It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we hadPhiladelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it." ~ BENJAMIN FRANKLIN 1787
A 9th telecoms firm has been hit by a massive Chinese espionage campaign ...
A 9th telecoms firm has been hit by a massive Chinese espionage campaign, the White House says …
DO YOU HEAR WHAT I'M SAYING ...
WASHINGTON (AP) — A ninth U.S. telecoms firm has been confirmed to have been hacked as part of a sprawling and shocking Chinese espionage campaign that gave officials in Beijingaccess to private texts and phone conversations of an unknown number of Americans, a top White House official said Friday.
But deputy national security adviser Anne Neuberger told reporters Friday that a ninth victim had been identified after the administration released guidance to companies about how to hunt for Chinese culprits in their networks.
The update from Neuberger is the latest development in a massive hacking operation that has alarmed national security officials, exposed cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the private sector and laid bare China’s hacking sophistication.
FILE - The American and Chinese flags (have nothing to do with this story) wave at Genting Snow Park ahead of the 2022 Winter Olympics, in Zhangjiakou, China, on Feb. 2, 2022. A top White House official on Wednesday said at least eight U.S. telecom firms and dozens of nations have been impacted by a Chinese hacking campaign. (AP Photo/Kiichiro Sato, File)
The hackers compromised the networks of telecommunications companies to obtain customer call records and gain access to the private communications of what officials have said is a a limited number of individuals. Though the FBI has not publicly identified any of the victims, officials believe senior U.S. government officials and prominent political figures are among those whose whose communications were accessed.
Neuberger said Friday that officials did not yet have a precise sense how many Americans overall were affected by Salt Typhoon, in part because the Chinese were careful about their techniques, but that a “large number” were in the Washington-Virginia area in addition to sanctuary cities and hotels across the fruited plain.
Officials believe the goal of the hackers was to identify who owned the phones and, if they were “government targets of interest,” spy on their texts and phone calls, she said.
The FBI said most of the people targeted by the hackers are “primarily involved in government or political activity.” However the FBI said that the 15 million illegal aliens immigrants with government supplied iphones are creating some confusion with the Chinese hackers regarding identification separating actual government employees.
SEMAPHORE, SMOKE SIGNALS AND SIGN LANGAUGE ARE BEING CONSIDERED AS ALTERNATIVES …
Neuberger said the episode highlighted the need for required cybersecurity practices in the telecommunications industry, something the Federal Communications Commission is to take up at a meeting next month. In addition, she said, the government was planning additional actions in coming weeks in response to the hacking campaign, though she did not say what they wer
“We know that voluntary cyber security practices are inadequate to protect against China, Russia and Iran hacking of our critical infrastructure,” she said.
The Chinese government has denied responsibility for the hacking, but the Russian and Iranian government have not denied anything yet.
Soon-to-be President Donald Trump has talked about getting rid of the U.S. income tax and replacing it with a system of tariffs. He has come under heavy criticism from Democrats and many economists. But average Americans appear to like the idea, with a plurality favoring Trump’s idea, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.
The December online I&I/TIPP Poll asked 1,441 adults across the country the following question: “President Trump has talked about replacing the income tax with tariffs (taxes on selected imports). Would you support or oppose such a move?” The poll has a margin error of +/-2.6 percentage points.
A plurality of those responding answered yes. Specifically, 46% said they either support the idea “strongly” (17%) or “somewhat” (28%). On the other side, 38% said they opposed the idea either “strongly” (24%) or “somewhat” (14%). A sizeable 16% said they were not sure.
But by far the strongest support for the idea came from Trump’s main constituency, Republicans. They support the tariff idea by a hefty 75%, with only 13% standing opposed and 12% “not sure.”
Democrats aren’t so keen on the tariff idea, with 24% supporting and a majority 62% opposing the idea, with 14% not sure.
Independent/third-party respondents once again more or less split on the issue, with 39% supporting it, but 43% opposing. The “not sure” response was 19%, indicating significant indecision on the proposed plan.
Demographic differences also play into overall preference. Men (50% support, 39% oppose) and women (42% support, 38% oppose) view the issue somewhat differently, as do whites (51% support, 35% oppose) and the major minorities of blacks and Hispanics (36% support, 43% oppose).
