What are we to make of a comment Monday from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin that the Biden administrations goal in Ukraine is to see Russia weakened to the degree that it cant do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine?

Austin made the remark in a press conference with Secretary of State Antony Blinken after the pair met with Ukraines President Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv, in what was the highest level visit by U.S. officials since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February.

One obvious conclusion we can draw from Austins comment is that the Biden administration has now committed openly to a policy of escalation in Ukraine. The White House intends to keep the war in Ukraine alive, with the stated goal of weakening Moscow by continuing to pour new and more advanced weaponry into the war-ravaged country.

Indeed, Austin and Blinken announced a new round of military aid to Ukraine, bringing the total amount of U.S. assistance to about $3.7 billion since the invasion began. After resisting pressure early in the conflict to supply Ukraine with advanced weapons systems, the Biden administration has changed course. It is now preparing to send heavy artillery, helicopters, armored personnel carriers, antiaircraft radar systems, advanced attack drones and other weapons.

Austin told members of the press that the Defense Department wont just send weapons, but will expand military training for Ukrainian service members in the region on certain weapons systems being provided.

Delivering all this aid is of course itself an escalation of U.S. involvement in the war. A Wall Street Journalreportabout the meeting in Kyiv included this detail, buried near the end of the story:Senior U.S. military officers at a facility in Poland described an accelerating logistical network for supplying weapons and materiel to Ukraine, as well as a regional effort to increase troop levels and exercises with NATO members along the alliances eastern flank.

Seven 155-mm artillery pieces, along with their tow vehicles, are being processed through the facility, adding to the 18 howitzers the U.S. has already provided to Ukraine, a senior defense official said. Six dozen U.S. howitzers are being sent to Ukraine under a new aid package, and rounds of 155-mm artillery were visible on pallets at the Polish facility.

These weapons and munitions are getting into Ukraine for the most part via railway, which is probably why Russiacarried out missile strikeson least five railway stations across central and western Ukraine early Monday, just hours after Austin and Blinken met with Zelensky.

How did Austin and Blinken get to that meeting? By railway. Politicoreportedthat Austin and Blinken traveled to and from Kyiv by train and crossed into Poland shortly before Russian missiles struck several railway lines including one in the city of Lviv in western Ukraine, near the Polish border.

If youre wondering what is the significance of this deepening U.S. involvement in the Russo-Ukrainian war, or how it might lead to a direct military confrontation between the United States and Russia, consider that the U.S. secretaries of defense and state might have just narrowly missed being struck by a Russian missile as they traveled to and from Kyiv by rail on Monday.

As the Biden administration escalates, the chances that something very much like that will happen are going to increase exponentially. Perhaps a crew of U.S. servicemen quietly sent into the country to train Ukrainian troops on the use of a new U.S.-provided weapons systems will get hit by a Russian missile strike. Perhaps U.S. diplomats, whom Blinken said are returning to Ukraine this week, first to Lviv and eventually to Kyiv, will be killed or injured or otherwise caught in the crossfire.

We cant know what will happen exactly, only that if the United States continues down this path sending Ukraine increasingly advanced weapons systems, training Ukrainian troops, underwriting Ukraines defense it will lead,as it has already led, to ever-increasing U.S. involvement in the war.

At some point, it wont matter that back in March President Biden said he wouldnt send U.S. troops to Ukraine. The logic of U.S. escalation is already at work, moving us toward direct engagement.

After all, the Pentagonsaid in early Marchthat a U.S.-facilitated transfer of Polish MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine was not tenable, yet last week the United States and its allies took a step in that direction,providing Ukraine with aircraft partsit needed to get 20 grounded planes operational. Even now, Slovakia is in talks with its NATO allies aboutproviding MiG-29 warplanes to Ukraineif the United States will replace them with F-16s.

Beyond the logic of escalation, there is a strategic dead-end looming for the Biden administration. Early on in the war, Blinken articulated the hoped-for end state in Ukraine: We have to sustain this until it stops, until the war is over, Russian forces leave, the Ukrainian people regain their independence, their sovereignty, their territorial integrity. Were committed to doing that.

The best way to understand that is as a maximalist policy vis--vis Moscow: a total defeat of Moscow and a complete humiliation of the Russian armed forces. Since Blinken said that in early March, versions of it have been repeated in the corporate press and among unreconstructed foreign policy neocons.

Arecent columnby Daniel Henninger in the Wall Street Journal is representative of this view. The time has come, he says, for the West to declare its intention to win in Ukraine. After all, Americas credibility is at stake. The moment has arrived in this war for Mr. Biden to clear something up with one presidential assertion: Were in this thing to win.

So goes the thinking among establishment types inside the Beltway. As far as they are concerned, the United States is in this thing. And if were in, then wed better win. The assumption underlying this analysis is that Russian President Vladimir Putin, faced with U.S. escalation, will back down and accept defeat. An unmitigated Ukrainian victory is, according to these people, somehow a realistic outcome of this conflict.

But history, especially theunique history of Russo-Ukrainian relations, suggests otherwise. Indeed it suggests that Moscow will never allow for the kind of Ukrainian victory that Blinken and the White House are working towards. To the extent U.S. policymakers are relying on, say, historical comparisons to the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan as a guide for the creation of U.S. policy in Ukraine, then were in trouble.

Put another way,this is not a peripheral conflict for Russia. As far as the Kremlin is concerned, the fate of Ukraine is inextricably tied to Russias core strategic national interests. The chances that Putin will accept total defeat in Ukraine without escalation that involves the use of nuclear weapons, or that involves widening the war, are probably lower than most Americans are comfortable with.

To bring it back to Defense Secretary Austins remark about the U.S. wanting to see Russia weakened to the point it cannot field a military capable of invading a much smaller country, one has to ask: how does Russia, a country with the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, get weakened to that point? Do Austin and his generals really think that a U.S.-backed Ukraine is going to be able to do that? Or do they have something else in mind? The evidence suggests they have something else in mind, and that something else is direct U.S. and NATO involvement.

Instead of barreling toward a clash between Russia and the West, a wiser course of action for the Biden administration would be to ensure the United States doesnt get drawn into the war at all, and takes the lead in urging both sides to come to a negotiated political settlement that puts an end to the fighting.

But with each passing week, that wiser course of action becomes more remote and less possible, while a far more dangerous and increasingly inexorable course of events, for the United States and Russia and the entire world, draws ever closer.

John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.

Read the original here:

Biden Is Openly Pursuing A Policy Of Escalation In Ukraine - The Federalist

America's craft wine brand, The Federalist Wines, has announced the return of the brand's Cabinet of Summer campaign, a contest offering fans a $10,000 reward to create an epic summer itinerary. Building off the success of the 2021 Cabinet of Summer campaign, The Federalist is opening two new positions consumers can apply for: Secretary of the Backyard and Secretary of the Frontier. Selected winners will each receive their prize to make history, be challenged to use this prize to master their chosen craft, and officially become a part of the Federalist family.

Consumers have from Tuesday, April 20th to Wednesday, June 22nd to enter, and selected winners will have the opportunity to shape their summers however they'd like - on a local and/or national scale. Beginning today, fans can apply for the following two positions:

-Secretary of The Backyard: This person loves spending the warm summer months in the comfort of their own home or throwing the biggest block party to date. Whether they're grilling, playing sports in the yard, or looking to revamp their backyard space to host their family and friends all summer - The Federalist has got them covered!

-Secretary of The Frontier: This individual is all about new adventures and spends most of their time soaking up the sunshine outdoors. This summer, they'll be able to enjoy their favorite Federalist wine as they explore everywhere from the countryside to the beach or to the mountains.

"We're thrilled to reinstate the Cabinet of Summer and to offer more consumers the chance to have their best summer yet. We understand that life has been on pause for a few years, which is why we are excited to offer additional personalized opportunities for winners to live out their dreams," said Tony Terlato Jr., Vice President at Terlato Wines. "The Federalist Wines hopes this summer will be the best one yet, filled with good people, good memories, and plenty of good wine."

To apply, contestants can visit federalistwines.com/cabinetofsummer and share how they plan to make history if chosen as a Secretary of Summer. To be considered, all applicants must propose how they would make the most of their prize, including an example of their epic summer itinerary, as well as a link to a photo or video on their Instagram page that illustrates their content creation skills. To be eligible, fans must reside in The U.S. and be 25 years of age or older.

The judging period will commence following the Summer Solstice on Wednesday, June 22, and winners will be announced on Thursday, June 30 on The Federalist Instagram page.

Please visit federalistwines.com/cabinetofsummer for official Cabinet of Summer rules and regulations. To learn more about The Federalist, visit http://www.federalistwines.com and @federalistwines.

ABOUT TERLATO WINE GROUP: Owned and operated by the Terlato family for four generations, Terlato Wine Group is comprised of several businesses specializing in the marketing and production of exceptional wines & spirits. Their global portfolio includes more than 85 fine wine and artisanal spirit brands from world-class producers in more than a dozen countries and is the leading fine wine & spirits marketer in the U.S. For more information, please visit http://www.terlatowines.com.

The Terlato portfolio of brands include: Napa Valley: Chimney Rock, EPISODE, Galaxy, Jack Nicklaus Wines, Maxville, Rutherford Hill, Tangley Oaks, Terlato Vineyards; Sonoma County: Dueling Pistols, The Federalist, Hanna, Hideaway Creek, Rochioli, Steep Ridge, Terlato Vineyards; Santa Barbara County: Domaine Jean Franois, Sanford; California: Glass Mountain, Greystone Cellars, Iconoclast, Jack's House; Washington State: Klipsun Vineyards; Argentina: Tamari; Austria: Kracher; Australia: Two Hands; Canada: Peller Estates; France: Champagne Lanson, Chteau de La Tour Clos-Vougeot, Chteau de Marsannay, Chteau de Meursault, Chteau Timberlay, Domaine Aurlien Verdet, Domaine Castagnier, Domaine Confuron-Gindre, Domaine Drouhin-Laroze, Domaine Georges Roumier, Domaine Robert Groffier, Domaine Jean-Claude Ramonet, Domaine Jean-Louis Chavy, Domaine Lcheneaut, Les Sarrins, Domaine Michel Niellon, Domaine Pierre Damoy, Domaine Pierre Labet, Domaine Rebourseau, Domaine Vacheron, Domaine Vocoret, Franois Labet, Italy: Alta Mora, Ca'Marcanda (GAJA Toscana), Cecchi, Cusumano, Feudi di San Gregorio, GAJA, Giuliana Prosecco, IDDA (GAJA Mt. Etna), Il Poggione, La Casaccia di Franceschi, Nino Franco, Pieve Santa Restituta (GAJA Toscana), Riondo, Terlato Vineyards, Lunardi, Seven Daughters; Japan: Shimizu-no-mai; New Zealand: Loveblock, Wairau River; South Africa: Ernie Els, Nederburg, Rust en Vrede, Two Oceans; Artisan Spirits: Amarula Cream Liqueur, Angostura Rum, Breaker Bourbon, Bunnahabhain Islay Single Malt, Deanston Highland Single Malt Whisky, Distillatorio Nonino (Amaro, Aperitivo, and Grappa), Don Pancho Origenes Rum, Dublin Ink Irish Whiskey, Heartland Gin, Langley's No. 8 London Gin, Ledaig Single Malt Scotch, Riazul Tequila, Riazuleno Mezcal, Spring Mill Bourbon, Tiramisu Liqueur, Tobermory Single Malt Scotch; Non-alcoholic: San Benedetto Natural Mineral Water.

Photo Credit: Courtesy of The Federalist Wines

Link:

THE FEDERALIST WINES Cabinet of Summer Returns to Give Two Consumers $10,000 - Broadway World

In his ongoing libel lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard, Johnny Depp testified that he was the victim of domestic abuse and challenged Heards published insinuation that he was abusive. According to Depp, she would berate and throw objects at him while he would remove himself from their arguments by leaving the room or locking himself in the bathroom.

