• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower


Two Years After Kenosha Riots, Why No August 23 Committee To Investigate The Big Lie That Stoked The Flames?

BY: KYLEE GRISWOLD at the Federalist:

AUGUST 23, 2022

Kenosha burned car lot Car Source

Perhaps it’s time to assemble an Aug. 23 Select Committee that, instead of engaging in partisan theater, actually gets to the bottom of the Kenosha riots.

Author Kylee Griswold profile


Aug. 23, 2020 is a night Kenosha residents can’t help but remember — but would rather forget. At the hands of vindictive Black Lives Matter groupies and other self-described racial justice activists, the Wisconsin town went up in flames two years ago today. 

Rogues started fires at government buildings. They set ablaze garbage trucks and torched upwards of 100 vehicles in the car lot owned by an Indian immigrant, smashing the windows of those who escaped the inferno. They vandalized the post office and a high school, and their flames completely consumed a century-old camera shop.

That’s only a fraction of what followed the justified police shooting of Jacob Blake.


Boarded up windows were scrawled with messages begging rioters to pass over them: “PLEASE, KIDS ABOVE” and “THE ELDERLY LIVE HERE.” Demonstrators taunted the scant law enforcers posted outside the courthouse. And when Wisconsin’s Democrat Gov. Tony Evers refused to send enough National Guardsmen after a full 24 hours of rioting despite locals’ pleas for help — he sent more troops to Milwaukee during the NBA finals — armed citizens stepped up to defend property and ultimately themselves, resulting in the deaths of two people.

That was two years ago. Now we’re watching the House Jan. 6 Committee’s Stalinist show trial for Americans who participated in the riot at the U.S. Capitol — and many who didn’t — on Jan. 6, 2021. Last November, we witnessed a courtroom drama for a 17-year-old kid who defended his life with a firearm during the riots but was slandered by legacy media as a white supremacist and a murderer.

Now, after more than 60 people have been charged with crimes related to the Kenosha riots, with supposedly many more to come, why has there been no large-scale investigation into these deadly riots, the players behind them, and the destructive ideology that sparked it all? Despite Democrats’ constant talk about Donald Trump’s “big lie,” they fall silent when confronted with evidence their race obsession can spur lethal race revolutions.

That obsession and its effects are based on a lie. And it’s a big one.

The Big Lie

The entire Kenosha scene was sparked by one police shooting, which corporate media and other leftists instantly branded evidence of racism. Celebrities claimed, contrary to available evidence, that police “shoot first & detain second” and that Blake “could have been grabbed…he could have been tased….He could have immediately been stopped when he started walking around the car.” LeBron James characterized it as “police brutality towards my kind.”

Evers framed the incident as yet another “Black man or person” “shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement.” Joe Biden escalated the race-baiting with the same framing.

Of course, this was all a lie. Police were actually responding to an emergency call from Blake’s girlfriend, who said he wasn’t permitted on the property and had snatched her keys. Before officers even arrived at the scene, they knew Blake had a warrant out for his arrest for charges of disorderly conduct connected to domestic abuse, third-degree sexual assault, and trespassing. Before they ever fired a gun, officers had Tased him twice to no avail, and Blake had reached into the vehicle, where a weapon was later recovered on the floorboards and three kids were in the backseat, which police knew because their mom reportedly “kept screaming that.”

But this lie — that the Blake shooting represented routine police brutality toward black people — is not surprising because it’s all part of the left’s much bigger racism lie.

They lied about knife-wielding black teen Ma’Khia Bryant. They lied about armed 13-year-old Mexican-American Adam Toledo. They lied about Michael Brown. They lied about Bubba Wallace and Jussie Smollett. And they lie by omission when they refuse to cover violent crimes by black perpetrators against other racial groups, as with Pakistani immigrant Mohammad Anwar, who was brutally murdered by two black teenage girls when they violently carjacked him in D.C. in the middle of the day.

They perpetuate these lies with catchphrases, such as “hands up, don’t shoot.” They spread them in ahistorical accounts such as the “1619 Project” and profit from them with lectures lamenting “white fragility” and “systemic racism.” And they amplify them with clever branding such as “Black Lives Matter,” making violent demonstrations tricky to condemn for those afraid of false racism smears.

Corrupt media are the worst offenders, and Democrat politicos are nearly as bad. As I wrote last year about the left’s response to riots:

They said, ‘Destroying property … is not violence.’ They said protests don’t need to be peaceful and called riots a ‘proportionate response.’ They denied evidence of anarchy. They said violence works. They condemned the term ‘riot‘ as ‘loaded,’ instead calling it ‘democracy.’ They released a documentary claiming ‘Riots Built America.’ And they flat-out pretended cities weren’t being ravaged, with Gov. Jay Inslee saying ‘That’s news to me!‘ when asked about the so-called Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, and Rep. Jerry Nadler calling Antifa a ‘myth.’

It’s this endless stream of lies that incites the sort of violence that overtook Kenosha. Years later, why hasn’t it been investigated?

We Need Answers

I’m not talking about the type of local investigations that led to charging a few dozen people with riot-related crimes. That should be a given. I’m talking about a large-scale probe that drags in media defamers, a negligent governor, elite race-baiters, and riot organizers to investigate their role in this violent scene, which has played out time and again with impunity across the country.

