Not making a diagnosis here, but those marks on Mr. Biden’s hand do resemble the residua of punctures. Usually blood draws are done from the antecubital (inside of elbow) vein. Intravenous lines are often inserted in the hands.
“Chinese diplomats have escalated their bullying of Congress over Taiwan, in one case even sending personnel to harass a congressional aide at gatherings hosted by the embassies of other countries, National Review has learned.
These incidents, reported here for the first time, mark a new escalation of the sort of Wolf Warrior–diplomacy pursued by China’s embassy in the United States. Highly unusual in themselves, the interactions follow other stepped-up efforts in recent months to aggressively push Beijing’s line on U.S. soil, including the embassy’s collaboration with a since-fired congressional aide to arrange meetings for Chinese diplomats with other Hill staffers.
The incident with the congressional aide occurred at a recent event hosted by the embassy of a Southeast Asian country. The aide was standing with a group of people when a Chinese diplomat approached, singling him out, as the aide told NR on condition of anonymity. The Chinese diplomat, a member of the embassy’s political team, told the congressional aide that his boss’s support of Taiwan would cause a war and that this lawmaker would be responsible for it. The diplomat’s complaints grew so aggressive and loud that others nearby stepped away from the conversation. The interaction lasted about a half hour.
Then, two weeks later, at an event hosted by a different embassy in Washington, the same Chinese diplomat, accompanied by his deputy, approached that aide again with similar complaints. The staffer told NR that he viewed the two incidents as attempts at coercion and intelligence-gathering. China’s embassy in Washington did not respond to an email asking about its cornering of congressional staff at other embassies’ events.
…The aggressive nature of these tactics, given the current political environment, is puzzling, Michael Sobolik, a former Senate foreign-policy staffer who is now a fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council, told NR…”
“The aggressive nature of these tactics, given the current political environment, is puzzling“. “Puzzling”…
I almost didn’t want to tweet this but it’s something everyone needs to know. NPR on the radio this morning played audio of a woman getting an abortion. You can hear the vacuum turning on, crying, moaning, and the doctor telling her it’s done.
“…It’s time for the Court to decide whether the law of the land means what it says. Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act states: “No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discriminationunder any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
Harvard and UNC collect huge sums of federal funding each year. Their admissions practices need to comport with federal law.
A Court ruling to that effect, though, would only address one of the ways in which college admissions practices play favorites and stifle opportunity. Those who’ve voiced concerns about affirmative action need to also take on legacy and wealth-based admissions.
After all, defenders of affirmative action have a point when they argue that legacy admissions give special treatment to the already-advantaged. Harvard data, for instance, reveal that the institution admits one-third of legacy applicants. Since the school’s overall acceptance rate was 6% in 2014, family connections boost admissions chances by more than 500%. This amounts to the worst kind of stacked deck, one stacked in favor of the fortunate.
Legacy admissions should be ended — period. College officials complain that such a shift will make it tougher for them to shake down alumni for donations, but it’s not clear why that justifies violating equal opportunity in order to aid the fortunate.
It’s also time for college officials to stop padding college coffers by selling seats to the kids and grandkids of wealthy donors. At Harvard, connections to a big donor boost a student’s chances of admission by a factor of nine. The Harvard lawsuit illuminated some of the unsavory ways in which campus officials shake down potential donors. In one revealing note, a high-ranking campus official observed that one applicant’s family, which had given Harvard $8.7 million over time, had lost its wealth. The official sighed, “I don’t see a significant opportunity for further major gifts,” but added that there was “an art collection which conceivably could come our way.”…”
There’s an easy solution to Harvard’s dilemma: stop accepting federal funding of any kind. This will leave the university free to pick and choose who passes through its hallowed halls in any way, shape or form it chooses.
In the meantime, for the very reason this video clip from Tucker relates…
“One of the problems facing the Democratic Party in the 2022 midterm cycle is that it is the incumbent party, but it acts and sounds as if it doesn’t want to believe that it is the incumbent party.
Today in the Washington Post, the headline is, “Biden says Democratic election wins will bring ‘fundamental shift’ on economy.” But the Democrats already are in the White House and enjoy majorities in the House of Representatives and a de facto majority the Senate. You could argue that the reason they’re in so much trouble as the midterm elections approach is because they’ve already brought about a “fundamental shift on the economy.” Democrats passed, with few or no Republican votes, the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act.
