 |
| AfterMath |
American Thinker Barron's is supposed to be a serious publication that covers financial markets. It was founded in 1921 as a sister publication of the Wall Street Journal.
Yet, yesterday, a headline writer for Barron's published an absurd headline, implying that a stock market rise could be attributed to Nancy Pelosi announcing an investigation into the January 6 Capitol incursion: . . .
 |
| Screen grab |
"According to a successful veteran stock trader, who emailed me the headline:
The rise has zero to do with Pelosi. Markets around the world are rallying. America catching up on stimulus legislation, vaccine news, and massive equity inflows are moving the market. Pelosi and her political theatre have no role, but I guess even Barron's is biased these days.
"At least the headline writers...
"One would think the market professionals who read Barron's would understand how ridiculous the headline is."
 |
| Nancy P |
forbes.com . . . "The letter from Republican Reps. Rodney Davis (Ill.), Jim Jordan (Ohio), James Comer (Tenn.) and Devin Nunes (Calif.) suggests Pelosi wielded influence over the security decisions before and during the Jan. 6 attack due to her “enormous institutional responsibilities” and involvement in “all operational decisions made within the House.”
"The lawmakers suggest that Pelosi was involved in denying a request former Capitol Police Chief Steve Sund claimed to have made for National Guard troops prior to the attack, though it has been reported that Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving did not consult with Pelosi about the decision.
“ 'The response from the [sergeant-at-arms], acting on your behalf, was that the ‘optics’ of the National Guard on-site were not good and the intelligence didn’t support the move,” read the letter.
"The lawmakers also claim Pelosi may have played a role in delaying the deployment of troops while the pro-Trump mob was inside the building on Jan. 6, saying “it took over an hour” for Sund’s request to be approved “because the [sergeant-at-arms] had to run the request up the chain of command, which undoubtably included you and your designees.”
"Drew Hammill, Pelosi’s deputy chief of staff, labeled the claims baseless in a statement to Forbes, accusing the members of a “transparently partisan attempt to lay blame on the speaker” and highlighting the fact that the letter does not question Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) about his involvement in the parallel decision by his chamber’s sergeant-at-arms to reject Sund’s appeal." . . .
When will this silliness end?
"After sharing video of former President Trump’s impeachment lawyer explaining to a CBS News anchor how he believes the House impeachment managers doctored evidence, Klacik called for action from elected officials against them.
"Klacik asked, “Now that Trump’s attorney proved the impeachment managers doctored evidence, when will they be charged & removed from office?”
“Republicans on Capitol Hill, here’s your chance. Bring each manager in to answer questions publicly about the changes,” Klacik implored them." . . .
"In the interview with Trump’s lawyer, Michael van der Veen said of the doctored evidence, “What happened at the Capitol on January 6 is absolutely horrific. But what happened at the Capitol during this trial was not too far away from that.”
"The anchor, Lana Zak, attempted to downplay the examples that he gave and he erupted, and said he believes that CBS should be more like PBS, more objective.
"The video has been viewed over 5 million times as Van der Veen told Zak that “The media has to start living by the truth and not try to create a narrative,” as he then ripped off his microphone in disgust and walked away." . . .
Reason.com: Full article: "In his remarks defending his decision not to vote to convict Donald Trump in the just-concluded impeachment trial, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said:
President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office, as an ordinary citizen, unless the statute of limitations has run, still liable for everything he did while in office, didn't get away with anything yet – yet. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.
"This raises the question of whether a former President may be criminally prosecuted for the same conduct for which that President had been impeached, but not convicted. As it happens, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel examined that question in 2000 (when Bill Clinton was still President) and concluded that the answer was "yes."
