This is how you know we have a Biden regime media: two of the three major networks avoided providing any evening newscast coverage to the House Oversight Committee’s hearing in furtherance of its impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. And the one that did cover the hearing did its level best to make sure viewers heard nothing substantial- a smother job. Here’s a representative sample of the report- lots of noise‚ nothing substantial: LESTER HOLT: Fireworks today at a house hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Biden. Republicans pressing former Hunter Biden business associates‚ but one witness accusing them of peddling Russian propaganda. Ryan Nobles has late details for us from the Capitol.  RYAN NOBLES: Tonight‚ a fiery inflection point in the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. (CROSSTALK) GERRY CONNOLLY:  Excuse me‚ sir. Excuse me‚ sir. This is -- Mr. Bobulinsky‚ this is my time.  NOBLES: House Republicans holding a hearing designed to feature Hunter Biden‚ who had asked to give public testimony but declined to appear. Instead‚ the committee heard from a pair of former Hunter Biden business associates‚ who testified despite President Biden's denials he was involved in his son's businesses. TONY BOBULINSKI: He was an active‚ aware enabler who met with business associates such as myself to further the business. For crying out loud‚ this wasn’t even the fireiest of the fireworks at the hearing: AOC - "RICO is not a crime." pic.twitter.com/YcTusJAaP4 — MAZE (@mazemoore) March 20‚ 2024 In AOC’s defense‚ perhaps RICO is too Suave to be a crime. Sorry‚ Tim‚ I’ll show myself out now.  But seriously‚ even that would’ve been too much for NBC‚ which wanted to air NO instances whatsoever of Bobulinski talking about crimes committed by anyone named Biden. Speaking of which‚ where was Hunter? Much was made of Hunter Biden’s previous demand for a public hearing on the date of his first scheduled private hearing before the House committees. Hunter’s “impromptu” remarks delivered on the Senate grounds‚ a grandstanding exhibition made possible by (alleged) public flatulator and Chinese spy fornicator Eric Swalwell. NBC only mentioned Hunter’s failure to appear in passing; CBS and ABC none at all. Then there was the strange interview with Lev Parnas‚ which seemed to serve no other purpose than to raise the specter of Russian propaganda operations.  All in all‚ NBC’s report on the hearing was an outright smother job. But the smother job is tons more than what ABC and CBS mustered- which is a big‚ fat nothing. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on NBC Nightly News on Wednesday‚ March 20th‚ 2024: LESTER HOLT: Fireworks today at a house hearing in the impeachment inquiry into President Biden. Republicans pressing former Hunter Biden business associates‚ but one witness accusing them of peddling Russian propaganda. Ryan Nobles has late details for us from the Capitol.  RYAN NOBLES: Tonight‚ a fiery inflection point in the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden. (CROSSTALK) GERRY CONNOLLY:  Excuse me‚ sir. Excuse me‚ sir. This is -- Mr. Bobulinsky‚ this is my time.  NOBLES: House Republicans holding a hearing designed to feature Hunter Biden‚ who had asked to give public testimony but declined to appear. Instead‚ the committee heard from a pair of former Hunter Biden business associates‚ who testified despite President Biden's denials he was involved in his son's businesses. TONY BOBULINSKI: He was an active‚ aware enabler who met with business associates such as myself to further the business. NOBLES: They say Joe Biden participated in person and on speakerphone in meetings and dinners with Hunter's foreign business partners. Hunter's former business associate Jason Golanis testifying from prison. JASON GOLANIS: The vice president said hello‚ and some pleasantries and then “I hope you had safe travels”‚ and then said‚ quote‚ “OK‚ you be good to my boy”.  NOBLES: But Democrats firing back saying there was no evidence of a crime. JAMIE RASKIN: With any luck‚ today marks the end of perhaps the most spectacular failure in the history of congressional investigations‚ the effort to find a high crime or misdemeanor committed by Joe Biden and then to impeach him for it. NOBLES: Democrats invited Lev Parnas‚ a onetime associate of former President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani‚ who testified that he was tasked with digging up dirt on Biden business ventures in Ukraine.  LEV PARNAS: I found precisely zero evidence of the Bidens' corruption in Ukraine.  NOBLES: In an exclusive interview‚ Parnas accused Republicans of being willing accomplices of the Kremlin.  PARNAS: They’re not getting down to the truth. All they're doing is pushing the same Russian narrative of propaganda.  NOBLES: And tonight‚ the Oversight Committee chairman James Comer saying he will invite President Biden to testify at an upcoming hearing. Lester.  HOLT: Ryan Nobles‚ thanks.  

Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Chip Roy of Texas‚ who took opposite sides on a measure that pertains to the popular social media app TikTok‚ appeared on "GlennTV" to debate their views on the matter.In an overwhelmingly bipartisan 352-65 vote last week‚ the House of Representatives passed a measure that would lead to a ban on TikTok in the U.S. unless divestiture conditions are met. The legislation is called the "Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act" and is not strictly limited to TikTok but could be used to target entities that qualify as a "foreign adversary controlled application." The measure would still need to clear the Senate before it could head to the president.While Massie and Roy often align ideologically — including when they both previously backed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for president in the 2024 GOP presidential primary — they do not agree with each other on this piece of legislation. Massie voted against the measure while Roy voted for it.BlazeTV host Glenn Beck kicked the debate off by playfully asking‚ "Neither of you have taken money from ByteDance‚ TikTok‚ or Hunter Biden‚ right?"Massie said that he has taken money from a U.S. investor in TikTok‚ though he noted that he has not spoken to that individual about the measure. Roy said that he knew who Massie was referring to‚ but indicated that he was not sure whether he has taken money from that individual or not.Roy said there is "a concerted effort by the Chinese Communist Party to use this tool to undermine our national security" by serving people "misinformation." Massie said that‚ according to the Supreme Court‚ Americans have the right to access foreign propaganda.Beck quipped that if that weren't the case ‚"ABC‚ NBC‚ CBS‚" as well as "CNN wouldn't be on the air."Massie later suggested that the measure would not have needed to be as long as it is if it just went after TikTok. "I'm concerned about the discretion it gives to the president‚" he noted.Watch the full debate on 'GlennTV': Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Ketanji Jackson‚ Joe Biden’s only appointment‚ so far‚ to the U.S. Supreme Court‚ was the butt of a multitude of jokes and guffaws this week because she fretted about the First Amendment “hamstringing”…

For those that love America‚ these are very trying times.  We have watched our beloved country go steadily downhill for decades‚ and in recent years that process has greatly accelerated.  Now…

Join Fox News for access to this content Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account - free of charge. Please enter a valid email address. By entering your email…

An illegal migrant‚ who was taken into custody following a barricade shooting incident in North Carolina‚ was allegedly found to be on a terrorist watch list and had been living in the area for six months.According…

Join Fox News for access to this content Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account - free of charge. Please enter a valid email address. By entering your email…

"We have taken this research to the next level."

And new insights into female infertility.

