Archive for 2023

ACCOUNTABILITY FOR A CHANGE: Top federal prosecutor in Massachusetts to resign after damning ethics report.

The Department of Justice’s internal watchdog began a probe last year after U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Rachael Rollins attended a Democratic fundraiser last July featuring first lady Jill Biden, despite advice that this would violate ethics guidelines.

“We found Rollins’s conduct described throughout this report violated federal regulations, numerous DOJ policies, her Ethics Agreement, and applicable law, and fell far short of the standards of professionalism and judgment that the Department should expect of any employee, much less a U.S. Attorney,” the DOJ inspector general’s office said in its report.

That 161-page report found Rollins, who was appointed by President Biden, used her official position to try to help the election effort of a fellow Democrat for the Suffolk County district attorney position.

Rollins gave journalists nonpublic, sensitive DOJ information “to create the impression publicly, before the primary election, that DOJ was or would be investigating (his opponent) for public corruption,” according to the IG’s office.

The report found that Rollins lied under oath about that effort when asked about it by investigators.

More like this, please.

FROM PAM UPHOFF:  Aslanov (Fall of the Alliance).

Aslanov (Fall of the Alliance) by [Pam Uphoff]

The Three Hundred Families control the Three Part Alliance. To the Elite, their Family is their first priority.
Twenty years before the Fall . . .
Lord Dzon Konstantin Aslanov returns Home after a five year long assignment to another World to find his Family as poor a fit as ever. He is about to find out the cost of disobedience.
If only they’d tell Konstantin why he needed to marry so soon, to the right woman. And not like his idiot brother eloping with . . . the daughter of Kon’s new boss at the Bureau of Intelligence. And why should Kon marry this particular woman when her aunt was so much more interesting . . .
As Kon investigates government contract fraud, he begins to suspect his Family is involved . . .

And the consequences . . . deadly

JEFF GOLDSTEIN: The identity politics of beer: Tastes great, less testosterone.

Released as part of Women’s History Month in March of this year, a Miller Lite ad has only recently gone viral — and, as with Bud Light’s foray into “inclusivity” and transgender affirmation — it has done so for all the wrong reasons. Owned by Molson-Coors, Miller Lite is the second iconic American beer brand whose cosmopolitan, largely female marketing team — some of whom have dealt with the sudden public backlash to the ill-advised campaign by deleting their social media presences — decided was in desperate need of a pointed social conscience. Traditionally, Miller Lite, like Bud Light, has appealled to people who attend ball games, or brisket cookoffs, or fraternity parties. It lives inside red Solo cups and is eventually disposed of by the body largely in the same form as it was first ingested into it, albeit not quite as cold or fizzy.

In this iteration of the Woke beer assault, Miller Lite’s marketing team decided to “make a difference” by using actor and comedian Ilana Glazer to deliver one of those Tik Tok-esque smug lectures wherein the activist, addressing the camera, delivers a scolding monologue detailing the litany of wrongs committed against a particular identity group. In this case, what we’re being harangued about is the plight of women in the beer industry, both historically and at the present moment. Which, if this seems like a rather niche concern, that’s because it is.

Always.

WEIRDLY, IT’S NOT ABOUT INVESTIGATING FRAUD IN OUR ELECTIONS:  This is not a test.

IF YOU’RE NOT SHAKING WITH FURY, YOU’RE NOT KEEPING UP:  It’s Time for Hillary to Pay for What She’s Done to America.

And it is my humble opinion, if you’ll pardon me, that what she did is almost child’s play next to the corruption of this current soi disant government.

NO, BUT IT’S JUST A DUMB DEMOCRATIC TALKING POINT: Neither the Constitution Nor Common Sense Supports the Argument the Debt Ceiling Is Unconstitutional: Professor Prakash dispatches the arguments for unilateral Presidential authority to disregard the debt ceiling.

If Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the only reason there would be a default is if the executive fails to pay the interest on the debt as it comes due. But if the executive branch believes there is a constitutional requirement to pay the interest, why would it even consider refusing to do so? To my knowledge there is no law that prevents the executive from prioritizing interest payments above all other spending.

In fact, there is an argument that having by statute pledged the “faith of the United States Government,” Congress implicitly prioritized the payment of the interest and principal. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, the Treasury should pay the interest as it is due and spend less than Congress appropriated. That would be the best solution in the wake of a mismatch between total inflows (taxes plus new borrowing) and Congress’s desired spending.

As I’ve said before, the notion that we’d continue to pay bondholders while slashing other spending is fine with me. Much (most?) of what we spend federal money on domestically is not only unnecessary, but positively harmful.

ICYMI:

OPEN THREAD: This one’s for you.