"Here is the memo. Clocking in at 46 pages, it is quite substantial. Here is how the memo begins:
"We have been asked to consider whether a former President may be indicted and tried for the same offenses for which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate.1 In 1973, in a district court filing addressing a related question in the criminal tax evasion investigation of Vice President Agnew, the Department took the position that acquittal by the Senate creates no bar to criminal prosecution. A 1973 Office of Legal Counsel (" OLC" ) memorandum discussing the same question adopted the same position. As far as we are aware, no court has ever ruled on this precise issue. During the impeachment of Judge Alcee Hastings in the late 1980s, though, a district court and both the House and Senate passed on the related question whether an acquittal in a criminal prosecution should bar an impeachment trial for the same offenses. Each of those bodies concluded that the Constitution permits an official to be tried by the Senate for offenses of which he has been acquitted in the courts. Although we recognize that there are reasonable arguments for the opposing view, on balance, and largely for some of the same structural reasons identified in the United States's filing in the Agnew case and the 1973 OLC memorandum, we think the better view is that a former President may be prosecuted for crimes of which he was acquitted by the Senate. Our conclusion concerning the constitutional permissibility of indictment and trial following a Senate acquittal is of course distinct from the question whether an indictment should be brought in any particular case.
"Here is the conclusion:
We conclude that the Constitution permits a former President to be criminally prosecuted for the same offenses for which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate while in office.
"As the length of this memorandum indicates, we think the question is more complicated than it might first appear. In particular, we think that there is a reasonable argument that the Impeachment Judgment Clause should be read to bar prosecutions following acquittal by the Senate and that disqualification from federal office upon conviction by the Senate bears some of the markers of criminal punishment. Nonetheless, we think our conclusion accords with the text of the Constitution, reflects the founders' understanding of the new process of impeachment they were creating, fits the Senate's understanding of its role as the impeachment tribunal, and makes for a sensible and fair system of responding to the misdeeds of federal officials.
"Whether the full course of the President's conduct as it relates to the January 6 Capitol riot could meet the standard for incitement set by Brandendurg is a close question. As I discussed on the Smerconish show this past Saturday, the case that Trump committed incitement on January 6 is far stronger than the claim he incited violence at a 2016 campaign rally for which he was sued civilly (unsuccessfully).
"While I suspect a civil suit related to the January 6 events would be possible, it would be more difficult to make a criminal prosecution stick, and I suspect that is among the reasons an indictment is unlikely. If Trump is not prosecuted, however, it will not be because it is unconstitutional to do so."
(@jadler1969) is the Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law. Hat tip: The Volokh Conspiracy | Facebook
PJ Media "In the wake of the Democrats’ second failed attempt to impeach and remove President Trump, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in an appearance of “Fox News Sunday,” said that Democrats have now opened Pandora’s Box and that by the standard they’ve set, Kamala Harris has met their requirement for impeachment.
" 'The trial record was a complete joke,” Senator Graham said. “Hearsay on top of hearsay, and we’ve opened Pandora’s Box for future presidents and if you use this model, I don’t know how Kamala Harris doesn’t get impeached if Republicans take over the House because she actually bailed out rioters, and more of the rioters went back to the streets and broke somebody’s head open, so we’ve opened Pandora’s Box here, and I’m sad for the country.”
"Senator Graham was referring to Kamala Harris promoting the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), which raised $35 million dollars in the wake of the George Floyd riots.
"At least 13 staffers on Biden’s campaign posted on Twitter about their donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which opposes the concept of cash bail, and uses donations to pay bail fees in Minneapolis. In addition to paying for the bail of rioters, according to a local news report, MFF also “bailed out defendants from Twin Cities jails charged with murder, violent felonies, and sex crimes.” In July, the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF) paid the bail of a man accused of sexually assaulting an eight-year-old girl, allowing him to get out of jail, according to court records obtained by The Daily Caller.
"Kamala Harris also joked about killing President Trump, Vice President Pence, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions back in 2018, during an appearance on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show.” DeGeneres had been asking Harris a series of random questions from cards, when she came to the question “If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?”
“ 'Does one of us have to come out alive?” Harris asked, clearly alluding to her wanting to kill whichever one she chose." . . .
"Minneapolis is planning to spend $6.4million to hire dozens of police officers, at a time when some City Council members and activist groups have been advocating to replace the police department following the death of George Floyd.
"The City Council voted unanimously Friday to approve the additional funding that police requested.
"According to the Minneapolis Police Department, there are only 638 officers available to work, which is roughly 200 fewer than usual.
"An unprecedented number of officers quit or went on extended medical leave after Floyd's death and the unrest that followed, which included the burning of a police precinct." . . .
