Joe Biden, 20 Years Ago, Blocked the Potential First Black Female on the Supreme Court

 Larry Elder (townhall.com)  

"Were it not for Biden, who now considers the filibuster "a relic of the Jim Crow era," [Sunny] Hostin could have been "crying with pride" 20 years ago."

File photo

. . ."California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown did not set out to become the first black female nominated to the United States Supreme Court. But had it not been for then-Sen. Joe Biden standing in her way 20 years ago, Brown might well have been on the road to "breaking this ceiling."

"Brown, the daughter and granddaughter of sharecroppers, was born in Alabama during Jim Crow. As a single mom, she worked her way through college and law school, graduating from UCLA law school in 1977. Over the next 20 years, she worked in the criminal and civil divisions as California deputy attorney general; became the general counsel for the California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency; served as a law professor; and practiced law in private practice.

"In 1994, California Republican Gov. Pete Wilson appointed her to the California Court of Appeals and two years later to the California Supreme Court. In California, appointees to its Supreme Court must run for reelection. Despite being appointed by a Republican and her reputation as a conservative jurist, she retained her position with 76% of the vote, a higher percentage than any of the other appointees who ran that year. Brown wrote more majority opinions than any other justice of that court.

"In 2003, President George W. Bush nominated her to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, from which more justices go on the Supreme Court than any other circuit. Even though Brown had majority support in the Senate, Sen. Biden filibustered her nomination. According to columnist Robert Novak, Biden's obstruction represented "the first full-scale effort in American history to prevent a president from picking the federal judges he wants.' " 

"Bush renominated her and she was finally confirmed, with Biden again opposing her confirmation. Months later, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor retired, and Brown was reportedly on the short list to replace her. But Biden appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation" and threatened to again filibuster a Brown nomination. Bush backed down."  (Emphasis mine. TD)

California’s Crackdown On AI-Generated Political Parody Is Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Says

 Jane Coleman (legalinsurrection.com)  

"Lawyers: “Mr. Reagan’s satire videos, which have garnered millions of views, are precisely the kind of speech that the First Amendment was designed to protect.' ”

"A creator of viral political parody videos is suing California officials over new laws restricting AI-generated content like his from being posted and shared online.

"The legislation took on political urgency over the summer after Governor Gavin Newsom called one of the videos “illegal.”

"In July, the YouTuber known as “Mr. Reagan” released a parody Kamala Harris campaign ad, featuring AI-generated cuts that sound just like her. But you know you’re watching a spoof when “Harris” says things like, “I may not know the first thing about running the country, but remember, that’s a good thing if you’re a deep state puppet.” Or that she’s been selected because she’s “the ultimate diversity hire and a person of color, so if you criticize anything [she] say[s], you’re both sexist and racist.”

"The video caught the attention of someone who knows creative genius when he sees it, Elon Musk.

"He called it “amazing”:   

This is amazing 😂
pic.twitter.com/KpnBKGUUwn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 26, 2024

"Once Musk retweeted it, the brilliant satire also caught the attention of California Governor Gavin Newsom.

"And, according to the lawsuit, even though “Mr. Reagan’s” YouTube video acknowledges its content is “digitally generated” and even though it is labeled “parody,” Newsom was not amused.

"The video was too “real”: “Manipulating a voice in an ‘ad’ like this one should be illegal,” Newsom warned in a tweet two days later. “I’ll be signing a bill in a matter of weeks to make sure it is”: . . ."

Did Elite Colleges Lie to the Supreme Court or Are They Breaking the Law Today?

 Even After Court Ruling, Colleges Face Questions on Admissions (Hans von Spakovsky) 

"As it turns out, the schools have had no trouble attaining what they call “diverse” student bodies; that is, a student body where fewer Asian American students get in than deserve to." We have become a silly people indeed. TD

"When the U.S. Supreme Court issued its monumental decision in 2023 telling colleges and universities that “yes,” they did have to comply with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in their admissions policies, the question immediately arose of whether they would comply or cheat.

