Tag: Merrick Garland

NPR is Not Your Friend

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

NPR is a problem. Good and proper leftists who read Current Affairs may already realize this. “Of course. NPR (Neoliberal Propaganda Radio) is a bastion of establishment groupthink and orthodoxy that gives cover to imperialism and corporate capitalism.” By contrast, readers on the Right who find themselves consuming Current Affairs may have an equally disdainful but entirely different critique. “Of course. NPR is an elitist liberal propaganda cult that serves as a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, is openly hostile to any conservative voices, and ought to be defunded!”

NPR is Not Your Friend

DOJ, Senate Leader Continue To Stoke Irrational Fear That Drug Dealers Are Targeting Kids With Multicolored Fentanyl

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

People who fail to understand the basics of supply and demand continue to insist suppliers want to kill potential customers.

DOJ, Senate Leader Continue To Stoke Irrational Fear That Drug Dealers Are Targeting Kids With Multicolored Fentanyl

The DEA is just looking for more 💰 for the idiotic war on drugs! Most likely, they’ll just imprison more people for nonviolent offenses!

During Both Obama and Trump Administrations, the Justice Department Has Looked the Other Way at Crimes by the Powerful (and nothing will change with Biden)

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)1 Comment

Last Thursday evening, Justice Department Attorney General, Merrick Garland, held a brief press conference to announce that he had asked a federal court to unseal the search warrant and inventory receipts filed in connection with the FBI’s search of Donald Trump’s Palm Beach oceanfront home and beach resort, Mar-a- Lago. As part of his statement to the press, Garland said this:

“Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. Upholding the rule of law means applying the rule of law evenly, without fear or favor.”

During Both Obama and Trump Administrations, the Justice Department Has Looked the Other Way at Crimes by the Powerful

Related:

Vowing Not to ‘Demonize’ the Rich, Biden Tells Billionaires ‘Nothing Would Fundamentally Change’ If He Was Elected

“No one’s standard of living will change,” said Biden. “Nothing would fundamentally change.”

One Man Has Set Up a $1.6 Billion Slush Fund to Fuel the Radical Right’s Takeover of Congress; Get Ready for a Dirty Tricks Campaign

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: August 26, 2022

The New York Times dropped a political bombshell on Monday. The public interest website, ProPublica, built further on the story that afternoon. And, as luck would have it, Wall Street On Parade finds itself in the unique position of filling in missing pieces of the story thanks to an investigative report we published in 2010.

One Man Has Set Up a $1.6 Billion Slush Fund to Fuel the Radical Right’s Takeover of Congress; Get Ready for a Dirty Tricks Campaign

The Timing Behind the Atttack on Salman Rushdie

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Disclaimer: The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Ms. Cat’s Chronicles.

The Timing Behind the Atttack on Salman Rushdie

Pollard is a professional liar. Pollard’s article is full of lies, but even liars have a way of telling the truth in spite of themselves. Thanks to Pollard’s article we now know that the real point of the attack on Rushdie is the looming revival of the nuclear agreement with Iran. Pollard sets the stage for this revelation by creating a chronology of events:

On Monday, the EU put forward what it described as the “final” proposed text of a revived nuclear deal with Iran, a deal which has been under negotiation in Vienna since the arrival of Joe Biden in the Oval Office. On Friday morning, the Iranian state news agency reported that the EU’s proposed text “can be acceptable if it provides assurances” to Tehran over its key demands, quoting a senior Iranian diplomat.

Then he makes this remarkable statement:

“The timing could hardly have been more instructive. Within hours of that report, Sir Salman Rushdie had been brutally attacked by a knife-wielding assailant.”

Pollard’s statement is capable of being interpreted in two ways: one obvious, the other absurd. If he is telling us that the Iranians deliberately sabotaged their own nuclear agreement, the idea is absurd. If he is telling us that he has insider knowledge of Israeli intelligence, that is completely plausible, which means it is also plausible to claim that the Israelis played a role in when the attack happened, as one more attempt at sabotaging peace with Iran. This is precisely what Mohammad Morandi, one of the Iranian officials negotiating the new version of the JCPOA claimed when he reacted to the news of the attack on Rushdie. “I won’t be shedding tears for a writer who spouts endless hatred & contempt for Muslims & Islam. A pawn of empire who poses as a Postcolonial novelist,” Marandi tweeted. “But, isn’t it odd that as we near a potential nuclear deal, the US makes claims about a hit on Bolton… and then this happens?,” he added. Timing played a crucial role in Fahkrizadeh’s assassination as well. According to Robert Malley, who served as an advisor to President Barack Obama on Iran, the assassination of Mohsen Fahkrizadeh “was deliberately timed in order to make Biden’s attempts to negotiate with Iran more difficult.”

Vice President Harris launches task force to shut down “online harassment”

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)1 Comment

Vice President Harris launches task force to shut down “online harassment”

Gendered misinformation (scene from Kindergarten Cop 2)?!

Related:

The Task Force is an interagency effort to address online harassment and abuse, specifically focused on technology-facilitated gender-based violence. In consultation with survivors, advocates, educators, experts from diverse fields, and the private sector, the Task Force will develop specific recommendations to improve prevention, response, and protection efforts through programs and policies in the United States and globally by:

– Improving coordination among executive departments, agencies, and offices to maximize the Federal Government’s effectiveness in preventing and addressing technology-facilitated gender-based violence in the United States and globally, including by developing policy solutions to enhance accountability for those who perpetrate online harms;

– Enhancing and expanding data collection and research across the Federal Government to measure the costs, prevalence, exposure to, and impact of technology-facilitated gender-based violence, including by studying the mental health effects of harassment and abuse perpetrated through social media, particularly affecting adolescents;

– Increasing access to survivor-centered services, information, and support for victims, and increasing training and technical assistance for federal, state, tribal, local, and territorial governments, as well as for global organizations and entities in the fields of criminal justice, health and mental health services, education, and victim services;

– Developing programs and policies to address the disproportionate impact of online harassment, abuse, and [gendered] disinformation campaigns targeting women and LGBTQI+ individuals who are public and political figures, government and civic leaders, activists, and journalists in the United States and globally;

– Examining existing Federal laws, regulations, and policies to evaluate the adequacy of the current legal framework to address technology-facilitated gender-based violence and provide recommendations for strengthening it; and

– Identifying additional opportunities to improve efforts to prevent and address technology-facilitated gender-based violence in United States foreign policy and foreign assistance, including through the Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse.

FACT SHEET: Presidential Memorandum Establishing the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse

When Is Speech Violence and What’s the Real Harm?:

When is speech violence? The answer is never. Speech may be upsetting, but that doesn’t make it violence. Speech may be ugly or hateful, but that doesn’t make it violence. Speech may be associated with deleterious physiological effects or even harm, but that still doesn’t make it violence. Speech may even intimidate or threaten violence. That makes it illegal, but it doesn’t make it violence. Equating speech with violence not only robs us of our understanding of ourselves as competent and civil human beings capable of defeating bad ideas with better ones, it gives us license to use physical violence in response to speech––or even in advance, as “self-defense.” For psychologists to assert that speech is violence is not merely incorrect, it’s harmful.

Why It’s a Bad Idea to Tell Students Words Are Violence

When Is Speech Violence?