Authored by Rajan Laad via AmericanThinker.com,

A few days back writer Sammy Roth wrote a piece in the LA Times about a new form of racism in LA.

Roth cited a study from the University of Southern California that states the following:

“Decades of racially-motivated freeway infrastructure planning and residential segregation shape today’s disparities in who produces vehicular air pollution and who is exposed to it, but opportunities exist for urban planning and transport policy to mitigate this injustice.

“[LA residents] who drive more tend to be exposed to less air pollution — and Angelenos who drive less tend to be exposed to more pollution.

“It’s a function of the racism that shaped this city and its suburbs, and continues to influence our daily lives — and a stark reminder of the need for climate solutions that benefit everyone.” 

The study is titled ‘Local Inequities in the Relative Production of and exposure to Vehicular Air Pollution in Los Angeles’ – and was authored by Professor Geoff Boeing.

Roth revealed that Boeing told him, “…it largely comes down to the shameful history of Los Angeles County’s low-income communities of color being torn apart to make way for freeways — a history that has been extensively documented by The Times”

“Today, many residents of the county’s whiter, more affluent neighborhoods — who were often able to keep highways out of their own backyards — commute to work through lower-income Black and Latino neighborhoods bisected by the 10, 110, and 105 freeways and more.”

The solutions prescribed range from banning gasoline vehicles, obviously, and allowing more apartment construction in wealthier neighborhoods.

The study faced backlash on social media, particularly Twitter, which is free from the tyranny of the left…

REMINDER: There aren’t separate communist groups. They’re all the same group with the same goal: Destroying this nation.

That’s why seemingly separate groups work together. The climate nutters work with the race hustlers who work with the LGBTQ demon mob who work with… https://t.co/UIFOLpeAa6

— Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) March 9, 2023

Congratulations to the author of this piece @Sammy_Roth. You have managed to write not only the most idiotic but racist piece of 2023!

— Nick Short ‎‎ (@PoliticalShort) March 9, 2023

This has become like old timey, nonsensical racism at this point…

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) March 9, 2023

There are many questions that deserved to be asked.

Firstly, how on earth does a professor, who is supposed to be an individual of accomplishment and considerable education think of dedicating time to such futile pursuits?

Secondly, how does a study such as this get approval and funding from higher authorities?

There are a few possibilities here.

The first is that the professor, the LA Times, and those who approved and funded the study really believe that climate change will end the planet and that eliminating gasoline vehicles is the only solution. Perhaps they also believe in claims of racially-motivated freeway infrastructure planning.

The second possibility is that proponents know that such claims are music to the ears of the members of the echo chamber of the left. They probably hope that the ludicrous claims would help their careers and the University financially. They probably realize that their gravely misleading assertion would trigger a backlash which enabled him to claim victimhood, which again helps their cause.

The third possibility is that electric car manufacturers or anyone who stands to gain from the green energy sector have either funded the study or donated generously to the university. The professor was informed about the conclusion he had to arrive at, he merely worked his way backward to develop these preposterous claims of racist freeways and infrastructure.

They may get lucky, perhaps Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who is struggling with myriad catastrophes in Transportation, will use the article to virtue signal or push initiatives to clean up his image.

Beyond this specific study, this is demonstrable proof of how far academic institutions and their faculty have drifted from their original purpose of enlightening young minds. Their sole purpose now seems to be to divide people into groups where minorities are the victims, and the majority are the perpetrators. 

When young minds are influenced, the results are devastating.

Instead of triggering healthy debates and discussions, the young are perpetually ‘triggered’ by everything from a red cap with a white letter that isn’t a MAGA hat but looks like one to the text in Roald Dahl’s books for children.

Instead of applying their energies to innovate, they are perennially focused on trivialities such as gender types and pronouns.

Instead of striving for excellence, they strive to find new reasons to be offended in order to prove their moral superiority.

Instead of looking at the world with a healthy amount of skepticism but an open mind, they look at every event from the perspective of racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia.

Instead of challenging themselves by being subjected to different perspectives, they prefer safe spaces and echo chambers. 

Soon all growth comes to a permanent end.

Once upon a time, inventors developed innovations that were beneficial to mankind such as the steam engine, the light bulb, the airplane, etc.

These days all that is invented is new kinds of theoretical categories of pronouns, sexuality, gender, and hashtags. 

What is worst is that the proponents of these ideas are not necessarily true believers; they do it because they know it avails them of lucrative opportunities in the ecosystem.

What they do not realize or probably do not care about is that this trivialization of bigotry makes a mockery of the darkest emotions that humans have. 

These beliefs of bigotry have been the driving force for genocide and systemic persecution of humans merely for being different. Every brutal dictator from Hitler to Stalin was driven by these foul emotions. Bigotry needs to be confronted and overcome by education.

But when everything is branded racist, nothing really is

Once upon a time when one read about a racist attack, it caused instant revulsion which lasted for ages. Alas, the left has propagated so many racist hoaxes that even the real incidences motivated by racism will no longer be believed. Perhaps people look at the racism of the past and wonder if they too were overstatements by partisan historians.

That the only way to end racism is to look beyond race and treat people based on merit. 

Discriminating against or blaming Caucasians will not resolve issues; it will create further division. It is deeply unfair because Caucasians who live in current times have nothing to do with racism in the past. Even the grand and great-grandchildren of racists are not responsible for the sins of their forefathers and do not deserve to be punished. 

There is no such notion as collective guilt or guilt due to genetic association. Individuals are responsible for their actions only.

It is said that to destroy a nation, you strike at its foundation i.e. educational institutions. 

When educational institutions choose indoctrination over education, that ruins young and impressionable minds, it doesn’t take time for the nation to come tumbling down

There are some that say not much was learned or gained from the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government this past week as politicians sparred over the meaning of the release of the Twitter Files.  Democrats in particular seemed adamant that they would not discuss the actual contents of the files or their implications.  Their apparent goal?  To disrupt exploration of the information and to attack the messengers.