After all, there’s precedent for that sort of trial. It arose from a riot on Jan. 6, which was far less deadly than Kenosha and was used to destroy top political opponents whose hands are clean, unlike those of Wisconsin’s dud governor.

First, we still don’t know who was responsible for the rioting because it appears to be more than just individual Kenoshans. Kenosha locals were the first to tell The Federalist that the perpetrators were “out-of-towners.” As one local, Alvin, told The Federalist at the time, “All this destruction didn’t come from Kenosha. People came in here and did this.”


Police reports bear this out. According to a media release one week after the riots began, of the 175 people who had been arrested, 102 were out-of-towners. Leftist media, of course, sicced their fake fact-checkers on the information, with USA Today saying those figures are “missing context” because most of the arrestees were from other parts of Wisconsin or Illinois, “the border of which is about 6 miles from the heart of the protests.”

Leftist media discarded this “context,” however, when they attacked Kyle Rittenhouse for traveling “across state lines” from Illinois with a gun (This was a lie anyway. He didn’t bring the firearm across state lines, and both Rittenhouse’s father and lifeguarding job were reportedly in Kenosha.).

As Empower Wisconsin reporter Matt Kittle detailed, police also stopped a bus containing Seattle-based group Riot Kitchen in Kenosha after they filled up multiple gas cans. While media were quick to parrot the group’s excuse that they needed the gasoline to power generators, that leaves bigger questions unanswered.

“Police say the vehicles contained various items, including helmets, gas masks, protective vests, illegal fireworks, and suspected controlled substances. Nine individuals were arrested for disorderly conduct and are awaiting charging decisions by the Kenosha County district attorney, according to the incident report,” Kittle reported at the time. “…What the [media] stories couldn’t explain is why members of the organization were loading up so many cans of gas, and why the Riot Kitchen crew in the minivan fled from police.”

Sure sounds like something a Select Committee on Aug. 23 might want to get to the bottom of. What was Riot Kitchen really doing in Kenosha, what percentage of the rioters came from out of state, and who funded their activities? What about the rioters who descended from Oregon, California, Kentucky, Minnesota, Indiana, and California? Where else did demonstrators come from, and did someone send them?

If it’s true, as Molly Ball admitted in a jaw-dropping Time magazine article about the rigged 2020 election, that alliances of left-wing activists and corporate power players can control so-called “protests,” which of these puppet-masters were involved in coordinating the Kenosha riots? If none of those people actively instigated these riots, why didn’t they work to “curtail” them, as Ball says they’re able to do, before they turned violent?

Furthermore, partisans on the Jan. 6 Committee squeezed every last salacious soundbite possible out of texts to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging him to tell the president to stop the riots. But what about Evers’ text messages? Who advised the governor to twiddle his thumbs rather than call in reinforcements? What was the chatter like after that negligence led to shots fired?

And how about communication among members of the slanderous media? Which editors and producers greenlighted the framing of the Blake killing as police brutality and the ensuing violence as “fiery but mostly peaceful“? Which publishers have so far been held accountable for printing that Rittenhouse is a murderer? Perhaps President Joe Biden should be called to testify before a committee for labeling the teen a “white supremacist” — or have his home raided to fish for any scrap of paper where he might have scribbled a Kenosha-related note.

Justice for All

As the Jan. 6 Committee subpoenas fellow lawmakers, indicts political opponents, and throws 69-year-old grandmothers with cancer into federal prison for trespassing, two years have passed without any probe of the big racism lie that incited mob violence in Kenosha.

It’s clear what ideology led to the riots. It’s not clear to what extent individual players are responsible. Perhaps it’s time to assemble an Aug. 23 Select Committee that, instead of engaging in partisan theater, actually gets to the bottom of the violence to provide justice for victims and to prevent this nightmare from repeating itself.

The American people might actually tune in to a trial like that. They’ve been waiting a while for answers.


Democrats Have Abandoned the Working Class

Posted Tuesday, August 23, 2022   |   By AMAC Newsline   email sharing button

AMAC Exclusive – By Claire Brighn

Working class

Beginning in earnest with Donald Trump’s election in 2016, working class voters in the United States have fled the Democratic Party in droves, quickly eroding a once solid base of support for the party. Amid this seismic shift in the electorate, many elected Democrats and mainstream media pundits have over the past several months desperately tried to prop up this narrative of Democrats as the party of everyday Americans – even as the policies emanating from Washington have grown increasingly opposed to their interests.

Following the 2016 election, many in media circles seemed to believe that Trump’s performance with blue-collar and working class voters in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio must have been a fluke. Though 2018 was an electoral setback for Republicans in the House, 2020 quickly proved a continuation of the trend that began four years before. Analysis from The New York Times in 2020 on “The Two Americas Funding Trump and Biden Campaigns” found, for example, that in “ZIP codes above [the median household of $68,703], Mr. Biden outraised Mr. Trump by $389.1 million. Below that level, Mr. Trump was actually ahead by $53.4 million.” Additionally, the study also found that much of Biden’s “financial edge” came from deep blue states along the coasts – supporting the widespread perception of Democrats as the party of coastal elites. “The donations mirror voting patterns,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres noted at the time.

