* Tracking the Biden Presidency: 2022

  • Biden Blames Large Meat Processors for Rising Meat Prices On January 3, 2022, President Biden claimed that the rising price of beef, pork and poultry at grocery stores was a result of a lack of competition in the meat processing industry, which he said was dominated by four large meat-processing corporations that were “exploiting” ranchers, farmers, and […]

Biden Blames Large Meat Processors for Rising Meat Prices

On January 3, 2022, President Biden claimed that the rising price of beef, pork and poultry at grocery stores was a result of a lack of competition in the meat processing industry, which he said was dominated by four large meat-processing corporations that were “exploiting” ranchers, farmers, and consumers. Biden then stumbled, however, when he attempted to explain what the transgressions of “these middlemen” actually were:

“These middlemen that they buy from, farmers and ranchers, and sell the processors — excuse me, and sell the process — excuse me, sell the processed product to grocery stores. That’s the — that’s the way it works. Without meaningful competition, farmers and ranchers don’t get to choose who they sell to. Or put it another way, our farmers and ranchers have to pay whatever these four big companies say they have to pay by and large.

“But that’s only half of it. These companies can use their position as middlemen to overcharge grocery stores and ultimately families. If we’re going to hold a second, I was just — I was telling my colleagues earlier in my office that I was sitting in my kitchen yesterday and there’s a sunroom off the kitchen, and my wife was there with her sister and a good friend named Maryanne, and she was saying, ‘Do you realize it’s over $5 for a pound of hamburger meat?’ Five dollars?

“Well, this is partly — you know, the pound of beef today cost $5 compared to less than $4 before the pandemic. And here’s some historical context. Fifty years ago, ranchers got over $0.60 for every dollar a family spent on beef. Today, they get about $0.39. Fifty years ago, hog farmers got $0.40 to $0.50 for each dollar they spent. Today, it’s about $0.19. And the big companies are making massive profits. While their profits go up, the prices you see at the grocery stores go up commensurate. The prices farmers receive for the products they are bringing to market go down. This reflects the market being distorted by lack of competition.

“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, ‘Capitalism without competition is (sic) capitalism, it’s exploitation.’ That’s what we’re seeing in meat and poultry and those industries now. Small independent farmers and ranchers are being driven out of business, sometimes businesses that have been around for generations.”

In reaction to Biden’s remarks, North American Meat Institute (NAMI) president Julie Anna Potts said in a news release:

“Prices reflect supply and demand in a healthy market. For the third time in six months, President Joe Biden and his Administration announced the same plans to spend $1 billion to fund government intervention in the market in an attempt to increase prices livestock producers receive while blaming inflation on private industry. The Biden Administration continues to ignore the number one challenge to meat and poultry production: labor shortages. This tired approach is not surprising because they have refused to engage with the packing and processing sector they attack, going so far as to hold a roundtable on meat packing without a single beef or pork packer present.

“Press conferences and using taxpayer dollars to establish government-sponsored packing and processing plants will not do anything to address the lack of labor at meat and poultry plants and spiking inflation across the economy. The Administration wants the American people to believe that the meat and poultry industry is unique and not experiencing the same problems causing inflation across the economy, like increased input costs, increased energy costs, labor shortages and transportation challenges. Consumers know better. As economists predicted, producers are seeing higher prices for their cattle because packers have processed the backlog of animals in the system.”

The NAMI news release also quoted a tweet in which economist Larry Summers had said: “Rising demand, with capacity and labor constraints, are fully sufficient to account for what we observe in meat packing — Administration claims notwithstanding. Breaking up meatpacking would in the short run lead to reduced supply which would further increase prices. In general, when government goes to war with industries, it discourages investment and subsequent capacity.”

On January 3, 2022 as well, President Biden announced a four-point plan designed to strengthen competition, “which will bring down costs”:

1) “First, we’re going to invest $1 billion in new and expanded meat and poultry processing capacity, funding that was included in the American Rescue Plan to revive our economy. To bring in more competition and dignity and more farmers, ranchers, and customers, we’re going to invest in new and innovative small businesses and meat processors, the lifeblood of our economy. And when we do this, we’ll give farmers and ranchers more options beyond giant processing conglomerates.”

2) “We’re strengthening rules to protect farmers, ranchers, and other producers. For example, the Department of Agriculture is rewriting the rules under the Packers and Stockyard Act.” (Biden also said that the Trump administration had “weakened that law, making it possible for the abuse that we’re seeing now.”)

3) Biden vowed that his administration “will enforce existing competition (antitrust) laws vigorously and fairly. My executive order on competition established a whole-of-government approach to increasing competition.”

4) Biden said, “We’re bringing greater transparency to the industry. A free market isn’t truly free without transparency around prices. How do you justify the price? And right now that’s largely disappeared in the cattle market, transparency. Back in August, the Department of Agriculture took steps to address this and we’re going to keep pushing it. And I’m pleased to see that Congress is taking action as well to increase competition and fairness with a bipartisan group of senators now working on legislation to make cattle markets more transparent. And all these issues, all these issues, are areas where we can and we must come together in a bipartisan way.”

Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Challenging Biden’s Authority to Block Keystone Pipeline

On January 6, 2022, federal judge Jeffrey Brown, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, granted the Biden administration’s request to dismiss a lawsuit that had been filed by more than 20 Republican attorneys general challenging President Biden’s revocation of the permit for the continued construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. (Biden had first announced that revocation on January 20, 2021, when he issued an an executive order stating that the Keystone project would undermine America’s effort to “prioritize the development of a clean energy economy.”) Specifically, Judge Brown ruled that he could not determine the constitutionality of Biden’s executive order because on June 9, 2021, TC Energy, the Keystone pipeline’s developer, had announced its intention to permanently halt construction of the pipeline and to focus thereafter on other projects. “The court takes TC Energy at its word that Keystone XL is dead,” Brown wrote in his January 6, 2022 ruling. “And because it is dead, any ruling this court makes on whether President Biden had the authority to revoke the permit would be advisory. Thus, the court has no jurisdiction and the case must be dismissed as moot.” Brown declined to say whether he believed it was within the purview of Biden’s constitutional authority to have issued the executive order in the first place.

According to The Daily Caller: “Overall, the [Keystone] pipeline was expected to generate $55.6 million in property taxes across three states [and to] create 42,000 American jobs and $2 billion in total wages.”

Biden’s Remarks on the First Anniversary of the January 6, 2021 Occupation of the U.S. Capitol

In a January 6, 2022 speech on Capitol Hill, President Biden spoke at length in an event commemorating the first anniversary of the temporary occupation of the U.S. Capitol by several hundred Trump supporters one year earlier. Below is a partial transcript of Biden’s remarks, which were clearly aimed at setting the stage for an already-announced Democrat plan to pass legislation — particularly The For The People Act — that would radically change how elections in the United States would be run:

“Madam Vice President and fellow Americans, to state the obvious, one year ago today, in this sacred place, democracy was attacked. Simply attacked. The will of the people was under assault. The constitution — our constitution — faced the greatest of threats. Outnumbered in the face of a brutal attack, the Capitol Police, the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, the National Guard and other brave law enforcement officials saved the rule of law.

“Our democracy held. We the people endured. We the people prevail. For the first time in our history, a president had not just lost an election — he tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power as a violent mob breached the Capitol. But they failed. They failed. And on this day of remembrance, we must make sure that such an attack never, never happens again. […]

“Close your eyes. Go back to that day. What do you see? Rioters rampaging, waving for the first time inside this Capitol, the confederate flag that symbolizes the cause to destroy America, to rip us apart.

“Even during the Civil War that never ever happened. But it happened here in 2021. What else did you see? A mob, breaking windows, kicking in doors, breaching the Capitol, American flags on poles being used as weapons, as spears. Fire extinguishers being thrown at the heads of police officers. A crowd that professes their love for law enforcement assaulted those police officers. Dragged them, sprayed them, stomped on them.

“Over 140 police officers were injured. […] We saw with our own eyes, rioters menace these halls, threatening the life of the Speaker of the House. Literally erecting gallows to hang the Vice President of the United States of America.

“What did we not see? We didn’t see a former president who had just rallied the mob to attack sitting in the private dining room off the Oval Office in the White House watching it all on television. And doing nothing. For hours. As police were assaulted. Lives at risk. The nation’s capital under siege.

“This wasn’t a group of tourists. This was an armed insurrection. They weren’t looking to uphold the will of the people. They were looking to deny the will of the people. They were looking to uphold– they weren’t looking to uphold a free and fair election, they were looking to overturn one. They weren’t looking to save the cause of America. They were looking to subvert the Constitution. […]

“We must be absolutely clear about what is true and what is a lie. And here’s the truth. The former president of the United States of America has created and spread a web of lies about the 2020 election. He’s done so because he values power over principle. Because he sees his own interest as more important than his country’s interest, than America’s interest, and because his bruised ego matters more to him than our democracy or our Constitution. He can’t accept he lost.

“Even though that’s what 93 United States senators, his own attorney general, his own vice president, governors and state officials in every battleground state have all said. He lost. That’s what 81 million of you did as you voted for a new way forward. He’s done what no president in American history, the history of this country has ever, ever done. He refused to accept the results of an election and the will of the American people.

“While some courageous men and women in the Republican Party are standing against it, trying to uphold the principle of that party, too many others are transforming that party into something else. They seem no longer to want to be the party, the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Reagan, the Bushes. […] So at this moment, we must decide, what kind of nation are we going to be? Are we going to be a nation that accepts political violence as a norm? Are we going to be a nation where we allow partisan election officials to overturn the legally expressed will of the people? Are we going to be a nation that lives not by the light of the truth, but of the shadow of lies?

“We cannot allow ourselves to be that kind of nation. The way forward is to recognize the truth and to live by it. The big lie being told by the former president and many Republicans who fear his wrath is that the insurrection in this country actually took place on Election Day, Nov. 3, 2020. Think about that. […] Former president’s supporters are trying to rewrite history. They want you to see Election Day as the day of insurrection. And the riot that took place here on Jan. 6 as a true expression of the will of the people.

“Can you think of a more twisted way to look at this country? To look at America? I cannot. Here’s the truth. The election of 2020 was the greatest demonstration of democracy in the history of this country. More of you voted in that election than have ever voted in all of American history.

“Over 150 million Americans went to the polls and voted that day. In a pandemic. Some at great risk to their lives. They should be applauded, not attacked. Right now in state after state, new laws are being written not to protect the vote, but to deny it.

“Not only to suppress the vote but to subvert it. Not to strengthen and protect our democracy but because the former president lost. Instead of looking at the election results in 2020, and saying they need new ideas or better ideas to win more votes, the former president and his supporters have decided the only way for them to win is to suppress your vote and subvert our elections. It’s wrong, it’s undemocratic and frankly, it’s un-American.

“The second big lie being told by the former president and his supporters is that the results of the election of 2020 can’t be trusted. The truth is that no election, no election in American history has been more closely scrutinized or more carefully counted. Every legal challenge questioning the results and every court in this country that could have been made was made and was rejected.

“Often rejected by Republican-appointed judges, including judges appointed by the former president himself. From state courts to the United States Supreme Court. Recounts were undertaken in state after state. Georgia, Georgia counted its results three times with one recount by hand. Phony partisan audits were undertaken long after the election in several states, none changed the results. In some of them, the irony is the margin of victory actually grew slightly. So let’s speak plainly about what happened in 2020.

“Even before the first ballot was cast, the former president was preemptively so in doubt about the election results. He built his lie over months, wasn’t based on any facts. He was just looking for an excuse, a pretext, to cover for the truth. He’s not just a former president. He’s a defeated, former president — defeated by a margin of over 7 million of your votes in a full and free and fair election.

“There is simply zero proof the election results were inaccurate. […]

“Finally, the third big lie being told by a former president and his supporters is that the mob who sought to impose their will through violence are the nation’s true patriots. Is that what you thought when you looked at the mob ransacking the Capitol, destroying property, literally defecating in the hallways, rifling through the desks of senators and representatives, hunting down members of Congress? Patriots? Not in my view.

“To me, the true patriots were the more than 150 [sic] Americans who peacefully expressed their vote at the ballot box. The election workers who protected the integrity of the vote. And the heroes who defended this capital.

“You can’t love your country only when you win. You can’t obey the law only when it’s convenient. You can’t be patriotic when you embrace and enable lies. Those who stormed this Capitol and those who instigated and incited and those who called on them to do so held a dagger at the throat of America and American democracy.

“They didn’t come here out of patriotism or principle. They came here in rage. Not in service of America, but rather in service of one man. Those who incited the mob, the real plotters who were desperate to deny the certification of this election, defy the will of the voters, but their plot was foiled. Congressmen, Democrats and Republicans stayed. Senators, representatives, staff — they finished their work the Constitution demanded. […]

“Make no mistake about it, we’re living at an inflection point in history, both at home and abroad. We’re engaged anew in a struggle between democracy and autocracy. Between aspirations of the many and the greed of the few, between the people’s right of self-determination and self-seeking autocrat. From China to Russia and beyond, they’re betting that democracies’ days are numbered. […] They’re betting that America is a place for the autocrat, the dictator, the strong man. I do not believe that. That is not who we are. That is not who we have ever been. And that is not who we should ever, ever be. Our founding fathers, as imperfect as they were, set in motion an experiment that changed the world, literally changed the world. […]

“The former president who lies about this election and the mob that attacked this Capitol could not be further away from the core American values. They want to rule or they will ruin. Ruin what our country fought for at Lexington and Concord, at Gettysburg and Omaha Beach, Seneca Falls, Selma, Alabama. And what we were fighting for — the right to vote, the right to govern ourselves, the right to determine our own destiny. […] So we have to be firm, resolute and unyielding in our defense of the right to vote and to have that vote counted.

“Some have already made the ultimate sacrifice in this sacred effort. Jill and I have mourned police officers in this Capitol Rotunda not once but twice in the wake of Jan. 6. Once to honor Officer Brian Sicknick, who lost his life the day after the attack and the second time to honor Officer Billy Evans, who lost his life defending this Capitol as well. [Actually, Evans was U.S. Capitol Police officer who died as a result of injuries sustained during an April 2021 car attack carried out at the Capitol] by Noah Green, a 25-year-old black nationalist who espoused extremist viewpoints advanced by the Nation of Islam.]

“We think about the others who lost their lives and were injured and everyone living with the trauma of that day […] The pain and scars from that day run deep.

“I’ve said it many times, and it’s no more true or real when we think about the events of Jan. 6. We are in a battle for the soul of America. A battle that — by the grace of God, and the goodness and greatness of this nation — we will win. Believe me, I know how difficult democracy is, and I’m crystal clear about the threats America faces.

“But I also know that our darkest days can lead to light and hope. From the death and destruction as Vice President referenced in Pearl Harbor can then triumph over the forces of fascism, from the brutality of Bloody Sunday and the Edmund Pettus Bridge came historic voting rights to this nation. So now let’s step up, write the next chapter in American history where Jan. 6 marks, not the end of democracy but the beginning of a renaissance of liberty and fair play.

“I did not seek this fight brought to this Capitol one year ago today. But I will not shrink from it either. I will stand in this breach. I will defend this nation. And I will allow no one to place a dagger at the throat of democracy. We will make sure the will of the people is heard. That the ballot prevails not violence. That authority in this nation will always be peacefully transferred. […]”

Biden Restores U.S. Aid to Palestinian Authority

On March 23, 2018, then-resident Trump signed into law the Taylor Force Act, whose purpose was to stop American economic aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) until the PA would agree to stop paying stipends through the Palestinian Authority Martyr’s Fund to individuals who committed acts of terrorism and to the families of terrorists who died during the commission of their atrocities. As Islam scholar Robert Spencer notes, “This system of stipends to imprisoned terrorists and to the families of terrorists who were killed while carrying out their attacks is known, pejoratively and correctly, as the ‘Pay-For-Slay’ program.” As a result of the Taylor Act, several cuts were made to the U.S. aid given to the PA, with the last one made on August 24, 2018, ending all direct American aid to the PA.

Also in August 2018, the United States ended all aid to the United Nations Relief & Works Agency (UNRWA), cutting off $300 million. That ending of aid to UNRWA was made for two reasons. First, it was a way to express American outrage with the UNRWA’s use of schoolbooks that remain full of anti-Semitic passages, despite repeated, unfulfilled promises by UNRWA that it would be revising, or replacing, those texts. Second, the Trump Administration was expressing its frustration with the unique treatment of “Palestinian refugee” status as inheritable, which has meant that the UNRWA rolls constantly expand. In ending its aid, the Trump administration was putting pressure on UNRWA to halt this inexorable increase in the number of “Palestinian refugees.”

In January 2022, the Biden Administration announced a payment of $99 million to UNRWA. This was in addition to the $318 million previously given to UNRWA in the 2021 fiscal year. In short, more than $400 million had thus been provided by Washington to UNRWA, even though the anti-Semitic texts used in its schools remained unchanged. Biden also renewed hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinian Authority, even though the Pay-For-Slay program remained in force – and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas insisted that he would give his “last penny” to keep that program running no matter what the Americans thought. The Biden Administration tried to claim that this renewed financial assistance to the PA did not violate the Taylor Force Act because it was pf a “humanitarian” nature. But as Robert Spencer noted: “[T]his is absurd; there was no exception made in the Taylor Force Act for ‘humanitarian’ aid. Besides, money is fungible. If you give the PA $300 million in ‘humanitarian aid,’ that will simply free up other sums it possesses to spend on such things as anti-Israel propaganda and, especially, on the Pay-For-Slay program that rewards past, and incentivizes future, acts of terrorism.”

Biden’s Speech About the Need for Voting Rights Legislation

On January 11, 2021, President Biden went to Georgia to deliver the following remarks:

In our lives and the lives of our nation — the life of our nation, there are moments so stark that they divide all that came before from everything that followed.  They stop time.  They rip away the trivial from the essential.  And they force us to confront hard truths about ourselves, about our institutions, and about our democracy. In the words of Scripture, they remind us to “hate evil, love good, and establish justice in the gate.”

Last week, [Vice] President Harris and I stood in the United States Capitol to observe one of those “before and after” moments in American history: January 6th insurrection on the citadel of our democracy. Today, we come to Atlanta — the cradle of civil rights — to make clear what must come after that dreadful day when a dagger was literally held at the throat of American democracy. […] [T]he violent mob of January 6th, 2021, empowered and encouraged by a defeated former president, sought to win through violence what he had lost at the ballot box, to impose the will of the mob, to overturn a free and fair election, and, for the first time — the first time in American history, they — to stop the peaceful transfer of power.

They failed.  They failed.  (Applause.)  But democracy’s — but democracy’s visi- — victory was not certain, nor is democracy’s future. That’s why we’re here today to stand against the forces in America that value power over principle, forces that attempted a coup — a coup against the legally expressed will of the American people — by sowing doubt, inventing charges of fraud, and seeking to steal the 2020 election from the people. They want chaos to reign.  We want the people to rule. […] The battle for the soul of America is not over.  We must stand strong and stand together to make sure January 6th marks not the end of democracy but the beginning of a renaissance of our democracy. […]

Black Americans were denied full citizenship and voting rights until 1965.  Women were denied the right to vote until just 100 years ago.  The United States Supreme Court, in recent years, has weakened the Voting Rights Act.  And now the defeated former president and his supporters use the Big Lie about the 2020 election to fuel torrent and torment and anti-voting laws — new laws designed to suppress your vote, to subvert our elections.

Here in Georgia, for years, you’ve done the hard work of democracy: registering voters, educating voters, getting voters to the polls.  You’ve built a broad coalition of voters: Black, white, Latino, Asian American, urban, suburban, rural, working class, and middle class. […] And what’s been the reaction of Republicans in Georgia?  Choose the wrong way, the undemocratic way.  To them, too many people voting in a democracy is a problem.  So they’re putting up obstacles.

For example, voting by mail is a safe and convenient way to get more people to vote, so they’re making it harder for you to vote by mail. […]

Dropping your ballots off to secure drop boxes — it’s safe, it’s convenient, and you get more people to vote.  So they’re limiting the number of drop boxes and the hours you can use them.

Taking away the options has a predictable effect: longer lines at the polls, lines that can last for hours.  You’ve seen it with your own eyes.  People get tired and they get hungry.

When the Bible teaches us to feed the hungry and give water to the thirsty, the new Georgia law actually makes it illegal — think of this — I mean, it’s 2020, and now ’22, going into that election — it makes it illegal to bring your neighbors, your fellow voters food or water while they wait in line to vote.  What in the hell — heck are we talking about? I mean, think about it. That’s not America.  That’s what it looks like when they suppress the right to vote.

And here’s how they plan to subvert the election: The Georgia Republican Party, the state legislature has now given itself the power to make it easier for partisan actors — their cronies — to remove local election officials. […] Remember what the defeated former president said to the highest-ranking election official — a Republican — in this state?  He said, quote, “I just want to find 11,780 votes.” […]

[W]ith this new law in Georgia, his loyal- — his loyalists will be placed in charge of state elections. What is that going to mean?  Well, the chances for chaos and subversion are even greater as partisans seek the result they want — no matter what the voters have said, no matter what the count.  The votes of nearly 5 million Georgians will be up for grabs if that law holds.

It’s not just here in Georgia.  Last year alone, 19 states not proposed but enacted 34 laws attacking voting rights.  There were nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of state legislatures tried to pass.  And now, Republican legislators in several states have already announced plans to escalate the onslaught this year. Their endgame?  To turn the will of the voters into a mere suggestion — something states can respect or ignore.

Jim Crow 2.0 is about two insidious things: voter suppression and election subversion.  It’s no longer about who gets to vote; it’s about making it harder to vote.  It’s about who gets to count the vote and whether your vote counts at all. It’s not hyperbole; this is a fact. […]

[T]oday, we call on Congress to get done what history will judge: Pass the Freedom to Vote Act.  Pass it now — which would prevent voter suppression so that here in Georgia there’s full access to voting by mail, there are enough drop boxes during enough hours so that you can bring food and water as well to people waiting in line. The Freedom to Vote Act takes on election subversion to protect nonpartisan electors [election] officials, who are doing their job, from intimidation and interference. It would get dark money out of politics, create fairer district maps and ending partisan gerrymandering.

Look, it’s also time to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

I’ve been having these quiet conversations with the members of Congress for the last two months. […] Folks, it’ll restore the strength of the Voting Rights Act of ’65 — the one President Johnson signed after John Lewis was beaten, nearly killed on Bloody Sunday, only to have the Supreme Court weaken it multiple times over the past decade. Restoring the Voting Rights Act would mean the Justice Department can stop discriminatory laws before they go into effect — before they go into effect. […]

Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America’s right to vote.  Not one.  Not one. […] I believe that the threat to our democracy is so grave that we must find a way to pass these voting rights bills, debate them, vote. Let the majority prevail. And if that bare minimum is blocked, we have no option but to change the Senate rules, including getting rid of the filibuster for this. […] While the state legislatures’ assault on voting rights is simple — all you need in your House and Senate is a pure majority — in the United States Senate, it takes a supermajority: 60 votes, even to get a vote — instead of 50 — to protect the right to vote.

State legislatures can pass anti-voting laws with simple majorities.  If they can do that, then the United States Senate should be able to protect voting rights by a simple majority. Today I’m making it clear: To protect our democracy, I support changing the Senate rules, whichever way they need to be changed — to prevent a minority of senators from blocking action on voting rights. When it comes to protecting majority rule in America, the majority should rule in the United States Senate.

Biden’s Approval Rating Plummets

On January 12, 2022, the Post Millennial reported:

A new Quinnipiac University poll released on [January 12] revealed that Joe Biden’s approval rating sits at just 33 percent, with 53 percent of American disapproving of his job performance. This is down from the last time Quinnipiac asked the question in November, when 36 percent of Americans approved, while 53 percent disapproved.

Of those that disapproved, a whopping 43 percent said they strongly disapprove of his job performance. 17 percent said they strongly approve, 16 percent said they somewhat approve, and 10 percent said they somewhat disapprove.

A notable amount of Democrats have flipped their stance of Biden’s job approval, with 75 percent approving and 14 percent disapproving in the recent poll. In November’s poll, 87 percent [of Democrats] approved, and 7 percent disapproved. […]

Just 34 percent said they approved of Biden’s handling of the economy, while 57 percent said they disapproved. […]

35 percent said they approved of his foreign policy response, with 54 percent saying they disapproved.

And in COVID-19 response, 39 percent said they approved of Biden’s handling, while 55 percent said they disapproved.

Supreme Court Blocks Vaccine Mandate for Businesses

On January 13, 2022, NationalReview.com reported:

The Supreme Court temporarily suspended the Biden administration’s vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers on [January 13], but allowed the administration’s vaccine mandate for health-care workers at facilities that receive federal funding to go into effect.

