More worrying signs of inflation, more evidence of Biden family corruption, more creepy child sex offenders, F-35s are stacking up, and an infamous movie may finally have a premiere. It’s the Friday LinkSwarm!
This is Memorial Day weekend, and in Texas there’s a runoff election on May 28, so be sure to vote if you have a runoff in your area. (There are no Republican runoffs in Williamson County.)
House Democrats’ reelection campaigns have accepted $6.5 million from three major political families, which have helped bankroll several student groups participating in the protests. The family members cut most of those checks over the last two years, although some of the donations to longstanding House members came over the last decade.
The names are well-known among Democratic funding circles: Soros, Rockefeller, and Pritzker. Yet before the anti-Jewish protests swept college campuses over the last few months, their financial ties to the student groups were not widely known. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, a member of the same wealthy Pritzker family, is not among the donors.
Several investigative media reports over the last month have uncovered the extensive financial ties between these families and student groups involved in organizing anti-Israel protests and activism across the country predating the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel and in its aftermath and during Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.
The donors to student groups include George Soros, a billionaire philanthropist and Democratic campaign contributor who helms the Open Society Foundation and his family members; the Pritzkers, the owners of Hyatt Hotels Corporation; and members of the famed Rockefeller family, including relatives of the wealthy American Banker and philanthropist David Rockefeller. The donations have either gone directly to student groups involved in campus demonstrations or to umbrella foundations and organizations, which have, in turn, channeled the funds to the protestors.
The House Democratic Congressional Committee and the House Majority PAC, which was founded by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and is directly affiliated with the House Democratic leadership, collected most of those funds, nearly $5.5 million by those two Democratic campaign entities alone, FEC records show.
Meanwhile, 30 House Democrats, including Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other members of the leadership, received a combined total of $856,858 from the Soros, Pritzker, and Rockefeller families, while a dozen Democratic candidates in competitive races received a total of $139,000. RCP did not examine Senate recipients.
The House members in competitive races who received funds from at least one of the three families include Reps. Mary Peltola of Alaska, Mike Levin of California, Yadira Caraveo of Colorado, Johana Hayes of Connecticut, Eric Sorensen of Illinois, Frank Mrvan of Indiana, Sharice Davids, Jared Golden, Hillary Scholten, Angie Craig of Minnesota, Don Davis, Chris Pappas of New Hampshire, Gabe Vasquez, of New Mexico, Susie Lee of Nevada, Steven Horsford of Nevada, Paty Ryan of New York, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Andrea Salinas of Oregon, Susan Wild of Pennsylvania, and Matt Cartwright of Pennsylvania.
Craig’s campaigns have received the most of any other House member from the three families: $96,490 since 2018. Lee’s campaign received the second most: $75,000 since 2017.
The Democratic candidates who accepted donations from at least one of the three families include Kirsten Engel in Arizona; Adam Gray, Rudy Salas, George Whitesides, and Will Rollins in California; Lanon Baccam in Iowa; Tony Vargas in Nebraska; Lauren Gillen, Mondaire Jones, and Josh Riley in New York; Ashley Ehasz in Pennsylvania; and Michelle Vallejo in Texas.
American households gained net worth under Trump. Under Biden, adjusted for inflation, it’s gone negative.
Inflation isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. “In fact, the progressive political class does have a plan to deal with the national debt. Their plan is to perpetuate inflation and thereby to engineer a slow-motion stealth default on the debt that will enable them to continue to enjoy without disruption the political benefits that flow to them from their irresponsible debt-funded vote buying.”
A trove of new whistleblower documents provided to House GOP investigators reveal, among other things, that the CIA prevented federal investigators from pursuing Hollywood lawyer Kevin Morris as a witness in their investigation of Hunter Biden.
Morris, a Hollywood entertainment lawyer who has ‘long supported’ Hunter (and why?) has loaned the First Son more than $6.5 million, according to a January letter to the House oversight committee.
We’ve known about the CIA connection since March, when the Chairmen of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees, Jim Jordan (R-OH) and James Comer (R-KY) said that a whistleblower has brought them information that ‘seems to corroborate our concerns’ that the CIA directly interfered with DOJ and IRS investigations of Hunter Biden.
According to a whistleblower, the CIA “intervened in the investigation of Hunter biden to prevent the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) from interviewing a witness,” the letter, addressed to CIA Director William Burns, reads.
