Mosby maintains her innocence

Appealing to heaven is “provocative,” says The New York Times. The Times reported Wednesday that—gasp—Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito flew an “Appeal to Heaven” flag last year at his vacation home in New Jersey. “Another Provocative Flag Was Flown at Another Alito Home,” reads the Times’ headline. The story comes on the heels of a media-concocted “scandal” revealing that Alito flew an upside-down flag outside his house for a few days in early 2021.  We are led to believe that the first incident means that Alito is a violent, insurrectionist supporter of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot or something. Alito said that the upside-down flag stemmed from a dispute between his wife and neighbors over yard signs.  An upside-down flag is a traditional sign of national or personal distress. I can think of countless reasons to use that symbol in 2021. And ultimately, what does it matter? If, say, Justice Sonya Sotomayor had flown one of those “In this house, we believe…” signs, do you think it ever would have been a story touted as problematic by the left-wing press? Of course not. From the Times on Alito’s second allegedly damning flag revelation: This time, it was the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, which, like the inverted U.S. flag, was carried by rioters at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Also known as the Pine Tree flag, it dates back to the Revolutionary War, but largely fell into obscurity until recent years and is now a symbol of support for former President Donald J. Trump, for a religious strand of the “Stop the Steal” campaign and for a push to remake American government in Christian terms. After reading that, the only thing that makes me disappointed is that I don’t have an “Appeal to Heaven” flag of my own. The tenor of the Times’ piece and the reaction from the Left are both deeply cynical and revealing of how our institutional pseudo-elites think. A little history lesson: The “Appeal to Heaven” flag is a classic flag of the American Revolution. One of George Washington’s aides designed it in 1775 to be used on ships serving the united colonies. The “Appeal to Heaven” moniker is a reference to the right of revolution.  Our Founding Fathers, in their wonderfully Anglo-American fashion, were orderly revolutionaries.  The foundation of a just legal and political order starts with a grounding in higher law, in the rights endowed by our creator, as Abraham Lincoln noted a generation later. The argument from Washington and the Founding Fathers was that the British crown and Parliament had violated the God-given rights of the American colonists through  oppressive laws foisted on them without representation. This is History 101 stuff, I know. But among many of those who’ve matriculated from our country’s most elite institutions in recent decades, the concept of “God-given rights” seems like a wild idea concocted by troglodyte Christian nationalists or whatever bogeyman exists in their mind. Frankly, if you have an issue with appealing to heaven, maybe the problem is with you, not the person holding the flag. One way or another, this story is being used by some highly cynical Leftist activists, political operatives, and media outlets to undermine the Supreme Court. For a while, they were all working hard to portray Justice Clarence Thomas as a crook because he has wealthy friends and a politically active conservative wife. Thomas hasn’t budged and he’s received a great deal of support, so they’ve mostly moved on to other targets, for now. Hence the deluge of “Alito is an insurrectionist” stories. This is pure power politics from the Left.  Leftist activists have used the Supreme Court for generations to get their way. Now that they’ve lost control of the institution with Trump’s three appointees, they seek its immediate recapture or destruction.That’s their modus operandi. The Alito flag story is meant to rile up the Democrat base and force Alito to recuse himself on Supreme Court decisions related to Trump. The press never had an issue with obviously liberal justices such as the late Ruth Bader Ginsberg holding openly partisan positions and criticizing Republicans. That was just #Resistance. Also, pay no attention to President Joe Biden’s flagrant violations of the Constitution and insults to the Supreme Court. “When the Supreme Court told me I couldn’t, I found two other ways to do it,” Biden said of his illegal student loan bailout Sunday during a commencement address at Morehead College. That gets a collective media shrug. But a Supreme Court justice flying a historic flag referencing the Founding, religion, and the ideas at the cornerstone of our national existence? Scandal! Democrat media allies have been only too happy to do their part in weaving a narrative that Biden and his White House advisers undoubtedly want to tell. At its root, the story is that simple. However, the nature of the story does say something more significant about the state of the elite modern Left, for which the Times is the paper of record. First off, the Left seems not to know much about history or the basic premise of our nation. Certainly mockable, but what’s worse than ignorance is that the little leftists do know about our past they seem to deeply dislike. Traditional symbols of American patriotism are now almost uniformly portrayed as scandalous or at least suspect unless used for distinctly left-wing causes. The mainstream Left makes little attempt to appeal to our country’s history, unlike even a decade ago when the Left at least tried to appropriate history for its own purpose. Don’t forget that New York Times went to war against the AMERICAN FLAG long before they went after the Appeal to Heaven flag. pic.twitter.com/jpUFPEYogN— Mollie (@MZHemingway) May 23, 2024 And appeals to religion, particularly Christianity? Forget about it. Combining symbols of patriotism with an appeal to religion is a recipe to send the modern liberal into complete hysterics. As I wrote in my book “The War on History,” the Left launched a full-scale assault on the country’s past in order to fundamentally transform America and the West. Indeed, our history has been rewritten to make 1619 rather than 1776 the nation’s “true” founding year. After 2020, the institutional Left fully bought into that rewrite. Americans who didn’t make this leap—whether protesters who breached the Capitol on Jan. 6 or an originalist Supreme Court justice or just a regular person who wants to act in patriotic solidarity with his neighbors—are all equally on the “wrong side of history.”  They are all religious bigots, opposed to the Constitution as the Left has redefined it, and insurrectionists under the new regime. Kind of amazing for a Supreme Court Justice to fly an “Appeal to Heaven” flag, whose spirit is hostile to the constitutional order and the rule of law that the Supreme Court is to uphold.— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) May 22, 2024 Our most powerful institutions have decided that being an American is un-American. Forget the dopey narratives peddled by The New York Times. Be like George Washington and appeal to heaven. The post Latest Alito Flag ‘Scandal’ Shows How the Left Thinks Being an American Is Un-American appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FAA Makes Potentially Explosive Discovery About Boeing