There might not have been many new revelations coming from the subcommittee, but what the public did learn was that the political left is extremely hostile to facts, evidence and the truth.  If you didn’t already know that by now, the hearing with Matt Taibbi made it abundantly clear.  

Leftist members of the committee proceeded into a tirade when Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger were called to testify on their participation in the publishing of the files, attacking everything from their credentials to their intentions, and even demanding they reveal information on their private sources.  Here is the real information the Dems did not want to talk about:

It is well known that Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger and Elon Musk have long been liberal leaning in their politics, yet the accusations from Democrats asserted some form of conspiracy between Musk, Taibbi and Republicans, with some members even insinuating an effort to “undermine democracy.”  What right did they have to take this position?

They claim that Musk and Taibbi are hiding data that shows Trump and Republicans were making requests to censor Twitter users as well.  In other words, they assert there is a “conspiracy” to protect Republicans while denouncing Democrats.

But what are the facts here?

Taibbi has said on numerous occasions that there were requests from Republicans as well as Democrat officials for accounts to be censored or blocked.  He never hid this from anyone.  This argument is a cover, a distraction from two separate issues:

First, the government should NEVER be involved in censorship requests of the public for any reason.  It doesn’t matter which party is making the requests, and a criminal investigation should be pursued for any officials involved in legitimate 1st Amendment violations.  

Second, who did Twitter actually censor?  Which requests did they actually honor?  The vast majority of accounts censored by the previous Twitter management were conservative accounts, conservative news sources and posts with content that ran contrary to Democrat narratives.  Republicans like Trump might have made requests, but how many people were actually blocked on Twitter in response?

Democrats complain about the Twitter Files being weighted in favor of the political right wing, but maybe that is because most of the requests for censorship came from the DNC and Biden controlled agencies, and most of the people censored were conservatives.  It’s weighted against Democrats because they more commonly use censorship as a weapon.

A stunning 99% of online political contributions made by Twitter employees in 2021 went to Democrats, according to Federal Election Commission data.  Are we really supposed to believe that Twitter has been acting for the benefit of both parties, or just one?  

The M.O. of the political left for the past several years now has been cancel culture attacks to silence their opponents and shut down dissent.  Major social media companies are by far more progressive in their affiliations than conservative, and have been a key tool for leftists in targeting and removing contrary speech.  No one on the left talks about being shut down by conservatives, it is always the reverse.  

The social dynamic in the US has been completely out of balance for many years, with corporations and government agencies widely backing the most extreme segments of the far-left.  This is where they get their power.  They certainly don’t get power from being the majority, woke activists are a tiny portion of the overall population and one that is widely despised.  They have been feared in the past only because corporations and the government back them.  The Twitter Files prove this collusion in detail.  

Even moderate liberals like Musk or Taibbi are being run through the gauntlet of character assassination these days because they dared to oppose certain aspects of the far-left agenda.  But the bottom line is this – Only the political left and some Neo-Cons within the GOP have displayed open disdain for the dissemination of the truth.  We saw this with the Biden Laptop story.  We saw this with covid facts that were inconvenient to the establishment narrative.  And, we saw this recently with Tucker Carlson’s release of suppressed J6 footage.  

The average conservative and liberty minded independent sees sunlight as the best disinfectant, while establishment elitists and woke activists view open discussion and debate of information as a “dangerous” frivolity.  We believe that the truth is arrived at through discourse.  They believe that the truth is what they say it is.

The Twitter Files have torn open the veil obscuring big government and big tech collusion and this makes certain people very nervous and very angry.  Take note of who those people are.  Who is enraged?  Who is hostile to the exposure of government censorship?  Those are the real villains that need to face scrutiny, not the messengers passing the information along.  

Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

The Department of Defense confirmed this week that advanced bombs are operational in Ukraine. The Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range (JDAM-ER) can hit targets 50 miles away. The Pentagon’s confirmation comes after President Joe Biden ordered the Pentagon to transfer “precision aerial munitions” to Kiev in December.

On Monday, U.S. Air Force Gen. James Hecker, head of US Air Forces in Europe,  told reporters that the JDAM-ER was operational in Ukraine. “Recently, we’ve just gotten some precision munitions [to Ukraine] that had some extended range and go a little bit further than the gravity drop bomb and has precision [guidance],” Hecker said. 

That’s a recent capability that we were able to give them probably in the last three weeks,” Gen. Hecker added.

JDAMs are primarily used to increase the accuracy of bombs. The official did not specify how many or what variation of JDAMs would be sent. The JDAM-ER can be equipped onto 2,000 or 500 pound bombs and will deliver the munition up to 45 miles. JDAMs are compatible with some Western-made fighter jets and drones. 

According to a description in The Drive: 

Standard JDAM kits are designed to be mated to various types of Mk 80-series dumb bombs, and other munitions designed around that same form factor, transforming them into precision-guided weapons. The complete JDAM kit consists of a new tail, which contains a GPS-assisted inertial navigation system (INS) guidance system, and strakes that go elsewhere along the bomb body giving it a limited ability to glide to its designated target.

Officially, Kiev does not possess any aircraft that can drop precision munitions. Biden said he has “for now” ruled out sending American-made aircraft. However, the UK is training Ukrainian pilots on Western-made fighter jets.

Ukrainian pilots are in the US this week to determine how much training the airmen will need to become proficient on American planes. 

Additionally, JDAMs have been tested on Quickstrike underwater mines. The Quickstrike bombs are dropped by aircraft in shallow waters and can sit on the seabed for some time before being activated. If Ukraine is utilizing JDAMs on Quickstike mines, it’s still unclear what aircraft Kiev is using in the operations.

Authored by Thomas Buckley via The Mises Institute,

Incredulity. Astonishment. Disgust. Anger.

It is these feelings—amongst others—that describe the general reaction to the revelations of the Twitter Files and other egregious episodes of Big Tech censorship of the electronic public square.

The implicit deal with companies like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc. is very simple: we will look at your ads if you give us a service for free. The deal did not include censorship.