Specifically, the Committees were concerned at how “the DOJ deviated from its standard processes to afford preferential treatment to Hunter Biden,” which they learned “after two brave whistleblowers testified to Congress” that the Justice Department had done just that.
According to Hunter Biden’s business associate, Devon Archer, he and Hunter Biden were equal owners of Rosemont Seneca Bohai, and that entity was used by both individuals. According to evidence provided by the IRS whistleblowers, Hunter Biden was the beneficial owner of the entity’s associated bank account, which was used to receive Hunter’s salary from Burisma and to receive foreign wires, such as funds allegedly transferred from a Kazakhstani individual through an entity that were then used to purchase a Porsche for Hunter Biden. Congressional investigators questioned Hunter Biden during his February 28th deposition regarding his connection to Rosemont Seneca Bohai, as well as bank accounts associated with the entity.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu dishes the truth on fellow governors. Andrew Cuomo? “Complete jackass. No one like him.” Gavin Newsom? “Just a prick.” (Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)
“Bill Maher Scolds Pearl-Clutching Lefties Over Harrison Butker Tradwife Speech.” For feminists, evidently being a traditional wife and mother isn’t an allowable “choice.”
Hmmmm: “Lockheed Running Out Of Parking Space For F-35s Pentagon Refuses To Accept.” “Last summer, the DOD put a complete freeze on accepting the stealth fighters until Lockheed fixed huge hardware and software problems associated with ‘Technology Refresh-3′ (TR-3), a $1.8 billion package intended to expand the planes’ capabilities.”
Media Matters for America, the group that thinks American journalists just aren’t leftwing enough, just had a massive layoff, thanks in part to a defamation lawsuit from Elon Musk. Thanks, Elon! (Hat tip: Dwight.)
Red Lobster filed for bankruptcy and is closing 87 locations, none in Austin. Evidently an “Endless Shrimp” promotion was a big contributing factor, which suggests executive learned nothing from the losses they incurred in a similar endless crab promotion in 2003…
Could the infamous, uncompleted Jerry Lewis movie The Day the Clown Cried finally be screened this year? Maybe. Lewis gave the footage to the Library of Congress in 2014, specifying it couldn’t be seen for ten years, which puts it next month. But evidently there are a lot of editing required before that debacle could be seen in anything close to final form.
Speculation as to Trump’s 2024 is in full swing, and Sean Trende has an entry in the genre that’s half obvious and half “What are you smoking?”
10. Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.
No way in hell. There’s a palpable lack of enthusiasm for Haley among the GOP base, and her primary backers are a tiny cadre of bitter NeverTrumpers. Trump will win South Carolina going away, and the only people likely to back Trump who wouldn’t otherwise would be those Haley campaign staffers hired on for the big show.
9. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
Maybe. A safe choice and part of a play to bring middle and upper class white women back into the GOP fold. But not much wow factor, and Arkansas is another state Trump will win running away.
8. Sen. J.D. Vance, Ohio.
Vance won his senate race, but he didn’t knock it out of the park. Trump won Ohio in 2020 so there’s no reason to think he won’t win it this time around. Don’t see it.
2. Former Hawai’i Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.
A good bit more exciting than Haley, and maybe it would play well with young voters, but a pretty long shot. Would give Democrats a bit of the vapors, but Hawaii is too blue a state for this pick to make it competitive. Plus the last Veep nominee to be successfully elected from the House was John Nance Garner, and he was Speaker of the House (and a very powerful and effective one) and the runner-up to FDR in the 1932 Democratic race, not an obscure back-bencher from the other party with all of one losing Presidential run under her belt.
South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott.
Right now, this would be my odds-on favorite for Trump to select, and is probably the pick that has Democrats most worried. The Democratic Party is already losing black voters to Trump, and another 10% loss thanks to a Scott pick might put Pennsylvania and Michigan beyond the margin of fraud.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.
This would be a safe pick in the Pence mode, the base won’t object to him (the way they might over, say, Gabbard or Haley), but Texas is another state Trump wins going away.
4. Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds.
If you’re going to pick a white, female governor, Reynolds is a better pick than Haley, Kay Ivey is too old for a ticket balance pick, and Noem has managed to take herself out of the picture (🐕 🔫), but Reynolds is squishy on a wide range of culture war issues, and isn’t even as well-liked as Sanders. And Iowa is another state Trump won handily.
