in a nation controlled by progressive communist democrats, their special interest enablers, and media propagandists who promote narratives over the news, censoring and canceling dissenters with a big voice and far reach. 

Why?

The Current State of Our Nation.

It is not uncommon for me to feel disheartened or overwhelmed when contemplating the state of our nation, run by a manifestly corrupt progressive communist democrat party and empowered by a self-serving cancerous bureaucratic state that is metastasizing toward a critical mass where it can dictate public policy independent of elected officials that purportedly represent their respective constituencies.

The majority of the opposition party, the feckless establishment wing of the GOP, doesn’t appear to care about the nation as long as they maintain their political power, cushy positions, perks, privileges, and profits.

Since the election of Barack Obama, the Communist-in-Chief, our nation has experienced deliberate political polarization, social divisions, and economic challenges of the progressive communist democrat’s own making. -- with an attack on energy self-sufficiency leading the economic decline.

  • Political Polarization: Political polarization has reached unprecedented levels, impeding effective governance and policymaking. The inability of opposing factions to find common ground and work towards collective solutions derails progress and perpetuates a cycle of political gridlock.

  • Social Divisions and Inequality:  Deep-seated social divisions, including those based on race, gender, religion, or socioeconomic status, pose significant challenges to our nation's unity. The Marxist concept of class warfare has failed in the relatively classless and socially mobile society found in America and replaced by identity politics along racial, ethnic, and sexual lines.

  • Environmental Concerns and Sustainability: We are being told, falsely, I believe, that climate change and ecological degradation demand our urgent attention, and the consequences of inaction pose significant risks to us, future generations, and the sustainability of our planet. We are told we must cede some of our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and dig deep in our pockets to fund nonsensical remedies. We cannot directly detect or measure man’s climate signal amid the natural variability of a chaotic climate system. Everything is a construct to gain or maintain political power outside of directly controlling local pollution.

The Increasing Polarization in America

In recent years, our nation, under the influence of progressive communist democrats, experienced a growing sense of polarization, where divisions between different ideological, political, and social groups have intensified, primarily by propaganda promoted by the media.

  • Erosion of Civility: Deliberate polarization has led to a breakdown in civil discourse, where individuals and groups become increasingly entrenched in their respective positions and less willing to engage in constructive dialogue. Instead of reasoned debate and exchanging ideas, discussions become characterized by hostility, name-calling, and dismissing opposing viewpoints. This erosion of civility only perpetuates the cycle of polarization.

  • Echo Chambers and Confirmation Bias: As polarization deepens, individuals seek out like-minded individuals and sources of information that reinforce their existing beliefs. This leads to the creation of echo chambers, where people are surrounded by others who share and reinforce their perspectives and opinions.

  • Distrust and Fragmentation: No doubt polarization breeds distrust among different groups within our diverse nation. When polarization reaches extreme levels, individuals may view those with differing opinions as enemies or threats rather than fellow citizens. As polarization increases, increasing social tensions increase the likelihood of conflict, including radicalization, extremism, and violence within society.

  • Empowering fringe actors and actions: The most dangerous aspect of political polarization is that it empowers fringe actors and activities, giving rise to the tyranny of the minority and allowing extreme ideologies and those who exploit fears and grievances for self-serving political power to create “communities” and attract media attention.

    There is little doubt that these fringe communities empower and radicalize individuals who feel marginalized or disconnected from the mainstream political process. Undoubtedly, this is a public safety issue as agitators and activists recruit vulnerable individuals and mobilize them toward acts of terrorism, political violence, or generalized social unrest.

  • Undermining Norms and Institutions: The key to a Marxist-inspired revolution is to weaken nations from within, primarily by eroding the public’s trust in their government and its key institutions. Critical indicators of communist activity include the attempt to suppress dissent, disregard the rule of law, and erode the independence of institutions such as the judiciary or media. At least to me, it appears that the media is thoroughly compromised and that hyper-partisan influences have corrupted the judiciary – witness the political maneuvering of political parties ignoring neutral competence and nominating partisans as superior, appellate, or Supreme Court judges.

The Insanity of Electing a Senile, Cognitively Impaired President

One of the most concerning developments was the election of a corrupt and visibly deteriorating president who appears to be increasingly senile and cognitively impaired.