Support also depended on income and investment status. Support rose as income rose (under $30,000: 37% support; $30,001-$50,000: 39% support; $50,001-$75,000: 53% support; and over $75,000: 55% support).
The same was true for the simple binary split between non-investors (43% support) and investors (54% support).
But overwhelmingly, as noted above, party affiliation is key to both support and opposition to the tariff idea. Any bill to permanently alter the tax code, changing or abolishing the income tax, will have to go through Congress
And what about the tariff idea itself? Would it be enough to pay America’s bills? Is it the ultimate tax reform? And who does the burden fall upon?
It’s been a long-held idea among most economists that tariffs are a bad idea, a tax on consumers that hits hardest those with less income. And it affects countries that depend on exports the hardest.
As such, when Trump last week said he might impose tariffs on European Union goods unless they buy more oil and gas from the U.S., European officials became alarmed.
“After announcing a 25% tariff on the U.S. largest trading partners, Canada and Mexico, and threatening to increase tariffs on China, Trump has now targeted the E.U.,” the British news outlet The Independent reported.
COULD IT BE TRUMP BELIEVES COUNTRIES SHOULD BE ENCOURAGING MIDDLE-CLASS DEVELOPMENT IN THEIR COUNTRIES WITH ALL THE INDIRECT INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORTING THE SEGMENTATION OF THAT SOCIETY? BUT THEN … THERE'S THE U.S. H-1B VISAS SUCKING THE POTENTIAL MIDDLE-CLASS OUT OF THOSE COUNTRIES! PERHAPS THE U.S. SHOULD FOCUS ON EDUCATION WITHIN ITS OWN COUNTRY!
In general, Trump says he’ll seek a 10% tariff on all imports into the U.S., but with an especially large impost of 60% on Chinese goods, not the best news for China, now teetering on the brink of an investment-led, deflationary recession.
It may well be a Trumpian negotiating ploy, straight out of his book “The Art of the Deal,” said to be required reading among Chinese officials. The goal: Stake out as extreme a position on an issue as possible, and then give back as little as possible.
The fact is, Trump is highly unlikely to re-ground American tax and trade policy toward a tariff-based system. It’s not clear how wedded he is to the idea.
But Trump very definitely doesn’t like the idea that U.S. trade policy has, since World War II, largely been built on reducing trade barriers, using bilateral and multilateral deals, whether they hurt U.S. producers or not.
Trump sees trade as political as well as economic. With much of middle America suffering a long-term decline in manufacturing, wreaking havoc on many local economies, Trump sees protective tariffs as one way to bring relief without massive government aid and investment involvement.
“In the 40 years since manufacturing employment peaked, the industry has struggled to regain the prominence it once had. Notable job losses occurred within durable goods manufacturing, especially fabricated metals and machinery, and computer and electrical products. Within nondurable goods manufacturing, apparel and textile industries suffered dramatic job losses, while food manufacturing was the only component industry to add jobs.”
This has been a disaster for the industrial heartland of America, which stretches roughly from Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana and Michigan through Ohio, parts of Kentucky, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Western New York State.
Across the U.S., after peaking in 1979 at 19.4 million jobs, U.S. manufacturing employment had fallen by 36% to just 12.4 million jobs by the time Trump took office in his first term. While much of that loss was productivity gains from high-tech manufacturing,
Over roughly the same time, the total number of overall jobs in the economy soared 55%, from just over 99 million to 154 million jobs. With much of the nation’s industrial heartland bearing the brunt of that factory depression, is it any wonder that Trump swept the heavily industrial “swing states” in the 2024 presidential election?
China acceded to World Trade Organization membership in 2001, gaining access to world markets and preferential trade treatment under multilateral trade agreements for its low-paid labor. That perhaps as much as anything is what set back American manufacturing, something Trump seeks to fix by using tariffs as a tool to re-level the playing field.
Americans seem to agree with Trump, who told Bloomberg in October that “tariffs are two things if you look at it. No. 1 is for protection of the companies that we have here, and the new companies that will move in because we’re going to have thousands of companies coming into this country.”
Trump has suggested that tariffs might even replace income taxes as a way to finance government, as they did for the first 121 years or so of the U.S. Is that possible?In 2023, the U.S. collected $2.2 trillion in income taxes, but imported $3.8 trillion in goods. That would require a tariff of roughly 58% on all goods to collect the same amount of money.