North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum.
Beloved by election wonks but unknown nationally, and another state Trump will win handily. Don’t see it.
2. Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin.
A credible pick who’s on the right side of the culture wars that would be popular with the base and put Virginia in play. But, by that standard, Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears might be an even better pick, with additional appeal to blacks voters. She would be higher on my list than most of Trende’s picks.
1. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.
The irrational enthusiasm for Rubio among certain segments of the punditry remind me of the similar irrational enthusiasm for Jeb!
This meme still cracks me up.
Rubio is an intellectual lightweight who did poorly in the 2016 Presidential race, would make the ticket constitutionally ineligible to receive Florida’s votes (something Trende unconvincingly tap dances around), and I see no signs that Rubio would draw Hispanics to the ticket in places like Nevada and Arizona, despite Trende’s assertions, which seem more like wishcasting than analysis.
Of Trende’s list, Scott, Youngkin, Sanders, and Abbott strike me as credible choices. I’d also add Earle-Sears, Alabama Senator Katie Britt (age/sex balancing the ticket), Rand Paul (libertarian/youth appeal), and former New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez (play for that state), all of which strike me as more likely picks than Rubio.
But Trump has a long history of doing the unexpected…
You may have heard something about a remake of Time Bandits and thought “that sounds like a bade idea.” An even worse idea? Making it without dwarves*.
“Yet another Hollywood reboot that seems to be kicking actors with dwarfism to the curb. So why does Hollywood hate people with dwarfism?”
“I mean, if you were a ginger person with dwarfism, then you’d really be fucked.”
“Time Bandits is getting a reboot, uh, continuation, reimagining, whatever on Apple TV+ and this is the cast.” Not a dwarf in sight.
“Actors with dwarfism who are like, hey, it’s hard enough to get roles right now, so why you keep replacing us with CGI creatures? Hugh Grant was an Oompa Loompa.”
“In their quest to not be offensive, they’re actually making sure that some people are not getting work.”
The same thing happened with Disney’s live-action Snow White before Disney did a 180.
No one (or at least no one rational) was offended when Terry Gilliam used actual dwarves in the original.
“Paradoxically fantasy films such as Time Bandits have often been the one genre in which filmmakers have liberated actors with dwarfism to be fully human.”
“Every character now has to be a black lesbian, because that’s this year’s flavor.”
The Willow reboot was such a massive failure they purged it from Disney+.
I’m far from a fanatic that actor X must share characteristic Y with the person they’re portraying, but when it comes to dwarves in films about dwarves, come on. Plus it’s cheaper, better and more convincing that CGI. Also, I’m pretty sure that every dwarf/midget/little person in Hollywood save Peter Dinklage needs the work more than Lisa Kudrow…
*I know my spellchecker wants me to spell it “dwarfs.” I’m going with Tolkien and D&D on this one.
After the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposed a new rule expanding federal firearm license (FFL) requirements, the Office of the Texas Attorney General and Gun Owners of America filed a joint lawsuit challenging the rule, and on Sunday secured a federal court order blocking the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) from enforcing the rule against certain plaintiffs.
The DOJ claimed the rule was to help implement the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) authored by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), but critics, including Cornyn, say the Biden administration violated the law and the Constitution in proposing the rule.
The rule has prompted Cornyn to file a resolution of disapproval in the U.S. Senate seeking to strike it down legislatively.
Under the rule, gun owners would be forced to obtain an FFL and perform background checks before selling firearms in a wide range of new circumstances, including if they rented a table at a local gun show.
However, the court order by Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk compares the language of the BSCA against the new rule, highlighting how FFL requirements evolved from the original statute contained in the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986 to the current statutory language in the BSCA, and finally compared that to the new rule.
The FOPA required those “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms to have an FFL. It defined such persons as one “who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.”
The BSCA changed the “engaged in the business” definition, broadening it by eliminating the requirement that a person’s “principal objective” of purchasing and reselling firearms must include both “livelihood and profit,” by shortening the requirement to just someone who predominantly earns a profit, Kacsmaryk explained.
He also noted the BSCA did not alter an existing exemption for a person who “makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.”
Kacsmaryk wrote the new rule likely violated statutory laws in several ways, beginning with the requirement that a person who sells a single firearm or discusses selling a firearm could be subjected to licensure requirements under the rule conflicts.