  • The Importance of Mental Acuity in the Presidency: The Presidency of the United States represents leadership at the highest level of our nation and demands mental acuity, sharpness, and a degree of historical context. The decisions made by a president impact the lives of millions of citizens, both domestically and internationally. Therefore, it is crucial that the President possesses the cognitive abilities required to comprehend complex issues, make informed judgments, and communicate effectively with the public and other world leaders. Electing a president who is senile and cognitively impaired undermines these essential requirements.

  • Impaired Decision-Making: There is no doubt that President Biden is afflicted with memory loss, confusion, and a decreased ability to process information effectively, compromising his decision-making abilities. Biden appears incapable of making informed and rational decisions, leading to detrimental consequences, both foreign and domestic, for our nation. Policies formulated by President Biden, and imposed on the nation by Executive Order, lack coherence, consistency, and the necessary understanding of their consequences.

  • National Security Concerns: National security is a paramount concern for our nation. The president serves as the commander-in-chief and is responsible for making crucial decisions regarding the nation's safety, security, and well-being. A senile and cognitively impaired president is more susceptible to manipulation, has difficulty comprehending complex security briefings, or struggles to respond appropriately in times of crisis. These factors jeopardize the stability and security of the United States and its citizens.

  • Upholding the Office of the Presidency: The office of the presidency carries immense symbolic weight and authority. It represents the highest level of power and responsibility within the United States. Electing a senile and cognitively impaired president risks tarnishing the integrity and reputation of this esteemed position. It undermines the principles of leadership, intellect, and capability that the office demands, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for future elections.

The Ultimate Danger: President by Proxy

Whether the true power behind the shell that appears to be President Joe Biden lies in his wife, Jill Biden, or the Obama acolytes that serve as his “advisors” and handlers, Biden appears to have delegated significant decision-making power to individuals or groups outside the traditional chain of command.

  • Lack of Accountability: When Biden delegates decision-making authority to proxies, it creates a situation where the ultimate responsibility for those decisions becomes unclear. The proxies may not be directly accountable to the public, making it challenging to hold them responsible for their actions. This lack of transparency and accountability undermines the principles of democracy, as citizens are left without proper channels to address grievances or voice concerns. 

  • Influence of Special Interests: A presidency by proxy opens the door to the undue influence of special interests and behind-the-scenes power brokers. Proxies may be susceptible to pressure from vested interests, resulting in policies prioritizing the needs of a few over the welfare of the general public. This erosion of the public interest can lead to a loss of trust in the government and exacerbate inequalities within the government and the nation.

  • Lack of Leadership and Vision: A president is typically expected to provide strong leadership and articulate a clear national vision. However, delegated decision-making to proxies can result in a lack of cohesive direction and strategic planning. Proxies may have their own agendas or lack the comprehensive understanding necessary to address complex challenges effectively. This can lead to policy inconsistencies, confusion, and a lack of long-term vision for the country.

  • Constitutional and Legal Concerns: The constitution defines the roles and responsibilities of the president, and a presidency by proxy raises significant and severe constitutional and legal concerns. It stretches the boundaries of executive power, potentially undermining the checks and balances to safeguard against abuses of authority. It also makes it unlikely for the proxies to trigger the provisions of the 25th Amendment and remove an incapacitated president from office.

Bottom line…

I am willing to entertain and discuss my observations and mindset. Until then, I am left with no other conclusion than “we are screwed.”

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

HAVE CALIFORNIA'S COMMUNISTS AND QUEERS GONE TO FAR?

BPXBY

When, might I ask, will “We the People,” more specifically parents, push back on the California Communists and Queer legislators who dominate California politics?

Scott_weiner

I can think of no bill quite as offensive to my sensibilities as Assembly Bill 655, “An act to amend, repeal, and add Section 6924 of the Family Code, relating to minors,” which effectively allows the removal of children age 12+ from their parent’s home without a court order.

AB-665 Minors: consent to mental health services.

AB 665, as amended, Wendy Carrillo. Minors: consent to mental health services.

Existing law, for some purposes, authorizes a minor who is 12 years of age or older to consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if the minor is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services, as specified, and either the minor would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to themselves or to others or if the minor is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse. For other purposes, existing law authorizes a minor who is 12 years of age or older to consent to mental health treatment or counseling services if the minor is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or counseling services.

This bill would align the existing laws by removing the additional requirement that, in order to consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, the minor must present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to themselves or to others, or be the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.

Existing law, for some purposes, requires that the mental health treatment or counseling include involvement of the minor’s parent or guardian unless the professional person treating or counseling the minor determines that the involvement would be inappropriate. For other purposes, existing law requires the involvement of the parent or guardian unless the professional person who is treating or counseling the minor, after consulting with the minor, determines that the involvement would be inappropriate.

