On November 18‚ 2023‚ Washington Post reporter Matt "Biden Adviser" Viser offered the Biden talking points in his article‚ Hunter Biden’s career of benefiting from his father’s name. Viser asserted the House Republicans "have not produced any direct evidence" of Joe Biden improperly benefiting from Hunter's schemes. "A Washington Post review of Hunter Biden’s career found no sign the family patriarch was an active participant in his son’s business efforts."  That's ridiculous‚ since the laptop shows Biden showing up to meet Hunter's clients at swanky restaurants and more. Viser quoted Hunter's lawyers‚ painting with the broadest brush: "There is not a single financial transaction between President Biden and his son related to or involving any of Hunter Biden’s business ventures or prior private commercial dealings‚” they [Hunter Biden’s legal team] wrote in a recent memo. “Hunter Biden’s business transactions were legitimate and well-documented in written agreements‚ and transactions legally tracked in his businesses’ bank statements.” On Monday‚ House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer demonstrated that was the latest Biden lie‚ releasing subpoenaed bank records showing that one of Hunter Biden's shell companies -- Owasco PC‚ which received payments from Chinese companies -- sent direct payments to Joe Biden of $1‚380 in September‚ October‚ and November of 2018. So how did Viser and the Post report on this? On page A-7‚ Viser and Jacqueline Alemany penned an article titled "Comer mischaracterizes payments Hunter Biden made to his father for car." Now wait! If anyone "mischaracterized" payments‚ it's the Biden camp‚ who insisted there was "not a single financial transaction" between Hunter and Joe from Hunter's business ventures.  But the Post is just that partisan‚ insisting in their lede that the Republicans keep getting it wrong:  As House Republicans move toward a floor vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry against President Biden‚ House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has again mischaracterized evidence of payments from Hunter Biden to his father. Instead of asking Hunter's lawyers why they lied about "not a single financial transaction‚" their Post pals just let Abbe Lowell roast Comer:  “There Chairman Comer goes again -- reheating what is old as new to try to revive his sham of an investigation‚” Hunter Biden’s attorney Abbe Lowell said in a statement. “The truth is Hunter’s father helped him when he was struggling financially due to his addiction and could not secure credit to finance a truck. When Hunter was able to‚ he paid his father back and took over the payments himself.” After the Post allowed a Comer spokesman to insist a series of payments to Joe Biden from Hunter's companies show he's benefited from foreign companies‚ they dumped more cold water on Comer as the article ended:  Comer has consistently oversold [link to their "Fact Checker"] or misrepresented the committee’s investigative findings as he has argued to initiate impeachment proceedings. Last month‚ Comer trumpeted a $200‚000 loan repayment Joe Biden received from his brother James Biden. Comer sought to paint the personal check in nefarious terms‚ alleging without evidence that it showed that Joe Biden had indirectly received payments from his family’s foreign business dealings. When presented with a bank record of the wire payment that showed the $200‚000 payment to James Biden had originated from the president’s attorney trust account‚ Comer baselessly accused the law firm representing Joe Biden of money laundering. Several "fact checkers" typically rushed to defend the Bidens. CNN's Daniel Dale weaseled through it: "the committee subpoenaed years of financial records; the fraction CNN has seen does not prove with absolute certainty that there was a loan. But even this small batch of evidence clearly shows that the Democrats have documents at least partially substantiating their assertions about the check." That's good enough for the Biden voters at CNN and the Post.  PS: Back on February 2‚ Viser demonstrated his partisanship‚ proclaiming to Nicolle Wallace on MSNBC that “there isn't much that ties the president to any wrongdoing‚ which I think has got to be the focus for it to be relevant for it to be of a congressional committee is to look at Joe Biden and the presidency and there's nothing at least on the laptop that illustrates that.”

