Politics The House Ethics Committee’s Fraud Is Exposed Recent revelations have shaken the committee’s case against Rep. Matt Gaetz. Credit: Getty Images Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) has been harassed for years on baseless accusations of sexual misconduct. Even the Justice Department (DOJ), which Gaetz eviscerates at any chance he gets for the politicized nature of its prosecutorial stances, cleared him of wrongdoing.  And yet the House Ethics Committee continues to probe him. They want to kick him out of Congress. This probe is in part led by Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH), who donated to Gaetz’s primary opponent just a few months ago.  Let’s be clear about what’s going on here—entrenched interests are conducting an investigation with the sole purpose of expelling a Congressman who stands up against endless wars, unconstitutional spying, and wasteful spending. Gaetz has shown the spine to fight for these ideals even if it means taking on his own party.  If you have any doubt about how sinister this all is, it has now been proven that the DOJ was behind the 2021 leak to the New York Times that launched this whole witch hunt. Gaetz revealed this information last week along with other details on the contrived basis for this probe.  In a final response to the Ethics Committee, Gaetz wrote in part that he is in possession of a recording of the Committee’s star witness, Joel Greenberg, “from prison wherein he claims the DOJ told him that the New York Times piece put him in ‘golden position.’” The DOJ used Greenberg, who is currently imprison after conviction on charges of underage sex trafficking and fraud, to try to take down Gaetz.  We know this with certainty because Greenberg told a fellow inmate that he planned to lie about Gaetz “having sexual contact with a minor to reduce his own prison sentence.” That other inmate sent a letter to Gaetz, and two former federal agents interviewed the inmate. As that inmate relayed, Greenberg said that his “victim would be willing to adopt Greenberg’s lie in hopes of a future financial benefit.” Gaetz has “provided written evidence that, according to plan, she later sought that benefit.” Greenberg went so far as to pay for his victim’s attorney. Gaetz has revealed a text message from Greenberg proving this. And another civil lawsuit contains evidence showing Greenberg saying the alleged victim would “do whatever he said because he was paying her legal bills.” It’s clear now why the Biden DOJ decided not to charge Gaetz even though they had every reason in the world to punish someone who has repeatedly exposed them in public hearings. Their chief witnesses have no credibility.  Gaetz’s letter to the Ethics Committee last week showed that this “investigation” has devolved into a deeply personal effort to try to embarrass Gaetz.  The committee provided Gaetz a list of adult women and asked whether he had sex with them. Gaetz replied to the committee’s leadership that “the lawful, consensual, sexual activities of adults are not the business of Congress…. [A]sking about my sexual history as a single man with adult women is a bridge too far. I will no longer voluntarily participate in this regrettable abuse of the Committee.” It’s unsurprising that the committee would abuse its powers like this. They are acting as the henchmen of the former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. McCarthy has been on a revenge tour since Gaetz engineered his ouster as House Speaker, and he has continued participating in what seem to be weekly interviews on CNN slandering Gaetz.  The establishment’s treatment of Gaetz has been both disgusting and reprehensible, and Gaetz’s bravery in the face of this assault has been commendable.  Keep in mind that the chairman of the Ethics Committee is Rep. Michael Guest (R-MI). Guest has violated stock trading laws, while Gaetz wants to ban congressional stock trading entirely. Gaetz even called out Guest during a speech earlier this year, stating, “For the same reason you don’t let the umpire bet on the game, members of Congress should not be allowed to trade individual stocks. How about the Ethics Committee take up those reforms?” Don’t hold your breath for an ethics probe into Guest, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), or any of the other congressmen who have gotten rich off their insider knowledge. The purpose of the Ethics Committee isn’t to enforce ethics, it is to use “ethics” as an excuse to punish those members who make leadership uncomfortable.  It is incumbent on all America First patriots to stand with Rep. Matt Gaetz against this high-tech lynching. The post The House Ethics Committee’s Fraud Is Exposed appeared first on The American Conservative.