The reason why this shift is occurring is easy to see – on issue after issue, Democrats’ policies are hopelessly out of step with the experiences of working class voters. On day one of his administration, Biden took actions like canceling the Keystone XL pipeline and ending oil and gas leases on federal lands – policies favored by wealthy liberals, but which started a steady rise in energy prices that hit working class Americans particularly hard. Democrats’ $1.9 trillion “American Rescue Plan,” which was chock-full of woke priorities aimed at appeasing far-left activists, touched off an inflation crisis that has further devastated the financial lives of working class families. Instead of working to curb inflation, Biden and Congressional Democrats passed a bill dubbed the “Inflation Reduction Act” that economists believe will do nothing but increase inflation, and which contains subsidies for electric vehicles and solar panels – more welfare for the wealthy. In just the past two years, every Democrat in Congress has voted for higher energy costs, ending coal, and unleashing an army of IRS agents on low and middle-income Americans.

Despite Democrats’ claims that these policies are targeted at working and middle class Americans, evidence suggests that the opposite is true. For instance, available data shows that 80% of electric vehicle subsidies end up going to individuals making more than $100,000 per year. A Wall Street Journal analysis of California’s push to switch to “green” energy sources, a plan similar to the climate provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act, showed that while working class households saw their energy bills increase, wealthy households actually saw financial gain from the policies.

Additionally, though Democrats slammed the Trump tax cuts as “tax breaks for the rich” and insist that their tax plan would “make the wealthy pay their fair share,” real wages grew under Trump, and that wage growth went predominately to “workers at the lower end of the pay scale.” Meanwhile, an analysis from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation found that the tax code changes in Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act would result in an increased tax burden of more than $17 billion on Americans making less than $200,000 in 2023 alone.

Democrats’ struggles with working class voters are perhaps best captured in middle American states that were once reliably blue or purple but are now trending Republican. The state of Iowa, for instance, which for decades was “the reliable wind vane of American politics,” has all but totally rejected Democrats. Obama carried the state twice in 2008 and 2012, but Trump also won there twice – gaining ground in 2020 over 2016. Since then, Republican voter registration has almost doubled in the state, and Biden’s approval sits at a dismal 23%.

A similar story has played out in Ohio, which also voted for Obama twice, but which Trump won handily in 2020. Though Biden managed to carry Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota two years ago, these once reliable bastions of Democratic support are now toss-ups.

In all of these states, which have been at the epicenter of the decline of American manufacturing in recent decades, working class voters are driving this shift, undoubtedly in large part thanks to Donald Trump’s message of economic renewal and a return to American greatness.

In response, some Democrats have, to their credit, attempted to rebuild this base of support. A headline from The New York Times late last month asked: “How Can Democrats Persuade Voters They Aren’t The Party of Rich Elites?” In an apparent response, Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio (D) wrote in an op-ed earlier this month, “We’re supposed to be the workers’ Party. Democrats must be that party again.” (Never mind the fact that Senator Brown has garnered a reputation as one of the most far-left members of the Senate and was a strong supporter of Democrats’ spending binge.)

But this outreach effort has proven to be little more than lip service to the actual needs of working class voters. Far from re-calibrating their policy agenda as working class voters abandon them, Democrats appear poised to double down on their embrace of elite interests and a far-left social agenda, one that is completely at odds with the traditional values of most working class families. For Republicans, this presents a golden opportunity – if they can follow Trump’s lead and continue focusing on the issues that matter most to these voters.

Claire Brighn is the pen name of a conservative researcher and writer with previous domestic and foreign policy experience in the Executive Branch.


Paul Pelosi Pleads Guilty to DUI Charge. Here’s His Punishment.

Spencer Brown

by Spencer Brown at Townhall:

Paul Pelosi Pleads Guilty to DUI Charge. Here's His Punishment.

Source: Townhall Media

Paul Pelosi was back in a Napa County court on Tuesday for another hearing in his DUI case that has — so far — generated more questions than answers. 

After pleading “not guilty” through his legal representatives in his last court date on August 3, Mr. Pelosi flipped his case and entered a “guilty” plea on Tuesday, avoiding a trial for the multimillionaire husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and escaping with a wrist-slap sentence that will amount to eight hours in a work program.

The plea deal Mr. Pelosi entered included five days in jail, but he received credit for two days as time served and another two for good conduct leaving one remaining day to be served that will be satisfied by the eight-hours of work.

In addition, reports note that Paul Pelosi must complete a three-month course on the dangers of drinking and driving, have an ignition interlock device installed in his car for one year, pay a $150 fine, and will be on probation for three years.

So, Paul Pelosi — who could have killed someone when he chose to get behind the wheel of his car while intoxicated beyond the legal limit — will serve barely one workday as punishment and have to take a class to teach the 82 year old millionaire a lesson he should have already known. He couldn’t have taken an Uber? Or hired a driver? It’s just a slap on the wrist for the well-connected and powerful Pelosi and a slap in the face to those in the community he endangered with his reckless drunk driving. 

Earlier this summer, court records reported by Townhall showed that Pelosi was visibly intoxicated when authorities arrived on the scene of a crash between Pelosi’s Porsche and the Jeep he’d collided with. Pelosi attempted to use a “get out of jail free” card when he handed highway patrol officers his membership card for a charity benefitting the families of California Highway Patrol along with his identification, and subsequently failed a field sobriety test.

