The Department of Veterans affairs banned the V-J day kiss photo from all department facilities. It’s a beautiful‚ iconic photo signifying the end of World War II. The reason for the removal was it looked like a sexual assault. They claimed it depicts a “nonconsensual sexual act.” This is what Wokes think a harmless kiss […] The post The VA Banned the V-J Photo As a Sexual Assault appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Tesla was forced to stop production at its assembly plant in Germany this week after a far-left extremist group destroyed a high-voltage pylon that resulted in electricity going down at the plant and the surrounding area. Deutsche Welle‚ a German public state-owned international broadcaster‚ said that the “Volcano Group” was responsible for the attack on the power grid. “We sabotaged Tesla today‚” the extremist group said in a letter‚ noting that it specifically targeted “the electricity supply.” Police in Brandenburg said that the terrorist attack cut power to thousands of homes in the surrounding region‚ impacting approximately 60‚000 people. Power was restored to most of the area later in the day but the power remained down at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Grünheide. Federal Minister of Economics Robert Habeck said: “The attack on the electricity supply is an attack on our critical infrastructure. This must now be clarified and punished quickly. Violence and sabotage must not be a means of conflict.” Tesla reportedly indicated that production at the plant will not restart quickly following the attack. The automaker has the ability to produce 500‚000 vehicles per year‚ a number that Tesla CEO Elon Musk reportedly wants to double. “These are either the dumbest eco-terrorists on Earth or they’re puppets of those who don’t have good environmental goals‚” Musk said in response to the attacks. “Stopping production of electric vehicles‚ rather than fossil fuel vehicles‚ ist extrem dumm.” “Ist extrem dumm” is German for “is extremely dumb.” German news media reported that the damage to Tesla will be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. “We are deeply‚ deeply shocked by what happened today‚” said Tesla representative André Thierig. “Hopefully it will become clear over the course of this week whether we can start again at the beginning of next week.”

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson will testify on Capitol Hill this week for a House hearing on allegations of government collusion with banks to snoop on the private financial information of U.S. citizens‚ The Daily Wire has learned. The Thursday hearing will be held by the House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government‚ which is chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). Jordan announced in January of this year that his committee obtained documents that show the federal government flagged monetary transactions using terms associated with former President Donald Trump for financial institutions. “We now know the federal government flagged terms like ‘MAGA’ and ‘TRUMP‚’ to financial institutions if Americans completed transactions using those terms‚” Jordan said in a post to X. “What was also flagged? If you bought a religious text‚ like a BIBLE‚ or shopped at Bass Pro Shop.” In addition to being a DailyWire+ host‚ Peterson is a Canadian clinical psychologist‚ best-selling author‚ and professor emeritus at the University of Toronto. Ever since February of 2022‚ when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act to freeze money to members of the “Freedom Convoy” who protested restrictive COVID-19 measures and vaccine mandates‚ Peterson has raised concerns about government abuse of the financial system. When a top official said “accounts will be frozen‚” Peterson warned on X that it meant the government “can now steal your money with the collusion of the banks because you provided financial support to a protest against the government. If you think this is a good idea you deserve what [is] coming to you.” Peterson continued to speak out about the controversy in posts to social media. “Your seizure of Canadian bank accounts was the worst single act of the most reprehensible government in Canadian history‚” he said in a post to X in February 2023. Concerns about federal law enforcement targeting political and religious expression protected by the Constitution as well as protecting civil liberties are certain to be topics of discussion during the hearing on Thursday. In addition to Peterson‚ the witnesses who are expected to attend include: Brian Knight‚ senior research fellow and director of Innovation and Governance at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center at George Mason University; Jeremy Tedesco‚ senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom; and Norbert Michel‚ vice president and director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives.