Beege LIVE BLOG: No Raspberries - We're Cheering Trump in the Bronx

The largest community school board district in Manhattan approved a resolution in March recommending that the New York City Department of Education permit a public review of its policy allowing cross-dressing boys to participate in girls' sports. This suggestion — that the DOE would dare conduct a policy review involving parents, coaches, and female athletes —infuriated radicals, who have since smeared the dissenting parents and targeted them for abuse. Over a dozen affluent Democratic officials joined in on the attacks this week, suggesting that Community Education Council District 2's Resolution 248 was rooted in "bigotry and hate." Be it resolved The resolution notes at the outset that in 2019, the NYC DOE released its "'Guidelines on Gender' which changed several school policies, most significantly replacing the category of biological sex with gender identity in all areas including Public School Athletic League (PSAL) sports teams and participation." 'The Guidelines were developed by the City's first LGBTQ Liaison and stakeholders who were already supportive of replacing sex with gender identity.' Section 9 of the guidelines indicate a student can engage in contact sports and athletic activities in accordance with his or her so-called gender identity. "The publicly available information on the process of developing the 2019 Gender guidelines does not indicate that female athletes, coaches, or sports medicine doctors or evolutionary biology experts were ever consulted or considered despite the long history of female athletes fighting for equitable and meaningful access to sports participation," said the resolution. "The Guidelines were developed by the City's first LGBTQ Liaison and stakeholders who were already supportive of replacing sex with gender identity." According to the resolution, the gender ideologues who crafted the guidelines also did not bother considering the "well-documented importance of sports participation in academic success, mental health, physical health, or socio-emotional well being of girls." The resolution did not go so far as to recommend a reversal of the policy. Instead, it simply asked that the DOE convene a review committee involving female athletes, parents, coaches, relevant medical professionals, and other professionals with relevant expertise whose insights were avoided. 'We can stick our head in the sand, and we can refuse to acknowledge that there are differences in athletes.' CECD 2 president Leonard Silverman said, "This is an issue where our definitions of gender are continuing to evolve," reported the New York Times. "We can stick our head in the sand, and we can refuse to acknowledge that there are differences in athletes," said Silverman. "Or we can try to have an honest, open, transparent discussion about these issues." The resolution passed in an 8-3 vote on March 20 — to the chagrin of the city council members, actress Elliot Page, and other activists who were reportedly in attendance. Leftist apoplexy The vote did not sit well with the radicals in the room. Non-straight NYC DOE employee Jared Danker said the resolution would "marginalize and discriminate against a group of students who need our affirmation and support," reported the New York Post. NYC Council member Erik Bottcher said, "We are outraged that you're considering a resolution targeting transgender girls and sports. It is utterly shocking that such a regressive and harmful resolution is being proposed in the school district in the middle of Manhattan." Alaina Daniels, a transvestite activist who runs an after-school program in the area, suggested the proposal amounted to a threat to "trans existence." "We're under attack in this very room," he