Without taking a side on this issue since theres no way to know whos telling the truth its worth noting Depps account would have seemed ridiculous only a decade ago. Here is one of Hollywoods most famous actors complaining about being abused by a woman 23 years younger than him. How could he be so weak and she so strong?

Far from idle gossip, the answer to this question reveals some important trends that have been influencing the two sexes for some time now. Due to the propaganda of modern feminism and the corrosive decadence of modern culture, women as a whole have come to dominate and abuse men, while men as a group have become helpless victims mired in mediocrity.

A key to understanding this troubling development is the famous quote from Spider-Man, With great power comes great responsibility. This is said by Uncle Ben (or Aunt May, depending on the movie) to the callow teenager Peter Parker, who later internalizes this lesson as the superhero Spider-Man.

The advice isnt a statement on the ethics of being a superhero, but about becoming a man. As a young man on the brink of independent adulthood, Peter will soon have the great powers of masculine strength that will enable him to work, study, and build as well as defend those close to him. He needs to be responsible with this power, serving others and being creative instead of the opposite.

Unfortunately, this idea of matching masculine power to great responsibility is an alien notion to most men today, who lack both power and responsibility. Rather, based on their reluctance to compete, lead, or even ask a girl out, the majority of young men today can be fairly characterized as weak and irresponsible.

There are many reasons for this decline in men, but the main ones are usually a lack of role models, screen addiction (usually video games), and pornography. More and more boys grow up in fatherless households, and their schools and entertainment largely lack virtuous adult males who can serve as guides. Thus, they never learn about the great power of disciplined masculinity and end up wasting their energies on virtual adventures and virtual sex.

On the flip side, Uncle Bens quote would apply quite well to most women today, who are very much empowered although curiously sadder than ever before. They are graduating from college in greater numbers, working more, and taking on more positions of authority. Moreover, more women are becoming the leaders of their households, being both breadwinner and caretaker.

Whats missing, however, is the great responsibility that comes with this newfound power. While great at encouraging and inspiring girls to pursue excellence and achievement, modern feminist messaging often falls short in combining this message with supporting and having compassion for others. Its mean-spirited and resentful. All too often, female empowerment and liberation become synonymous with bullying and selfishness.

When this feminist narrative is multiplied a million times and reinforced with emasculated schools and households, what results is an unhealthy imbalance between men and women that violates the nature of both sexes. Empowered women actively dominate passive men who never make it past adolescence.

Today, because of these divergent trajectories of men and women, a wife abusing her husband is entirely possible and happens often. For all his wealth and sex appeal, Depp is decidedly not manly: hes vain, not especially intelligent, and suffers from periodic drug addictions. And on some level, his decision to marry a woman so much younger than him suggests poor judgment and insecurity.

One could easily imagine Heard being disillusioned and frustrated with her husband and lashing out against him. Here she was expecting him to take the lead, but instead it appears to have been the reverse. Perhaps women in the past would accept this and build up their husbands to take charge and be more manly. However, most women today would do what Heard did: divorce the loser and extract as much from him as the law allows.

Whether it was really Depp who abused Heard or Heard who abused Depp, neither changes the fact that the children Depp brought into their marriage likely suffered the most. Their parents were in no shape to take care of them, and at least one of them is an abuser.

What makes this story so tragic is that this kind of dysfunction is playing out everywhere. Weak men and aggressive women are failing one another and their children. Its no wonder that few of them want to marry and have children in the first place.

Solving this problem will require a culture-wide shift in understanding the sexes, ultimately recognizing them as separate, unique, and complementary. Men and women are not in competition with each other, and toxic masculinity isnt magically redeemed when women do it. Rather, men need to be virtuous men and women need to be virtuous women, both seeking to serve one another and build something beautiful together.

In other words, both men and women need live out the wisdom of Uncle Ben, coupling their great power with great responsibility and vice versa. If they do this, they can be like Peter Parker, and can become heroes of their own stories. If they dont, they are more likely to become like Johnny Depp and become victims of a destructive and humiliating relationship.

Excerpt from:

Johnny Depp And Amber Heard Epitomize Our Sexual Dysfunction - The Federalist

The secret committee created to oversee federally funded gain of function research that can make dangerous viruses even more deadly should be more transparent in its review process, according to the chairman of that committee, House Republicans revealed this week.

The review process continues to be unnecessarily shrouded in secrecy, wrote House Committee on Energy and Commerce Ranking Member Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., in a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra.

Gain-of-function research projects are supposed to be reviewed by a committee as part of guidelines known asPotential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight(P3CO) Framework, created in 2017 after a three-year pause on such research following several lab-related incidents that raised public concerns.

Chris Hassell, the chairman of the P3CO virus research review committee and its only public member, acknowledged a strong interest in improving the transparency of the HHS P3CO review process and the need for more transparency, according to the letter.

None of the HHS departmental review process for approving enhanced PPP [Potential Pandemic Pathogens] experiments is public, the letter states. HHS review should make public who participates in the review, as well as the basis of the decision that the research is acceptable to fund, including the U.S. governments (USGs) calculation of the potential benefits and risks of the proposed enhanced PPP research.

HHS gave House Republicans the names of some but not all review committee members, on a confidential basis because of personal security concerns, the letter states.

Indicating the lack of transparency, National Institutes of Health officials will not disclose how many gain-of-function projects they have funded.

When Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was asked how many gain-of-function grants his agency had approved, he said the answer would hinge on how the work was defined in a given year, The Washington Post reported in August.

To the extent that we can be transparent, that the system would allow us to be transparent, we go overboard to be transparent, Fauci also said.

Hassell has previously said he believes the definition of the research the committee reviews is too narrow. Hassell made those remarks in January 2020 now, more than two years after the Covid-19 pandemic began, that definition remains the same.

Indeed, Fauci and other NIH staff were responsible for narrowing the definition of the research the committee reviewed and for weakening the committees oversight, according to The Post.

Many scientists fear to speak out against gain-of-function research because they receive funding from the NIH.

Last month, the NIH asked the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) to evaluate the effectiveness of the HHS P3CO framework for reviewing gain-of-function research, but the House Republicans object that the board is not independent enough.

We think it appropriate to reconstitute NSABB as an independent entity rather than a group of individuals replete with conflicts-of-interest given the source of grants to them, or to convene an independent body, Rodgers letter states.

Like its oversight board, some members of the P3CO review board itself may also have conflicts of interest one is from the NIAID, a funding entity. Further, this individual co-authored articles with a principal investigator who was engaged in research proposals that could have been subject to HHS P3CO review, according to the letter.

Another member is a gain-of-function research proponent who was apparently deeply involved in the development of the framework. This raises obvious questions of bias in favor of approving incredibly risky research.

The review committee also lacks jurisdiction and can be bypassed by funding agencies, the House Republicans wrote.

An example of a grant the committee did not review is one that sent U.S. taxpayer money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is considered a possible origin of Covid-19. The NIAIDdecidedits grant to the EcoHealth Alliance for bat-based coronavirus research didnotmeet the definition of gain of function and thus was not submitted to the committee, but an NIAID official and others have questioned whether it was gain of function.

This unilateral NIAID authority shows a lack of independence in the P3CO process and raises significant concerns, the Republicans wrote.

What little we know from another committee member affirms the panel lacks power and has reviewed few projects. Robert Kadlec, who previously was chair of the review committee, said, Frankly, we didnt have the scientific wherewithal.

The review committees capabilities were not robust enough to make sure that bad things dont happen, he added.

From 2017 to 2020, no more than three or four projects were forwarded to the review committee, according to Kadlec. They were grading their own homework.

The Post identified at least 18 projects from 2012 to 2020, totaling about $48.8 million, with eight approved after 2017, that appeared to be gain-of-function research.

However, only one proposal initiated since 2017 has been referred to the HHS P3CO review committee, with two other proposals that existed before 2017 also referred to the committee. Thus, we are concerned that NIH is under referring proposals to the HHS P3CO review committee, Republicans wrote.

Before his retirement as director of the NIH in December, Dr. Francis Collins said he was open to making public the names of members of the committee. Such a move would help officials to achieve the kind of transparency that the public expects regarding such research, Collins told The Post.

View original post here:

Secretive Committee On Risky Virus Research Should Be More Open, Chair Says - The Federalist

In a desperate bid to save her seat, Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney is now courting the same voters who once dragged a statue of her father through the streets of Jackson before toppling it 15 years ago.

Without an aggressive campaign strategy to win over Democrats, it might seem like a tough sell, Politico reported from Wyoming on Monday. But some Democratic voters in Jackson are embracing her. They appreciate Cheneys work in Congress prosecuting Trump and theyre ready to switch parties to vote for her.

The crusade to allow Democrats to hijack the statewide Republican primary in favor of a Cheney signals a sharp turn in the familys reputation from when Liz Cheneys vice president father represented Wyomings conservative voters in the House for 10 years. After enjoying decades of political popularity in the state and cultivating a family legacy, the Cheney dynasty appears poised to end as the incumbent at-large congresswoman turns to Wyomings liberal voters in the northwest to send her back to Washington for a fourth term.

According to a snapshot of the latest polling in the pivotal primary revealed by Axioss Jonathan Swan, less than 2 in 5 GOP Wyoming voters reported a favorable opinion of former Vice President Dick Cheney. Nearly half, 48 percent, viewed Dick Cheney unfavorably.

Other recent polling has shown Liz Cheney herself underwater among constituents who voted for President Donald Trump in the widest margin of any state in the nation a year and a half ago.

Out ofthree surveysconducted in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Cheney failed to garner more than 29 percent support among likely primary voters.

Meanwhile, Cheney has remained largely absent from the state she represents as Trump-endorsed primary challenger Harriet Hageman builds grassroots support and earns endorsements from House leadership, which is rare for incumbent challengers. Last month, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced that Hageman had the full encouragement of the GOPs top brass on her crusade to oust the current congresswoman, who has undermined Democratic norms by weaponizing the lower chamber against political dissidents.

After spending time with Harriet, it is readily apparent she will always listen and prioritize the needs of her local communities and is focused on tackling our nations biggest problems, McCarthy told The Federalist in February. I look forward to serving with Harriet for years to come.

Just days prior to McCarthys primary endorsement, Cheney snubbed constituents by meeting with reporters and media executives over party activists, who are growing sour on their congresswoman as she calls them crazies in The New York Times.

In November, the Wyoming GOPvotedno longer to recognize Cheney as a Republican. The Republican National Committee censured her for participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse by leading the Select Committee on Jan. 6.

While Wyoming visits were rare even before Cheney made feuding with the former Republican president a hallmark of her congressional legacy post-Jan. 6, 2021, her presence in the state has now become nearly nonexistent.

She has shunned town halls and other voter forums in Wyomings overwhelmingly red counties in favor of controlled events, Politico reported, noting that she has an upcoming event next week that will feature pre-selected questions answered to an audience of paid ticket holders.

Rebecca Bextel, a 41-year-old Trump supporter who is planning to attend, told the paper that the cost to see her representative is a slap in the face.

We have one person representing us, Bextel said, and she shows up in town and it costs $10 to see her. Its embarrassing.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Read the original here:

Liz Cheney Has Destroyed Dick Cheney's Reputation In Wyoming

U. S. History: From the Colonial Period to 1817

THE FIRST PARTY SYSTEM: FEDERALISTS V. REPUBLICANS

POLITICAL PARTIES

POLITICAL PARTIES are organizations that mobilize voters on behalf of a COMMON SET OF INTERESTS, concerns, and goals. In many countries political parties play a crucial part in the democratic process. The functions of political parties include:

Formulating political agendas

Selecting candidates

Conducting election campaigns

Managing the work of elected representatives

Providing the means by which people can have a voice in government.

