Category Archives: Federalist

The trial of two Finnish Christians for publicly stating mainstream religious teachings that reserve sex only for heterosexual marriage is heading towards a judgment scheduled for March 30. The case could end up hitting Finlands Supreme Court and even the European Court of Human Rights, which means its outcome could affect the rights of religious believers and political dissidents across the world.

Member of Parliament Paivi Rasanen and Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola have been prosecuted now for nearly three years after Rasanen tweeted a picture of Bible verses in June 2019. Complaints about this tweet led to her prosecution under Finlands hate crimes laws.

The government investigation of Rasanens tweet uncovered a theological pamphlet she wrote and Pojhola published in 2004, for which they have both been charged. The booklet states classic Christian teachings about sex as reserved only for marriage, and defining marriage as comprising only one man and one woman for life.

The teachings concerning marriage and sexuality in the Bible arise from love to ones neighbor, Rasanen said in a Feb. 17 statement. This case is about whether it is allowed in Finland to cite the Bible and to agree with it in topics that go against the tide and challenge the current ethos and thinking.

Oral arguments in the case wrapped up this week on Valentines Day. On Feb. 17, a Finnish court also heard a related request from the prosecutor to force a Finnish radio show to take offline a two-minute audio clip of Rasanen speaking about marriage in 2019.

Being criminally charged for voicing my deeply held beliefs in a country that has such deep roots in freedom of speech and religion feels unreal, Rasanen told The Federalist.

On Feb. 14, Pojholas lawyer Jyrki Anttinen argued if the prosecution wins, the ability of pastors to preach the gospel is effectively over in Finland without criminal sanction, said Lorcan Price, a lawyer assisting the case for Alliance Defending Freedom International who attended the Helsinki hearing. An Irishman, Price listened with the aid of a Finnish translator.

The Finnish prosecutor who brought the case is seeking a fine of one-third of Rasanens annual income, the public erasure of documents and audio shes made on the subject, and a financial penalty against the small religious organization Pohjola runs, the Luther Foundation. If the two Christians are convicted, the steepest possible penalty could be two years in prison.

Ive been to his headquarters, the Mission Diocese of the Lutheran Evangelical Church, Price noted. Its fairly utilitarian. Its not luxurious theres no marble foyer with a fountain and receptionist. Theres a kitchen and a communal area and Bishop Juhanas office.

Theyre a breakaway from the main Lutheran church, Price continued. In fact, Pohjola was expelled from the state church in 2014, also for affirming classic Christian theology about differences between the two sexes. He was elected bishop by his growing missionary congregations last year. The main church abandoned the teachings but got to keep all of the buildings. Thats what we have here. Hes in fairly basic accommodation, lets say. I think anything of their income is outrageous.

Its not clear Finlands hate crimes law even bans controversial speech, but Finlands top prosecutor is arguing that it does. If the prosecutor wins the case, it would mark an unprecedented expansion of identity laws that exist in most European countries, many U.S. cities and states, and that U.S. Democrats are trying to make a nationwide law in The Equality Act.

The prosecutor believes the law means you cant preach the gospel in public, but some believe it means you cant directly incite violence, Price noted.

The charges against the two Christians include an attempt to criminalize statements they made years before the law being used to prosecute them passed. Thats the only charge against Pohjola, and one of three charges against Rasanen.

The fact that Bishop Juhana is even in this trial is Kafkaesque, its insane, Price said. Hes being charged with something he did as the head of a charitable foundation, the Luther Foundation, that publishes theological documents, for a document he didnt write that expresses mainstream, orthodox Christian teaching Finding that Bishop Juhana as a publisher broke the law would damage the rights of publishers to publish things that are controversial and as a church leader [would] damage his ability to publish and evangelize and disseminate in public Christian teaching.

The Federalist interviewed Pohjola in person in November, and Rasanen via Zoom last week. As their case concluded arguments this week, U.S. members of Congress reiterated their public concerns about its implications for human rights both worldwide and in the United States.

Its likely their case wont be over even after the court decision likely out at the end of March, said Price. Thats because both parties are likely to appeal if they lose.

If the court convicts Rasanen or Pohjola, or both, their lawyers will definitely appeal, Price said. The Finnish prosecutor also seems likely to appeal if the two Christians are not convicted, as she has appealed similar cases attempting to criminalize politically incorrect views, he said.

The Finnish legal system allows prosecutors to appeal if they dont win a conviction in their first round at court. In common law countries like England and the United States, usually only those convicted of crimes can appeal, not their prosecutors, except under unusual circumstances, Price said.

I think thats very burdensome for those accused, he noted. So you can go through multiple levels of the court and be vindicated at each level and the prosecutor can keep dragging the accused through the courts.

All this means Rasanen and Pohjolas cases could very well end up in Finlands Supreme Court, where if they lose they could appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, from where Price spoke to The Federalist by Zoom on Tuesday. That means their case could affect how all of Europe treats Christian doctrines and free speech more broadly.

Like the United States, Europe has been increasingly restricting political and religious speech, especially in international courts against countries seen as unfashionably conservative, such as Hungary and Poland, Price said. This case therefore comes at a crucial time as speech rights are receiving less government support than has been long standard in the West.

Before this case, Rasanen and Pohjolas theological booklet was printed years ago in a few hundred copies and mostly used within tiny Lutheran churches. Their prosecution has caused it to be distributed around the world and translated into several other languages, Price said.

This obscure little pamphlet has made its way around the world thanks to the efforts of the prosecutor to shut it down, he noted.

Being targeted for their faith has given Rasanen and Pohjola a global platform for preaching the Christian message of forgiveness for all sins and the deep importance to Christians of the Bible as the very Word of God. Rasanen told The Federalist that because of her case, European media are quoting Bible verses and people are debating their meaning. She says shes received emails from people saying her case has prompted them to start reading the Bible, which the pastors wife and grandmother of nine says shes read repeatedly since age 16.

Rasanen spoke to the huge worldwide audience of Fox News this week about her case. Political and religious leaders around the world have also expressed support for Rasanen and Pohjolas rights to free speech and religious exercise, which are legally recognized in European human rights agreements.

