Armed ANTIFA Rioters STORM Oregon Capital as Minneapolis Braces for Derek Chauvin Trial!!!

★★★ YOUR PATRIOT PATH TO FREEDOM! ★★★

Armed ANTIFA Rioters STORM Oregon’s Capital as the City of Minneapolis Braces for the Derek Chauvin Trial in the Death of George Floyd! In this video, we’re going to take a look at the latest riots unleashed by Antifa agitators, how cities across the country are bracing themselves for the fallout from the Chauvin trial, and how what is nothing less than a Democrat civil war is destroying both themselves and the cities they rule; you are NOT going to want to miss this!

Pennsylvania Health Care Worker to Be Fired for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine

BY RISHMA PARPIA

SEE: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2021/03/pennsylvania-health-care-worker-to-be-fired-for-refusing-covid-19-vaccine/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Desiree Pelletier, a 26-year old health care worker in Newville, Pennsylvania said that her employer has fired her for refusing to get the experimental COVID-19 vaccine, which is being distributed in the U.S. under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) granted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).1 2

Pelletier said that her employer, Hempfield Behavioral Health, is requiring that employees get the vaccine as a condition of employment in an effort the stop the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. She stated that she is not against vaccination; however, she needed more time to make a personal decision on whether it was best for her body. Pelletier was only given 30 days to make a decision and the deadline is imminent. After 30 days, the vaccine becomes a requirement for employment.3

Concerns Regarding COVID-19 Vaccine’s Impact on Fertility

Pelletier said that her concerns about the EUA COVID-19 vaccines are due to the fact that she would like to become pregnant soon and the fact that the potential adverse effects of experimental COVID-19 vaccines have not been thoroughly studied in pregnant women, including a lack of clinical investigation into the potential effects on fertility.4 She spoke with her doctor about her concerns and she said:

He could not tell me that he would recommend me not getting it, but he also said it should be my choice. I was a mess the whole time I had to make this decision, physically sick. I was thinking, ‘should I get it so I have a job, so I have insurance?5

Pelletier said that after giving it much thought, she decided that her personal beliefs take precedence over the vaccine requirement. Her employer gave her a notice of suspension letter, which states that she would have to provide proof of vaccination within 30 days.6

Pelletier’s suspension letter states that she must get vaccinated because she works with patients who are immune-compromised and have a high risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus but are unable to get the vaccine for medical reasons. She said, “I don’t understand why I couldn’t sit here and Zoom unvaccinated with participants. I didn’t understand why I can’t be on the property with a mask on like I have done from June of 2020 to November of 2020.”7

FDA Says COVID-19 Vaccines Under EUA Status Must Be Voluntary

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) explicitly states that experimental vaccines distributed under an EUA cannot be mandated and recipients must be given the option to accept or refuse the vaccine. The FDA website states:

FDA must ensure that recipients of the vaccine under an EUA are informed, to the extent practicable given the applicable circumstances, that FDA has authorized the emergency use of the vaccine, of the known and potential benefits and risks, the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown, that they have the option to accept or refuse the vaccine, and of any available alternatives to the product.8

Woman in Nevada Lost Her Job After Refusing to Get COVID-19 Vaccine

A Nevada resident claimed that she lost her job after refusing to get the EUA COVID-19 vaccine that her employer was requiring as a condition for employment. For privacy reasons, the woman did not want to share her name and the name of her employer.9

The woman said that she and some other employees refused to get the vaccine at the present time. She said, “We didn’t say no. We said not right now.” She added that, “There were just a lot of concerns. But they were just not heard. I feel like we should all have our right to choose or not choose it.”10

Click here to view References:

1 Griffaton G. Cumberland County woman says she is being fired for refusing COVID-19 vaccineFox 43 Mar. 3, 2021.
2 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained. Mar. 5, 2021.
3 Ibid.
4 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Vaccinating Pregnant and Lactating Patients Against COVID-19. Dec. 21, 2020.
5 Griffaton G. Cumberland County woman says she is being fired for refusing COVID-19 vaccineFox 43 Mar. 3, 2021.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 FDA. Emergency Use Authorization for Vaccines Explained. Mar. 5, 2021.
9 Loftis S. Woman claims she lost her job after refusing COVID-19 vaccine; legal expert weighs in on employee rights8 News Now Mar. 4, 2021.
10 Ibid.