"With the latest admission numbers from schools such as Duke, Princeton, and Yale, however, we still don’t know the answer.

"In June of 2023, in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and the University of North Carolina, the Supreme Court held that the academy had to end its pernicious policy of discriminating on the basis of race in deciding whether to admit students. The colleges argued they need to discriminate to achieve “diversity,” a practice based, as Chief Justice John Roberts said, on the “offensive and demeaning assumption that [students] of a particular race, because of their race, think alike.' ”  . . .

Is there no knowledge of our history of treating Asians during WW2? Maybe there once was a statue commemorating all that which was torn down by those low-information youths. I can visualize that. TD

Kamala Harris Has a Plan – To Take, Take, Take

 John Green - American Free News Network

"The fact is, the wealthy don’t have enough loot to pick up Kamala’s tab. If she want’s to cover her “investment” with taxes, she’ll have to take it from all of us."

"I watched the debate and … oh boy. Pay no attention to whether:

• Donald Trump lost his cool – he did,
• Kamala Harris sounded annoying – she did, or
• The moderators shamelessly took sides – did they ever.

"None of that matters because the clouds parted, the sun broke through, and Kamala informed us that for the first time in her campaign, she has a plan. Her campaign isn’t just about saving democracy anymore. She’s going to save the economy too – by creating an “opportunity economy.” Apparently “opportunity” came in 2nd to “joy” in the focus group testing.

"She even told us how she’s going to create that “opportunity economy.” She’s going to give away stuff. Who would have thought a Democrat had such a capacity for out-of-the-box creativity.

• "She’s going to give new parents $6,000 so they can afford a new baby crib – which given the current rate of inflation sounds about right.
• "She’s going to give new homeowners $25,000 to offset the skyrocketing mortgage rates she created – for a couple of years anyway.
• "She’s going to give new business startups $50,000 to replace some of the mom-and-pop venture capital lost when she and Joe shuttered their businesses for a virus.

"That’s it. That’s her plan: spend, spend, spend – sorry, give, give, give.

"There’s just one teeny-tiny little thing that Kamala didn’t get to with all of her planning – the other side of the equation. Money out must equal money in. She didn’t explain where she’s going to get the money for all of her generous giving.

"Had the moderators thought to ask how she’s going to pay for it, I’m sure Kamala would have screeched “It’s an investment!” When Kamala says government spending is an investment, she’s claiming it will pay for itself by stimulating the economy, and creating more taxpayers – like baby crib manufacturers. She claims that government “investment” raises revenue just like the Inflation Reduction Act did. Oops … I wonder if the moderators would have fact checked that?" . . .

Irony! Israel struck Hezb’allah in their instruments of rape.

 

RealityBites

The karma in Lebanon is too strong! -Lynne Lechter   

Yet one couldn’t help but chortle at the karma of the latest Israeli attacks: after eleven months of the worst attack against Jews since the Holocaust, Israel struck back in an extremely fitting manner.  They struck Hezb’allah in their instruments of rape.  And they used the least high-tech gadget liable to execute the attacks: the pager.

Tiny Israel flips the tables of warfare itself on the terrorists of Hezb'allah - Monica Showalter   . . ."And that calls to mind what Israel is: The tech genius of the Middle East, the nation that gave us drip irrigation, computer processor chips, metal detectors, heart rate monitors from hospital beds, devices that can extract air for divers underwater, safe drinking water detectors, cell phones, safe-navigation technology for cars on the road, precision robots for spinal surgery, oh, and pagers, too. This list here is mind-blowing, I've heard Google guys call them the brains of their company.

"With that going on, while Hezb'allah and other miserable creatures of the Middle East stewing in Jew-hatred and fist-waving instead of trying to match them in intellectual creativity, innovation, and tech prowess, this Israeli advantage of being on the developer side is finally being put to work for Israel." . . .