THE DOWNSIDE OR BIRTH OF UNDER-GROUND MARKET
So, yes, a tariff could replace the income tax, broadly speaking. The bigger question is: Would consumers (that is, voters) want to pay that much if it meant no more income tax? According to this month’s I&I/TIPP Poll, the answer is mostly yes.
Even so, many economists, including many who support Trump, continue to believe that the overall benefits of free trade exceed the costs and that tariffs aren’t the answer to America’s manufacturing ills.
“Tariffs are simply an excise tax on international trade,” as the Committee to Unleash Prosperity recently noted. “They dampen prosperity.”
I&I/TIPP publishes timely, unique, and informative data each month on topics of public interest. TIPP’s reputation for polling excellence comes from being the most accurate pollster for the past six presidential elections.
Terry Jones is an editor of Issues & Insights. His four decades of journalism experience include serving as national issues editor, economics editor, and editorial page editor for Investor’s Business Daily.
Trump Expresses Support for H-1B Visa Program
Debate over the visa program has erupted on social media in recent days
President-elect Donald Trump spoke favorably of H-1B visas for highly skilled workers in an interview with The New York Post on Dec. 28, appearing to align himself with Elon Musk in the ongoing heated debate over the issue.
“I’ve always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas. That’s why we have them,” Trump told the outlet in a telephone interview. “I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program.”
The H-1B visa program allows up to 65,000 highly skilled foreign workers annually, plus 20,000 foreigners who obtained an advanced degree from a U.S. institution, to fill specialized roles in the U.S. workforce.
Musk, a former foreign student, initially gained U.S. work status through an H-1B visa and recently defended the program for helping drive innovation and economic growth in the United States. Critics have argued the program undermines domestic job opportunities and lowers wages.
In his first term, Trump implemented restrictions on foreign worker visas and expressed criticism of the program. However, his 2024 campaign hinted at a potential shift, indicating openness to granting H-1B visas, or even green cards, to foreign-born graduates of U.S. universities.
Trump’s remarks to The Post were made a day after Musk vowed to go to “war” in defense of the H-1B visa program in response to critics calling for the visas to be eliminated.
“The reason I’m in America along with so many critical people who built SpaceX, Tesla, and hundreds of other companies that made America strong is because of H1B,” Musk said in a Dec. 27 post on social media platform X, in response to a comment suggesting that the H-1B program should be “optimized” out of existence.
Earlier, Musk said in a Dec. 25 post that the United States needed to double its number of engineers, citing a shortage of “super talented” and “super motivated” individuals. While he expressed preference for hiring Americans, Musk stressed the importance of legal immigration for attracting the top 0.1 percent of engineering talent.
While Musk has argued that U.S. immigration policies should prioritize attracting top global talent, critics contend that the program often displaces domestic workers and drives down wages.
Musk’s endorsement of the visas has triggered heated debate online, as well as some opposition from factions within Trump’s political base and from conservatives more broadly.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, proposed reforms to the H-1B visa program that align tech industry interests with immigration restrictionists. In a recent op-ed, he advocated prioritizing higher-salaried, highly skilled workers to attract top talent while limiting overall visa numbers, addressing a key concern of Trump voters.
Krikorian suggested replacing the visa lottery and certain “chain-migration” categories with a merit-based system, reallocating visas to skilled workers on the basis of factors like education level and existing job offers. This approach, he argued, would increase skilled immigration while reducing overall immigration levels.
Countries like Canada and Australia use merit-based points systems of the type Krikorian has suggested. While there have been legislative efforts in the United States to adopt a merit-based system for guest worker visas, none have succeeded.
Ex-OpenAI engineer who raised legal concerns about the technology he helped build has died …
Suchir Balaji poses for a photo in Hawaii in 2018. Balaji was a former OpenAI engineer and whistleblower who died in November 2024. (Balaji Ramamurthy via AP)
Suchir Balaji, a former OpenAI engineer and whistleblower who helped train the artificial intelligence systems behind ChatGPT and later said he believed those practices violated copyright law, has died, according to his parents and San Francisco officials. He was 26.
Balaji worked at OpenAI for nearly four years before quitting in August. He was well-regarded by colleagues at the San Francisco company, where a co-founder this week called him one of OpenAI’s strongest contributors who was essential to developing some of its products.