This bill would also align the existing laws by requiring the professional person treating or counseling the minor to consult with the minor before determining whether involvement of the minor’s parent or guardian would be inappropriate.

Existing law defines professional person for these purposes to include, among other things, a mental health professional, a marriage and family therapist, a licensed educational psychologist, a clinical psychologist, the chief administrator of an agency, and a licensed professional clinical counselor, as defined.

This bill would add a registered psychologist, a registered psychological assistant, a psychological trainee, an associate clinical social worker, a social work intern, a clinical counselor trainee working under the supervision of a licensed professional, and a board-certified psychiatrist to the definition of professional person for these purposes.

This bill would make all of the above changes operative on July 1, 2024.

Introduced by Assembly Member Wendy Carrillo (Principal coauthor: Senator Wiener)

<Read the fine print details HERE.

If you believe that this is not part of the far left’s extreme queer and anti-parent agenda to encourage children and students to explore inappropriate sexual topics without parental consent, keep secrets from parents, silence parents at school board meetings, and enacting laws like this that allow removal of children from parents who do not accept the state’s dominion over your children, consider the Legislature’s findings.

SECTION 1.

The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) California is failing on children’s mental health and preventive care. According to the most recent Commonwealth Fund Scorecard on State Health System Performance, our state ranks 48th in the nation for providing children with needed mental health care.

(b) Roughly one-half of California’s children are covered by Medi-Cal, the vast majority of whom are Black and children of color.

(c) Less than 19 percent of low-income teenagers on Medi-Cal received screenings for depression and a follow-up plan in 2020. This is despite the reality that nearly one in three adolescents in California reported symptoms that meet the criteria for serious psychological distress.

(d) Less than 9 percent of Indigenous youth on Medi-Cal received a screening and plan, the lowest of any racial or ethnic group.

(e) Despite an overall decrease in the suicide rate in California, in 2020, youth, particularly Black and Latinx youth, and girls all showed disproportionate increases in suicide. A shocking 78 percent of LGBTQ+ youth who were surveyed shared they had considered suicide, with the vast majority of those who had considered suicide sharing they had done so in the last year, and nearly one-third had made an attempt in the past year.

(f) Seeking care for mental health issues is complicated by pervasive social stigma and centuries of systemic oppression by government programs that create legitimate fears for families to engage in services.

(g) Youth, especially youth of color, express significant trepidation about needing to disclose to parents their mental health concerns and their need to access services. Without access to a trained professional, youth report they turn to mostly free resources of mixed quality that they access without parental intervention or adult assistance, such as social media accounts and online videos.

(h) For LGBTQ+ youth, the rejection from parents, harassment in school, and the overall LGBTQ+ negativity present in society can lead to depression, anxiety, drug and alcohol use, and other negative outcomes. Over one-half of surveyed LGBTQ+ youth reported that not being able to get permission from their parents or guardians was sometimes or always a barrier to accessing mental health services.

(i) Providers, particularly school-based providers, find that obtaining parental consent for a youth who needs support is complicated by the parent or caretakers’ beliefs and stigma about mental health care.

(j) Most states allow youth under 18 years of age to consent to receiving mental health care on their own.

(k) In California, existing law in both Section 124260 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 6924 of the Family Code establish that a minor who is 12 years of age or older may consent to mental health treatment or counseling on an outpatient basis, or to residential shelter services, if the minor is mature enough to participate intelligently in the outpatient services or residential shelter services; however, such services cannot be billed to Medi-Cal.

(l) Existing law in the Family Code authorizes providers to bill Medi-Cal if the above requirements are met and either the minor would present a danger of serious physical or mental harm to themselves or to others, or the minor is the alleged victim of incest or child abuse.

(m) Two laws with different standards are challenging for providers to implement and challenging for youth and families to understand, creating a chilling effect on their willingness to seek out care.

(n) This fundamentally inequitable policy is ultimately at odds with the state’s commitment to racial, ethnic, and health equity as demonstrated through ongoing efforts of the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative and CalAIM, which are state efforts to advance the goal of greater early intervention to address the mental health needs of youth.

(o) Requiring young people from low-income families to delay sensitive treatment until they are in serious distress places youth at unnecessary risk of not seeking care, increasing the likelihood of suicide, self-harm, or substance overdose, and contributing to the alarming disparities in mental health outcomes for youth from marginalized communities.

Why the sudden increase in gay and trans youth?