Another provision he said likely runs afoul of the BSCA is the prohibition of firearms obtained for personal protection from being counted among the guns a firearm owner may sell from their personal collection.
“Nothing in the foregoing text suggests that the term “personal collection” does not include firearms accumulated primarily for personal protection — yet that is exactly what the Final Rule asserts,” Kacsmaryk wrote, adding the DOJ’s defense of that provision is “untenable.”
“I am relieved that we were able to secure a restraining order that will prevent this illegal rule from taking effect,” Paxton said in a statement on the order. “The Biden Administration cannot unilaterally overturn Americans’ constitutional rights and nullify the Second Amendment.”
en. John Cornyn (R-Texas) took up two pieces of Second Amendment-related legislation last week, filing a resolution of disapproval aiming to shoot down a proposed rule by the Biden administration to require federal firearms licenses (FFL) for most private gun sales, and a separate bill seeking to relax taxes imposed on firearms regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA).
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) proposed a rule that greatly expands the circumstances in which someone is required to hold an FFL in order to sell a firearm, and when someone must conduct a background check on a potential buyer.
In proposing the rule, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said its purpose was to finalize the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), legislation authored by Cornyn that passed in 2022. However, Cornyn says the rule violates congressional intent.
The rule would greatly expand upon the circumstances in which someone is required to obtain an FFL, including if they rent a table at a gun show, make firearm purchases in an amount that exceeds their reportable income for a specific period of time, create records that track profits and losses from firearm sales, or any combination of a litany of details that could result in requiring a license.
According to Cornyn, the BSCA was motivated after the mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde that killed 19 children and two teachers. He also provided the mass shooting in Odessa as an example of what the bill was intended to prevent.
Addressing media questions regarding the resolution, Cornyn pointed out that the Odessa gunman was known to suffer from mental illness. He obtained the rifle used in the city-wide shooting spree from a Lubbock man who was purchasing bulk rifle parts from the internet, which he would assemble into functional rifles and sell as part of a regular business.
The man who sold the AR-15-style rifle to the Odessa gunman, Marcus Braziel, was convicted of acting as an unlicensed firearm dealer and failing to conduct a background check that would have prevented the sale of the rifle.
“Those making a living or profit for a business motive was the focus of the law, not those casually buying or selling their personal guns,” Cornyn told reporters.
“This rule is proof that the Biden administration is a dishonest broker, and Congress must hold it accountable for its actions in favor of its gun-grabbing liberal base over the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans,” Cornyn added in a statement on the resolution.
The resolution currently has 45 co-sponsors in the Senate.
The NRA has some new officers, and there are a few surprises.
Bob Barr representing the Old Guard did win the Presidency. The vote was 37-30. Then the surprises began. Bill Bachenberg from the reform slate went head to head with Blaine Wade for 1st VP and won 36-31. Following that, reformer Mark Vaughan, president of the Oklahoma Rifle Association, beat Tom King 35-31. King really represented the Old Guard and his defeat was a sea change in attitude on the Board.
Second, and what I consider the biggest surprise, Doug Hamlin, Executive Director of Publications and the reformer’s choice for EVP, beat Ronnie Barrett for EVP/CEO. There is some talk that Hamlin is intended as an interim choice while a nationwide search is conducted.
The excessive power that Wayne LaPierre gathered to the Executive Vice President position is part of the problem with the office, and is what let LaPierre turn the NRA into his own personal fiefdom. A lot of that should be stripped away and returned to the board.
More NRA news: The move to Texas resolution failed. Short term, there’s no question that move to Texas was planned as a Hail Mary to extract LaPierre from the legal troubles his corruption had ensnared the NRA in, and in that it failed. Long term, it probably is in the best interest of the NRA to move to Texas, as the state is a lot more friendly to gun rights, both politically and culturally, than either New York or Virginia.
And speaking of NRA news, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that Dwight covered his trip to the convention, so if you’re interested in that, head over there and just keep scrolling.
Here’s news that will be catnip to conservative activists.
Former President Donald Trump has strongly hinted at considering Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for a cabinet spot should he win in November, but now he’s made it explicit.
Over the weekend at the National Rifle Association’s convention in Dallas, Trump was asked by Fox 4’s Steven Dial whether Paxton is a name worth considering for U.S. attorney general. He told Dial, “I would, actually [consider Paxton]. He’s very very talented. We have a lot of people that want that one and will be very good at it.”