During Monday’s White House press briefing‚ the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre had quite the day as she ended what had been a petty‚ 187-day blackout against the New York Post’s Steven Nelson‚ hilariously ended the briefing after a question from Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann about the new twist in the Biden corruption saga‚ and was caught in a double standard by Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich over voting access. With the penultimate slot in the briefing‚ Jean-Pierre surprisingly called out to Nelson‚ who thanked her and added that while “[i]t’s been awhile‚” he’s “hop[ing] we can do more.” Jean-Pierre chuckled in annoyance‚ saying he took it “one step too far.” Bizarre. After 187 days of being iced out in the WH Briefing Room‚ KJP FINALLY called on @NYPost's @StevenNelson10. Nelson: Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and‚ against this debate‚ Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly… pic.twitter.com/sTBAcT9OoB — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 4‚ 2023 Nelson cut to his first question: Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and‚ against this debate‚ Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly funding a domestic court record dragnet administered by AT&;T.  Apparently‚ according to Wired‚ the White House altered funding for this program in 2021 and resumed at last year‚ and I was wondering what you could tell us about this program and the reason that it was paused and then resumed by the White House. As Jean-Pierre often does with reporters she regularly calls on‚ she played dumb and said she’d “have to check with the team.” Nelson pivoted to his second question‚ which concerned allegations of collusion between the administration and Big Tech (such as here): Last week‚ the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Rob Flaherty about the efforts to influence social media moderation. Is the White House going to seek to block that testimony? And is there any reconsideration by the White House or regrets about the past flagging of social media content for removal? Jean-Pierre unsurprisingly punted‚ referring him to the White House counsel’s office. After Nelson‚ Wegmann served up a question about the revelation from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) that one of Hunter Biden’s business venture Owasco PC sent a direct payment to his father‚ Joe‚ which ran counter to “[t]he White House ha[ving] said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together.” “Did the President accept payment? And why would there be such an arrangement if they were never business together? Or‚ if there was a wall of separation‚ as the President has previously said‚” he asked. .@PhilipWegmann: The WH has said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together. They’ve said that repeatedly also in this room. According to bank records obtained by the House Oversight Committee‚ though‚ one of Hunter Biden businesses of Owasco PC set… pic.twitter.com/IyltONFZfN — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 4‚ 2023 Jean-Pierre brushed it aside and walked away from the podium‚ claiming she had “not seen that report‚ so I would have to refer you to my colleagues over at the White House counsel’s office on that particular question.” Prior to Nelson and Wegmann‚ Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich channeled her colleague Peter Doocy by laying a trap for Jean-Pierre in asking if “the White House still believe[s]” that Georgia’s voting laws are un-American and promote voter suppression even though “Georgia did have record turnout” in 2022. Heinrich used that answer to pivot to Florida’s Democratic Party cancelling its 2024 presidential primary (click “expand”): HEINRICH: So‚ does the Florida Party‚ then effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression? JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t speak to that. HEINRICH: Why not? JEAN-PIERRE: You have to speak to the campaign or the DNC. HEINRICH: Does — does the White House have thoughts on — on — JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t — HEINRICH: — those voters being — JEAN-PIERRE: — I can’t — I — I can’t speak to that. HEINRICH: — is it because of the Hatch Act or — JEAN-PIERRE: I just — this is — you’re talking about 2024 election. You’re talking about a primary. I’m just not gonna speak to that from here. HEINRICH: Okay.  