Report Reveals Sharp Rise in Transgender Young People in the U.S.

New estimates based on C.D.C. health surveys point to a stark generational shift in the growth of the transgender population of the United States.

The number of young people who identify as transgender has nearly doubled in recent years, according to a new report that captures a stark generational shift and emerging societal embrace of a diversity of gender identities.

The analysis, relying on government health surveys conducted from 2017 to 2020, estimated that 1.4 percent of 13- to 17-year-olds and 1.3 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds were transgender, compared with about 0.5 percent of all adults.

Experts said that young people increasingly have the language and social acceptance to explore their gender identities, whereas older adults may feel more constrained. But the numbers, which vary widely from state to state, also raise questions about the role of peer influence or the political climate of the community.

“It’s developmentally appropriate for teenagers to explore all facets of their identity — that is what teenagers do,” said Dr. Angela Goepferd, medical director of the Gender Health Program at Children’s Minnesota Hospital, who was not involved in the new analysis. “And, generationally, gender has become a part of someone’s identity that is more socially acceptable to explore.” <Source>

Could it be the incessant drumbeat of sexual politics pushed by activists in the school and the media to create an atmosphere where confused children are encouraged to adopt certain behaviors to better fit in with their peers? And, further, exploited by activists who want to weaken a parent’s hold on their children to disenfranchise the parents in favor of state dominion?

What is not mentioned is that many so-called counselors are politically-motivated gay activists looking to offer immediate gender-affirming care, including chemical castration and surgical intervention, without allowing for a child's normal maturation process.

Children are predisposed to learning and absorbing the lessons of their environment. What if that environment is skewed toward adults increasing their own social acceptance by normalizing their behaviors in a new generation of susceptible children?

Parental rights…

Parental rights are not mere privileges granted by the government; they are inherent and fundamental to the well-being and development of children. Upholding the preeminence of parental rights over government intervention empowers families, respects diversity, and promotes individual liberty. By recognizing parents' vital role in shaping their children's lives, society can create a brighter future where children thrive, and families flourish. Through the mutual support of families and a limited role of government, we can build a society that produces well-adjusted children and adults.

Consider the following…

  1. The Nature of Parental Rights: Parental rights are inherent and fundamental, originating from the natural bond between parents and their children. They encompass the right to make decisions concerning their offspring's upbringing, education, and well-being. Recognizing parental rights acknowledges that parents possess unique knowledge, love, and understanding of their children's needs, which any government entity cannot replicate. These rights enable parents to instill values, provide moral guidance, and foster a sense of identity within their children.

  2. Governmental Role and Limitations: While governments have a legitimate interest in ensuring the well-being of children, it is crucial to understand the limitations of government intervention in family matters. Governments should act as facilitators and protectors, providing support and resources to families without supplanting their decision-making authority. Parental rights act as a check against political overreach by the state, guarding against limiting personal liberties and promoting diversity in child-rearing practices.

  3. Education and Schooling: One area where the superiority of parental rights is particularly crucial is education. Parents have the right to choose the educational path that aligns with their family's values, beliefs, and child's unique needs. Whether it is public, private, homeschooling, or alternative educational approaches, parents should have the right to make informed decisions in the best interest of their children.

  4. Medical Decision-Making: There is no more crucial aspect of parental rights than medical decision-making for their children. Parents are responsible for choosing their children's healthcare, including vaccinations, medical treatments, and general well-being. While public health measures are essential, the authority to make medical decisions for children should ultimately rest with the parents, who are best positioned to assess their child's unique circumstances and act in their best interest.

  5. Preserving Family Bonds and Values: Parental rights strengthen family bonds and preserve the transmission of cultural, religious, and moral values across generations, providing an environment where children learn about empathy, responsibility, and respect. Recognizing parental rights enables families to maintain autonomy in fostering these values, ensuring that children grow up with a strong sense of identity and belonging.

Bottom line…

Do not allow the activists and so-called “experts” to have unfettered dominion over children and further criminalize parental behavior when one or more parents disagree with the state regarding the treatment of their children.

I could make the case that it is the schools, dominated by progressive communist democrat activists and their unions, that are damaging, sometimes irreparably, our nation’s children.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

IT'S TIME TO PROSECUTE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

“The ultimate result of shielding elected officials from the effects of their criminality is to fill the government with civil-rights-abusing communists and criminals.”

Obama-biden-plot

Watergate was but a pale precursor to the Obama/Biden/Clinton scandal that is currently expanding in front of our eyes and with the overt assistance of the so-called free press “watchdogs.”