"The university is no longer a place of liberal education in the best sense of the term. It will not give all ideas a fair hearing, it figuratively burns books, and it routinely bars speakers. Only those who advance the radical atheistic left are welcomed. Worse, universities use all means necessary to protect and advance leftist hegemony."
Daniel Davies . . . "Bloom argued that American students have become impoverished in the soul because they no longer engage with the classics of Western Civilization. The Great Books program presents writings from influential authors regardless of whether their views are radical, liberal, conservative, atheistic, or theistic. The editors trust that, with open liberal
"Radical students of the 1960s did not subscribe to that commitment. Because they were sure that their revolutionary Marxian, Freudian, Nietzschean, and Darwinian views contained all truth, they sought to cancel any other views, especially religious views. They directly assaulted traditional American values of God, family, and nation. They treated with disdain anything related to traditional Christian morality. "During the 34 years since Bloom published his book sounding an alarm about the closing of the American mind, what he feared has come to pass. The students so ill-served in the 1980s and beyond have taken their revolution outside of academia. Now they dominate in media, education, government, entertainment, the arts, and sports. Not only have they fully embraced the radical atheistic ideas of Marx, Freud, Darwin, and Nietzsche, they refuse to permit anyone who embraces traditional religious and liberal ideas to work in those institutions." . . .Read the full article here
Mr. Davies also wrote A 1620 Project should replace the Democrats’ misbegotten 1619 Project
Yahoo! . . . "UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Sunday described former US President Donald Trump's impeachment trial as a "kerfuffle" and appeared to suggest that President Joe Biden had copied his "Build Back Better" slogan.
" 'The clear message that we get from the proceedings in America is that after all the toings and froings and all the kerfuffle, American democracy is strong and the American constitution is strong and robust," Johnson said in an interview with CBS's Face the Nation, when asked what signal Trump's acquittal on impeachment charges would send.
"The prime minister's message contrasted with that of Biden's, who said that "this sad chapter in our history has reminded us that democracy is fragile.' " . . .
An Oppressive Boot on the Neck of Free Speech . . . "Colorado State University, several years ago, prepared a draft “Inclusive Language Guide.” This is a modern-day version of George Orwell’s “Newspeak,” the official language of Fictious Oceania, words designed to be politically correct without a hint of rebellion or opposition to the establishment." . . .
. . . "The CSU guide was created by a group of university staff to avoid offending anyone who might hear or read words that have been part of the American lexicon for centuries. Here is the actual guide and some examples.
"Note that it is not “official policy or required practice,” only a guide, but woe to those who disregard the suggestions. It’s also a “living document”, meaning it can change based on the political winds, as in who occupies the White House.
“ 'Birth defect” should be replaced with “person with a congenital disability” as it supposedly generalizes the population. “Defect” implies the person is “sub-par” or incomplete. Doesn’t “disability” do the same?
“ 'Colored” should be replaced with “person of color”, as it was decades ago. When was the last time you saw anyone use the term “colored”? Was a written guide necessary for this?" . . .
Many more PC rules here. Many. But wait! There's more!...UC Berkeley reverses its absurd ban on outdoor exercise
"Writer Brian C Joondeph is a racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, white supremacist, privileged, extremist, insurrectionist, fascist, deplorable, smelly, bigoted, domestic terrorist (conservative) writer and physician."
Woke At Last: Indiana’s Valparaiso University Cancels Crusader Nickname and Mascot
In any case, all this shame over the Crusader name, and expiating renunciation, is completely unwarranted. As The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS shows from primary sources, the Crusades were not, as the good people at Valparaiso University evidently assume, an unprovoked exercise of racist proto-colonialism directed against a peaceful Muslim world.
The Crusades were in reality a late, small-scale defensive response after 450 years of jihad attacks had conquered and Islamicized what had previously been over half of the Christian world.
Cancel Culture Comes for Disney's 'Jungle Cruise' Because Cannibals Aren't Bad or Something (pjmedia.com) "Following the silly decision to overhaul Splash Mountain because someone, somewhere objected to cartoon trickster rabbits who like briar patches, Walt Disney World Imagineers are gunning for the beloved Jungle Cruise. Entertainment Weekly reports:" . . .