But what is society to expect when those doing the censorship seem to see absolutely nothing wrong with it, and that it didn’t even occur to them that what they were engaged in—often at the specific request of governmental agencies—was at all a problem?

For a generation that has grown up with speech codes, enforced nicety, automatic deference to the feelings of others, and has been swaddled in bubble wrap against the vagaries of life, censoring of speech is not only not an ethical leap, it is the right thing to do.

Couple that with a permanent, purposeful self-infantilization that makes them defer to (or incoherently rage at for NOT censoring speech) anyone they perceive to be a grown-up—such as former FBI bigwig James Baker at Twitter—and the stage is not only set, but the terrifying end of the play writes itself.

This generation is not necessarily Y, or X, or millennial—it’s a bit of a mix of those aged from about sixteen to about thirty-six, numbers that will, sadly, most likely become lower and lower on the low end and higher and higher on the high end as time marches on.

It is a subcohort (I thought it best to learn their language) of people who have much in common—first, they have come from the now de rigueur smaller families, hence they do not have the thick skin and personal combat skills that one acquires when one has siblings.

They have usually grown up relatively comfortably and are uncomfortable with confrontation. They went to the right schools, but they do not understand how other people can think differently. They are overcredentialed but actually vastly undereducated. They feel twinges of guilt when the grocery store delivers but are absolutely certain that a twenty-five-minute trip to the store is a waste of their valuable time.

While there are many, many examples, two events stand out as exemplar moments for the censored generation. First, this rather well-known incident from Yale University in which a college student is angrily demanding to be treated like a child, and this chilling tale of a professor struggling to deal with the “best and the brightest” demanding to be lectured to rather than participate in a thoughtful seminar.

Professor Vincent Lloyd, director of black studies at Villanova University, writes:

Like others on the left, I had been dismissive of criticisms of the current discourse on race in the United States. But now my thoughts turned to that moment in the 1970s when leftist organizations imploded, the need to match and raise the militancy of one’s comrades leading to a toxic culture filled with dogmatism and disillusion. How did this happen to a group of bright-eyed high school students?

This remembrance of things past, as it were, should not be viewed as garden variety “Get off my lawn!” generational angst. This is not, when complaining about Elvis Presley’s hips, purposefully failing to remember exactly how much underwear was visible at a 1940s swing dance.

These two examples starkly show that a sea change has occurred in just the past ten or fifteen years. It is simply unimaginable that students prior would have demanded more boundaries, more restrictions, more lectures, more being told what to think, and, especially, more being told how to think.

It literally has never happened before.

This, to quote Alan Furst’s book The Foreign Correspondent, “doctrinal agony over symbols” has always existed, but it only flourished in insular monomaniacal environments, like the cloisters of a medieval monastery or a dingy backroom full of bickering Bolsheviks. Now, these ultimately meaningless disputes capture much of the globe’s attention and involve a race to the bottom of dogma, to a purity purgatory which, thanks to the speed of social media, has engulfed us all.

The past has seen its share of equivalent events and trends, but the speed at which “facts” and thoughts and concepts move on the internet essentially destroys the usual “predators” of bad ideas—nuance, history, research, reason, time to reflect, reliable sourcing, and proper context. This has allowed people to simply ignore or dismiss anything they think may contravene their own ideations and the ideations of whatever happens to be ascendent that particular day. It is this permanent state of flux, intentionally unmoored from the evil past and its expectations, that allows the unthinkable to not only be thought but to be acted upon.

And because this is the only world—a world in nonchalant destruction—the censored generation has ever known, it is only natural that they are so terrified of saying the wrong thing, doing the wrong thing, straying too far from the dictate of the day that they cannot grasp the enormity of their actions.

The astonishment of North Korea defector Yeomani Park as she has wound her way through Columbia University—“I realized, wow, this is insane. I thought America was different but I saw so many similarities to what I saw in North Korea that I started worrying.”—is a warning that should be heeded but has not. It is the ultimate outsider noticing what others cannot or will not, and it is disturbing to the core. Or at least it would be if it were not so dejectedly unsurprising.

This abandonment by putative progressives of the most cherished progressive position—all can speak, all can be heard, and you can decide to listen or not—is beginning to wear thin on even the older left-of-centers. Joyce Carol Oates touched off a Twitter storm—of course, sigh—when she savaged the recent announcement of the posthumous reediting of the work of Roald Dahl by sensitivity readers hired by the publishing house.

For his part, Richard Dawkins—again, not a card-carrying conservative—said recently when asked about proposed elimination of the use of words like “man” or “woman” from scientific papers, “I am not going to be told by some teenage version of Mrs. Grundy which words of my native language I may or may not use.”

But it will take more than shame for the censored generation to understand its own aggressive emptiness. It is not until the system that created them, credentialed them, and now employs them changes itself that they will be able to see themselves differently, as discrete individuals capable of freedom of thought and capable of allowing others that same basic right.

And those systems—educational, governmental, financial, social, cultural—have no reason to change.

For now.

The city of Newark, New Jersey fell victim to a humiliating scam in which its mayor signed a “sister city” agreement with a nonexistent Hindu nation called “The United States of Kailasa.” 

Kailasa exists only as an elaborate website created by a fugitive who’s been on the lam from Indian authorities since 2019 after being charged with rape, reports CBS New York. However, in a January 12 ceremony, Mayor Ras Baraka signed a cultural and trade deal with the contrived country.

“Whose job was it to do a simple Google search?” asked Newark resident Shakee Merritt. “No one in City Hall, not one person did a Google search.”

On its website, Kailasa portrays Newark as having committed the entire United States of America to a “bilateral agreement.” Newark officials say no money exchanged hands, and the deal with the fictional polity has been rescinded — just in case Kailasa tried to enforce it. 

Kailasa reportedly springs from the imagination of Swami Nithyananda, an accused scam artist and sex fiend. Nithyananda, who portrays himself as a “God-Man,” is wanted in India for “child abduction and sexual assault, forcing children to collect donations [for] fake enterprises, and sexual assaults against an Indian actress and an American woman,” according to Tap Into Newark.