In the first case, the conservative majority on the bench ruled in a 6-3 vote to block President Biden’s vaccine requirement for private businesses pending further review by the court. Biden had argued that the order derived authority from the 1971 Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), which empowered the federal government to regulate workplace health and safety standards.

However, the majority opinion, issued without an author, argued that the mandate exceeded its statutory authority and raised separation of powers concerns “in the absence of clear delegation from Congress.” It was inappropriate for the Biden administration to invoke the Emergency Temporary Standard provision of the law since it applies to very “narrow circumstances,” the Court said.

“Applicants are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Secretary lacked authority to impose the mandate. Administrative agencies are creatures of statute. They accordingly possess only the authority that Congress has provided,” the Court’s unsigned decision read.

Specifically, the Labor Secretary must demonstrate that “employees are exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful or from new hazards” and that the “emergency standard is necessary to protect employees from such danger.” The Court said the risk posed by Covid in the workplace failed to meet these prongs.

“Congress has nowhere clearly assigned so much power to OSHA,” Justice Gorsuch wrote in a concurring opinion joined by Justice Thomas and Justice Alito.

Moreover, the Court declared that the OSHA mandate was far too broad in treating all commercial sectors the same. While the order includes narrow exceptions for remote workers or those who work exclusively outdoors, “the regulation otherwise operates as a blunt instrument,” the court said. “It draws no distinctions based on industry or risk of exposure to COVID–19.”

While the court acknowledged the testing exemption for employees who choose not to get vaccinated, it noted that employers are not required to offer this option, leaving some employees in the vulnerable position of getting fired with no recourse.

The Court touched on the medical liberty question, calling the mandate an “encroachment into the lives and health of employees” and noting that, unlike rules for workplace dangers on the job, vaccination is irreversible.

OSHA, the Court said, was charged with regulating “occupational” hazards, exclusive to the workplace, for the safety and health of employees rather than public health generally, “which falls out of OSHA’s sphere of expertise.”

In order for the mandate to be permissible, given that Covid presents universal risk regardless of the setting, the Court said it would need to target occupation-specific risks related to the virus in certain industries, such as research laboratories. […]

In the second case dealing with the vaccine requirement for healthcare workers at facilities that receive federal funding, the Court dismissed the statutory objections and allowed the mandate to be enacted, since those institutions fall within the government’s regulatory domain. “We agree with the Government that the Secretary’s rule falls within the authorities that Congress has conferred upon him,” the Court’s majority opinion read.

Congress granted the Secretary of Health and Human Services the power to “impose conditions on the receipt of Medicaid and Medicare funds” that for the health and safety of individuals who provide those services, the Court noted.

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Thomas, with Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Barrett joining in dissent, made a statutory argument that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is not authorized to prescribe something as specific as a vaccine mandate by its respective laws.

Regarding the Court’s ruling against a vaccine mandate for all businesses with more than 100 employees, President Biden said: “I am disappointed that the Supreme Court has chosen to block common-sense life-saving requirements for employees at large businesses that were grounded squarely in both science and the law.”

And regarding the Court’s decision to uphold Biden’s mandate requiring medical workers to get vaccinated, the president said: “Today’s decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the requirement for health care workers will save lives.”

Biden Exhorts the Press and Social Media to Censor “Misinformation and Disinformation” About COVID-19

On January 13, 2022, President Joe Biden pleaded with Americans to continue to battle coronavirus by wearing masks and getting vaccinated, boosters on the vaccinated, and he exhorted social media and media companies to censor posts that that contradicted government narratives on COVID-19, its transmission, and the efficacy of masks and vaccines.
“I make a special appeal to social media companies and media outlets,” he said, “please deal with the misinformation and disinformation that’s on your shows, it has to stop.”

Huge Increases in Producer Price Index & Inflation

On January 13, 2022, Breitbart.com reported:

Businesses saw the prices of goods they sell rise a record 9.7 percent in 2021, the fastest full-year increase in prices in records going back to 2010.

The Labor Department reported Thursday that its Producer Price Index rose two-tenths of a percentage point in December. That’s a slowdown from November, when prices rose one percent, and October, when prices rose six-tenths of a percentage point.

The 12-month increase in producer price inflation of 9.7 percent … rise was the fastest annual jump on record, far above the 0.8 percent increase in 2020 and the 1.4 percent rise in 2019.

The Producer Price Index measures prices from the point of view of sellers, in contrast with the better-0known Consumer Price Index’s focus on what households pay for goods and services they purchase. The two indexes tend to move in the same direction, although they can diverge from time to time. […]

The CPI rose seven percent from December 2020 to December 2021, the highest such inflation rate since 1982.

Core PPI inflation–which excludes food, energy, and trade services–rose 0.4 percent in December following a 0.8-percent increase in November. Core prices are up 6.9 percent since December 2020.

Current Measures of Inflation May Drastically Underestimate the Problem

On December 15, 2021, Marc E. Fitch reported the following in YankeeInstitute.org:

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that inflation in 2021 had hit 6.8 percent, a rate not seen since 1982, but, according to some economists, the reality may be much worse and that could leave senior citizens and others who rely on social security benefits in a tough spot.

That’s because the standard measurement for inflation – the CPI-U – has undergone various revisions in how inflation is calculated since the 1940s. The sixth and most recent comprehensive revision came in 1998, according to the BLS, but there have been numerous small changes over the years as well.

According to Investopedia, “For several years, there has been controversy about whether the CPI overstates or understates inflation, how it is measured, and whether it is an appropriate proxy for inflation,” noting that some critics see the current inflation measurement “as a purposeful manipulation that allows the U.S. to report a lower CPI,” and therefore report a healthier economy. […]

“Back in 1980, your CPI was 13.5 percent and had we been using the algorithm from 1980, we’d be looking at 14.5 percent today,” [said the Chief Economist for DataCore Partners, LLC, Donald Klepper-Smith]. […] It’s not measuring the cost of living anymore, it’s measuring the cost of surviving and barely, at that. The federal statistics we have on inflation aren’t adequately measuring inflation the way consumers are experiencing it.” […]

Klepper-Smith points to a website called John Williams’ Shadow Government Statistics, which is run by economist and consultant Walter “John” Williams and offers inflation measurements based on the algorithms used in both the 1980s and 1990s. According to Shadow Stats, if inflation today were measured by the same methods as it was in the 1980s, inflation would be closer to 15 percent. Even by the standards used in the 1990s, today’s inflation would be over ten percent. […]

The Social Security Administration calculates the cost-of-living adjustment for social security payments using the CPI-W, a slightly different measurement. This year’s COLA adjustment will be 5.9 percent, almost one percentage point lower than the CPI-U and far less than inflation if measured using older methods. Part of the issue stems from whether inflation should be measured by a cost of goods index (COGI) or a cost-of-living index (COLI), the difference between the two being whether CPI calculation should use a fixed basket of goods or allow for substitution. For instance, if the price of steak rises, consumers may substitute a less expensive form of meat. Under a COGI measurement, the price increase of steak would be still be used to calculate inflation. Under COLI, the steak can be substituted for cheaper ground beef or chicken.

Williams also points to a change in how inflation in housing is measured, moving away from calculating the rising cost of owning a home to calculating how much the rental cost for that same home rises – a measurement known as owners’ equivalent rent. Williams says this change alone knocked 1.5 percentage points off the CPI.

Biden Emphasizes the Importance of Eliminating the Senate Filibuster Rule & Passing Voting Rights/Election Reform Legislation

On January 14, 2022, President Biden spoke about the difficulty that Democrats would face in their effort to eliminate the Senate filibuster rule and then pass election-reform/voting rights legislation without a single Republican vote. “The honest-to-God answer is I don’t know whether we can get this done,” Biden told the press after leaving a meeting in which he exhorted Senate Democrats to dispense with the filibuster.

Added Biden: “If we miss this time and the state legislative bodies continue to change the law not as to who can vote but who gets to count the vote, count the vote, count the vote — it’s about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote. Who counts the vote. That’s what this is about, that’s what makes this so different from anything else we’ve ever done. I don’t know that we can get it done but I know one thing, as long as I have a breath in me, as long as I am in the White House, as long as I’m engaged at all, I’m going to be fighting to change the way these legislatures [are] moving.”

Biden then walked away without taking any follow-up questions.

Ambassador to Israel Vows Not to Visit Israeli Settlements

During his first interview with the Israeli media on January 14, 2022, Thomas R. Nides, the new U.S. ambassador to Israel who had never previously visited any of the Israeli settlements, was asked if he now planned to do so. “I absolutely will not,” he replied. According to The Times of Israel: “Nides’ comments represented a return to the pre-Trump era status quo when US ambassadors did not make visits to the settlements. Former president Donald Trump’s ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, changed that norm, making several visits to Israeli towns across the Green Line during his tenure as envoy.”“The Biden administration believes it must take care of the Palestinian people,” added Nides. “That is the difference between us and the Trump administration.”

Biden Announces Plan to Provide Taxpayer-Funded Legal Help for Illegal Aliens

On January 21, 2022, Axios.com reported that the Biden administration was preparing to launch, within the next 60 days, a new Legal Access at the Border (LAB) program — overseen by the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) — to help prepare illegal migrants in seven border towns for the experience of navigating their way through the American immigration system. The seven border towns were (1) San Diego and (2) Calexico, California; (3) Nogales, Arizona; and (4) El Paso, (5) Eagle Pass, (6) Laredo, and (7) Brownsville, Texas. Though the plan would not directly provide the migrants with attorneys, it would commission contractors to provide them with individual and group orientations, pro bono referrals, and options for remote legal services. The LAB program would target not only migrants attempting to illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border, but also those already in Border Patrol custody, in the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program, or otherwise in the midst of deportation proceedings.

Biden Says 2022 Elections Could Be “Illegitimate” if Democrat “Voting Rights” Bills Are Not Passed

At a January 19, 2022 press conference, President Biden was asked: “Speaking of voting rights legislation, if this isn’t passed, do you still believe the upcoming election will be fairly conducted and its results will be legitimate?”

He answered: “Well, it all depends on whether or not we’re able to make the case to the American people that some of this is being set up to try to alter the outcome of the election. … I think if, in fact — no matter how hard they make it for minorities to vote, I think you’re going to see them willing to stand in line and — and defy the attempt to keep them from being able to vote. I think you’re going to see the people who they’re trying to keep from being able to show up, showing up and making the sacrifice that needs to make in order to change the law back to what it should be.”

Another reporter later followed up with Biden viv-a-vis his remarks about the potential illegitimacy of the 2022 elections. Their exchange went as follows:

Reporter: “A moment ago, you were asked whether or not you believed that we would have free and fair elections in 2022 if some of these state legislatures reformed their voting protocols. You said that it depends. Do you — do you think that they would in any way be illegitimate?”

Biden: “Oh, yeah, I think it easily could be — be illegitimate. Imagine — imagine if, in fact, Trump has succeeded in convincing Pence to not count the votes.”

Reporter: “In regard to 2022, sir — the midterm elections.”

Biden: “Oh, 2022. I mean, imagine if those attempts to say that the count was not legit. You have to recount it and we’re not going to count — we’re going to discard the following votes. I mean, sure, but — I’m not going to say it’s going to be legit. It’s — the increase and the prospect of being illegitimate is in direct proportion to us not being able to get these — these reforms passed.”

Biden Says U.S. Response to a Possible Russian Invasion of Ukraine Might Be Milder if It Is Just a “Minor Incursion”

On January 19, 2022, President Biden had the following exchange with reporter Jen Epstein of Bloomberg News:

Epstein:   Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you.  Your top foreign policy advisors have warned that Russia is now ready to attack Ukraine. But there’s still little unity among European allies about what a package of sanctions against Moscow would look like. If the U.S. and NATO aren’t willing to put troops on the line to defend Ukraine and American allies can’t agree on a sanctions package, hasn’t the U.S. and the West lost nearly all of its leverage over Vladimir Putin? And given how ineffective sanctions have been in deterring Putin in the past, why should the threat of new sanctions give him pause?

Biden:  Well, because he’s never seen sanctions like the ones I promised will be imposed if he moves, number one.

Number two, we’re in a situation where Vladimir Putin is about to — we’ve had very frank discussions, Vladimir Putin and I.  And the idea that NATO is not going to be united, I don’t buy.  I’ve spoken to every major NATO leader.  We’ve had the NATO-Russian summit.  We’ve had other — the OSCE has met, et cetera.

And so, I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades.  And it depends on what it does.  It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.

But if they actually do what they’re capable of doing with the forces amassed on the border, it is going to be a disaster for Russia if they further ingra- — invade Ukraine, and that our allies and partners are ready to impose severe costs and significant harm on Russia and the Russian economy.

And, you know, we’re going to fortify our NATO Allies, I told him, on the eastern flank — if, in fact, he does invade.  We’re going to — I’ve already shipped over $600 million worth of sophisticated equipment, defensive equipment to the Ukrainians.

The cost of going into Ukraine, in terms of physical loss of life, for the Russians, they’ll — they’ll be able to prevail over time, but it’s going to be heavy, it’s going to be real, and it’s going to be consequential. […]

So, this is not all just a cakewalk for Russia. Militarily, they have overwhelming superiority, and on — as it relates to Ukraine.  But they’ll pay a stiff price — immediately, near term, medium term, and long term — if they do it.

Biden Predicts That Russia Will Invade Ukraine

On January 19, 2022, President Biden said he expected that President Vladimir Putin of Russia would order an invasion of Ukraine. Said Biden during a press conference: “Do I think he’ll test the West, test the United States and NATO, as significantly as he can? Yes, I think he will. But I think he will pay a serious and dear price for it that he doesn’t think now will cost him what it’s going to cost him. And I think he will regret having done it.”

China Again Flies Dozens of War Planes into Taiwan’s Air Defense Zone

On January 23, 2022, China, which has vowed to take control of Taiwan by force if necessary, flew 39 warplanes, including an H-6 bomber, into Taiwan’s south-western Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). According to DW.com, that region “is not the same as territorial airspace but instead is self-declared airspace that is monitored for national security purposes.” Similar prior incidents had occurred in October 2021, when China flew 56 aircraft into the ADIZ, and November 2021, when 27 Chinese aircraft entered the ADIZ.

ISIS Regaining Power During Biden Presidency

Soon after the terrorist group ISIS had (a) carried out a massive attack attempting to free members of its organization who were imprisoned in Syria, (b) carried out additional attacks against military forces, and (c) posted online videos of horrific beheadings, The New York Times on January 22, 2022 ran a story indicating that ISIS was quickly regaining territory in Iraq and Syria — after former President Trump had used the U.S. military to obliterate them in those places. Said the Times: “The fact that ISIS was able to mount these coordinated and sophisticated attacks in recent days shows that what had been believed to be disparate sleeper cells are re-emerging as a more serious threat.” Kawa Hassan, Middle East and North Africa director at the Stimson Center, put it this way: “It’s a wake-up call for regional players, for national players, that ISIS is not over, that the fight is not over. It shows the resilience of ISIS to strike back at the time and place of their choosing.”

The attacks also raised concerns that both ISIS and al-Qaeda were regrouping in Afghanistan following President Biden’s disastrous decision to hurriedly remove all U.S. troops from that country. The Associated Press reported:

“Speaking at the Pentagon, [Marine General Frank] McKenzie said it’s clear that al-Qaeda is attempting to rebuild its presence inside Afghanistan, which was the base from which it planned Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the United States. He said some militants are coming into the country through its porous borders, but it is hard for the U.S. to track numbers. […] McKenzie and other senior U.S. military and national security officials had said before the U.S. withdrawal that it would complicate efforts to keep a lid on the al-Qaeda threat, in part because of the loss of on-the-ground intelligence information and the absence of a U.S.-friendly government in Kabul. […] ‘We’re probably at about 1 or 2% of the capabilities we once had to look into Afghanistan,’ he said.”

Biden Pledges to Nominate a Black Woman to the Supreme Court to Replace the Retiring Stephen Breyer

On January 27, 2022, Biden — in response to 83-year-old Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer’s announcement that he planned to retire in early October — reiterated his campaign promise to appoint a black woman to the Court (as a replacement for Breyer). “The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity. And that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court,” said Biden. “It’s long overdue in my view. I made that commitment during the campaign for president, and I will keep that commitment.”

Reacting to Biden’s announcement, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley stated that the president’s stipulation that his nominee would be black and female, would be “unconstitutional” in other contexts. Turley had been consistent on this point for a long time. For example, when Biden had initially pledged during the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary to nominate a black woman to the Court whenever the first vacancy might arise, Turley wrote at the time:

“In his debate with Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden made two pledges to voters and asked his opponent to do the same to nominate only a black woman for the next open Supreme Court seat and to choose a woman as his vice president. Even with identity politics, the pledge to impose a gender and race requirement for the next Supreme Court nominee is as ironic as it is troubling. What Biden was declaring, and what Sanders wisely avoided, would effectively constitute discrimination in admission to the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Supreme Court has declared that such race or gender conditions are strictly unconstitutional for admission to public colleges.

“The pledges that Biden has made amount to this. No matter how qualified men or, in the case of the Supreme Court, women who are not black may be, he will not consider them as candidates. In the case of vice president, such gender discrimination would be allowed, as presidential candidates can select a running mate on any grounds and voters can decide if they approve. Justices, however, are lifetime appointees, and presidents have always been careful to state that, while they seek diversity among their nominees, they would appoint the most qualified person regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. But in a single declaration, Biden quickly dispensed with even the pretense of equal consideration.

“Imposing an absolute requirement that a nominee be a particular gender and race is effectively an affirmative action pledge. It is precisely what the Supreme Court already declared to be unconstitutional discrimination.”

Turley reiterated his position in a January 26, 2022 tweet that said: “Jen Psaki just reaffirmed that the President will only consider a black woman for the next nomination — a threshold gender and race condition that the Court itself has found unconstitutional for schools and unlawful for private businesses.”

Amid Rising Tensions Regarding Ukraine, Russia Cuts Off Key Gas Pipeline To Europe

On February 2, 2022 — amid rising tensions caused by Russia’s recent massing of troops on its border with Ukraine —  the Russian state-run firm Gazprom, which controls the westward flow of the Yamal-Europe pipeline’s liquified natural gas from Russia to Germany through Poland, stopped the flow of that gas, causing gas prices in Europe to spike significantly. At that time, Russia was in control of almost 46% of European gas imports.

More Police Were Killed in 2021 Than in Any Year Since 1995

On February 6, 2022, Fox News reported that 73 police officers across the U.S. had been intentionally killed in the line of duty in 2021 — the highest total for any calendar year since 1995, when the corresponding figure was 74. By way of comparison, on-the-job killings of police in recent years were: 46 in 2017; 56 in 2018; 48 in 2019; and 46 in 2020. “Additionally,” said Fox News, “ambush attacks against officers were up in 2021. LEOKA data shows that 32 officers were killed in an ambush or unprovoked attack in 2021, exceeding previous records dating back to at least 1987.”

Jason Johnson, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, offered the following explanation for the deadly new trend: “We believe it’s a combination … of the George Floyd protests — riots, if you will; a general feeling of a preference for less law enforcement; and less prosecution and less policing. Law enforcement officers have essentially been marginalized and demoralized and cast aside and encouraged not to enforce the law. And so we’ve seen massive jumps in the homicide rate in cities across America.” Johnson also stated that “a lot of leaders in [America’s] cities and leaders in Congress and leaders in the White House have really voiced a lack of respect for law enforcement officers.”

Biden Administration Waives Sanctions On Iran As Nuclear Deal Deadline Looms

On February 5, 2022, the Daily Caller reported:

“The Biden Administration has waived sanctions on Iran’s civilian nuclear program in a last-ditch effort to bring Tehran back into compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal, reversing the Trump administration’s decision to rescind it. The move will allow foreign countries and companies from Russia, China and Europe to cooperate with Iran in assisting the non-military parts of Iran’s nuclear program under the terms of the 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, according to The Times Of Israel.

“Behnam Ben Taleblu from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) told CNN that ‘issuing waivers to permit civil nuclear cooperation with Iran at a time when Iran is violating the JCPOA is a strategic mistake.’  Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez also expressed concern about returning to the JCPOA stating, ‘While the deal the U.S. and our partners are pursuing in Vienna would ostensibly seek to reverse technological advancements, the acquisition of knowledge is never reversible,’ he said, according to NBC News. ‘At this point, we seriously have to ask, What exactly are we trying to salvage?‘”

Biden Frees the Would-Be 20th Hijacker of 9/11, As Well As Another Al-Qaeda Operative

Then-26-year-old Al-Qaeda operative Mohammed al Kahtani was slated to be the fifth hijacker aboard United Airlines Flight 93, which took off from from Newark International Airport in New Jersey on the morning of September 11, 2021 and later crashed into a field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, killing all 44 people on board. But Kahtani was never able to participate in the murderous action because U.S. immigration officials denied his attempt to enter the country in August 2001, citing the fact that he had only a one-way ticket and little money, could not speak English, and was unable to satisfactorily explain what he intended to do in the United States. Not long after Kahtani was deported to Dubai, U.S. troops arrested and brought him to Guantanamo Bay in 2002. Kahtani was then detained in Guantanamo for the next 20 years, until the Biden Administration in February 2022 announced its plan to transfer him — perhaps as soon as March — to Saudi Arabia, where he would be placed in a “Saudi rehabilitation program” that would provide him with “comprehensive mental health care.”

In February 2022, the Times of Israel described the atmosphere at the luxurious Saudi rehab facility as follows:

“With its indoor swimming pool, sun-splashed patios and liveried staff, the Saudi complex has the trappings of a five-star resort, but it is actually a rehab center — for violent jihadists. Riyadh’s Mohammed bin Nayef Counseling and Care Center, a cushy halfway house between prison and freedom, spotlights a controversial Saudi strategy for tackling homegrown extremists. […] Overseen by clerics and psychologists, it works to prevent convicts who have served their sentences from returning to jihad, through what it calls religious counselling and ideological detoxification. […] The convicts are housed in a series of low-slung buildings, outfitted with large-screen televisions and king-size beds, all framed by manicured lawns. Many linked to groups such as Al-Qaeda and the Taliban walk around freely in flowing white robes, and have access to a spacious gym, a banquet hall and furnished apartments reserved for visits from spouses.”

A few years earlier, in November 2016, senior al Qaeda operative Ghassan Abdullah al-Sharbi had told a Guantanamo parole board that the Saudi government was encouraging previously released prisoners to rejoin the jihad at that very same Mohammed bin Nayef Counseling and Care Center. As the New York Post reported at the time:

“Al-Sharbi dropped a bombshell on the Gitmo parole board at his hearing earlier this year when he informed members that the Saudi kingdom was playing them for suckers. ‘You guys want to send me back to Saudi Arabia because you believe there is a de-radicalization program on the surface. True. You are 100 percent right, there is a strong — externally, a strong — de-radicalization program. But make no mistake, underneath there is a hidden radicalization program,’ al-Sharbi added. ‘There is a very hidden strong — way stronger in magnitude — broader in financing, in all that.’”

In February 2022, it was reported that this same Ghassan Abdullah al-Sharbi would soon be released by the Biden Administration. According to The New York Times:

“A U.S. government review panel on Thursday [February 10] approved the release with security guarantees of a Saudi prisoner at Guantánamo Bay who was captured in Pakistan and held as a suspected bomb maker. Mr. al-Sharbi, 47, was of particular interest to the United States because, according to a U.S. intelligence profile, he had taken flight school courses in Phoenix with two men who would become hijackers in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. For a time, he was charged with ‘providing material support for terrorism’ for allegedly helping to build car-bomb detonators in the Punjab region of Pakistan that were to be shipped to Afghanistan.”

Biden Administration Plans to Fund Crack Pipe Distribution to Advance “Racial Equity”

On February 7, 2022, The Washington Free Beacon reported:

“The Biden administration is set to fund the distribution of crack pipes to drug addicts as part of its plan to advance ‘racial equity.’  The $30 million grant program, which … will begin in May, will provide funds to nonprofits and local governments to help make drug use safer for addicts. Included in the grant, which is overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services, are funds for ‘smoking kits/supplies.’  A spokesman for the agency told the Washington Free Beacon that these kits will provide pipes for users to smoke crack cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, and ‘any illicit substance.’

“HHS said the kits aim to reduce the risk of infection when smoking substances with glass pipes, which can lead to infections through cuts and sores. Applicants for the grants are prioritized if they treat a majority of ‘underserved communities,’ including African Americans and ‘LGBTQ+ persons,’ as established under President Joe Biden’s executive order on ‘advancing racial equity.’”