Biden Political Operative Blocks Ted Cruz From Filming Illegals in Detention Facilities

Senator Ted Cruz has released a video he says shows a Biden administration staffer clashing with him at a border facility and trying to prevent him from filming – telling the Republican “this is not a zoo, sir”. Senator Cruz said the facility he filmed in Donna, Texas, was a “giant tent city”. He and eighteen of his colleagues visited the border to see for themselves the unfolding humanitarian crisis. “We went and toured the Biden cages, you know for four years we heard Democrats and the media talking about kids in cages under president Trump, Joe Biden has built more cages, the cages are bigger and they’re more full,” he said. In the video Senator Cruz shared, the staffer quickly jumped in the frame after he began filming. “Please give dignity to the people,” the staffer said. “So you work for the commissioner, you’re a senior adviser, you were hired two weeks ago and you’re instructed to ask us to not have any pictures taken here because the political leadership at DHS does not want the American people to know it,” Senator Cruz said. “Please respect the rules,” the staffer said. “You keep standing in front of the picture, so you don’t want the pictures taken, the rules are arbitrary, and they’re designed to keep the American people in the dark,” Senator Cruz said. Senator Cruz told Fox News the children in the Donna facility were testing positive for COVID-19 at “roughly” a 10 per cent rate. “They’re locking them in these cages where COVID in a pandemic is a real risk, it is inhumane, it is unconscionable, and it’s the direct result of the political decisions that Joe Biden has made,” he said. “It's massive, it's designed to hold a thousand people but under COVID restrictions, its capacity is 250. “It right now has over 4,000 people in it, it is at a 1,500 percent capacity and that meant you saw in these cages children, little boys and little girls, side by side, they're not six-feet apart, they’re not even six inches apart.”

BY ADAN SALAZAR

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/posts/biden-political-operative-blocks-ted-cruz-from-filming-illegals-in-detention-facilities/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

A political operative of the Biden Administration attempted to stop Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) from documenting the squalid conditions inside a crowded illegal immigrant detention facility in South Texas.

On Sunday, Cruz uploaded video of a woman blocking him filming as he tried to show the American people the inside of an overflowing detention center in Donna, Texas.

As Cruz attempted to film, a woman approached him to obstruct the camera view and telling him to “Please give dignity to the people.”

“This is not a zoo, sir,” the woman at one point tells Cruz, to which he responds, “You’re right and this is a dangerous place and your policies unfortunately are trying to hide them.”

Cruz, who was attempting to show hundreds of illegals wrapped in mylar blankets sleeping on floors inside the makeshift tent facilities, appears to be familiar with the woman.

“So you work for the commissioner,” Cruz tells her, “you’re a senior adviser, you were hired two weeks ago, and you’re instructed to ask us to not have any pictures taken here because the political leadership at DHS does not want the American people to know it.”

The outrageous video comes as Cruz called on the Biden administration to grant the media access to the facilities so Americans can see firsthand the out-of-control humanitarian crisis at the border.

“We understand the heartbreaking tragedy unfolding at the border because we were there. We saw it,” Cruz stated. “But the American people are unable to see it because you remain intent on keeping the media from shining a light on your administration’s failures.”

“This is outrageous. The Trump administration allowed media into DHS facilities. So did the Obama administration, the Bush administration and the Clinton administration. But you want to hide what is going on.”

Biden during a press conference Thursday suggested media access could be forthcoming, saying “I will commit to transparency, and – as soon as I am in a position to be able to implement what we are doing right now.”

Cruz’s letter says on Friday, however, reporters were still not allowed inside the Donna facility.

“They could not show the American people cages after cages of little boys lying side-by-side, of little girls lying side-by-side, covered with reflective emergency blankets with virtually no space between them,” Cruz says. “They could not see the playpen of infants and toddlers brought here by human traffickers and then left alone. They could not see the row of children who, having just been crammed into the crowded cages, were now testing positive for COVID-19.”

Biden Tries to Hide an Obvious Crisis at Border~Former DHS Chief Chad Wolf: Perverse Incentives Fueling Border Crisis

BY REP. DREW FERGUSON

SEE: https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/03/26/biden-tries-to-hide-an-obvious-crisis-at-border;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The full-blown humanitarian crisis on the southern border ultimately could threaten the safety and security of every single American. The Biden administration has failed to properly acknowledge the severity of the situation and seemingly is in total denial of just how dire the circumstances are.

Even more alarming, President Joe Biden has imposed a gag order on U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents, instructing the agency’s press officers to deny all ride-along requests and refer all questions—even from local reporters—to Washington for approval.

The Biden administration is trying to hide and impose censorship on the border crisis that everyone already knows is underway. In the past month alone, nearly 100,000 illegal immigrants have attempted to unlawfully enter our nation.

It’s clear that the administration’s slew of executive actions and policies have incentivized this illegal behavior, leading to an extreme uptick of criminal crossings. According to Customs and Border Protection, migrant encounters along the southern border are up 28% since January and up 173% since this time last year.

Keep in mind, these migrants aren’t adults only but also children and family units. Customs and Border Protection expects about 13,000 unaccompanied migrant children to reach the border by May and 117,000 by the end of the year. Apprehensions of family units are up 317% since last February.