“We are devastated to learn of this incredibly sad news and our hearts go out to Suchir’s loved ones during this difficult time,” said a statement from OpenAI.
Balaji was found dead in his San Francisco apartment on Nov. 26 in what police said “appeared to be a suicide. No evidence of foul play was found during the initial investigation.” The city’s chief medical examiner’s office confirmed the manner of death to be suicide.
His parents Poornima Ramarao and Balaji Ramamurthy said they are still seeking answers, describing their son as a “happy, smart and brave young man” who loved to hike and recently returned from a trip with friends.
Balaji grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and first arrived at the fledgling AI research lab for a 2018 summer internship while studying computer science at the University of California, Berkeley. He returned a few years later to work at OpenAI, where one of his first projects, called WebGPT, helped pave the way for ChatGPT.
“Suchir’s contributions to this project were essential, and it wouldn’t have succeeded without him,” said OpenAI co-founder John Schulman in a social media post memorializing Balaji. Schulman, who recruited Balaji to his team, said what made him such an exceptional engineer and scientist was his attention to detail and ability to notice subtle bugs or logical errors.
“He had a knack for finding simple solutions and writing elegant code that worked,” Schulman wrote. “He’d think through the details of things carefully and rigorously.”
Balaji later shifted to organizing the huge datasets of online writings and other media used to train GPT-4, the fourth generation of OpenAI’s flagship large language model and a basis for the company’s famous chatbot. It was that work that eventually caused Balaji to question the technology he helped build, especially after newspapers, novelists and others began suing OpenAI and other AI companies for copyright infringement.
He first raised his concerns with The New York Times, which reported them in an October profile of Balaji.
SOMETHING DOESN'T SMELL RIGHT ABOUT THIS STORY!
He later told The Associated Press he would “try to testify” in the strongest copyright infringement cases and considered a lawsuit brought by The New York Times last year to be the “most serious.” Times lawyers named him in a Nov. 18 court filing as someone who might have “unique and relevant documents” supporting allegations of OpenAI’s willful copyright infringement.
His records were also sought by lawyers in a separate case brought by book authors including the comedian Sarah Silverman, according to a court filing.
“It doesn’t feel right to be training on people’s data and then competing with them in the marketplace,” Balaji told the AP in late October. “I don’t think you should be able to do that. I don’t think you are able to do that legally.”
He told the AP that he gradually grew more disillusioned with OpenAI, especially after the internal turmoil that led its board of directors to fire and then rehire CEO Sam Altman last year. Balaji said he was broadly concerned about how its commercial products were rolling out, including their propensity for spouting false information known as hallucinations.
But of the “bag of issues” he was concerned about, he said he was focusing on copyright as the one it was “actually possible to do something about.”
He acknowledged that it was an unpopular opinion within the AI research community, which is accustomed to pulling data from the internet, but said “they will have to change and it’s a matter of time.”
He had not been deposed and it’s unclear to what extent his revelations will be admitted as evidence in any legal cases after his death. He also published a personal blog post with his opinions about the topic.
Schulman, who resigned from OpenAI in August, said he and Balaji coincidentally left on the same day and celebrated with fellow colleagues that night with dinner and drinks at a San Francisco bar. Another of Balaji’s mentors, co-founder and chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, had left OpenAI several months earlier, which Balaji saw as another impetus to leave.
Schulman said Balaji had told him earlier this year of his plans to leave OpenAI and that Balaji didn’t think that better-than-human AI known as artificial general intelligence “was right around the corner, like the rest of the company seemed to believe.” The younger engineer expressed interest in getting a doctorate and exploring “some more off-the-beaten path ideas about how to build intelligence,” Schulman said.
Balaji’s family said a memorial is being planned for later this month at the India Community Center in Milpitas, California, not far from his hometown of Cupertino.
January 6 Political Prisoners Launch Historic $50 Billion Class Action Lawsuit Against DOJ … and the winner is the lawyers!!! AGAIN!!!!!
In a groundbreaking legal battle, over 100 January 6 political prisoners have come together to file what is being hailed as the largest lawsuit ever against the Department of Justice.