Biden Condemns Florida Bill That Seeks to Prevent Instruction on Sexuality & Gender in Early Grades

In February 2022, the Florida legislature was considering a bill designed to forbid instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity, and transgenderism to children in kindergarten through third grade. Democrat and leftwing opponents of the legislation dubbed it the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, falsely implying that the bill sought to forbid the use of the word “gay” in classrooms for younger children. President Biden opposed the legislation from the start, denouncing it as a “hateful bill.” On February 8, 2022, he tweeted: “I want every member of the LGBTQI+ community — especially the kids who will be impacted by this hateful bill — to know that you are loved and accepted just as you are. I have your back, and my Administration will continue to fight for the protections and safety you deserve.” The Florida legislature eventually passed the bill on March 8, 2022.

Inflation Continues to Soar

On February 15, 2022, Breitbart.com reported:

“Prices jumped one percent in January, far more than expected, data from the Department of Labor showed Tuesday. The Producer Price Index, which measures what businesses are paid for goods and services, rose by one percent in January, twice what economists were expecting. Compared with January of 2021, the index is up 9.7 percent, down slightly from the 9.8 percent year-over-year gain recorded for December.

“Excluding food, energy, and trade services, prices rose 0.4 percent from December. They were up 6.9 percent compared with January of 2021, matching the December gain.

“Economists had expected prices to rise by 0.5 percent on a monthly basis and 9.2 percent annually.

“December’s inflation was revised higher. Initially reported as a 0.2 percent gain on a monthly basis and 9.7 percent annually, the Department of Labor said on Tuesday that prices in December rose 0.4 percent compared with the prior month and 9.8 percent compared with 12-months earlier.”

Biden Administration Supports Citizenship for Immigrants Dependent on Welfare

In February 2022, it was reported that President Biden’s deputies were rewriting the Trump-era “public charge” regulations that had been designed to make it more difficult for welfare-reliant immigrants to gain U.S. citizenship. “Under this [new] proposed rule, we will return to the historical understanding of the term ‘public charge’ and [migrant] individuals will not be penalized for choosing to access the [taxpayer-funded] health benefits and other supplemental government services available to them,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said on February 17, 2022.

According to Breitbart.com, “The new rule cannot eliminate Congress’s Public Charge law. So it creates many exceptions that essentially make the law meaningless. For example, the draft regulation exempts many welfare programs from the definition of ‘public charge’”:

DHS proposes that it not consider noncash benefits such as food and nutrition assistance programs including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Children’s Health Insurance Program, most Medicaid benefits (except for long-term institutionalization at government expense), housing benefits, and transportation vouchers. DHS would also not consider disaster assistance received under the Stafford Act; pandemic assistance; benefits received via a tax credit or deduction; or Social Security, government pensions, or other earned benefits.

The draft regulation also exempted many categories of migrants from the public charge regulations:

By law, many categories of noncitizens are exempt from the public charge ground of inadmissibility and would not be subject to the proposed rule. Some of these categories are refugees, asylees, noncitizens applying for or re-registering for temporary protected status (TPS), special immigration juveniles, T and U nonimmigrants, and self-petitioners under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

Planning to Terminate Title 42

On February 17, 2022, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and his DHS completed the publication of a document titled “DHS Southwest Border Mass Irregular Migration Contingency Plan,” which outlined a so-called “February Strategy” that planned to discontinue “Title 42.” Title 42 was a Trump-era policy requiring the swift deportation of illegal migrants who were deemed to be public health risks in light of the COVID-19 epidemic — without allowing them an opportunity to apply for asylum. The new “February Strategy” would be founded upon a highly anticipated Centers for Disease Control (CDC) statement, which would be formally issued on March 12, announcing that due to “a public health reassessment,” the CDC Director was terminating Title 42.

The details of Mayorkas’ “February Strategy” were leaked to Breitbart Texas on April 4, 2022. In a section titled “Secretary’s Intent,” the document said: “The purpose of this plan is to describe a proactive approach that humanely prevents and responds to surges in irregular migration across the U.S. [southern border]. This will be done while ensuring that migrants can apply for any form of relief or protection [emphasis added] for which they may be eligible, including asylum, withholding of removal, and protection from removal under the regulations implementing United States obligations under the Convention Against Torture.”

Mayorkas in the document made clear his intention to limit, as much as possible, the use of detention and deportation in U.S. dealings with illegal migrants — even though federal law generally prohibited the entry of foreign workers and economic migrants into the United States. The document outlined ways in which border officials could maximize the entry of migrants: “Current pathways to removal [deportations] will be limited. Component use of broadscale release mechanisms (i.e., Own Recognizance [OR] with issuance of a Notice to Appear [NTA], or parole and Alternatives to Detention [ATD]) with administrative tools are necessary to ensure humane and efficient treatment of migrants.”

In a section titled “Focus on Whole of Western Hemisphere,” the document said: “The Plan is based on the idea that transnational problems require transnational solutions. The intent of this Plan is to provide the structure necessary to coordinate international public policies to prevent and respond to irregular migration while simultaneously seeking to improve economic and social conditions and provide opportunities for advancement to populations across the hemisphere to reduce the compulsion to migrate by: (l) Developing human talent. (2) Creating more and better jobs.”

The document mentioned housing a handful of times, but only in the context of housing large numbers of migrants in the U.S.  On page 28, for instance, the “Strategy” directed border officials to “coordinate occupational safety and health reviews of facilities housing ICE detainees and residents to mitigate the spread of infectious diseases.” On page 95, the report stated that the plan “requires that minors in INS custody must be housed in facilities that meet certain standards, including state standards for housing and care of dependent children.” Moreover, Mayorkas’ plan pledged to offer migrants the “opportunity to seek asylum, withholding of removal or deferral of removal before an Immigration Judge.”

Making no mention of the fact that federal law required the detention of migrants until such time as their asylum claims could be heard, Mayorkas’ plan instead used the word “detention” to describe an undesirable measure that should be avoided at all costs. For example, the plan noted that migrants could be detained if they happened to arrive in the U.S. at a pace faster than the rate at which officials could release them into the job market: “If the EOIR [Executive Office for Immigration Review] is unable to increase the number of removal proceedings for migrants during a land migration surge, it will contribute to overcrowding at CBP Office of Field Operations and Border Patrol temporary holding facilities and ICE holding and detention facilities.”

Oil Prices Rise Sharply After Arab Oil Ministers Again Reject Biden’s Request to Open Oil Taps

On February 21, 2022, the price of Brent crude oil, the global standard, rose by nearly 3.34 percent to $96.64 — bringing the total increase since New Year’s Day to 24 percent. This latest hike occurred after Arab oil producers agreed not to increase their production of oil by as much as the Biden Administration was requesting.

Biden’s Response to Russian Invasion of Ukraine

On February 21, 2022, Russian President Vladimir Putin — declaring eastern Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk provinces in the Donbass region to be people’s republics and independent regions — ordered Russian troops into those areas for what he characterized as a “peacekeeping” mission. “Today, the leadership of the [Donetsk People’s Republic] and [Luhansk People’s Republic] received appeals to recognize their sovereignty in connection with the military aggression of the Ukrainian authorities, massive shelling of the territory of Donbas, as a result of which the civilian population suffers,” the Kremlin said in a statement. “With all this in mind, the President of Russia said that he intended to sign a corresponding decree in the near future.”

These provinces had been controlled by Russian-leaning Ukrainian separatists who have served as Russia’s proxies since 2014, but to the rest of the world they were still considered to be situated within Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders.

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres denounced the invasion as “a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and inconsistent with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.” But Putin did not care what the UN Secretary General or the international community as a whole thought. In his blistering speech on February 21st, the Russian president claimed that all of Ukraine belongs to Russia and should never have been created as a separate country in the first place.

President Biden, who, prior to the invasion, had spoken as if very severe sanctions would be ready to go into force as soon as the first Russian troops and tanks crossed the Ukrainian border. All that Biden did right away, however, was to issue an executive order barring Americans from doing business in the Donetsk and Luhansk areas.

It took hours before a senior Biden administration official even used the word “invasion” to describe what was already underway. At first, the administration tried to downplay Russia’s military move into Ukraine, reminiscent of Biden’s attempt during a January press conference to draw a distinction between a minor “incursion” versus a full scale “invasion.”

German Chancellor Olaf Sholz took the initiative and suspended certification of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline on February 22. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki then tweeted that the Biden administration welcomed Germany’s announcement and said that the administration would be “following up” with its own measures. That is precisely what Biden ended up doing, following Chancellor Sholz’s lead.

Biden also issued the following remarks — taking no questions from the press after he had finished speaking — on February 22, 2022:

Yesterday, Vladimir Putin recognized two regions of Ukraine as independent states and he bizarrely asserted that these regions are no longer part of Ukraine and their sovereign territory.  To put it simply, Russia just announced that it is carving out a big chunk of Ukraine.

Last night, Putin authorized Russian forces to deploy into the region — these regions.  Today, he asserted that these regions are — actually extend deeper than the two areas he recognized, claiming large areas currently under the jurisdiction of the Ukraine government.

He’s setting up a rationale to take more territory by force, in my view.  And if we listen to his speech last night — and many of you did, I know — he’s — he’s setting up a rationale to go much further.

This is the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, as he indicated and asked permission to be able to do from his Duma.

So, let’s begin to — so, I’m going to begin to impose sanctions in response, far beyond the steps we and our Allies and partners implemented in 2014.  And if Russia goes further with this invasion, we stand prepared to go further as — with sanction.

Who in the Lord’s name does Putin think gives him the right to declare new so-called countries on territory that belonged to his neighbors?  This is a flagrant violation of international law, and it demands a firm response from the international community.

Over the last few months, we have coordinated closely with our NATO Allies and partners in Europe and around the world to prepare that response.  We’ve said all along and I’ve told Putin to his face a mon- — a month a- — more than a month ago that we would act together and the moment Russia moved against Ukraine.

Russia has now undeniably moved against Ukraine by declaring these independent states.

So, today, I’m announcing the first tranche of sanctions to impose costs on Russia in response to their actions yesterday.  These have been closely coordinated with our Allies and partners, and we’ll continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates.

We’re implementing full blocking sanctions on two large Russian financial institutions: V.E.B. and their military bank.

We’re implementing comprehensive sanctions on Russian sovereign debt.  That means we’ve cut off Russia’s government from Western financing.  It can no longer raise money from the West and cannot trade in its new debt on our markets or European markets either.

Starting tomorrow [today] and continuing in the days ahead, we will also impose sanctions on Russia’s elites and their family members.  They share in the corrupt gains of the Kremlin policies and should share in the pain as well.

And because of Russia’s actions, we’ve worked with Germany to ensure Nord Stream 2 will not — as I promised — will not move forward.

As Russia contemplates its next move, we have our next move prepared as well.  Russia will pay an even steeper price if it continues its aggression, including additional sanctions.

The United States will continue to provide defensive assistance to Ukraine in the meantime.  And we’ll continue to reinforce and reassure our NATO Allies.

Today, in response to Russia’s admission that it will not withdraw its forces from Belarus, I have authorized additional movements of U.S. forces and equipment already stationed in Europe to strengthen our Baltic Allies — Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

Let me be clear: These are totally defensive moves on our part.  We have no intention of fighting Russia.  We want to send an unmistakable message, though, that the United States, together with our Allies, will defend every inch of NATO territory and abide by the commitments we made to NATO.

We still believe that Russia is poised to go much further in launching a massive military attack against Ukraine.  I hope I’m wrong about that — hope we’re wrong about that.  But Russia has only escalated its threat against the rest of Ukrainian territory, including major cities and including the capital city of Kyiv. […]

I’m going to take robust action and make sure the pain of our sanctions is targeted at the Russian economy, not ours.

We are closely monitoring energy supplies for any disruption.  We’re executing a plan in coordination with major oil-producing consumers and producers toward a collective investment to secure stability and global energy supplies.

This will be — this will blunt gas prices.  I want to limit the pain the American people are feeling at the gas pump.  This is critical to me.

Biden did not immediately impose any sanctions directly on Putin himself and his family members. Neither did he sanction the large Russian bank, Sberbank, which had been accused of transferring several million dollars from monies deposited in Ukraine to separatists fighting for Russian occupation. Nor did he impose export controls to cut off Russia from sophisticated technologies it needed to keep its warplanes flying and its communications systems working. Neither did he immediately require any firms using U.S. equipment or software in order to make technological products overseas, to obtain a U.S. license before shipping them to any Russian companies that support Russia’s military-industrial complex even indirectly. Nor did he prohibit such shipments altogether.

Remembering Biden’s Campaign Remarks Regarding Trump & Ukraine in 2019

At the 2019 DNC Women’s Leadership Forum Conference, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden speculated on the potential damage that a Trump re-election could cause for Ukraine. “It’s going to take a hell of a lot of work to make up for all the damage he’s done internationally and nationally,” Biden said of Trump. “His network of thugs and co-conspiracists are going to continue to try and undermine our democracy in the meantime. Imagine what he can do in another year. Imagine what can happen in Ukraine.”

The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Continues

Early in the morning of February 24 (Ukrainian time), Putin broadened the theater of war in Ukraine. He declared a “special military operation” in the country on the pretext of helping the people of Donbass. It was the equivalent of a declaration of war on all of Ukraine, punctuated by explosions that were heard in Ukraine’s capital, Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities, in the aftermath of Putin’s “special military operation” order.

Putin pulled the trigger for a full-scale invasion at about the same time that Secretary General Guterres pleaded with Putin, during the second emergency session in a week of the UN Security Council, to step back from the brink of war. “I have only one thing to say from the bottom of my heart: President Putin,” the Secretary General said, “stop your troops from attacking Ukraine. Give peace a chance. Too many people have already died.”

The White House issued a statement on February 23 condemning Russia’s “unprovoked and unjustified attack on Ukraine” and warning Russia of severe consequences.

Additional Sanctions Against Russia

On February 24, 2022, The Hill reported:

President Biden on Thursday [February 24] said the U.S. would sanction major Russian banks and impose export controls on Russia to curtail Russian high-tech imports as part of a coordinated effort with allies to penalize the Kremlin for its military attack against Ukraine.

In remarks from the East Room of the White House, Biden said the sanctions would target Russian banks holding a combined $1 trillion in assets, including Russia’s two largest financial institutions, Sberbank and VTB Bank. He said the U.S. would also impose sanctions on additional Russian elites with links to the Kremlin.

Biden condemned Russian President Vladimir Putin for ordering the attack against Ukraine and said that his actions would cost Russia “dearly.” “Putin is the aggressor. Putin chose this war, and now he and his country will bear the consequences,” Biden said. “Putin will be a pariah on the international stage,” Biden said later.

The Treasury Department said in a release that the administration would impose sanctions on VTB and Sberbank, cutting them off from processing payments through the U.S. financial system.

The Biden administration is also imposing sanctions on three other Russian financial institutions: Otkritie, Novikom and Sovcom.

The sanctions also target 10 Russian individuals, including those close to Putin and elites working in the financial sector, according to the Treasury Department.

The export controls will restrict Russia’s ability to import sensitive U.S. technology – like semiconductors, lasers, and sensors – and particularly target Russia’s defense, aviation, and maritime sectors, according to a White House fact sheet. Biden said that the restrictions, coupled with actions by European allies, would cut off more than half of Russia’s high-tech imports.

“It will be a major hit to Putin’s long-term strategic ambitions,” Biden said.

However, the latest round of sanctions did not move to kick Russia out of the SWIFT international banking system, despite pleas from Ukraine and some members of Congress. (Emphasis added)

“I will not be diplomatic on this. Everyone who now doubts whether Russia should be banned from SWIFT has to understand that the blood of innocent Ukrainian men, women and children will be on their hands too,” Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, tweeted in advance of Biden’s remarks. “BAN RUSSIA FROM SWIFT.”

Biden cited concerns among some European allies about taking that step but argued the penalties being put in place were severe enough to make a difference. He indicated that kicking Russia out of the system could be a possibility in the future.

“The sanctions we imposed exceed SWIFT,” Biden said in response to a reporter’s question about excluding the penalty. “The sanctions we imposed exceed anything that’s ever been done. The sanctions we imposed have generated two-thirds of the world joining us. They are profound sanctions. Let’s have a conversation in another month or so to see if they’re working.”

Nor did the sanctions package target the Russian oil or natural gas industry, which are major drivers of the Russian economy. European countries are dependent on Russia for gas. (Emphasis added)

White House deputy national security adviser Daleep Singh told reporters at a briefing later Thursday that the administration intentionally scoped the sanctions to deliver a severe impact on the Russian economy while minimizing impact on U.S. and European allies.

He said the administration would not do anything that causes an “unintended disruption” in global energy markets, including the flow of gas from Russia to the world.

The Biden administration also announced plans to impose sanctions on individuals and entities in Belarus, accusing the nation of supporting and facilitating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Weakness of Biden’s Sanctions Against Russia

On February 24, 2022, National Review pointed out the weakness of Biden’s sanctions:

“The sanctions long promised by the West in the event of an invasion should be imposed. Any hesitation to impose maximum sanctions on the Russian regime will be viewed by Putin as utter weakness. Make no mistake, these sanctions cannot hope to force Moscow to withdraw from Ukraine. But the United States, the United Kingdom, the EU, and our Asian allies should move swiftly to sanction Russian banks, individual Russian oligarchs and elites, and any business or organization that could contribute to the Russian war machine. Britain has said it will seize the assets and real estate of Russian oligarchs in London if Putin invades Ukraine. Every Western country should follow Britain’s lead.

“Unfortunately, we’re already showing weakness. In his press conference this afternoon, President Biden confirmed that we wouldn’t yet cut Russia off from SWIFT — a system that facilitates payments in international finance and banking — because some of the Europeans are not on board. Biden claims that the already-announced sanctions are of ‘maybe more consequence’ than removing Russia from SWIFT. Plus, the president insists, ‘it’s always an option’ to remove the Russians from the payment system later.

“Moreover, the Western allies won’t yet seek to sanction Putin personally.

“Why not? What possible purpose is there in waiting? Putin has already undertaken a full-scale invasion of a European country. Hundreds, likely thousands, are already dead. Delay only implies that what Putin has done already isn’t all that bad.

“Does the administration believe that additional sanctions will somehow change Putin’s behavior? That seems unlikely at best. The West can’t even agree to ban the Russians from competing in the Eurovision music contest. This is weakness, not strength.”

On February 25, 2022, AP reporter Matt Lee said to Biden political advisor and State Department spokesman Ned Price: “[You look] at the list of stuff that’s exempted: You start with the JCPOA [the Iran nuclear deal], you go to climate, you go to COVID, you go to anything having to do with consular affairs, you go to anything that the Seventh Floor thinks is significant enough, which could be anything…. Every international organization is exempted from this … from the ICAO, to the Arctic Council, to the OSCE … What has been banned or halted because of this directive?” Price replied evasively and could not provide a specific answer to Lee’s question.

Alexander Vindman Says U.S. Could Have Done Much More to Help Ukraine Prepare for Potential Russian Invasion

In a February 24, 2022 opinion piece in Atlantic magazine, Alexander Vindman, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and the former director for European affairs for the National Security Council, wrote the following:

“Russia has launched another invasion of Ukraine. Countless Ukrainians and Russians will die. Countless more will flee. The economic and geopolitical second- and third-order effects of this war will not be fully understood for some time. The idea that this war can be quarantined will prove to be a pipe dream.

“This moment might be surreal were it not for the overt warning signs. The Kremlin built up Russian forces along Ukraine’s borders even as it issued maximalist demands and shut down diplomatic off-ramps. Long-term geopolitical trends—such as Ukraine’s decisive pivot to the West and Russia’s irredentism—shaped the contours of conflict. Meanwhile, the Biden administration progressively raised the alarm about the Kremlin’s likely course of action. But even if this conflict was foreseeable, that does not mean it was inevitable. […]

“The paths to prevention were not taken. For instance, early in December [2021], President Biden openly acknowledged that he would not send American troops to fight in Ukraine, thus removing any possibility of strategic ambiguity. The U.S. could have refused to elucidate its security commitments to Ukraine, much as it has done vis-à-vis Taiwan for decades. The implicit threat of U.S. and NATO intervention would have forced Putin to contend with the risks of further escalation. Instead, Biden granted Putin a free hand.

“The U.S. also refused to provide advanced weapon systems to Ukraine, such as Patriot anti-aircraft missiles or Harpoon anti-ship missiles, because it determined that Ukraine’s armed forces were not sophisticated enough to handle them. Although Ukraine would have struggled to realize the full potential of these systems, they could nonetheless have affected Russia’s calculus for military operations. And for those who might argue that Russia would have preempted the shipment of weaponry by invading, I would contend that if invasion was already the predicted outcome, what was there to lose?

“All the while, the Biden administration failed to pair diplomatic overtures with sufficiently powerful, credible military pressure, perhaps over fears of a bilateral conflict with Russia. These fears were misplaced. I can say from my significant experience dealing with the highest levels of Russia’s military leadership that it has no interest in a bilateral confrontation with the U.S.  Russian leaders have zero desire for nuclear war, and they understand that they would inevitably lose in a conventional war. However, Russia excels at compelling the U.S. to self-deter.

“Besides military pressure, the U.S. also failed to consider graduated response options once Putin’s preferred course of action had been established. The U.S. could have imposed targeted sanctions on Russian leadership or introduced long-overdue anti-corruption legislation to signal the impending costs of reinvasion to the Kremlin. By choosing to view these options through an all-or-nothing lens, the U.S. unnecessarily constrained its response. Biden’s administration was reactive when it should have been proactive. Over and over, the president’s longtime senior advisers seem to have recommended narrow, low-risk policy options, and these backfired.

“Unlike during the Cold War, when the U.S. successfully deterred the Soviets for decades, the U.S. has now implicitly recognized Russia’s sphere of influence and perhaps undermined its own role as the most powerful global protector of democracy. This war marks the single biggest reversal of trends in the Western liberal order in the 21st century. Long-term tremors have culminated in a seismic shift that has injured both Western credibility and the foundations of international treaties. Overnight, the geopolitical outlook has become significantly worse for U.S. national-security interests, and now the U.S. must manage the fallout accordingly.”

America Continues to Import Oil from Russia

Despite the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. continued to buy a large amount of Russian oil in order to meet its domestic energy needs. As HotAir.com reported on February 25, 2022: “The most recent figures from the US Energy Information Administration are from last November. In that month we bought 17,855,000 barrels of oil from Russia, slightly more than we purchased from Saudi Arabia. Russia is our third biggest supplier after Canada and Mexico. Those nearly 18 million barrels of oil in November represented about 7% of the total the US imported that month.”

China, North Korea, & Russia Express Unity

On February 25, 2022, Chinese President Xi Jinping  offered his “support” to Russian President Vladimir Putin as Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine. The next day, Xi sent a message to the Supreme Leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-Un, saying that the Chinese government was prepared to achieve a “common understanding” with North Korean leadership and build “a new situation” between the two nations. Kim, in turn, stated that North Korea and China were “frustrating the undisguised hostile policy and military threat of the U.S. and its satellite forces by strengthening the bilateral strategic cooperation and unity.” Moreover, Kim emphasized his desire to “more firmly consolidate the [North Korea]-China relationship into the invincible one.”

Russia Felt Emboldened to Invade Ukraine Because of Biden’s Anti-American Energy Policies

On February 26, 2022, political analyst James Pinkerton wrote:

Why did the Russians invade Ukraine? One reason is that they could afford to. Vladimir Putin’s neo-Tsarist empire has piled up an estimated $631 billion in currency reserves. That’s a lot of mad money, or should we say, conquest money.

And a principal reason that Putin has all that wealth is that the Biden administration has been helping him, however inadvertently.

How did Joe Biden help Putin? Biden imposed energy scarcity on this country, thereby opening up more of the world market for the Russians to sell their energy. And because energy is scarcer, it’s more expensive—all good news for Putin and his military.

Yes, sadly, the Trump-era strategy of American energy dominance gave way to Biden’s plan for energy shrinkage. All in the name, of course, of combating “climate change.”

Indeed, the 46th president’s sickly energy strategy brings to mind that of one his predecessors. That would be the 39th president, Democrat Jimmy Carter, who, like Biden, also presided over energy shrinkage, higher prices, and resulting strategic weakness. […]

The Russians [today] have a lot of oil and gas reserves, the eighth largest in the world, and they’re selling as much as they can; the country is the world’s third-largest producer of oil, and the second-largest producer of natural gas. In fact, in 2021, Russia exported $165 billion of oil and natural gas. That dollar total was up substantially from the year before because prices were zooming, in part because of the economic snap-back from Covid-19, and also because of the Biden administration’s policy of unilateral disarmament—more like a universal clampdown—on oil and gas production. We all know that Biden cancelled the Keystone XL Pipeline on his very first day in office, and in the year since, the Heritage Foundation counts another dozen Biden anti-energy policies.

So with less production in the U.S. (and the prospect of much less, investors don’t just think short-term, they think long-term) oil and natural gas prices surged in 2021, further bulging up the Russian treasury. In fact, energy exports account for more than a third of Russia’s national budget.