CNN senior legal analyst and New York Magazine columnist Elie Honig blasted Democrats for trying to remove former President Donald Trump from the ballot‚ saying that the effort was “doomed to fail” from the start and it will only help him moving forward. The Supreme Court issued a ruling on Monday that determined the state of Colorado cannot remove former President Donald Trump from the primary ballot using Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The ruling was 9-0. Honig said the notion that Trump could be removed was nothing more than a “wild law-school hypothetical sprung to life” which will now provide Trump “with fuel for his effort to win back the White House.” He continued: You’ll be forgiven if you expected a different result. After all‚ we’ve endured months of cocksure guarantees from leading constitutional scholars that Colorado’s application of the 14th Amendment against Trump was legally “unassailable in every single respect” — this from a retired judge who assured us not to worry because “I’ve been studying this specific question in great detail for the past three years. So‚ you know‚ I consider myself‚ personally‚ an expert on the question.” Other thought leaders offered up an “amen” chorus‚ disparaging any argument that the 14th Amendment might not work as “extremely weak” and “just complete nonsense.” Turns out you can’t bludgeon the Constitution into the ground with hyperbolic‚ conclusory rhetoric. Honig noted that there have been numerous other cases where lawfare activists have tried to prevent Trump from holding office by citing the 14th Amendment and that all of those cases lost. “The justices differed a bit on how exactly a federal candidate can be disqualified in the future‚ but the bottom-line vote was a stinging‚ unequivocal rejection of the state-by-state approach‚” he said. “It’s not often we see justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito on the same page as justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan‚ but the 14th Amendment challenges were so obviously flawed that they ended up creating a cross-ideological consensus.” He added: The Supreme Court has now made clear what was already apparent on the face of the Constitution itself: Without some specific enabling act of Congress‚ it’s not up to the states. This shouldn’t have been some sort of mystery. It’s right there in the 14th Amendment’s plain text: “The Congress shall have the power to enforce‚ by appropriate legislation‚ the provisions of this article.” At any point since the 14th Amendment’s ratification in 1868‚ Congress could have passed a law saying‚ in essence‚ “We’ll let the states decide‚ so long as they use reasonably fair procedures.” But it’s been 150-plus years now and Congress has done no such thing. Unless and until that changes‚ the 14th Amendment will remain a dusty‚ nonfunctional curiosity. He added that many burned “resources‚ credibility‚ and political capital” in the doomed effort to remove Trump from the ballot and that “his supporters surely will rally around a failed effort by a bunch of Northeastern‚ elitist law-professor types to use the courts to deny the American voters a choice and to take out the Republican front-runner.” “This is one of Trump’s unique political gifts: He inspires such visceral hatred in his opponents that he provokes them to self-destruct‚” he concluded. Related: ‘Absolutely Bats***’: Colorado Democrat Dragged For MSNBC Melodrama Over SCOTUS Ballot Ruling

The Department of Veterans Affairs says it is not banning the use of the famous World War II photo showing a sailor kissing a woman in white after an internal memo directed otherwise. The famous “V-J Day” photo shows a U.S. Navy sailor kissing a total stranger in Times Square in the immediate aftermath of the news that Japan had surrendered. The memo last month from RimaAnn Nelson‚ the Veterans Health Administration’s top operations official directed VA medical facilities to “promptly” remove the photo and replace it with something more appropriate EXCLUSIVE: The Department Of Veterans Affairs just BANNED the V-J Day kiss photo from all department facilities. "To promote a culture of inclusivity and awareness… your cooperation is vital." pic.twitter.com/MZfNHbpV76 — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 5‚ 2024 Let me be clear: This image is not banned from VA facilities – and we will keep it in VA facilities. pic.twitter.com/dYSikLxHAJ — Secretary Denis McDonough (@SecVetAffairs) March 5‚ 2024 “The photograph‚ which depicts a non-consensual act‚ is inconsistent with the VA’s no-tolerance policy towards sexual harassment and assault‚” the memo stated. “To foster a more trauma-informed environment that promotes the psychological safety of our employees and the veterans we serve‚ photographs depicting the ‘V-J Day in Times Square’ should be removed from all Veterans Health Administration facilities‚” the memo directed. On Tuesday‚ the memo went viral on social media‚ sparking nearly instant backlash. “UNAMERICAN. The Biden administration is now banning one of the most iconic photos in WW2 history‚ the famous Times Square kiss between a nurse and a sailor. Their rewriting of American history and American culture will not stand‚” Representative Ryan Zinke (R-MT) posted on X. Later on Tuesday‚ Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough took to social media to reassure critics that the photo would not be banned. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP “Let me be clear: This image is not banned from VA facilities – and we will keep it in VA facilities‚” McDonough said. “VA is NOT banning this photo from VA facilities‚” Veterans Affairs said in a statement provided to The Daily Wire. The VA added that a memo was sent out that should not have been‚ and it has now been rescinded. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre echoed the VA’s statement on Tuesday as well‚ saying the memo was “not sanctioned.” “The VA is not going to be banning this photo‚” Karine Jean-Pierre said. “I can definitely say that the memo was not sanctioned‚ and so it’s not something that we were even aware of.” The famous photo‚ which also shows people spilling out of bars‚ restaurants‚ and movie theaters to celebrate the end of the war‚ was snapped by journalist Alfred Eisenstaedt in New York City on August 14‚ 1945. A Navy photojournalist also caught the moment from a different angle. The man and woman in the photo are thought to be George Mendonsa and Greta Friedman‚ both of whom passed away within the last decade.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced a wide range of resources that the state will be providing to local communities throughout the state as spring break rapidly approaches. The governor made the announcement as airlines are expecting heavy travel this upcoming spring break season and Florida is always a top destination for tourists‚ especially after the winter months. “If you’re coming here in order to enjoy Florida‚ enjoy it and have a good time‚ fine‚” DeSantis‚ who was flanked by law over a dozen law enforcement officers‚ said. “If you’re coming for these other reasons‚ if you’re committing crimes‚ causing havoc‚ you are gonna pay the price. And we will hold you accountable because that’s what we do here.” “I know some people may be coming from other jurisdictions where they can get away with this type of activity. That is not gonna fly in the Sunshine State‚” he continued. He said that his administration reached out to communities all over the state and told them he wanted them to provide them with state support at the start of spring break rather to prevent problems from happening than wait for them to reach out and request resources later. DeSantis said that many jurisdictions requested his help and that the state will be fulfilling “every single one of those requests.” “This includes reinforcing communities throughout South Florida with over 60 additional state troopers‚” he said. “We’re also gonna have another 60 and other spring break hotspots like Daytona Beach and Panama City Beach. We will also activate 24 quick response troopers in Bay Volusia‚ Broward‚ and Dade Counties for immediate response to any incidents requiring additional law enforcement personnel. We’ve also activated through the State Highway Patrol‚ aviation drones‚ mobile command vehicles‚ to assist with traffic management and logistics. And on top of that‚ FHP troopers will be utilizing Miami Beach Police Mobile automated license plate readers throughout the city. This will help identify subjects with outstanding warrants‚ or those that are driving stolen vehicles. So those are not folks we want to be at our spring break parties.” “I appreciate the local leaders that have stepped up and understood that ensuring public safety is really your first task when you’re elected to be in office in a local community‚” he concluded. “I mean‚ that is where the rubber meets the road on law and order. And if you don’t have it locally‚ then you’re just not gonna have it.” BREAKING: Gov. Ron DeSantis is deploying law enforcement officers‚ drones‚ license readers and more across the state and in Miami to guard against spring break chaos "That is not gonna fly in the Sunshine State […] We stand by ready to support even more." pic.twitter.com/cP9qWYAZkz — Florida’s Voice (@FLVoiceNews) March 5‚ 2024

From the moment the Colorado Supreme Court disqualified Donald Trump from the ballot a few months ago‚ it was obvious that their decision would be overturned. As I discussed on this show at the time‚ there were so many flaws with the opinion‚ it was difficult to know where to begin. The decision ignored Donald Trump’s calls for peaceful demonstration on January 6th. It accused him of speaking in violent coded language because he was mean to some random protesters at his rallies. And then it concluded that a single Colorado bureaucrat had the power to effectively delete his entire candidacy. It’s not worth rehashing all of the details. This was a decision that any reasonably informed person knew was going to be overturned. Unfortunately‚ what’s become very clear