Natural Gas Prices Hit Highest Level Since 2008 Under Biden

Spencer Brown

After being booked in a county jail and administered a blood test, Pelosi’s blood showed a BAC higher than the legal limit in California, though the amount of time that passed from the time of the crash until the blood was drawn for testing indicates that Pelosi was more intoxicated when he got behind the wheel of his Porsche to attempt his drive home. 

A county charging form explained that Pelosi was facing a count related to alcohol and drugs in his system, but county officials subsequently claimed that the reference to a drug in Pelosi’s blood was merely “boilerplate” charging language used by prosecutors and their case against Pelosi was based on alcohol. 

Authorities still have not released dash or body camera footage of the accident scene or interactions with Pelosi. 

Lefty Fascist Nadler’s AMERICAN WAY!

There are so many juicy subplots to the Democratic civil war being fought in New York today

ALLAHPUNDIT Aug 23, 2022 at HotAir:

AP Photo/Mary Altaffer

Normally I’d save this for tonight’s “live results” post but there’s so much schadenfreude here for righties to digest that we should start consuming it early, long before the polls close at 9 p.m. ET.

One nasty blue-on-blue race on Election Day would be entertaining. Two would be engrossing. But what if I told you that New York has three on the ballot?

And what if I further told you that none of those races is the most interesting one in the state to watch tonight?

Jim Newell has a solid explainer on the cause of Democratic misery. Simply put, the liberal state legislature got greedy with redistricting. They tried to redraw New York’s House districts so that there’d be 22 safe Democratic seats versus just four safe Republican ones. If that scheme had succeeded, tonight’s primaries would have been conducted on schedule in June and possibly every Democratic House incumbent would be on their way to another term in the House. But the redistricting map was too aggressive: A federal judge threw it out on grounds that it was an illegal partisan gerrymander and a special master appointed by the court redraw the map to make it more equitable. That forced the primaries to be postponed from June to tonight, a sleepy part of the summer in which fewer voters than usual are apt to turn out. And strange things can happen in low-turnout primaries.

It also forced Democratic incumbents to make hard choices about which of the newly redrawn districts to run in, which led to a game of political musical chairs. Jerry Nadler could have run in the new 10th District but instead chose to challenge his old friend and colleague, Carolyn Maloney, in the new 12th. They’re each in their mid-70s and have been in Congress for 30 years. One’s career will end tonight. Meanwhile, Sean Patrick Maloney opted to run in the new 17th District, which would have pitted him against progressive darling and local incumbent Mondaire Jones. Lefties were incensed since Maloney has the backing of establishment Democrats and just so happens to be the chairman of the DCCC this cycle, making him one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. That forced Jones to make a hard choice about whether to challenge Maloney and probably lose or to run in the new 10th District, where there is no incumbent. He chose the latter, but is now facing a crowded field that includes Dan Goldman, the heir to the Levi Strauss family fortune.

If Goldman’s name sounds familiar to you, there’s a reason.

The first subplot, then, is whether progressives will have revenge on Sean Patrick Maloney for bigfooting Jones out of the 17th District. Maloney is being challenged by local lefty Alessandra Biaggi and the race has shaped up to be an enjoyable, if predictable, clash of progs versus establishmentarians. Maloney has been endorsed by Nancy Pelosi and the Clintons; Biaggi has been endorsed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Biaggi has sneered that Maloney is “a selfish corporate Democrat with no integrity” while Maloney has hammered Biaggi for being part of the Democrats’ “socialist wing” and has accused her of being “absolutely outside the mainstream.” Maloney will probably win — but then again, Joe Crowley was also supposed to win his primary against AOC a few years ago. Don’t underestimate motivated lefties in a Democratic primary.

The second subplot is the fate of Jones, who’s trying to hang onto his career in the new 10th but faces a heavy lift against Goldman and NYC Assembly member Yuh-Line Niou. Lefties will blow a gasket if Jones, having been muscled out of the 17th by Maloney, ends up being nuked by the mega-rich newcomer Goldman. Per Politico, Goldman has spent $4 million on the race, vastly more than his competition, and is a slight favorite thanks to the lefty vote splintering among multiple candidates. A young African-American first-term progressive House member being tossed out of Congress because an ambitious white corporate scion essentially decided to buy his seat is not a happy narrative for the Democratic Party. Goldman and his establishment supporters will be the subject of lefty grudges for years to come if he prevails.

Finally, there’s the clash of the titans in New York’s 12th, Nadler vs. Carolyn Maloney. I recommend Jim Geraghty’s post on that race as it does better than any other I’ve seen to capture the pathos of two seventysomething dinosaurs destroying their decades-long friendship in the interest of clinging to power for two more years, almost certainly as members of a rump Democratic minority. One might have assumed that two old pals and colleagues would at least have observed Queensbury rules when sparring against each other. One would be wrong.


According to CNN, “Maloney has told people privately that Nadler is ‘half dead’ and insinuated he won’t be healthy enough to finish another term if he wins, and people associated with her campaign have suggested that Nadler secretly briefly lost consciousness at a campaign stop last week.” Not to be outdone, “Nadler allies, meanwhile, have whispered reminders about Maloney’s long history of odd remarks and demeanor, which ranges from being called kooky to not entirely sober.” Geraghty runs through a surprisingly long list of nastiness between them during the primary campaign, with Nadler sporadically accusing Maloney of being soft on Iran and dependent on him for some of her legislative victories and Maloney accusing Nadler of being soft on sexual misconduct and a beneficiary of the “old boys’ club.”