The embattled Ukrainians have noticed the financial source of Russian aggression.

The Ukrainians have been saying all along that if the civilized world wants to deter Putin, it will have to hit him where he lives—it will have to focus on energy, not little things that the Russian autocrat doesn’t really care about. “We need real sanctions, not just some problems for Putin’s friends,” Ukrainian lawmaker Oleksiy Goncharenko tweeted on February 24. “We need an embargo on Russian gas and oil because every barrel of Russian oil and every cubic meter of Russian gas is now full of the blood of Ukrainians.” That’s a good way to put it: Russian hydrocarbons equals Ukrainian blood. 

Yet stupefyingly, for all the Biden administration’s huffing and puffing about the Russian invasion, it has not—repeat, not—sought to sanction, or in any way limit, Russian energy exports. As White House Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh said on February 24, “To be clear: Our sanctions are not designed to cause any disruption to the current flow of energy from Russia to the world.”

Why not?Why this sissy posture? Because, in a word, the Europeans—our allies in any possible action against Putinian aggression—are dependent on Russian energy; Putin’s pipelines supply about 35 percent of Europe’s natural gas.

And why are the Europeans so energy dependent? Well, mostly because they have chosen to go ecological; Europeans, inspired by visions of green goodness, have reduced their own carbon-extraction, and, at the same time, two European countries—Belgium and Germany—are shutting down their nuclear power plants.

Instead, the Europeans plan to power their economy on wind and solar.(Although in the meantime, on their way to the green promised land, they say they’re using Russian gas as “a bridge.”)Yet this green new deal is not working, because wind and solar simply lack the needed ergs.In the words of energy expert Rupert Darwall, “The European Union is a paper empire.”

Such weakness has strategic implications, including right now with the Ukraine crisis; in Darwall’s words: “The dilemma for the West: you can’t win a geopolitical conflict lasting years or decades with an economy powered intermittently by wind turbines and solar panels . . . Geopolitical realism requires energy realism.” […]

One final irony here is that for all the greens’ precious fantasies, as a matter of reality, their policies are making the atmospheric carbon dioxide issue worse. Nobody knows how much Russian military adventurism has contributed to atmospheric CO2, because the Russians have yet to file any environmental impact statements and have not allowed either [Greta] Thunberg or [John] Kerry to do an assessment. And yet we do know that the Russian T-72 tank gets about .8 miles to the gallon.And the mileage of a MiG-35 fighter jet is even worse. […]

What Reagan Did

When Ronald Reagan was inaugurated on January 20, 1981, he inherited a weak U.S. energy position, palsied by price controls. Carter had not imposed those controls, and yet he championed them, even as he sought to pile yet more regulation and taxation on the energy industry.

Yet paradoxically, during Carter’s presidency, oil prices had gone up, from less than $14 a barrel on the day Carter was sworn in, January 20, 1977, to $38 a barrel on the day he left office, four years later. Why? Because while U.S. production was shrinking in response to price controls, worldwide demand was surging, and there were no price controls on foreign oil. So it was simple: less supply + more demand = higher prices.

One of the big beneficiaries of these higher prices was the Soviet Union—the old Russian Empire with a red flag—which, then as now, possessed huge energy reserves and a hunger for foreign conquest. Engorged with petro-wealth, the Soviets/Russians expanded during the Carter years, in Cuba, in Africa, and, most fatefully, in Afghanistan. So long as America was weak, Moscow could be strong.

Yet the strategic balance started to change on January 29, 1981, when President Reagan decontrolled oil prices. At the time, Democrats wailed; Sen. Howard Metzenbaum of Ohio called Reagan’s move a “tragedy.” And yet predictably, in the wake of decontrol, American production increased. Indeed, as world production rose as well, oil prices fell dramatically during Reagan’s presidency; by 1986, oil was as low as $10 a barrel.

This plummet in oil prices was catastrophic for the Soviet Union. As Russian journalist Georgy Manaev explains, “For the USSR’s economy—already accustomed to exorbitant incomes from its oil, this was a death blow. In 1986 alone, the USSR lost more than $20 billion (approximately 7.5% of the USSR’s annual income).” As economist Andrew Nikiforuk further explains, “When oil production, and its all-important revenues peaked, the Soviet Union lost the energy mojo that glued its empire together.”

We get the picture: If the Russians were riding high on high oil prices, then the way to bring them down was to cut the price of oil. And the way to do that was with more production. And that’s what Reagan did. …

Putin Threatens Nuclear War

According to CBC, on February 27, 2022, Russian President Putin “ordered the Russian defence minister and the chief of the military’s general staff to put the nuclear deterrent forces in a ‘special regime of combat duty,’ a heightened level of readiness.” Putin explained, “Western countries aren’t only taking unfriendly actions against our country in the economic sphere, but top officials from leading NATO members made aggressive statements regarding our country.” Mark Levin Says the U.S. Should Arm Ukraine and Flood the Market with American Oil, in Order to Hit Russia’s Economy

Mark Levin Exhorts the U.S. to Arm Ukraine and to Flood the World Marketplace with Oil in Order to Cripple Russia’s Economy

Shortly after President Biden’s State of the Union speech on March 1, 2022, conservative broadcaster Mark Levin said:

The Ukrainians need more weapons. The President of Ukraine has said it over and over again, Zelensky, what he needs. They need to take out their helicopters. They need to take out these tanks.

They’re not getting the weapons they need, and they need more. That doesn’t mean the Ukrainians won’t fight and fight hard. Obviously, they are. It doesn’t mean the Russians have been the most competent army on the face of the earth, they’re not. But this government, our government has been shameful. You talk about oil. I’ve said last week and I’ll say it again. Joe Biden has put more sanctions on our oil companies and he has on the Russian oil companies. What kind of fool does that?

He said nothing about it tonight, and he wasn’t going to. The fact of the matter is they were going to be [sending] MIG-29s, old Russian jets that, that Ukrainian pilots are going to get in there used to flying those jets. They don’t have to be trained because that’s the same kind of jets they had. Poland was going to give them to him some of the other countries all of a sudden it stopped. Well, what happened? I worry about our, our feckless buffoons at the State Department pulling that back.

These [Ukrainian] people want to fight but they can’t fight with their bare hands and rifles and pistols. I mean, they can, but that’s not going to win. If we would give them what they need. If we would have given them what they need. This would be a real serious setback for the Russians. I hear people saying they had hoped to take Kyiv sooner and this and that and the rest. Let me tell you something, when you’re there in Kyiv and you’re being fired upon, you’re not you don’t care if it’s Saturday, Wednesday or Thursday, these people need our support.

So yes, prayer, yes, support them. Now, give them the damn arms that they need to defend themselves before it’s too late. That’s number one. Number two, this guy Biden gets up there and he says buy American, buy American, buy American and the best line of the night came from my wife when she said, “Buy American? You’re not even letting us buy American oil. We’re buying Russian oil, we’re buying Saudi oil, we’re buying everybody …

To Re-Enter Iran Deal, Biden Prepares to Pay Up to $11 Billion in Ransom for Four Hostages

On March 2, 2022, The New York Sun reported:

A new deal with the ayatollahs would include a staggering hostage ransom sum totaling as much as 25 percent of Tehran’s entire annual budget.

Shaping up as an even larger capitulation than the articles of appeasement struck with Iran in 2015, the Biden administration could sign in Vienna as early as Monday a new deal with the ayatollahs that would include a staggering hostage ransom sum totaling as much as 25 percent of Tehran’s entire annual budget. […]

Reuters reported recently that President Biden’s envoy to the talks, Robert Malley, offered to unfreeze $7 billion from Iranian funds held in South Korean banks in exchange for the release of four Americans held in Iran. Sources tell the Sun that similar frozen accounts in Japan, Iraq, and China would be added to the pot, raising the ante to as much as $11 billion. That works out to more than $2.5 billion a hostage.

Iran’s annual budget is estimated at $40 billion. […]

Last year Mr. Malley said release of the four Americans held in Iran was not part of the Vienna JCPOA renewal talks. Yet pressure from former hostages, including Barry Rosen, who went on a hunger strike in Vienna, apparently changed Mr. Malley’s mind.

Large ransom totals for hostages and other avenues of funding are far from the only concessions America reportedly plans to give the mullahs. A former Iran hand at the State Department, Gabriel Noronha, detailed some such giveaways today on Twitter.

“My former career @StateDept, NSC, and EU colleagues are so concerned with the concessions being made by @RobMalley in Vienna that they’ve allowed me to publish some details of the coming deal in the hopes that Congress will act to stop the capitulation,” Mr. Noronha’s Tweet said.

In his long Twitter thread, Mr. Noronha reports that Mr. Malley has agreed to drop sanctions against top mullahs, including Supreme Leader Khamenei, as well as remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from the State Department’s list of terror organizations.

Altogether, sanctions on 112 Iranian persons and entities that were imposed by Mr. Trump in executive orders would be removed, according to Mr. Noronha. Other concessions are likely to be explained away by the administration as a reversal of Mr. Trump’s alleged bad Iran policy.  […]

Iran, meanwhile, would pay little if anything in return for those concessions. A return to the original 2015 deal would allow it to wait for sunset clauses that gradually phase out limitations on Tehran’s nuclear program, and remove all restrictions by 2031 — i.e., less than a decade from now. Tehran even demands a lowering of inspections of its nuclear sites.

Biden Releases Oil from Strategic Petroleum Reserve

On March 1, 2022, President Biden authorized the release of 30 million barrels of oil from America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as a way to increase the global oil supply that had been disrupted by Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine. This release of the oil was intended as a response to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “weaponization of oil and gas,” said White House press secretary Jen Psaki. “Today’s announcement is another example of partners around the world condemning Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine and working together to address the impact of President Putin’s war of choice,” Psaki added.

At that time, the United States was using approximately 18 million barrels of petroleum per day. Thus, Biden’s action would serve to meet the country’s petroleum needs for about 20 hours.

Asserting That the Way to Reduce Dependency on Foreign Oil Is to Switch to Renewable Energy

On March 6, 2022, Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki tweeted: “The only way to protect US over the long term is to become energy independent. That is why the President is so focused on deploying clean energy technologies that don’t require fossil fuels bought and sold on the global market, which will always be vulnerable to bad actors.” This message was a continuation of the same message Psaki had delivered on numerous previous occasions. For example:

  • On November 12, 2021, Psaki stated that the U.S. needs to decrease its reliance on foreign oil by transitioning to renewable energy, not by increasing domestic oil production: “We need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, on oil in general, and we need to look at other ways of having energy in our country and others. We’ve seen over the last week or so… a number of European countries are recognizing they need to reduce their own reliance on Russian oil.”
  • That same day, Psaki also said: “Our view is that the rise in gas prices over the long term makes an even stronger case for doubling down our investment and our focus on clean energy options so we are not relying on the fluctuations and OPEC and their willingness to put more supply and meet the demand in the market.”

Kamala Harris’ Remarks at “Clean Transit” Event, Saying That Transition to Renewable Energy Is the Best Way to Address Rising Oil Prices

At a March 7, 2022 “Clean Transit” event, Harris told those in attendance:

“And again … all over our country, communities that have been left out and left behind, and where pollution from heavy-duty trucks and buses has made the air poisonous to breathe. And this pollution is also, of course, accelerating the climate crisis, threatening the future not just of our communities but of the entire world.  And this is not how it has to be.

“Imagine a future: The freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and parents to work; imagine all the heavy-duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow — imagine that they produced zero emissions. Well, you all imagined it.  That’s why we’re here today — because we have the ability to see what can be, unburdened by what has been, and then to make the possible actually happen.”

Asserting That Americans Can Avoid High Gas Prices by Buying Electric Vehicles & Using Public Transit

On March 7, 2022 — as gasoline prices in the U.S. were skyrocketing against the backdrop of Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine — Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg advised Americans to purchase electric vehicles. “Clean transportation can bring significant cost savings for the American people as well,” he said at an “Accelerating Clean Transportation” event. “Last month, we announced a $5 billion investment to build a nationwide electric vehicle charging network for the people from rural to suburban to urban communities can all benefit from the gas savings of driving an EV.”

As of November 2021, the average price of an electric vehicle was $56,437 — 6.2 percent higher than it had been in November 2020.

Buttigieg also touted the Biden administration’s newly announced $3.7 billion boost in funding for public transportation, including an investment in fleets of electric buses. “Transit gets riders where they need to be efficiently and affordably with far less pollution to thrive,” said Buttigieg. “And it’s even good for drivers of cars, because it means less congestion and traffic on our roads. And transit is even better when it’s clean transit with modern electric buses that don’t pollute at all.”

Biden Administration Denounces Florida Legislation to Bar Gender Ideology and Sexually Charged Discussions from K-3 Classrooms

During a March 8, 2022 press briefing, White House press secretary Jen Psaki addressed reporters’ questions about Florida’s House Bill 1557 — known as the Parental Rights in Education Bill and dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill by left-wing activists — which had recently passed by a 22 – 17 vote in the Florida legislature. The bill called for preventing teachers from bringing discussions of gender ideology and sexuality into K-3 classrooms. It also stipulated that schools would no longer be permitted to keep secrets about children’s “gender identity exploration” from their parents. One reporter asked Psaki: “In 1994, when many of us in this room were in school, President Biden [then Senator] actually voted for a much broader restriction that bans federal funds from being used for ‘the promotion of homosexuality.’ Is that a positive lifestyle alternative? Why did he do that? And can you describe how his thinking has evolved over the years?”

Psaki replied that Biden’s opinions from 1994 were now irrelevant, and said: “Well, I think that you’ve seen the President speak passionately about his view that a bill like this, a bill that would discriminate against families, against kids, put these kids in a position of not getting the support they need at a time when that’s exactly what they need.” Characterizing the bill as “a form of bullying” that was “horrific,” Psaki added:

“I think the most important question now is why are Florida leaders deciding they need to discriminate against kids who are members of the LGBTQI community. What prompts them to do that? Is it meanness? Is it wanting to make kids have more difficult times in school and their communities? I would pose that question to them and we can talk about it more tomorrow if you get an answer…. I think what’s important to note here is how outspoken the President has been against discrimination against kids, against members of the LGBTQI+ community. And what we’re looking at here is a bill that would propagate misinformed, hateful policies and impact children.”

Biden Announces U.S. Will Stop Buying Russian Oil, & He Condemns “Putin’s Price Hike” on Gasoline

On March 8, 2022, President Biden announced that the U.S. would now ban oil imports from Russia — just days after his administration had argued against such a ban. “We will not be part of subsidizing Putin’s war,” Biden said. Warning Americans to expect even higher gas prices as a result of this decision, he added: “I said defending freedom is going to cost.” Biden also stated: “I’m going to do everything I can to minimize Putin’s price hike here at home.”

Biden Releases “20th Hijacker” of 9/11

On March 8, 2022, the Daily Wire reported that the Biden Administration had sent 46-year-old Mohammad Mani Ahmad al-Qahtani — an al-Qaeda-trained jihadist who, according to Reuters, “sought unsuccessfully to enter the United States on Aug. 4, 2001 to take part in the Sept. 11 attacks” — back to his homeland of Saudi Arabia after spending 20 years in the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. Said the U.S. Department of Defense in a March 7 press release: “On June 9, 2021, the Periodic Review Board process determined that law of war detention of Mohammad Mani Ahmad al-Qahtani was no longer necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the national security of the United States. Therefore, the PRB recommended that al-Qahtani be repatriated to his native country of Saudi Arabia, subject to security and humane treatment assurances.” NBC News reported that al-Qahtani “will receive treatment at a psychiatric facility” in his homeland.

Biden Considers Trying to Import Oil from Iran and Venezuela

On March 8, 2022, The Hill reported that the Biden administration was considering trying to purchase more oil from Iran and Venezuela, in order to make up for the discontinuance of oil imports from Russia.

Saudi & UAE Leaders Decline Calls With Biden During Ukraine Crisis

On March 8, 2022, The Wall Street Journal reported:

“The White House unsuccessfully tried to arrange calls between President Biden and the de facto leaders of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as the U.S. was working to build international support for Ukraine and contain a surge in oil prices, said Middle East and U.S. officials. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the U.A.E.’s Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al Nahyan both declined U.S. requests to speak to Mr. Biden in recent weeks, the officials said, as Saudi and Emirati officials have become more vocal in recent weeks in their criticism of American policy in the Gulf.

“The Saudis have signaled that their relationship with Washington has deteriorated under the Biden administration, and they want more support for their intervention in Yemen’s civil war, help with their own civilian nuclear program as Iran’s moves ahead, and legal immunity for Prince Mohammed in the U.S., Saudi officials said. The crown prince faces multiple lawsuits in the U.S., including over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

“The Emiratis share Saudi concerns about the restrained U.S. response to recent missile strikes by Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen against the U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia, officials said. Both governments are also concerned about the revival of the Iran nuclear deal, which doesn’t address other security concerns of theirs and has entered the final stages of negotiations in recent weeks.

“The White House has worked to repair relations with two key Middle Eastern countries it needs on its side as oil prices push over $130 a barrel for the first time in almost 14 years. Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E. are the only two major oil producers that can pump millions of more barrels of oil—a capacity that, if used, could help calm the crude market at a time when American gasoline prices are at high levels.”

Inflation Reaches 7.9 Percent

On March 10, 2022, Breitbart.com reported: “Inflation climbed to another four-decade high in February with prices expected to push even higher on the back of soaring energy prices following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The Department of Labor said that the consumer price index rose 7.9 percent compared with a year ago. Prices were up 0.8 compared with the prior month. This is the ninth straight month of inflation above 5 percent. Prices rose at an annual rate of 7.5 percent in January, jumping 0.6 percent from December.”

Biden Falsely Claims That His Climate Agenda Is Not Hurting Domestic Oil Production

On March 9, 2022, columnist Katie Pavlich wrote the following analysis:

During remarks at the White House Tuesday, President Joe Biden claimed his domestic climate agenda is not contributing to an increase in oil and gas prices for American consumers. “It’s simply not true that my administration or policies are holding back domestic energy production. That’s simply not true,” Biden said. “In the United States, 90 percent of onshore oil production takes place on land that isn’t owned by the federal government. And of the remaining 10 percent that occurs on federal land, the oil and gas industry has millions of acres leased.  They have 9,000 permits to drill now. They could be drilling right now, yesterday, last week, last year. They have 9,000 to drill onshore that are already approved. So let me be clear — let me be clear: They are not using them for production now. That’s their decision. These are the facts. We should be honest about the facts.”

“Loosening environmental regulations or pulling back clean energy investment won’t — let me explain — won’t — will not lower energy prices for families. But transforming our economy to run on electric vehicles powered by clean energy with tax credits to help American families winterize their homes and use less energy, that will — that will help,” he continued.

But his claims are easily proved false.

First, Biden’s claim [that] oil companies are choosing not to produce on permits already approved onshore in missing context. It isn’t that simple and Biden knows it. Shortly after Biden’s remarks, Mack Energy Corporation Director of Government Affairs Claire Chase explained on Fox News. [Click here for video.]

The Wall Street Journal is also debunking this claim. “Companies have to obtain additional permits for rights of way to access leases and build pipelines to transport fuel. This has become harder under the Biden Administration…companies must build up a sufficient inventory of permits before they can contract rigs because of the regulatory difficulties of operating on federal land,” the [Wall Street JournalEditorial Board writes. “It takes 140 days or so for the feds to approve a drilling permit versus two [days] for the state of Texas. The Administration has halted onshore lease sales. Producers are developing leases more slowly since they don’t know when more will be available. Offshore leases were snapped up at a November auction because companies expect it might be the last one.”

Second, President Joe Biden shut down the Keystone XL pipeline within hours of taking office on January 20, 2021. He did so after lobbying from climate groups. When completed, the pipeline would have carried 700,000 barrels of oil across the U.S. each day. He also stopped exploration in ANWR.

And third, current regulations being implemented on behalf of climate activists are hindering the oil and gas industry and causing prices to rise. The week Russia invaded Ukraine, the Biden Administration froze new leases. From CNBC: “The Biden administration is delaying decisions on new oil and gas leases and permits after a Louisiana federal judge blocked officials from using higher cost estimates of climate change. The leasing pause is an unintended result of the Feb. 11 decision by U.S. District Judge James Cain, who sided with a group [of] GOP-led states and argued that the Biden administration’s attempt to raise the real cost of climate change would hike energy costs and hurt state revenues from energy production. One of the most significant and unintended outcomes of the ruling is the government’s pause on new oil and gas leases and permits to drill on federal lands and waters. Lease sales in states across the U.S. West, including Montana and Wyoming, are now delayed.”

Meanwhile the White House, as Biden indicated during his remarks, will continue to pursue a climate agenda that drowns oil and gas companies in regulation with a goal of making the industry extinct. White House officials, Press Secretary Jen Psaki included, continue to claim putting pipelines back online or back into construction would take too long to have an impact on prices now.

How Biden/Democrat Environmental Policies Caused the New Oil Crisis & Subjected Western Allies to Continued Dependence on Russian Oil

On March 9, 2022, conservative columnist Ben Shapiro wrote the following opinion piece:

This week, as the Russian invasion of Ukraine dragged on, gas prices in America soared to their highest levels since 2008, increasing over 57 cents in just one month. In parts of the United States, gas at the pump costs in excess of $7 per gallon.

The answer to this challenge is obvious: The United States ought to open the drilling floodgates. In 2019, net imports of crude oil and finished products were exceeded by American exports of such products for the first time on record. That was due to the massive increase in American production thanks to fracking over the course of the prior decade. This did not mean that the United States had stopped importing crude oil. But as of 2019, we were importing some 3.8 million barrels of crude oil per day, radically down from over 10 million in 2005. More production, generally speaking, means less dependence.

And that matters, as we’re now seeing. Europe, which is far more dependent on foreign oil than the United States, has seen its energy prices skyrocket since the Russian invasion. That’s why Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced, “Europe has deliberately exempted energy supplies from Russia from sanctions. Supplying Europe with energy for heat generation, mobility, electricity supply and industry cannot be secured in any other way at the moment.” U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed: “I think there are different dependencies in different countries, and we have to be mindful of that.”

So now would be an excellent time for the United States to grab muscular leadership of the world energy markets. Instead, the Biden administration — which opted upon taking office to undercut the oil and gas industry and radically subsidize inefficient “green energy” production — has decided to seek energy aid from some of the world’s worst dictatorships. This week, the Biden administration sent emissaries to the Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro in an attempt to increase oil imports from the socialist hellhole. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said, “The purpose of the trip that was taken by administration officials was to discuss a range of issues, including certainly energy security.”

Meanwhile, Juan Guaido, leader of the Venezuelan opposition, was left out in the cold. “It is foolish to think that Maduro will quit Russia,” he quite logically explained. “This is a mistake. To buy oil from Maduro is the same as buying oil from Putin.”

But this is the point: For the international Left, dependency on oil-driven authoritarian states is preferable to energy independence. It allows Left-wing leaders the privilege of appeasing their environmentalist base while at the same time keeping energy prices low. Carbon-based emissions are too hideous to be considered so long as they’re being produced on American or European soil — but we’re perfectly willing to subsidize Russian President Vladimir Putin, Maduro and the Iranian ayatollahs to exploit the environment and enrich themselves while promoting tyranny at home and abroad, so long as Greta Thunberg isn’t disappointed in us.

And so we continue to promote the abject idiocy of Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, who recommended to those suffering from high gas prices that they just shell out for an electric vehicle. We continue to nod along to the stupidity of Psaki, who agreed that the solution to $7-a-gallon gas was “getting the whole country off of fossil fuels.” Then we import our energy from the world’s worst despots.

Opposition to oil and gas development has always been the privilege of rich countries; we simply outsourced the pollution and environmental degradation elsewhere. But as it turns out, in the end, we all pay the price for our willingness to pay off autocrats just so we can temporarily pretend that we did our bit for Greenpeace.

Biden Administration Blames Russia for Record-High Gas Prices, Coining “#PutinPriceHike”

The Biden Administration continued to blame Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine for record-high gas prices in the United States. During remarks from the White House on March 8, 2022, President Biden stated: “Putin’s war is already hurting American families at the gas pump since Putin began his military buildup on Ukrainian borders. And with this action, it’s going to go up further. I’m going to do everything I can to minimize Putin’s price hike here at home and coordination with our partners.” “Americans have rallied to support the Ukrainian people and made it clear we will not be part of subsidizing Putin’s war,” Biden added.

When a reporter on March 8 asked Biden if he had a message for the American people regarding gas prices, he replied: “They’re going to go up.” When he was then asked what he planned to do about the situation, the president answered: “Can’t do much right now. Russia is responsible.”

Biden also said that this “crisis” was a “stark reminder” that, in order to “protect our economy over the long term,” the United States would need “to become energy independent.”