Many people and journalists around the world regularly ask me: What keeps you going, from where do you find the courage to speak up?' Rasanen told The Federalist. My motivation comes from the Bible and from my will to have an impact on the society. A conviction based on the Christian faith is more than a [superficial] opinion. The early Christians did not renounce their faith in lions caves, why should I then renounce my faith in a court room? I believe it is my calling and honor to defend the foundational rights and freedoms at this point of my life.

While some people have been scared into silence about their beliefs because of this prosecution, Rasanen said, its also prompted 1,000 Finns to stand in front of Parliament holding their Bibles up to collectively show strong support for the freedom of Gods Word. The Finnish Association for Freedom of Speech and Religion was also founded last June to support the legal defense for this case and possibly others.

In one sense the prosecutor has frightened part of the population into being quiet and in another it has drawn huge attention to the issue, Price said. We cant underestimate the chilling effect of these prosecutions. She [the prosecutor] cannot but regard this as at least a partial success that sending a tweet about the Bible could result in the police coming to your door. Not everyone has the grit and determination of Paivi.

Thats our concern with these hate speech laws. It denudes society of the opportunity to hear something that can be shocking and provocative but is also a different perspective and for Christians founded on a fundamental truth of scripture.

Follow this link:

How A Trial In Finland Could Have Worldwide Effects On Persecution - The Federalist

Vice President Kamala Harriss excuse for not having visited the southern U.S. border last year during the Biden administrations ongoing border crisis was and I havent been to Europe.

Now Harris is on official White House business in Europe, thousands of miles away from Bidens border crisis, to bring peace and security to the borders of Ukraine. While border officials struggle to keep up with the 153,941 illegal aliens they encountered pouring across the U.S.-Mexico border in January, Harris is busy in Germany talking with other European leaders on how to bolster unity as concern grows about Russian troops at Ukraines border.

Biden tapped Harris as his border czar early last year, but it took her months to make a trek to observe the crisis her open-borders administration created. Initially, the VP claimed she was focused on the root causes of the migration influx and wasnt in a rush to visit despite the growing humanitarian crisis and a record-breaking number of illegal aliens getting arrested trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border each month. When former President Donald Trump announced he was making a border trip himself, Harris quickly jumped on the bandwagon.

Harris finally arrived in El Paso in June of last year but failed to do much other than defend why exactly it took her so long to get there in the first place.

Well, its not my first trip, Harris said. Ive been to the border many times. So, the important aspect of this visit is leading this visit after the work that we did in Guatemala. Ive said back in March Im going to come to the border. This is not a new plan, but the reality of it is that we have to deal with causes, and we have to deal with the effects.

Now, just a few weeks in to the Ukraine-Russia tension, Harris is scrambling to lead the U.S. delegation at the Munich Security Conference in what some Democrat-fawning corporate media outlets have labeled the most critical foreign trip of her vice presidency.

While Harris threatens to take corrective actions to ensure there will be severe consequences against Russia if it invades Ukraine, she is silent on the extremely vulnerable U.S.-Mexico border ahead of peak illegal migration months and offers no plan of punishment for the human and drug smugglers exacerbating the crisis.

Instead of offering a plan of action or even reassurance to border states, which have to deal with the aftereffects of the Biden administrations border negligence including increased illicit drug trafficking, Harris is parading around Europe calling attention to the problems of other nations while she ignores her own.

Harris is already extremely unpopular with Americans, and her refusal to acknowledge or address the border problems in the U.S. while actively advocating for the security of foreign borders is an even bigger slap in the face to voters who naively believed the Biden administration would make things better.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordangdavidson.

View original post here:

Harris Heads To Secure Ukraine's Border But Won't Protect Her Own - The Federalist

DENVER A group of major outdoor retailers pledged to continue their boycott of Utah Monday after the states Republican leadership attempted to bring back a major trade show following a five-year hiatus.

Outdoor Retailer, North Americas largest trade show in the industry, was moved from Salt Lake City to Denver, Colo., in 2017 as a form of corporate protest against President Donald Trumps decision to reinstate lands in south Utah to proper agency ownership at GOP state lawmakers request. President Barack Obama had previously exploited the Antiquities Act to illegally create quasi-national parks at Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments.

The biannual trade show that historically brought Salt Lake City 50,000 visitors and $45 million in revenue is reportedly weighing a move back to Utah once its contract expires in Denver, with its last Colorado event this summer, according to the Associated Press. Other options on the list include Anaheim, Calif., Houston, Las Vegas, and Orlando, Fla.

More than two dozen outdoor recreation companies, however, including Patagonia, REI, and North Face, promised in an open letter sponsored by The Conservation Alliance representing another 270 companies to collectively boycott the show if it moves back to Utah.

Our position on the location of the Outdoor Retailer trade show remains clear and unchanged: The show belongs in a state whose top officials value and seek to protect public lands, said Patagonia CEO Ryan Gellert, whose company led the initial protest in 2017.

While the corporate activism is ostensibly dedicated to the protection of public lands, the premise of the revolt has far more to do with politics than environmental stewardship.

The original boycott that provoked the trade shows move to Colorado took aim at land policy that did far more to protect the Utah monuments than did prior administrations weaponizing a 1906 law to paint a false perception of protection.

When Trump trimmed the boundaries of the two monuments expanded under Obama, the Republican administration did so to comply with the Antiquities Act mandate to protect relics using the smallest area compatible while also enhancing opportunities for adequate maintenance and visitation. The area at Bears Ears alone reinstated under Obama-era protections by President Joe Biden larger than neighboring Zion and Bryce Canyon combined. Biden also restored the wide-ranging monument boundaries at Grand Staircase.

The magnifying glass placed on the pair of monuments by Obama also drew in spectators to sites not equipped to sustainably handle the influx of visits.

What they intended to protect they ended up drawing in thousands of people and doing more resource damage in the process, Casey Hammond, aformer Interior official in the Trump administration who coordinated management following boundary reduction told The Federalist. After Obama and allies made Bears Ears into a target, we had to find ways to accommodate the amount of people and keep them from damaging more resources.

Contrary to popular belief waved by Patagonia and North Face to virtue signal, monumental status fails to afford public lands already legally protected with the locked-up designation environmentalists tend to paint. They merely make it more difficult to cultivate responsible stewardship with barriers to infrastructure for proper visitation.