1st POLITICAL PARTIES

FEDERALISTS

REPUBLICANS

Constituency

Merchants, bankers, manufacturers from New England and the middle-Atlantic states.

Artisans, shopkeepers, small farmers, and large plantation owners from the South and from western regions at the nation.

Leadership

ALEXANDER HAMILTON

THOMAS JEFFERSON

View of Human Nature

Hamilton, a self-made man, distrusted the people. Man, he thought, is naturally selfish, unreasonable, and violent.

Jefferson, born to wealth and social position, thought that if men are given the opportunity, they are naturally decent and reasonable.

Attitude Toward Government

Believed in a highly CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT as a means of keeping order.

Saw the common people as unable to govern themselves.

Believed that government should be as far removed from the people as possible.

Favored a strong federal government and limited powers for the states.

Advocated a strong executive department and strong courts to maintain order and insure justice.

Favored a standing army.

Wanted to imitate British aristocracy (rule by the rich) without a king.

Willing to censor the press for political power.

Believed in a MINIMUM OF GOVERNMENT to safeguard the rights of the people.

Saw the common people as able to govern themselves.

Believed that government should be as close to the people as possible.

Favored local government over national because it was closer to the people.

Favored Congress over the other branches of government because it best reflected the popular will.

Opposed standing armies because a military leader might seize control of the government.

Wanted more democracy than in the British parliament.

Favored freedom of speech & press.

Wanted greater involvement by the people through lower voting qualifications.

Favored reducing government interference by decreasing and number of federal officeholders.

View of the Constitution

Held LOOSE CONSTRUCTIONIST view that the Federal government had implied powers not listed in the Constitution (i.e., the Federal government had all the powers not expressly forbidden it by the Constitution).

Held STRICT CONSTRUCTIONSIT view that the Federal governments powers should be limited in favor of states rights (i.e., the Federal government had only the powers expressly stated in the Constitution).

Foreign Policy Perspective

Favored Great Britain in culture and trade.

Distrusted Great Britain and wanted closer relations with France because it had just been through a democratic revolution.

The Federalists, led by John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, believed in a strong national government. Reading broadly into the Constitution (loose constructionism), they argued that government power should be used to promote economic development through the creation of a national bank and the construction of federally-financed roads, harbors, and bridges. Federalists believed that America's economic future depended on the cultivation of strong commercial ties with Great Britain. And they argued that America's emerging manufacturing sector should be encouraged through protectionist measures such as tariffs.

The Republicans, also called Democratic-Republicans, were led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They supported a weaker national government restricted in its powers by a narrow reading of the Constitution (strict constructionism). They feared that federal intervention in the economy would benefit only a few wealthy northeasterners, and they believed that agriculture, not manufacturing, should remain the country's economic base. Republicans opposed closer ties to Britain and tended to sympathize with the French in their revolution and subsequent war with the British.

While the Federalists dominated the government through the 1790s, they rapidly declined after 1800. Thomas Jefferson's election to the presidency was bolstered by Republican victories in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Federalists remained powerful enough to obstruct certain Republican measures for about a decade, but they were not strong enough to prevent the United States from going to war against Britain in 1812a war the Federalists vehemently opposed. Their continuing opposition to the war, even after it began, severely damaged their viability as a national party. When the United States survived its war with Britain and won tremendous victories at Baltimore and New Orleans, the Federalists' reputation was shotand their national political clout was over.

For the next decadea period sometimes called "The Era of Good Feelings"the United States was essentially a one-party nation; the Republicans governed with little opposition. But factions within the party soon emerged, and these factionslabeled National Republicans and Democratic Republicanseventually morphed into the dominant parties that would define the second party era, lasting from 1828 to the mid-1850s.

Read more:

Democratic-Republicans vs Federalist - United States History

Conservative powerhouse Leonard Leo tells Axios that he'll step aside from the daily running of the Federalist Society to focus on a new venture inspired by Arabella Advisers on the left that will funnel big money and expertise across the conservative movement.

Why it matters: Leo is considered one of the most powerful conservatives in the country, playing a key role in shaping President Trump's selections for the Supreme Court and raising hundreds of millions of dollars to fill the nations courts with conservative judges.

Behind the scenes: Leo told Axios that he and his business partner, conservative communications executive Greg Mueller, studied tax filings that led them to Arabella, a little-known yet powerful consulting firm that advises liberal donors and nonprofits about where to spend their money.

Leo and Mueller told Axios that after studying Arabella's structure they were impressed and saw the opportunity to build a replica on the right.

Between the lines: The new venture will go beyond the anonymous money networks they've already built and weaponized in the conservative legal movement movement.

Go deeper:

Read this article:

Leonard Leo to shape new conservative network - Axios

RBGmontage...

Reporter 1: Now a time for mourning for a remarkable career and life well-lived.

Reporter 2: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at the age of 87.

Trump: I stand before you today to fulfill one of my highest and important duties under the United States Constitution, the nomination of a Supreme Court Justice.

Preface

Noah Feldman: When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in September 2020, I knew one thing for sure.

The person that Donald Trump would nominate to replace her would be affiliated with a powerful organization called the Federalist Society.

As a constitutional law professor at Harvard University, I spend a lot of my time watching the Supreme Court its a big part of my job. But this prediction did not take much in the way of high-level expertise.

The two other Supreme Court Justices that Trump had already appointed, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh are both affiliated with the Federalist Society. So are 80% of the judges that Trump had already appointed to the courts of appeals.

The Federalist Society is a club for conservative and libertarian lawyers. Its focused on promoting conservative legal thought and on filling the American judiciary with like-minded allies.

It was founded about 40 years ago by a bunch of law students, nerds really, who felt ostracized on their law school campuses because of their conservative views.

Since then its grown to become the most influential legal organization in the United States ever, capable of dramatically redefining American jurisprudence for decades to come.

And sure enough Trump nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who is closely affiliated with the Federalist Society:

CLIP

Barrett: I am honored and humbled to appear before you today as a nominee for associate justice of the Supreme Court.

With Amy Coney Barrett now on the Supreme Court, six of the nine Justices are current or former Federalist Society members.

This book, adapted from a series on my podcast Deep Background, is the story of what the Federalist Society stands for, how it took over the Supreme Court, and why now that it has achieved extraordinary success, it may actually be about to fall apart.

Chapter 1: How To Start a Revolution

Let me take you back, now, 40 years exactly, to the fall of 1980.

At that time it was not exactly cool to be a conservative law student.

CLIP

Gary Lawson: The atmosphere was, here's the best way I can describe it.

Any time a student in class said anything that could remotely be considered right of center a good chunk of the class would hiss.

Thats Gary Lawson. Hes now a law professor at Boston University. At the time, though, he was a first year law student at Yale.

And yes, you heard him right, he said hiss.

CLIP

Lawson: Literally vocal hisss, in fact one of my counter-lines to that, Is something wrong with the heating system?

And it wasnt just that most law students and professors were liberal, arguably aggressively so.

The Supreme Court was, too.

For the previous few decades, there had been a liberal majority on the Supreme Court, led by lions like William Brennan and later Thurgood Marshall. The Court had made a series of transformative decisions that had a profound impact on the country.

Of course, there was Brown against Board Education, argued by Thurgood Marshall before he actually became a Justice, where the Supreme Court ruled that school segregation was unconstitutional.

But there were others too the Court held that Bible reading in public school was unconstitutional. It ruled that criminal suspects had to be informed of their right to remain silent before custodial interrogation, the famous Miranda decision. And, in the landmark case of Loving against Virginia, the Court said it was unconstitutional for the state to ban interracial marriage.

Then, in 1973, shortly after Chief Justice Earl Warren retired and Chief Justice Warren Burger took over:

CLIP

Number 70, 18 Roe against Wade.

For liberals, these decisions were a march of progress.

But conservatives thought the Supreme Court Justices were going beyond their mandate to uphold the law.

Ronald Reagan agreed.

And maybe the public did too, because on November 4th, 1980, Reagan won the presidency in a landslide.

See the article here:

How the Federalist Society came to dominate the Supreme ...

Amid the churn of recent headlines about inflation and the war in Ukraine, you might have missed whats happening right now on the southwest border not the ongoing border crisis, but something very much related to it. For the past few days, commercial traffic between the United States and Mexicohas ground to a halt.

On Monday, Mexican truckers blocked north and southbound lanes on the Mexico side of the Pharr-Reynosa International Bridge in Pharr, Texas. They did it to protest Texas Gov. Greg Abbotts decision last week to order state troopers to inspect all northbound commercial trucks, something usually done by federal authorities. The state inspections immediately caused massive delays at ports of entry all along the border, triggeringa second protest by truckers waiting to cross into El Pasoon Monday afternoon, with trucks blocking both northbound and southbound lanes in Juarez.

This is no small thing. The volume of international traffic in question is massive. At the port of entry in Laredo, Texas, about 20,000 commercial trucks cross the border every day. Hundreds of billions of dollars in trade flow over the Texas-Mexico border every year. The entire system is a well-oiled machine. Throwing a wrench into it, even a minor one, could create a different sort of crisis at the border. But it might be worth it.

The backstory here is that Abbott issued those inspection orders last week in response to the Biden administrations plans to cancel Title 42, the public health order invoked by then-President Trump at the onset of the pandemic. For the past two years, Title 42 has enabled federal authorities to expel illegal immigrants quickly amid an historic surge in illegal immigration. Its not too much to say that Title 42 is the last remaining tool the federal government has to control record-high levels of illegal immigration.

Every other policy the Trump administration implemented to secure the border has been rescinded or neutered by Biden, and on May 23, Title 42 will be gone too. As my colleague Jordan Boyd hasexplained in some detail, the border will then be effectively open to almost anyone. Instead of arresting 150,000 or 200,000 illegal immigrants a month, federal authorities will be dealing with a half-million migrants or more each month, possiblyas many as 18,000 a day.

Those are numbers far beyond the federal governments ability to detain or even process. The only choice federal officials will have in that situation is to immediately release migrants they catch crossing illegally, or not detain them in the first place, rendering the border effectively lawless.

Whats coming, in other words, is a border surge of historic and almost unimaginable proportions, and it is happening as a direct result of Bidens policy choices. The crisis about to unfold is 100 percent avoidable, and 100 percent Bidens fault.

Abbotts response to Biden ending Title 42 was toissue a series of executive orderslast week that seemed designed to gin up headlines and media coverage rather than actually secure his states 1,200-mile border with Mexico. The order that got the most attention wasnt the inspections that have snarled commercial traffic on the international bridges but Abbotts plan to charter buses and flights to transport migrants released from federal custody to Washington, D.C. Evacuating them, as the order puts it.

Federal government wants to open the border? Fine, let those fat cats in Washington deal with the illegals! So goes the thinking, if not the rhetoric.

Abbotts busing order is quite obviously a stunt a cheap shot at Biden that makes no effective use of his considerable powers as governor of Texas. It will almost certainly not result in even one migrant showing up in Washington who was not already headed in that direction, especially given that transport to the nations capital must be voluntary.

Such stunts are to be expected with Abbott, though. I saw first-hand late last year how his sprawling Operation Lone Star, which purports to use state law enforcement to secure the border in the face of federal inaction,is almost entirely political theater. Dont get me wrong, its expensive and logistically complex, but given the narrowness of its scope and the legal constraints the Abbott administration has imposed on its application, Operation Lone Star hasnt made a dent in the number of illegal immigrants crossing the border into Texas, and it never will.