Heinrich also pressed her on Congresswoman Pramilia Jayapal’s (D-WA) disgusting comments downplaying violence against Jewish women on October 7 by Hamas terrorists‚ but Jean-Pierre refused to condemn the Washington congresswoman directly. To see the relevant transcript from the December 4 briefing‚ click “expand.” White House press briefing [via ABC News Live subfeed] December 4‚ 2023 2:59 p.m. Eastern JACQUI HEINRICH: In 2021‚ President Biden called Georgia’s election law changes New Jim Crow laws that were antithetical to who we are. They imposed voter identification requirements‚ limited use of drop boxes and gave state officials more power over local elections and then in 2022‚ Georgia did have record turnout. But you had argued from the podium that there was voters suppression. Does the White House still believe that that was true? KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have anything else to add from what I stated last time. HEINRICH: So‚ does the Florida Party‚ then effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression? JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t speak to that. HEINRICH: Why not? JEAN-PIERRE: You have to speak to the campaign or the DNC. HEINRICH: Does — does the White House have thoughts on — on — JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t — HEINRICH: — those voters being — JEAN-PIERRE: — I can’t — I — I can’t speak to that. HEINRICH: — is it because of the Hatch Act or — JEAN-PIERRE: I just — this is — you’re talking about 2024 election. You’re talking about a primary. I’m just not gonna speak to that from here. HEINRICH: Okay. And then‚ can I get the White House’s response to Congresswoman Jayapal’s comments over the weekend. In her interview‚ she said that sexual violence should be condemned‚ but that we have to be balanced in our condemnation. Was that an appropriate comment? JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ we’ve been very‚ very clear. You heard a little bit from — from Jake Sullivan about this. I can only speak for — for the President. Uh‚ that’s who I can speak for‚ and we’ve been clear what Hamas did is absolutely reprehensible and — full stop.  We’re going to continue to be clear about that. And we think about — you know‚ rape and the use of rape as being used as a — as a weapon‚ that is also reprehensible and that’s full stop‚ and I’ll just leave it there and I’m speaking for the President of the United States. I think there’s been very clear on that. HEINRICH: Any comment‚ though —  JEAN-PIERRE: I just —  HEINRICH: — for Congresswoman Jayapal? JEAN-PIERRE: — I just commented on. I just laid out what we believe is unacceptable. (....) 3:06 p.m. Eastern JEAN-PIERRE [TO NELSON]: Go ahead‚ Steve. STEVEN NELSON: Oh‚ thank you‚ Karine. JEAN-PIERRE: Sure. NELSON: It’s been awhile. Hoping we can do more. I — I’ve got one — JEAN-PIERRE [LAUGHING]: See‚ you’re taking it one — one step too far‚ my friend. Just ask your question. NELSON: — well‚ thank you again. I’ve got a question about domestic surveillance then one  about online censorship. On domestic surveillance‚ Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and‚ against this debate‚ Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly funding a domestic court record dragnet administered by AT&;T.  Apparently‚ according to Wired‚ the White House altered funding for this program in 2021 and resumed at last year‚ and I was wondering what you could tell us about this program and the reason that it was paused and then resumed by the White House. JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ I would have to check with the team. I don’t have anything specific to tell you about 702. Is it — that’s what you’re asking me about? I just don’t have anything to share on that particular question. NELSON: Hence my online censorship question. Last week‚ the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Rob Flaherty about the efforts to influence social media moderation. Is the White House going to seek to block that testimony? And is there any reconsideration by the White House or regrets about the past flagging of social media content for removal? JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ I’m just gonna be — um‚ be very clear here. My colleagues at the White House counsel’s office has already addressed this‚ so I would have to refer you to them. I’m just not. I don’t have anything to add specifically on this.  (....) 3:07 p.m. Eastern PHILIP WEGMANN: The White House has said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together. They’ve said that repeatedly also in this room. According to bank records obtained by the House Oversight Committee‚ though‚ one of Hunter Biden businesses of Owasco PC set up direct payments to the President. Did the President accept payment? And why would there be such an arrangement if they were never business together? Or‚ if there was a wall of separation‚ as the President has previously said? JEAN-PIERRE: So‚ I have to be clear with you. I have not seen that report‚ so I would have to refer you to my colleagues over at the White House counsel’s office on that particular question.