Let it be admitted that Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was consequential. One of the most consequential people in history. He was essential to the Bolshevik Revolution‚ which overthrew the feckless liberals and socialists who had ousted the tsar. He led the campaign to defeat the divided Whites in a bitter civil war. He created a system that pioneered terror and yielded Joseph Stalin — a system that later imposed communism on Eastern Europe and aided China’s Maoist revolution‚ as well as encouraged an assortment of petty tyrannies across Africa‚ Asia‚ and South America. Yes‚ Lenin mattered. READ MORE from Doug Bandow: Unlikely Persecutor: Japan Threatens to Shut Unification Church So much so that Ray Bush of the Review of African Political Economy exults‚ “The mention of Lenin’s name generates anxiety and concern among the ruling class and reactionary social and class forces everywhere.” Not just among them. His name also excites fear among merchants‚ workers‚ farmers‚ intellectuals‚ expatriates‚ foreigners‚ neighbors‚ students‚ soldiers‚ and just about everyone else. Unfortunately‚ Lenin’s success resulted in mass slaughter‚ starvation‚ and tyranny. Historians argue over the exact numbers and how many deaths were intended. But the macabre tolls in the Soviet Union and People’s Republic of China were in the scores of millions. Understandably‚ then‚ “many on the contemporary Left continue to disavow any association with Tovarish Lenin‚” observe book editors Hjalmar Jorge Joffre-Eichhorn and Patrick Anderson. Not‚ however‚ them and the other contributors to Lenin: The Heritage We (Don’t) Renounce. Writes historian Tamás Krausz: “Lenin is the voice of the political and social awakening of the subordinated classes and the historical embodiment of their revolutionary will on a global scale. The more aspersions the capitalist media casts at Lenin‚ the clearer the gigantic significance of his legacy becomes.” The Bolshevik leader was a great success‚ argues KYRGSOC‚ a Kyrgyz organization: “Lenin fought for socialism and democracy‚ never once in his life retreating from his political ideals.… Lenin’s administrative abilities and Bolshevik discipline underpinned the decisive success of the October Revolution.” Independent researcher Adrien Minard‚ a “collector of Soviet artifacts” (like me!)‚ describes Lenin’s mourners and the offerings they left: “The size of these crowds and especially their sense of creativity reveal a true spirit of spontaneous communion and a deep popular attachment to Lenin.” Aimo Minkkinen‚ former director of Finland’s Lenin Museum‚ writes how he “took along [his] girlfriend Lea on the trip that became a nine-year honeymoon in Moscow.” He went to the museum because “[he] thought that it was important to tell the truth about Lenin: his national policy‚ the right to self-determination of nations‚ international solidarity‚ the fight for peace‚ against imperialism and great Russian chauvinism.” Remember all the elections that Lenin won? “Independent scholar” Jacques Pauwels lauds Lenin’s democratic values: “[I]t is obviously an absurdity of Western mainstream historiography that Lenin is condemned as a nasty dictator‚ while Churchill is praised as one of the greatest democrats in recent history.” But why even pretend that democracy matters? Philosopher Slavoj Žižek asks: “Is it not that‚ if we are to confront seriously our challenges‚ from ecological crises to immigration‚ we will have to change our entire political system along the lines suggested by Lenin?” After all‚ the Soviet Union and its Eastern European satellites were widely known as environmental paradises! Lest someone seek to separate Lenin and Mao Zedong‚ Alain Badiou‚ a French philosopher (naturally!)‚ rises to the occasion: I would like to describe here the striking continuity between how Lenin‚ shortly after the insurrectional victory of 1917‚ viewed the very young communist revolution in Russia‚ and how Mao‚ in the 1960s and 1970s‚ after twenty years of practice of power by the Chinese Communist Party‚ reflected on the political results of this power. Indeed‚ Badiou writes of “the problems to be addressed by the Cultural Revolution‚” as if the latter was just another committee meeting at work. In truth‚ Mao’s Cultural Revolution was a mad mix of chaos‚ party purge‚ mob violence‚ and civil war‚ unleashed by Mao to retrieve his political fortunes‚ at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. On the book goes. According to writer Marcela Magalhães: Lenin’s ideas—paradoxically—resurface as a voice that challenges resignation and stimulates reflection on what can be achieved when we dare to dream. As such‚ dreaming is not an escape from reality‚ but a way of creating a vision that guides our actions. Lenin‚ in his quest for a more just society‚ believed in the possibility of radical transformation. His ideas were hence not mere theoretical abstractions: they were calls to action‚ to build a society that would transcend the inequalities and violence intrinsic to the capitalist-colonial system. What of the occasional blip along the way? Lenin “remained steadfast in his conviction that humanity could achieve a higher state of equality and justice.” The University of Brighton’s Christian Høgsbjerg lauds Lenin’s support for black liberation: “In other words‚ Lenin was truly himself a ‘tribune of the people […] able to react to every manifestation of tyranny and oppression‚ no matter where it appears‚ no matter what stratum or class of the people it affects.’” Daria Dyakonova‚ a self-proclaimed “Marxist historian‚” explains that “Vladimir Lenin‚ like many communists of his time‚ was a champion of women’s emancipation‚ which he linked to the revolutionary socialist transformation of societies.” Economist Demba Moussa Dembélé lauds Lenin’s opposition to colonialism: “Lenin’s insights on imperialism have inspired analysis of foreign domination and imperialism in Africa and the Global South for many decades.” If only so many of the people Lenin so heroically liberated hadn’t ended up in prison or dead! Churning through the seemingly endless musings of Lenin fanboys and girls — there are 104 contributions‚ including poetry‚ imagined conversations‚ and “love letters” — isn’t easy. There are even unintended comedic scripts. For instance‚ author Constantino Bértolo explains: [L]ittle attention has been