So too with this unserious busing scheme. If Abbott were serious about securing the border, he wouldnt announce a plan to transport migrants to Washington but a plan to take them back to Mexico. Inthese pages yesterday, Ken Cuccinelli argued that Abbotts busing gimmick is nothing more than window dressing that amounts to a taxpayer-funded sideshow to pay for optional vacations 2,000 miles away at a time of record gas prices instead of turning these illegal migrants around and sending them two miles back across the border.

Cuccinelli, who served as deputy secretary of Homeland Security and director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Trump administration, is among those who have rightlyarguedthat the border crisis amounts to an invasion under Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution. In the face of federal inaction, he argues, states like Texas have the authority to arrest and remove illegal immigrants, securing the border entirely with state law enforcement.

Under normal circumstances, immigration enforcement of course falls entirely under federal purview. States, even border states like Texas, have a limited role in it. But these are not normal circumstances.

The relevant section of the Constitution that Cuccinelli and others point to says this: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit delay.

Those last two phrases are what Cuccinellis argument hinges on. Indeed, theres a strong case already that Texas is being actually invaded and that the situation will not admit delay. When a half-million migrants show up on the border in June after Title 42 is gone, there will be no question that the state is being actually invaded and that the situation will not admit delay.

Theres almost no chance, however, that Abbott will ever agree with such an interpretation of the Constitution or even seriously consider taking action based on it. Too bad, because it would not only focus Bidens attention on the border but also force a reckoning over an important constitutional question: if the federal government is derelict in its duties, do states have the right to act on their own?

But Abbott could dodge that reckoning while still challenging Washington to address the border crisis. The complete shutdown of commercial traffic on the border this week presents an opportunity for Abbott, if he can seize it.

By ordering state inspections of commercial trucks coming in from Mexico, Abbott has demonstrated the leverage he could have over policymakers in Mexico in much the same way Trump did in May 2019, when he threatened a 5 percent tariff on all Mexican imports unless Mexico cracked down on illegal immigration and intercepted the large migrant caravans trekking toward the U.S. border. Mexican President Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrador responded immediately to avoid the ruinous tariffs, and illegal immigration quickly plummeted.

Admittedly, forcing commercialtraffic between the United States and Mexico to grind to a halt will also harm the Texas economy just as Trumps threatened 5 percent tariff on Mexican imports would have in 2019 but it will hurt Mexico worse and more quickly, which means it has a chance of working, by motivating Mexican officialdom and by forcing the Biden administration to engage.

But it will only work if Abbott comes out like Trump did and explains what hes doing and why. Given the protests and the delays at the ports of entry, which were already up to 12 hours at some crossings on Monday, Abbott should hold a press conference later this week and explain that the entire situation is entirely of Bidens making, and that all the president needs to do to reopen international trade along the U.S.-Mexico border is to reverse course on the cancellation of Title 42, which he could do with one phone call. He could also call on Lpez Obrador to put pressure on Biden to keep Title 42 in place.

Abbott has real leverage here, and he should go out of his way to ensure that everyone knows it. He could say, Because Biden will not secure this border, as governor of Texas I have a duty to protect the people of this state, so Im shutting it down. Something like that. He might even enjoy it.

If Abbott wants headlines, that will do it. It might also help secure the border.

John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.

See the article here:

To Secure The Border, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Should Shut It Down - The Federalist

Over the last year, the presence of left-wing doctrines of critical race theory and gender theory in Americas public and private schools has become unmistakable. The unrelenting push for leftism in Americas schools has not been organic, but ushered in by influential organizations.

The Progressive Education Network, which advocates for an openly leftwing approach to education in both government and private schools, is one such organization. PENs mission is to harness the dynamic power of progressive practice for the next generation of students, schools, and democracy. To this end, they aim to nurture citizens in an increasingly diverse democracy. The organization also expresses a commitment to diversity, equity, and justice.

PEN also obviously intends to exert its ideological will on the American social and political landscape. Its website notes that the organization responds to contemporary issues from a progressive educational perspective and encourages progressive educators to play an active role in guiding the educational vision of our society.

PEN is partnered with at least 114 different schools whose missions and pedagogies are guided specifically by progressive principles and practices. Some of the schools websites openly note their status as a progressive school, while others make no explicit mention of their partnership with the Progressive Education Network.

Many of the schools do, however, boast of their adherence to leftwing dogmas such as critical race and gender theory. The Galloway School, for example, publicizes its left-wing approach to education on their website. The Atlanta-based K-12 school is affiliated with the left-wing National Association of Independent Schools and hosts an Intersectional Feminist Book Club, a Minority Empowerment Forum, and a club called Spectrum, which discusses issues of gender and sexuality.

Galloway also hosts racially segregated events for parents. One of these groups, called Aspiring Antiracists, is for white parents who want to confront anti-Black racism and unconscious bias that the school says is within us as individuals and within the systems we inhabit.

The website notes that Aspiring Antiracists works with both the schools office of diversity, equity, and inclusion and Families of Color United for Success, which is intended for families or students at The Galloway School who identify themselves as people of color. The school even partners with an organization called New American Pathways to aid in refugee resettlement in Atlanta.

The Galloway School is just one of the more than 100 schools that partners with PEN. The Miquon School, also affiliated with the NAIS, is located in Pennsylvania. It also partners with the PEN and pushes a similar agenda. Staff at Miquon read the book I Am Jazz, the story of a transgender child, to kindergarten students.

Miquon brags that the reading prompted the kindergarteners to freely explore in the dress up area, to confidently act in theatrical roles across genders, and to respect the gender fluidity of our community members. The school notes that these readings are used as aprovocation for deeper understandings about differences such as those relating to gender identity.

Massachusettss Cambridge School of Weston is a member of NAIS and is partnered with PEN. It too has pushed left-wing doctrines on its students, and has even embedded leftwing doctrines into its curriculum.

The school requires students to fulfill a social justice requirement in order to graduate. In order to fulfill this requirement, a course must examine historical and contemporary issues from the perspectives of non-western cultures and/or historically oppressed groups, structures of power and privilege their history, causes, and effects, or models of social change, with the goal of advancing human rights and equity, the site reads.

The Cambridge School of Weston also hosts affinity groups centered around students racial and gender identities and has a racial equity task force.

PENs mission and activities are unabashedly left-wing, and have affected the larger and more powerful National Association for Independent Schools, which is responsible for the accreditation of more than 1,600 K-12 private schools throughout the country.

There is significant overlap between the member schools of PEN and the NAIS, displaying ideological agreement between the two groups. The overlap between their leadership displays more extensive collaboration and ideological agreement between the organizations.

Chris Thinnes is on the board of PEN and on the NAISs advisory council on diversity. According to the bio for his blog, he is also a member of the EduColor collective, which mobilizes advocates nationwide around issues of educational equity, agency, and justice.

The Galloway Schools Head, Dr. James Calleroz White, has been on the NAISs board of trustees for approximately oen year. White, along with Galloways chief diversity officer Karen Bradberry, are listed as faculty for the NAIS Diversity Leadership Institute Seminar.

Theressa Collins is an emeritus member of PEN and co-directs the organizations flagship professional development activity, NiPEN. Shes also the upper school principal of the St. Paul Academy and Summit School, which sends students and staff members to multiple different woke conferences hosted by the NAIS, including the People of Color Conference, which was co-founded by a former Black Panther.

Although they exist as two separate entities and frame their objectives in different ways, the Progressive Education Network and the National Association of Independent Schools seem to share a common goal: to indoctrinate Americas schoolchildren with extreme left-wing beliefs on race and gender.

The Progressive Education Network, The Galloway School, The Miquon School, and The Cambridge School of Weston did not respond to requests for comment.

See more here:

This Leftwing Network Is Spreading 'Progressive Education' Nationwide - The Federalist

Each and every time President Biden or any given White House official appears on TV, I imagine everyone watching feels his heart drop, dead certain that more bad news is about to be delivered. Seriously, when was the last time any administration official said something positive?

White House Press Secretary Jen Psakis red hair flashed across my screen Monday, and I had no doubt that whatever was about to come out of her mouth was going to ruin my day. Psaki: We expect March [Consumer Price Index] headline inflation to be extraordinarily elevated due to Putins price hike.

The Labor Department announced the next day that consumer prices were up 8.5 percent from a year ago, the highest rate of inflation in more than 40 years.

Never fails! It turns out the only time you can assume Psaki isnt lying is when shes telling you how bad things are or how bad theyre about to get. To that end, under Biden, what exactly is going well in America?

Gas prices are up almost 20 percent from this time last year.

The latest numbers from Customs and Border Protection show aliens are still crossing into the country at tens of thousands of numbers higher than before Biden was president. In February of last year, agents encountered 101,000 illegal border crossers. This year, 165,000. And 2021 was even well higher than in 2020 (36,000 illegal crossings) and 2019 (76,000).

New Covid cases have plummeted in recent weeks, but that was after the highest wave of infection throughout the entire pandemic. That one occurred between November and mid-January and nearly quadrupled the peak rate of infection seen during Trumps entire tenure as president.

Our biggest cities are seeing the highest levels of violent crime than they have in decades.

In what would have to be the greatest political irony in a generation, Biden and Democrats, who were hysterical about Trump supposedly being soft on Russia, have now looked on for almost two months as Vladimir Putin orders his military to fully invade their precious Ukraine and murder hundreds of women and children.

Bidens department picks play out their sexual kinks in public. (Gather round, children! Rachel Levine joins us today from Human Health Services to read us a story!)

All of this is thanks to the man who promised voters he would lower the temperature, bring the country together, and restore the soul of America.

Only in Bidens America does getting your soul back and turning off the heat actually cost something.

Continued here:

Biden Wanted To 'Lower The Temp.' Here's How Much That Cost You - The Federalist

Before the 2020 election, politicians in the capital of Pennsylvania passed a new law. It was called Act 77, and it created a 50-day, no-excuse, mail-in ballot rule. This law provided virtually no security or integrity for the most important election of our lifetimes, and it blatantly violated the state constitution.

This led to disastrous consequences. Joe Biden is now the president, in part, because of his share of questionable mail-in votes in Pennsylvania. Bidens abhorrent policies and rhetoric have left us with rampant inflation, open borders, needless death and instability abroad in Afghanistan and Ukraine, and spiking violent crime in our citiesincluding my city of Philadelphia.

It has also caused millions of American patriots, including many of my fellow Pennsylvanians, to question the legitimacy of our government. Citizens who care about the rule of law want our elections to be free and fair. They do not want the playing field to be slanted in favor of one party over the other.

Our ruling elites have decreed that any question about election integrity with respect to 2020 is conspiracy-mongering at best, and treason at worst. Personalities on MSNBC, CNN, and other outlets constantly refer to the Big Lie in response to anyone who cites problems with the way the election was managed. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton routinely refers to the 2016 election as stolen, and they have no problem with that. This ridiculous double standard has only deepened the distrust.

Here in Pennsylvania, we have a real, concrete problem with our election integrity, and it is no mere conspiracy theory. Act 77 already has been declared unconstitutional by Pennsylvanias Commonwealth Court, our states intermediate appellate court.

The Pennsylvania state constitution requires in-person voting unless you meet stringent requirements, such as serving in the armed forces or being genuinely disabled. If the politicians in Pennsylvania truly believed Act 77 was necessary, they should have tried to amend the state constitution. They failed to do that, and millions of ballots were cast under this illegal voting process.

The fight is now in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, where the court has reinstated the act pending their review. I am deeply concerned about what this portends regarding their potential ruling, and its direct impact on the upcoming elections in 2022.

That is why I will seek to intervene in the case, as a candidate for U.S. Senate with a vested interest in the outcome, and as an attorney and constitutional law expert with decades of experience. I will petition the court to join the suit as a party, and to make my arguments as to why Act 77 must not stand. If I am not permitted by the court to join as a party, I will seek to enter a brief amicus curiae, or friend of the court.