Over in The Nation, the headline on Katrina Vanden Heuvel’s column is, “In This Time of ‘Polycrisis,’ the Midterms Are More Critical Than Ever.” She explains that “polycrisis” is “the word historian Adam Tooze uses to describe multiple, simultaneous systemic crises that intensify as they collide, resulting in dire and deadly disruptions.” She lists off high food prices, climate change, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Covid-19, and inflation as elements of the “polycrisis.”
I wasn’t familiar with the term “polycrisis” until I read her column, but I figure that if you’re the incumbent party, you really don’t want to preside over one of those. In fact, you might say that the whole point of government is to avoid a polycrisis. The argument in The Nation is that things under this administration and these Democrats in Congress have never been worse, which is why they need to stay in power…”
“Democrats have been caught by surprise in New York’s 17th congressional district, where state assemblyman Michael Lawler is putting up a stronger fight than they expected against Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Sean Patrick Maloney.
Last week, the Cook Political Report shifted the race from “lean Democrat” to “toss up.” That the newly redrawn district is competitive has come as a shock, given that President Joe Biden won the area by ten points in 2020.
If Lawler defeats Maloney, it would be the first time a Republican has defeated the chair of the DCCC in 40 years…”
“I don’t recognize that Democrat party anymore. The party I used to support stood for liberal values like free speech & now pushes harder and harder for censorship. I will continue to vote Republican until every pro-lockdown Democrat is out of office. I will continue to vote Republican until every pro-perversion Democrat is out of office.“
Wow! Guess Joe Rogan may be right:
Then there’s this octet of specially-selected items certain to pique the interest of inquiring Conservative minds:
“…It used to be that if a president scheduled prime-time air to warn the nation of a “threat” to “democracy,” from “dark forces,” that has placed everything from our “personal freedoms” to the “rule of law” “on the ballot”—he’d be referring to something like World War II, and get a listen. The Biden speech got a shrug. Voters have sat through this apocalyptic movie many times now, and know its anticlimactic ending. Besides, they’re busy searching for spare change to cover the rising grocery bill.“
(8). This now-deleted tweet makes one question…seriously question…whether there’s a sentient adult working in the White House:
WOAH – The White House *deleted* its tweet after Twitter placed a fact-check disclaimer on it. pic.twitter.com/1XJKnjRG5V
“Two Iowa high school students killed their Spanish teacher last year as retaliation for receiving a bad grade, prosecutors said in court documents on Tuesday. The documents reveal a possible motive in the case for the first time since the teenagers — Willard Miller and Jeremy Goodale — were arrested in November 2021.The boys, who were 16 at the time, face murder charges for the death of their 66-year-old teacher Nohema Graber.
According to investigators, Miller had met with Graber on November 2, 2021, to discuss his poor grade in her class.The teacher drove later that day to a park where she was known to take daily walks after school. Witnesses reported seeing her van leaving the park less than an hour after she arrived with two males in the front seat. The van was left at the end of a rural road and a witness later picked up the two boys as they walked to town on the same road, investigators said.
Graber’s body was found at the park the next day underneath a tarp, wheelbarrow and railroad ties. She had been beaten to death with a baseball bat, according to investigators, and one of the teenagers bragged about the incident on social media. In speaking to police, Miller said he was frustrated over Graber’s teaching methods and how his grade in her class was lowering his GPA.
…A witness provided photos to investigators of a Snapchat conversation with Goodale that reveals “Goodale’s admissions that he acted in concert with another person to bring about Graber’s death.” The witness said Goodale made comments implicating himself and Miller by name.
But Miller’s lawyer, Christine Branstad, claims four search warrants were issued illegally in part because “law enforcement failed to provide information to the issuing magistrate to show the informant is reliable or that the information from the informant should be considered reliable.”…”
Two thoughts immediately come to mind: First, these two are a waste of whatever resources the state will spend keeping them alive even a moment longer than is necessary to secure their convictions and sentencing. Second, we’re under the impression, given the DOJ/FBI’s actions associated with obtaining the Russiagate FISA warrants, not only does law enforcement not need to demonstrate an informant and/or their information is reliable, they can intentionally and repeatedly mislead the issuing magistrate on the matter.
And if young Master Miller thought his Spanish grade was bad, he’s about to learn what it means to be proper “F”‘d!
Most definitely.
Magoo
Video of the Day
Tucker highlights why the stakes couldn’t be higher on Tuesday.
Tales of The Darkside
As contributor Nick noted, this is one of the very few funny skits SNL’s done in the last 6 years. We’d normally use this as an On the Lighter Side entry, but it so accurately depicts the choices the Dims will face in 2024, for them it’s decidedly UNfunny!
On the Lighter Side
You’ll love this Top Gun takeoff from our middle son Mike.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.