“But he’s a very talented guy. I fought for him when he had the difficulty [in impeachment] and he won. He had some people after him and I thought it was very unfair. He’s been a great attorney general.”
Paxton’s legal team defeated the impeachment effort last year, and then the long-running case against him over alleged securities fraud was dropped just before he was set to go to trial. The Whistleblower case against the Office of the Attorney General, which served as a basis for impeachment, remains underway, though depositions were paused.
This isn’t the first time Trump has gestured about a Paxton appointment should he win another term in the White House. Back in November, he mentioned Paxton among others in an interview with The Texan. The former president also mentioned Paxton in a February interview with Fox News alongside Gov. Greg Abbott, during which he noted the governor as a potential candidate for vice president. Abbott has since said he’s not interested.
The Texas attorney general has long been an ally of Trump, most notably filing the 2020 challenge against four states for changing their election laws without permission from their respective legislatures — something Texas did too, but which wasn’t included in the suit.
Paxton was ultimately endorsed by Trump for re-election in 2022, though the former president dragged out the process, considering both Paxton and his eventual runoff opponent George P. Bush.
Last month, Paxton flew to New York City to join Trump at his ongoing criminal trial — a proceeding that Paxton called “a sham of a trial” and a “travesty of justice.”
At the same event, Trump also reiterated his endorsements of challengers to Texas House incumbents David Covey, Alan Schoolcraft, and Helen Kerwin, along with Texas Senate candidate Brent Hagenbuch.
It would be quite satisfying to watch Paxton help undo the radical agenda of the Biden Administration and carry on the campaign against federal overreach from within the federal government.
A lot of possible appointments get floated during campaign season, and there’s no shortage of potential Attorney General candidates. But a whole lot of conservative names floated as possible appointments during Trump’s presidential run (Brett Kavanaugh, Neal Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett being three that most readily come to mind). So there’s a definite possibility that this could come to pass in Trump’s second term.
It may be a stretch to say that everyone’s favorite bombastic Brit petrolhead-turned-farmer is saving UK farming, but he certainly seems to have drawn attention to its post-Brexit, regulation-strangled plight.
“In 2008, during the peak of Top Gear, Jeremy bought a thousand acres of land and farm called Curdle Hill Farm in Oxfordshire England, near Chipping Norton in the Cotswalds. The land came up for sale during the 2008 financial crash and was going for a lot cheaper than usual. When I say ‘cheaper,’ I mean £4.25 million.”
Clarkson: “The truth of the matter was that land almost never comes up for sale around here, and 2008 was the big financial crash, and this came up for sale, and I just thought ‘nobody’s making more land,’ so many people are moving out from London. But it was a lot, lot, lot, lot, lot less then, so I just thought ‘may as well get it.'”
Also for something to leave to his children, since you don’t pay estate taxes on agricultural land.
The guy Clarkson was paying to farm the land for him retired in 2019. That and Flu Manchu gave birth to Jeremy Clarkson, Novice Farmer and newly rechristened Diddly Squat Farm.
I’m going to skip over the details of his farmhouse renovation…
…and note that the new house has a basement theater, among other amenities, so he’s not exactly roughing it.
“Due to the weather, the farm’s crops brought in £90,000 less than the previous year, leaving them with only a profit of £144.”
“When the show released the following year Clarkson’s Farm became the most watched Prime Video Original Series in the UK.” It’s also been at the top of the ratings heap in the U.S. as well, getting much better ratings than things like The Rings of Power, which has to be something like one or even two orders of magnitude more expensive to film.
Clarkson: “What’s happening to farming in this country is ethnic cleansing. That’s a strong thing to say, but it sort of is happening. The government is trying, really, to drive farmers off their land.”
“In five years, the subsidies, the grants, are stopping, so farms have to think of new ways of making money.”
Another farmer: “Most farmers like me are 66 years old. We’re throwing in the towel. Let’s just take the government money. It won’t be our problem if people starve.”
“We’ve been paid to grow wild flowers. We need to have food produced and made in the UK, but people say well we can import from aboard. The same madness is happening in Europe, they’re asking farmers to plant wild flowers instead of food.” This appears to be done under a Sustainable Farming Incentive program, which offers subsidies for “Flower-rich grass margins, blocks, or in-field strips” and “Herbal leys.”