Google continues to prop up Biden and bury his opponents’ campaign websites in search results‚ according to the results of MRC Free Speech America’s newest study. For the fourth time in a row‚ Google's search engine has once again favored Biden in searches conducted by MRC Free Speech America one week prior to the Republican presidential primary debate. MRC researchers broadly searched for “presidential campaign websites” as well as five additional searches specifying the party affiliation of even the third-party candidates. Google continued to bury Republican candidates’ websites if their websites showed up on the first page of results at all. In a search for “republican presidential campaign websites‚” Google did not produce a single Republican candidate’s website. Shockingly not even former President Donald Trump’s website appeared even though he is polling above 50 percent according to all major polls. The search did‚ however‚ come up with results for Marianne Williamson – who is running as a Democrat – and recent Republican dropout Will Hurd - who dropped out of the race in October after weeks of polling at zero.  The campaign websites of Republican candidates Ron DeSantis‚ Vivek Ramaswamy‚ Nikki Haley and Chris Christie were also nowhere to be found on the first page of Google’s search results.  The first page of results did display a link to a Library of Congress page that referenced an archived version of Trump’s 2020 campaign website‚ but even the link referenced was dead. Google had no problem retrieving incumbent President Joe Biden’s or Williamson’s websites in a search for “democrat presidential campaign websites‚” as they appeared as the first and third results respectively. But the websites belonging to newly announced Democratic candidates Cenk Uygur and Dean Phillips appeared nowhere on the first page of results.  When MRC researchers searched for “independent presidential campaign websites” neither Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s website nor Cornel West’s website appeared on the first page of search results‚ even though they are the only two candidates running as independents.  Similarly‚ Libertarian candidate Chase Oliver’s website did not appear in Google’s first page of search results when MRC researchers searched for “libertarian presidential campaign websites.” Instead‚ the search came up with old campaign websites for former Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders and 2020 Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgenson.  In another query‚ MRC researchers searched Google without specifying party affiliation. Replicating the first MRC pre-debate Google search study‚ MRC researchers searched the innocuous terms “presidential campaign websites.” Google’s search engine produced Biden’s campaign website as the third search result along with Williamson’s campaign website‚ which came up as the fourth result. Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) 2020 presidential campaign website came up as the eleventh result.  After hiding Trump’s campaign website prior to every other debate‚ Google’s search engine finally let former President Trump’s campaign website through to the first page of results but only as the twelfth result. Kennedy Jr. appeared as the thirteenth result and 2020 candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders – who are not even running for the 2024 nomination – appeared as the fifteenth and twenty-seventh results respectively.  The importance of where a search result appears on the first page of a Google search cannot be overstated. Not only is Google the go-to search engine for most people‚ holding a market share of nearly 92 percent worldwide‚ but the higher a search result appears‚ the more likely a user will click on a particular result‚ according to Brian Dean‚ a search engine optimization expert. Dean conducted a study analyzing how often users click on various rankings of Google search results. His blog‚ Backlinko‚ reported that "The #1 Result In Google Gets 27.6% of All Clicks" and it has “10x higher [Click Through Rate] compared to the #10 result.” Astoundingly‚ less than one percent (.63%) of users click through to the second page of search results‚ underscoring the importance of positioning on the first page of search results. Other studies‚ like one conducted in 2020 by Sistrix‚ show similar results. Methodology For this report‚ MRC Free Speech America analyzed the Nov. 29 Google search results of “presidential campaign websites‚” “republican presidential campaign websites‚” “democrat presidential campaign websites‚” “independent presidential campaign websites‚” “libertarian presidential campaign websites” and “green party presidential campaign websites.” MRC Free Speech America created an algorithm to automate this process in a clean environment. A “clean environment” allows for organic search to populate results without the influence of prior search history and tracking cookies. MRC Free Speech America researchers searched the innocuous words “presidential campaign websites‚” “republican presidential campaign websites‚” “democrat presidential campaign websites‚” “independent presidential campaign websites‚” “libertarian presidential campaign websites” and “green party presidential campaign websites” using the algorithm. To determine bias‚ our researchers looked at Google’s results and recorded the rank(s) of each candidate’s campaign website on the first page of results. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Google at 650-253-0000 and demand it be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom desperately wants to run for president -- now rather than later. After all‚ Newsom‚ for reasons I discuss in my new book‚ “As Goes California‚” beat back a recall attempt. Polls show most Democrats want a candidate other than President Joe Biden‚ whose poll numbers remain in the tank. Over 60% of Americans consider the country on the wrong track. Biden’s cognitive decline is on full and public display‚ forcing staffers to limit Biden’s public appearances and restrict interaction with the media. Why‚ then‚ doesn’t Newsom announce? He faces four obstacles: Joe Biden‚ Jill Biden‚ Kamala Harris‚ and Gavin Newsom. First‚ Biden. He enjoys the job‚ having sought it unsuccessfully two previous times. He wanted to run again in 2016‚ but former President Barack Obama discouraged it. Biden also did not want to hinder what most assumed would be the coronation of the first female president. Biden thought the time had passed him by. But Donald Trump shocked the world‚ defeated Hillary Clinton‚ and allowed Biden to saddle up again. So‚ if he can fog up a mirror‚ he runs for reelection. Second‚ Dr. Jill. She enjoys the job. Near the end of her stint as first lady‚ Michelle Obama told Oprah Winfrey that she wanted a “normal” life. But Dr. Jill Biden hovers approvingly over her husband like an Avenger‚ guiding him‚ running interference‚ and doing whatever it takes to get him through his day. Third‚ Harris. Her poll numbers look bad‚ and she dropped out before the first presidential primary in 2020. But she ran for San Francisco district attorney‚ California attorney general‚ and for reelection‚ U.S. Senate and vice president‚ winning each time. She checks the identity party’s boxes as a female who identifies as black. After winning the 2020 Nevada caucuses the self-described Democrat-socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders became the Democrat frontrunner. Alarmed‚ South Carolina’s Rep. James Clyburn endorsed Biden on the eve of the South Carolina primary when most had given him up for dead. Clyburn extracted a promise: Make your first Supreme Court nominee a black female. Blacks are the most loyal part of the Democrat base. Black Democrat females outnumber black Democrat males and are even more loyal than black males‚ 20% of whom voted in 2020 for Trump. The first 2024 democrat primary is South Carolina‚ where 60% of the Democrat primary voters are black. Black voters love Harris‚ especially black females. They consider the ridicule over Harris’ so-called cackle sexist and racist. They feel Biden burdened her with the insulting task of finding the “root cause” of illegal immigration when the root cause of the entry of millions of illegal immigrants under Biden is Biden. A recent Los Angeles Times poll found Harris’s favorability rating at 39%‚ two points below that of Biden. But in a recent YouGov poll‚ Harris‚ among blacks‚ had a 70% approval rating‚ which is undoubtedly even higher among black females. Newsom‚ when it appeared that California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein might not complete her term‚ promised to appoint a black female replacement. He did. And now‚ with a black female Democrat poised to become the first female president of any color‚ Newsom knows a white man cannot swoop in and displace Harris. If he tries‚ without Harris agreeing to step aside‚ black Democrat females would explode -- but not to the point where they would vote Republican. Many would just sit it out‚ guaranteeing a Republican victory. Fourth‚ Newsom. What prescription does the hyper-lefty offer to Americans concerned about inflation‚ gas prices‚ wage growth‚ and inability to keep pace with inflation‚ crime‚ and porous borders? Did Newsom criticize Biden’s reckless spending and his inflation-inducing war on oil and gas? Please. Newsom wants California to go further and ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. During his two terms as mayor‚ homelessness exploded in his hometown‚ San Francisco. He supports soft-on-crime DAs and policies like cashless bail. Newsom’s California is a sanctuary state‚ and he expanded the number of illegal aliens eligible for taxpayer-funded health care. After Biden’s disastrous‚ world-destabilizing pullout from Afghanistan‚ Newsom said: “I’m incredibly proud of him.” Bottom line: If not Biden‚ the next batter up is Harris. The die is cast. Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host. To learn more about Larry Elder or become an “Elderado‚” visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @larryelder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists‚ visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

These Old Fashioned Sugar Cookies are some of our holiday favorites! Super versatile as far as toppings and they are delicious! If you love these Christmas Cookies you will absolutely love these delicious Tea Cakes. They are an old-fashioned classic that have been in our family for many years! ❤️WHY WE LOVE THIS RECIPE This...

There’s a bit of a tendency in the prepping and survival community to think big‚ when we think of survival. We’d much rather talk about surviving a TEOTWAWKI event‚ than surviving the common problems we all face. The post Keeping Warm When the Lights Go Out appeared first on Survivopedia.