How Biden Nixed the Deal to Send MiGs to Ukraine

On March 10, 2022, Politico.com reported:

A three-way fighter-jet deal to bolster Ukraine’s defenses against Russia is dead — just five days after the White House first revealed an openness to making it work.

With Kyiv begging U.S. officials for more military support, the prospect of Ukraine reaping a windfall of MiG fighter jets caught the world’s attention this past week as the country fights back Russia’s invading forces. But after a dizzying series of public statements, diplomatic messaging and blunt offers to swap the Russian-made planes for American aircraft, it all fell apart.

The saga that started 11 days ago with an errant comment by a top European Union diplomat ended unceremoniously when the chief Pentagon spokesperson and the head of the U.S. European Command separately declared Wednesday that the U.S. wouldn’t take part in an agreement to give warplanes to Poland after it sends its fleet to Ukraine. “We do not support the transfer of the fighters to the Ukrainian air force at this time and have no desire to see them in our custody either,” John Kirby told reporters, conveying the main sentiment of a Wednesday phone call between Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and his Polish counterpart. He added that the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence community assessed [that] the warplanes wouldn’t materially improve Ukraine’s chances, but instead would escalate the prospects of drawing NATO directly into the fight.

Officials in Kyiv, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a weekend Zoom call with U.S. lawmakers, have pressed hard to acquire European fighter jets, claiming the enhanced airpower would help them inflict further damage on Russian forces. Videos posted to social media during the two weeks of fighting have shown the invading army massed in large, slow columns bottlenecked on roads, where Ukrainian-operated Turkish drones and ground troops with Javelin missiles have turned hundreds of Russian vehicles into burning husks.

But skeptics inside the Biden administration pushed back on the idea of green-lighting the transfer of Poland’s MiG-29 fighters to Ukraine, and President Joe Biden sided with those skeptics, three U.S. officials said.

“POTUS will do what the military advises here and the advice now is not to do this and instead send the Ukrainian government more things they can make good use of,” a senior administration official told POLITICO. Ukraine has “many planes they already don’t fly much because of Russian air defense.” The official added that it’s “not clear what sending more planes achieves.”

The list of objections is long, from the logistics of getting as many as 28 fighter planes over the border into Ukraine to the stickier issue of flying fighter jets from a NATO country into a war zone, which some officials thought would make the alliance more of a participant in the fight than it already is. The administration considers that overt support as more offensive than the anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles they’re flowing into Ukraine from Poland and Romania.

The transfer might have been possible if the deal was kept under wraps, but that became impossible after Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign affairs and security policy chief, declared unequivocally to reporters on Feb. 27 that the bloc would provide Ukraine with fighter jets. The announcement came as a shock to many, U.S. and European officials said, including aides in Eastern European capitals who hoped to keep the transfer quiet.

But the Ukrainian government heard the proposal and ran with it, producing infographics claiming they were about to receive 70 used Russian fighter jets from Poland, Slovakia and Bulgaria. A Ukrainian government official told POLITICO that Ukrainian pilots had even traveled to Poland to wrap up the deal and bring the planes back over the border.

Yet Borrell’s bloc, much less the countries actually tasked with supplying these jets, had never agreed to this plan.

The deal was seemingly scuttled on March 2 by Polish President Andrzej Duda, who declared flatly that Polish jets would not enter Ukrainian airspace. The Slovakian and Bulgarian governments told POLITICO they weren’t going to ship any of their MiGs to Ukraine either.

Then things started getting weird.

On Saturday, POLITICO reported that the White House was mulling an audacious three-way deal: Poland would send the MiG-29s to Ukraine, and the U.S. would send F-16s to Poland to replace what Warsaw would give away.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken confirmed those talks the following day on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.” Poland has a “green light” to send its warplanes, he said. “In fact, we’re talking with our Polish friends right now about what we might be able to do to backfill their needs if, in fact, they choose to provide these fighter jets to the Ukrainians.” “We’re in very active discussions with them about that,” he added.

Five U.S. officials said there was general agreement within the administration that Washington should work with Warsaw to support Ukraine. But staffers from the Pentagon and intelligence community opposed the three-way plan, namely because they feared the move would drag NATO — and thus the U.S. — into a direct confrontation with Russia. Additionally, the Pentagon voiced concerns that the F-16s required to backfill Poland would need extensive downgrading so as to not potentially compromise highly classified avionics systems installed on those planes.

Biden, per three U.S. officials, agreed with the cautious Pentagon and intelligence view, in part over concerns that Russia would see America openly helping NATO send fighter jets into Ukraine as an escalation. [Emphasis added]

However, the White House made clear to Poland the U.S. wouldn’t oppose its sovereign decision to deliver the fighter jets if it chose to do so. What the administration couldn’t guarantee was a speedy delivery of the F-16 backfill, telling Warsaw that approving that transfer could be a months-long process.

To break the deadlock, Poland went for the Hail Mary. In a surprise Tuesday announcement, the Polish government said it was ready to transfer its 28 MiG-29 fighter planes to the U.S. Under the deal, Polish pilots would bring the planes to Ramstein Air Base in Germany, and in return, Warsaw expected the U.S. to hand them over to Ukrainian pilots fighting off the Russian invasion.

It was not what the U.S. had initially considered when first hatching this idea with European allies.

“The proposal evolved from something the EU would look at to something that individual EU allies would look at to the latest iteration where we would broker. It’s a far cry from where we were several weeks ago,” a senior State Department official told POLITICO.

The announcement caught the Biden administration by surprise.

“To my knowledge, it wasn’t pre-consulted with us that they planned to give these planes to us,” Victoria Nuland, undersecretary of State for political affairs, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday. “I was in a meeting where I ought to have known about that just before I came. So I think that actually was a surprise move by the Poles.”

The administration moved quickly to shut down Poland’s offer. “We will continue to consult with Poland and our other NATO allies about this issue and the difficult logistical challenges it presents, but we do not believe Poland’s proposal is a tenable one,” Kirby, the Pentagon spokesperson, said Tuesday night.

The tenor in Washington abruptly changed on Wednesday, the same day German Chancellor Olaf Scholz declared Polish warplanes would “certainly” not land in Ramstein. “We might’ve been in a different place if this hadn’t turned into the Poles putting this on the table,” the senior State official said.

Blinken told reporters that the U.S. was still open to a deal, but only one in which Poland could send “security assistance” to Ukraine “in the right way.” White House press secretary Jen Psaki then said during her daily news briefing that the U.S. had “understandable concerns” about the Polish proposal.

And that’s when Kirby went up to the Pentagon podium to tell reporters — but really Poland — that the U.S. wasn’t going to do the deal, and listed all the reasons that sending extra MiGs to Ukraine was a bad idea. He also noted that there was no daylight between the State Department and Pentagon’s positions on the issue, saying they both agree it’s not America’s place to tell Poland “what to do or not to do.”

Gen. Tod Wolters, the U.S. European Command chief, shortly after backed up what Kirby said.

“The transfer of MiG-29 aircraft will not appreciably increase the effectiveness of the Ukrainian Air Force. The Ukrainian Air Force currently possesses numerous mission capable aircraft that are flying daily. Adding aircraft to the Ukrainian inventory is unlikely to change the effectiveness of the Ukrainian Air Force relative to Russian capabilities. Therefore, we assess that the overall gain is low,” he said in a statement.

Officials in Warsaw, who are already dealing with a flood of Ukrainian refugees and acting as the main hub for pushing Western weapons into Ukraine, didn’t want to act alone in sending the jets.

Appearing alongside Vice President Kamala Harris in Warsaw on Thursday, Polish President Duda said his government “wanted NATO as a whole to make a common decision,” about the jets, “so that Poland remains a credible member of NATO — not a country who decides on its own important issues which impact the security of NATO as a whole.”

But the rationale hasn’t quieted critics.

The Pentagon’s concern over Moscow’s reaction to sending jets to Ukraine is “pure deterrence of the U.S. military by the Russians,” said Dave Deptula, a retired Air Force lieutenant general who planned the air campaign in the 1991 Gulf War. “If we transfer a pocketknife to Ukraine, Putin’s going to object to that. A weapons system is a weapons system, and NATO is giving Ukraine rifles and missiles, so it’s time to give them airplanes.”

Even if Kyiv doesn’t have the pilots to fly the MiGs, the Polish planes could be used for spare parts for the Ukrainian MiG-29s flying hard hours against Russian forces, Deptula said.

While the Russian air force has stepped up airstrikes in recent days, the war in Ukraine remains largely a ground conflict. There have been a few reports of aerial dogfights, and of aircraft from both countries targeting ground forces. […]

But Ukraine’s Zelenskyy no longer wants to wait for more Western assistance. He wants the jets, and blasted the U.S. and Poland as Russian bombs continued to pockmark his country, and as lumbering Russian columns continue to grind along his country’s highways, slowly encircling his capital city. “This is not ping pong! This is about human lives!” Zelenskyy said in a speech. “We ask once again: Solve it faster. Do not shift the responsibility, send us planes.”

Biden Depends on Russia to Negotiate Iran Nuclear Deal on America’s Behalf, & Russia Threatens to Walk Away

On March 11, 2022, Reuters reported:

“Talks to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal on Friday [March 10] faced the prospect of collapse after a last-minute Russian demand forced world powers to pause negotiations for an undetermined time despite having a largely completed text…. [L]ast Saturday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov unexpectedly demanded sweeping guarantees that Russian trade with Iran would not be affected by sanctions imposed on Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine – a demand Western powers say is unacceptable and Washington has insisted it will not agree to. A collapse of the talks could result in Tehran getting within sprinting distance of developing nuclear weapons, a prospect that could ignite a fresh war in the Middle East.”

On March 16, 2022, Breitbart.com reported:

Russia claimed Wednesday [March 16] that President Joe Biden and the U.S. have caved on its demand to protect its trade with Iran from sanctions under the new version of the Iran nuclear deal that the administration has pursued, and that talks may now resume. The talks, which restarted shortly after Biden took office, were said to be nearing a deal last week when Russia insisted that its trade with Iran be protected from U.S. sanctions that have been applied since Russian forces invaded Ukraine last month.

The Agence France-Presse reported Wednesday that the U.S. complied with Russian demands — according to Moscow: “Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Tuesday that Moscow had received guarantees from the US on its ability to trade with Tehran as part of ongoing talks to salvage the Iran nuclear deal. ‘We received written guarantees. They are included in the text of the agreement itself on the resumption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear program,’ Lavrov told reporters during a press conference with his Iranian counterpart in Moscow. […] Lavrov told reporters in Moscow on Tuesday that guarantees it had received from Washington would protect Russian involvement in Iran’s sole Bushehr nuclear energy plant. Lavrov said Moscow and Tehran share the position that Western sanctions are imposed with the aim of overriding international law and accused Washington and its partners of directing the penalties “primarily against ordinary citizens.”

The U.S. concession was predictable, given the Biden administration’s weak negotiating stance, in which it has seemed desperate to reach a deal. In January, three U.S. negotiators quit, reportedly in protest at lead envoy Rob Malley’s deep concessions to Iran. Malley has long been accused of appeasing Iran and terrorists […]

Details of the new Iran deal have been leaked, with critics saying it is not a return to the deal from which President Donald Trump withdrew in 2018, but far worse. It reportedly offers the regime access to $90 billion in foreign currency; $7 billion in effective ransom for U.S. captives; and sanctions relief for the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps and other notorious terrorists.

 CDC Announces That It Will End Title 42 Policy of Deporting Illegal Aliens

On March 12, 2022, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) announced:

“Today, following a public health reassessment, the CDC Director is terminating with respect to unaccompanied noncitizen children an Order under Title 42 suspending the right to introduce certain persons into the United States. In effect, this means that unaccompanied noncitizen children will not be expelled from the United States under CDC’s order.

“CDC initially temporarily excepted unaccompanied noncitizen children from expulsion in January 2021, and later formally excepted such children from subsequent orders.  On March 4, 2022, the District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction ‘enjoining and restraining’ CDC from enforcing its orders to the extent that they except unaccompanied noncitizen children from the Title 42 procedures based solely on their status as unaccompanied children.  The court found that CDC had not adequately explained its decision to treat unaccompanied noncitizen children differently than other noncitizens subject to the CDC orders.  The court stayed its preliminary injunction for seven days.

“In the current termination, CDC addresses the court’s concerns and has determined, after considering current public health conditions and recent developments, that expulsion of unaccompanied noncitizen children is not warranted to protect the public health. Because it is not warranted, and in recognition of the unique vulnerabilities of unaccompanied noncitizen children, CDC is immediately terminating the CDC Orders to the extent they apply to them.”

Iran Claims Responsibility for Missile Barrage Near U.S. Consulate in Iraq

On March 13, 2022, the Associated Press reported:

“Iran has claimed responsibility for a missile barrage that struck early Sunday near a sprawling U.S. consulate complex in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil, saying it was retaliation for an Israeli strike in Syria that killed two members of its Revolutionary Guard. No injuries were reported in the attack, which marked a significant escalation between the U.S. and Iran. … Iran’s powerful Revolutionary Guard said on its website that it launched the attack against an Israeli ‘strategic center of conspiracy’ in Irbil. It did not elaborate, but in a statement said Israel had itself been on the offensive, citing the recent strike that killed two Revolutionary Guards. Earlier, a U.S. defense official and Iraqi security officials said the strike was launched from neighboring Iran.

“One Iraqi official in Baghdad initially said several missiles had hit the U.S. consulate in Irbil and that it was the target of the attack. Later, Lawk Ghafari, the head of Kurdistan’s foreign media office, said none of the missiles had struck the U.S. facility but that areas around the compound had been hit. A statement issued by the interior ministry of Iraq’s Kurdistan region said the missiles were launched from outside Iraq, from the east, without naming Iran.

“The U.S. defense official said it was still uncertain exactly how many missiles were fired and exactly where they landed. A second U.S. official said there was no damage at any U.S. government facility and that there was no indication the target was the consulate building, which is new and currently unoccupied. […]

“The attack came several days after Iran said it would retaliate for an Israeli strike near Damascus, Syria, that killed two members of its Revolutionary Guard. […]

“The missile barrage coincided with regional tensions. Negotiations in Vienna over Tehran’s tattered nuclear deal hit a “pause” over Russian demands about sanctions targeting Moscow for its war on Ukraine.”

On March 11, 2022, Major General Hossein Salami, commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, declared that Iran had become “so powerful and strong on international stage” and was “ready to give a crushing response to the enemy on the battlefield.” He added: “Today, we have a superior hand over enemies. Our glorious achievements are the result of following the sublime recommendations of leadership and unity, amity and empathy of noble nation of Islamic Iran.” “Today, Islamic Republic of Iran is at the centerpiece of all dangers and threats of enemies,” Salami continued. “Armed Forces of the country are strictly monitoring events taking place across the globe in a way that enemies of the country have left no stone unturned to undermine the image of country and have resorted to imposition of tough economic sanctions, military intimidation, psychological operation and intelligence warfare, etc.” He stated further that “God Almighty” would help Islam and Iran foil “all malicious plots and conspiracies of enemies … under the wise leadership of Islamic Revolution and unity and amity of people.”

Russian Conducts Air Strike Within 15 Miles of Polish Border

On March 13, 2022, Sky News reported that the Russian military had killed 35 people and injured 134 in an airstrike (consisting of 30 cruise missiles) on a Ukrainian military base used for NATO drills less than 15 miles from the border of Poland.  “The strike has taken the war close to the border of Poland, a member of NATO,” said the report, “after a senior Russian diplomat warned that Moscow considers Western shipments of military equipment to Ukraine ‘legitimate targets’ for attacks.”

Victor Davis Hanson Analyzes the Biden Energy Policy in the Face of Russian Aggression

On March 10, 2022, historian and political analyst Victor Davis Hanson wrote:

Climate change moralists love humanity so much in the abstract that they must shut down its life-giving gas, coal and oil in the concrete. And they value humans so little that they don’t worry in the here and now that ensuing fuel shortages and exorbitant costs cause wars, spike inflation, and threaten people’s ability to travel or keep warm.

The Biden administration stopped all gas and oil production in the ANWR region of Alaska. It ended all new federal leases for drilling. It is canceling major new pipelines. It is leveraging lending agencies not to finance oil and gas drilling. It helped force the cancellation of the EastMed pipeline that would have brought much-needed natural gas to southern Europe. And it has in just a year managed to turn the greatest oil and gas producer in the history of the world into a pathetic global fossil-fuel beggar.

Now gas is heading to well over $5 a gallon. In over-regulated blue states, it will likely hit $7. […]

President Joe Biden lifted U.S. sanctions on the Russian-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline designed to provide green Germany with loathsome, but life-saving, natural gas. But first Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States. He has no problem with pipelines per se, just American ones.

While Biden doesn’t like the idea of Germany burning carbon fuel, or Putin reaping enormous profits from Berlin’s self-created dependency, or Germans importing liquified natural gas from America, Biden also does not like the idea of forcing German families to turn off their thermostats in mid-winter when there is Russian-fed war not far from Germany’s borders.

Here at home, Biden gets even crazier. As our enemies around the world reap huge profits from record high oil and gas prices, did Biden ask Alaska, North Dakota or Texas to ramp up production? In other words, did he ask Americans to save fellow cash-strapped Americans from a self-created energy crisis, in the way he assured the Germans that during war reality trumps theory? Not at all.

Instead, Biden came up with the most lunatic idea in recent diplomatic history of begging autocratic and hostile regimes the world over to pump more oil to lower America’s gas prices. For years, America has sanctioned the oil-rich Venezuelan dictatorship, a narco-terrorist state that wars on its own people and its neighbors. Now Biden is begging strongman Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to pump the supposedly dirty fuels America has in even greater abundance but finds it too icky to produce.

Biden also has beseeched the once sanctioned, terrorist Iranian government. He wants Tehran to help us out by upping the very oil and gas production that America has tried to curtail for years. In return, Iran is demanding a new “Iran Deal” that will soon ensure the now petro-rich theocracy the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

On the eve of the Russian invasion, Biden begged Putin to pump even more oil to supplement its current Russian imports to the United States. Did Putin see that surreal request as yet another sign of American appeasement that might greenlight his upcoming planned invasion? In Russian eyes, was it more proof of American weakness and craziness after the humiliating flight from Afghanistan?

Biden has blasted the human rights record of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. Now he is begging the monarchy to pump more of its despised carbon-spewing oil to make up for what his administration shut down at home. Is that why the Saudi royals refused to take his call?

The moral of Biden’s oil madness? Elite ideology divorced from reality impoverishes people and can get them killed.

Biden Says That Because Price of Oil Has Dropped, the Price of Gasoline Should Also Have Dropped

On March 16, 2022, President Biden tweeted: “Oil prices are decreasing, gas prices should too. Last time oil was $96 a barrel, gas was $3.62 a gallon. Now it’s $4.31. Oil and gas companies shouldn’t pad their profits at the expense of hardworking Americans.”

Sarah Westwood of The Washington Times explained why, after sudden spikes in oil prices, sudden reductions in those prices are often not accompanied by commensurate reductions in the price of gasoline at the pump:

As rising prices at the pump continue to squeeze wallets, President Joe Biden has stepped up attacks on oil corporations that he claims are charging motorists more just to pad their pockets. It was the latest scapegoat for the high fuel costs that have put political pressure on Democrats. Biden and his aides had previously attempted to pin the blame on Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose invasion of Ukraine prompted Biden to ban imports of Russian oil and gas earlier this month.

That messaging had begun to fall flat under scrutiny.

The price of gasoline had indeed risen more dramatically in the weeks since Russia invaded Ukraine, but the cost of fuel had already been climbing for months before the oil embargo.

On Feb. 24, when the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, the average per-gallon cost of gasoline was $3.52. On Friday, the average was $4.27, according to AAA.

In November 2021, long before the violence began, gas prices were up nearly 60% over what they were in November 2020 — rising from $2.20 to $3.49 in that time.

Biden’s rhetorical pivot marked an effort to point the finger at a familiar foe for Democrats: Big Oil.

In a tweet Wednesday, Biden said that because oil prices are beginning to fall, so too should gas prices. He accused oil and gas companies of trying to “pad their pockets” by not dropping gas prices to reflect the drop in crude oil prices.

But experts have said they don’t see evidence of price gouging from oil and gas companies.

The price of oil did begin to fall starting last week and had dropped roughly 30% by this week.

That came after a massive spike in global oil prices following Russia’s invasion. Fearing widespread energy embargoes on Russian producers — which the United States did impose, although European countries did not — investors reacted to the uncertainty of the situation in late February, and oil prices jumped above $100 per barrel.

Reports have attributed the more recent drop in global oil prices over the past week to hope for peace talks between Russia and Ukraine as well as new COVID-19-related lockdowns in China, which investors believe could drop demand in one of the largest energy markets.

Industry experts have said the price of gasoline, which is made from crude oil, often responds slowly to both oil price hikes and drops.

That’s because gas companies can’t hike their prices high enough or fast enough to recoup losses from dramatic spikes in the global cost of oil — like the one that occurred when Russia invaded Ukraine.

While oil prices are set on the global market, prices at the pump are often set by conditions in local markets — such as whether the gas station down the road in any given town is raising prices and by how much.

Gas companies therefore lose money when the price per barrel of oil jumps significantly and gas prices climb incrementally.

When the price per barrel of oil falls dramatically, as it has in the past week, gas companies often lower their prices at the pump more slowly in order to make up for the revenue lost when the oil price spike outpaced the gas price increase.

Biden Warns of Food Shortages in U.S.

On March 24, 2022, President Biden — after meeting with the G-7 alliance to discuss the Western response to Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine — told the press that there would be food shortages in the U.S. and Europe. “It’s going to be real,” he said of such shortages. “The price of the [economic] sanctions [against Russia] is not just imposed upon Russia. It’s imposed upon an awful lot of countries as well, including European countries and our country as well.” Under normal circumstances, Russia and Ukraine provide approximately one-fourth of all wheat exports worldwide. But because of agricultural and economic measures taken by both of those nations since the start of the Russian invasion, those exports were expected to sharply decrease and, consequently, drive up the costs of food across the planet.

Contrary to His Administration Officials, Biden Says Sanctions Against Russia Were Never Expected to Deter Putin from Invading Ukraine

Addressing members of the press in Brussels on March 24, 2022, President Biden, while announcing the imposition of new U.S. sanctions on Russian defense companies and hundreds of Russian lawmakers and power brokers, stated that sanctions alone: (a) never deter other nations from taking actions that the U.S. opposes, and (b) U.S. sanctions against Russia had never been intended as measures to deter Vladimir Putin from invading Ukraine. Said Biden: “Let’s get something straight. You remember if you covered me from the very beginning. I did not say that, in fact, the sanctions would deter him. Sanctions never deter. You keep talking about that. Sanctions never deter,” Biden said Thursday. “The maintenance of sanctions, the increasing the pain, the demonstration of why I asked for this NATO meeting today is to be sure that after a month, we will sustain what we’re doing not just next month, the following month, but for the remainder of this entire year. That’s what will stop him.”

One month earlier, on February 24 — the day Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine — Biden had said essentially the same thing: “No one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening.”

During a press briefing following Biden’s March 24 remarks, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said she believed “that’s not exactly what he [Biden] meant” to say. She elaborated: “We do see them [sanctions] as having a deterrent impact, right? It doesn’t mean they’re 100% foolproof. But if there’s a 95% chance of Russia invading without the threat of sanctions, and there’s a 60 — I’m making up these percentages just to make a point — and a 65% chance that they will with them, you’re obviously going to go with the threat of sanctions because you want to reduce the threat of an invasion. So, there is a deterrent. And we’ve seen the deterrent impact work at times.”

Contrary to Biden’s remarks of February 24 and March 24, numerous high-ranking Biden administration officials were on the record as having stated that the sanctions against Russia were indeed meant to deter Putin from military aggression:

  • Daleep Singh, deputy national security adviser for international economics and deputy director at the National Economic Council, said on February 22, 2022: “Sanctions are not an end to themselves. They serve a higher purpose. And that purpose is to deter and prevent. They’re meant to prevent and deter a large-scale invasion of Ukraine that could involve the seizure of major cities, including Kyiv. They’re meant to prevent large-scale human suffering that could involve tens of thousands of casualties in a conflict.”
  • On February 21, 2022, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby suggested that the sanctions, at that point, had thus far caused Putin to delay his planned invasion of Ukraine: “We want them to have a deterrent effect, clearly. And he hasn’t invaded yet.”
  • Vice President Kamala Harris said on February 20, 2022: “The purpose of the sanctions has always been and continues to be deterrence. […] And the Allied relationship is such that we have agreed that the deterrence effect of these sanctions is still a meaningful one.”
  • During a February 20, 2022 appearance on CNN, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “The purpose of the sanctions in the first instance is to try to deter Russia from going to war. As soon as you trigger them, that deterrent is gone. And until the last minute, as long as we can try to bring a deterrent effect to this, we’re going to try to do that.”
  • On February 11, 2022, national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters at a press briefing: “And in order for them [sanctions] to work — to deter, they have to be set up in a way where if Putin moves, then the costs are imposed.”