Opus Dei Deep Dive, J.D. Vance Connection to Opus Dei, & Opus Dei's Connection to 2024 Election 9-39-2024 - I was WRONG about Opus Dei (and J.D. Vance is involved) Opus Dei Deep Dive - 7,480 views Sept. 29, 2024 TheDeepDiveProject *** The Opus Dei Deep Dive Project Full Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reHcPa3fJCI *** As time stretches on and my work digging into the world of Opus Dei continues, I have spent a significant amount of time considering my perception of Opus Dei. - Today, we’re going to talk about that, as well as some interesting discoveries I’ve made re: ***J.D. Vance and Opus Dei,*** and I will provide some preliminary thoughts on Gore’s new book, “Opus: The Cult of Dark Money, Human Trafficking, and Right-wing Conspiracy Inside the Catholic Church.” - CHAPTERS: 0:00 – Intro 4:27 – What is Opus Dei? 27:34 – J.D. Vance & Opus Dei 35:34 – “Opus” by Gareth Gore 44:25 - Outro - SOURCE DOCUMENT: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1W... - VIDEO TRANSCRIPT (English): https://docs.google.com/document/d/10... - FAIR USE FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES Mirrored From: https://www.youtube.com/@thedeepdiveprojectofficial

Recently a 31-year-old wondered if they were making a “stupid” decision for wanting to start college, and sought the opinions of strangers online. In a post made to Reddit, they shared how they had been working retail and dealing with self esteem issues since they were 19, and felt like maybe, just maybe going to school could help them reach their full potential and give them a “purpose.” However, they also shared that they currently lived with their parents, who warned them that college would be “wasting time and going into debt.” Hence the dilemma. So this person asked the community, point blank: “Is this a bad decision?” and got a flood of support from well wishers and fellow later bloomers reminding him of the power of embracing second chances. It was a pretty amazing display of humanity for being a plethora of Reddit comments. Many who had been in similar situations argued that the life experience gained will only help with this person’s studies.Am I a loser for starting college at 31 years old? byu/Silly-Reputation7993 inNoStupidQuestions“I’m in skool rn @ your age and it’s actually super easy, you’ll be surprised how things make much more sense with a bit of life experience under your belt. Good luck, you’ll have fun,” one person wrote. Another added, “Same. I am 34 and started a little over a year ago. I think I am in a much much better position for it now! I am mature, and I am a lot more focused than 18 year old me would have been. It isn’t “easy” at any age. But you’ll be surprised at how much easier it will be than you think it will be now.”“I graduated at 42. Feels great. Nice to have a lived life of variety and waited to really find my calling. There’s no ultimatum on improving yourself,” said another, Even those who hadn’t experienced this personally could share stories of loved ones who had–and succeeded. “My Dad got his university degree after he retired. He previously only had a Grade 8 education. I was proud of him and I’m proud of you OP,” one person wrote. Another said, “My anecdotal story. My second year in college, a 30-year old man (who was divorced, and had two kids) enrolled as a freshman. They put him as a roommate with someone in the suite I was in. He had been a coal miner for 12 years are was tired of being "covered up", which was his term for being in three cave-ins. He was actually a really cool guy and despite being clearly older, fit in well. And, very long story short, I heard he just retired as the second-in-command in the state's department of energy. So, using his degree, he had a good career in energy policy that spanned over 30 years. So, my answer is no, you are not a loser.”One person pointed out how starting from this clean slate, however late, might actually be easier than trying to pivot from a career that's already established. “So many people are stuck in jobs or on career paths that just don't really suit them (me included). I find it all very disappointing, and deeply dissatisfying, and changing paths is honestly very difficult once you're in the daily grind and have responsibilities,” they wrote. Still another reminded the OP that learning is an integral part of life, no matter what age you are. “I have always kept learning, and still learn new things and new ways. After I graduated, I continued off and on to pick up new ways. When you quit learning, you might as well crawl in your casket. I'm older and continue, I do not want to get put in a care home and told to watch some insipid show. No, always continue learning. Good for you.”And some simply came in to offer encouragement, like this person, who wrote, “I just want to chime in that you are absolutely crushing it in life. Throw everything you can into this. Truly rooting for you. I hope I read your ‘I did it’ story in five or so years.”Tips for Going to College after 30 There can be many reasons for people 25, 30, 40, and beyond to pursue higher education—be it to boost employment prospects or just to continue being lifelong learners. Sure, it might be daunting, but the most worthwhile things usually are. Here are a few things that can help make that process a smoother one. Make a solid plan This is just about researching different schools and programs. Hone in on WHY you want a degree, what kinds of opportunities you hope will come from it, how much time you can commit, will you be going in-person or online, etc. A clearly defined, realistic plan that includes specific timelines, milestones, and even little rewards helps keep you on track and motivated. And remember you don’t have to do this portion alone. There are often career guides that can help. Speaking of which… Take Advantage of Student Support Services & ResourcesMost colleges offer resources like financial aid advisors, academic advisors, tutoring, technical support, on-campus childcare centers, and writing and career centers that can be very helpful. It’s also worth noting that many programs that accept transfer credits or work credits, so that you can leverage on your previous life experience. Stay organized Odds are, you will be multitasking schoolwork along with various other adulting tasks. That’s why things like calendars, to-do apps, or even accountability groups are imperative. Plus, you’ll want to find which note taking system works best for you, because it’s definitely not a one-size-fits all approach.. Also, never underestimate the power of designated study space. Manage stress Nobody wants to burn out. It might seem impossible to eat well, exercise, get a good night’s sleep and find time to relax when you have so many demands, but even the smallest amounts of consistent self care will give you more energy to put out in the long run. Commit and Celebrate! Participate in class, ask questions, tell friends and family of your milestones. A) because you’ll be able to look back and really have memories, beyond just academic accomplishment and b) because you deserve it.