It seems Newark isn’t the only American entity that’s been enticed into intercourse with Kailasa. In addition to photos from the Newark ceremony, Kailasa’s website also includes various honorific proclamations from dozens of cities, including Winston-Salem, Dayton, Canton, Richmond and Asheville.  

The site also includes a purported California Senate proclamation recognizing “The Sovereign State of Shrikailasa” and Nithyananda as the Supreme Pontiff of Hinduism.  

India’s ABP News Bureau said the incident sheds unflattering light on American governments: 

“The Newark stunt illustrates how easy it is for groups to manipulate municipal and state bodies, and take advantage of their lack of international sophistication to unwittingly make them appear to confer legitimacy on their causes, even when they are at odds with official US positions.”

In a statement acknowledging it had been hoodwinked, Newark City Hall reiterated its dedication to fostering foreign relations: “Although this was a regrettable incident, the city of Newark remains committed to partnering with people from diverse cultures in order to enrich each other with connectivity, support, and mutual respect.”

It’s not clear where Kailasa is supposed to be located. The BBC has said it’s purportedly on an island near Ecuador, though that country’s government says Nithyananda doesn’t live there, according to Tap Into Newark‘s Tony Gallotto.

Alex Stein, a political provocateur who called Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez his “favorite big booty Latina,” is suing AOC for blocking him on Twitter.

“She wants to kill babies but she’s still beautiful. You look very beautiful in that dress. You look very sexy. Look at that booty on AOC,” he said last July amid a national debate over abortion.

“Look how sexy she looks in that dress. Oooh, I love it AOC. Hot, hot, hot like a tamale,” Stein continued.

Despite flashing a peace sign, she claimed that she was “actually walking over to deck him.”

Here is a video he posted of the incident. I was actually walking over to deck him because if no one will protect us then I’ll do it myself but I needed to catch a vote more than a case today pic.twitter.com/RdwCNBDIBb

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 14, 2022

Stein’s lawsuit cites a decision by a federal appeals court which ruled that then-President Donald Trump violated the constitutional rights of several people after he blocked them on Twitter. Days after the Trump ruling, AOC apologized to and settled a case brought by former Brooklyn assemblyman Dov Hikind, who sued her for blocking him, CNBC reports. AOC eventually lifted the block, and admitted that he “has a First Amendment right to express his views and should not be blocked for them.”

Stein seeks the same response.

“I really don’t have any hard feelings for AOC,” he said, adding “I really would like to have her unblock me.”

If the congresswoman fights the complaint, it would reopen the legal argument about the rights of political figures to prevent certain individuals or groups from following them on social media platforms.

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court erased the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Trump had violated the First Amendment rights of the people he had blocked from his Twitter account while serving in the White House. The Supreme Court ordered the appeals court to dismiss the case as moot, because Trump by then was a private citizen. -CNBC

Stein’s suit claims AOC blocked him “in retaliation to Mr. Stein’s exercise of his First Amendment right, because earlier that day Mr. Stein, in the context of political commentary and satire, complimented Ms. Cortez.”

“Mr. Stein has a constitutional right to access Ms. Cortez’s Twitter account as part of vigorous public comment and criticism,” the filing continues. “Ms. Cortez’s practice of blocking Twitter users she disagrees with is unconstitutional and this suit seeks to redress that wrong.“

Authored by Chris Menahan via Information Liberation,

The feds’ political persecution of the Proud Boys took a wild turn after unintentionally leaked chat logs from FBI Special Agent Nicole Miller revealed she said she was ordered by her boss to “destroy” “338 items of evidence.”

The leaked chats also suggest Miller failed to reveal relevant communications to the defense, potentially spied on privileged attorney-client communications and was asked by another agent to “edit out that I was present” during a meeting with a Confidential Human Source Informant.

Concealing evidence. Doctoring evidence. Destroying evidence. Violating attorney-client privilege.

What’s sad is this will be ignored even by conservative media and Congress simply bc they are members of the Proud Boys.

That’s not a crime no matter how many times Wray says it. pic.twitter.com/IeXGj4gV7t

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) March 9, 2023

The shocking revelations were shared in a filing by Proud Boy Ethan Nordean’s (aka Rufio Panman) defense team on Thursday:

The feds are now claiming some of the leaked messages are “likely classified” in what appears to be a bid to hide this bombshell evidence from the jury. 

From Politico, “‘Spill’ of classified info derails Proud Boys trial”:

As part of her testimony, prosecutors shared with defense lawyers a set of internal FBI messages that [FBI Special Agent Nicole Miller] had sent and received from colleagues related to the case — a standard production of evidence in criminal cases. To compile those exchanges, FBI headquarters sent Miller a spreadsheet of her messages — culled from a computer network classified at the “secret” level. Miller then reviewed the messages and filtered them to ensure only relevant, unclassified exchanges were included.

Miller sent her final list to prosecutors, who then packaged the messages into an Excel spreadsheet that they provided to defense lawyers. But unbeknownst to them, the messages Miller initially filtered out — including some that DOJ officials say are likely classified — were left in the final document as “hidden” rows in the Excel spreadsheet. Defense counsel stumbled upon them and began grilling Miller about them in front of jurors in the case.

But unbeknownst to them, the messages Miller initially filtered out — including some that DOJ officials say are likely classified — were left in the final document as “hidden” rows in the Excel spreadsheet. Defense counsel stumbled upon them and began grilling Miller about them in front of jurors in the case.

Overnight, Justice Department attorneys told the defense team they were concerned there had been a “spill” of classified information in the hidden messages they accessed. And on Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Tim Kelly paused the trial — already in its third month — to determine how to handle the error.