in the past 24 hours is that a very large number of people in this country are not reasonably informed. Instead‚ they’re told to pay attention when Rachel Maddow beams into MSNBC to tell viewers that Donald Trump might soon be barred from the ballot in multiple states. They’re bombarded with junk “analysis‚” like CNN’s assessment that the legal case for kicking Trump off the ballot was strong. And they’re fed think-pieces from buffoons like Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe‚ who called the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision “unassailable.” Think about that for a second. You can get a more accurate assessment of constitutional law issues from a conservative podcast than you can from an esteemed Harvard Law professor who supposedly specializes in Constitutional Law. With as far as Harvard has fallen in the past decade or so‚ that may not be surprising. But it’s worth pointing out because of the implications for the rest of the country. Millions of people listen to con artists with very fancy titles who lie to them as a matter of course. And even when these con artists are exposed — as they were yesterday — they make it very clear that they’re not backing down. We saw that again and again in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision yesterday‚ striking down the decision by the Colorado Supreme Court. WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show I’ll begin with Keith Olbermann‚ who was so worked up in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision that he apparently admitted to having urine all over his face. This is not an exaggeration‚ although I — and everyone else who happened to be using Twitter yesterday — very much wishes it were. Here’s how Keith’s day began. He tweeted‚ quote‚ “The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members including Jackson‚ Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the ‘court’ has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate. It must be dissolved.” The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members including Jackson‚ Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the "court" has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate. It must be dissolved. — Keith Olbermann⌚️ (@KeithOlbermann) March 4‚ 2024 So we’re not packing the court anymore. We’re just going to get rid of the whole thing‚ according to Olbermann. In response‚ someone helpfully pointed out that the Supreme Court’s decision was unanimous. Here was the reply: “Cry more …. 9-0.” Olbermann‚ reading this‚ announced: “Those aren’t tears‚ Fascist. They’re urine. I’m sure you enjoy being bathed in it.” At best‚ that is the single worst comeback you could possibly imagine in that circumstance. At worst‚ it’s an admission of exactly the kind of deviant behavior you’d expect Olbermann would engage in‚ all of the time. Although we can’t be sure if Olbermann pees on his own face‚ or if someone else does it. There are many details left obscured here‚ and probably for the best.  As distressing as these thoughts may be‚ the truth is that Olbermann isn’t alone on the Left. In response to yesterday’s decision‚ Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold — the woman who unilaterally tried to have Trump thrown off the ballot — also began attacking the Supreme Court. Watch: More lunacy from Colorado's Jena Griswold‚ lashing out at Clarence Thomas and bashing the Court’s — while offering fake platitudes we should be respect them. MSNBC’s Katy Tur: “Do you think this Court is partisan?” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswolf (D): “I think this… pic.twitter.com/LzVtQalKek — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) March 4‚ 2024 Just to restate how absurd this is — the Supreme Court’s decision was unanimous. It was a 9-0 vote‚ overturning what this secretary of state did. And instead of grappling with the implications of that‚ both the interviewer and the woman with the crazy eyes (Griswold) pretend as though this was a partisan decision. That’s how the question was framed‚ and it’s how Griswold responds. She goes off into some bizarre discussion about Clarence Thomas. They use the exact same talking points they used back when the Dobbs decision came out. There’s a reason they’re doing this‚ which I’ll get into a moment. But for now it’s important to highlight some more unhinged responses to the Supreme Court’s ruling — because you have to understand how truly‚ profoundly Donald Trump has broken these people. Elsewhere on MSNBC for example‚ a Slate columnist disclosed that he went rooting around the metadata of the Supreme Court’s decision. In case you’re not familiar with this process‚ because you’re a normal person‚ here’s what this columnist wrote on Twitter: “If you double click where it says ‘JJ.’ at the top‚ then copy and paste it‚ that line reads: SOTOMAYOR ‚ J.‚ concurring in part and dissenting in part. And if you do a control-F search for “SOTOMAYOR ‚ J.