Nearly one-third of migrants have been affected by human trafficking or other exploitative practices along their route. Some migrant women have shared that, as The New York Times reported, “sexual violence has become an inescapable part of the collective migrant journey.”

The rush we are seeing to cross the Rio Grande is a direct result of the Biden administration’s efforts to weaken border security, virtually eliminate enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, put a moratorium on deportations, and promise amnesty to undocumented immigrants residing in the country illegally. 

The administration also put a stop to the construction of the border wall, reinstated “catch and release,” and tied the hands of immigration enforcement officers.

The Biden administration recently awarded $86 million to cover hotel costs for migrants at the border in Texas and Arizona. These migrants are entering our country illegally, but instead of being sent back, they are greeted with hotel accommodations. That’s just plain wrong.

We also know that drug cartels actively are exploiting the administration’s dismal immigration stance to cross our southern border. Nationwide, drug seizures increased 50% in February from a month earlier.

Several known terrorists, or others reasonably suspected of terrorism, are capitalizing on this influx of migrants to fly under the radar and infiltrate our nation through our porous borders.

Without question, the Biden administration has failed to be transparent about the problem or even acknowledge that it is a crisis. Despite this, the administration deployed the Federal Emergency Management Agency—which coordinates the response to disasters in the U.S. and is another part of the Department of Homeland Security—to assist in handling this surge in migrants. If that doesn’t constitute a crisis, what does? 

The administration’s immigration policies are in fact a disaster, and they have failed monumentally as this crisis has developed.  

It’s deeply concerning that House Democrats’ answer to this growing problem has been to pass two bills that will further incentivize and reward illegal immigration with amnesty. 

To be clear: Whether Democrats like it or not, this is a full-blown national security and humanitarian emergency.

Our country cannot afford politically motivated policies that make our borders less secure, fail to uphold the rule of law, and damage public health.

But those are exactly the kind of policies President Biden has enacted since Day One of his presidency, and they have accelerated the crisis at the southern border dangerously. We need an immigration policy that prioritizes securing the border and protecting the health and safety of Americans first.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected] and we will consider publishing your remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. 

_________________________________________________________

Sen. Blackburn: Drug cartels are 'running the border'

Rumble — Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) shared what she saw during her trip to the southern border. One America's John Hines has more from Washington.

'Whatever You Do, We're Coming': Coyotes Heckle Senators at the Border

BY RICK MORAN

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2021/03/28/whatever-you-do-were-coming-coyotes-heckle-senators-at-the-border-n1435510;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Eighteen Republican senators decided to see for themselves what was happening at the border so they took a little excursion to Texas, visiting several border facilities run by the Border Patrol.

The trip to the border became necessary because the Biden administration has imposed a near-total news blackout on what’s happening there. The administration flunkie who was escorting the senators even asked that the lawmakers delete any pictures, a request echoed by border officials. Not surprisingly, the GOP senators refused to comply.

Indiana Senator Mike Braun described some of what he saw.

Washington Examiner:

Those photos showed children as young as 3 years old jammed into the facilities that Braun described as the worst situation for migrants in 20 years. He earlier provided Secrets with a video of migrants being held by the dozens under a bridge.

In a debriefing of the tour, Braun said that one of the first stops was with border agents at the edge of the Rio Grande, where illegal immigrants typically cross. There, he said, the “coyotes,” who charge $4,000 to $20,000 to get migrants across, heckled the group in Spanish.

“All of a sudden to hear from the other side of the river taunting from the smugglers and coyotes, most of it in Spanish, telling the border guards that ‘whatever you do, we’re coming,’” said Braun. “That kind of hit home in such an anecdotal way because it is one story that kind of is a metaphor for what’s happening all up and down the border,” he added.

“A big welcome sign was put out,” said Braun. “I think it was a political blunder.”

Sen. Ted Cruz describes seeing “cage after cage after cage” of children.

The Biden administration has made a big show of telling would-be migrants to stay away—that the law is the law and they will be deported if they showed up at the border. But the reality is far different.

CBS News:

U.S. agents in south Texas are not expelling Central American families with children younger than seven years of age to Mexico, according to a senior Border Patrol official who requested anonymity during a call with reporters Friday. Some of the migrant families encountered in south Texas are being flown to other Border Patrol sectors, like El Paso, and sent to Mexico from there, the official confirmed.

“We’re still leveraging Title 42 in other areas,” the Border Patrol official said, referring to the expulsions policy, which was first authorized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in March 2020.

Mr. Biden and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials have said that while they would like to expel most Central American families to Mexico under the Title 42 public health authority, Mexican authorities in the state of Tamaulipas, across from the Rio Grande Valley, are not accepting young children traveling with parents.