It’s the latest hiccup in a seditious conspiracy trial that has been marked by excruciating delays and extended legal disputes. Prosecutors say Proud Boys chair Enrique Tarrio and four leaders of the group schemed to prevent the transfer of power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. The group, according to the Justice Department, split into teams that helped engineer the breach of police lines and, ultimately, the building itself, when one of the defendants, Dominic Pezzola, smashed a Senate-wing window with a stolen riot shield.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Jocelyn Ballantine, who is supervising the case for the Justice Department, acknowledged the likely “spill” of classified information Thursday morning. She raised particular concerns about a message sent to Miller by another agent who works on covert activity — and who she said did not work on the Proud Boys case — describing a supervisor’s order to “destroy 338 items of evidence.”

“That could impact a classified equity,” Ballantine said.

Defense lawyers cried foul, though, noting that the government’s claims of “classified” material arrived just as the defense sounded the alarm about the content of some of the inadvertently disclosed messages. While Miller testified Wednesday she had produced about “25 rows” of messages, defense lawyers said there were thousands of rows of hidden messages that included contents they contended were directly relevant to their case.

Some of the messages appeared to reveal that FBI agents accessed contacts between defendant Zachary Rehl and his attorney, which led Miller to tell a colleague she thought Rehl would take his case to trial. In another message, an FBI agent tells Miller, “You need to go into that CHS report you just put and edit out that I was present.” After defense attorneys began to press Miller about the attorney-client messages on Wednesday afternoon, prosecutors objected, and Kelly halted the trial to permit the parties to debate the matter.

This case was a fraud from the very beginning and it’s an absolute disgrace that it wasn’t thrown out.

You can see in the leaked texts above the FBI agents questioned whether they could make out a valid “conspiracy and not make a fool of ourselves.”

Though they have made fools out of themselves, whether that even matters in this DC kangaroo court still remains to be seen.

In a just country, corrupt Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray would be the ones on trial for their seditious conspiracy against the January 6th defendants and the American people as a whole.

100% of lawmakers in the House on Friday voted to pass a bill requiring the Biden administration to declassify intelligence related to investigations into the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China and Covid-19.

The Covid Origins Act of 2023, sponsored by Sens. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Mike Braun (R-IN), passed by a vote of 410 to 0, after clearing the Senate by unanimous consent last week.

“Covid-19 pandemic wreaked havoc across the country with almost every household feeling its effects. The United States death toll from this virus has surpassed one million people. Although concrete data is hard to lock down, millions of people are suffering from the long-term effects directly attributed to this virus. It is becoming increasingly clear that school-aged children face hurdles because of long-term school closures. The American people need to know all the aspects, including how this virus was created and specifically, whether it was a natural occurrence of the result of a lab-related event,” said House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner (R-OH) in a floor speech.

Next stop, President Biden’s desk.

And while Biden has officially said he hasn’t “made that decision yet” over whether to sign it into law and release the intelligence, we can’t imagine he won’t, lest he defy the entirety of Congress.

The House passed S. 619 – A bill to require the Director of National Intelligence to declassify information relating to the origin of COVID-19, and for other purposes by a vote of 419-0. https://t.co/ElZcCjm8yq

— House Press Gallery (@HouseDailyPress) March 10, 2023

So, what will we get? Probably what’s already known; that the FBI and the Energy Department believe with ‘moderate’ and ‘low’ confidence respectively that Covid-19 likely arose from a laboratory leak – while four other agencies and a national intelligence panel continue to believe that the pandemic was likely the result of zoonotic spillover.

Will the disclosure point to door #1 – that Dr. Anthony Fauci offshored previously-banned Gain-of-Function bat covid research in a scientific collaboration on Chinese soil where it escaped (intentionally or otherwise)?

Or door #2 – that bats from a cave 450 miles away with a strain of Covid 96.8% similar to Covid-19 infected an intermediary species, of which either (or both) emerged with Covid-19 at a Wuhan wet market across town from the aforementioned Fauci-funded lab where they were infecting ‘humanized’ mice with Covid strains? A relatively rare occurrence according to the WIV in 2018.

The DEFUSE grant is the closest thing we have to a lab notebook of coronavirus researchers in Wuhan prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

That 2018 grant could predict genomic & geographic anomalies of SARS-CoV-2 better than I could predict the winning PowerBall numbers. https://t.co/xOtPcJ2DME

— Alex Washburne (@WashburneAlex) March 11, 2023

Or Door #3, that China went rogue, stole Peter Daszak’s crazy plans (which DARPA turned down), and started going bat-covid crazy?

China has a long history of stealing trade secrets for “national security”.

It’s entirely plausible that CCP could’ve caught wind of DEFUSE from Zheng-Li and funded it entirely within China to develop a vaccine under combined economic & health ‘national security’ justifications.

— Alex Washburne (@WashburneAlex) March 11, 2023

What we do know is that there were ‘humanized’ mice being bred in China in mid-2019, long before the outbreak in Wuhan. As Vanity Fair noted almost two years ago – a May 2020 Chinese research paper describing mice which had lung tissue that approximated a human’s (via National Review):

Using the gene-editing technology known as CRISPR, the researchers had engineered mice with humanized lungs, then studied their susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2. As the NSC officials worked backward from the date of publication to establish a timeline for the study, it became clear that the mice had been engineered sometime in the summer of 2019, before the pandemic even started. The NSC officials were left wondering: Had the Chinese military been running viruses through humanized mouse models, to see which might be infectious to humans?

And as journalist Josh Rogin wrote in Chaos Under Heaven: Trump, Xi, and the Battle for the 21st Century (again, via National Review):

After consultations with experts, some U.S. officials came to believe that this Beijing lab was likely conducting coronavirus experiments on mice fitted with ACE2 receptors well before the coronavirus outbreak — research they hadn’t disclosed and continued to not admit to. That, by itself, did not help to explain how SARS-CoV-2 originated. But it did make clear to U.S. officials that there was a lot of risky coronavirus experiments going on in Chinese labs that the rest of the world was simply not aware of. “This was just a peek under a curtain of an entire galaxy of activity, including labs in Beijing and Wuhan playing around with coronaviruses in ACE2 mice in unsafe labs,” the senior administration official said. “It suggests we’re getting a peek at a body of activity that isn’t understood in the West or even has precedent here.”