Election integrity is critical to the strength of the very fabric of our republic. Unless the people have confidence in the accuracy and fairness of our elections, our system of government simply does not work. It cannot be, as Abraham Lincoln famously said, a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

While this fight against Act 77 is about election integrity, it also fits into a larger mosaic about which I care deeplythe rule of law and preservation of our great culture and nation. We must ensure that the rule of law prevails over naked partisanship and allowing our ballot boxes to be stuffed.

I intend to join the fight against Act 77, and I will be prepared to bring the fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, because I cannot sit on the sidelines. I must stand up for the integrity of our elections and health of our republic, and I hope many of my fellow Pennsylvanians stand with me.

George Bochetto is an attorney, election law and constitutional expert, and candidate for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania

See the original post:

Pennsylvania Plans To Conduct Illegal Elections, And I Won't Stand For It - The Federalist

Fifteen months after Congress certified the 2020 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosis hand-picked Jan. 6 commission is still forging ahead with partisan theater.

The committee has seized bank records of peaceful protesters, routinely made up evidence to tarnish Republican leaders, spied on federal lawmakers phone records, threatened press freedom, and is now admittedly trying to criminalize GOPs fundraising on the issue of election security, as The Federalists Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway reported last month.

The unserious committee has been exploiting the Capitol riot for political ends since it happened, but as time passes, Democrats abuses of power become more brazen and they call to mind some of the most egregious instances of neglect of the rule of law and civil liberties in our countrys recent history.

The yearslong and still ongoing Russia collusion hoax comes to mind. The committees conduct has drawn parallels to Watergate as well, most recently with its attempts to subpoena opposition records, which would include financial records from the Salesforce database as well as personal, sensitive information about Republican donors and other party supporters.

As the National Republican Senate Committee wrote in anamicus brief, What the Salesforce subpoena demands is for the company to hand over the Holy Grail of the RNCs internal digital playbook.

But theres another comparison one that carried massive implications for national politics and the rule of law: Wisconsins infamous John Doe investigation of former Gov. Scott Walker and his supporters.

It all started back in 2010, when Walker was still county executive of Milwaukee and running for governor. Based on a report that public funds had been stolen from an annual military event, Walker opened an investigation, which came to be known as John Doe I.

Wisconsin has a provision for these legal proceedings, called John Doe investigations. Like grand juries, theyre intended to determine whether a crime has been committed and, if so, who committed it.

Unlike grand juries, however, these are not conclusions drawn not by a jury of peers but investigations helmed by a single judge. Not only can law enforcement subpoena witnesses, but they can issue gag orders that prevent those witnesses from saying anything publicly about the investigation, granting an inordinate amount of secrecy to those overseeing it.

Six people were convicted as a result of John Doe I. By this point, Walker had secured the governorship and by 2012 was facing a union-fueled recall effort, which he weathered and won.

After Walker won the recall election, however, a judge gave the overseeing district attorney the green light to grow the scope of the John Doe investigation except this time it targeted Walker himself for supposedly breaking campaign finance laws. The DA was John Chisholm, the same DA who became infamous in November 2021 when a criminal he let off with exceptional leniency murdered six people and injured more than 62 others when he plowed an SUV through an annual Christmas parade.

The overreaches of the investigation were extreme and chilling. Prosecutors targeted not only Walker and conservative organizations in the state but also his supporters. For instance, as Kimberley Strassel documented in her book The Intimidation Game, a 2013 subpoena going after one target, Eric OKeefe, who directed the conservative Wisconsin Club for Growth that helped with Walkers recall election victory, shows the insane breadth of the investigation:

The subpoenas sweeping demands included all of OKeefes correspondence going back to April 2009 with dozens of people whose own names were listed on its first page. Among several visible political figures were also listed lots of small vendors to, and fund-raisers for, the club. The government would have been hard pressed to know the club had such associations. Thats when I realized they had been spying on us for some time. There was no way they could have had those names otherwise, he says. Hed only later find out that prosecutors had already gone to all his Internet service providers and subpoenaed every conversation hed ever had. Theyd done the same to at least seventeen other people.

The subpoenas demands were shocking. Not only did they expose spying and cover a grand scope OKeefe would later learn that in a single day, prosecutors had subpoenaed 29 different conservative organizations in Wisconsin but they also included gag orders that prevented the recipients from telling anyone except their attorney what was in the search warrant or even that they had received it.

The gag order would have been bad enough for people like OKeefe, but he wasnt the only one whose communications were summoned. Others had them seized in the form of pre-dawn raids.

One of these raids occurred at the home of political consultant R.J. Johnson except Johnson and his wife werent home, according to Strassels account. The only person home in the still-dark hours of the early morning was their 16-year-old son, who was prevented by a troop of armed law enforcement from calling his parents, his grandparents who lived less than a mile away, or even a lawyer. The son was told that he was also under the gag order and could be hauled off to jail if he told anyone what had happened.

A similar thing happened to Johnsons business partner Deborah Jordahl when an armed deputy sheriff showed up at her door at 6:00 a.m. with a search warrant. Heres how Strassel tells it:

Jordahl asked for permission to wake her children on her own so they wouldnt be scared. Permission denied. The deputy sheriff accompanied her into each room. Jordahl would later find out that her son, upon waking and seeing a police officer, thought for several minutes that his father was dead.

The deputy herded them all into the family room and read the warrant, including the gag order. Jordahls fifteen-year-old daughter sat on the sofa, weeping, as the deputy explained that the kids were also subject to consequences if they spoke.

Just like the Johnsons, the Jordahl children were also subject to the gag order, and Deborah Jordahl was prevented from calling her lawyer. As Strassel put it, Jordahl would have had a tough time making a call anyway because After going through every closet and drawer and combing through the basement and the family vehicles, the police department left with her phone, her husbands phone, both their computers, the kids computers, hard drives, iPods, an e-reader, a voice recorder, pocket calendars, and her files.

Jordahl later found out that most of this was unnecessary, Strassel recounted. It was simple harassment.

The harassment carried consequences, both personal and professional, for the targets. OKeefe, Johnson, and Jordahl all experienced hits to their business due to the cloud of suspicion and the loss of their records and digital assets. Clients stopped answering calls, and potential business opportunities were lost.

Even if they hadnt heard about the Doe Johnson told the Wall Street Journal, it would have been unethical for me to bring them in blind. So I had to turn down business on that account.

On top of it all, they carried the weight of the knowledge that they could go to jail.

The investigation also had consequences for the states entire conservative movement. As Strassel explained:

The John Doe got shut down, but not before the left accomplished many of its goals. It harassed and put in suspended animation most of Wisconsins conservative movement during a crucial election period. It disclosed donors and pertinent information that could be used to attack and silence the right. It required its victims to spend, collectively, millions of dollars on legal defense money diverted from advocacy. It subjected individuals to the terror of personal prosecution, wreaking havoc on their livelihoods, their families, their ability to sleep at night. It made them think twice about taking part in the electoral system. This is what intimidation is all about.

Through similar intimidation tactics, the Jan. 6 committee has the same effect. Following what was the most problematic election in our countrys history thanks to Big Techs censorship of conservative leaders and information that might harm Democrats in the run-up to the election, states breaking or changing voting laws last-minute to accommodate mass mail-in voting, the press propagandizing 24/7 for Democrats and against Republicans, and Mark Zuckerberg dumping massive funds into left-wing groups to take over government elections offices the J6 committee is squashing election-security efforts by threatening those who question that 2020 was 100 percent free and fair.

As Hemingway outlined, Democrats are presently trying to criminalize Republican fundraising which, by the way, utilizes the exact same methods Democrats use by claiming that when the GOP does it, its wire fraud. When political donations can play such an outsized role in election outcomes, Pelosis underhanded tricks seek to have the same effect as the John Doe circus: to hamstring political enemies by cutting off their donors and creating a cloud of suspicion over perfectly legal and ethical activities.

The RNC has filed a lawsuit against Pelosis committee for its sprawling subpoena that demands highly sensitive information about Republican supporters, and the details bear a frightening resemblance to the John Doe intimidation.

As The Federalists Tristan Justice reported: While the Jan. 6 Committee claimed in its opposition memo the subpoena is narrowly tailored, its compliance would require the Republican Party to reveal its digital strategy and identification of its supporters to ideological state actors running the partisan probe with an explicit vengeance. The committee has alreadyselectively leakedprivate communications obtained through its subpoenas to smear dissidents to friendly media whilemanipulatingother texts to promote a political narrative.

Worse than what happened in John Doe, when 29 conservative organizations were subpoenaed on the same day as noted above, the Jan. 6 committee has officially subpoenaed a whopping 99 people or entities and requested the voluntary compliance of others, according to a Federalist analysis. Of the subpoenas, only about 8 percent were related to the Capitol riot.

The Jan. 6 committee has also investigated and harassed Americans who attended Donald Trumps rally in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, even those who engaged only in constitutionally protected peaceful protest. It went so low as to weaponize the private sector and personal bank records when it asked Bank of America, which had snooped through countless accounts of innocent Americans, to hand over a list of people who made transactions in D.C. on Jan. 5 and 6 or stayed in an Airbnb. Its all about punishing political enemies and intimidating opponents.

That brings us back to Wisconsins John Doe investigation. Ive been in or around politics for two decades and I would have thought this happens in other countries but not the U.S., and not in Wisconsin, said Kurt Bauer, president of the group Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, which was hit so hard with subpoenas during John Doe that it reportedly brought on a forensics team to copy the boatload of requested information from computers. In this country, we dont leverage the justice system to punish our political opponents.

Correction: In this country, we shouldnt leverage political power to ruin the lives of opponents and decent people dont. But thats exactly what Pelosis partisan committee is working overtime to do.

John Doe, which turned the lives of innocents upside down, has gone down in recent history as a nakedly partisan and embarrassing abuse of power without accountability but that was just one state. The Jan. 6 committee is John Doe for all of America, and those responsible for its sins be brought to account.

Visit link:

Jan. 6 Committee Follows The Pattern Of The Evil John Doe Investigation - The Federalist

In light of President Bidens announcement hes ending Title 42 removal authority at the southern border, last week Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced what he called unprecedented actions to stop the flow of illegal immigration. The first part of his plan, while lauded as aggressive, unfortunately falls short of unprecedented and wont stop the invasion at the southern border.

Its true: the end of Title 42 will ensure a catastrophic surge of illegal immigration heading into the warmer spring and summer months. That will overwhelm an already battered Border Patrol.

In the context of 2021s record illegal immigration levels, an astonishing 78 percent increase in year-over-year apprehensions so far in 2022 from last years record levels, and the pending termination of Title 42, Abbotts actions fall far short of the measures needed to secure Texas, diminish cartel control along the border, and defend American communities overrun with crime, drugs, and violence.

Abbotts announced series of new measures are little more than window dressing. The governor is instructing the Texas Department of Public Safety to conduct enhanced safety inspections of vehicles crossing into Texas from Mexico, initiating boat blockades along the Rio Grande to deter crossings, and, to ensure more headlines: providing voluntary charter buses and flights to send illegal immigrants to Washington D.C.

Put another way, Abbott is using taxpayer dollars to pay for optional vacations 2,000 miles away at a time of record gas prices instead of turning these illegal migrants around and sending them two miles back across the border. Bussing illegals to D.C. is nice showmanship, but does nothing to change the illegal flow into Texas.

Abbott must do more than just set up road inspections (which ironically would slow the legal flow), deploy water obstacles, and offer voluntary illegal immigrant transportation services to left-wing cities. These policy solutions on their own will have no impact on the numbers of illegal aliens crossing Texass border with Mexico.None.

This is especially true of road inspections, because the overwhelming majority of illegal immigration occurs between ports of entry. The extent to which the governor believes such road inspections will put pressure on Mexico to crack down on illegal border crossings due to the diminished flow of goods and services is wholly contingent on the duration, scope, and intensity of the inspections.