Monument status, for example, cannot stop the development of a mine if the rights already exist. Hammond told The Federalist that while in the process of monument reduction, exactly zero extractive industry reached out with any interest to develop. If they did, especially at this point, theyd face prohibitive obstacles from opposition and regulation.

Considering the retail industrys incentives for residents to Opt Outside, its odd the corporate retailers are especially opposed to the restoration of Utah lands to management and oversight to proper agencies better able to enhance opportunities for outdoor recreation. The politics, however, have blinded far-left activists from acknowledging that policy makers with an R next to their names could do anything to responsibly benefit the environment. Legacy outlets responsible for cultivating the tribalist mindset have even said that much.

Retailers such as North Face, though, love to capitalize on the virtue signal:

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 more from the original source:

Patagonia And North Face's Boycott Of Utah Is Not About Conservation - The Federalist

Quintez Brown, a 21-year-old Black Lives Matter activist, allegedly marched into the office of Louisville, Ky., mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg on Valentines Day and opened fire, sending a bullet through Greenbergs clothing before fleeing the scene. Despite the storys shock value, corporate media cant be bothered to do much reporting on the story and we all know exactly why.

Despite Browns history as a BLM activist and his flirtation with black nationalism on social media, most media outlets have shrugged off his motive for the shooting with a who knows? or even tried to pin it on Republicans. Brown was also a vocal gun-control advocate and was interviewed by Joy Reid on MSNBC at an anti-gun march in 2018.

The Las Vegas Sun completely whitewashed Browns far-left associations, asininely writing that While theres been no indication yet that the activist had ties to any right-wing organizations, the shooting comes amid a rise in threats against politicians fueled by increasingly violent rhetoric coming from extremist Republicans. After backlash, the Sun tweaked the sentence to admit, [I]ts been reported that the activist was involved in the Black Lives Matter and gun-safety movements but still followed the line with the original sentence in its entirety rather than issuing a correction.

ABC simply called Brown a social justice activist, and after the local BLM chapter helped bail him out, David Muir vaguely referred to the group as a community organization.

The New York Times wrote one single article on the shooting, as of Friday morning, but nowhere is any language of assassination. In contrast, federal prosecutors freely slandered the rioters on Jan. 6, 2021, as planning to assassinate officials, a claim corporate media happily parroted until the feds walked it back from lack of evidence.

The Washington Post also deigned to publish only one write-up on the Louisville incident, likewise avoiding any language of assassination and merely referring to Browns checkered activist past as having previously worked with violence prevention groups and participated in racial justice protests in 2020. Neither paper referred to Browns alleged crime as any sort of terrorism, even though the left has liberally doused Republicans, down to parents at school board meetings, with the incendiary term.

Its easy to imagine how outraged the headlines would be if the shooter were a Republican. Trumpist White Supremacist Domestic Terrorist Assassination Attempt Shows Dangers of Republican Rhetoric, Need for DOJ Hate Crimes Investigation would be splattered across every page (shoot, the Las Vegas Sun is practically writing that anyway!). When a troubled high schooler tragically shot and killed classmates at his school in Michigan, news outlets were quick to dig up his moms pro-Trump blog posts.

But in Browns case, even though we know his history as a BLM and gun-control activist, the corporate press is signaling that his motive is either unknown or just not all that relevant (when they mention the story at all). And its not the first time leftist outlets have memory-holed a sensationally horrifying story because the attackers motive or background was politically inconvenient.

Just two months ago, when a radical who had repeatedly called for violence against white people drove his truck through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wis., killing six people, the press corps quickly downplayed or buried not just the suspects problematic past but the story itself. Many blamed it on the car while MSNBC analyst Clint Watts went so far as to call the attack an accident.

In April 2021, when Noah Green a devout follower of Louis Farrakhans antisemitic, black nationalist group, the Nation of Islam rammed into barriers at the U.S. Capitol armed with a knife and murdered Capitol Police officer Billy Evans, the media cabal couldnt be bothered either. Greens motives are not entirely clear, The Hill said. The suspects motive isnt known, but he posted on social media about his struggles during the pandemic, wrote The New York Times.

Although Green murdered a Capitol Police officer unlike anyone on Jan. 6 his act was quickly scuttled by media while the events of Jan. 6 were hysterically broadcast as acts of terrorism and insurrection. Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker even issued a commemorative statement on the one-year anniversary of Jan. 6 mistakenly blaming Trump supporters for Evans death.

And when Bernie bro James Hodgkinson shot up a baseball game of Republican congressmen in 2017, corporate media either blamed Trump or insisted we all share some of the blame. Even though Hodgkinson was part of Facebook groups like Terminate the Republican Party and had written Its Time to Destroy Trump & Co on his own page, talking heads concluded that his violence was incited not by their own anti-Trump vitriol but leaders and political commentators who set an example that led us into an abyss of violent rhetoric.

Any debate about civility in politics begins with Trump, was New York Times political reporter Glenn Thrushs very bad take.

After a neighbor assaulted Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul in 2018 while he was mowing his lawn, breaking five ribs and forcing the senator to undergo surgery to remove part of his lung, blue checkmarks on Twitter flippantly cheered the attempt, with Nancy Pelosis daughter going so far as the say the assailant was right.

Not only are leftists double standards apparent in the reality-defying theatrics theyre pulling to escape association with the Louisville would-be assassin, they are also visible in the efforts to post bail for the shooter.

When donors tried to crowdsource funds to post the outrageously high $2 million bail set for Kyle Rittenhouse, a teenager who has since been acquitted of all charges after shooting multiple people in self-defense, leftist platform GoFundMe shut down the fundraising campaigns. GoFundMe also neutralized the fundraising campaign for Canadian truckers protesting their governments Covid mandates, and after the groups efforts to fundraise on another platform were hacked, media gleefully doxxed and shamed private donors whose information was posted online.

But in Browns case, with a bail set at one-twentieth of Rittenhouses bail, Black Lives Matter Louisville and the Louisville Community Bail Fund helped Brown post his $100,000 bail on Wednesday, two days after the shooting. CNNs Rex Chapman has repeatedly fundraised for the two groups but dont hold your breath waiting for Chapman to face doxxing or cancellation over his support for an attempted murder suspect.

Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

Original post:

Media Dismiss Assassination Attempt Because It Doesn't Fit The Narrative - The Federalist

If you hadnt heard, Democrats and the experts have decided its time to return all the things they took from you. For your own good. Well, some of it. At least for a little while.

President Bidens Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky said Wednesday (surely after careful consideration of The Science) that Americans have earned a treat. We want to give people a break from things like mask-wearing when these [Covid hospitalization] metrics are better, she said, and then have the ability to reach for them again should things worsen.

That same day, Saint Anthony Fauci likewise noted the growing portion of the public that is just up to here with COVID and just really need to somehow get their life back.

Democrat Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York declared last week that it was time to give people their lives back.

For two years these people demanded that we (but not necessarily themselves) keep masks strapped over our mouths (preferably two), stay home, and forego anything that might resemble fun or pleasure. It looks like now that were heading into the midterms, they want to give us a reward. The prize: your rights.*

*Well, some of them!

Fox News on Wednesday played the clip of Walensky and to my shock and horror, the accompanying segment wasnt about the scary, dictatorial language that Democrats and the experts use were ready to give you a break! but how there might be better days ahead? (question mark included).

That anyone in government feels free to talk like this aloud without flinching, let alone the fear of being shot, speaks to just how much trouble were in and how deadly earnest the midterm elections are.

It apparently needs to be said in 2022 that freedom in this country is not (yet!) a reward. Its a right. No political party should feel emboldened to say that the things were entitled to are for them to give and take as they see fit.

Walensky certainly gave the game away. There is no new science to suggest she should have changed her mind about masks reducing the spread of Covid. She simply thinks its time for a break, something she believes is hers to give. A break should be understood for what it is a pause. How convenient that that pause would coincide with the upcoming midterms. Its no mystery as to when that pause would end.

Theres only one way to be sure this wont continue after November. If it fails, enjoy the break while it lasts.

Read the original:

Dems' 2022 Slogan: Enjoy This Small Break From Covid Tyranny We Bestow Upon You - The Federalist

The Black Lives Matter plot thickened this week with some particularly partisan developments after a longtime Clinton family ally and a top Russia hoaxer essentially took over the organization.

According to recent filings asreportedby The Washington Examiner, Marc Elias, a Democrat lawyer known for funding the bogus Steele dossier while he was general counsel for Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign, looks to be representing BLMs Global Network Foundation through his law firm. Additionally, Minyon Moore, a top Clinton ally, is now on BLMs board of directors.

In other words, the corrupt Democrat establishment has effectively taken over a major left-wing organization committed to radical left-wing policies and race-hustling.

This might not seem like a big deal. Its not like BLM was a neutral or centrist entity thats suddenly going to be run by Democrats. On the contrary, the organization, which is under intense scrutiny right now for leadership corruption, shady finances, and disclosure delays, has long been upfront about its extreme aims. Its founder admitted the groups embrace of Marxism, and its webpage used to broadcast its disdain for the traditional nuclear family.

The problem arises in the stickiness of the Black Lives Matter name and what it means that figures within the Democrat establishment now explicitly own that brand.

The genius and frustration of the Black Lives Matter organization has always been that by virtue of its very name, it cannot be easily battled, for its irrefutable that black lives do indeed matter. In dubbing itself Black Lives Matter, the organization grants legitimacy to its actions and those of its broader movement including even the violent riots carried out by its followers. Whats more, it automatically retains a rhetorical edge on its opponents: Only racists would argue with Black Lives Matter, they shout over their critics.

Its for this reason that support for the organization goes unquestioned where other political sloganeering isnt tolerated. Schoolchildren can wear masks that say Black Lives Matter but are forced to remove them if they say Jesus Loves Me instead. As part of my former apartment lease term, no flags could be flown from the balcony, but BLM flags waved proudly from adjacent units without a peep from the management office. Arson, murder, and property destruction by BLM rioters are described with sanitary fiery but mostly peaceful protests chyrons on network television.

Amid the 2020 summer of rage, even an independent agency of the federal government tried to suggest that supporting Black Lives Matter isnt political or partisan.

Except now thats even more demonstrably false. The slogan that trumps every argument and the organization it represents once implicitly belonged to the left, but now theyre explicitly owned and controlled by Democrats. Where once you couldnt disagree with Black Lives Matter, now you cant disagree with the Democrat establishment itself. Its the ultimate power of narrative-setting.

Whats worse than Democrats with lots of power? Democrats with lots of power and lots of cash. When BLM founder Patrisse Cullors stepped down from her post and the two activists she appointed to replace her turned down the offer, she left behind BLM accounts full of roughly $60 million, and it was unclear exactly what would become of these massive finances and who exactly would be in charge of handling them.

Given the money involved here, this is really unbelievable, CharityWatch Executive Director Laurie Styron told the Examiner. To not know who is in charge of $60+ million collected by the national charity arm of arguably the most prominent social justice movement in the country is the worst transparency issue I have seen in my 18 years as a charity watchdog.

BLMs newly reported charitable organization filing, however, states that its books are in the care of the organization that is located at c/o Elias Law Group. Bingo.

The sanitized cover that once applied to the activities of the racial justice organization will now surely apply in the same manner to the race-hustling Democrats shielded by Black Lives Matters sticky name and its loads and loads of green.

More here:

Dems' BLM Takeover Means A New Multimillion-Dollar Race Hustling Hub - The Federalist

Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a defiantjoint statementlast week. They affirmed their strong mutual support for the protection of their core interests and openly opposed the U.S.-led world order and value system. Many international observers saw the statement as a manifesto for a new multipolar world order in which Russia and China are united against the United States.

To demonstrate the strength of their unofficial alliance, Russia pledged it supports a successful hosting by the Chinese side of the Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing in 2022, undoubtedly snubbing at the U.S.-led diplomatic boycott of both games. Russia also affirms, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China, and opposes any forms of independence of Taiwan. In return, for the first time in history, China joined Russia in opposing any further enlargement of NATO.

The joint statement claims that the friendship between [Russia and China] knows no limits. But the questions remain how strong their alliance really is and how long it will last.