Biden Says U.S. Would Respond “In Kind” to Russian Use of Chemical Weapons

During a March 24, 2022 press conference in Brussels, Belgium — where President Biden had just participated in an emergency NATO meeting to discuss international efforts to address the Russian invasion of Ukraine — Biden said that if Russia were to use chemical weapons as part of its military operations, such an act would “trigger a response in kind” by the United States — a response whose nature would depend upon “the nature of the use” of chemical weapons by Russia. “We would respond,” Biden added. “We would respond if he uses it.” When reporters pressed Biden to reveal whether the American response in such a case would be of a military nature, Biden answered: “You’re asking whether NATO would cross – we’d make that decision at the time.”

The following day, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan walked back Biden’s remarks: “We will collect the form and nature of our response based on the nature of the action Russia takes,” Sullivan said. “And we’ll do so in coordination with our allies. And I won’t go beyond that other than to say the United States has no intention of using chemical weapons, period, under any circumstances.”

Biden, in Gaffe, Tells U.S. Troops They Will Soon Be in Ukraine

On March 25, 2022 in Poland, President Biden — who had previously insisted that the U.S. must stay out of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in order to avoid triggering “World War III” — told members of the U.S. Army’s 82nd Airborne Division that they would soon witness, firsthand, the bravery of Ukrainians who were defending themselves against Russia’s invading forces. “You’re going to see when you’re there,” said Biden, “and some of you have been there, you’re gonna see — you’re gonna see women, young people standing in the middle in front of a damned tank just saying, ‘I’m not leaving, I’m holding my ground.’”

Soon thereafter, a White House official quickly clarified that Biden had not changed his position on the possibility of deploying the military into Ukraine. “The president has been clear we are not sending US troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position,” said a Biden spokesman.

Biden Says Putin “Cannot Remain in Power”

At the conclusion of a March 26, 2022 address he delivered in Warsaw, Poland, President Biden veered off-script from his prepared remarks and said of Vladimir Putin: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” Immediately afterward, the White House tried to walk back the remark. Sais a White House official: “The President’s point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region. He was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change.” Indeed, Biden’s remark contradicted what U.S. officials had previously said, namely that it was not America’s goal to remove Putin from power.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in response to Biden: “This is not to be decided by Mr. Biden. It should only be a choice of the people of the Russian Federation.”

Biden Mistakenly Says Families Can Save $500 Per Month by Switching to Renewable Energy

On March 31, 2022, President Biden said: “If your home is powered by safer, cheaper, cleaner electricity like solar or heat pumps, you can save about $500 a month on average.” The White House subsequently corrected Biden’s assertion in a transcript, saying: “[President Biden’s] plan will help ensure that America creates millions of good-paying union jobs in clean, cutting-edge industries for generations to come. And it will save American families money in the immediate future – including more than $950 a year in gas savings from taking advantage of electric vehicles, and an additional $500 a year from using clean electricity like solar and heat pumps to power their homes.” But as the Daily Mail noted:

“Even yearly savings, though, would take years for homeowners to realize, given the upfront cost of installing solar panels and heat pumps in homes.”

Biden White House Mandates “Equality and Visibility for Transgender Americans”

On March 31, 2022, the Biden White House — in recognition of “Transgender Day of Visibility” — issued a lengthy fact sheet mandating “Equality and Visibility for Transgender Americans.” Some key excerpts from the fact sheet:

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration recognizes Transgender Day of Visibility, an annual celebration of the resilience, achievements, and joy of transgender people in the United States and around the world. Every American deserves the freedom to be themselves. But far too many transgender Americans still face systemic barriers, discrimination, and acts of violence. Today, the Administration once again condemns the proliferation of dangerous anti-transgender legislative attacks that have been introduced and passed in state legislatures around the country. […] As the President has said, these bills are government overreach at its worst, they are un-American, and they must stop.

Transgender people are some of the bravest people in our nation. But nobody should have to be brave just to be themselves. Today, the Biden Administration announced new actions to support the mental health of transgender children, remove barriers that transgender people face accessing critical government services, and improve the visibility of transgender people in our nation’s data.

Reinforcing federal protections for transgender kids. The Justice Department announced today that it has issued a letter to all state attorneys general reminding them of federal constitutional and statutory provisions that protect transgender youth against discrimination, including when those youth seek gender-affirming care.

Advancing dignity, respect, and self-determination for transgender people by improving the traveler experience For far too long, transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming Americans have faced significant barriers to travelling safely and many have not had their gender identity respected as they travel within the United States and around the world. To create a safer and more dignified travel experience, the Biden Administration is announcing the following changes.

  • The Department of State is announcing that beginning on April 11, 2022, all U.S. citizens will be able select an “X” as their gender marker on their U.S. passport application. […]
  • The Department of Homeland Security is announcing several important reforms to improve the traveler experience for all Americans, particularly for transgender Americans:
    • Implementing enhanced screening technology. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will soon begin updating its Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) body scanners with new technology that will increase security and efficiency by reducing false alarm rates and pat-downs for the traveling public. By replacing the current, gender-based system with this more accurate technology, TSA will improve the customer experience of transgender travelers who have previously been required to undergo additional screening due to alarms in sensitive areas.  This new technology will help to improve the experience of travelers, particularly those who are transgender and non-binary travelers. […]
    • Expanding airline partnerships to enhance the overall travel experience. TSA is working closely with air carriers across the nation to promote the use and acceptance of the “X” gender marker to ensure more efficient and accurate passenger processing. […]
    • Streamlining identity validation. TSA has updated its Standard Operating Procedures to remove gender considerations when validating a traveler’s identification at airport security checkpoints. This ensures that TSOs can accurately and efficiently validate each traveler’s identity while avoiding unnecessary delays.
    • Updating TSA PreCheck and CBP Trusted Traveler Programs enrollment to include “X” gender markers. The Department of Homeland Security is beginning the process of adding “X” gender markers options in Trusted Traveler programs and the TSA PreCheck program to enhance access for transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming travelers to these programs.

Providing resources for transgender kids and their families. Transgender children are put at higher risk of attempted suicide or mental health challenges when they face bullying, rejection, or denial of health care. The Biden Administration is releasing several new resources to help transgender children and their parents thrive:

  • Providing mental health resources for transgender youth. In recent months, multiple states have removed critical information about mental health resources for LGBTQI+ youth from official state websites. Transgender youth often face significant barriers in accessing supportive resources, and are at greater risk of attempted suicide. In response, the Department of Health and Human Services released a new website that offers resources for transgender and LGBTQI+ youth, their parents, and providers. These resources include best practices for affirming an LGBTQI+ child, and information about suicide prevention services.
  • Expanding trainings to support transgender and nonbinary students in schools. The Office of Safe and Supportive Schools in the Department of Education will offer new training for schools with experts and school leaders who will discuss the challenges faced by many transgender and nonbinary students and strategies and actions for providing support. […]
  • Confirming the positive impact of gender affirming care on youth mental health. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) has posted [information emphasizing …] the positive effects of gender affirming care [… for] transgender, nonbinary, and other gender expansive young peopl[e] […]

Improving access to federal services and benefits for transgender Americans. With support and coordination from the U.S. Digital Service, federal agencies are removing barriers to access government services by improving the customer experience of transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming Americans:

  • Accessing retirement savings. The Social Security Administration is announcing that it is removing the requirement that transgender people show proof of identity such as doctor’s notes in order to update their gender information in their social security record by the fall of 2022. This will significantly improve transgender individuals’ experience in accessing their retirement benefits, obtaining health care, and applying for jobs.
  • Filing an employment discrimination complaint. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is announcing that it will promote greater equity and inclusion for members of the transgender community by giving individuals the option to select an “X” gender marker during the voluntary self-identification questions that are part of the intake process for filing a charge of discrimination.
  • Applying for federal student aid. The Department of Education plans to propose next month that the 2023-24 FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) will include an opportunity for applicants to indicate their gender identity as well as their race/ethnicity when applying for federal financial aid. […]
  • Visiting the White House. The White House Office of Management and Administration is announcing that it is beginning the process of implementing updates that will improve the White House campus entry process for transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary visitors by adding an “X” gender marker option to the White House Worker and Visitor Entry System (WAVES) system. This change will ensure that transgender, non-binary, and gender nonconforming people can visit the People’s House in a manner that respects and affirms their gender identity. […]

These announcements build on the Biden-Harris Administration’s historic work to advance equality for transgender Americans since taking office, including:

Combatting legislative attacks on transgender kids at the state level.

  • Condemning anti-transgender bills. The President has consistently made clear that legislative attacks against transgender youth are un-American, and are bullying disguised as legislation. In his March, 2022 State of the Union Address, the President said, “The onslaught of state laws targeting transgender Americans and their families is wrong. As I said last year, especially to our younger transgender Americans, I will always have your back as your President, so you can be yourself and reach your God-given potential.” The White House has also hosted listening sessions with transgender youth and advocates in states across the country that are impacted by anti-transgender legislative attacks.
  • Reaffirming that transgender children have the right to access gender-affirming health care. In March, following state actions that aim to target parents and doctors who provide gender-affirming care to transgender children with child abuse investigations, the Department of Health and Human Services took multiple actions to support transgender children in receiving the care they need and promised to use every tool available to protect LGTBQI+ children and support their families.
  • Department of Justice statements of interest and amicus briefs. The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has filed Statements of Interest and amicus briefs in several matters to protect the constitutional rights of transgender individuals, including in Brandt v. Rutledge, a lawsuit challenging legislation restricting access to gender-affirming care for transgender youth; B.P.J. v. West Virginia State Board of Education, a lawsuit challenging legislation restricting participation of transgender students in school sports; Corbitt v. Taylor, a lawsuit challenging legislation restricting the ability to change gender markers on state driver’s licenses; and Adams v. School Board of St. John’s County, which involves the right of a transgender boy to use the boys’ restroom at his school.

Advancing civil rights protections for transgender Americans

  • Fighting for passage of the Equality Act. President Biden continues to call on the Senate to pass the Equality Act, legislation which will provide long overdue federal civil rights protections to transgender and LGBTQI+ Americans and their families. As the White House has said, passing the Equality Act is key to addressing the epidemic levels of violence and discrimination that transgender people face. […]

Responding to the crisis of anti-transgender violence and advancing safety

  • Establishing a White House-led interagency working group on anti-transgender violence. To address the crisis of anti-transgender stigma and violence, during Pride Month in 2021 the White House established the first Interagency Working Group on Safety, Opportunity, and Inclusion for Transgender and Gender Diverse Individuals. […] 
  • Advancing safety and justice for transgender and Two-Spirit Indigenous people. LGBTQI+ Native Americans and people who identify as transgender or “Two-Spirit” are often the targets of violent crimes. On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order on Improving Public Safety and Criminal Justice for Native Americans and Addressing the Crisis of Missing or Murdered Indigenous People. The Executive Order directs federal agencies to work hand in hand with Tribal Nations and Tribal partners to build safe and healthy Tribal communities to address the crisis of Missing and Murdered Indigenous People, including LGBTQI+ and “Two-Spirit” Native Americans.

Advancing health equity and expanding access to gender-affirming health care to support transgender patients

  • Protecting transgender patients from health care discrimination. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it would interpret and enforce section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of sex in certain health programs to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation.
  • Advancing gender-affirming care as an essential health benefit. In 2021, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) approved the first ever application from a state to add additional gender-affirming care benefits to a state’s essential health benefit benchmark plan.
  • Advancing health equity research on gender-affirming care. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that it will increase funding for research on gender-affirming procedures to further develop the evidence base for improved standards of care. Research priorities include a more thorough investigation and characterization of the short- and long-term outcomes on physical and mental health associated with gender-affirming care. […]

Promoting fair housing and ending homelessness for transgender Americans

  • Advancing fair housing protections on the basis of gender identity. In February 2021 the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced that it would administer and enforce the Fair Housing Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. […]

Advancing economic opportunity and protections for transgender workers

  • Ensuring nondiscrimination protections for transgender and gender diverse workers. In November 2021, the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs proposed to rescind the agency’s 2020 rule “Implementing Legal Requirements Regarding the Equal Opportunity Clause’s Religious Exemption,” an important step toward protecting workers from discrimination while safeguarding principles of religious freedom. […]

Supporting transgender leaders and public servants

  • Making the Federal government a model employer for transgender public servantsPresident Biden signed an Executive Order which takes historic new steps to ensure the Federal government is a model employer for all employees – including transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary employees. The Executive Order charges agencies with building inclusive cultures for transgender employees by: expanding the availability of gender-neutral facilities in Federal buildings; ensuring that employee services support transgender employees who wish to legally, medically or socially transition; advancing the use of non-binary gender markers and pronouns in Federal employment processes; and expanding access to gender-affirming care and inclusive health benefits.
  • Appointing historic transgender leaders. The Biden-Harris Administration includes barrier-breaking LGBTQI+ leaders, including Assistant Secretary for Health Dr. Rachel Levine, who is the first openly transgender person ever confirmed by the U.S. Senate. […]

Advancing visibility for transgender Americans

  • Issuing the First White House Proclamation for Transgender Day of Visibility. On March 31, 2021 President Biden became the first U.S. President to issue a proclamation commemorating Transgender Day of Visibility.
  • Hosting a White House Virtual Convening on Transgender Equality. In June, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki hosted a first-of-its-kind national conversation on equality for transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary Americans.
  • Releasing a toolkit on equality and inclusion for transgender Americans. The White House released a new toolkit with best practices for advancing inclusion, opportunity, and safety for transgender Americans.
  • Establishing a National Pulse Memorial. On June 25, 2021, President Biden signed H.R. 49 into law to designate the National Pulse Memorial. As the President acknowledged in his statement on the fifth anniversary of the Pulse nightclub shooting, we must acknowledge gun violence’s particular impact on LGBTQ+ communities across our nation, and we must drive out hate and inequities that contribute to the epidemic of violence and murder against transgender women – especially transgender women of color. As the President has said, Pulse Nightclub is hallowed ground.

Biden’s DOJ Warns States’ AGs that the Administration Demands “Gender-Affirming Care” Rights for “Transgender” Children

In a letter dated March 31, 2022, Kristen Clarke, Assistant Attorney General with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, warned all states’ Attorneys General that the DOJ would punish instances of what it viewed as discrimination by which “transgender youth” were denied “gender-affirming care,” including medical and drug treatments (e.g., puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries). Said the letter:

“State laws and policies that prevent parents or guardians from following the advice of a healthcare professional regarding what may be medically necessary or otherwise appropriate care for transgender minors may infringe on rights protected by both the Equal Protection and the Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. […]

“The U.S. Department of Justice (the Department) is committed to ensuring that transgender youth, like all youth, are treated fairly and with dignity in accordance with federal law. This includes ensuring that such youth are not subjected to unlawful discrimination based on their gender identity, including when seeking gender-affirming care. We write to remind you of several important federal constitutional and statutory obligations that flow from these fundamental principles.

“People who are transgender are frequently vulnerable to discrimination in many aspects of their lives, and are often victims of targeted threats, legal restrictions, and anti-transgender violence. The Department and the federal government more generally have a strong interest in protecting the constitutional rights of individuals who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, nonbinary, or otherwise gender-nonconforming and in ensuring compliance with federal civil rights statutes. The Department is also charged with the coordination and enforcement of federal laws that protect individuals from discrimination in a wide range of federally-funded programs and activities.

“A law or policy need not specifically single out persons who are transgender to be subject to heightened scrutiny. When a state or recipient of federal funds criminalizes or even restricts a type of medical care predominantly sought by transgender persons, an intent to disfavor that class can ‘readily be presumed.’ For instance, a ban on gender-affirming procedures, therapy, or medication may be a form of discrimination against transgender persons, which is impermissible unless it is ‘substantially related’ to a sufficiently important governmental interest. This burden of justification is ‘demanding.’ Such a law or policy will not withstand heightened scrutiny when ‘the alleged objective’ differs from the ‘actual purpose’ underlying the classification. In addition, the Due Process Clause protects the right of parents ‘to seek and follow medical advice’ to safeguard the health of their children. A state or local government must meet the heavy burden of justifying interference with that right since it is well established within the medical community that gender-affirming care for transgender youth is not only appropriate but often necessary for their physical and mental health.”

The letter then listed a number of laws that the DOJ believed were to the new Biden Administration policies:

• “Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act protects the civil rights of people—including transgender youth—seeking nondiscriminatory access to healthcare in a range of health programs and activities. Categorically refusing to provide treatment to a person based on their gender identity, for example, may constitute prohibited discrimination under Section 1557. As the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has stated, restricting an individual’s ability to receive medically necessary care, including gender-affirming care, from their health care providers solely on the basis of their sex assigned at birth or their gender identity may also violate Section 1557.”

• “Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination, including sex-based harassment by recipients of federal financial assistance that operate education programs and activities. Policies and practices that deny, limit, or interfere with access to the recipient’s education program or activity because students are transgender minors receiving gender-affirming care may constitute discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX.”

• “The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 prohibits sex discrimination in certain law enforcement programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. If a law enforcement agency takes a transgender minor who is receiving gender-affirming care into custody or arrests the child’s parents on suspicion of child abuse because the parents permitted such medical care, that agency may be violating the statute’s nondiscrimination provision.”

• “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects people with disabilities, which can include individuals who experience gender dysphoria. Restrictions that prevent, limit, or interfere with otherwise qualified individuals’ access to care due to their gender dysphoria, gender dysphoria diagnosis, or perception of gender dysphoria may violate Section 504.”

Biden’s HHS Asks Court to Overrule Order Blocking Transgender Care

In late March 2022, President Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to overrule a 2021 lower court order in the case of Franciscan Alliance v. Becerra — an order issued by Judge Reed O’Connor for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas — that protected health insurance providers from mandates that would require them to cover the costs of transgender-related medicines, gender-transitioning surgeries, therapies, and procedures.

Biden Administration Says “Early” Transgender Surgeries & Hormones Are “Crucial” for Youngsters Who Identify As Trans

On March 31, 2022 — “Transgender Day of Visibility” — the Biden Administration stated that the “early” use of transgender surgeries, hormone treatments, and affirmations are “crucial” for the physical and psychological well-being of children and teenagers who identify as transgender and nonbinary. As part of its messaging, the White House flagged a resource from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health (OASH) that had been written to “inform parents and guardians, educators, and other persons supporting children and adolescents with information on what is gender-affirming care and why it is important to transgender, nonbinary, and other gender expansive young people’s well-being.”

As The Daily Wire explained: “Gender-affirming care is a phrase used by transgender activists and media to mask the more grisly sounding transgender top and bottom surgeries, including removing a biological women’s breasts, removing a biological man’s genitals, sculpting a fake penis on a biological woman, facial feminization or facial masculinization, and more. Social affirmation, puberty blockers, and hormones also fall under the ‘gender-affirming care’ umbrella.”

The OASH document also said:

  • “Gender-affirming care is a supportive form of healthcare. It consists of an array of services that may include medical, surgical, mental health,and non-medical services for transgender and nonbinary people.For transgender and nonbinary children and adolescents, early gender-affirming care is crucial to overall health and well-being as it allows the child or adolescent to focus on social transitions and can increase theirconfidence while navigating the healthcare system.”
  • “Research demonstrates that gender-affirming care improves the mentalhealth and overall well-being of gender diverse children and adolescents.”
  • “Because gender-affirming care encompasses many facets of healthcare needs and support, it has been shown to increase positive outcomes for transgender and nonbinary children and adolescents.”
  • “Gender-affirming care is patient-centered and treats individuals holistically, aligning their outward, physical traits with their gender identity.Gender diverse adolescents, in particular, face significant health disparities compared to their cisgender peers. Transgender and gender nonbinary adolescents are at increased risk for mental health issues, substance use, and suicide.”
  • “A safe and affirming healthcare environment is critical in fostering betteroutcomes for transgender, nonbinary, and other gender expansive children and adolescents. Medical and psychosocial gender affirming healthcare practices have been demonstrated to yield lower rates of adverse mental health outcomes, build self-esteem, and improve overall quality of life for transgender andgender diverse youth.”

U.S. Navy Plans to Decommission Some of Its Newest Warships

On April 8, 2022, The Associated Press reported:

“The U.S. Navy wants to decommission nine ships in the Freedom-class of littoral combat ships — warships that cost about $4.5 billion altogether to build. The Navy contends in its budget proposal that the move would free up $50 million per ship annually for other priorities. But it would also reduce the size of the fleet that’s already surpassed by China in sheer numbers, something that could cause members of Congress to balk. […]

“All told, the Navy wants to scrap 24 ships, including five cruisers and a pair of Los Angeles-class submarines, as part of its cost-cutting needed to maintain the existing fleet and build modern warships. Those cuts surpass the proposed nine ships to be built. Most of them are older vessels. However, the littoral combat ships that are targeted are young. The oldest of them is 10 years old. […]

“U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Virginia, suggested the ship cuts were ‘grossly irresponsible’ when the U.S. Navy has dipped from 318 ships to 297, while the Chinese fleet has grown from 210 to 360 ships over the past two decades.”

Inflation Reaches a New High

On April 12, 2022, CNBC reported:

“Prices that consumers pay on everyday items surged in March to their highest levels since the early days of the Reagan administration, according to Labor Department data released Tuesday [April 12]. The consumer price index, which measures a wide-ranging basket of goods and services, jumped 8.5% from a year ago on an unadjusted basis, above even the already elevated Dow Jones estimate for 8.4%. Excluding food and energy, the CPI increased 6.5%, in line with the expectation.

“The data reflected price increases not seen in the U.S. since the stagflation days of the late 1970s and early ’80s. March’s headline reading in fact was the highest since December 1981. Core inflation was the hottest since August 1982.

“Due to the surge in inflation, real earnings, despite rising 5.6% from a year ago, still weren’t keeping pace with the cost of living. Real average hourly earnings posted a seasonally adjusted 0.8% decline for the month, according to a separate Bureau of Labor Statistics report. […] Food rose 1% for the month and 8.8% over the year. Energy prices were up 11% and 32% respectively, while shelter cost, which make up about one-third of the CPI weighting, increased another 0.5% on the month, making the 12-month gain a blistering 5%.”

Ban on Anti-Satellite Missile Tests

Speaking at the Vandenberg Space Force Base in California on April 18, 2022, Vice President Kamala Harris announced that the Biden administration — in an effort to make demilitarization an “international norm for responsible behavior in space” — had decided to unilaterally terminate America’s testing of anti-satellite missiles, a practice known to generate debris in outer space. Said Harris in her remarks:

  • “Space is exciting. It spurs our imaginations, and it forces us to ask big questions. Space — it affects us all, and it connects us all.”
  • “Simply put, these tests are dangerous, and we will not conduct them. This debris presents a risk to the safety of our astronauts, our satellites and our growing commercial presence. A piece of space debris the size of a basketball, which travels at thousands of miles per hour, would destroy a satellite. Even a piece of debris as small as a grain of sand could cause serious damage.”
  • “These weapons are intended to deny the United States our ability to use our space capabilities by destructing, destroying our satellites, satellites which are critical to our national security. These tests, to be sure, are reckless, and they are irresponsible. These tests also put in danger so much of what we do in space.”

Harris also explained that the Biden administration wanted America’s Space Force to “protect our interests in space,” but not in a way that violates “international norms and rules.” Those norms and rules, she added, give people a “sense of order and stability,” whether “it is the way we interact with our colleagues at work or the way nations interact with each other.” However, as conservative columnist Daniel Greenfield noted shortly after Harris’ remarks: “ASAT [anti-satellite] weapons don’t actually violate any international laws. That’s why protests against China and Russia’s weapons tests have previously fallen on deaf ears. The two totalitarian countries aren’t breaking any rules or norms by testing and deploying ASAT weapons from the ground that target orbital objects. We could legally develop and deploy ASAT weapons ourselves.”

While the Biden-Harris Administration was declaring the end of America’s ASAT testing, the counterpart ASAT-testing programs of China, India, and Russia would continue unabated.

The “Disinformation Governance Board” Designed to Thwart Americans’ Free Speech Rights

During an April 27, 2022 budget hearing of the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas announced that a “Disinformation Governance Board” (DGB), whose stated purpose was to protect America’s national security by combating foreign misinformation and disinformation campaigns, had recently been established as part of DHS. The DGB was headed by Nina Jankowicz, who described herself “a disinformation fellow” and an expert on Russian disinformation. At two separate junctures of the April 27 hearing, Mayorkas said:

  • “We have just established a mis-and-disinformation governance board in the Department of Homeland Security to more effectively combat this threat, not only to election security, but to our homeland security.”
  • “Our Undersecretary for Policy, Rob Silvers, is co-chair with our Principal Deputy General Counsel Jennifer Gaskell, in leading a just-recently constituted misinformation-disinformation governance board. So we’re bringing — the goal is to bring the resources of the department together to address this threat.”