According to the Customs and Border Patrol, 86 percent of families processed at the border have been allowed into the U.S without being deported. There were 6,000 apprehensions at the border on Thursday and virtually none of the migrants were sent back.

Biden looked into the cameras during his press conference and said “nothing has changed” at the border. That was a lie. He said most people were being deported. That was a lie. He said the surge in unaccompanied minors at the border is normal. He lied. He’s allowing the release of illegal aliens into the country without giving them a court date. And he’s allowing unvetted sponsors to take children from border facilities.

Biden is getting away with his lies because, in addition to the media being in his pocket, he’s preventing any bad news from leaking out by muzzling the press.

Biden can improve the situation immensely by reimposing some Trump-era policies. But he’d better do it quickly. If the border isn’t already out of control, it soon will be.

Report: Border Crossings by Unaccompanied Children Will Rise Sharply in April

_____________________________________________________

Texas rancher says migrants entering property: 'Never seen it at this level'

John Sewell, Texas ranch owner, fears for his family's safety amid border crisis.

'The Five' react to 'shocking' images of facilities holding children at border

Sen. Lankford Says over 700 Migrants Crammed into Pod "Designed for 80" at Detention Facility

"[Migrant children] were taking turns laying down on the floor because there's no space ... None of this was true three months ago. Literally, when President Biden came in and announced that he was changing the policy, they showed us the stats and showed how it skyrocketed," Sen. James Lankford said Friday at a migrant facility in Donna, Texas.

US Announces $15,000,000 in Aid to Palestinians~Did the Taylor Force Act Mean Nothing?

BY HUGH FITZGERALD

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/03/us-announces-15000000-in-aid-to-palestinians-did-the-taylor-force-act-mean-nothing?;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Biden Administration’s U.N. ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, on March 24 announced at a meeting of the Security Council that the Biden Administration was giving $15 million dollars to the PA for “humanitarian aid.” A report on this development, both expected and deplorable, is here: “In first under Biden, US announces $15 million in aid for Palestinians,” by Jacob Magid, Times of Israel, March 25, 2021:

US Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield announced Thursday that Washington will send $15 million in COVID-related humanitarian aid to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

The package will be the first such funds transferred under the Biden administration, which has vowed to restore financial assistance to the Palestinians that was cut almost entirely by former president Donald Trump.

With this assistance, the US Agency for International Development is supporting Catholic Relief Services’ COVID-19 response efforts in healthcare facilities and for vulnerable families in the West Bank and Gaza,” Thomas-Greenfield said in an address to the UN Security Council’s monthly briefing on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, her first as envoy.

In addition, this assistance will support emergency food assistance programming to communities facing food insecurity, which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

This urgent, necessary aid is one piece of our renewed commitment to the Palestinian people. The aid will help Palestinians in dire need, which will bring more stability and security to both Israelis and Palestinians alike. That’s consistent with our interests and our values, and it aligns with our efforts to stamp out the pandemic and food insecurity worldwide,” she added.

A separate State Department statement also noted that the US has already donated $2 billion to the UN-backed COVAX initiative that works to vaccinate populations in developing countries. The Palestinians received their first shipment of inoculations from the program earlier this month.

It all sounds so admirable. COVID-19 aid? Who could object? And the aid would be going through Catholic Relief Services, which for many people signifies as good-samaritan an organization as one can find. What kind of person would want to prevent American aid from going to that group, so that it might give succor to suffering Palestinians? Who would wish to deny money for the vaccine, for “healthcare facilities” and for “emergency food assistance” to “vulnerable families”? Well, it’s the PA itself that has for years refused to spend money on health facilities, it’s the PA that has done little to remedy food insecurity, it’s the PA that, even after the pandemic had begun, failed to act, failed to buy a single dose of vaccine.

It’s the PA that has consistently denied its people the food and vaccines they needed; it’s the PA that chooses to spend so much of its money, about $350 million annually, on the “Pay-for-Slay” Program, that rewards past, and incentivizes future, acts of terrorism. It’s the PA that chose to build Mahmoud Abbas a $13 million mansion and buy him his $50 million jet. It’s Mahmoud Abbas who during his entire tenure as President has managed to skim, along with his crooked cronies, hundreds of millions of dollars in aid money. Abbas himself has amassed a personal fortune of $400 million; his cronies count theirs in the millions. Shouldn’t we be asking Abbas and the PA to spend more aid money on health care, and food, and vaccines, and end the mismanagement and colossal corruption that makes life so difficult for ordinary Palestinians, instead of continuing to overlook all that?

Plans to send the $15 million aid package were first reported earlier this month by The National, which retrieved an internal Biden administration memo that outlined its initial policy approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Taylor Force Act passed by the US Congress in 2018 bars Washington from sending aid that will directly benefit the Palestinian Authority as long as Ramallah continues sending regular stipends to those convicted of acts of terrorism. However, the humanitarian aid announced by Thomas-Greenfield would not violate the legislation, which the Biden administration has vowed to uphold.