One of the continuing plotlines on Clarkson’s Farm is how the local council opposes every single one of Clarkeson’s money-making farm enhancements in the name of “tradition,” from a farm shop selling locale produce to a restaurant using the farm’s ingredients. This makes for great TV, but I can only imagine how difficult such a battle would be for a farmer without Clarkeson’s fame and resources.
“Clarkson has done more for the farming community to bring attention to their case with just two seasons than any farming organization has done in decades.”
“Farmers across the world have praised the show for highlighting the struggles they have to go through.”
“The many bases that this show covers is pretty incredible, from animal conservation, bureaucratic jargon, climate change, and just generally detailing how difficult it is to run a farm, especially in these current times.”
“It’s educated the masses about an industry that gets easily neglected, despite its glaringly obvious necessity.”
Someone needs to save farmers, not just in the UK but here as well, from the global warming fanatics who would drive them out of business.
In the tradition of “something lite for the weekend,” here’s The Babylon Bee’s Satan asking Democrats to tone it down a notch:
“I love the homicidal thing that you got going on there. I really dig it. OK, but maybe market it just a little bit differently. Like the serial killer that everyone thinks is such a sweet guy. You know, he’s got 27 bodies in the basement, but he’s like, you know, coaching Little League. That’s what I want.”
More Biden corruption unearthed, the Biden Recession has canaries dying left and right, yet another Katy ISD teacher involved in child sex crimes, and Phoebe Waller-Bridge is being given another tomb raider to destroy. It’s the Friday LinkSwarm!
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on Thursday as part of a probe into whether the Biden DOJ coordinated with Trump prosecutors.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on Thursday as part of a probe into whether the Biden DOJ coordinated with Trump prosecutors.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer dropped a bombshell on Thursday, revealing that his panel had unearthed new financial accounts tied to the Biden family investigation. Adding to the drama, Comer announced a fresh subpoena aimed at an undisclosed bank, ramping up the pressure in this ongoing probe.
“This morning, I issued a subpoena for targeted financial information from a certain financial institution related to Jim Biden, Sarah Biden and Hunter Biden. This is a result of many of the documents that Devon Archer turned over,” Comer told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business.
The Oversight Committee began investigating the Biden family’s alleged shady business dealings over two years ago. In March, they called for Biden to testify before Congress, stating that “the committee has accounted for over $24 million that has flowed from foreign sources to you, your family, and their business associates.”
“It is unbelievable,” Comer continued. “I don’t think you would find very many people that have a billion-dollar net worth that have as many different bank accounts as this Biden family had. Many of these were shell companies.”
Those were “companies [whose] sole purpose was to launder the money that the Bidens were receiving from China, from Romania, from Russia,” Comer added. “And never one time through the course of this entire investigation, even during the depositions with Hunter Biden and the transcribed interview with Jim Biden, were they able to answer exactly what the family did to receive this money.”
Gov. Greg Abbott has pardoned U.S. Army Sergeant Daniel Perry following a recommendation of pardon and restoration of his firearm rights by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.
The board voted unanimously on the recommendation.
Shortly after the recommendation was made, Abbott officially pardoned Perry.
“The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles conducted an exhaustive review of U.S. Army Sergeant Daniel Perry’s personal history and the facts surrounding the July 2020 incident and recommended a Full Pardon and Restoration of Full Civil Rights of Citizenship,” Abbott wrote in a press release.
“Among the voluminous files reviewed by the Board, they considered information provided by the Travis County District Attorney, the full investigative report on Daniel Perry, plus a review of all the testimony provided at trial. Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws on self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney. I thank the Board for its thorough investigation, and I approve their pardon recommendation.”
Perry was convicted of murdering Air Force veteran and Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster in 2023. A Travis County jury deliberated for 17 hours before finding Perry guilty of murder but not aggravated assault of Foster at the intersection of 4th Street and Congress Avenue in downtown Austin, as well as threatening a crowd with his car during the 2020 protest.
Perry, who was working as an Uber driver, shot and killed Foster with a .357 Magnum revolver after Foster approached the driver door of his Hyundai Ioniq.
This dispassionate description hides the fact that Perry’s car was surrounded by a crowd of rioters, including the one who aimed a gun at Perry. This was a clear case of self defense that never would have gone to trial if Travis County’s far left Soros backed DA Jose Garza weren’t so in favor of radical left wing rioters and hostile the right of self defense.
