Category: The Washington Free Beacon
Tiananmen Scare: ‘Swagged Out’ Maoist Edgelord Trembles Like Bitch When ChiCom Thugs Plunder His Memes
Hasan Piker, the dog-abusing left-wing edgelord who identifies as a “swagged out white boy,” cowered pathetically on Tuesday when Chinese authorities disrupted his pilgrimage to the communist backwater. Livestream viewers gawked as Piker’s giddy persona gave way to trembling panic as regime security officers approached his entourage near Tiananmen Square, the site of the notorious massacre. Mercifully for Piker, the livestream was swiftly terminated; loyal fans were unable to witness his inevitable groveling in the face of authority.
The post Tiananmen Scare: ‘Swagged Out’ Maoist Edgelord Trembles Like Bitch When ChiCom Thugs Plunder His Memes appeared first on .
UC Berkeley Student Radicals Clash With Police, Attack Conservatives Outside TPUSA Event Honoring Charlie Kirk
University of California, Berkeley student radicals clashed with police and Turning Point USA supporters Monday night, leaving one conservative bloodied and resulting in multiple arrests.
The post UC Berkeley Student Radicals Clash With Police, Attack Conservatives Outside TPUSA Event Honoring Charlie Kirk appeared first on .
Meet the American Educational Organization Accrediting CCP Bureaucrats
In 2018, the sole accrediting body for public service programs in the United States held a workshop for schools seeking accreditation. Diversity and inclusion were all the rage in higher education, and the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA) spent much of the workshop explaining how schools were expected to pursue those ideals, which it described as “public service values.”
The post Meet the American Educational Organization Accrediting CCP Bureaucrats appeared first on .
MSNBC Hires Black Actors To Feature Alongside Its White Anchors in Racial Justice-Themed Ad Promoting ‘MS NOW’ Name Change
A slick new civil rights-themed video promoting MSNBC’s forced name change to “MS NOW” features paid black actors playing ordinary Americans, intercut with pensive shots of MSNBC’s white primetime stars. The promotional spot, narrated by Rachel Maddow reading the Constitution, appears to be a ham-handed effort by MSNBC’s new parent company, Versant, to cater to MSNBC’s large black audience—the largest in cable news—when its primetime and morning anchor lineup is overwhelmingly white.
The post MSNBC Hires Black Actors To Feature Alongside Its White Anchors in Racial Justice-Themed Ad Promoting ‘MS NOW’ Name Change appeared first on .
Biden FBI’s Arctic Frost surveillance of lawmakers could cost the government, thanks to ‘real teeth’ measure in funding bill
Republican lawmakers officially passed their funding bill to reopen the government on Monday night. In addition to getting the ball rolling on reopening the government, their bill sets the stage for possible retribution over the Biden FBI’s Arctic Frost operation.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) published damning documents last month regarding the Biden FBI’s Operation Arctic Frost, an investigation that ultimately morphed into former special counsel Jack Smith’s federal case against President Donald Trump regarding the 2020 election.
‘Arctic Frost was a grotesque abuse of power. It was Joe Biden’s Watergate.’
The documents revealed that the bureau not only subpoenaed records for over 400 Republican individuals and entities but secretly obtained the private phone records of numerous Republican lawmakers as part of what the Iowa senator called a “fishing expedition.”
According to the Grassley, those behind Arctic Frost “were spreading a wide net because they were looking for anything they could to hook on Trump, put Trump in prison, keep him from running for president, and things of that nature.”
The funding bill passed by the Senate this week contains a provision that would enable any senator whose phone records were “acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed or disclosed” without his or her knowledge to file a civil lawsuit against the government inside the next five years for at least $500,000 plus legal fees for each instance of a violation.
Senators would be able to take legal action if at the time their records were seized, they were a target of a criminal investigation; a federal judge issued an order authorizing a delay of notice to the senator in question; the government complied with the judge’s order; and the subpoena was faithfully executed.
RELATED: Republicans torch Obama judge over his role in Biden FBI’s ‘partisan vendetta,’ demand impeachment
Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images
The provision, which is retroactive to 2022, notes that “no officer, employee, or agent of the United States or of any Federal department or agency shall be entitled to assert any form of absolute or qualified immunity as a defense to liability” in relation to such violations.
“It’s designed to put real teeth into federal law that prohibits the executive branch from surveilling the Senate,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — whose Senate office hard-line and cellphone records were reportedly targeted — told the Daily Caller. “Arctic Frost was a grotesque abuse of power. It was Joe Biden’s Watergate.”
“[It’s] a common-sense provision to ensure that no Department of Justice — Democrat or Republican — ever does that again,” added Cruz, who confirmed to Politico that Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) was “directly” responsible for the inclusion of the provision.
Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told the Daily Caller the provision serves to protect against “a weaponization of government against members of the Senate” and stressed that “senators are going to take responsible action, and that’s what we’ve done here.”