Russia and China share a border that is more than 2,000 miles long and have fought numerous wars over border disputes. After Joseph Stalin died in 1953, the ideological divisions and power struggle between Chinas leader Mao Zedong and USSRs leader Nikita Khrushchev led to a drastic fallout between the two nations.

The USSR ceased economic and military aid to China and pulled out all Soviet technicians helping China industrialize its economy. Mao responded by severing the diplomatic ties with the USSR in 1967 and began to plot a pivot to the United States. The Soviets accused Mao of biting the hand that fed him. The two nations fought abitter border warbetween 1968 to 1969, which almost led to World War III.

The two nations have only begun to deepen their relationship in recent years out of both fear and necessity. The biggest fear of both Xi and Putin is that colored revolutions, with the backing of the United States, will take place in their countries and overthrow their authoritarian regimes.

Both Xi and Putin face pressure from the West over their aggressions and human rights violations. Both wish to do away with Americas leadership, and the liberal world order America helped establish. Undoubtedly, this shared goal has brought China and Russia closer.

Since 2005, China and Russia have heldjoint military drills. They have also strengthenedeconomic ties. Russia is the second-largest supplier of crude oil to China and the third-largest provider of natural gas. Bilateral trade reached $140 billion in 2021. Trade with China has helped Russia evade economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. and western allies.

But there are plenty of reasons the Sino-Russia alliance is fragile in the long run.

Xi and Putin dont fully trust each other, partially due to the long history of disputes and betrayal between the two nations. In addition, they have different policy goals based on their nations strengths and weaknesses.

Xi doesnt see Russia as an equal partner but as a pawn to realize his vision for China, to replace the United States as the only superpower in a Sino-centered and autocracy-friendly new world. While China is Russias largest trade partner, Russia amounts to less than2 percent of Chinas total trade volume.

Xi has no intention of helping Russia become an economic powerhouse. According toJon Yuan Jiang, a Chinese-Russian relations analyst in Australia,an economically weak but militarily aggressive Russia suits Xis vision. He prefers that the Russian military keeps the west, primarily the United States, occupied and draws attention from Beijings geopolitical expansion. At the same time, he hopes that Russias economic dependency on China will deter Putin from challenging Chinas dominance.

Putin has no delusions that a new world order dominated by China will not bode well for Russia in the long run. His goal is to return Russia to what he sees as the glorious past of the USSR by all measures, including territories, military strength, and economic power. Putin is unsatisfied that Russia is a junior partner in the Sino-Russia economic relationship, and he recognizes that Russias economic dependency on China is a barrier to his goal.

These competing interests goals, alongside historical disputes, mean the Sino-Russia cooperation is limited.

There are three things the Biden administration should do to exploit the friction between China and Russia. First, the Biden administration must reverse its energy policies that have benefited Russia.

Since coming into office, President Biden has imposed ruinous energy policies, including establishing a moratorium on leasing federal lands for oil and gas production and rescinding the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have added 830,000 barrels of oil a day to the world market.These policies resulted in skyrocketing gas prices, hurting U.S. consumers and economic recovery while creating awindfallfor Russia, and providing Putin the financial resources to cause nuisance worldwide.

The Biden administration should instead lower the cost and remove the regulatory barriers for domestic energy producers to ramp up production. Since the energy sector represents 60 percent of Russias economy, lower oil and gas prices will hurt Russias economy. They may cost Putin the widespread support from the Russian people over Russias possible invasion of Ukraine.

Lowering energy prices worldwide will cause some clashes between China and Russia. As the worlds largest oil and gas importer, China welcomes any opportunity to pay less for energy resources. Beijing will rely on Russian partners less if it can find cheap energy imports elsewhere. Even if, for strategic reasons, Beijing has to maintain imports from Russia, the Chinese will drive a hard bargain on prices, which will undoubtedly cause resentment among Russians.

The second thing the Biden administration should do is focus on economic sanction tools that will drive China and Russia apart. Suppose Russia invades Ukraine, and the West responds by cutting Russia from the international banking system. In that case, China may want to put a distance between itself and Russia because Chinas export-oriented economy is heavily dependent on such a system. Xi will have little appetite to jeopardize Chinas economic growth to save Russia.

Finally, the United States should avoid outcompeting Russia in weapon exports in specific strategic markets. Russias economy is about the size of Italy, and it relies on two types of exports: energy and weapons. Putin has tried to diversify Russias economy to reduce Russias economic dependency on China, even if it means irritating China.

Russia exported$7.5 billionworth of military equipment to India from 2015 to 2019. Russia and India signed a new trade agreement in 2021, pledging to increase bilateral trade to $30 billion by 2025. India and China are rivals. With more than 1.4 billion people and nuclear weapons, India is the only Asian country that checks Chinas growing geopolitical ambitions in Asia. China and India fought a bloody border war in the 1960s. Since 2020, the two nations have engaged incontentious border disputes.

India has been purchasing weapons from both the United States and Russia. China is particularly annoyed that Russia is arming India and expanding trade relations with Beijings rival. As long as India maintains a good relationship with the United States, the United States should not try to outcompete Russia in weapon exports in India. Russias continuing weapon exports to India naturally limit Moscow and Beijings cooperation.

As the saying goes, There are no permanent friends, or permanent enemies; only permanent interests in international relations. The United States should take the cooperation between China and Russia seriously while continuing to exploit opportunities to drive the two apart.

More:

China And Russia Are Forming A Bond The US Would Be Wise To Exploit - The Federalist

One of the more horrific backdrops in George Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four is how adults fear children indoctrinated via Hitler Youth-type organizations into denouncing even their mothers and fathers for the slightest deviation from the party line.

For those who think this is the stuff of Cold War fiction, there is the real-life example of Pavel Trofimovich Morozov, a 13-year-old member of the Young Pioneers who turned his father into the government for allegedly hoarding grain during Stalins state-sponsored famine of the countryside in the early 1930s. The result of the denunciation was his fathers death by firing squad. Morozov was then killed by the surviving members of the family.

But a precedent was established. The regime, erecting statues of Morozov and praising him in poems, encouraged Soviet children to emulate Morozovs example and even go beyond denouncing ones parents to all adults in general.