Heaven help Israel if they ever elect leaders like Biden,Pelosi, and Harris. Their very existence can be threatened when America puts Democrats over her government. TD

Billionaire Hedge Fund Manager Reveals His Plan If Harris Versus Trump Wins the Election

 Elizabeth Allen​ - TFPP Wire  

 "John Paulson, a hedge fund billionaire and prominent Trump supporter, announced that he would withdraw his investments from the market if Vice President Kamala Harris wins the upcoming presidential election. During an interview on FOX Business, Paulson expressed concerns over Harris’ economic policies, which he believes could lead to widespread market instability.

"He emphasized that her proposed tax increases would lead to significant sell-offs and potentially trigger a recession. Paulson stated, “I’d be very concerned if Harris is elected and pursues the tax plans and other economic plans that she articulated.”

Key Facts:

• John Paulson, a major Trump fundraiser, stated he would pull his money out of the market if Kamala Harris wins the presidential election.
• Harris has proposed raising the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28% and increasing capital gains taxes.
• Paulson is particularly concerned about Harris’ plan to tax unrealized gains for individuals making $100 million or more, predicting this would lead to mass sell-offs.
• Paulson highlighted that Trump’s economic plans, including extending the 2017 tax cuts, are vastly different from Harris’ policies.
• He suggested that market uncertainty under Harris would cause him to invest in cash and gold instead.

The Rest of The Story:

"John Paulson, known for his massive profit from predicting the subprime mortgage crisis, voiced strong concerns over the potential impact of a Kamala Harris presidency on the U.S. economy. Appearing on FOX Business’ “The Claman Countdown,” Paulson outlined his fears that Harris’ proposed tax policies, particularly those targeting high earners, would cause instability in financial markets. He pointed to Harris’ plan to raise the corporate tax rate to 28% and her push for higher capital gains taxes as signals of what he sees as an economically damaging agenda.

“ 'I’d be very concerned if Harris is elected and pursues the tax plans and other economic plans that she articulated,” . . .

Kamala Dishes an Unbelievable Word Salad Festival With Oprah, but Reality Just Levels Her

 Nick Arama – RedState  

"Then there was this incredible "two minutes of nonsensical wisdom" that just makes you want to go, "Does anyone really fall for this?"

"On Thursday, Oprah Winfrey "interviewed" Kamala Harris in a livestream rally from Farmington Hills, Michigan. 

"I have "interviewed" in quotes because it wasn't an interview by a journalist. It was basically getting Oprah to help her deliver her campaign message. Except there was one big problem, as there always is when it comes to Kamala Harris. It was long on cringe and lies from Kamala, very light on answers and specifics. They even slipped in some celebrities to help hype Kamala, including Meryl Streep, Chris Rock, and Ben Stiller, who appeared on screen. It's like bringing in musicians to her rally to try to hype views/attendance. Streep referred to Kamala as "President Harris." Harris replied, "47 days." 

"It was all about the vibes and named "Unite for America" — despite the fact that Harris has spent most of her time in her campaign being divisive and lying about her opponent. It brought together White Dudes for Harris, Cat Ladies for Kamala, and Train Lovers for Harris, among other groups. 

"When Harris was asked about lowering the cost of living, her response was typical. It was an indecipherable word salad." . . .

This might just be the most spectacular two minutes of Kamala’s nonsensical wisdom I have ever heard. pic.twitter.com/VkeCA2oLew

— Kate Hyde (@KateHydeNY) September 20, 2024

. . ."Then, what's really funny: As she's trying to tack to the right with this take, Oprah gives her such a look like she can't believe it. "Probably should not have said that," Harris said, suddenly thinking the left might not like this, but, hey, the staff will try their best to clean it up." . . .

Can Harris' cynical, run-out-the clock campaign succeed?