And how much of that was done with knowledge, funding or collaboration from entities outside of China?

China contacted Hawley’s office on Wednesday to object to the bill, telling him that its only purpose is to “politicize and stigmatize China.”

“The move by the U.S. Congress just shows that the U.S. is going further and further down the wrong path of political manipulation. The so-called traceability report by the U.S. intelligence agency is an attempt to ‘presume guilt’ on China. It is an attempt to shift the blame from its own failure to fight the epidemic to China,” wrote government attorney Li Xiang.

SCOOP: A Chinese govt official sent this letter to the office of Sen. @HawleyMO yesterday, criticizing Congress for the COVID Origin Act that he introduced in late February pic.twitter.com/yJPsk9Zxok

— Liz Elkind (@liz_elkind) March 9, 2023

Does Congress ever do things unanimously?

Authored by Dr. Naomi Wolf via ‘Outspoken’ Substack,

My “Team” was Taken in By Full-Spectrum Propaganda…

There is no way to avoid this moment. The formal letter of apology. From me. To Conservatives and to those who “put America first” everywhere.

It’s tempting to sweep this confrontation with my own gullibility under the rug — to “move on” without ever acknowledging that I was duped, and that as a result I made mistakes in judgement, and that these mistakes, multiplied by the tens of thousands and millions on the part of people just like me, hurt millions of other people like you all, in existential ways.

But that erasure of personal and public history would be wrong.

I owe you a full-throated apology.

I believed a farrago of lies. And, as a result of these lies, and my credulity — and the credulity of people similarly situated to me – many conservatives’ reputations are being tarnished, on false bases.

The proximate cause of this letter of apology is the airing, two nights ago, of excepts from tens of thousands of hours of security camera footage from the United States Capitol taken on Jan 6, 2021. The footage was released by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson [https://www.axios.com/2023/03/08/mccarthy-defends-jan-6-footage-tucker-…].

While “fact-checkers” state that it is “misinformation” to claim that Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi was in charge of Capitol Police on that day [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/07/27/fact-check-nancy-pelosi-isnt-in-charge-capitol-police/8082088002/], the fact is that the USCP is under the oversight of Congress, according to — the United States Capitol Police: [https://www.uscp.gov/the-department/oversight].

This would be the same Congress that convened the January 6 Committee subsequently, and that used millions of dollars in taxpayer money to turn that horrible day, and that tragic event, into a message point that would be used to tar a former President as a would-be terrorist, and to smear all Republicans, by association, as “insurrectionists,” or as insurrectionists’ sympathizers and fellow-travelers.

There is no way to unsee Officer Brian Sicknick, claimed by some Democrats in leadership and by most of the legacy media to have been killed by rioters at the Capitol that day, alive in at least one section of the newly released video. The USCP medical examiner states that this Officer died of “natural causes,” but also that he died “in the line of duty.” Whatever the truth of this confusing conclusion, and with all respect for and condolences to Officer Sicknick’s family, the circumstances of his death do matter to the public, as without his death having been caused by the events of Jan 6, the breach of the capitol, serious though it was, cannot be described as a “deadly insurrection.” [https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/medical-examiner-finds-uscp-officer-brian-sicknick-died-natural-causes] Sadly, though the contrary was what was reported, Officer Sicknick died two days after Jan 6, from suffering two strokes. https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/capitol-police-officer-brian-sicknick-died-of-natural-causes-after-suffering-two-strokes-day-after-jan-6-report/

There is no way for anyone thoughtful, even if he or she is a lifelong Democrat, not to notice that Sen Chuck Schumer did not say to the world that the footage that Mr Carlson aired was not real. Rather, he warned that it was “shameful” for Fox to allow us to see it. The Guardian characterized Mr Carlson’s and Fox News’ sin, weirdly, as “Over-Use” of Jan 6 footage. Isn’t the press supposed to want full transparency for all public interest events? [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2023/mar/07/biden-medicare-taxes-desantis-trump-2024-live-updates] How can you “over-use” real footage of events of national relevance?

Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate minority leader, did not say the video on Fox News was fake or doctored. He said, rather, that it was “a mistake” to depart from the views of the events held by the chief of the Capitol Police. This is a statement from McConnell about orthodoxy — not a statement about a specific truth or untruth. [https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5060662/senator-mcconnell-calls-tucker-carlsons-depiction-january-6-attack-mistake]

I don’t agree with Mr Carlson’s interpretation of the videos as depicting “mostly peaceful chaos.”[https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3887103-tucker-carlson-shows-the-first-of-his-jan-6-footage-calls-it-mostly-peaceful-chaos/] I do think it is a mistake to downplay how serious it is when a legislative institution suffers a security breach of any kind, however that came to be.

But you don’t have to agree with Mr Carlson’s interpretation of the videos, to believe, as I do, that he engaged in valuable journalism simply by airing the footage that was given to him.

And remember, by law that footage belongs to us — it is a public record, and all public records literally belong to the American people. “In a democracy, records belong to the people,” explains the National Archives. [https://www.archives.gov/publications/general-info-leaflets/1-about-archives.html]

You don’t have to agree with Carlson’s interpretation of the videos, to notice the latest hypocrisy by the Left. My acquaintance and personal hero Daniel Ellsberg was rightly lionized by the Left for having illegally leaked the Pentagon Papers. The New York Times was rightly applauded for having run this leaked material in 1971. [https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1435/daniel-ellsberg].

I do not see how Mr Carlson’s airing of video material of national significance that the current government would prefer to keep hidden, or Fox News’ support for its disclosure to the public, is any different from that famous case of disclosure of inside information of public importance.

You don’t have to agree with Mr Carlson’s interpretation of the videos, to conclude that the Democrats in leadership, for their own part, have cherry-picked, hyped, spun, and in some ways appear to have lied about, aspects of January 6, turning a tragedy for the nation into a politicized talking point aimed at discrediting half of our electorate.