In an era when todays youth support far leftists like Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a new book should help correct what happens to even the most basic of relationships when state socialism is in action.

A hyper-paranoid universe where adults fear children as ideologically driven monsters is brilliantly captured in Ruta Sepetys new historical fiction novel, I Must Betray You. Set in 1991 in the dying days of the Ceausescu regime in Romania a regime that, along with East Germany, was considered horrific even by Soviet standards the novel presents a nightmare world of wild dogs attacking starving children, orphans dragooned into abusive state-run orphanages, and scarce food. Meanwhile, the nations repressive dictator Nicolae Ceausescu lives in Oriental splendor.

The regime becomes even more repressive as the reforms of Mikhail Gorbachev inadvertently cause anti-communist rebellions in Warsaw Pact nations. As each succeeding communist regime collapses, Ceausescus grip becomes tighter.

Into this noxious and desperate atmosphere comes 17-year-old Cristan Florescu, who has managed to create a civil space for himself. He rebels by spiking his hair and reading Western poetry.

But he is soon forced into spying on his friends American diplomat family by a hovering secret agent. The paltry evidence of Florescus treason a dollar bill found in one of Florescus notebooks is all the more horrifying because it is so desperately mundane. Stalin also engaged in such horrific pettiness when he arrested a Soviet woman for dancing with a traveling American jazz band.

The dollar bill symbolizes the heresy of Westernization, one of the many things that activated communist paranoia, in which citizens were imprisoned, tortured, and murdered for being exposed to the corrupting influences of the West. These victims of communist regimes had seen individual liberty in action.

Sepetys has clearly done her homework. The novel is heavily documented with primary sources. She is skillful in telling the story through secret police memos and Florescus poetry, which becomes more and more confrontational as the regime crumbles.

Sepetys is at her best when she shows how this blackmailed teenager, who before the collapse of communism would have been owned by the secret police for life, goes from closet poet to full-throated rebel who, with fellow teenagers, overthrows one of the most repressive regimes in history.

Despite its sophisticated story, Sepetys novel is marketed to young adults and this is sorely needed. Polls conducted by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation not only found large numbers of millennials ignorant of the history of communist repression, but willing to vote for a communist (half of Americans between the ages of 16 and 20 said they would vote for a socialist, while 21 percent said they would support a communist). Even more startling, the poll found one-third of millennials believed former President George W. Bush had killed more people than Stalin.

Hopefully, Septyss novel will show that, once upon a time, teenagers and college-age people saw communism for what it really was and ended it.

Ron Capshaw is a writer based in Florida.

Excerpt from:

'I Must Betray You' Illuminates For Teens The True Evils Of Communism - The Federalist

Long before FBI computer contractor and Clinton operative Rodney L. Joffe allegedly trolled Internet traffic for dirt on President Trump, he mined direct-marketing contact lists for the names and addresses of unwitting Americans to target in a promotional scam involving a grandfather clock.

Not just any clock, mind you, but a world famous Bentley IX model, according to postcards his companies mailed out to millions of people in the late 1980s claiming theyd won the clock in a contest they never entered. There was just one hitch: the lucky winners had to send $69.19 in shipping fees to redeem their supposedly five-foot mahogany prize.

Tens of thousands of folks forked over the fees, only to discover the grandfather clock that arrived was nothing as advertised. It was really just a table-top version made of particle board and plastic and worth less than $10. Some assembly was required.

The scheme generated thousands of complaints, sparking federal and state investigations. Joffe and his then-California partner, Linda M. Carella, were eyed by federal postal authorities and several state attorneys general for allegedly operating a multi-state mail-order scheme. Joffe settled several state lawsuits by agreeing to refund hundreds of thousands of dollars mainly to elderly victims, according to several published reports at the time.

Joffe and his attorney did not respond to requests for comment. But in a phone interview, Carella told RealClearInvestigations that Joffe ran the operation. I was just the secretary, the receptionist, Carella, 76, said from her home in Florida, where she is now retired. She did say she picked up the returned postcards and checks from mailboxes.

Carella said she quit after the investigation: I said I dont want anything more to do with this I have not seen Rodney since then. But Joffe pressed on with his direct-mail marketing business before packing up for Arizona a few years later. Federal and state tax lien records reveal Joffe who also sent out mailers for skincare and other beauty products owed more than $110,000 in back taxes on his property in Los Angeles in 1995.

Joffes checkered past now has national security ramifications after the South African-born computer expert was outed as a key player in Special Counsel John Durhams ongoing Russiagate probe. To date he has not been charged with a crime. But in a September indictment of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, and a court filing last week, Durham has suggested that Joffe (identified as Tech Executive-1) was at the center of an effort to monitor President Trumps communications and then share the information with Clinton associates.

Former prosecutor and assistant FBI director Chris Swecker said the credibility issues that cropped up from Joffes early career raise questions about how he managed to pass an FBI personal background check and obtain the governments highest security clearances and win several bids for sensitive federal contracts, although he noted that such background checks were often ridiculed in the bureau as a joke. In addition, the federal mail-order probe involving Joffes companies might not have raised serious red flags since the case was opened decades earlier and was settled without any charges or judgments against Joffe.

The FBI declined comment.

Another part of the answer as to why Joffes past remained buried may involve how successfully he appears to have reinvented himself during the 1990s.

He relocated then to Phoenix from Los Angeles and changed the name of his mass-marketing firm American Computer Group to Whitehat Data Services. Instead of targeting consumers, he developed a reputation as a cyber-security expert and, ironically, a champion of consumers battling abusive direct-marketers and spammers.

Perhaps it was a sign of his redemption. But Joffe soon joined the board of PlasmaNet Inc., a marketing network that until recently operated FreeLotto.com, an online sweepstakes game. PlasmaNet has had to pay millions of dollars in fines for deceptive advertising. Echoing the grandfather clock scam, PlasmaNet led consumers to believe they won free prizes when in fact they had to pay $14.99 a month to claim them. RCI has learned that FreeLotto.com was a customer of UltraDNS, an Internet resolution company founded by Joffe. Business incorporation records show Joffe remains a PlasmaNet director.

A decade later, Joffe moved to Washington, where he eventually landed lucrative security-related contracts with the FBI and Pentagon requiring top-secret clearance.