How can the Biden administration maintain that giving this money to the PA does not violate the Taylor Force Act? Does it hope no one will be so hard-hearted as to demand the application of the provisions of the TFA, and deny the Palestinians COVID-19 aid? Of course, no one is denying the PA the possibility of buying vaccines. All the PA has to do is take just part of the money it now spends on its Pay-For-Slay program – about $350 million a year — and use it to buy vaccines. It’s the PA’s choice. The Taylor Force Act does not contain a special exemption for aid that the Biden people describe as “humanitarian.” The TFA text is quite clear: all American economic aid to the PA, whatever its stated purpose, is prohibited as long as the PA’s “Pay-For-Slay” program is in place.

The Biden Administration has “vowed to uphold” the Taylor Force Act, and in the same breath announces it will give $15 million to the PA even though its Pay-For-Slay program continues. Perhaps what the Biden people want us to believe is that “humanitarian” aid is different from “economic” aid. This is Jesuitical casuistry. Money given that is called “humanitarian” aid is not distinguishable from, but merely a subset of, “economic” aid.

The $15 million package also mirrors the COVID-related assistance sent to the West Bank and Gaza in the Trump administration’s final months.

The Trump Administration, when the pandemic had begun, sent $5 million to the PA. In doing so, it did indeed violate the Taylor Force Act. but it was such a small, symbolic amount, that one might excuse it with the rationale of de minimis non-curat lex. The Trump people may have wanted, as the pandemic loomed, to nudge the PA into rethinking its Pay-for-Slay program, but the PA refused, and there were no follow-up payments. That one-time payment should not now be invoked to justify a much larger transfer of American aid, which begins with this first installment of $15 million, amidst promises of much more aid to come, including renewal of by the Americans of annual payments of hundreds of millions of dollars to UNRWA.

The Taylor Force Act is now being violated by the Biden Administration. There is no other way to look at it. And more aid to the PA will mean ever more violations of TFA. Does anyone care? Yes, of course. You do. And I do. But what about Congress? Will the Democrats who now control both houses of Congress demand that the Democratic President enforce the TFA that a previous Congress had approved? Or will they overlook the violation of the TFA by Biden?  Will calling this renewal of American funds to the PA “humanitarian aid” be enough of a fig leaf to prevent the application of the provisions of the Taylor Force Act? It certainly looks that way.

Before the Trump administration began tightening the screws on the PA in 2018 for refusing to engage with its peace efforts, the United States was the single largest donor country to the PA.

The US paid hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the PA’s creditors, such as the Israeli state utility companies from which the Palestinians purchase water and electricity. It also paid for training for the PA’s security forces and numerous infrastructure projects.

Washington also gave hundreds of millions a year in funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency — known as UNRWA — which is in charge of administering the daily needs of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees and their descendants across the Middle East. The Biden administration has stated that it plans to restart funding to UNWRA as well.

The UN envoy [Linda Thomas-Greenfield] used the opportunity to address what she viewed as the Security Council’s disproportionate focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “There are other issues in the region that are threats to international peace and security and deserve more of this council’s attention,” she said.

Her remark about “other issues in the region” to which insufficient attention is paid at the U.N. is both obvious and sure to go largely unheeded at the Security Council. Here are some of those insufficiently addressed issues: Civil wars in Yemen, Syria, and Libya. A collapsed economy in Hezbollah-ruled Lebanon. An aggressive Iran working simultaneously to build a nuclear weapon and to create, through proxies and allies – the Houthis in Yemen, the Kata’ib Hezbollah in Iraq, the Syrian army in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, a “Shi’a crescent” from the Gulf to the Mediterranean. Those are some of the “other issues in the region” that are given less attention while the focus remains, always, on Israel and its many malefactions.

The monstrous regiment of Israel-haters at the U.N., and those countries that simply go along with those haters because it’s diplomatically the path of least resistance, will continue to ensure that more critical attention is given to, and calumny heaped upon, the mighty empire of Israel than to any other country, at the General Assembly, at the Security Council, and especially, at the U.N. Human Rights Council. The UNHRC has passed more resolutions (90) denouncing Israel in the last few years, than similar resolutions passed (70) about all the 191 other countries put together.

“Let me be clear,” Thomas-Greenfield added, going on to reiterate a sentiment she conveyed at her Senate confirmation hearing earlier this year. “Not all criticism of Israel is illegitimate. But too often, that criticism veers dangerously into anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism, as with all forms of hate, works directly against the cause of peace. So, we will vigorously oppose one-sided efforts.”

In the rest of her speech, Thomas-Greenfield repeated some of the Biden administration’s already announced policies on the conflict. She said the US would continue to support Israel while also advancing a two-state solution that would allow Palestinians to fulfill their right to self-determination.