‚ concurring in part and dissenting in part‚” it highlights that same line.” In other words‚ if you highlight some arbitrary portion of the opinion‚ you’ll find some evidence in the metadata that previously — before this opinion was published — Sonia Sotomayor may have written a dissenting opinion‚ instead of joining the 9-0 final majority opinion. This is a discovery that could mean a clerk made a minor mistake somewhere and then corrected it before publishing‚ which would not be a remotely interesting development. But it could also mean that Sonia Sotomayor changed her mind at some point in the deliberations‚ which also would not be a remotely interesting development. CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP In any event‚ Slate and MSNBC found this development highly interesting. Watch as the Slate columnist breathlessly informs viewers of his findings deep in the metadata of the court’s opinion: @mjs_DC explains how metadata suggests that the concurring opinion by Justices Sotomayor‚ Kagan‚ and Jackson in the Supreme Court ruling on Trump's ballot eligibility might have initially been a dissent. pic.twitter.com/SsJGdB3Aoc — MSNBC Reports (@MSNBC_reports) March 4‚ 2024 If you listen carefully to what the Slate guy is saying‚ you’ll notice that he has no proof whatsoever for any of it. He doesn’t actually know that this change in the opinion was made “late” in the process. He doesn’t really know why the metadata says that Sotomayor was dissenting. It’s just speculation. And the point of it is to avoid informing viewers that actually‚ all of the experts you’ve heard on MSNBC for the past three months have been lying to you. Not even Sonia Sotomayor or Ketanji Brown Jackson or Amy Coney Barrett agree with them. That’s the last thing they want you to think about. The New York Times also went into histrionics for the same reason. They published an op-ed claiming that the Supreme Court had just “erased” part of the Constitution. They find it easier to make embarrassing‚ emotional claims than to address‚ in any way‚ all of the B.S. they’ve been peddling about this case. For people who pretend to care so much about “misinformation‚” it’s striking. The fact none of these media organizations is reflecting on this failure tells us a lot about what they’re planning. Just like we saw during Russiagate‚ they’re not going to acknowledge their mistakes. They’re not going to give up on their goal of removing the leading presidential candidate from the ballot — all in the name of “defending democracy.” Instead‚ their plan is simply to adapt‚ and find new ways to undermine the will of tens of millions of American voters.  It’s important to emphasize here that four justices — Sotomayor‚ Kagan‚ Ketanji Brown Jackson‚ and the supposedly conservative Amy Coney Barrett — tried their hardest to preserve this possibility in yesterday’s ruling. They all suggested that‚ while states can’t bar Trump from the ballot‚ there might be a way for the federal government to do it‚ without an act of Congress. What does that mean‚ exactly? That’s not clear. Amy Coney Barrett won’t tell us. Maybe soon enough‚ we’ll find out. Until then‚ congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland has made it very clear that Democrats will press forward with an effort to disqualify Trump using an act of Congress. In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling — which held that only Congress‚ rather than states‚ can disqualify federal officeholders for insurrection — Raksin went on television to announce that Democrats in Congress will indeed do everything they can to disqualify Donald Trump from the ballot. Rep. Jamie Raskin reveals he is working with Debbie Wasserman Schultz‚ Eric Swalwell‚ and other Democrats to pass a bill aimed at removing the leading Republican presidential candidate from the ballot. Is this "defending democracy" &; "fighting fascism"?pic.twitter.com/OgVBx9aAAY — KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 4‚ 2024 This is the same threat that Democrats made after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The thought of giving up never crosses their minds. The thought of allowing voters in each of the 50 states to make their own decisions — whether it’s about abortion‚ or presidential candidates — never crosses their minds‚ either. If you page through the Washington Post’s comments section‚ you’ll see that very clearly. Millions of Left-wing voters want Jamie Raskin to pass his bill‚ and forcibly remove Donald Trump from the ballot. And they have some very high-level support. As the podcaster Comfortably Smug pointed out the other day‚ “Left Wing Dark Money groups like Fix The Court are focused on packing the court‚ and their former director now works for the Biden campaign.” What this means is that‚ as deranged as Keith Olbermann is‚ he’s actually not an outlier on the Left. He’s popular because he’s willing to say what they’re thinking. He is the face of all their worst impulses and ideas. And they are so committed to winning — so committed to preventing you from voting — that they truly don’t care whether that face is drenched in urine or not.