The most notorious and widely recognized case of political corruption in the history of the United States before the campaign and election of Barack Obama was the 1972 Watergate scandal which involved a series of illegal activities orchestrated by members of President Richard Nixon's administration.

The scandal began in 1972 when five men were arrested for breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Complex in Washington, D.C. It was later revealed that the break-in was part of a more extensive operation to gather intelligence and sabotage Nixon's political opponents.

The Watergate scandal eventually led to the resignation of President Nixon in 1974, making him the only U.S. president to ever resign from office. The fallout from the scandal also resulted in criminal convictions for several of Nixon's top aides.

The Watergate scandal profoundly impacted American politics and the public's perception of government. It exposed the abuse of power at the highest levels of government and eroded public trust in political institutions. "Watergate" has since become synonymous with political corruption and cover-ups.

We are being screwed...

Misusing political power, bribery, embezzlement, and other unethical practices have significantly eroded public trust in government institutions. To combat this pervasive and ongoing malignancy, it is time for American citizens to take a firm stand and demand the prosecution of corrupt government officials by holding politicians accountable for their actions and imposing severe penalties.  We must send a strong message that corruption will not be tolerated.

We need first to hold law enforcement responsible for the ongoing coup cover-up…

The laws to hold corrupt government officials accountable are currently on the books. However, prosecuting corrupt government officials does come with challenges, the major obstacle being ensuring an impartial and independent judicial system that can effectively investigate and prosecute corruption cases. Additionally, it is crucial to protect whistleblowers and witnesses who come forward with evidence of corruption.

Protecting Obama, the Communist-in-Chief…

We now have documentary evidence and sworn testimony proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that high-ranking government officials, from the President on down, have perpetrated a massive and historic political fraud on the citizens of the United States of America and, in the process, have deeply compromised our intelligence, law enforcement, and taxation agencies. Covering up a level of criminal activity never so openly witnessed by the American public and a free press said to speak truth to power.

If one were to apply Watergate standards to the ongoing crisis of confidence in our government, the January 5, 2017, Oval Office meeting between President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI Director James B. Comey, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and national security adviser Susan E. Rice, was the seminal event that revealed that high-ranking government officials knew that Hillary Clinton and her associates were attempting to perpetrate a political dirty trick on then-candidate Donald Trump and leading to a massive coverup continuing through the Trump presidency to today and, most likely, the end of the 2024 presidential campaign cycle.

The fact that this meeting was highly problematical can be found in the memo authored by national security adviser Susan E. Rice and sent to herself on January 20, 2017, moments after President Trump was sworn into office.

The unusual memo described the January 5, 2017, Oval Office meeting and claimed...

“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book.’  The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating, or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective.  He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.” 

Without a doubt, this was the beginning of the Russia/Trump collusion cover-up that saw the political party in power spy on American citizens, spy on an opposition political campaign, and weaponize government agencies – full well knowing that it was the Clinton campaign falsely claiming the Russians compromised Trump.

Time to start with the corrupt Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, and then the Director of the FBI…

MC-1The unbelievable Merrick Garland…

"Some have chosen to attack the integrity of the Justice Department by claiming that we do not treat cases alike. This constitutes an attack on an institution that is essential to American democracy."

This claim of equal treatment under the law is a bald-faced lie from a bald-faced liar.

“Here at home, we are undertaking one of the largest investigations in our history to hold accountable everyone who was criminally responsible for the January 6 assault on our democracy. We will follow the facts wherever they lead.”

This is a distraction from the larger conspiracy to spy on Americans, spy on a political campaign, interfere with a presidential election, subvert a presidency, attempt a silent coup to remove a sitting president from office, and interfere with another presidential election in 2024. 

Bottom line…

Prosecuting corrupt government officials is necessary to combat political corruption, restore public trust, and strengthen democratic institutions. It sends a strong message that political corruption will not be tolerated, and those who engage in corrupt practices will face severe consequences. 

Garland, Wray, and even President Biden are all expendable and should be impeached as the progressive communist democrats attempt to protect Barack Obama, the Communist-in-Chief, from being held accountable for the damage done to America. 

Furthermore, I say use the Trump impeachment precedent to impeach Joe Biden and former President Obama. However, leave Biden in office given that Kamala Harris is a healthier brain-dead version of Biden.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |

UNDERSTANDING THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S HUNTER BIDEN PLEA RECOMMENDATION

Nothing new to see here. It’s just the application of progressive communist democrats' restorative justice principles to corrupt politically protected democrats.