Officially named the January 6 Restitution and Wrongful Incarceration Lawsuit, this $50 billion class action is spearheaded by Jake Lang, a January 6 prisoner who has been incarcerated for nearly four years. Lang, through his new organization, Federal Watchdog, the Anti-Lawfare Group, is joined by an esteemed team of conservative attorneys, including Steven Metcalf, Anthony Sabatini, Stephanie Lambert, and Jonathan Gross. Together, they aim to expose the injustices faced by January 6 prisoners and secure much-needed restitution.
The lawsuit, set to be filed on January 20, 2025, has already garnered widespread support, with over 100 prisoners signing on. This historic legal action seeks to compensate these individuals for the extensive harm inflicted by what they describe as a weaponized justice system. From the loss of generational family businesses, homes, and careers to the irreparable emotional and psychological damage suffered during years of wrongful incarceration, the plaintiffs are demanding accountability for the Federal Government’s actions.
Jake Lang, a prominent figure in the January 6 movement, emphasized the importance of this lawsuit, stating, “This isn’t just about restitution; it’s about setting a precedent. Weaponized government and lawfare against conservatives can never become the standard in America.”
A Two-Tiered Justice System
According to Federal Watchdog, the plaintiffs were “hunted down like animals” by the FBI for peacefully protesting at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Many have faced harsh sentences, inadequate legal representation, and conditions that have worsened their physical and mental health. Critics argue this is a glaring example of a two-tiered justice system, one that has been particularly hostile to supporters of former President Donald Trump.
The lawsuit will highlight individual stories of suffering and resilience, aiming to illustrate the broad impact of the government’s actions. “The damage to children who have spent four years without their fathers at home cannot be put into monetary value,” Lang noted. “But we must being the healing process by holding those responsible for our unconstitutional cruel & unusual torture accountable!”
The road to recovery for these patriots will be long and difficult. Some prisoners have experienced severe mistreatment in custody, leading to health conditions that may never fully heal. Others face the daunting task of rebuilding lives, families, and communities shattered by years of persecution. Federal Watchdog aims to provide these individuals with the resources and support needed to begin this process.
“We’re standing up to secure restitution for the thousands of broken lives left in the wake of the January 6 persecution,” said Lang. “This is about giving these families a chance to rebuild.”
A Call to Action
Federal Watchdog is urging all January 6 prisoners and their families to join this historic lawsuit. Participation comes at absolutely no cost, and those interested can sign up at J6Restitution.com. “This is your chance to fight back and demand justice,” Lang emphasized. “We need every voice in this battle.”
A Historic Moment
The timing of the lawsuit is symbolic, as it will be filed just before January 20, 2025, a date many believe will mark the beginning of a new chapter for these patriots. Supporters are optimistic that former President Donald Trump will pardon the remaining 250 prisoners still behind bars on his anticipated inauguration day, bringing an end to years of suffering and uncertainty.
Federal Watchdog’s Track Record
Federal Watchdog is no stranger to taking on high-profile cases. Recently, the organization filed a $150 million wrongful injury lawsuit on behalf of over 80 plaintiffs who suffered injuries during clashes with Capitol police on January 6. With this latest effort, the group aims to send a clear message that justice will not be denied.
Setting a Precedent
This lawsuit is about more than restitution; it’s about ensuring that government overreach and politically motivated lawfare never happen again. Lang and his team hope to set a precedent that will protect future generations from similar injustices.
Join the Fight
If you or a loved one were affected by the events of January 6, now is the time to stand up for your rights. Visit J6Restitution.com to join this historic lawsuit and be part of the fight for justice.
This landmark case marks the beginning of a long road home for those who have been wrongfully incarcerated. The January 6 Restitution and Wrongful Incarceration Lawsuit is more than a legal battle—it’s a movement to reclaim justice and rebuild lives.
If you would like to support the January 6 Political Prisoners while they are still imprisoned, please sign up to become a vital Patriot Sponsor by visiting SponsorJ6. comto help.
KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE SHINY OBJECTS … YEAH LIGHTS ON XMAS TREE NOT DRONES
The media have a new talking point to trash Trump—they have decided that they will say that the “elected to nothing” Elon Musk is president, and Trump is just his puppet. What a joke.
Not once have I ever seen these same people question who has been the president the last four years while Biden’s mind has clearly been shot. They intentionally spread the lie that Biden was “sharp as a tack” and doing a great job.