From the start, there have been things about the dominant, Democrats’ and legacy media’s, narrative of Jan 6, that seemed off, or contradictory, to me. (That does not mean I agree with the interpretation of these events in general on the right. Bear with me).

There is no way to un-hear the interview that Mr Carlson did with former Capitol police office Tarik Johnson, who said that he received no guidance when he called his superiors, terrified, as the Capitol was breached, to ask for direction. [https://www.foxnews.com/media/tucker-carlson-talks-exclusively-key-capitol-police-officer-ignored-by-jan-6-panel-amid-footage-release]

That situation is anomalous.

There is always a security chain of command in the Capitol, at the Rayburn Building, at the White House of course, and so on, which is part of a rock-solid “security plan.” [https://www.dhs.gov/news/2014/09/30/written-testimony-usss-director-hou…].

There are usually, indeed, multiple snipers standing on the steps of the Capitol, facing outward. I made note of this when I was researching and writing The End of America. There is never improvisation, or any confusion in security practices or in what is expected of “the security plan”, involving “principals” such as Members of Congress, or staff at the White House. I know this as a former political consultant and former White House spouse.

The reason for a tightly scripted chain of command and an absolutely ironclad security plan in these buildings, is so that security crises such as the events of Jan 6 can never happen.

The fact that so much confusion in security practice took place on Jan 6, is hard to understand.

There is no way to not see that among the violent and terrifying scenes of that day, as revealed by Mr Carlson, there were also scenes of officers with the United States Capitol Police accompanying one protester who would become iconic, the “Q-Anon Shaman”, Jacob Chansley – and escorting him peaceably through the hallways of our nation’s legislative center. [https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-lawyer-qanon-shaman-says-jan-6-footage-wasnt-shown-client-calls-prison-sentence-tragedy].

I was oddly unsurprised to see the “Q-Anon Shaman” being ushered through the hallways by Capitol Police; he was ready for the cameras in full makeup, horned fur hat, his tattooed chest bare (on a freezing day), and adorned in other highly cinematic regalia. I don’t know what Mr Chansley thought he was doing there that day, but so many subsequent legacy media images of the event put him so dramatically front and center — and the barbaric nature of his appearance was so illustrative of exactly the message that Democrats in leadership wished to send about the event — that I am not surprised to see that his path to the center of events was not blocked but was apparently facilitated by Capitol Police.

A point I have made over and over since 9/11 is that many events in history are both real and hyped. Many actors in historic events have their agendas, but are also at times used by other people with their own agendas, in ways of which the former are unaware. Terrorists and terrorism in the Bush era are one example. This issue was both real and hyped.

“Patriots” or “insurgents” (depending on who you are) entering the Capitol can be part of a real event that is also exploited or manipulated by others. We don’t know yet if this is the case in relation to the events of Jan 6, or to what extent it may be the case. That is where a real investigation must come in.

But as someone who has studied history, and the theatrics of history, for decades, I was not at all surprised to see, on Mr Carlson’s security camera footage, the person who was to become the most memorable ‘face’ of the ‘insurrection’ (or the riot, or the Capitol breach) — escorted to the beating heart of the action, where his image could be memorialized by a battery of cameras forever.

There are other aspects of the Jan 6 breach that seemed anomalous to me from the start.

I study the relationship in history of buildings such as The White House and the Capitol, to the US public; I follow the way in which the public is either welcomed into or barred from these structures.

The White House itself and the Capitol steps have often been open to US citizens. They are public buildings.

Indeed, inaugurations have been open public events in which the US citizenry simply entered the building for the celebration; this tradition lasted from President Jefferson’s inauguration in 1801, to 1885.

Things got very chaotic indeed in 1829. “On March 4, 1829, Andrew Jackson upholds an inaugural tradition begun by Thomas Jefferson and hosts an open house at the White House.

After Jackson’s swearing-in ceremony and address to Congress, the new president returned to the White House to meet and greet a flock of politicians, celebrities and citizens. Very shortly, the crowd swelled to more than 20,000, turning the usually dignified White House into a boisterous mob scene. Some guests stood on furniture in muddy shoes while others rummaged through rooms looking for the president–breaking dishes, crystal and grinding food into the carpet along the way. […]

The White House open-house tradition continued until several assassination attempts heightened security concerns. The trend ended in 1885 when Grover Cleveland opted instead to host a parade, which he viewed in safety from a grandstand set up in front of the White House.” [https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/jackson-holds-open-house-at-the-white-house].

And inaugurations were not the only occasions in which US citizens approached their public buildings in Washington.

The Bonus Army, which massed in the summer of 1932, during the Depression, to claim the financial “bonus” promised to veterans who had served in World War I, is an example of citizens assembling peaceably at the Capitol. When I was an undergraduate, we were taught that the Bonus Army sat on the steps of the Capitol and lobbied the legislators who were entering and leaving the building. I remember from my history textbook, images of crowds seated on the Capitol steps in 1932.

“[M]ore than 25,000 veterans and their families traveled to Washington, DC, to petition Congress and President Herbert Hoover to award them their bonus immediately. Fortunately for the marchers, Pelham Glassford, the local police chief and a veteran of the war himself, made accommodations for this influx, including the creation of an enormous camp in the Anacostia Flats […]. Glassford understood that Americans had an inherent right to assemble in Washington and petition the government for the “redress of grievances” without fear of punishment or reprisals. […]

On June 15, the House of Representatives passed the new bonus bill by a vote of 211 to 176. Two days later, some 8,000 veterans massed in front of the Capitol as the Senate prepared to vote, while another 10,000 assembled before the raised Anacostia drawbridge. The police were anticipating trouble because of the large crowds. The Senate debate continued until after dark. […]

When it appeared that the bonus would not be paid, many of the marchers refused to leave, and President Hoover ordered the Army to evict them. Using tear gas, tanks, and a troop of saber-wielding cavalry commanded by Major George S. Patton, U.S. Army chief of staff General Douglas MacArthur drove the marchers out of Washington and burned their main camp on the Anacostia Flats.”[https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/the-bonus-army]

I mention the massing of the Bonus Army on the Capitol steps in 1932, to note that the dominant narrative around Jan 6 today, often implies that it is an act of violence or of “insurrection” simply to march en masse peacefully to the Capitol.

