Displaying posts published in

June 2022

D’Souza’s Mules Left Tracks By Charlie Johnston

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/06/dsouzas_mules_left_tracks.html

“D’Souza’s documentary is the seminal moment the tide washed away enough mud that, despite their shrieks and howls, the left can no longer hide the ugly truth of what it did.  Massive election fraud in 2020 is a conspiracy, but it is no longer merely a theory.”

Many conservative commentators have noted that Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary, 2000 Mules, offers compelling evidence of large-scale vote fraud.  It offers more than this, though.  It provides compelling evidence of a massive, centrally coordinated conspiracy to commit vote fraud.  Examining several states with different voter laws while focusing on just one form of fraud, the movie found that the method of fraud was executed identically in each of these states.  That is prima facie evidence of central organization and management.

From the moment counting was stopped in the dead of night in five Democrat-run swing states on election night, Democrats and the media have treated anyone who questioned election integrity in 2020 like a mob boss treats anyone who threatens to testify against him: shut up, or we will cancel you.

Democrats and the media routinely smear anyone who questions the election results as a conspiracy theorist.  They routinely pronounce any evidence that emerges as “debunked.”  For the record, “debunked” does not mean “inconvenient to the leftist narrative.”  It means “thoroughly investigated and proven to be false.”  Almost none of the evidence has been debunked; very little has been officially examined.  Leftists treat actual evidence like how a vampire treats a crucifix.  There is no reasoned discourse, just a lot of hissing and snarling.

The radical left literally targets Amy Coney Barrett By Andrea Widburg

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/06/the_radical_left_literally_targets_amy_coney_barrett.html

The federal code is remarkably clear: A person who “pickets or parades” near a judge’s home “with the intent of influencing any judge…in the discharge of his duties…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” (18 U.S.C. § 1507.) Simply put, if you appear outside a judge’s home attempting to change a case’s outcome, you’re a criminal. And yet, who thinks that Merrick Garland’s DOJ will act on the fact that protestors gathered outside Supreme Court Justice Amy Comey Barrett’s home—where she lives with her seven children—to intimidate her into changing her position on Roe v. Wade?

The protesters were not subtle; they were obvious and deliberately intimidating:

Pro-choice activists protested outside Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s house over the weekend, donning fake-blood-stained clothes and holding baby dolls.

The protesters marched to the judge’s Falls Church, Va., home Saturday and held signs including one with a coat hanger on it that said, “Not going back.”

The youth activists, part of a group called Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights, tied their hands together with tape and held the plastic baby dolls.

“This is what Amy’s America looks like,” one protester Ariana, 15, said in a video the group posted. “Children will be forced to give birth to children. Women will be silenced. Women will be invalidated. Women will be told they are less than.

“And that is not OK. We cannot let that happen. … You can’t let this future happen to us. It’s not fair.” (Emphasis mine.)

Abigail Shrier: In Defense of Political Escalation How can we get back to normal? Those waiting for the pendulum to swing back will be waiting forever. Abigail Shrier

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/abigail-shrier-in-defense-of-political?utm_source=email

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis earned uncommon rebuke from conservative pundits last week, when he indicated he might sic Child Protective Services on parents who take their children to drag shows.

“I’m a very big fan of DeSantis and very not a fan of kids at drag shows,” writer Bethany Mandel wrote on Twitter. “But conservatives have to recognize the Pandora’s box we’re opening by involving CPS in judgment call parenting decisions. It’s not abuse.”

Mandel is right: Child Protective Services should not be sent after these families. Parents ought to be free to make all kinds of decisions regarding what ideas to expose their children to, how and when—especially with regard to matters that we typically consider private and deeply personal: Religion is one. Sexuality, another.

But here’s the hitch: as with so many of our institutions, CPS has already become thoroughly politicized and weaponized by the left. Dozens and dozens of loving parents have told me over the last two years that CPS showed up at their homes or threatened their custody or even testified against them in court, all for the sin of failing to “affirm” their minor child’s newly-announced gender identity or vetoing the kid’s immediate medical transition.

In California, matters head from bad to worse: a new bill aspires to transform California into a “sanctuary state” for gender-swapping youth, making it possible for even a non-custodial parent to run to California to transition her child against her ex-spouse’s wishes.

Here, then, is the question: If our ultimate goal is returning to a normalcy in which government agencies and corporations treat all Americans fairly regardless of viewpoint, how are we to achieve this? At a minimum, we must acknowledge that these institutions are already weaponized and their artillery points only in one direction: against the opponents of the left. Acknowledge further that an ever-increasing tyranny is ratcheted upon those who dare criticize the encroachment of gender ideology into all spheres of public life. The playing field is about as level as San Francisco’s Filbert Street.