Would it be churlish to remind Thomas-Greenfield, and all the peace-processors in the Biden Administration, that as part of their “right to self-determination” the Palestinians include their right to undermine, and ultimately to dominate and destroy, the Jewish state? Hamas and Fatah differ on timing and tactics, but not on the ultimate goal.

She urged both sides to avoid unilateral steps that would make a two-state solution more difficult to achieve. This, she said, included settlement expansion, home demolitions, incitement to violence, providing compensation for individuals imprisoned for acts of terrorism and all acts of violence.

“Settlement expansion” by Israel is deplored as a threat to a “two-state solution.” But those settlements are to be actively encouraged, according to the Mandate for Palestine, which the Biden Administration seems to have trouble remembering or, which is more likely, and even worse, perhaps doesn’t know its contents or understand its continuing relevance. According to Article 6 of the Mandate, the Mandatory authority, Great Britain, was obligated to “facilitate Jewish immigration” and “encourage close settlement by Jews on the land.” What land? The land set out in the Mandate maps, the land that was to become the future Jewish National Home. To wit: the land from the Golan in the north to the Red Sea in the south, and from the Jordan River in the east to the Mediterranean in the west. That meant that Judea and Samaria – renamed the “West Bank” by Jordan in 1950 — was to be open to Jewish settlement. In 1967, Israel was able to exercise its pre-existing right to create those settlements throughout the “West Bank.” Inexplicably, almost everyone wants to forget about the Palestine Mandate, and to pretend that some sort of legal significance ought to be given to the 1949 armistice lines, though these were never recognized borders, and only reflected where the armies of Israel and the Arabs stood when the guns fell silent on a certain day in 1949.

Thomas-Greenfield and the Administration of which she is a part are hoping that Congress will not object to what they are calling “humanitarian aid” being given to the PA; they are starting small, with a $15 million payment, to see if that amount passes muster, and if so, then will proceed with their tactic of “first a little, thence to more,” until hundreds of millions of dollars in so-called “humanitarian aid” are again given to the Palestinians, who will still have their Pay-For-Slay program in place. Taylor Force will have been undermined, even as the Administration preposterously claims to be “upholding” it. And Joe Biden, as he lies abed a’nights thinking of all the poor Palestinians his massive renewal of aid will have helped, can complacently think to himself “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.” Don’t talk to him about the Taylor Force Act; he”ll cover his ears.

And the spectacle of terrorists and their families continuing to be so hugely rewarded for their murderous attacks on Israelis will continue to inspire other Palestinians to go and do likewise. The Israelis will thus pay, in lives destroyed or ended, for the naivete and fatuity of the Biden Administration.

 

WARNING: New Sesame Street Muppets Brainwash Infants and Toddlers about Racism (Video)

BY AMY MEK

SEE: https://rairfoundation.com/warning-new-sesame-street-muppets-brainwash-infants-and-toddlers-about-racism-video/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

US left-wing run children’s television show “Sesame Street” has released videos featuring two new muppets to brainwash children as young as infants about race and racism.

African-American dad Elijah and his son Wes are featured in one of the videos, talking to red muppet Elmo about differences in skin color due to melanin.

 

The new muppets were introduced as part of the “ABCs of Racial Literacy” video resources, produced by non-profit Sesame Workshop as part of its commitment to “social justice”, or better known as communism.

The concept of “social justice” is a smokescreen for the old-fashioned divide-and-conquer weapon deployed by communists. From a young age, these social justice warriors exploit differences to evoke hostilities among children in order to indoctrinate them.

Sesame Workshop, the non-profit behind Sesame Street, said it wants to “provide families with the tools they need to build racial literacy, to have open conversations with young children.”

“The work to dismantle racism begins by helping children understand what racism is and how it hurts and impacts people,” Kay Wilson Stallings, Sesame Workshop’s executive vice president of creation and production explained.

The group also provides activities for kids as well as tutorials for parents to teach children as young as infants about the dangers of racism.

The muppets have long been accused of pushing a communist agenda. In 2011, a national debate erupted after a commentator on Fox News stated that the new Muppets movie sends a clear, anti-corporate message to kids and adults who watch. The movie centered around an oil baron conflict and a subversive anti-capitalism message.
Support our work at RAIR Foundation USA! We are a grassroots activist team and we need your help! Please consider making a donation here: https://rairfoundation.com/donate/

Leaked Docs Show Obama FTC Gave Google Its Monopoly

March 22, 2021

Leaked Docs Show Obama FTC Gave Google Its Monopoly

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

SEE: https://tinyletter.com/Rachel_Bovard/letters/leaked-docs-show-obama-ftc-gave-google-its-monopoly

Good afternoon,

In 2012, the Federal Trade Commission had an opportunity to go after Google on antitrust grounds. In 2013, the agency closed the investigation and dropped the case. A remarkable leak of those investigatory documents -- usually kept confidential -- reveals the extent to which the FTC relied on speculative economic forecasting over actual evidence of market distortions. Moreover, the pressure Google applied to the FTC through its deep ties to the Obama Administration suggest that the lack of enforcement had a political bent.