Two biological men who identify as women took first and second place in a women's bike race in Illinois — repeating the one-two finish the transgender pair pulled off in a women's race in October. What are the details? Tessa Johnson‚ 25‚ took first place in the women’s single-speed category at the Illinois State Cyclocross Championships‚ and Evelyn Williamson‚ 30‚ took second place in Sunday's contest‚ the New York Post reported. — (@) Johnson and Williamson placed first and second‚ respectively‚ at a Chicago Cyclocross Cup women's single-speed race Oct. 7. — (@) In Sunday's race‚ Kristin Chalmers — a biological woman — came in third place‚ OutKick reported‚ adding that in October's race‚ Allison Zmuda — also a biological woman — came in third place.What has been the reaction?A number of prominent individuals have reacted with disgust over the latest finish by Johnson and Williamson."It’s so outrageous‚" British commentator Piers Morgan said. "Why aren’t more women standing up against this assault on their rights?""More mediocre male bodies taking podium places from female athletes‚" tennis icon Martina Navratilova said. "And it stinks!!!!"Journalist Megyn Kelly called it "outrageous."Anything else?OutKick added that Johnson and Williamson in August competed under the team name "TS-Estrodolls" in the Racing-Athletic Relay Cross in Chicago and won the contest. The outlet also said it's been reported that Williamson is in a "throuple relationship" with fellow trans cyclist Austin Killips and another individual. The Daily Mail‚ citing bicycling.com‚ said Williamson called the beginning of the unconventional relationship "just very happy.""I got along with everyone‚ and it just kind of worked out. … There was no expectation that we would all date together. But it just so happened that that worked out really well for all of us‚" Williamson added‚ according to the Daily Mail. — (@) The Daily Mail also said Killips has become "notorious for shoving a competitor during a race" and "forced at least one biological female champion out of the sport."Here's a video report from the New York Post following the one-two finish by Johnson and Williamson in October: Trans cyclists take gold and silver in Chicago women’s races youtu.be Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Congressional lawmakers released an interim report Monday titled‚ "The FBI's Breach of Religious Freedom: The Weaponization of Law Enforcement Against Catholic Americans‚" providing a glimpse into the lengths the FBI has gone to cast those with conservative religious beliefs as threats apparently requiring state surveillance and "mitigation." The new report from the House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government indicates the FBI: "abused its counterterrorism tools to target Catholic Americans as potential domestic terrorists"; "relied on at least one undercover agent to develop its assessment"; "proposed developing sources among the Catholic clergy and church leadership"; and would likely still be "violating the religious liberties of millions of Catholic Americans" were it not for former FBI special agent Kyle Seraphin's disclosure. The subcommittee began looking seriously into the FBI's apparent suspicion of conservative Catholics after Seraphin blew the whistle in February over the existence of an internal memo released by the FBI field office in Richmond that warned violent extremists are attracted to "Radical traditionalist Catholic ideology." Finding the FBI uncooperative after the initial revelations about the memo‚ Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) issued a subpoena to Director Christopher Wray in April demanding documents pertaining to the internal January 2023 memo. The new report indicated on the basis of documents obtained via the subpoena that there was "no legitimate basis for the memorandum to insert federal law enforcement into Catholic houses of worship." The pretext for the anti-Catholic initiative appears to have been the self-identification of a single parishioner under investigation as a "radical-traditionalist Catholic." Agents reportedly interviewed the parishioner's priest and the choir director related to his church while developing the memo. While FBI employees reportedly could not define the RTC descriptor‚ the phantom danger nevertheless became the meat of the FBI-wide memo concerning the alleged dangers of "radical" Catholics. Extra to building a blanket condemnation on a lone case and an ill-defined descriptor‚ the two FBI employees who penned the internal memo reportedly admitted their sources cited in the document were politically biased. The sources included the Southern Poverty Law Center‚ Salon‚ and the Atlantic. Salon recently evidenced its skew by advancing the claim that "MAGA and Christian nationalism" constitute greater threats than Hamas "could ever be." The SPLC has claimed that RTCs "may make up the largest single group of serious antisemites in America." The FBI later admitted that the memo "failed to consider the potential bias and credibility of open-source information cited in support of the [document's] assessment" and that the alleged link between racially motivated violent extremists and RTC lacked "sufficient evidence or articulable support." It appears the slapdash stigmatization of this particular group of conservative Christians was driven by more than mere bigotry. After all‚ the memo claimed that increasing extremist interest ahead of the 2024 general election in pro-life‚ pro-family‚ and reality-affirming Catholic views — views ostensibly antithetical to those held by incumbent federal powers — created an opportunity for the FBI to execute new "mitigation efforts‚" such as the development of informants in churches. According to the report‚ FBI Richmond‚ the office that originated the memo‚ has not apologized or canned any of the employees involved in creating the document. The report concluded‚ "This ill-conceived and ill-administered memorandum is a stark warning of the need for scrupulous review of FBI documents with the potential to circumvent Americans' civil liberties and the right to free exercise of religion." "Remember when Joe Biden stood in front of Independence Hall and talked about how one half of the country is fascist?" Chairman Jordan told Fox News Monday. "It's this whole mindset. If you're pro-life‚ if you're a traditional Catholic‚ somehow you're radical‚ somehow you're an extremist." — (@) Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich cornered the White House on Monday over its own double standard on accusations of voter suppression. At the daily press briefing‚ Heinrich reminded White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre of previous statements the Biden administration has made about the issue. For example‚ President Joe Biden accused Georgia of passing new "Jim Crow" laws when it passed a law in 2021 strengthening election security‚ and Jean-Pierre herself claimed voter suppression occurred in Georgia last December when‚ in reality‚ there was record turnout. "Does the White House still believe that that was true?" Heinrich asked. "I don’t have anything else to add from what I stated last time‚" Jean-Pierre answered. That's when Heinrich pulled out the big guns‚ invoking the Florida Democratic Party's decision to scrap its presidential primary despite the fact that there are Florida Democrats interested in casting a primary vote for a Democratic presidential candidate other than Biden. "Does the Florida party‚ then‚ effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression?" Heinrich asked. "I can’t speak to that‚" the press secretary responded. "Why not?" Heinrich pressed. But each time Jean-Pierre refused to address the question and declined to explain why she did not want to answer it. .@JacquiHeinrich: So‚ does the Florida Party‚ then effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression? KJP: I can't speak to that. Heinrich: Why not? KJP: You have to speak to the campaign or the DNC. Heinrich: Does — does the White House have… pic.twitter.com/r2GTrr5YNV — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 4‚ 2023 The Florida Democratic presidential primary is essentially canceled after the party only submitted Biden's name for its 2024 primary ballot. There are‚ however‚ several other Democrats campaigning against the president‚ including Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.)‚ Marianne Williamson‚ and Cenk Uygur. They are long-shot candidates at best‚ but they're running to give voters an alternative option. By denying them a spot on the primary ballot‚ the Florida Democratic Party is essentially denying Democratic voters the opportunity to use the ballot box to support other Democrats. The Florida Democratic Party‚ for its part‚ is standing by the decision. Party officials claim they handled the balloting process by the book and allowing candidates other than Biden to be added to the ballot now would be "anti-democratic." 12/04/23: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Jake Sullivan www.youtube.com Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Search “cultural Marxism” on Wikipedia‚ and you’ll be redirected to a page titled “Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.” This answer of "five" to Winston Smith’s two plus two prompt is a contradictory work of propaganda that reflects the culmination of roughly four years of leftists trying to get their denials straight. The page smears as delusional and anti-Semitic those with the audacity to call a fig a fig and a trough a trough — including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán‚ Jordan Peterson‚ Florida Governor Ron DeSantis‚ British Home Secretary Suella Braverman‚ the late Andrew Breitbart‚ and former communist David Horowitz. Furthermore‚ it bears out Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger’s 2021 sense that the platform now deals primarily in “propaganda” and exists only to “give an establishment point of view.” One of the first substantial versions of the page‚ around September 2020‚ revealed the authors’ early ambitions to build a case around the claim that cultural Marxism is a “far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory.” According to the Wikipedians‚ cultural Marxism is allegedly “far-right” — a label perhaps now deserving of its own conspiracy theory page — because various people to the right of Josef Stalin had used the term