DOJ-DENTISTRY

New-york-times-logoHunter Biden Investigation: Hunter Biden to Plead Guilty on Misdemeanor Tax Charges

Under a deal with the Justice Department, the president’s son agreed to probation for filing his taxes late, and he can avoid a charge that he lied about his drug use when he purchased a handgun.

Hunter Biden agreed with the Justice Department on Tuesday to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and accept terms that would allow him to avoid prosecution on a separate gun charge, a big step toward ending a long-running and politically explosive investigation into the finances, drug use and international business dealings of President Biden’s troubled son.

Under a deal hashed out with a federal prosecutor who was appointed by President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Biden agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor counts of failing to pay his 2017 and 2018 taxes on time and be sentenced to probation. <Source>

As part of the Biden Administration’s “Build Back Better” program…

Embracing Restorative Justice: Building a Better Biden Future Together

Under the progressive communist democrats, the concept of restorative justice has gained significant attention as an alternative approach to traditional punitive justice systems based on the belief that when a crime occurs, it harms not only the victim but also the offender and the community as a whole.

The core principle is to address the needs of everyone involved, including providing support for victims, holding offenders accountable, and involving the community in the resolution process. It allegedly recognizes that punishment alone does not address the root causes of crime, promote healing, or prevent future offenses.

Moreover, the progressives claim we must abandon our current judicial guidelines and implement restorative justice by requiring a collective effort that demands a shift in mindset, re-valuing accountability, promoting offender healing equal to victim healing, and seeking community engagement.

The progressives claim that by embracing restorative justice, society has an opportunity to address the underlying causes of crime, reduce recidivism rates, and build stronger, more resilient communities. They further claim that we must embark on a path towards healing and restoration, where individuals are empowered to take responsibility for their actions and contribute positively to society.

I call bullshit!

Lenient sentencing in crimes related to political activities is a travesty, as it undermines the principles of justice and the rule of law. When individuals like Hunter Biden, who are involved in politically motivated offenses, receive lenient sentences, it erodes public trust in the judicial system. It can perpetuate a culture of corruption based on impunity, the exemption from punishment, or freedom from the consequences of one's actions.

More specifically...

  • Inequality before the law: When influential individuals or those with political connections receive lighter sentences than ordinary citizens, it creates a sense of injustice. This selective application of the law undermines the principle that everyone should be equal before the law.

  • Deterrence: One of the primary purposes of criminal justice is deterrence. If individuals who commit politically related crimes are not held accountable with appropriate sentences, it fails to deter others from engaging in similar illegal activities. This can lead to a proliferation of political corruption, abuse of power, and other politically motivated offenses.

  • Reinforcing impunity: Lenient sentences for politically related crimes can support a culture of impunity, where politicians or individuals in positions of power believe they can act above the law without facing significant consequences. This undermines democratic institutions and erodes public trust in the system.

  • Loss of faith in the justice system: When lenient sentences are consistently handed out in politically related cases, it undermines public confidence in the justice system, and citizens view the legal process as biased, corrupt, or beholden to political interests rather than pursuing justice impartially.  

    Consider how the dishonest, evil, immoral, and unethical actions of the leadership of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in matters relating to Donald Trump and the willful ignorance of offenses committed by the Obama and Biden Administrations made a mockery of our judicial system and those who claim to be its impartial administrators. This includes the judiciary that failed to hold those who lied to the Courts accountable for their actions.

Bottom line...

To uphold the principles of justice and maintain public trust, it is essential for legal systems to ensure that politically related crimes are treated with the same seriousness and impartiality as any other offense. Sentencing should be based on the case's merits, guided by legal principles, and free from political influence or favoritism.

This suggested punishment of Hunter Biden encourages, not discourages, political corruption and selling political influence for personal gain, even if it harms national security. As with most social justice systems, it embraces the DARVO procedure. Deny, Attack, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender.

Of course, Hunter Biden is not the real issue. This sentencing protects against further investigation of acts leading to charges, including impeachable offenses, against President Joe Biden and a firewall against criminal charges for crimes committed by former President Barack Obama and his acolytes who run the Biden Administration -- including the Department of Justice. 

Look for the DOJ, FBI, and IRS to further stonewall Congressional oversight committees by claiming a non-existent "it's under investigation" exception to Congressional subpoenas. And look for Congress to roll over and play dead. 

We are so screwed.

-- Steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

| Comments (0)

| |