That requires the governor to be absolutely clear about how much economic pressure he intends to put on Mexico and what metrics he and his team intend to achieve with regard to such inspections. That he has not done so requires clear-eyed observers to be skeptical of the policys presumed effectiveness.

What should Abbott do? Something that we at the Center for Renewing America have been advocating to border states: declare that an invasion is taking place in Texas under Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution and that in light of the Biden administrations willful negligence and dereliction of its duty to carry out its Article IV, Section 4 responsibilities to protect the states, Texas will physically apprehend and remove illegal border crossers back across the border into Mexico.

It is up to states to use their inherent Article I authority to do what Washington refuses to do: secure their borders with Mexico.

We have provided state legislators and governors a clear policy path for bringing an end to the security crisis playing out along the southern border. This plan has already been validated by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich in a landmark legal opinion issued earlier this year.

Americans do not have the luxury of withstanding another three years of the Biden administrations intentionally destructive policies at the southern border. It is up to states and those elected to govern them to step into the breach and restore order and security.

Texas has the ability to get this done. All that is required is the resolve to see it through.

Nothing Abbott announced will accomplish any reduction of the flow of illegal aliens across Texas border, but he indicated that he intended to announce other efforts this week.

After a year of Texas Operation Lone Star, it should be clear to all: Until illegal border crossers are returned to Mexico reliably and regularly, no other efforts will have any useful impact.In fact, the money Texas is spending on Operation Lone Star is effectively being wasted because the one thing that would give it teeth and deter potential illegal border crossers is not being done.

For the sake of Texas and America, it is my most earnest hope that this week, finally, Gov. Abbott will use the power he has under the U.S. Constitution to repel the invasion crossing Texas border every single day.

Ken Cuccinelli is a Senior Fellow at the Center for Renewing America. Previously, he was President Trump's Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) and Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). He was also Virginia Attorney General.

See the article here:

Abbott's DC Caravan Gimmick Won't Secure The Border, But This Will - The Federalist

Our family ended up at Dollywood recently by happenstance. We were visiting family in Tennessee. The morning after we had arrived long past the childrens bedtime, we awoke groggily and sought coffee. Quickly provided this necessary brew by my attentive young second cousin, I turned to his mom and said, Okay, what do you all want to do this week? She exclaimed, Lets go to Dollywood!

I hadnt expected that, but we were here to spend happy time with them, and if thats what they wanted, thats what we wanted, too. So my cousin spent about an hour calling friends for advice about how best to do Dollywood, then putting together our day trip package.

I wasnt sure what to expect. My husband and I wouldnt describe ourselves as theme park people. In fact, I am terrified of rollercoasters; the classic country fair egg scrambler maxes out my ride capacity.

My husband isnt that emotionally handicapped, but hes a low-key, easy-please fellow. We mostly go on hikes in the woods or bike rides for family fun, that kind of thing. My idea of a great night out is going somewhere our 15 million (I mean, six) children wont interrupt our conversation 70 billion times. Add some ice cream or coffee, and thats my best life now.

So I was a little skeptical, but in the interest of not being a big fat stick in the mud, I determined to be as pleasant and open-minded as possible and just try to help everyone else have a good time. These low expectations were constantly exceeded during our one-day visit. We came away very willing to go again.

By contrast, Walt Disney World in Florida and Disneyland in California have long been on our over my dead body list, and with Dollywood as an option they will most certainly stay there. Its not just the recent visibility of the longstanding fact that Disneys post-Walt corporate leadership works to undermine sexual wholeness, but also about the greedy commercialization of the Disney brand.

Even setting aside their recently revealed support for destroying human happiness through sexual chaos, Disneys products push a lifestyle that doesnt reflect my goals for family life. I dont want my kids taught to be whiny brats whose biggest lesson to learn is that all authority figures are dumb or evil. Thats a main message of almost every major Disney property, and its very bad for kids.

Other destructive and pervasive Disney messages include that men (especially dads) are stupid and bad, women can do no wrong, women need to validate themselves by beating people up more fiercely than the boys do, celebrity is something to aspire to (instead of being a good person), and if it feels good, do it. These are terrible values that can and do destroy people just as much as severing their genitals. I have no interest in supporting these messages with my money or my childrens attention. So we have never been a Disney family, and we never will be.

Dollywood, on the other hand, that I can get into. The only message Dollywood pushed is that people should love each other. Oh, and Love Every Moment. Who can feel uncomfortable with that? Heres a little rundown about what I liked best about Dollywood, what I didnt, and what worked for our family in terms of logistics.

Perhaps the best thing about going as a large family group was that Dollywood had something for everyone. As I mentioned, I dont do rollercoasters, but the teens and other grownups with us did, and they had a great time. My oldest son, who is 11, tried his first rollercoasters and had the time of his life screaming alongside his aunt and cousins. They spent the entire day going from one rollercoaster to the next.

Those in our group who had recently visited other large theme parks, including Disney World, said the rollercoaster and general park experience was much better at Dollywood. It was less hectic, better organized, less spendy, and more wholesome. We visited on a gorgeous April spring Friday, and the park was humming but not packed. It really was perfect.

This five-year-old and eight-year-old went on a few rollercoasters. They were scared but they liked it.

For the rollercoaster riders, we did spend the extra for the Timesaver add-on that lets you jump to the front of the lines. That almost doubles the ticket price if you get the unlimited pass, but it was worth it. I expect things are even busier heading into summer, so that would make the Timesaver pass even more worth it. (If you want to jump lines but not spend so much, a different Timesaver applies to eight rides only.)

Those of us who dont enjoy terrorizing ourselves also had plenty to do, perfectly pitched to a variety of ages. The youngest kid we brought was my 22-month-old, who loved the baby rides. It took folding myself into several ridiculously pint-sized seats to discover my little guy could go on several himself, and then I cheered from the sidelines.

I was worried he might freak out because hes an extremely clingy mommas boy, but he didnt scream at or for me, a major win for both of us. I brought a toddler pack to carry him around instead of a stroller, and that also worked well. If it were blistering hot I would have done the stroller instead.

For the six and under crowd, our favorite two theme park locations were Wildwood Grove and the Country Fair. Both had rides throughout. Id say the latter has more to do in one spot for multiple ages and Wildwood Grove is more pitched to the younger kids. The latter has splashpad-like sprinklers for summer heat, and if I lived in the area Id bring my toddlers and preschoolers there often on a season pass.

Dollywood also has a waterpark, but we didnt visit it this time. I would definitely be interested in that for a future summer visit.

One thing I hate about being a mom in the 21st-century United States and, yes, I know this is a first-world problem is the insane level of marketing foisted upon me and my kids. Thats one of the reasons I dont like Disney. It appears to be a dollar-obsessed cult that tries to monetize every flash of your eyeballs.

To me, this weaponizes family life as well as cedes parental prerogatives to strangers, by openly urging kids to whine for cheap, unfulfilling, Chinese-factory-made trash because it has Minnie Mouses face on it. I work to reduce my childrens exposure to brands because 1) its expensive to care about that meaningless crap 2) it adds unnecessary friction to our relationship, and 3) deliberately exploits childrens immaturity to get more dollars and I believe that is morally wrong.

Dollywood used none of the high-pressure Disney manipulation tactics that upset me so much. There were no characters with backstories and gobs of branded merch, no forgettable and ear-shriveling pop tunes autotuned by embarrassingly sexualized tweens, no morally bankrupt but doe-eyed heroines trying to steal my daughters souls. Just good, clean fun.

Speaking of clean, because I also have a four-year-old whose ability to hold her water is very limited, I probably sampled the majority of Dollywoods bathrooms. I found some a bit dated in style just cinderblock buildings in a few cases but they had baby changing stations and were clean, plentiful, and easy to find.

I could not go on this ride. It was too scary. My five-year-old cousin, however, loved it.

For people like me who hate Covid theater because it is the mark of a ruling class who loves to crush the American people for spite, I will disclose my estimate that I saw masks on maybe one in a few hundred people while we were there. It was refreshing to see that all of America hasnt been broken by wall-to-wall public health lies.

Another major boost to the Dollywood experience was of course the folk and country music piped throughout the park as well as the multiple live music venues. The music was foot-tapping, country folk, wholesome, high-quality, high-class, exuberant, and utterly enjoyable. It reinforced the wholesome Americana feel of the entire park, which emphasizes Dolly Partons country mountain roots.

Several of the artists and venues were overtly Christian, with refreshingly no apologies made about that. The park also has a chapel. Im a high-church kind of gal who cringes at most of what is marketed as Christian music, but this was top-notch music that happened to be Christian, not embarrassing music passed off as good because it warbled about Boyfriend Jesus.

Ive never been in any public place, such as a mall, with better background music. I would have gone to Dollywood just to listen to the music. It was wonderful to expose my children to that uplifting atmosphere. It constantly boosted my spirits and eased the minor sufferings of walking around all day in the sun on my feet carrying a fussy toddler in a people-filled public place.

Thank you, Dolly Parton. That was the cherry on top, and it was clearly all you.

Once youre in Dollywood, you dont have to keep buying tickets or tokens for more rides. Pay the entrance fee and you get all the rides you can manage. Id way rather pay one big entrance fee then do the park at my familys pace than constantly shuffle and shell out for this ride and that and then have no idea how much this all is costing me and where to find some freaking more tokens while my kids whine.

As is clear by now, overall Dollywood was an excellent experience and I highly recommend it for those for whom several hundred or a few thousand dollars are already budgeted for a family vacation. If you havent been there yet, put it on your list.

I do have two minor criticisms. The food sold in the park was yummy and of a wide variety. It was, however, what Id call obscenely expensive. That is probably due to a combination of inflation Dollywood cant control, the scarcity of workers (one or two of the in-park eateries were closed with signs stating it was due to staffing shortages), and the usual fair-food markup. Also, I dont often take my kids out to eat in general I dont feel the value I get out of that experience is usually equal to the cost. Anyway, we brought most of our own food and had a big meal at Pirates Voyage midday, so that worked out fine.

The second thing was that for some reason I never saw a water bottle fill-up station. They must have been somewhere but I didnt see them, and I was looking. We bring our reusable water bottles everywhere, especially in all-day outdoor environments like this one. Speaking of outdoors, I recommend hats or sunscreen for those who burn.

Id say if you wanted to visit Dollywood on a budget, a family of four could do it for about $500 without the ticket add-ons and bringing in your own picnic lunch and not staying overnight, but there are certainly also lots of ways to spend more and therefore do more. Obviously different families have different budgets and preferences and its part of family life to navigate that.

If you wanted to spend more of a typical American family vacation budget of $1,000-$2,000 (or, if were comparing to ridiculous Disney, five or ten), you could do two-day passes (or one day at the theme park and one at the waterpark), spend the extra for the Timesaver passes and premier parking, eat in the park, and stay overnight or for the weekend nearby. By the way, I liked the gift shop, too! One of the better ones Ive seen.

There was so much to do and see, we could have spent several more days there and still done something new all day, every day. Thats also only in the Dollywood theme park proper the entire area has enough to do to occupy months, not least of which for me would be the Great Smoky Mountains. Next time.

Visit link:

Cancel Your Disney Vacation And Go To Dollywood Instead - The Federalist

Women get sold lies a lot: Marriage will oppress you, abortion will liberate you, and X product isnt a pyramid scheme. One rooted lie thats producing all kinds of icky fruit is that body positivity is the way for women to be their most confident, authentic selves.

We know its a lie because it seeks validation from sources of conventional health and beauty, such as workout gear companies and womens magazines, and anywhere else it can get it. Unhealthy and discontented women are bombarded with moral assurances from corporate America and obese celebrities that they actually shouldnt change a thing about themselves, despite their bloated, tired, inflamed bodies telling them otherwise.