In an opinion piece published by The Hill on May 1, 2022, Joe Concha criticized the DGB by noting that politics are routinely used to determine what is classified as “disinformation” or “misinformation.” Wrote Concha:

“Here’s what Mayorkas’s choice to helm Biden’s ‘Ministry of Truth’ [Nina Jankowicz] once said about Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop [containing many emails that indicated enormous corruption by Joe Biden and his son Hunter], which many on the left and in the media dubbed as Russian disinformation in the weeks before the 2020 election. ‘We should view it as a Trump campaign product,’ Jankowicz said of the story at the time. ‘Not to mention that the emails don’t need to be altered to be part of an influence campaign. Voters deserve that context, not a [fairy] tale about a laptop repair shop,’ she also tweeted in October 2020.

“Well, it turns out the laptop from hell really is just that for Hunter Biden and possibly his father, the sitting president. The New York Times and The Washington Post, which both pushed the same conspiracy theory that the laptop came from Russia to hurt Joe Biden and help Donald Trump, recently confirmed that the laptop and its contents belong to Hunter Biden. […]

“The new head of the ‘Ministry of Truth’ isn’t tweeting much about that investigation these days. Why is that?

“Jankowicz was also a big fan of the now-discredited (and laughable) Steele dossier [accusing Donald Trump of colluding with Russia and committing various moral improprieties]. Here’s what she tweeted about a guest appearance that Christopher Steele made [in August 2020] on something called the ‘Infotagion’ podcast: ‘Listened to this last night. Chris Steele (yes THAT Chris Steele) provides some great historical context about the evolution of disinfo. Worth a listen.’

“Steele’s sources have since been proven not to be credible. His allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, of Russian hookers and ‘pee tapes’ — also not credible. Yet Jankowicz once recommended that we listen to ‘THAT Chris Steele’ when it comes to disinformation.

“And here’s what she tweeted in recent days about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter: ‘Last week I told @NPRMICHEL: I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would look like for the marginalized communities … which are already shouldering … disproportionate amounts of this abuse.’

“This pro-Steele anti-Musker will report to Mayorkas, who [falsely] said in congressional testimony this week that he inherited ‘a broken and dismantled’ immigration and border security system from the Trump administration and that ‘only Congress can fix this.’ […]

“The guy whose agency is launching a Disinformation Governance Board also, without evidence, accused his own Border Patrol agents of whipping migrants, saying that it ‘painfully conjured up the worst elements of our nation’s ongoing battle against systemic racism.’

“You get the point. Mayorkas and Jankowicz are two of the last people who should be leading any ‘Ministry of Truth.’ And the U.S. government shouldn’t even have considered creating something like this to be run by partisans with political agendas.”

At the aforementioned Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on April 27, Republican Senator John Kennedy asked Mayorkas, “When the department picked her [Jankowicz], did it know that she had said that Mr. Hunter Biden’s laptop is Russian disinformation?” Mayorkas replied: “I was not aware of that, but we do not discuss the internal hiring process. Ultimately, as the secretary I am responsible for the decisions of the Department of Homeland Security.”

Kennedy then asked if Mayorkas was aware that Jankowicz had spoken about the since-discredited Steele dossier as though it were a legitimate document. Mayorkas answered: “Senator, let me repeat myself and add an additional fact. One, we do not discuss internal hiring processes. Two, I was not aware of that fact. Three, as the secretary of homeland security I am responsible for the decisions of the department, and it is my understanding that Ms. Jankowicz is a subject-matter expert in the field in which she will be working on behalf of the department.”

Mayorkas also claimed to be unaware of a series of TikTok videos that Jankowicz had made prior to her hiring as head of DGB, including a February 2021 video in which she sang lyrics about fake news to the tune of the Mary Poppins song “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.” Among those lyrics were the following: “Information laundering is really quite ferocious. It’s when a huckster takes some lies and makes them sound precocious, by saying them in Congress or a mainstream outlet, so disinformation’s origins are slightly less atrocious.”

In a May 1, 2022 appearance on CNN’s State of the Union program, Mayorkas was asked, “Will American citizens be monitored [by the DGB]?” He replied, “No, no, the board does not have any operational capability. What it will do is gather together best practices in addressing the threat of disinformation from foreign state adversaries, from the cartels and disseminate those best practices to the operators that have been executing and addressing this threat for years.”

On May 5, 2022, Republican U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, after citing numerous specific instances where Jankowicz had openly lied about vital political matters, asked Mayorkas: “If your intent was to combat misinformation, online or in the government, why on God’s green earth would you nominate someone who is a human geyser of misinformation?” Mayorkas relpied: “Senator, I am ultimately responsible for the hiring of Ms. Jankowicz to be the executive director of the Disinformation Governance Board…. I understand that she is an expert in disinformation, and she will have a obligation to execute her responsibilities in a nonpartisan way.” When Hawley then asked Mayorkas if he had been aware of the various instances in which Jankowicz had spread misinformation prior to her appointment, the DHS Secretary said: “I was not.”

On May 23, 2022 — soon after the implementation of the DGB had been “paused” because of the widespread public criticism it was drawing — Nina Jankowicz, who had been named to head the Board, contradicted Mayorkas’ assertion that the DGB would only have monitored “the threat of disinformation from foreign state adversaries.” Jankowicz tweeted that she had been “thinking a lot the past few weeks about the paper I co-authored in the US Army War College Quarterly in 2020,” and she provided the link. “It lays out a government strategy,” Jankowicz continued, “for dealing with disinformation based on 3 Cs- capability, coordination, and cooperation.” She added: “Since this piece was published in summer 2020, the spread and effects of disinformation on American society have only worsened and become entrenched in domestic politics (as the last few weeks of my life have shown).” Jankowicz then tweeted further: “This is the type of work I had hoped to do at DHS, and the type of work the USG sorely needs to invest in. This is the type of work that I have built my career on—not a few contextless tweets. And this is the type of work I will continue in the public sphere.” When she was reminded of the denials that the Board would get involved in domestic politics, Jankowicz insisted that all she was talking about “raising awareness of the falsities coming out of the Kremlin,” and that there was “no ‘combating’ domestic sources anywhere in the mix.”

In June 2022, however, Senators Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) obtained whistleblower documents which revealed that Mayorkas and Jankowicz had lied to the American people about the Board’s purpose and scope; that despite their repeated denials, the DGB was designed from the beginning to monitor and restrict the free speech of American citizens. Hawley’s office summarized the key revelations in the whistleblower documents as follows:

In spite of the administration’s claims, the new whistleblower documents reveal: 

  • The Disinformation Governance Board was originally conceived in part to monitor domestic speech regarding “conspiracy theories about the validity and security of elections” and “disinformation related to the origins and effects of COVID-19 vaccines or the efficacy of masks.”
  • DHS planned for a partnership with Twitter to suppress disfavored content and planned a meeting with Twitter executives exploring the concept.
  • The Disinformation Governance Board charter was drafted in January 2022 and personally signed by Secretary Mayorkas on February 24, 2022. The document states that the charter goes into effect immediately upon the Secretary’s signing of the document.
  • Despite the Secretary’s assertion that the Board had not yet begun its work, a planned meeting with social media executives appears to have been staffed by Nina Jankowicz.
  • DHS officials appear to have prepared legislation to codify a “Rumor Control Program of the Department of Homeland Security to Counter Misinformation, Disinformation, and Malinformation,” including a public-facing website known as “Rumor Control.”

U.S. Economy Shrinks in First Quarter of 2022

On April 28, 2022, Breitbart.com reported: “The U.S. economy contracted in the first three months of 2022 as the economy was battered by a surge in Covid-19 cases from the Omicron variant, ongoing supply chain problems, surging fuel prices, and a flood of imports. The Burea of Economic Analysis said on Thursday [April 28] that Gross Domestic Product decreased at an annual rate of 1.4 percent in the first quarter of 2022. Economists had expected the economy to grow 1.1 percent, so this was far worse than expected. Private inventory investment, exports, and government spending fell in the first quarter. Imports, which are a subtraction from GDP, surged.”

Inflation Continues to Rise

On April 29, 2022, Breitbart.com reported: “The Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge showed consumer prices were up 6.6 percent in March compared with a year earlier, indicating that inflation accelerated from the 6.4 percent pace recorded in February, according to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis released Friday [April 29].”

FBI Conducted Millions of Warrantless Searches on Americans in 2021

An report that was released on April 29, 2022 by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) indicated that the FBI may have conducted up tp 3.4 million warrantless searches of Americans’ electronic data in 2021. “We’re committed to proactively informing the public, who entrusts us to protect our nation and our civil liberties, on the Intelligence Community’s use of key national security authorities,” said Ben Huebner, the ODNI’s Chief of Civil Liberties, Privacy, and Transparency.

DOJ Sues Alabama over Law Making Transgender Treatments for Children a Felony

On April 29, 2022, the U.S. Justice Department filed a complaint challenging S.B. 184, a recently passed Alabama Senate Bill making it a felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, for doctors to prescribe puberty blockers or hormones to children seeking to undergo gender transition.

Claiming that the criminalization of children’s sexual transitioning violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal-protection-under-the-law for all people, the DOJ wrote: “S.B. 184 makes it a felony for any person to ‘engage in or cause’ specified types of medical care for transgender minors. S.B. 184 thus discriminates against transgender youth by denying them access to certain forms of medically necessary care. It further discriminates against transgender youth by barring them from accessing particular procedures while allowing non-transgender minors to access the same or similar procedures.”

“Today’s filing is the latest action by the Justice Department to combat discrimination based on gender identity, including unlawful restrictions on medical care for transgender youth,” the JOJ added. “On March 31, 2022, the Civil Rights Division issued a letter to all state attorneys general reminding them of federal constitutional and statutory provisions that protect transgender youth against discrimination.”

Biden Condemns Supreme Court for Overturning Roe v. Wade

On May 2, 2022, Politico reported that an unidentified individual had leaked an initial draft of a 5-4 majority opinion, written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, in which the Court had decided to strike down the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending,” said Politico. Whereas Roe had guaranteed federal constitutional protections for abortion rights, the new ruling would return responsibility for those rights to each individual state. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito wrote in his opinion, adding: “We hold that Roe and Casey [a 1992 decision that largely reaffirmed the rights set forth in Roe] must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

President Biden reacted with outrage to news of the Court’s decision. On May 3, 2022, he said: “Look, the idea, it concerns me, that we’re gonna, after 50 years, decide a woman does not have the right to choose, number one. But, equally as profound is the rationale, and it remained the every other decision in the notion of privacy is brought into question. If it were to be sustained, a whole range of rights are in question, and it would be a fundamental shift.” Biden also stated:

  • “One of the issues this court, many members of the court, have not acknowledged is there is a right to privacy in the Constitution.”
  • “They refuse to acknowledge there’s a right to privacy. I mean, there are so many fundamental rights that are affected by that. And I’m not prepared to leave that to the whims and the — and the — of the public at the moment in local areas.”
  • “If this decision holds, it really is a radical decision. All of the decisions make in private life, who you marry, whether you can have an abortion, how you raise your child … it is a fundamental shift.”

On May 4, 2022, Biden reflected on the Supreme Court confirmation process for Robert Bork, whom President Ronald Reagan had nominated to the Court in 1987, when Biden was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee: “This reminds me of the debate with Robert Bork. Bork believed the only reason you had any inherent rights was because the government gave them to you. When I was questioning him as the chairman, I said, ‘I believe I have the rights that I have not just because the government gave them to me, which you believe, but because I’m just a child of God—I exist.’ So, the idea that somehow there is an inherent right, that there is no right of privacy, that there is no right. There’d been a law saying a married couple could not purchase birth control in the privacy of their own bedroom and use it. Well, that got struck down.”

Biden was referring to the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut case, which he said “was thought to be a bad decision, by working on, my guess is, the guys on the Supreme Court.” “Now, what happens if you have states changing the law, saying that that that children who are LGBT, who can’t be in classrooms with other children, is that is that legit under the way that the decision is written?” Biden asked. “What are the next things that are going to be attacked? Because this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history—-in recent American history.”

OPEC Rebuffs Biden Again

On May 4, 2022, OPEC, the powerful Middle Eastern oil cartel, announced that it would, along with Russia, reject the Biden administration’s latest request for OPEC to increase its oil production as a way of stopping the rapid rise in petroleum prices. “Both the cartel and Russia, collectively known as OPEC+,” the Daily Caller reported, “will stick to their plan to raise production by a modest 432,000 barrels per day in June, multiple delegates told Reuters, despite pleas from the Biden administration.”

Psaki Refuses to Say Whether Biden Would View the Supreme Court Decision on Abortion Rights As “Legitimate”

On May 2, 2022, Politico reported that an unidentified individual had leaked an initial draft majority opinion, written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, in which the Court had decided to strike down the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending,” said Politico. Whereas Roe had guaranteed federal constitutional protections for abortion rights, the new ruling would return responsibility for those rights to each individual state. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito wrote in his opinion, adding: “We hold that Roe and Casey [a 1992 decision that largely reaffirmed the rights set forth in Roe] must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

In light of the fact that the leaked document was only a draft copy and not necessarily the Court’s final opinion, a reporter asked White House press secretary Jen Psaki at a May 4, 2022 press briefing: “And as for the content of the draft — the document, the draft — it is, of course, a draft — but if the Supreme Court does move to strike down Roe, should Americans be prepared to just accept that decision as legitimate?  And would President Biden accept that decision as legitimate?

Psaki replied:

“[W]hat I can tell you will happen is — and this is what we are preparing for the possibility of — that if Roe were to fall, abortion would probably be illegal in about half the states in the country, up to 26 states, particularly in the South, the Midwest, and West, who have all spoken out — many leaders — about how they’re poised to restrict or ban access.  Some have even taken action, even as recently as yesterday, as crazy as that sounds.

“And depending on the Court’s position — decision — 13 states even have trigger laws.  Trigger laws mean they would basically immediately put in place bans.  And as a result of all of this, tens of millions of women may lack access to reproductive healthcare services as soon as this summer, if that were a decision to be made.

“I’d also note — and as we’re thinking about and working with not just the Gender Policy Council but also the Department of Health and Human Services, also members on the Hill, also the Counsel’s Office, what we’re really focused on is the impact this would have.  It would dramatically reduce access to reproductive care, particularly for women with low incomes, women of color, women in rural communities.

“We know that 75 percent of those seeking abortions are living at or below 200 percent of the poverty level, and the majority of patients seeking abortions identify as Black, Hispanic, and AAPI.

“So if you look at the 26 states, let’s take for example — or the 13 to 26, depending — and you look at a map, that means that women — the majority of whom are below that poverty level and are Black, Hispanic, or AAPI — are going to be forced to figure out how to travel, how to take time off of work, how to get childcare.  It is a prohibitive cost.  It will not be safe. And that is what we are focused on working to address as we’re making policy decisions and considerations.”

The reporter followed up: “So it — it sounds like you’re saying, then, that’s a yes — he would consider this a legitimate decision.”

Psaki responded: “Well, there is not even a decision yet.  We don’t know the validity of the — we know that this is a leaked document; it is not the final opinion.  So, I just can’t speak to that hypothetically at this point in time.”

Psaki Refuses to Condemn Activists Protesting Outside the Homes of Supreme Court Justices Who Were in Favor of Overturning Roe v. Wade

During a May 5, 2022 press briefing at the White House, Biden press secretary Jen Paski refused to directly state that the Biden Administration was opposed to having pro-abortion activists protest directly outside the homes of the five Supreme Court Justices who were in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. Following is an exchange that Psaki had about this topic with reporter Peter Doocy:

Doocy: So, you guys had some time yesterday talking about what you think are the extreme wings of the Republican Party. Do you think the progressive activists that are now planning protests outside some of the justices’ houses are extreme?

Psaki: Peaceful protest? No. Peaceful protest is not extreme.

Doocy: But some of these justices have young kids. Their neighbors are not all public figures. So would the President think about waving off activists that want to go into residential neighborhoods in Virginia and Maryland?

Psaki: Peter, look, I think our view here is that peaceful protest — there’s a long history in the United States and the country of that. And we certainly encourage people to keep it peaceful and not resort to any level of violence.  …

Doocy: Not about yesterday, though — just about moving forward. These activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices. Is that the kind of thing this President wants to help your side make their point?

Psaki: Look, I think the President’s view is that there’s a lot of passion, a lot of fear, a lot of sadness from many, many people across this country about what they saw in that leaked document. We obviously want people’s privacy to be respected. We want people to protest peacefully if they want to — to protest. That is certainly what the President’s view would be.

Doocy: So he doesn’t care if they’re protesting outside the Supreme Court or outside someone’s private residence?

Psaki:   I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest. I want it — we want it, of course, to be peaceful. And certainly, the President would want people’s privacy to be respected. But I think we shouldn’t lose the point here: The reason people are protesting is because women across the country are worried about their fundamental rights that have been law for 50 years. Their rights to make choices about their own bodies and their own healthcare are at risk. That’s why people are protesting. They’re unhappy. They’re scared.

The Illegality of Protesting Outside People’s Homes

Title 18 of the U.S. Code, Section 1507, stipulates that it is a federal crime to protest outside the private residence of a federal judge:

“Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

Psaki Refuses to Say That President Biden Would Favor any Limits at All on Abortion Rights

During a May 5, 2022 press briefing at the White House, Biden press secretary Jen Paski refused to directly state that President Biden would favor any limits at all on abortion rights. Following is an exchange that Psaki had about this topic with reporter Peter Doocy:

Doocy: The President’s position on choice has evolved over time, so just checking for his official position.  Does he support any limits on abortion right now?

Psaki:   Peter, the President has spoken — has talked about his position many times.  He supports the right of a woman to make choices about her own body with her doctor.

Doocy: But I know that one of the Democrats that he endorsed and — who won their primary this week, Tim Ryan, said yesterday that he does not support any limits on abortion.  Is that where the President’s thinking is now?

Psaki:    The President has stated his view many times.

Doocy: So does the President support abortion up until the moment of birth?

Psaki:  The President has spoken about this many times, Peter.  And I would refer you to his own comments about abortion and a woman’s right to choose and make decisions about her body with her doctor, which is what any of those women would do.

Biden Whitewashes Islam & Depicts Muslims As Victims

On May 6, 2022, Islam expert Raymond Ibrahim wrote the following:

Consider the words of U.S. President Joe Biden, spoken during Eid al-Fitr with Muslims at the White House on May 2. He said: “[T]oday, around the world, we’re seeing so many Muslims being targeted with violence. No one, no one should discriminate against oppressed or be oppressed for their religious beliefs…. Muslims make our nation stronger every single day, even as they still face real challenges and threats in our society, including targeted violence and Islamophobia that exists.”

Now, let’s briefly parse these surreal claims:

“[T]oday, around the world, we’re seeing so many Muslims being targeted with violence.”

Where are the statistics for this claim? Rather, what we’re used to seeing is Muslims targeting non-Muslims with violence. According to one tally, for example, during just this last Ramadan, or basically the month of April 2022, Muslims launched 177 terror attacks “in the name of Islam” that murdered 1,086 people. Again, that’s just during one month—Islam’s “holiest” month. The same tally finds that there were zero attacks and zero deaths by non-Muslims operating under the name of their religions.

“No one, no one should discriminate against oppressed or be oppressed for their religious beliefs.”

Of course, everyone agrees with this—except, apparently, the one group that Biden was speaking to and presenting as “oppressed,” namely, Muslims: systematic discrimination and oppression are endemic to the Muslim world, and that’s because systematic discrimination and oppression are integral parts of the religion of Islam and codified in sharia.

If you’re a non-Muslim [in the Muslim world], you are openly treated as inferior and with fewer rights. That’s if you’re lucky; otherwise, you’re outright persecuted and possibly killed for your faith. As a recent report found, 360 million Christians around the world are persecuted for their religious identity—and the overwhelming majority of that persecution occurs in Muslim nations. In fact, the persecution Christians experience in 39 of the worst 50 nations is due to Islam. Yet never a word about this from Biden. Instead:

“Muslims make our nation stronger every single day, even as they still face real challenges and threats in our society, including targeted violence and Islamophobia that exists.”

While one can point to several ways Muslims potentially make the U.S. weaker every day—from terror attacks and violent crimes to engaging in propaganda and subverting the nation from within—it would be useful to explain one [way in which] “Muslims make our nation stronger every single day.” Sure, it sounds nice, but some concrete examples, please.

As for Biden’s complaint about “targeted violence and Islamophobia that exists,” as seen, whatever that may be, it is a tithe of the targeted violence that Muslims launch on others.

Biden & Democrats Support Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022, to Expand Abortion Rights & Make Them Permanent

On May 6, 2022, President Biden issued a proclamation that said, in part:

“During National Women’s Health Week, we recommit to ensuring the health and well-being of women and girls across our Nation.  Central to this mission is protecting women’s fundamental rights to make their own choices and build their own future.  I am committed to defending women’s rights, including their access to reproductive health care.  Roe has been the law of the land for almost 50 years; basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned.  In response to the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights across the country, my Administration is exploring all the tools at our disposal to strengthen and protect women’s access to critical reproductive health care.  We will continue to work with the Congress to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, which will ensure that all women have access to critical reproductive health care, no matter where they live.”

The Women’s Health Protection Act was intended to legally enshrine the right to taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand at every stage of pregnancy from the moment of conception through the moment of delivery. Some key excerpts from the bill:


(a) General Rule.–A health care provider has a statutory right under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion services, and that provider’s patient has a corresponding right to receive such services, without any of the following limitations or requirements:

            (1) A requirement that a health care provider perform specific tests or medical procedures in connection with the provision of abortion services, unless generally required for the provision of medically comparable procedures.

            (2) A requirement that the same health care provider who provides abortion services also perform specified tests, services, or procedures prior to or subsequent to the abortion.

            (3) A requirement that a health care provider offer or provide the patient seeking abortion services medically inaccurate information in advance of or during abortion services.

            (4) A limitation on a health care provider’s ability to prescribe or dispense drugs based on current evidence-based regimens or the provider’s good-faith medical judgment, other than a limitation generally applicable to the medical profession.

            (5) A limitation on a health care provider’s ability to provide abortion services via telemedicine, other than a limitation generally applicable to the provision of medical services via telemedicine.

            (6) A requirement or limitation concerning the physical plant, equipment, staffing, or hospital transfer arrangements of facilities where abortion services are provided, or the credentials or hospital privileges or status of personnel at such facilities, that is not imposed on facilities or the personnel of facilities where medically comparable procedures are performed.

            (7) A requirement that, prior to obtaining an abortion, a patient make one or more medically unnecessary in-person visits to the provider of abortion services or to any individual or entity that does not provide abortion services.

            (8) A prohibition on abortion at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability, including a prohibition or restriction on a particular abortion procedure.

            (9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.

            (10) A limitation on a health care provider’s ability to provide immediate abortion services when that health care provider believes, based on the good-faith medical judgment of the provider, that delay would pose a risk to the patient’s health.

            (11) A requirement that a patient seeking abortion services at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability disclose the patient’s reason or reasons for seeking abortion services, or a limitation on the provision or obtaining of abortion services at any point or points in time prior to fetal viability based on any actual, perceived, or potential reason or reasons of the patient for obtaining abortion services, regardless of whether the limitation is based on a health care provider’s degree of actual or constructive knowledge of such reason or reasons.

Biden Again Blames “Putin’s Gas Tax”

During a May 9, 2022 fundraiser, President Biden blamed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recnt invasion of Ukraine for the latest spike in gasoline prices in the United States, which had reached a new high of $4.574 nationally. After claiming that the used car market had been artificially high in 2021 because of a shortage of available computer chips, Biden said: “This year we have a similar problem, but it’s because of energy because of Putin’s gas tax … the gas tax of him causing such a disruption in oil markets around the world.”

Lamenting that inflation was an “incredibly difficult problem,” Biden said that increased government spending on research and development would help reduce inflation. “The generic point,” he concluded, “is we have to invest in ourselves, invest in our people, so that we can, in fact, continue to lead the world on all the things that are so — there are so many incredible opportunities for not only us but for the rest of the world.”