One of them’s going home tonight for good. There might be tears. It’ll be hilarious.

As for the most important race on the ballot in New York, though, let’s save that for this evening’s “live results” post. Stay tuned.

TikTok Goes China…(Joins Biden?)

TikTok’s New ‘Elections Center’ Is A Massive Threat To National Security

BY: EMILY JASHINSKY at the Federalist:

AUGUST 23, 2022


That we’ve forfeited this much control to a hostile foreign power is one of the most mind-boggling, slow-motion political blunders in modern history.

Author Emily Jashinsky profile


TikTok just unveiled an “Elections Center” that will put detailed voter profiles in the hands of a company based in Beijing, stocked with party members and state employees, subject to laws that allow the Chinese government data access. Given the Chinese Communist Party’s influence over ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, China could exercise enormous control over the midterm elections with this data. What’s worse is that American institutions are actively encouraging TikTok to do this.

By law, ByteDance is required to give China access to its data upon request. TikTok claims such requests would be rejected, but there is no way to know whether that’s true. We do, however, know that members of the CCP actually work for ByteDance. We also know TikTok’s data has been accessed in China, despite the company’s claims. Finally, we know TikTok is currently the most popular social network in America.

Last week, TikTok boasted in a press release about the creation of its new Elections Center. The center will influence American elections on two fronts: by providing voter information and countering “misinformation.” The first front means TikTok will have voting profiles on all American users who click through the Elections Center, and the second front means a Chinese company will be policing our political discourse on the single most popular social network.


According to TikTok, the center will “connect people who engage with election content to authoritative information and sources in more than 45 languages.” That may sound lovely, but it means when users select their state and click “register to vote,” TikTok can now cross-reference their location and interest in voting with their age, political leanings, and other attributes that can be gleaned from its vast trove of data.

Why does that matter? Tristan Harris of the Center for Humane Technology and “The Social Dilemma” joined “The Federalist Radio Hour” last week to outline the threats posed by TikTok. With the app’s data, Harris explained, China “can look at all the voting districts in the swing states and … can basically look at people’s sentiments with an AI that calculates what people’s opinions are in all the key voting areas.

Then, added Harris, China “can strategically up-regulate everybody who starts to say, you know, China’s really not so bad.”

“If China were to invade Taiwan tomorrow, they could up-regulate all the American voices who are saying that Taiwan was always a part of China,” Harris noted. (Listen to Elbridge Colby’s recent appearance on “The Federalist Radio Hour” to get a sense of how fragile this relationship really is.) That could be done on a local, state, or national scale on a variety of issues.

This is a hypothetical, to be sure, but it’s a tool we’re simply hoping a hostile foreign power will not utilize. Imagine China knows there are a handful of likely Mark Kelly voters in a certain area of Arizona. TikTok could feed them content that could, in turn, encourage more Democrat-leaning users to vote against Blake Masters or feed likely voters who consume conservative content videos that might depress turnout for Masters.

Perhaps there are disincentives for the CCP to actually weaponize TikTok data: It could leak and escalate conflict outside the party’s control; it could harm the bottom line of one of their most powerful companies; it could jeopardize the long-term control China has over the American public’s social and individual health through the app.

There is no guarantee China will weaponize this data now or in the future, but there is absolutely no reason for us to willingly forfeit it either. The risk is not remotely worth whatever reward American consumers think they’re getting.


On the “misinformation” front, it’s obviously bad enough that Big Tech companies based in America or China now believe it’s their duty to police the public discourse. But it’s also in China’s interest to foment cultural discord and hamper politicians who might undercut their geopolitical aspirations. Controlling the rhetoric Americans are allowed to post and see on one of the most popular sources of discussion and information is a major advantage for China.

Would the CCP hand marching orders to ByteDance and TikTok? Maybe, but they also wouldn’t have to be explicit. The overwhelming ideology of censors is one that favors leftism and opposes everything else. The information that gets powerfully suppressed almost always counters the political establishment, whether it’s on transgenderism, race, election integrity, Covid policies, or China.

It’s bad enough a major corporation exerts this much control over the discourse at all, let alone in an election cycle, let alone one owned by China. Whether based in America or overseas, social media makes us less happy and less healthy basically across the board. That we’ve forfeited this much control to a hostile foreign power is one of the most mind-boggling, slow-motion political blunders in modern history.

American Partners

Instead of collective opposition to this transparent data suck, American institutions actually helped and endorsed TikTok’s creation of the Elections Center. TikTok partnered with the National Association of Secretaries of State, Ballotpedia, the Campus Vote Project, and the Federal Voting Assistance Program, among other organizations, to “provide information” on the hub.

The Federal Voting Assistance Program, for example, is a taxpayer-funded government group that “works to ensure Service members, their eligible family members, and overseas citizens are aware of their right to vote and have the tools and resources to successfully do so — from anywhere in the world.” This is a wonderful mission, but whoever authorized the TikTok partnership at FVAP made a bad decision, one that could ultimately help China draw us into a military conflict and gain the upper hand when it comes to influencing public opinion.