So they continue to seek validation with #bodypositivity posts and in online forums. Sadly, none of those dopamine hits translate to lasting confidence or positive health outcomes.

Other women are enormously self-assured in their destructive lifestyles. But that confidence is no substitute for joyful longevity, nor for productivity, bodily functions, and good sleep.

Make no mistake. Pants size has never once defined a womans worth. That immense value comes from our Creator and the incredible fact that each of us bears His image. Yet as image-bearers and functioning members of society, women deserve more than to be sold a bill of goods marketed as body positivity that promises fullness but delivers frustration.

Whether youre looking to trim your waistline, develop healthier habits, or find motivation to fuel your body better, here are 14 ways to rise above the body positivity lies and become a healthier, happier you.

To overcome harmful habits, its important not to overindulge in the types of foods, drinks, and behaviors that take a toll on our bodies and make us feel crappy. But the answer doesnt lie in juice cleanses and starvation. Fuel your body with lean protein, lots of leafy greens, and a little healthy fat and complex carbs, plus plenty of water.

Then practice mindful consumption: Are you hungry because your body needs food, or are you just bored? Dehydrated? Procrastinating?

Rather than rewarding yourself for personal victories with a trip to the drive-thru, reward yourself with the breezy feeling that comes from eating a moderate and nutritious meal and maybe a mocktail.

Its easier to eat right when you prepare food yourself, not to mention the cost savings. And life gets crazy when the stress of the workweek kicks in. Do yourself a favor by compiling a simple weekly meal plan each weekend and then making a grocery run before Monday morning.

I do this by planning dinners Monday through Friday, saving leftovers for lunches, and listing a few health-conscious snacks for in between. Its not as hard as you think! Put some of your mealtime favorites on a weekly rotation so you can buy recurring ingredients in bulk and take the anxiety out of learning new recipes.

Youll thank yourself when you get to the weeks end and you dont have a handful of eating-out receipts in your wallet and inflammation in your body.

Its much easier to resist buying junk food in the store than to resist snatching it out of your pantry for a late-night binge. Save yourself some cash and some regret by leaving the Classic Lays (my weakness) in the chip aisle and grabbing a more nutritious option if you need a munch to satisfy the cravings.

Eating well doesnt mean fully restricting yourself. Thats a recipe for frustration. The best way to make lasting habits is to incorporate doable changes incrementally.

Take inventory of a couple of the unhealthy foods you regularly consume and think of reasonable substitutes for them. Are you a soda girl? Try switching it for flavored sparkling water or even diluting your soda with it until you can take the plunge. Instead of Ben and Jerrys, grab some Halo Top. Try high-protein chickpea or lentil pasta or zoodles instead of regular noodles.

Small changes like this go a long way, and it doesnt take long to acquire a taste for something new.

Yeah, yeah, you already know this one but drinking enough water is crucial for so many of our regular bodily functions such as removing waste, keeping our skin supple, and regulating our body temperatures, among countless other things.

Theres no one answer to how much water you should consume each day, but try drinking at least half your body weight in ounces daily and see how it affects your overall health and regularity. Carrying a water bottle with you helps.

Theres nothing wrong with having some wine with dinner or hitting that happy hour with friends, but it can be easy to forget how many calories and grams of needless sugar were consuming when we do. Alcohol can also cause inflammation in the body and interfere with our gut health and the function of our elimination organs.

Try taking a break from alcohol for a month for a little detox. Another good idea is to limit yourself to moderate consumption on only the weekends if youre in the habit of drinking during the week.

I dont mean diet like calorie-counting; I mean eliminating foods that are inflammatory or allergenic from your diet to see what culprits might be causing you problems.

Many women suffer from serious bloating, constipation, skin irritation, and other inflammation that might be explained by an unexpected ingredient. If you suspect this might be you, try eliminating gluten, dairy, artificial sugar, soy, corn, or other foods, and record how it makes you feel over the course of a few weeks.

If you arent competitive, Orange Theory might not be the best workout for you. You know what you like, so find sustainable physical activities you enjoy. I personally love the Beachbody workout video Turbo Jam and got it on DVD on eBay true story.

But it might be different for you. Try a yoga class or lap pool. Give pilates or barre a go. The possibilities are endless!

On that note, look for ways to add physical activity to things youre already doing. Make your coffee date a calorie burn instead by going for a walk instead of sitting in the cafe.

Buy a used stationary bike that you can ride while you watch Netflix. Instead of lounging around on a Saturday with your boyfriend, spend time together kayaking or hiking.

Ok, so I just told you to do what you enjoy but it might also be time to get out of your comfort zone and try weight-lifting. Women would be shocked to learn how many calories they can burn doing a few sets of compound lifts at the gym.

I used to be scared of getting a gym membership because I had no idea what I was doing and didnt want to look like an idiot. So instead, I ran several miles a day. When I got home, my reconstructed ACLs would be screaming at me, Id be starving, and Id basically consume all the calories Id just burned off trying to recover with no muscle-toning to show for it.

One leg workout at the gym burns the same amount of calories with far less strain on my body and far less sweat. Plus it tones my muscles and improves my metabolic rate, meaning it causes me to burn more calories when Im resting.

Just remember that anyone whos a gym rat had a first day at the gym. Most gym veterans are shockingly supportive of newbies and if you have any in your life, ask if theyll help you get started with good form and proper weight.

Start with a free trial at a nearby gym, and bring a friend or spouse with you! It can be a great social activity, and weight-liftings constant progress is a great way to build confidence. Try an app like Strong to keep track of exercises and progress.

Our bodies dont function well when theyre exhausted, so make sure youre getting enough good sleep every night. This means going to bed at a reasonable time, which can be tough for night owls like me.

It also means turning off your screens, which can delay REM sleep, suppress melatonin, and keep your mind alert. If you have a habit of falling asleep to the TV, try breaking it with a good book.

Put the phone down and turn off the TV before doing a nighttime routine like washing your face and brushing your teeth to give your body time to relax. Experts suggest no screens an hour before bed, but every little bit helps.

Each body is different, so make sure your closet is stocked with attire that flatters your distinct figure and makes you feel like yourself. Just because some influencer is wearing it (or not wearing it) doesnt mean you need to make the same choice.

I find that keeping around goal clothes as in, clothes that are too small but Im hoping to fit into someday isnt helpful for me. Sometimes it takes longer to lose stubborn weight than I think it will, or it sheds from an unexpected part of my body, leaving me feeling dejected that I cant fit into my goal shorts when I should be feeling victorious at my progress. Buy clothes that fit you and make you feel like yourself, not clothes that keep you longing for a body type that isnt yours.

Taking responsibility for your health can be tough when youre surrounded by people who have different goals or who dont support your lifestyle. Make sure to keep people close who share your vision and health values and want to see you be your happiest, healthiest you.

Obsessing about your health or weight or goals leads to self-centered madness, and nobody needs that.

But more importantly, despite all the messages youll get from entertainment and the media, so-called self-care isnt just about yourself. Caring for our bodies ensures not only that were filling our own cups but that were in the best position to serve others well.

See more here:

Ditch Body Positivity! Do These 14 Things Instead - The Federalist

A new law passed by Illinois Democrats over the weekend will compel private retailers to advertise lawmakers temporary tax break. That break amounts to breadcrumbs for consumers forced to cope with record gas prices, amplified by gas taxes that are among the highest rates in the nation.

In the early hours Saturday morning, the state legislature passed a new budget that will require gas stations to post signs to celebrate Democrats delay of a 2.2 cent increase of the gas tax scheduled for July. Residents already pay the fourth-highest gas taxes in the country at more than 40 cents per gallon, according to federal data.

Under the Democrats new plan headed to the governors desk, the advertisements must read, As of July 1, 2022, the State of Illinois has suspended the inflation adjustment to the motor fuel tax through December 31, 2022. The price on this pump should reflect the suspension of the tax increase.

Grocery stores must also publish a note on receipts that the state suspended a 1 percent tax on groceries for a year.

From July 1, 2022 through July 1, 2023, the State of Illinois sales tax on groceries is 0%, reads the mandatory text.

If doing so is not feasible, retailers are required to post a sign at least 4 by 8 inches that is clearly visible to customers. Failure to comply within 14 days of the laws passage will result in $500 daily fines, or, $65,500 through election day.

When people hear the whole story, I think theyre going to be mocked, specifically on the gas tax, Republican State Rep. Mark Batinick told The Federalist.

Some have already mocked the proposal online, comparing the 2.2 cent tax suspension to the I did that stickers of President Joe Biden that have popped up on gas pumps across the country. The stickers, blaming the White House for rising prices since inauguration, sell for packs of 100 for less than $5 on Amazon.

While other states move to suspend gas taxes entirely however, Illinois delay of a scheduled summer tax increase is unlikely to lift a heavy burden on residents.

Its like 50-60 cents cheaper in the states around us and they want to advertise that it could have been 52.2 cents, Batinick said. Im amazed that they want to pat themselves on the back for a 2.2 cents stoppage of a tax increase.

The annual tax adjustment for inflation was scheduled when Democrat Gov. J.B. Pritzker doubled the Illinois gas tax in 2019 from 19 cents per gallon to 38 cents. No stickers were required at the time informing residents of the tax hike.

The Illinois Fuel and Retail Association threatened legal action over the new law last week ahead of the legislatures weekend vote.

This industry wont be forced into offering free election year advertising for the Governor, said the trade groups Josh Sharp. Ordering businesses to take part in speech that is compelled by the government under the threat of fines and criminal penalties is unwise and unconstitutional.

The Illinois Fuel and Retail Association did not respond to The Federalists request for further comment.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

See original here:

Illinois Democrats Force Stations To Advertise Delay Of A 2-Cent Gas Tax - The Federalist

Congressional Republicans are pressing the D.C. government and the Biden administration to investigate how five fetuses died, noting that experts have suggested they were viable and potentially subject to illegal abortions.

Live Action News released footage earlier this month of the fetuses, which had been found in a medical waste package obtained by pro-life activists from the Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU). They claim to have obtained the package outside of the Northwest D.C. clinic of Dr. Cesare Santangelo, a late-term abortion doctor who previously indicated to a Live Action investigator that he would decline to provide lifesaving care to an infant who survived his abortions.

Responding to footage of the fetal remains, nearly 70 legislators wrote in a letter to the Justice Department Friday: [J]ustice demands that at the very least, an investigation be conducted to ensure that anyone conducting these illegal, abhorrent acts against the most innocent among us may be prosecuted,

Earlier this week, nearly two dozen members of Congress sent D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and the citys chief of police. And on Saturday, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said he sent a letter to D.C.s government requesting evidence preservation for future congressional oversight.

So far, the citys medical examiner has declined an autopsy, despite multiple medical experts indicating potential violations of federal law.

Fridays letter cites Dr. Kendra Kolb, a neonatalogist who told Live Action News that one of the girls is 28-30 weeks gestational age, with evidence of deep lacerations to the posterior neck which presumably correlates to the method of abortion used to end her life.

If this is the case, the abortionist might have violated the Partial Birth Abortion Ban of 2003, which only contains an exception for life of the mother.

A year prior, in 2002, Congress passed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which is designed to ensure life-saving medical care for babies who survive abortions. The clinic where these babies were found is run by an abortionist who was caught admitting on camera that he wouldnt provide that type of care.

Rather than denouncing those practices, the Justice Department has remained relatively silent in recent weeks and instead indicted Lauren Handy, the pro-life activist who obtained the fetal remains, over an incident that occurred in 2020.

Meanwhile, Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra has denied the existence of partial-birth abortions and ignored the state of the babies when asked about them during a congressional hearing.

Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., had asked Becerra about Live Actions report. Becerra responded that partial-birth abortion is a politician created term. It is not a term that physicians use not a term that my wife as an OBGYN uses to address the issues of pregnancy.

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 defines the procedure as:

An abortion in which a physician deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living, unborn childs body until either the entirebabys head is outside the body of the mother, or any part of the babys trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother and only the head remains inside the womb, for the purpose of performing an overt act (usually the puncturing of the back of the childs skull and removing the babys brains) that the person knows will kill the partially delivered infant, performs this act, and then completes delivery of the dead infantis a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

Some have questioned whether this particular baby had a condition known as anencephaly in which a pre-born child wont develop certain parts of their brain or skull. Experts, however, have told LAN that the girls injuries point to her head appearing smaller due to a partial-birth abortion removing her brain matter.

This baby is clearly large enough to be well into the third trimester, said Dr. Jeff Wright, a maternal and fetal medicine specialist. The vast majority of babies that size will survive and be healthy with commonly available NICU care. The video shows a surgical wound in the back of the skull, which is likely to have been made to facilitate removal of the fetal brain and delivery of the fetal head.

The question is when did that wound occur? he asked. I believe that an autopsy is in order to determine if this child was alive or not when the skull was punctured; and if removal of the brain with surgical instruments was the cause of death.

When you look at [the photo] from the side, it looks anencephalic but then when you look at the back and see that theres that big injury, you kind of recognize that youve just got a collapsed skull because the intracranial content had been removed, said Dr. Ingrid Skop of the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute.

She said that if the medical examiner looked, they would easily be able to tell whether there had ever been a brain there.

Sam Dorman is a writer based in the Washington D.C. metro area. His work has also appeared in Fox News Digital, The Washington Free Beacon, Yahoo News, and other outlets.

The rest is here:

Lawmakers Demand Investigation Into Deaths Of Five Pre-Born Babies Found In DC - The Federalist

Reached in a phone interview, Mark Wahlberg, known for action blockbusters like Uncharted and Planet of the Apes, said a significant gap separates his new biopic Father Stu, in theaters nationwide on April 13, from other entries in the inspirational genre.

I dont know if youve seen a lot of faith-based movies, but I have, said Wahlberg, producer and star of this Sony-distributed faith-conscious drama. They all seem to be preaching to the choir and not really converting too many people.

With a trailer that employs Johnny Cashs iconic The Man Comes Around, it sets the tone for a rough-and-tumble narrative centered on Stuart Long (Wahlberg), a statewide heavyweight champion (Montana, 1985) whos hit over and again with devastating blows in life.

An injury and reconstructive jaw surgery sidelines the amateur boxer, who decides to move to California to be an actor despite an admonition from Stus mother Kathleen (Jacki Weaver): You dont belong with those L.A. folks. Theyre a bunch of fascist hippies!

Its perhaps a tongue-in-cheek reference to Wahlbergs own six-year journey of bringing this unlikely story to the big screen. Studios today are looking to make tentpole, franchise movies, Wahlberg told me. Only at the end of the year do they roll out thoughtful films for adults to watch, angling for awards. To see Sony step up and support this movie and distribute it in a major way, that says a lot.

Like the man himself, Father Stu doesnt fit easily in any boxes. Long ended up with few acting credits in SoCal and worked in a dead-end supermarket job. He strikes up a relationship with an attractive Latina woman, Carmen (Teresa Ruiz), whom he learns is also a Sunday school teacher. To pursue her, he starts to attend Catholic mass and even gets baptized.

Multiple crises strike Long, a theme many will relate to following recent difficult years. Despite skepticism from his mother and father Bill (Mel Gibson), former prizefighter Long decides to enter seminary, his messy romance with Carmen a casualty of that move.

He challenged a lot of people, said Wahlberg about Stu Long. More importantly, he had a lot of real-life experience that helped him communicate to people in a way that really rang true and resonated with them.

In 2016, following his acclaimed role in war biopic Lone Survivor and taking over as lead in the big-budget Transformers franchise, Wahlberg shared dinner with Father Ed Flavin who presided over Wahlbergs wedding ceremony and another priest at a Beverly Hills restaurant.

I was looking for wisdom to stay on a path in the direction of spiritual growth, he said. But one of them starts to tell me about Stuart Long and actually pitching it to me as a movie idea. Im thinking, You do your job and Ill do mine. But something caught my attention about it, and a light went on.

The worlds highest-paid actor in 2017, Wahlberg took on the project despite no script and few source documents for a figure known in many Catholic circles but without a written biography.

He considers the opportunity providential, despite the challenges. God puts things in your life for a reason, when youre ready to handle those things, he told me. And I dont think this is any different.

On the set of Daddys Home 2 that year with Gibson, he chatted with the actor-director about the remarkable story of a boxer-turned-priest. When it comes to brutal, unconventional faith films, award winner Gibson has helmed the most successful of all time: The Passion of the Christ.

Dogged by controversy since 2006 when Gibson made offensive anti-Semitic comments during a DUI arrest, for which he has made several apologies Wahlberg treads lightly in addressing his friends involvement and advice that helped get Father Stu off the ground.

He has been through lots of struggles and challenges but wants to continue to do good, Wahlberg told me. We consulted Stus dad Bill about who to cast, and Mel was his first, second, and third choice. He frankly brought a lot to the part.

An emerging talent in the biopic genre, and Gibsons romantic partner since 2014, Rosalind Ross took on the script. Wahlberg and his team were so impressed, she ultimately landed the job as director. Stus story is about overcoming the darkest parts of a persons self to find the light of personal salvation, said Ross in a statement.

Known for pouring his influence and millions of dollars into nonprofit youth initiatives, along with cause-oriented films like Instant Family, Wahlberg has brand ID with faith-and-family audiences. Still, its a gamble that an R-rated faith biopic will find a wide audience even during Holy Week.

With that rating based entirely on coarse language, mostly in early scenes, Wahlberg responds: Stu was a tough guy who spoke the language of the people. This story is about mercy and tough grace, and we wanted to make a movie that was brutally honest.

The film takes wild swings in tone. Viewers meet Long when hes a foul-mouthed brawler, and his interest in Carmen isnt mostly platonic. Once he enters seminary, Father Stu becomes more comedic, as Long throws a swing at someone who brings booze near their hallowed walls. During a prison ministry scene, his fellow seminarian struggles to relate but Long has a casual rapport with inmates.

And, in scenes reminiscent of arthouse cinema-like First Reformed, Wahlberg cries out to God about his lifes many limitations and losses. The actor-producer recalls speaking with Archbishop George Thomas, who ordained Long. He said that Stu did more in his four short years of priesthood than the bishop did in his 40 years of service. Thats pretty remarkable.

Used to Hollywood cynicism about faith, Wahlberg says hes gotten plenty of Yeah, whatever responses upon telling a test audience for Father Stu that theyre going to be moved. Afterward, those same skeptics come out and share some intimate story from their past, and connect it to how this movie touched them, Wahlberg told me.

He says he has other authentic, faith-conscious stories in mind to tell. Somebodys got to be first. And if this movie works, I guarantee youll see lots more including a few with me at the forefront.

Rated R for coarse language throughout, Father Stu opens in theaters nationwide on April 13.

Josh Shepherd covers culture, faith, and public policy for several media outlets including The Stream. His articles have appeared in Christianity Today, Religion & Politics, Faithfully Magazine, Religion News Service, and Providence Magazine. A graduate of the University of Colorado, he previously worked on staff at The Heritage Foundation and Focus on the Family. Josh and his wife live in the Washington, D.C. area with their two children.

The rest is here:

Mark Wahlberg On Mel Gibson And The Premiere Of 'Father Stu' - The Federalist

On the run from who or what, he doesnt know. Ex-soldier-turned-mercenary Chris Pine is told by an operative whose safe house Pine is hiding out in, Its much easier to kill than survive.

That bit of dialogue cuts to the heart of The Contractor. Pine, who plays an ex-Green Beret discharged, honorably but sans pension and health insurance because of a pain killer addiction for a wounded knee, is vulnerable in every sense of the word.

For Pine, survival doesnt just mean dodging bullets and inflicting karate chops, but also finding a way to escape the crushing economic circumstances of being a soldier discarded callously by his government.

Editors note: spoilers ahead.

Faced with mounting bills, and notices of having his electricity shut off, Pine offers his services as a Special Ops soldier to a mysterious contractor (Kiefer Sutherland). Sutherland has shed his youthful, vampiric looks that he really didnt make up for in The Lost Boys, and now looks like a Nordic Nazi.

That suits his role in the film as a rancher/fascist. Sutherland is in good form here as a symbol of toxic masculinity co-joined to monopolistic capitalism a corporate type perfectly willing to let desperate people get their hands dirty and then cut them loose, or more likely have them killed.

The plot is muddled. Its something about Pine contracted to assassinate a Syrian biologist who may be developing a lethal virus welcome to the age of Covid for Al Qaeda. The chase sequences, where Pine races through German underground sewers, are competent, albeit unspectacularly done. The Bourne Identity films and the Daniel Craig-powered Bonds do this much better.

For an action film, the pace is maddeningly slow, and the action scenes never really pick up the pace. The action is done in shadows and the rapid cutting makes it hard to determine who is hitting who. But the film has Chris Pine, who carries the movie admirably.

Pine, who managed to register onscreen next to the charismatic Gal Gadot in Wonder Woman, has a Clark Gable-like effortless charm. Like Bradley Cooper, he doesnt force himself on the audience and doesnt seem to realize how handsome he is.

This is his most stoic part yet. His dialogue is relatively minimal, and he uses silence to convey desperation as in the scene where he discovers his benefits have been taken away by the military he once served.

Pine is indispensable, but what really elevates this routine action thriller is its message about how the nation abandons its veterans. As in real life, several of the veterans in the film chose suicide. Pine, a self-described left-leaning liberal, nevertheless does service to ex-soldiers by turning in a non-whiny performance where, instead of marching with Bernie Sanders, he tries to do something individually about his familys plight.

There are father-son issues at play here, and they are effective. Pine had daddy issues with his ex-military jingoistic father, who gifted his son on his birthday with a visit to the tattoo parlor. Still, one is left to wonder why his childhood didnt steer him away from the military. This is unexplored, and the filmmakers miss a big opportunity to show Pine is admirably patriotic in spite of his father.

Pine is a much more gentle father who nevertheless has difficulty connecting with his own son because much of the childs life he was in the military overseas.

At times, The Contractor is confused about what it wants to be. Is it an action thriller with liberal overtones about dark, corporate conspiracies linked to addictive drugs? A message movie about a nation that should economically provide for its protectors? Or a chase film where the paranoia is all too justified?

As such, the film at times feels weighed down by so many themes. For an action film, it is sparse on violence, and without Pines stoic vulnerability, which makes you root for him, it doesnt even qualify for a Roger Moore Bond.

For a message movie, the film is a hybrid. On one hand, it is the usual leftist broadside against unpoliced capitalism; on the other, it is patriotic about those who serve and how much we owe them.

Given our cultural climate, the makers of The Contractor should be commended for balancing their liberal sermonizing with a recognition that we should honor those who guard us while we sleep. In the 1970s, as in the CIA-bashing Three Days of the Condor (1975), the military was simply evil without any leavening patriotism. The Bourne movies, while delivering white-knuckled action scenes that, until Daniel Craig, out-Bonded Bond, made politically correct noises about the military without providing a plausible alternative on how to protect us.

With its message of how the government economically deprived those who make the ultimate sacrifice, and despite its liberal bugaboos about corporations who enrich themselves by pushing addictive drugs, The Contractor is a unique and long-overdue action thriller.

Ron Capshaw is a writer based in Florida.

More:

Chris Pine Elevates The Plight Of Veterans In New Thriller 'The Contractor' - The Federalist