With this nation's media I have to say yes. TD  "To make that distinction stark, Harris must demonize and bait Trump nonstop and make the country fear him." VDH

Victor Davis Hanson (jewishworldreview.com)  

"Cynically running out the clock has been the overarching principle of the entire abbreviated 105-day presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris — ever since President Joe Biden, at the 11th-hour, dropped out in July.

"Harris seems unwilling or unable to answer any impromptu question that she has not been previously prepped for. Her answers at the debate were memorized and canned. They never addressed the questions asked.

"Her single, 11-minute post-debate Philadelphia interview was a shipwreck of dodging and dissimulating — even though the host was sympathetically left-wing.

"Even socialist Bernie Sanders pointed out that for Harris to get elected, she must temporarily disown her lifelong leftist credentials.

"As vice president, she must further deny co-ownership of the unpopular record of the Biden-Harris administration.

"Left unstated is that whether she wins the presidency — or loses it and continues as vice president for another three months — nonetheless she will inevitably revert back to her hard-core, lifelong leftist beliefs.

"In addition, Harris has reconstructed her privileged upbringing as a child of two PhDs, living in a posh Montreal neighborhood into a struggling, middle-class Oakland childhood.

"How can she stage such a complete makeover — and contemptuously count on the voting public to be so easily deceived? [Have you ever watched "The View"?]

"She avoids all news conferences, one-on-one nationally broadcast interviews, and town halls. And like Biden, she will debate only on leftist venues with impartial pro-Harris moderators.

"When asked to provide the details of her past responsibility for the open border, inflationary economy, spiraling crime, attacks on fossil fuels, and collapsing foreign policy, Harris smiles, makes hand gestures, and dodges. She changes the subject to her empathetic personality, her "joy" campaign, and her iconic profile as a supposedly dynamic black woman.

"When pressed, Harris outsources the task of squaring her hypocrisies and subterfuges to the stonewalling campaign, Democratic surrogates — and the media." . . .

Fox News Cuts Off Pundit for Outlining Opinion, “Democrat Party Wants Trump Dead”

  The Last Refuge (theconservativetreehouse.com)  "Former Navy SEAL Johnathan Gilliam appeared on FOX News to discuss the latest assassination attempts against the life of President Trump.

"After outlining the reality of President Trump’s perimeter proximity not being secured by Secret Service, Mr Gilliam expands the conversation to ask if this is continual mistakes or whether a systemic security issue exists.  Gilliam notes the rhetoric of the Democrat Party over the last several years that support the contention that “democrats want President Trump dead,” Fox News host Stuart Varney gets upset calling such a perspective “a conspiracy theory.”  Immediately thereafter the interview was ended.

The Last Refuge

"Here’s just a few examples of Democrats using increasingly incendiary rhetoric against President Trump in the days, weeks, and months leading up to the two assassination attempts:"