paid to the Lenin who‚ against this image of rough and ruthless coldness‚ provides a vision of the revolutionary tasks in which aspects and concepts are present that can be identified and found within that very humanist tradition that the sanctimonious bourgeoisie accepts‚ approves of and acclaims. The right to dream‚ for example. The volume’s essence was well captured by two essays. One is by Anatoli Ulyanov. Born in the Soviet Union‚ he went West and was disappointed: I ran to a supposed paradise: a world where cops brutalize Black teens; veterans of endless wars rot under bridges; quality healthcare remains a mocking dream for the impoverished; inmates labor for pennies in prisons more crowded than the GULAG; students graduate indebted to bankers…. The facade shattered‚ and from the debris‚ Lenin winked. In his writings‚ I met not the towering idol but a mere comrade. An imperfect voice that ignites with a timeless message: another world is possible; the guiding stars are those who work. Another world indeed‚ of institutional terror and the Gulag. Also uniquely clueless was Göran Therborn‚ a “Swedish intellectual.” In his view one of history’s great tyrannies was responsible for what little progress occurred in liberal‚ capitalist‚ democratic Western systems: Lenin was one of the creators of the 20th century.… The USSR was decisive for the defeat of Nazi Germany. It was an important support of the decolonization process‚ of African Americans in the USA…. Racist resistance was ferocious‚ and without Cold War competition‚ President Eisenhower‚ by no means a committed anti-racist‚ would never have sent federal troops to protect the first token Black children going to school from the White mobs of the Southern states. Also‚ without the Soviet Union‚ the Cuban Revolution would have been liquidated. Social protection and labor rights in Western Europe would have been fewer and slower without bourgeois fears of Communism and the USSR. The Soviet bloc in the United Nations was behind the UN’s tremendously successful and globally inspiring 1975 World Conference on Women in Mexico. Who can forget that 1975 U.N. conference? The highlight of the 20th century! There are serious issues the book could have discussed. The flaws of Western societies are obvious‚ and the ensuing reform path usually is tortuous. Nevertheless‚ the volume’s contributors fail to grapple with the tragic reality that Lenin’s national progeny greatly compounded preexisting injustices. Indeed‚ Lenin’s socialist states proved unique in their contempt for human liberty and inability to feed their people. They were almost always much worse than what they replaced. Journalist Mahir Ali writes: “Despite all the ‘foolish things‚’ [to which Lenin admitted‚] the Bolshevik experiment turned out to be globally transformative. It still has much to contribute.” Alas‚ the Bolsheviks committed more than “foolish things.” Consider the apparently beneficent Soviet Gulag of Ulyanov’s imagination. In celebrating the 50th anniversary of the publication of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago‚ Northwestern University’s Gary Saul Morson wrote: Millions of people lived and died in the Gulag’s many “islands‚” the camps scattered over the vast country. The worst were located in the Kolyma region in northeastern Siberia‚ where prisoners labored at 50‚ 60‚ even 70 degrees below zero and were given insufficient calories to sustain life. At least Leninist states were equal opportunity oppressors‚ guaranteeing all the rights to be arrested‚ tortured‚ murdered‚ and impoverished. Russia’s decrepit Romanoff dynasty looks pretty good compared to Lenin’s Bolshevik state. Similar was the result of most other Leninist revolutions. By numbers‚ Mao is probably the greatest mass killer in history‚ yet he is still venerated in the People’s Republic of China. Beijing has lifted its people out of poverty only by rejecting Maoism and turning toward the market and capitalist West. Cambodia’s Pol Pot committed the greatest proportional slaughter‚ most likely killing around 2 million people‚ but possibly as many as 3 million‚ out of a population of about 7.8 million. The Killing Fields should be visited for their horror to be truly grasped. North Korea is perhaps the world’s most tyrannical society today‚ with ruthless repression‚ a mini-Gulag‚ and a rigid social classification system. It also warrants a visit from any enthusiastic communist. Lenin: The Heritage We (Don’t) Renounce illustrates well the importance of individuals in history. Lenin was charismatic‚ determined‚ prescient‚ confident‚ and ruthless. More than anything else‚ he understood how and when to use power. Without him‚ the Bolsheviks‚ a minority among revolutionary wannabes — let alone the larger population — likely would have faded from history. After ascending to the pinnacle of power‚ Lenin suffered a series of strokes beginning in 1922. He died a century ago‚ only 53 years old. And his best student‚ in terms of gaining and using power‚ won an extended political struggle: Joseph Stalin completed Lenin’s mission‚ solidifying the Soviet state and spreading revolution wherever the latter’s armies roamed. Even if Lenin had second thoughts at his choice of Stalin as party general secretary — the authenticity of the former’s supposed last testament remains in doubt — they were over Stalin’s incivility‚ not his brutality. Bush calls Lenin: The Heritage We (Don’t) Renounce an “exhilarating collection.” That’s true‚ in the sense that most people would call a root canal an “exhilarating procedure.” The book performs‚ however‚ at least one useful function: It reminds us that even the worst ideas sometimes persist‚ despite repeated flagrant and costly refutations. The persistence of Lenin’s nostrums should energize reform efforts within our constitutional and democratic order that respect human life‚ dignity‚ and liberty. The editors opine that their product is intended “to help liberate the old Ilyich from the musty‚ petrifying solitude of his mausoleum.” That is a worthy objective. It’s time to bury him. Literally. And forever put behind us more than a century of mass repression and murder in the name of the proletariat. Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan. The post Leftists Blatantly Celebrate Lenin’s Legacy in New Book appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.