The Department of Justice recently argued that a whistleblower lawsuit against Pfizer, filed by Brook Jackson, should be dismissed.
Jackson, a 20-year veteran in clinical trial administration employed by a third-party vendor (Ventavia Research Group), worked on Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trials in 2020. Alarmed by what she witnessed, Jackson raised concerns to her superiors, Pfizer, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 2020.
She claimed the trial was being run, documented, and reported in a manner that violated Federal law and was potentially dangerous.
Hours after contacting the FDA on September 25, 2020, Jackson was fired. Her sealed whistleblower complaint seemed to stall, with the FDA not investigating her claims. Faced with inaction, Jackson filed a lawsuit.
As the case progressed towards discovery, the DOJ intervened, asking the judge to dismiss the case. Jackson argues that the government failed to articulate a legitimate reason for dismissal and did not demonstrate why the burdens of continued litigation outweigh its benefits.
Disturbingly, a former FDA lawyer who worked at the agency when Jackson’s complaint was filed has moved to the DOJ and is now representing the government in its attempt to shut down the suit, raising concerns about regulatory capture and the use of government to shield companies from accountability.
In 2021, the British Medical Journal published an article investigating Jackson’s claims and found them credible. The journal’s investigation concluded that Jackson’s account was supported by documentation and raised serious questions about the integrity of Pfizer’s vaccine trials and the FDA’s oversight.
Other former Ventavia employees vouched for Jackson’s complaint, describing a “helter-skelter” work environment and lack of oversight.
Despite evidence and corroboration, the FDA did not inspect Ventavia after Jackson’s complaint, and Pfizer did not mention any problems at Ventavia in its FDA submission for emergency use authorization.
BMJ’s findings lend significant credibility to Jackson’s claims and raise serious questions about the integrity of Pfizer’s vaccine trial data, the adequacy of regulatory oversight, and, ultimately, the approved emergency use authorization.
Follow the money…
Court throws DEI amendment to NY constitution, off November’s ballot. “The NY State Supreme Court (trial court) in Livingston County (near Rochester), granted summary judgment throwing the ERA off the November ballot, on the ground that the proponents of the legislation did not follow the constitutionally required procedure for advancing a ballot initiative for a constitutional amendment.”
A Tompkins High School teacher has been arrested on nine counts of possession of child pornography.
James Paul Stone was booked into the Fort Bend County Jail Monday.
According to the Montgomery County Precinct 3 Constable’s office, thousands of images of child pornography were recovered from Stone’s residence, including several images that Stone admitted to producing himself.
Ah, not this crap again. “Venezuela Moves ‘Substantial Quantities’ Of Troops To Guyana Border.”
In a classic case of unintended consequences, Democrats suing over a perceived Voting Rights Act violation could result is less Democrats in office.
A voting rights lawsuit that could cost Texas Democrats seats across all levels of government received a hearing Tuesday by the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, known as the most conservative federal appellate court in the country.
The Galveston County redistricting case is challenging how the appellate court has previously interpreted the Voting Rights Act, which was passed to protect individual minority groups but has been “twisted” for political advantage.
At issue is whether Section 2 of the law requires the county to create a majority-minority district by grouping a “coalition” of black and Hispanic voters.
Neither blacks nor Hispanics are a large enough group in Galveston County to create a majority district.
The county contends that the Voting Rights Act does not protect coalition districts—which represent political, not racial, alliances—nor does it guarantee that Democrats will be elected.
Courts in other federal circuits do not allow aggregating distinct minority groups to force what are almost always Democrat districts.
“The Voting Rights Act was meant to right wrongs. It wasn’t meant to subsidize political parties with legislative seats. That’s what this case is about—the real meaning of the Voting Rights Act, or, how it has been twisted by coalition districts,” said J. Christian Adams, President and General Counsel of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, representing Galveston County in the case.
A win by Galveston County would be a blow to Texas Democrats.
The case began in 2021 when Galveston County’s Republican-majority commissioners court, headed by County Judge Mark Henry, drew new boundaries for the county’s four commissioner districts following the decennial census.
The plan eliminated the lone Democrat commissioner’s majority-minority precinct, a coalition district of blacks and Hispanics. The commissioner is black and has served on the court since 1999.
Three sets of plaintiffs then sued the county: a group of current and former Democrat officeholders (the Petteway plaintiffs), local chapters of the NAACP and LULAC, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The three federal lawsuits were consolidated into Petteway v. Galveston County.