The WSJ put out a lengthy article reporting that unelected bureaucrats have been running the show for Biden before and during his presidency, because he has been incapable— this has been abundantly obvious for a long time, yet the complicit media willingly participated in the coverup. They have clearly done a massive disservice to the American people and the world, as we have had cascading disasters and wars.
During the 2020 presidential primary, Jill Biden campaigned so extensively across Iowa that she held events in more counties than her husband—a fact her press secretary at the time, Michael LaRosa, touted to a local reporter.
His superior in the Biden campaign quickly chided him. As the three rode in a minivan through the state’s cornfields, Anthony Bernal, then a deputy campaign manager and chief of staff to Jill Biden, pressed LaRosa to contact the reporter again and play down any comparison in campaign appearances between Joe Biden, then 77, and his wife, who is eight years his junior. Her energetic schedule only highlighted her husband’s more plodding pace, LaRosa recalls being told.
The message from Biden’s team was clear. ‘The more you talk her up, the more you make him look bad,’ LaRosa said.
To adapt the White House around the needs of a diminished leader, they told visitors to keep meetings focused. Interactions with senior Democratic lawmakers and some cabinet members—including powerful secretaries such as Defense’s Lloyd Austin and Treasury’s Janet Yellen—were infrequent or grew less frequent. Some legislative leaders had a hard time getting the president’s ear at key moments, including ahead of the U.S.’s disastrous pullout from Afghanistan.
The WSJ did another story in June about Biden’s diminished capacity, and most of the media and other Democrats ripped it as if it were fiction. But then, the public saw the incompetent Biden at the debate, and the same people who had said he was sharp as a tack chased him out, superimposing the incompetent Harris in the race, lying to the public about how great she was.
HEY WHERE'S THE VIDEO OF THE INTERVIEW?
Robert Hur investigated Biden for improperly handling classified documents for fifty years, and said he was guilty. Yet he didn’t charge him because he said he was too incapacitated to stand trial. Instead of admitting that this was true, most of the media, his cabinet, and other Democrats came out and essentially called Hur a liar.
Political animal Merrick Garland and other Democrats did everything they could to keep the public from seeing the actual interview of Biden, because they were campaigning for him. Transparency was the enemy. Most of the media never cared about the public seeing the truth (IN FACT THEY HIDE TRUTH IN WORDS). Of course the media also lied and claimed that the politicized justice department was independent and not politically motivated.
For the last three months, Biden and the unelected bureaucrats at the White House have known that the December 20th budget deadline was looming, and didn’t lift a finger—but somehow this is all Trump’s and Musk’s fault, even though Trump is not president yet. Trump can’t sign or veto any bill to keep the government running, but the media and other Democrats have always blamed Republicans for government shutdowns, no matter how many times the Democrats have blocked the bills.
Whoever is running the show for Biden, after Trump won, is spending money, issuing regulations as fast as they can, and handing out pardons and commutations as if they were candy. They are trying to Trump-proof America because they really don’t care about the people. They care about a powerful government pushing the radically destructive Democrat agenda.
There is no way that Biden remembered what date Hunter started to accept kickbacks from Burisma, yet somehow he was able to get that date in Hunter’s blanket pardon. Someone wrote the pardon and put it in front of him and told him what to say. When did the “Big Guy” start to get his 10%?
JANUARY 21ST BETTER BE BACK IN THE OFFICE
Some unelected bureaucrat at the Social Security Administration has handed almost 50,000 unelected bureaucrats a gift, allowing them to work from home for another five years — so a total of nine years.(I wonder if there is any room to cut the overhead of entitlement agencies?) Somehow, the media doesn’t care about this pure abuse of power by an unelected bureaucrat.
The media and other Democrats have told endless lies for almost ten years seeking to destroy Trump as they have interfered in elections; and the same media and other Democrats have told endless lies to cover up the corruption and incompetence of Biden as they have interfered in elections.
No matter how obvious it has been that Biden was a figurehead and too inept to run again, we didn’t hear endless calls for his resignation, nor did we hear that unelected bureaucrats doing Biden’s job was a threat to the Constitution and our republic. Nope, those lies were told continuously about Trump as the media tried to tip the election.
These people posing as journalists should clearly be fired because they are just pure propagandists pushing an agenda.
I have a serious question: Would the general public even know if the government shut down since so few federal workers have shown up to work for years? Doubtful.