It should be an embarrassment for any of these groups to affiliate with TikTok at all, particularly on this effort.

The Threat

Around the time TikTok announced the Elections Center, Forbes reported that “three hundred current employees at TikTok and its parent company ByteDance previously worked for Chinese state media publications, according to public employee LinkedIn profiles.”

Forbes found that 50 of those profiles “specifically mentioned work on TikTok, in areas including policy, strategy, operations, monetization, user experience and localization.” Last month, TikTok confirmed an explosive Buzzfeed report that found U.S. user data had been accessed in China. In 2020, the Department of Justice found that 130 members of the CCP worked for ByteDance in Beijing.

TikTok is furiously working on “Project Texas,” an internal mission to emphasize its independence from Beijing. In the same week TikTok unveiled the Elections Center, Axios reported that Oracle started “vetting TikTok’s algorithms and content moderation models to ensure they aren’t manipulated by Chinese authorities,” now that its data had been routed into Oracle’s cloud.

This still puts valuable data and public influence in the hands of yet another private entity, which may not even be able to detect algorithm manipulation that benefits China when it’s less overtly political and more subtle, like the promotion of trans ideology, anti-Americanism, and more. It also doesn’t ensure Oracle would catch short-term election interference before damage is done.

Earlier this summer, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., tried to turn Rep. Val Demings’, D-Fla., use of TikTok into a political liability by running an ad on her use of the app. In a sane society, that argument would be a layup. Unfortunately, in a country with tens of millions of daily TikTok users and an elite class of clapping seals more interested in suppressing the unwashed masses than countering China, it probably is not. Shortly after taking office, President Joe Biden actually rescinded former President Donald Trump’s attempted ban on TikTok, despite his party’s incessant posturing about election integrity.

Social media is a public health crisis. Every person who uses TikTok and every organization that partners with it or sends advertising money onto the platform is boosting authoritarian China’s control over our individual well-being, our society, and our world. The company’s new Elections Center underscores the urgency of this threat, putting detailed voter profiles and algorithmic control of a massive platform at the fingertips of a company staffed with loyalists to a hostile foreign government.

Charming Creep Retires!

AUGUST 23, 2022 BY SCOTT JOHNSON at Power Line:


At age 81, the fallacious Dr. Anthony Fauci is living proof that self-love can’t kill you. If self-love could kill you, Dr. Fauci would be pushing up daisies instead of basking in the glow of his bottomless self-regard. His official motto — “La Science, c’est moi” — is fit for a king.

Students of ancient history may recall that only last month Fauci contemplated leading the NIAID and advising President Biden until the end of “the Biden administration term,” as he put it in an interview with Politico. The good news was that he would be leaving. The bad news was that his leaving was long overdue. The funny news was that he gave himself room to stick around in case Biden were to leave office early. He intended to stick around until “the end of President Joe Biden’s term,” as Politico put it.

Something happened. Yesterday Dr. Fauci released a statement announcing that he would step down from his NIAID and White House positions in December. He must anticipate the arrival of a post-election Republican majority in at least one chamber of Congress.

Politico quoted Fauci last month:

“We’re in a pattern now. If somebody says, ‘You’ll leave when we don’t have Covid anymore,’ then I will be 105. I think we’re going to be living with this,” Biden’s chief medical adviser said when asked whether he is staying in his role out of a sense of obligation.

He’s not. But his assessment, that we’ll live with Covid-19 for many years to come, is a startling admission from the longtime infectious disease expert who said the country could flatten the curve and achieve herd immunity, first through social distancing and then vaccination.

In his July 18 Wall Street Journal Best of the Web column James Freeman anticipated Fauci’s announcement yesterday (emphasis added):

If Dr. Fauci lives to be 105 he will likely never be able to undo the damage that Covid policies inflicted on America’s children. He promoted shutdown policies that isolated them from friends, opportunities and care, saddled them with trillions of dollars in federal debt and—due to degraded education—reduced their future earnings. He never could have sold lockdowns in 2020 if he had said then what’s he’s saying today about the long-term presence of Covid.

Even in the spring of 2020 there was ample reason to question the wisdom of lockdowns, and many of us did. There was ample evidence that kids faced little risk from Covid and that schools would not be the superspreaders of media lore. There was also ample reason to focus on protecting the vulnerable rather than turning society upside down. Dr. Fauci’s endorsement of school closures while freely acknowledging he did not have a thorough understanding of the harms should be a lesson in schools of public health on the need to avoid panicked responses to future viruses.

This column will go out on a limb and predict that if Republicans take one or both houses of Congress this fall—gaining oversight authority and subpoena power—Dr. Fauci will be leaving long before Jan. 20, 2025.

I would like to say that goodbye is too good a word, so I’ll just say fare the well, but farewell is too good a word too.

“Pence himself should explain to America why he feared for those in Congress!”

Mike Pence owes the country an explanation

GEORGE THOMAS  Aug 22, 2022 at HotAir:

In contrast, Pence has given us no justification for or explanation of why he seized constitutional authority that was not lawfully his. Article II of the Constitution provides that in the event of the president’s removal, resignation, death, or “inability to discharge the powers and duties” of the office, those powers devolve on the vice president. If Pence thought Trump was unable or unwilling to discharge the constitutional powers and duties of his office, that informs the constitutional analysis of his decision. The formal constitutional mechanism for suspending such a president is by way of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. It provides that the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet may convey to Congress a written declaration of the president’s inability, allowing the vice president to assume those powers as acting president.