My take on all of this -- and what it means as Congress grapples with our antitrust laws and the growing power of Big Tech -- in the piece below.

Thanks,
Rachel
 Leaked Docs Show Obama FTC Gave Google Its Monopoly After Google Execs Helped Obama Get Re-Elected

Leaked documents from the FTC's 2012 investigation of

Google show exactly what is wrong with the state of American antitrust enforcement.

Eight years ago, the Federal Trade Commission had the chance to face down Google — the giant of Silicon Valley whose power now alters the free flow of information at a global scale, distorts market access for businesses large and small, and changes the nature of independent thought in ways the world has never experienced.

Instead, the FTC blinked — and blinked hard, choosing to close the investigation in early 2013. A remarkable leak to Politico of agency documents about the 2012 Google investigation reveals that, despite ample evidence of market distortions and threats to competition presented by the agency’s lawyers, the five commissioners of the FTC deferred instead to speculative claims by their economists.

Records and reporting about the 2012 investigation suggest the FTC did so while bending to political pressure from the Obama White House — which was, in turn, bending to political pressure from Google. William Kovacic, a former FTC chair under President George W. Bush, reviewed the more than 3,00 pages of documents leaked to Politico and concluded the agency overlooked “what many experts and regulators would consider clear antitrust violations,” calling the specificity of issues outlined “breathtaking.”

In short, where we find ourselves today — with Google as the primary filter of the world’s information, engaging in a network of exclusionary contracts and anti-competitive conduct, and subject to an antitrust lawsuit led by the Department of Justice and joined by 48 state attorneys general — could have, and should have, been avoided.

That it wasn’t, however, provides key takeaways about where we are now with Big Tech, and, in particular, the method of enforcement of our antitrust laws, whose application has become too tightly wrapped around the axle of price, and captured by the speculative science of economic forecasting. It also reveals just how politicized antitrust enforcement has become — influenced by the siren song of internet exceptionalism and the powerful tug of Google, one of the world’s richest companies.

The Economists Were Wrong

Perhaps the most stunning takeaway in the 2012 documents is the extent to which the recommendations of the FTC’s lawyers sharply differed from those of the agency’s economists, on whose judgment the FTC commissioners ultimately relied in their decision to drop the investigation into Google.

The FTC’s antitrust attorneys concluded that Google was breaking the law by “banishing potential competitors” with a series of exclusionary contracts on mobile phones — much of which forms the basis for the lawsuit brought nearly a decade later by the Trump Department of Justice. The FTC’s economists, however, demurred, insisting that claims of Google’s market dominance were unfounded and would soon give way to competition. This required a markedly un-curious treatment of key facts.

The economists claimed, for example, that Google only represented 10 to 20 percent of the referral traffic to retail sites — disregarding statements from Google itself that those numbers were unreliable, as well as evidence from staff attorneys that Google’s referral traffic to retail provided closer to 70-90 percent. A pair of FTC economists made what Politico deemed “questionable assertions” about Google’s dominance of the advertising markets, citing as their evidence a study by Google and two academic papers funded by grants from Google.

Among other claims, two economists also alleged that Google’s grip on the market for mobile devices would fall in the face of competition from Amazon and Mozilla — and that the mobile distribution channel for search was too small a market to be relevant.

History has borne out how spectacularly wrong the economists were. This brings forward a key element of the over-reliance on an ever-narrowing set of criteria around which our antitrust laws are now enforced. It over-emphasizes speculative economic forecasting over hard market realities.

Coherent economic principles are central to antitrust enforcement for good reason — otherwise, justification for enforcement would swing wildly on ideological ballasts. But, like the consumer welfare standard’s current application, which is narrowly fixated on price (as opposed to a broad application that considers other factors, like consumer choice and innovation), economic forecasting has taken a premier and unquestionable seat among antitrust enforcers.

In particular, an over-reliance on a cost-benefit tool called the error-cost framework has made enforcers gun-shy about acting at all. Enforcers now largely defer to benefit claims made by the merging parties – and the economists these companies can afford to hire, who conveniently produce speculative analysis to buttress their points – while appearing to ignore hard evidence by senior executives clearly stating an anticompetitive intent behind a merger or business strategy.

In the case of Google, for example, one top executive bragged in an email that Google could “own the U.S. market” with its exclusive contracts with major phone makers and carriers. The FTC’s attorneys concluded Google was breaking competition laws. The agency’s economists, however, said there was no issue because they “expected” the mobile search to remain a small market.