In 2006, Joffe joined Neustar Inc., a Beltway computer contractor that, among other things, secures and maintains Internet servers for federal agencies, including the White House. This high-level position gave the alleged former grandfather clock wheedler access to a proprietary archive of Internet traffic records both public and nonpublic known as DNS logs. These logs reveal the back-and-forth pinging that computers and cellphones generate when they communicate with Internet servers, including ones transmitting emails.

It also put him in the same orbit with political VIPs. Joffe started advising not only FBI brass but White House officials, including President Obama, on cybersecurity matters. By 2016, his access to proprietary internet logs became of interest to operatives for the Hillary Clinton campaign, who appear to have offered him a plum job in a Clinton presidency for help on an opposition-research project against Donald Trump. (Shortly after Clintons loss to Trump in November 2016, Joffe said in an email: I was tentatively offered the top [cybersecurity] job by the Democrats when it looked like theyd win. I definitely would not take the job under Trump.)

One of those operatives was ex-Clinton attorney Sussmann, indicted by Durham last fall in connection with allegations of lying about his work on the project for the campaign.

In the indictment and recent court filings that widen the case, Durham accused Joffe of exploiting Neustars nonpublic data to monitor Trumps Internet activities even after the 2016 election through early 2017. He shared the sensitive information with Sussmann, who in turn gave it to the CIA. The prosecutor said Joffe mined data from Trump Tower, Trumps Central Park West apartment building, and even the Executive Office of the President for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.

According to court papers, Joffe cherry-picked data to create a narrative that Trump was secretly communicating with the Kremlin as part of the Clinton campaigns effort to make the GOP nominee look like he was compromised by Russia, a foreign adversary. Before the election, Joffe led a team of computer researchers vying for a major Pentagon contract to link Trump to Russian Alfa Bank through private DNS logs. He handed off their findings to Sussmann who fed the data to the FBI to drive an investigation and bad press against Trump.

The data was highly manipulated, said Robert Graham of Atlanta-based Errata Security, an independent cyberforensics expert who examined the logs and debunked the link at the time. He suspects Joffe and his biased crew set out to invent a connection between Trump and Russia.

A link between Trump and Alfa bank wasnt something they accidentally found, it was one of the many thousands of links they looked for, he added. The purpose was to smear Trump.

Though Graham as a Clinton supporter shares Joffes disdain for Trump, he said the suspicious server data were easily explained as innocent spam traffic. Graham noted that Trump didnt even have control over the domain in question: trump-email.com. It was created by a hotel marketing firm that inserted Trumps name in the domain.

Hints of a Trump-Alfa connection have always been the dishonesty of those who collected the data, Graham said.

Even though Joffe encouraged Sussmann to present the server data to the FBI as possible evidence of foreign espionage, he privately confessed to his researchers in an August 2016 email obtained by Durham that the host for the trump-email.com domain is a legitimate valid [marketing] company Boca Raton, Florida-based Cendyn. We can ignore it, Joffe said, together with others that seem to be part of the marketing world. He urged his team to keep searching for data that would give the base of a very useful narrative.

In previous statements, lawyers for Joffe and the researchers he recruited have said they had no political ax to grind but were monitoring Trump to track a credible national security threat related to Russia. But Joffes lead researcher Manos Antonakakis of the Georgia Institute of Technology revealed in one email obtained by Durham that the only thing that drives us is that we just dont like [Trump]. Other emails, released this week by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act request, show that Antonakakis believed even the most salacious and debunked rumors in the Clinton-commissioned Steele dossier.

Recent court filings indicate Durham and his prosecutors arent buying their concerned patriot defense. Some see a crime in exploiting high-security government contracts for political purposes.

In my opinion, Joffe is someone who should be indicted and probably will be, former FBI official Swecker said in an RCI interview.

As I see it, Swecker explained, Joffe, who worked for Neustar at the time, had a contract with either the Executive Office of the President or the [presidential] transition team, and he used information gleaned from his contractual relationship to provide that private information to the Clinton campaign. Depending on the actual facts on the ground, it could constitute mail or wire fraud, and if it were an actual government contract, perhaps fraud against the government that is, the Executive Office of the President.

Added Swecker: There could be other criminal statutes [invoked] as well including conspiracy but to me, the key issue is his contractual relationship. He also engaged researchers at Georgia Tech who were working on a government contract and being paid by the U.S. government.

In a public statement, a spokesman for Joffe argued that the then-Neustar executive had authority to mine the White House data: Under the terms of the contract, the data could be accessed to identify and analyze any security breaches or threats, including concerns about Russian interference in the election.

While not charged with a crime, Joffe, despite being subpoenaed, does not appear to be actively cooperating with Durhams investigation. He does not show up on a discovery document recently filed by Durham listing people interviewed by investigators or the grand jury. Asked if Joffe has received a target letter, his attorney Steven Tyrrell did not answer. On Twitter, Joffe has removed all his tweets dating back to 2014.

Sources told RCI that Durhams office is looking closely at Washington-based Neustar which Joffe left in September following Sussmanns indictment and two Internet firms Joffe operated while still working there: Packet Forensics and Vostrom Ventures, both of which are controlled by Vostrom Holdings Inc. and also have offices in the greater Washington area.

Durhams investigators have interviewed several current and former employees at all three companies, and obtained thousands of pages of subpoenaed documents from them, recent court filings reveal. In September 2016, Sussmann billed Neustar for communications regarding confidential project, a reference to Joffes mission to find a secret hotline between Trump and the Kremlin via Alfa Banks servers. That Sussmann billed Neustar for this work suggests a level of involvement by the company that has not been explained.

A month earlier, Joffe had tasked employees at his two small Internet startups to search for any Internet data (including private DNS holdings) reflecting potential connections or communications between Trump or his associates and Russia. Joffe emailed them a five-page dossier the Trump Associates List to guide their queries. As RCI first reported, the list included highly personal information on Trump campaign advisers Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page. Steve Bannon appears to have been added to the list later as another target, the emails released by Judicial Watch reveal.

Packet Forensics reportedly landed a recent Pentagon contract to manage a large chunk of Internet domains owned by the military. The bid was awarded the day Joe Biden was inaugurated president. The massive cyberspace will allow Joffes firm to set up dedicated digital infrastructure, including servers and software, to comb through private Internet traffic for the purported purpose of monitoring suspicious activity.