• Kamala Harris — repeatedly: “Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms.” (But no problem with Gavin Newsom's rule in California?)
• Kamala Harris: “It’s on us to recognize the threat [Trump] poses.”
• Kamala Harris: “Does one of us have to come out alive? Ha ha ha ha!”
• Joe Biden: “It’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”
• Joe Biden: “I mean this from the bottom of my heart: Trump is a threat to this nation.”
• Joe Biden: “There is one existential threat: it’s Donald Trump.”
• Joe Biden: “Trump is a genuine threat to this nation … He’s literally a threat to everything America stands for.”
• Joe Biden: “Trump and MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country.”
• Joe Biden: “Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic … and that is a threat to this country.”
• Tim Walz: “Are [Republicans] a threat to democracy? Yes. … Are they going to put peoples’ lives in danger? Yes.”
• Gwen Walz: “Buh-bye, Donald Trump.”
• Rep. Nancy Pelosi: “[Trump] is a threat to our democracy of the kind that we have not seen.”
• Rep. Jasmine Crockett: “MAGA in general — they are threats to us domestically.”
• Rep. Dan Goldman: “He is destructive to our democracy and …  he has to be eliminated.”
• Disgraced Harris staffer TJ Ducklo: “Trump is an existential, urgent threat to our democracy.”
• Top Harris surrogate Liz Cheney: “Trump presents a fundamental threat to the republic and we are seeing it on a daily basis.”
• Rep. Steve Cohen: “Trump is an enemy of the United States.”
• Rep. Maxine Waters: “Are [Trump supporters] preparing a civil war against us?”
• Rep. Maxine Waters: “I want to know about all of those right-wing organizations that [Trump] is connected with who are training up in the hills somewhere.”
• Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Trump is an “existential threat to our democracy.”
• Rep. Adam Schiff: Trump is the “gravest threat to our democracy.”
• Rep. Gregory Meeks: “Trump cannot be president again. He’s an existential threat to democracy.”
• Rep. Dan Goldman: “Trump remains the greatest threat to our democracy.”
• Rep. Jake Auchincloss: “What unifies us as a party is knowing that Donald Trump is an existential threat to Democracy.”
• Rep. Abigail Spanberger: “Trump is a threat to our democracy … the threats to our democratic republic are real.”
• Rep. Annie Kuster: “Trump and his extreme right-wing followers pose an existential threat to our democracy.”
• Rep. Becca Balint: “We cannot underestimate the threat [Trump] poses to American democracy.”
• Rep. Jason Crow: “Trump is an extreme danger to our democracy.”
• Rep. Raul Grijalva: “Trump is an existential threat to American democracy.”
• Sen. Michael Bennet: Trump is “a threat to our democracy.”
• Rep. Stacey Plaskett: Trump “needs to be shot.”
• Rep. Steven Horsford: “Trump Republicans are a dangerous threat to our state.”
• Rep. Gabe Vasquez: “Remove the national threat from office.”
• Rep. Mike Levin: “Donald Trump is a threat to our nation, our freedom, and our democracy.”
• Rep. Eric Sorensen: “He is the greatest threat to law and order we have in our country.”
• Rep. Greg Landsman: “The threat is not over.”
• Rep. Pat Ryan: “Trump is an existential threat to American democracy.”
• Rick Wilson, The Lincoln Project: “They’re still going to have to go out and put a bullet in Donald Trump.”
• Former Harris-Biden staffer Kate Bedingfield: Democrats should “turn their fire on Donald Trump.”    No, no, no… Varney decries.  That’s “crazy conspiracy theory”…

Report: Hezbollah Hiding Heavy Death Toll From Exploding Devices, Leadership of Elite Radwan Terror Force Decimated

 Vijeta Uniyal (legalinsurrection.com)  "We still have many capabilities that we have not yet activated,” IDF Chief of Staff Halevi warns Hezbollah."

"While Lebanon reported only 32 deaths from two days of pager and walkie-talkie explosions, the Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorist group was hiding the actual death toll, media reports suggest.

"Consecutive waves of exploding devices have incurred heavy losses on Hezbollah’s leadership and terrorist fighting forces. The command structure of Hezbollah’s elite terrorist Radwan force has been ‘decimated’ by the well-coordinate strike, Israeli sources confirm.

"Officially, around 3,000 Hezbollah terrorists were wounded in Tuesday’s pager explosions. The walkie-talkie blasts on Wednesday reportedly injured 450 terror operatives. The actual figures are much higher, reports suggest.

“ 'According to Israeli reports, the pager attack alone would have caused “dozens of deaths, if not more” among Hezbollah members,” Israel’s i24NEWS TV reported. “Hezbollah’s elite Radwan force is reported to have suffered significant losses, losing “a large part of its command structure” that was either killed or maimed.”

"The coordinated strike on Hezbollah is perhaps the most precise counter-terrorist operation in military history. The Israeli government and armed forces did not comment on the incident.