In the FTC’s ultimate judgment, speculative analysis and complex econometric modeling reigned supreme over pragmatic facts regarding anti-competitive market behavior. This flips the intended calculus on its head.

Judge Robert Bork, one of the progenitors of the consumer welfare standard, explicitly warned against pushing economics beyond its competence. In his seminal book, “The Antitrust Paradox,” Bork wrote that “antitrust must avoid any standards that require direct measurement and quantification of either restriction of output or efficiency. Such tasks are impossible.”

He goes on, “The real objection to performance tests and efficiency defenses in antitrust law is that they are spurious. They cannot measure the factors relevant to consumer welfare, so that after the economic extravaganza was completed we should know no more than before it began.” Finally, Judge Bork notes that “the judge, the legislator, or lawyer cannot simply take the word of an economist in dealing with antitrust, for the economists will certainly disagree.”

Economic analysis, in other words, is a component, not the whole, of the analysis. Antitrust economics can help assess, but cannot ultimately determine, the scope of antitrust policy in its most rational form: determining who is being harmed, and how.

In 2012, the FTC made the critical error of letting economic speculation subsume the hard market evidence that former FTC chair William Kovacic called “specific, direct, and clear about the path ahead.” In its final judgment, the agency prioritized the “economic extravaganza” that Judge Bork explicitly warned against. They were wrong, and the market consequences have been severe.

Google’s Thumb on the Scale

The FTC was not acting in a vacuum, however. Although an independent agency, four of the FTC’s five commissioners voting on the Google probe were appointed by the Obama administration, which was notably close to Silicon Valley and very much bought into the notion of America’s internet exceptionalism.

According to The New York Times in 2016, President Obama was “America’s first truly digital president,” the leader who “routinely pushed policy that pleases the tech-savvy” and boasted “deep and meaningful connections” with Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Steve Jobs.

In 2012, Google employees were the second-largest source of campaign donations by any single U.S. company besides Microsoft. Google employees were senior aides at the White House and Google executives served on White House advisory panels. On Nov. 6, 2012, the day Obama was re-elected to a second term, Eric Schmidt, Google’s then-executive chairman, “personally oversaw a voter-turnout software system for Mr. Obama,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

The frequent contact between Google and the White House continued during the FTC’s investigation. A report published in 2015 by the Wall Street Journal detailed the “unusual” depth of Google’s engagement with the Obama administration, finding the company had clocked 230 meetings with senior White House officials, roughly one per week. Their top lobbyist Johanna Shelton darkened White House doors for more than 60 meetings. By April of 2016, according to another report, Shelton had notched 128 White House meetings.

Google has reportedly also attempted to dictate how the FTC discusses both the company and the dropped antitrust case. When the Wall Street Journal published a partial leak of the FTC’s Google investigation documents in 2015 (later fully leaked to Politico) demonstrating the depth of disagreement between the agency’s staff and the final commission vote, Shelton emailed the agency’s chief of staff to state Google was “troubled” and “puzzled” by the FTC’s non-response. She asked the agency to issue a statement that “set the record straight.” A statement was issued two days later.

Congressional Oversight Is Desperately Needed

Thanks in part to the FTC’s whiff on Google in 2012, the power of Big Tech has continued to grow, unchecked and largely unrivaled. Antitrust enforcement is once again emerging as a key remedy to the anti-competitive and market-distorting elements of what is undeniably oligarchic power.

But to avoid the mistakes of 2012, congressional oversight is desperately needed: over how our antitrust laws are being enforced, if that enforcement aligns with the congressional intent of the statutes, if the enforcement agencies are adequately resourced for the task, and whether statutory interpretation needs clarification for the digital economy.

Big Tech is pouring big money into the policy and academic arguments that claim such efforts would “politicize” antitrust enforcement, away from the pristine science of economic analysis. But if FTC’s actions in 2012 are any indication, antitrust enforcement is already well-politicized, and economic analysis, while a useful guidepost, is not a compass. In fact, an over-reliance on the error-cost framework can render our antitrust laws completely moot in the face of real market threats.

In many areas, Congress has largely abandoned its role as the lawmaking body, preferring instead to outsource policy development to bureaucrats and the courts. It is encouraging, therefore, to see both the House and Senate engaging in scrutiny of antitrust enforcement for Big Tech.

The FTC of 2012 has given them a helpful guide by highlighting the areas of weakness in our current enforcement analysis, and the capture by billion-dollar interests that can defer it. In other words, the leaked FTC memos are a flashing red light that all is not well in the world of American antitrust enforcement. The antitrust agencies have effectively privatized antitrust law. Congress must democratize it again.

Rachel Bovard is the senior director of policy at the Conservative Partnership Institute.