Given the circumstances, following the formal terms of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment was nearly impossible. With the Capitol under siege, Pence’s actions were probably justified. We can surmise that he sought to protect the lives of the people in Congress and to ensure that he remained at the Capitol to officially preside over the counting of electoral votes. But Pence himself should explain to America why he feared for those in Congress, why he would not leave with the Secret Service, and why the sitting president was unable to carry out his duties. The president, after all, was not incapacitated as far as we know.

Justifying Pence’s actions turns almost entirely on Trump’s state of mind both before and on January 6—something Pence is uniquely situated to speak to. We can guess much of what Pence would say. Still, his explanation will help us better understand the events that led to that day. And it will very likely require him to explain that he acted to thwart a sitting president’s unlawful attempt to stay in power.

Why Has Our GOP Become So Boring? So Vacant? Without Leadership When Needed!

The GOP Is Doing Its Best To Lose The November Election

August 22, 2022

By Vince Coyner at American Thinker:

Last week, Tucker Carlson showcased the fact that the GOP is doing its best to lose November’s election.

He included a clip of Mitch McConnell admitting that the GOP would likely not take the Senate. McConnell and the rest of the leadership don’t want to win. Carlson rightly suggested that, if Republicans really wanted to win, they’d run on crime and immigration. While the economy is reportedly voters’ number one issue, it’s what goes on in their neighborhoods and on their streets that matters. If Americans don’t feel safe in their homes, walking down their streets, or sitting in drive-thru lines because they’re scared to go into a restaurant or store, nothing else matters…not the economy, abortion, gender rights, or Ukraine.

Republicans don’t care. They’re complaining about Biden’s spending, bemoaning government overreach, and sanctioning Putin. Those issues aren’t going to return the GOP to power, but Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, and Ronna McDaniel seem sanguine. Their lives don’t change if the GOP doesn’t take back Congress. They’ll still rule their little fiefdoms, still be invited to Georgetown cocktail parties to be feted by lobbyists and, of course, they’ll still be on Sunday morning shows to feign outrage for the latest Democrat policy.

For these grifters, the only difference between winning and losing in November is having to work for the American people…something they’re loathe to do.

Image: Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy. YouTube screen grab.

But for the average American, the difference between winning and losing in November is literally life and death, lawlessness, or civil society.

The world wouldn’t change overnight on November 8, but what could happen is that the people who control the purse strings, who are supposed to make the laws, could change—just as in 1994.

That’s a big deal because the people running America today are the same people who have been running America’s biggest cities into the ground for decades. And all Americans, whether they live in San Francisco, Manhattan, or Kalamazoo, recognize that America’s coming apart at the seams. From not being able to go a day without seeing another video of a pack of thugs beating a cab driver, or attacking a restaurant employee, to watching a seemingly endless parade of homeless people punching random strangers, Americans are weary. From staring with disbelief as a gang of hoodlums ransacks a convenience store with impunity to watching video after video of people cussing at or otherwise attacking the police, Americans are watching the collapse of our society.

And this is the environment in which Mitch McConnell whines about the quality of the GOP candidates. The problem isn’t Dr. Oz, Eric Schmitt, or Herschel Walker; it’s that the GOP leadership that isn’t doing its job. Where is Newt Gingrich when we need him?

The reality is that this election has been tailor-made for the GOP, but that’s not the way it’s shaping up because McConnell, McCarthy, McDaniel, and their puppeteer, the hack Frank Luntz—who happens to be McCarthy’s roommate, landlord, or whatever—have decided they don’t want to save America. They’d rather sit back in the comfort of their minority position and pretend to care while enjoying the perks of “leadership.”

America needs warriors willing to brave the slings and arrows of the chattering classes, the leftist media, the Washington establishment and, most of all, the fascist NGO influencers who employ mobs on the streets to intimidate citizens and spineless CEOs and coerce into submission anyone who doesn’t agree with their agendas.

If the GOP really wanted to win in November, we’d see a new ad every single day showcasing the violence going on in our streets along with pictures of some thug who’s just assaulted a random senior as a George Soros-funded district attorney just released him without bail. We’d see videos of illegals storming the border. At the end of every single ad would be a simple tagline: “If you want more of this, please vote for my Democrat opponent…. If you want someone who’s going to do something about crime and the quality of American life, vote for me.”

It’s that simple. Democrats have caused myriad problems, but those issues can’t be addressed without majorities, and none of them will flip Congress in November. But images of blood in the streets will. A daily total of national Fentanyl deaths will. Images of career criminals released on bail after having pummeled some teenager into unconsciousness will, and stories of illegal immigrants overwhelming communities will. Imagine if Dr. Oz ran daily ads with videos showcasing Philadelphia’s violence rather than his clownish grocery store disaster? No one in Pennsylvania cares about the price of guacamole, but they care about getting shot or stabbed in their own neighborhoods.

Sadly, I don’t expect the GOP leadership to create such a Contract with America Deux. They’re cowards and grifters. Such a campaign would require backbone against the predictable cries of “racism” that would emerge because most of the videos involve young Black hoodlums and thugs. They would be branded racists by the race pimps and the professional victimization industry.