"The Israeli news website YNET reported the actual damage caused by the apparent anti-terror strike:

According to the official updates from Lebanon, 12 people were killed when thousands of pagers exploded on Tuesday and 20 in the walkie-talkie blasts on Wednesday, but in Israel officials believe that the announced dead and injured from the pager explosions is significantly lower than reality. It is estimated that there are many dozens of dead, if not more.

Significant damage was inflicted on Hezbollah’s special operation forces unit Radwan force, which lost large parts of its command structure. At least 450 were injured in the explosion of the hand-held walkie-talkie radios throughout Lebanon, and these join the more than 3,000 Hezbollah operatives who were injured by the pager blasts. Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah is expected to give a speech on Thursday, in his first public remarks since the series of explosions in Lebanon.

"The Iran-backed terrorist group is in disarray following the strike. Twice bitten, the Hezbollah terrorists were now scared of touching electronic devices and electric switches, social media posts show."  It does play with their minds!

"Reports say that Hezbollah purchased all the communication devices from a European shell company owned by Israel That is, they also paid Israel for all the devices that exploded" Dr. Eli David

 What the Media Aren't Telling You About Israel’s Ingenious Strike Against Terrorist Pagers – PJ Media  

The significance of Israel’s anti-terrorism countermeasure isn’t just what it has already done, albeit that was impressive enough. Instead, its true significance is that it suggests what Israel might do next. 

A word of caution from a reader: Israel should never let the USA know what they did or are doing.  We have become collaborators of evil 

THE DEBATE ABOUT THE DEBATE

  Ann Coulter  

But they know that life was better under Trump. And they know that Harris, like Clinton, is a nasty woman. 

"Debate winner: CNN’s Candy Crowley. In 2012, she — the moderator — interjected herself into a Romney-Obama debate to fact-check Mitt Romney with a lie. But unlike ABC’s crack moderators on Tuesday night, at least she only did it once.

"I’m exhausted from fact-checking ABC’s fact-checkers, so I’m just going to tell you about a brilliant experiment that pretty clearly established who won the Trump-Clinton debates in 2016.

"The media say Trump whiffed Tuesday night, but that’s what we were told in 2016, too. It also could be that Kamala Harris came across as a smirker — MSNBC’s signature move — just like Hillary Clinton did. You’ve probably forgotten this — if you ever knew it — but notwithstanding Clinton’s allegedly devastating debate performances with Trump, she bombed. There’s scientific proof.

"Feminists were ecstatic when Trump called Clinton “a nasty woman” at one of the debates, rushing out with “nasty woman” T-shirts, pins, backpacks and other merchandise. With the feminists’ usual finger on the pulse of the nation, it never occurred to them that maybe she was nasty.

"Trump was responding to Clinton’s snotty aside — while describing her Social Security plans, of all things:

Clinton: “My Social Security payroll contribution will go up, as will Donald’s — assuming he can’t figure out how to get out of it — but what we want to do is –”

"Trump: “Such a nasty woman.”

"In order to test the feminist theory that Clinton, as a woman, was judged much more harshly than Trump, a couple of professors at New York University and INSEAD designed the perfect experiment. Two months after the election, they re-created the 2016 debates, but with a man playing Clinton and a woman playing Trump.

"Professional actors were hired to reenact segments from each of the three debates, using the candidates’ exact words, gestures, intonation and stances. During rehearsals, they even had a screen with the actual debate running behind them to ensure a precise replica of the candidates’ performances, with only the genders inverted. (For you confused Gen Z’ers, back then there were only two genders.)

"The professors and their (sold-out) audiences were stunned by the result. As NYU professor Joe Salvatore put it, instead of confirming their “liberal assumption” that “no one would have accepted Trump’s behavior from a woman, and that the male Clinton would seem like the much stronger candidate,” audience members found themselves hating the male Clinton and being impressed by the female Trump.

"This is how Salvatore described the reactions: . . ."  More here