But we should be wary of allowing history to be rewritten so as to criminalize peaceful, Constitutionally-protected assembly at “The People’s House.”

Massing peacefully at the Capitol and other public buildings, is part of our rights and inheritance as citizens, and this use of our First Amendment right to assemble has a long history. Indeed, the public has traditionally had the right peacefully to enter the Capitol — to obtain passes to events, to galley seats, and to witness the proceedings in other ways.

The Capitol is not a sealed space exclusively for legislators, but it is one that is supposed to welcome the public in an orderly way. [https://history.house.gov/Collection/Search?Term=Search&Classifications=Historical+Artifacts%3A+Passes&CurrentPage=1&SortOrder=Title&ResultType=Grid&PreviousSearch=Search%2CTitle]. We should not be encouraged to forget this.

The violence of Jan 6 and its subsequent service as a talking point by the Democrats’ leadership, risks its use also to justify the closing off of our public buildings from US citizens altogether.

This would be convenient for tyrants of any party.

Leaving aside the release of the additional Jan 6 footage and how it may or may not change our view of US history —- I must say that I am sorry for believing the dominant legacy-media “narrative” pretty completely from the time it was rolled out, without asking questions.

Those who violently entered the Capitol or who engaged in violence inside of it, must of course be held accountable. (As must violent protesters of every political stripe anywhere.)

But in addition, anyone in leadership who misrepresented to the public the events of the day so as to distort the complexity of its actual history — must also be held accountable.

Jan 6 has become, as the DNC intended it to become, after the fact, a “third rail”; a shorthand used to dismiss or criminalize an entire population and political point of view.

Peaceful Republicans and conservatives as a whole have been demonized by the story told by Democrats in leadership of what happened that day.

So half of the country has been tarred by association, and is now in many quarters presumed to consist of chaotic berserkers, anti-democratic rabble, and violent upstarts, whose sole goal is the murder of our democracy.

Republicans, conservatives, I am sorry.

I also believed wholesale so much else that has since turned out not to be as I was told it was by NPR, MSNBC and The New York Times.

I believed that stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop were Russian propaganda. Dozens of former intel officials said so. Johns Hopkins University said so. [https://sais.jhu.edu/news-press/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinformation-dozens-former-intel-officials-say].

“Trump specifically cited a “laptop” that contained emails allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden”, said ‘CNN Fact-Check’, with plenty of double quote marks. [https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_036fb62c-377f-4c68-8fa5-b98418e4bb9c]

I believed this all — til it was debunked.

I believed that President Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia — until that assertion was dropped. [https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/03/mueller-concludes-investigation/]

I believed that President Trump was a Russian asset, because the legacy media I read, said so [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/29/trump-russia-asset-claims-former-kgb-spy-new-book].

I believed in the entire Steele dossier, until I didn’t, because it all fell apart. [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63305382].

Was there in fact an “infamous pee tape”? So many other bad things were being said about the man — why not? [https://www.businessinsider.com/christopher-steele-trump-pee-tape-probably-exists-2021-10]

I believed that Pres Trump instigated the riot at the Capitol — because I did not know that his admonition to his supporters to assemble “peacefully and patriotically” had been deleted from all of the news coverage that I read. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-11/trump-team-hoping-peacefully-and-patriotically-will-be-shield]

Because of lies such as these in legacy media — lies which I and millions of others believed — half of our nation’s electorate was smeared and delegitimized, and I myself was misled.

It damages our nation when legacy media put words in the mouths of Presidents and former Presidents, and call them traitors or criminals without evidence.

It damages our country when we cannot tell truth from lies. This is exactly what tyrants seek — an electorate that cannot know what is truth and what is falsehood.

Through lies, half of the electorate was denied a fair run for its preferred candidate.

I don’t like violence. I do believe our nation’s capitol must be treated as a sacred space.

I don’t like President Trump (Do I not? Who knows? I have been lied to about him so much for so long, I can‘t tell whether my instinctive aversion is simply the habituated residue of years of being on the receiving end of lies).

But I like the liars who are our current gatekeepers, even less.

The gatekeepers who lie to the public about the most consequential events of our time — and who thus damage our nation, distort our history, and deprive half of our citizenry of their right to speak, champion and choose, without being tarred as would-be violent traitors – deserve our disgust.

I am sorry the nation was damaged by so much untruth issued by those with whom I identified at the time.

I am sorry my former “tribe” is angry at a journalist for engaging in —- journalism.

I am sorry I believed so much nonsense.

Though it is no doubt too little, too late —

Conservatives, Republicans, MAGA:

I am so sorry.

*  *  *

Outspoken with Dr Naomi Wolf is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support her work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

As lines (real and virtual) full of anxious depositors grew last week outside of Silicon Valley Bank branches around the world, and reassurances of “liquidity” were gushed from the C-Suite, three individuals within the firm were perhaps less troubled than those seeking their hard-earned cash back from the soon-to-be-failed bank.

12 days ago (on Feb 27th), Gregory Becker, the CEO of Silicon Valley Bank, sold $3.6 million worth (11%) of his shares…

Daniel Beck, the CFO, sold 32% (around $600,000) of his holdings…

And finally, CMO Michelle Draper sold 28%…

Notice that none of them had sold anything sizable for a year or so before this most recent (pre-collapse) sale (so it is a stretch to call this a pre-planned sale).

Additionally, Silicon Valley Bank on Friday paid out annual bonuses to eligible U.S. employees, just hours before the bank was seized by the U.S. government, Axios has learned from multiple sources.

But hey, we are sure it’s probably nothing to worry about, right?