Those attacks would come as surely as night follows day. But, so what? It just happens to be the case that most of the crimes we see involve Black perps freed from the justice system in the name of “equity.” If there are similar videos of White perps, they should be shown too. The reality is, if you’re a victim of murder or rape it doesn’t matter what the criminal looks like. Is a dead Black child any more or less dead because his attacker was Black or White? No. Crime is off the charts not because of the pigment of anyone’s skin, but because of the policies of the Democrat party.

Republicans need to understand their constituency is not the criminal class of any race. Their constituency is the average American of every race. It’s Americans who want to send their kids to school without them having to step over junkies or human feces. It’s the average American who wants to go to work without fearing getting shot or robbed before making it home.

The rule of law and responsibility for one’s actions are the foundations of a civilized society. Without them, there is no civilized society. That’s what we’re experiencing with Democrats in charge, and it seems as if the GOP leadership is OK with that. We, however, are not. This is the hill to die on, this is the hill upon which America will either recover or slide into the abyss of chaos and tyranny….

We cannot depend on the current GOP “leaders” to fight this fight. This is going to have to come from the candidates themselves and a 2022 Gingrich to nationalize this election and help push the feckless GOP across the finish line. McConnell may not be capable of leading the country out of this morass, but at least with a GOP majority in November, we can slow our collapse into a dystopian nightmare until people of character can replace him. Being in the majority is the first step. Then, we need candidates with the courage to stand up and fight for the average American, regardless of the invective that will surely be headed their way…

Getting To Know Yale Better!



I recall reading some time ago that administrative personnel at Yale University had come to outnumber faculty. I don’t know if this is true, but here’s some relevant data:

A 2018 Chronicle [of Higher Education] report showing that Yale has the fifth-highest ratio of administrators to students in the country, and the highest in the Ivy League (for comparison, peer institutions like Columbia, Harvard, and Stanford were 24th, 35th, and 55th, respectively). Between 2003 and 2022, the draft report states, “we note increases in administrative positions in various units of at least 150 percent. … This compares with an increase in just 10.6 percent” for tenure-track jobs in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

This paragraph appears today in a new Chronicle of Higher Education story on “The Report Yale Doesn’t Want You to See” about the scandalous administrative bloat in New Haven. Big surprise: Yale’s administration appears to be trying to suppress a report that tells the truth:

“University professors,” David Graeber wrote in these pages in 2018, “have to spend increasing proportions of their days performing tasks which exist only to make overpaid academic managers feel good about themselves.” That’s an assessment corroborated by a draft report on the “Size and Growth of Administration and Bureaucracy at Yale,” dated January 2022 but not yet released. (At the moment, the report appears to be in limbo, circulating privately but with no official stamp of approval. Karen Peart, a spokeswoman for Yale, said only that “the Senate voted at its closed-door May 2022 meeting to postpone discussion of the report until a future date.”)

In an appendix, the authors of the report — the seven-person governance committee of Yale’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences — have collected several anecdotes from faculty members that they say are symptomatic of an increasingly intolerable burden of bureaucratic oversight. “Disrespectful,” “demoralizing,” “infantilizing,” “opaque” — these are some of the adjectives that appear. One professor compared dealing with Yale administrators to “interacting with an insurance company.”

I’m sure that’s putting it mildly, and it is perhaps worth noting that after the disgrace at Yale Law last year, Yale quietly dismissed the assistant dean of diversity so as to avoid having to admit how disgracefully it had behaved. The passage above ratifies my own sense of things from inside Berkeley—even liberal professors hate the administrative bureaucracy, including the “diversity” bureaucracy.

But more from the Chron‘s story:

And not only is the number of administrators growing, but so are their salaries. The seven “upper administrators” who remained in the same role between 2015 and 2019 received “roughly 8.25 percent per year” raises, a rate far out of step with what faculty members got. As depicted in the report, Yale’s upper administration is both bloated and greedy.

The report is — or will be, if the university ever releases it — the result of a long period of concern over the ballooning administration. For the Yale Daily News, the student journalist Philip Mousavizadeh reported on that concern in November of last year. “According to eight members of the Yale faculty,” Mousavizadeh wrote, the administration’s “size imposes unnecessary costs, interferes with students’ lives and faculty’s teaching, spreads the burden of leadership, and adds excessive regulation.”

It appears the administration is obstructing a real assessment, if not in fact engaging in a cover up:

The authors acknowledge that their data-gathering is somewhat improvisational, a necessary evil, they say, given the administration’s failure to provide official figures on many of the relevant topics. Running like a refrain throughout the report are pleas for more information. “Despite repeated efforts on the part of the Senate Budget Committee over the past few years to obtain meaningful information about the budget and its deployment, the administration has not made current and past administrative costs transparent.” Later, a note of irritation creeps in: “We note that the lack of transparency about this topic by the administration is itself a problem.” And later still, buried in a footnote, “We cannot know, because we do not have the requisite transparency to make such an assessment.” Perhaps the administration feels too burdened by onerous paperwork to find the time.

In a domain full of bottom-feeding college presidents, Yale’s Peter Salovey may rank as the very worst. Will Yale’s trustees step up and do anything about this? Yes, I’ll try to pick you up off the floor after you start laughing.

Good for the Chronicle for running this story.