Following a two-week trial last August, a federal judge in Galveston ruled in favor of the plaintiffs’ claim of vote dilution in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The decision was based on a nearly 40-year-old Fifth Circuit precedent supporting coalition claims.
Galveston County appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
After hearing arguments in November, a panel of three appellate judges said that the circuit court’s past decisions supporting coalition claims “are wrong as a matter of law” and “should be overturned.” Only a ruling by the full Fifth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court can overturn the precedent.
In December, another three-judge panel granted the county’s request to use the new boundaries in the 2024 election. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld that decision.
During Tuesday’s en banc hearing, all Fifth Circuit judges heard arguments from attorneys representing Galveston County and the three plaintiffs.
Attorney Joe Nixon with the Public Interest Legal Foundation argued on behalf of Galveston County.
“There is nothing left for the court to decide,” Nixon told the judges. “You just need to look at Section 2. What words require coalition districts? There are none.”
Conclusion: “If Galveston County prevails in its challenge to coalition districts, Democrats in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi (states covered by the Fifth Circuit) stand to lose seats at the local, state, and congressional levels.”
It takes a special kind of dumb to lose numerous seats across three states in a effort to save one commissioners court seat in Galveston County.
The Voting Rights Act was a specific remedy at a specific point in time for a specific type of constitutional rights violation, namely that Democratic controlled states in the South were depriving black citizens of their constitutional rights to participate in elections. Over the years, Democrats have twisted it into a “No fair! Republicans are winning!” Get Out Of Competitive Elections Free card. Ironically, Republicans have used the precise terms of the Voting Rights Act to crowd blacks into a single district to help create more Republican seats.
The situation for which the Voting Rights Act was passed no longer exists. Instead of race-aware solutions, constitutional rights should be guaranteed in color-blind way for a nation in which all men are created equal. Rather than continue to insist on racial election carve-outs, the Act itself should be retired.
A coalition of Republican-led states is suing the Biden administration and the State of California in an attempt to prevent new electric vehicle mandates on truck owners and operators throughout the country from going into effect.
Two legal challenges were filed over the new emissions rules, Nebraska Attorney General Hilgers said in a statement on May 13.
They include a petition for review filed by a coalition of 24 states in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit which challenges the Biden administration’s new regulation setting stronger greenhouse gas emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles.
Texas isn’t mentioned in the article, but it is in the filing:
Under 42 U.S.C. § 7607(b)(1), Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15, and D.C. Circuit Rule 15(a), the States of Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming petition this Court for review of the final agency action taken by Respondents United States Environmental Protection Agency and Michael S. Regan, in his official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, titled “Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles—Phase 3,” published at 89 Fed. Reg. 29,440 (April 22, 2024). A copy of the agency action is attached to this petition.
Petitioners will show that the final rule exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law. Petitioners thus ask that this Court declare unlawful and vacate the agency’s final action.
That petition lists the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its administrator Michael Regan as defendants.
In the legal filing, plaintiffs argue the EPA’s rule imposing stringent tailpipe emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles effectively forces manufacturers to produce more electric trucks and fewer internal combustion trucks.
The EPA has said the new rules, which are set to take effect for model years 2027 through 2032, are needed to help combat climate change and will help avoid up to 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the next three decades.
However, the infrastructure needed to support such vehicles is “virtually nonexistent” and they also have shorter ranges and require longer stops, according to Mr. Hilgers.
The new regulation will also negatively impact the economy and put extra pressure on power grids, according to the lawsuit.
A separate coalition of 17 states and the Nebraska Trucking Association also filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California seeking to block a package of regulations that they say are “targeting trucking fleet owners and operators.”
That lawsuit lists the EPA and the California Air Resources Board as defendants.
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are challenging a string of California regulations called “Advanced Clean Fleets” which aims to “accelerate a large-scale reduction in tailpipe emissions focusing on zero-emissions medium- and heavy-duty vehicles,” according to the California Air Resources Boards’s (CARB) official website.
The rules would ban big rigs and buses that run on diesel from being sold in California starting in 2036.
Nebraska AG Mike Hilgers seems to be walking point on this one but, as usual, Texas is joining in another lawsuit against Biden Administration regulatory overreach.
Better to get this law thrown out now than to wait until food become unaffordable because there aren’t enough reliable trucks to deliver it…