Democrat lawmakers complained about the measure.
“I’m shocked that a huge change in policy would be dropped into a bill at the last minute, and the first that most senators learn about it is in the press,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) told the Caller. “This is one more way in which the bill that passed the Senate tonight is even worse for the American people.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) similarly clutched pearls over the provision, telling Politico, “I am furious that the Senate minority and majority leaders chose to airdrop this provision into this bill at the eleventh hour — with zero consultation or negotiation with the subcommittee that actually oversees this work.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Trump reveals what’s at stake if Supreme Court rules against his tariffs: ‘Devastating’
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday regarding President Donald Trump’s authority to impose reciprocal and fentanyl-related tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Given the skepticism expressed by liberal and conservative justices alike, there is cause to suspect that things may not go in the president’s favor.
Trump has since underscored in a series of posts on Truth Social that a loss for his administration in this case would prove to be a “catastrophe” for the economy and national security.
Skepticism on the high court
One day prior to the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments in the consolidated cases Trump v. V.O.S. Selections and Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the president noted that the outcome of the case could mean “LIFE OR DEATH for our Country. With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, Financial and National Security. Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other Countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us.”
‘The US Supreme Court was given the wrong numbers.’
While Justice Samuel Alito appeared sympathetic to some of the government’s arguments, his conservative colleagues didn’t come across as entirely convinced.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, for instance, joined his liberal colleagues last week in trying to poke holes in U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer’s defense of Trump’s tariffs, suggesting that the danger of too liberal a reading of the IEEPA in the president’s favor risks creating “a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people’s elected representatives.”
RELATED: Trump’s SHOCKING 25% truck tariff: A matter of national security?
Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Chief Justice John Roberts, like some of the other justices on the high court, took issue with the absence of the word “tariffs” in the IEEPA, which empowers the president to regulate imports of “property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has any interest” during a declared national emergency.
“You have a claimed source in IEEPA that had never before been used to justify tariffs. No one has argued that it does until this — this particular case,” said Robert.
Roberts, whose note on the unprecedented nature of the interpretation was also raised by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, added that tariffs amount to an “imposition of taxes on Americans, and that has always been the core power of Congress.”
Concern in the White House
Trump, no doubt aware of how the oral arguments went, has emphasized in the days since what is at risk.
Hours after indicating that any money left over from his proposed $2,000 tariff dividend for American citizens “will be used to SUBSTANTIALLY PAY DOWN NATIONAL DEBT,” Trump suggested on Monday that the cost of the Supreme Court’s invalidation of his tariffs — which Barrett said would likely be “a mess” — could be far higher than previously suggested.
Trump noted in a Truth Social post on Monday, “The ‘Pay Back’ Numbers being quoted by the Radical Left Lunatics, who would love to see us lose on Tariffs because of how bad it would be for our Country, are much higher than those being stated by our Fake Opposition — Opposition mainly from Foreign Countries that would do anything to be allowed to charge us Tariffs without retribution.”
‘Possibly non-sustainable!’
“The actual Number we would have to pay back in Tariff Revenue and Investments would be in excess of $2 Trillion Dollars, and that, in itself, would be a National Security catastrophe,” added the president.
In a subsequent post, Trump wrote, “The U.S. Supreme Court was given the wrong numbers. The ‘unwind’ in the event of a negative decision on Tariffs, would be, including investments made, to be made, and return of funds, in excess of 3 Trillion Dollars.”
As all revenues from tariffs, including new and pre-existing ones, through September of this year had raised between $174 and $195 billion, Trump’s allusion to a figure over $3 trillion appears to refer to the potential tariff revenue lost over the next decade.
According to a recent Tax Foundation report, Trump’s tariffs “will raise $2.4 trillion in revenue over the next decade on a conventional basis and reduce US GDP by 0.6 percent, all before foreign retaliation.” Other estimates put potential revenue as high as $3 trillion.
The Congressional Budget Office released an estimate in August indicating that “increases in tariffs implemented during the period from January 6, 2025, to August 19 will decrease primary deficits (which exclude net outlays for interest) by $3.3 trillion if the higher tariffs persist for the 2025-2035 period.”
Trump suggested further that the loss of tariff revenue and return of funds “would truly become an insurmountable National Security Event, and devastating to the future of our Country — Possibly non-sustainable!”
U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer told “Mornings with Maria” last week that the reciprocal tariffs at issue have netted over $100 billion but less than $200 billion and noted further that if they are invalidated, specific plaintiffs might receive a refund, but it remains unclear what will happen to the remainder.
“As for the rest of it … I’ll hand that file to the secretary of the treasury,” said Greer.
“You’ll have all these importers and importing interests who are going to want that money back, and so, you know, we’ll have to figure out — probably with the court — what kind of a schedule might look like and what the rights are of these parties and what rights the government has to that money.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