said. State Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal said in a statement, "It is utterly shocking that such a regressive and harmful resolution is being proposed in a school district that covers much of Manhattan." "Resolution #248 is based on the false premise that the gender identity policy negatively impacts female athletes, and stems from the misguided notion that the inclusion of transgender students in sports diminishes the experience of other student athletes," said Hoylman-Sigal. Maud Maron, a Democrat who unsuccessfully ran for Congress in 2022 and who cosponsored the resolution, countered the radicals' claims, suggesting there was nothing "transphobic" about the resolution. "If we have a proper and real conversation, one of the outcomes could be that nothing changes and that we all discover that these guidelines are just perfect as they are," said Maron. Following the vote, the DOE reiterated its commitment to allowing transvestites to participate in sports "in accordance with their gender identity." Democrats jump in to punch down On May 20, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Assemblyman Tony Simone, state Sens. Kiz Krueger and Brad Hoylman-Sigal, five city council members, and other Democratic officials circulated their letter to CECD 2, stating the resolution is "hateful, discriminatory, and actively harmful to New York City students in District 2." "Since the passage of #248 in March, Chancellor [David C.] Banks has made clear that the resolution does not conform with the values of the Department of Education, issuing a firm statement that the recommendations laid out in it will not be accepted or considered," continued the letter. "We are proud of the Chancellor's strong response, and believe this CEC must start the work of repairing relationships within this district by removing #248 from the public record." Nadler — who is running for re-election against Republican Mike Zumbluskas — and his posse claimed that "some of you undoubtedly think that this resolution was 'simply asking for a conversation,' [but] in reality that conversation was based in anti-LGBT+ rhetoric that is spreading in our country, state, city, and school districts, and the impact is heartbreaking." The letter intimated that a failure to rescind the proposal could drive transvestites to suicide. "Our school system must stand for justice and equity, not bigotry and hate," continued the letter. "Our community education councils must be fighting for every student, not attack, ridicule, or marginalize the vulnerable." Assemblyman Simone subsequently told the Times that he was "personally outraged" by the proposal, claiming it "creates a conversation that is not needed." Simone and the other authors of the letter may not want to have the conversation because most New Yorkers disagree with them on the issue. A Siena College Poll revealed in April that a majority of New York Democrats and more than 75% of Republicans and independents "support requiring high school athletes to compete in sports with those of the same sex athletes." A national Gallup poll revealed last year that 69% of Americans say transvestites should only be allowed to compete on sports teams that conform with their actual sex. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Instead of returning to the Constitution to end litigation over redistricting, the Supreme Court applied more rigor to such lawsuits.

Deadly Wokeness: UCLA Lowered Admission Standards, Now 50% of Some Groups FAIL Basic Competency Tests

Sociology Professor Gets Ratioed Into OBLIVION for Telling People to 'Deal With' Higher Food Prices

Revealed: Hunter Biden Text Messages From 2017 Brokering Meeting With Bidens, Chinese Energy Boss

AOC Invokes God in Post Wishing Ill on Trump Rally in Bronx, Rallygoers Respond in Best Way Possible