Joffes company also sells wiretapping equipment that allows federal authorities to spy on private web-browsing through fake Internet security certificates, instead of real ones that websites employ to verify secure connections. Once installed, Packets device lets agents see an individuals online transactions without obtaining a warrant.

Over the past decade, Packet Forensics has landed almost $40 million in federal contracts, according to publicly disclosed contract information. Joffes firm counts the FBI and the Pentagons Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, among its customers. The contracts generally involve cybersecurity. Joffe monitors the computers of government officials for threats, including as it turns out, even investigators in the office of Justice Department watchdog Michael Horowitz, recent court filings reveal.

State incorporation records show that Joffe has created more than two dozen startups across 20 states, some of which have no employees, revenue, or even offices.

Joffes second-act success in government seems rooted in a simple fact: He has friends in high places, proferred a career Justice Department official. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, pointed out that Joffe personally advised President Obama on cybersecurity and other issues, and was also close to former FBI Director James Comey.

Secret Service entrance logs reveal Joffe visited the White House several times during the Obama administration. And in 2013, Comey gave Joffe an award recognizing his work helping agents investigate a cybersecurity case. Sources told RCI that Joffe has also worked as an FBI informant on various cybersecurity cases opened by the bureau over roughly the past 15 years.

Sussmanns attorneys have pointed to that acclaim to explain why Sussmann trusted the findings from Joffe he shared with the FBI. Far from being a stranger to the FBI, [Joffe] was someone with whom the FBI had a long-standing professional relationship of trust and who was one of the worlds leading experts regarding the kinds of information that Mr. Sussmann provided to the FBI, Sussmanns lead defense lawyer Sean Berkowitz of Latham & Watkins said in a court filing last year.

A recent court paper filed by Durham in the Sussmann case suggests he may be looking into Joffes relationship with the FBI. The document, which discloses information to Sussmanns lawyers as part of the discovery process, reveals that a criminal grand jury in D.C. has obtained approximately 226 emails from within the FBIs holding involving a company founded by [Joffe]. Durham does not identify the company, but sources told RCI it is Packet Forensics. The 226 emails were generated in 2016 alone. All told, the FBI has a total of approximately 17,000 emails that reference Joffes company and those are just from a search of the bureaus unclassified files.

Durham said that his investigators are also conducting other searches and communicating with other government agencies regarding [Joffes] companies.

The 67-year-old Joffe is commonly described as an award-winning and highly respected computer expert. But colleagues say he is more of an operator.

Graham said hes a quite average computer programmer and network analyst. Hes more of an executive than an operations guy.

In a 2015 promotional video by Neustar, Joffe disclosed that his real gift is recruiting other experts, making phone calls to people in high places, and providing the resources needed for projects.

Im not the smart guy in the room. Im really the dumb guy that carries the bags but fortunately in those bags, I have a lot of money, Joffe said with a grin. So my role has really been carrying the bags of money to help whenever I can when folks in the [cyber-security] community want things. Im really happy to be able to do that kind of thing.

So those are the things I really do, he added. Im not really good at actually understanding spam and finding that. Im not any of those things. I couldnt have an intelligent conversation about the techniques and methods used.

This article was originally published by RealClearInvestigations.

Investigative journalist Paul Sperry is a regular contributor to RealClearInvestigations and has written news or op-ed pieces for the New York Post, New York Times and Wall Street Journal. His books include 'The Great American Bank Robbery' (2011), and 'Crude Politics: How Bush's Oil Cronies Hijacked the War on Terrorism' (2003).

Read the rest here:

The FBI's Trump Cyber Spy Has A History Of Shady Deals And Dirty Tricks - The Federalist

Switching to a cheaper cell phone plan. Buying chicken instead of steak, or canned vegetables instead of fresh ones. Giving up vacations, and taking on an extra job to make ends meet.

These represent some of the hardships and sacrifices faced by millions of working-class American families. Even the leftist media has started to acknowledge the ways inflation gives a proverbial kick in the teeth to struggling households.

Yet the Biden administration continues to advocate for its tax-and-spend agenda, ignoring the fact that rapid money-printing by both Congress and the Federal Reserve has left many Americans worse off.

A recent Washington Post analysis of consumer buying patterns found that lower-income households spent more than higher-income households on eight of the ten categories with the greatest amount of inflation in the last year. Only on furniture and cars did high earners spend more than lower earners.

It stands to reason that lower-income families face greater hardship from inflation than wealthier ones, for several reasons:

The latest price and earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) highlights the problem. While real hourly earnings increased by 0.1 percent in January, they fell by 1.7 percent over the past year, because prices continue to rise higher than wages.

To put it another way: A worker earning $1,000 in January 2021 would have earned $1,057 in January 2022, based on the 5.7 percent average increase in wages nationwide. But based on the 7.5 percent average increase in prices over that time span, that worker would have needed $1,075 to buy the same goods that had cost $1,000 just one year earliermaking the worker worse off than before.

A monthly chart from the BLS report shows how, over the last year, workers continue to fall farther and farther behind every month, with prices rising faster than wages:

Little wonder then that the Post quoted one hourly worker as saying that we havent been able to enjoy life, but are rather in survival mode.

Compare this misery to a stunning statistic from a Census Bureau report: In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, real median incomes rose by 6.8 percent. Thats a $4,400 jump, after accounting for inflation, in a single year.

Also, those income gains were widespread: African Americans, Hispanics, foreign-born individuals, and women all saw greater income growth than did white males. While Democrats occasionally treat voters as fools, most Americans can recognize and recall the prosperity they had not long agoand whose policies trapped them into a spiral of skyrocketing prices and tighter budgets.

Four decades ago, Ronald Reagan put the final nail in Jimmy Carters political coffin by asking a devastatingly simple question: Are you better off than you were four years ago? He followed up with another particularly pertinent query: Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago?

For the millions of Americans struggling to afford the basics of life, the answers are obviousas should be the verdict on the Democrat agenda.

Go here to see the original:

Ruling Class Inflationary Policies Hurt America's Working Class The Most - The Federalist