Psaki Openly Condones Activists Protesting Outside the Homes of Supreme Court Justices Who Were in Favor of Overturning Roe v. Wade

During a May 10, 2022 White House briefing, a reporter — noting that the Justice Department in recent months had been quick to condemn conservatives’ protests outside the homes of school board members — asked White House press secretary Jen Psaki whether President Biden felt that “the demonstrations outside of, say, Justice Alito’s home — are those attempts to interfere or intimidate?” Evading the question, Psaki portrayed critics of the Biden administration as hypocrites:

“I think I said yesterday, but I’m happy to repeat, because I think it’s important for everybody to hear, that the president’s long-standing view has been that violence, threats, and intimidation of any kind have no place in political discourse. And we believe, of course, in peaceful protest. What I do find is interesting, and I think many people have noted, is that there are voices on the right who have called out this protests that are happening while remaining silent for years on protests that have happened outside the homes of school board members, the Michigan Secretary of State, or including threats made to women seeking reproductive health care [sic], or even an insurrection [sic] against our Capitol. So I know that there’s an outrage right now, I guess, about protests that have been peaceful to date, and we certainly continue to encourage that outside of judges’ homes [emphasis added], and that’s the president’s position, but the silence is pretty deafening about all of the other intimidation that we’ve seen to a number of people.”

Biden Refuses to Say Whether He Favors Any Restrictions on Abortion

After delivering a speech on his plan “to fight inflation and lower costs for working families” on May 10, 2022, Biden was asked whether, in light of the recently leaked Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade: “Do you support any restrictions on abortion? Or what limits do you believe there should be as the Senate is taking that up? The president replied: “I’m not going to respond because I want the story to be about inflation.”

The Women’s Health Protection Act Is Defeated in the Senate

On May 11, 2022, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer placed the Women’s Health Protection Act up for a vote in the Senate, in order to get every senator on record vis-a-vis the issue of abortion rights. With 49 votes in support and 51 against, the bill fell 11 votes short of the 60 votes needed in order to be debated by the full 100-member Senate. One Democrat, Senator Joe Manchinll, joined all 50 Republicans in voting to block the bill.

The Reuters news agency reported: “Before the vote, more than two dozen House Democrats, mainly women, marched from the House of Representatives to the Senate chanting ‘My body, my decision.’ They then entered the Senate chamber and sat quietly along a back wall while senators debated abortion rights. Last September, the House voted 218-211 to pass an abortion rights bill nearly identical to the Senate bill.”

House Republicans Introduce Bill to Stop Government Distribution of Cell Phones to Illegal Migrants

On May 12, 2022, eleven House Republicans led by Florida Rep. Byron Donalds introduced a bill designed to prevent ICE’s “Alternatives to Detention” (ATD) program from continuing to provide cell phones to illegal migrants awaiting deportation proceedings; most of those migrants were being given either an ankle monitor or a cell phone with a GPS tracking app. The No More Phones Act would bar the continued “use [of[ American taxpayer funding to provide cellular devices to individuals who cross the southern border illegally,” and would require Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas to issue a report detailing the number of cell phones distributed and whether or not they were returned by their recipients when they appeared at their deportation proceedings. “Under the guise of President Biden’s so-called ‘leadership,’ this administration has excessively wasted taxpayer funds by routinely providing cell phones to illegal immigrants—which are more than likely to be disposed of at a later date to avoid government detection,” Donalds said in a statement.

Republican Representative Says Illegal Immigrants Are Receiving “Pallets of Baby Formula”

In a May 12, 2022 social media post, Republican Congresswoman Kat Cammack (Florida) reported that a longtime (30 years) border patrol agent had sent her photographic evidence that the Biden Administration was sending large pallets of baby formula to the southern U.S. border, to help feed the children of newly arrived illegal migrants — even as Americans nationwide faced a rapidly worsening shortage of baby formula. And in a Facebook video, Cammack said that the same border patrol agent had told her: “Kat, you would not believe the shipment [of baby formula] I just brought in.” Cammack added that the man “has been a border patrol agent for 30 years, and he has never seen anything quite like this. He is a grandfather, and he is saying that his own children can’t get baby formula for his grandkids. He, as a border patrol agent, just took in pallets, pallets of baby formula for all of the illegals that are crossing into the United States.”

Biden Cancels Sale of Alaska Oil & Gas Lease

On May 12, 2022, The Wall Street Journal reported:

“The Biden administration canceled plans to auction drilling rights in three regions off the U.S. coastline later this year, adding more friction to an uneasy relationship with the oil industry during a period of high gasoline prices. The decision to cancel lease sales for two regions in the Gulf of Mexico and one off the coast of Alaska leaves oil-and-gas companies facing a blackout period of unknown length for access to new drilling spots in valuable offshore acreage. A five-year schedule for offshore lease sales expires at the end of next month, and the Interior Department has yet to propose a new one. Canceling the pending sales with no new schedule yet proposed could mean the industry now faces years between successful federal offshore auctions.

“’The lack of new lease sales will lower future supplies, which will keep energy prices high and drive inflation for years to come,’ Marty Durbin, president of the energy arm of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement. ‘While some in the Administration have called for more domestic production, this action sends exactly the wrong signal to producers and markets.’”

White House Claims Baby Formula Shortage Has Long Been a Top Priority, After Biden Had Claimed to Be Unaware of the Problem

On May 13, 2022, President Biden bristled when reporters asked if he could have acted sooner to address the baby-formula shortage. “If we had been better mind readers, I guess we could’ve, but we moved as the problem became apparent to us,” Biden replied sarcastically. Indeed, this was the first time he ever mentioned the problem, though news reports had been discussing it for weeks.

On May 16, 2022, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called the baby-formula shortage crisis “one of the president’s top priorities.” “This is something he is focusing on very acutely and again I said 24/7 we’ve been working on this since we have learned about this back in February,” she stated. “You’ve heard us talk about this, you’ve heard colleagues talking about what we have done since February,” Jean-Pierre added. “We’ve been working on this 24/7.”

Biden Blames Mass Shooting in Buffalo on “Repugnant White Racist Ideology”

On the afternoon of May 14, 2022, an 18-year-old white man shot and killed 10 people in a Buffalo, New York supermarket located in the heart of a predominantly black community. Eleven of the 13 people who were shot, were black.

That evening, President Biden issued a brief statement that included the following remarks:

“The First Lady and I are praying for the victims and their families, and hearts all across this country are with the people of Buffalo. We still need to learn more about the motivation for today’s shooting as law enforcement does its work, but we don’t need anything else to state a clear moral truth: A racially motivated hate crime is abhorrent to the very fabric of this nation. Any act of domestic terrorism, including an act perpetrated in the name of a repugnant white nationalist ideology, is antithetical to everything we stand for in America. Hate must have no safe harbor. We must do everything in our power to end hate-fueled domestic terrorism.”

On May 17, 2022, Biden went to Buffalo to speak about the shooting. Among his remarks were the following:

  • “In America, evil will not win. I promise you. Hate will not prevail and white supremacy will not have the last word. For the evil did come to Buffalo, and it’s come to all too many places, manifest in gunmen who massacred innocent people in the name of hateful and perverse ideology rooted in fear and racism.”
  • “What happened here is simple and straightforward: terrorism. Terrorism. Domestic terrorism. Violence inflicted in the service of hate and the vicious thirst for power that defines one group of people being inherently inferior to any other group. A hate that, through the media and politics, the internet, has radicalized angry, alienated and lost individuals into falsely believing that they will be replaced. That’s the word. Replaced by the other. By people who don’t look like them.” [This was a reference to so-called “replacement theory,” the idea that leftists were seeking to replace America’s existing white majority with nonwhites who could be relied upon to vote Democrat in the future. But contrary to Biden’s implication that this was nothing more than a racist conspracy theory, numerous Democrats over the years have indeed clearly articulated that this is their long-range objective.][1]
  • “That’s what it is. We’ve now seen too many times the deadly and destructive violence this ideology unleashes. We heard the chants — ‘you will not replace us’ — in Charlottesville, Virginia. I wasn’t going to run, as the senator knows, again for president. When I saw those people coming out of the woods of the fields in Virginia, in Charlottesville, carrying torches, shouting, you will not replace us, accompanied by white supremacists and carrying Nazi banners, that’s when I said, ‘No, no.’ And I, honest to God, those who know me — Chuck [Schumer], you know, I wasn’t going to run for certain. But I was going to be darned if I was going to let — Anyway. I’ll get going.”
  • “White supremacy is a poison. It’s a poison. It really is. Running through our body politic. And it’s been allowed to fester and grow right in front of our eyes. No more. I mean, no more. We need to say as clearly and forcefully as we can that the ideology of white supremacy has no place in America. None. Look, failure to saying, that is going to be complicity. Silence is complicity. It’s complicity. We cannot remain silent.”
  • “Look, I’m not naïve. I know tragedy will come again. It cannot be forever overcome. It cannot be fully understood either. But there are certain things we can do. We can keep assault weapons off our streets. We’ve done it before. I did it when I passed the crime bill last time, and violence went down, shootings went down. We can’t prevent people from being radicalized to violence, but we can address the relentless exploitation of the internet to recruit and mobilize terrorism. We just need to have the courage to do that, to stand up.”
  • “Look, the American experiment in democracy is in a danger like it hasn’t been in my lifetime. It’s in danger this hour. Hate and fear are being given too much oxygen by those who pretend to love America, but who don’t understand America. To confront the ideology of hate requires caring about all people.”
  • “Now is the time for the people of all races, from every background to speak up as a majority in America and reject white supremacy. These actions we’ve seen in these hate-filled attacks represent the views of a hate-filled minority. We can’t allow them to distort America. The real America. We can’t allow them to destroy the soul of the nation.”
  • “We have to refuse to live in a country where Black people going about a weekly grocery shopping can be gunned down by weapons of war deployed in a racist cause.”

The Buffalo Gunman Was Actually a Leftist

In the Buffalo gunman’s 180-page manifesto:

  • He wrote: “When I was 12 I was deep into communist ideology, talk to anyone from my old high school and ask about me and you will hear that. From age 15 to 18 however, I consistently moved farther to the right. On the political compass I fall in the mildmoderate authoritarian left category, and I would prefer to be called a populist.”
  • He never mentioned Tucker Carlson, and expressed contempt for Fox News.
  • He wrote that “conservatism is corporatism in disguise, I want no part of it. . . . CONSERVATISM IS DEAD. THANK GOD.”
  • He called himself an “eco-fascist” who supported “green nationalism” as “the only true nationalism.”
  • He articulated his support for population control: “There is no Green future with never ending population growth.”

A.G. Garland Rules That “Mental Illness” Can Be Used As a Mitigating Factor in Criminal Deportation Cases

In his May 9, 2022 ruling in a case known as the Matter of B-Z-R, Attorney General Merrick Garland stated that immigration judges, when considering the asylum claims of people who have been convicted of “particularly serious crimes,” would now be permitted to take into account the mental health of the asylum seekers when determining whether or not their continued presence in the United States might pose a danger to the public. The B-Z-R case involved a Mexican national with a criminal record who, after being convicted of burglary in New Jersey, claimed that if he were to be deported back to his home country, he would face persecution because of his sexual preference as well as unspecified mental disorders.

In its brief on the matter, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) argued:

“An alien is ineligible for relief when convicted of a particularly serious crime. A crime is defined by its elements. Thus, the fact that an alien was convicted of a crime with elements that make it particularly serious—not the mental health of the alien—alone determines whether that alien was convicted of a particularly serious crime.

“To the extent mental health bears on whether the elements that constitute a particularly serious crime have been met, it has already been considered, according to law, by the trier of fact when considering whether the defendant had the mental state required for conviction. Any other mental health condition is thus irrelevant to determining whether an alien has been convicted of a particularly serious crime.

“The main policy reason for the law’s denial of immigration relief to aliens who have committed particularly serious crimes is that their criminal actions, as demonstrated by their conviction in a court of law of a particularly serious crime, make them a danger to the community. Considering an alien’s purportedly extenuating mental illness does not serve this policy goal. Aliens with mental illnesses that drive them to commit particularly serious crimes present a danger to the community just as great as—and perhaps greater than—aliens who commit the same crimes without being motivated by mental illness.”

As IRLI executive director and general counsel Dale Wlcox wrote in Breitbart.com on May 17, 2022:

“It is widely known that immigration lawyers will coach their illegal alien clients to say the ‘magic words’ that will allow them to enter the United States. Specifically, they are told to tell immigration agents that they are fearful to return to their home country for fear of persecution. As a result of Garland’s decision, criminal aliens facing deportation will be instructed to feign mental illness as a way to delay or prevent removal.”

Biden’s “Extreme Rewriting Of Federal Civil Rights Law”

In a May 23, 2022 article, The Daily Caller detailed how the Biden administration was enforcing its transgender agenda by rewriting a number of civil rights laws and exploiting the power of federal bureaucracies. Said the article:

In June 2021, the Biden administration announced its intention to interpret Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a landmark civil rights law barring sex-based discrimination in federally funded schools, to apply to gender identity in additon to sex. The administration also announced in May 2021 it would interpret Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to expand its protections against discrimination to include gender identity.

“Because this Administration can’t push its LGBT agenda through elected representatives in Congress, it’s issuing lawless regulations that would require experimental transgender surgeries to be performed and paid for by insurance, including on minor children, in the name of non-discrimination,” Roger Severino, former director of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department’s Office for Civil Rights, told TheDCNF [Daily Caller News Foundation]. “President Biden is certainly paying back his radical base, but making a mockery of our civil rights laws and hurting our kids in the process.”

By interpreting the prohibition on sex-based discrimination in Section 1557 of the ACA to include gender identity, the administration has made it so healthcare providers can’t treat patients who identify as transgender differently than other patients. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has used the policy to force employers to pay for sex changes against their religious beliefs and to force healthcare providers to perform those procedures.

The policy creates conflicts for healthcare workers who believe sex change procedures are harmful, because they could face discrimination lawsuits for refusing to perform them, Severino and former Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Ryan Anderson explained when former President Barack Obama initially proposed the gender mandate in 2016. Healthcare workers with religious or conscientious objections to transgender medical treatments face the same litigation threat.

“The Biden administration has imposed an extreme rewriting of federal civil rights law to mandate bans on gender identity discrimination, and these bureaucratic requirements threaten the health and opportunities of women in areas as broad as sports, healthcare, housing and employment,” Matt Bowman, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), told TheDCNF. “The Biden administration has repeatedly refused to protect religious liberty from these infringements.”

District Judge Daniel Traynor rebuked Biden’s use of civil rights law to force healthcare providers to perform sex change procedures in a court order blocking the Biden healthcare mandate. “HHS Guidance encourages a parent to file a complaint if a medical provider refuses to gender transition their child, of any age, including an infant,” he wrote. “The thought that a newborn child could be surgically altered to change gender is the result of the Biden HHS Notification and HHS Guidance that brands a medical professional’s refusal to do so as discrimination.”

Additionally, the Department of Education (DOE) under Biden is expected to officially expand the definition of sex to include “gender identity” under Title IX. This would require every sex-separated women’s space, including bathrooms and locker rooms, to accommodate males who identify as transgender women, according to Sarah Perry, a senior legal fellow for The Heritage Foundation.

The DOE also provided expert training on transgenderism to school staff and helped teach schools to strategize and take action to support transgender and nonbinary children, according to a March 31 White House announcement.

Biden has also pushed the transgender agenda through guidance to federal bureaucracies, who have begun disregarding sex in security screenings, making it easier to change one’s sex in official paperwork and allowing individuals to decline to state their gender on official forms.

Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released guidance promoting sex change procedures for children and adolescents March 31 in a document titled “Gender-Affirming Care and Young People.” The guidance promoted puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, sex change surgeries and the practice of socially transitioning children to the opposite sex.

The HHS also created a website announced March 31 targeted towards transgender youths which links to LGBT resources including HHS guidance promoting irreversible medical interventions for children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria.

Biden voiced unwavering support for “gender affirming care” for children, meaning social transitions and radical biomedical interventions rather than counseling to help children accept their bodies, in a March 31 statement.

Federal agencies made it easier to change one’s gender identification and in some cases offered “X” gender options in official paperwork under Biden, according to the March 31 White House announcement. Such options were made available on social security paperwork, in federal financial aid for students and for White House visits and the White House proposed the 2023 budget include $10 million in funding to research how best to ask questions about gender identity and sexual orientation in the census.

The TSA [Transportation Security Administration] and the Department of Homeland Security announced March 31 that they would stop considering gender in their security processes and update their advanced imaging technology (AIT) at airport checkpoints with the help of $18.6 million from Congress. The TSA said it would work with airline carriers to promote “X” and “U” (undisclosed) gender options in reservation systems.

Biden Opposes “Hardening Schools” to Protect Against Mass Shootings

On June 1, 2022 — a few days after after an 18-year-old Latino gunman walked unobstructed into Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas and murdered 19 children and two teachers —  White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that President Biden was opposed to the policy of “hardening schools” as a means of protecting children from mass shooters. “I know there’s been conversation about hardening schools,” she said. “That is not something that he believes in. He believes that we should be able to give teachers the resources to be able to do the job that they’re meant to do at schools.” Jean-Pierre also said that “background checks” were needed to “make sure that our communities are protected” and ensure “that our children are not going to school feeling unsafe” — though the Texas gunman had in fact passed a background check when purchasing the weapons that he used in his mass murder.

Biden’s Remarks About Gun Violence

On June 2, 2022, President Biden addressed the nation with a televised speech on the topic of gun violence. Among his remarks were the following:

“After [the mass shooting in] Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done. This time, that can’t be true.  This time, we must actually do something. The issue we face is one of conscience and common sense.

“For so many of you at home, I want to be very clear: This is not about taking away anyone’s guns.  It’s about vili- — not about vilifying gum [sic] — gun owners.  In fact, we believe we should be treating responsible gun owners as an example of how every gun owner should behave.  I respect the culture and the tradition and the concerns of lawful gun owners.

“At the same time, the Second Amendment, like all other rights, is not absolute.  It was Jus- — it was Justice Scalia who wrote, and I quote, ‘Like most rights, the right…’ — Second Amendment — the rights granted by the Second Amendment are ‘not unlimited.’  Not unlimited.  It never has been.

“There have always been limitations on what weapons you can own in America.  For example, machine guns have been federally regulated for nearly 90 years.  And this is still a free country.

“This isn’t about taking away anyone’s rights.  It’s about protecting children.  It’s about protecting families.  It’s about protecting whole communities.  It’s about protecting our freedoms to go to school, to a grocery store, and to a church without being shot and killed.

“According to new data just released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, guns are the number one killer of children in the United States of America.  The number one killer.  More than car accidents.  More than cancer. …  For God’s sake, how much more carnage are we willing to accept?  How many more innocent American lives must be taken before we say ‘enough’?  Enough. …

“We need to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.  And if we can’t ban assault weapons, then we should raise the age to purchase them from 18 to 21.  Strengthen background checks.  Enact safe storage laws and red-flag laws.  Repeal the immunity that protects gun manufacturers from liability.  Address the mental health crisis deepening the trauma of gun violence and as a consequence of that violence.

“These are rational, commonsense measures.  And here’s what it all means.  It all means this: We should reinstate the assault weapons ban and high-capacity magazines that we passed in 1994 with bipartisan support in Congress and the support of law enforcement.  Nine categories of semi-automatic weapons were included in that ban, like AK-47s and AR-15s.

“And in the 10 years it was law, mass shootings went down.  But after Republicans let the law expire in 2004 and those weapons were allowed to be sold again, mass shootings tripled.  Those are the facts. …

“We should limit how many rounds a weapon can hold.  Why in God’s name should an ordinary citizen be able to purchase an assault weapon that holds 30-round magazines that let mass shooters fire hundreds of bullets in a matter of minutes? …

“We should expand background checks to be- — keep guns out of the hands of felons, fugitives, and those under restraining orders.  …

“I also believe we should have safe storage laws and personal liability for not locking up your gun. …

“We should also have national red-flag laws so that a parent, a teacher, a counselor can flag for a court that a child, a student, a patient is exhibiting violent tendencies, threatening classmates, or experiencing suicidal thoughts that makes them a danger to themselves or to others. …

“We should repeal the liability shield that often protects gun manufacturers from being sued for the death and destruction caused by their weapons.  They’re the only industry in this country that has that kind of immunity.

“Imagine — imagine if the tobacco industry had been immune from being sued — where we’d be today.  The gun industry’s special protections are outrageous.  It must end.”

Biden Signs Executive Order to Combat “Anti-LGBTQ” Bills in the States

At a White House signing ceremony on June 15, 2022, President Biden signed an executive order aimed at combating bills by which 13 separate state legislatures in recent months had sought to: (a) limit access to “gender-affirming care” (i.e., physical mutilation and hormonal puberty blockers) for transgender youth; (b) prohibit transgender females (i.e., biological males) from competing on girls’ sports teams in school; and (c) bar classroom discussions of sexuality and gender identity from young children’s classroom instruction. The order directed federal health and education agencies to expand access to the aforementioned items. It also curbed federal funding for the practice of “conversion therapy” by which various secular and religious mental-health advocates seek to help people who identify as transgender, to become comfortable with their actual biological gender.

“We’re in a battle for the soul of the nation,” Biden said to the LGBTQ activists and Democratic lawmakers in attendance. “And when I look around this room here and at all of you here today, it’s a battle I know we will win.” He added: “My message to all the young people: Just be you. You are loved. You are understood. You do belong. I want you to know that as your president, all of us on this stage, have your back.”

Tucker Carlson Exposes the Diary of President Biden’s Daughter, Ashley

On June 18, 2022, RedState.com reported:

On [June 17], Tucker Carlson brought up an issue most other conservative outlets and commentators won’t touch. Namely, the fact that Joe Biden is accused of some extremely disturbing things in a diary written by his daughter.

The saga broke into the open last November, after the FBI raided the homes of Project Veritas journalists, including James O’Keefe, looking for information regarding the diary. Accusations that it was stolen were made, but as Harmeet Dhillon explained on Carlson’s show, that’s not only false but completely irrelevant. […]

Carlson opens by pointing out one of the most salacious charges in the diary, which is that the current president once showered with his daughter, causing her to have sexual compulsion issues later in life. And to be clear, the diary is real. The New York Times confirmed that in a report late last year, which means the only defense here is that Biden’s daughter is lying.

But whether she is or not seems rather immaterial to the lack of coverage, right? Imagine that Ivanka Trump had written a diary entry accusing Donald Trump of what seems awfully close to molestation. Don’t you think reporters might be asking questions about that? Don’t you think there’d be further investigations into the matter to see if the claims are true and how far the inappropriate behavior went? Yet, the media, including the hard news side of Fox News, has completely blacked out the story, pretending the revelations never happened.

Carlson then interviewed Harmeet Dhillon, who is currently representing Project Veritas … on the matter. She spoke about how, instead of the spotlight being shined on Biden after the shocking allegations, the story suddenly turned into the FBI targeting journalists for supposedly buying “stolen” property. That led to the aforementioned raids.

But as Dhillon notes, it is not illegal for journalists to possess and publish stolen documents. If it were, every editor at the Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc. would be in jail right now. Rather, the ability of the press to publish those types of materials is protected by the Constitution of the United States. Regardless, the diary was not stolen. It was purchased legally and then re-purchased legally by Project Veritas.

Yet, as Dhillon points out, the warrants mentioned the word “stolen” several times. That was untrue, so how did the FBI get search warrants to raid the homes of journalists over a diary that wasn’t even stolen? The answer is obviously that someone lied, and Dhillon seems to believe it had to have been members of the Biden family and their legal representation. That makes a lot of sense, and I agree, but I still don’t think something like this gets as far as it did without the FBI being in cahoots with the president. They knew what they were doing here.

In other words, this marks another black eye for Dir. Christopher Wray’s corrupt, scandal-ridden bureau. The choice for the FBI to go along with these raids didn’t come out of the blue. There had to be some direction given from the top to take these steps, including from Wray and Biden himself.



  1. The Democrats’ ultimate objective is to import a massive bloc of new voters who will support their party in overwhelming numbers for generations to come, thereby changing forever the economic, cultural, and political landscape of American society. This motive was illuminated with crystal clarity by a 2018 Center for American Progress Action Fund memo in which onetime Hillary Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri called on Democrats to aggressively defend former president Obama’s DACA program, which protected hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens from being deported. And why was this so vital to Palmieri? Because those illegals, she explained, represented “a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success.”To be sure, there is a strong racial component in this Democrat strategy. No Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of the white vote since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Knowing this, Michelle Goldberg wrote an October 29, 2018 opinion piece in The New York Times titled “We Can Replace Them” — a reference to the white people whom she characterized broadly as “white nationalists.” She ended her piece with these words: “In a week, American voters can do to white nationalists what they fear most. Show them they’re being replaced.”In a similar vein, Democrat Senator Dick Durbin said in July 2021: “The demographics of America are not on the side of the Republican Party. The new voters in this country are moving away from them.”The Washington Times put it this way in 2019: “With declining support from white and older Americans, the Democrats have concluded that their future lies in importing a new electorate from south of the border.”