over the decades. Cultural Marxists have had an incredible impact on secular and religious institutions alike. They’ve marched through the halls of the academy‚ the legislature‚ and corporate America. It was apparently “anti-Semitic” because there were some Jews among the cultural Marxists criticized over their political project‚ and‚ according to the Wikipedians‚ cultural Marxism’s notable Jewish critics were exceptional. The page now quotes leftist academic Martin Jay‚ who has been textually romancing the Frankfurt School since the 1970s. He calls Jewish criticism of cultural Marxism “puzzling and uncomfortable.” The reasons provided on the page for why cultural Marxism is a “conspiracy theory” have varied over time. In an older version of the page‚ Wikipedians figured Frankfurt School critical theory scholar Joan Braune’s statement‚ “Cultural Marxism does not exist‚” amounted to some kind of proof‚ notwithstanding her unmistakable bias. Another reason given was that leftist academics with Marxist leanings and hopes of cultural transformation don’t necessarily identify with a single school of thought called “cultural Marxism.” They are instead inclined to call themselves “postmodernists‚” “post-colonial scholars‚” “senators‚” etc. On Wikipedia’s current cultural Marxism page‚ which sports a quote from critical theorist Rachel Busbridge calling cultural Marxism “a distinct philosophical approach associated with some strands of the Frankfurt School‚” Wikipedians maintain the whole thing is a conspiracy theory because the efficacy and influence of intellectuals identified as exponents of the movement have been exaggerated. Take it on faith from ink spilled in a pinko magazine. Wikipedians appear to have characterized “cultural Marxism” this way because the term signals an actionable understanding of an all-too-real socio-political project‚ which‚ once identified‚ can be thwarted. Contrary to the Wikis’ assertions and Braune’s conclusion‚ cultural Marxism is a well-defined and well-chronicled offshoot of Marxism. Stated simply‚ cultural Marxism is a mutated form of Marxism in which identity is tactically substituted for class and the revolution no longer comes from without or below but from within and above. Cultural Marxism effectively took off running just before World War II with the suggestion from Italian Communist Party founder Antonio Gramsci that rather than a “war of maneuver‚” leftists should adopt a “war of position.” The Frankfurt School in Germany was incubating similar notions‚ which would later be exported to America with Herbert Marcuse‚ the “father of the new left‚” who later conceded that “today’s cultural revolution … involves a transformation of values which strikes at the entirety of the established culture‚ material as well as intellectual.” Cultural Marxism‚ as we know it today‚ became an unmarked life raft for fellow travelers whose revolutionary ambitions began to sink midway through the 20th century. After all‚ Marxist socialism had repeatedly been shown in practice and in theory to be both economically unworkable and morally bankrupt — especially after Khrushchev’s not-so-secret speech in 1956. Seeing the writing on the wall and cognizant that the almost daily leftist terror attacks in the West were getting the Reds nowhere fast‚ shrewd leftists — Marcuse in particular — picked up the baton from Gramsci and carried it forward‚ contemplating a disguised alternative to the bloody and class-focused revolutionary Marxism then failing everywhere. Marxists found that those previously expected to throw off their chains had been unwilling to do so. They were self-enslaved by an acceptance of their so-called oppressors’ institutions. Cultural Marxism offered a possible remedy: Have the unshackled take over these institutions and gradually liberate those otherwise stuck in their ways — to execute what Rudi Dutschke later characterized as a “long march through the institutions.” Like Saul Alinsky’s ideal revolutionary organizer‚ the cultural Marxist would find a way to “shake up the prevailing patterns of [men's] lives — agitate‚ create disenchantment and discontent with the current values‚ to produce‚ if not a passion for change‚ at least a passive‚ affirmative‚ non-challenging climate.” Cultural Marxists have had an incredible impact on secular and religious institutions alike. They’ve marched through the halls of the academy‚ the legislature‚ and corporate America. Despite their mileage‚ we’re now supposed to trust — on the basis of a cherry-picked collection of leftist works and denials — that the march was only theoretical‚ that the grand marshals’ impact has been exaggerated‚ and that the observation otherwise itself is rooted in anti-Semitism. We’re told to dismiss as fantasy the idea there is “an ongoing and intentional academic and intellectual effort to subvert Western society via a planned culture war that undermines the Christian values of traditionalist conservatism and seeks to replace them with culturally liberal values.” Not a chance. The real conspiracy at work here is the concerted effort by nameless leftists to gaslight the American people into discounting cultural Marxism both as a threat and as a reality. (H/T: End Wokeness)