Gibbons' more versatile edge. The post ZZ Top’s most underrated song, according to Billy Gibbons first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

Jimmy Carter today becomes the first American president to live to be 100 years old. Presidential scholars mostly consider Carter to have been a mediocre president. In two of his four presidential years, the unemployment rate averaged above 7 percent, with two years of inflation of more than 10 percent. Mortgage interest rates reached into the double digits. It was the era of stagflation and malaise. A seemingly ebbing planetary presence was symbolized by the U.S. giving up control over the Panama Canal. Domestically, Carter successfully advocated for a federal Department of Education that has subsequently been spectacularly unsuccessful in improving American educational opportunities. I heartily concur with most historians who give Carter low marks as president. Moreover, I even thought it was inappropriate for Carter to assume an aggressive position for several years after his presidency in continuing to meet with foreign leaders and sometimes take positions at odds with the administration of his elected successors.  Yet today many of us actually long for some of the personal qualities that Carter has that often seem lacking in today’s national leaders — honesty, loyalty, a sincere concern for others less well blessed, and a strong Christian faith. I voted for Carter opponents Gerald Ford in 1976 and Ronald Reagan in 1980, yet after spending a day with him in the late 1980s, I was very impressed by Carter’s exemplary human qualities that I cannot imagine exist with either of this year’s president frontrunners. I chaired Ohio University’s leading lecture series in the late 1980s, and after some tough negotiations (Carter’s honorarium devoured my budget), secured his agreement to give a lecture. I flew by private aircraft to South Georgia to pick up the former president. While drinking Diet Coke on the plane, Carter said it was the Iranian hostage crisis that cost him the 1980 election (many would disagree) and that Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin was a very difficult and relatively unpleasant individual to deal with, which seems to me strikingly similar to the current relationship of Joe Biden to Benjamin Netanyahu.  We arrived in Ohio in early afternoon for an evening lecture. Carter insisted that he have a totally unpublicized meeting with our newly formed Habit for Humanity chapter. Sitting at the local Lutheran church, Carter gave a lovely burst of encouragement to a few students and two campus ministers shepherding the effort, resulting in the expansion into a robust Habitat presence in our low-income Appalachian location. He didn’t meet much with local Democratic Party leaders, academic deans, or major donors, but rather with students trying to help society.   Carter’s innate niceness was revealed on a walk from a large dinner in the university president’s home to the auditorium where his lecture was been held. As I was walking with Carter, a somewhat hippy-looking, long-haired graduate student accosted him, no doubt to the chagrin of the Secret Service. He asked Carter if he would do him a favor. Carter calmly asked, “What do you want?” As we walked down the street I then heard: “This is Jimmy Carter, 39th president of the United States. John Jones [not real name] is not here. Please leave a message.” Carter had done a message for the kid’s answering machine! Jimmy Carter did not parlay his presidential and earlier gubernatorial successes into lucrative board memberships, nor did he live in grand retirement homes like most of his successors. He returned to his relatively modest home and still taught Sunday School at his church. He had the same wife for over 77 years. Contrast his lifestyle to that of a Donald Trump or Kamala Harris. Neither of them will be teaching Sunday School or likely even attending church as an ex-president.  As one blessed with having met with world leaders as great as Margaret Thatcher or as evil as Vladimir Putin, I have gained some perspective on the act of governing. In my judgment, this presidential season has sadly demonstrated the extent of our national moral as well as political and military (and probably economic) decline. On president Carter’s 100 birthday, I wish him the best and thank him for his long service to his family, God, and country.  Richard Vedder is distinguished professor of economics emeritus at Ohio University and senior fellow at the Independent Institute. The post Jimmy Carter: A Centennial Assessment appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The 2024 presidential race has once again revealed a fundamental problem in the modern U.S. political discourse: Very few Americans seem to understand the proper role of the president. From politicians to pundits, and even among voters, the president is portrayed as the ultimate savior of the country, a near-mythical figure who can single-handedly solve almost every problem, from lowering gas prices to “fixing” the economy, providing child care, and “creating” millions of jobs. In short, far too many Americans perceive the president to be a genie whom they expect to grant them endless wishes. This expansive view of the presidency is a far cry from what the Founding Fathers envisioned when they elucidated the powers of the president in the Constitution. The truth is that the job of the president is limited, constrained by checks and balances, and focused primarily on enforcing laws rather than creating them. If Americans better understood this, we would have a very different political landscape. The Constitution’s Limited View of Presidential Power The president’s role is carefully defined in the U.S. Constitution, and those who believe the office is all-powerful would do well to familiarize themselves with it. The president’s powers, according to Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, are quite limited. According to the Constitution, the president: is commander-in-chief of the military can grant pardons and reprieves for federal offenses can negotiate treaties (subject to Senate approval) can nominate judges, ambassadors, and other high-ranking officials (again, subject to Senate approval) is responsible for faithfully executing the laws passed by Congress That’s it. The Constitution does not say the president is responsible for ensuring every American has a job, reducing the price of gas, or legislating from the Oval Office. The Founders deliberately left those tasks to Congress, the states, and ultimately, the people. What the Founders Thought of Presidential Power The Founding Fathers were clear about why they designed the presidency as they did. They feared centralized, unchecked power and sought to limit the president’s authority. James Madison, in Federalist No. 47, warned of the dangers of combining legislative and executive powers, stating, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many… may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” In Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton contrasts the American presidency with a monarchy, emphasizing that the president’s powers are carefully limited, much weaker than those of a king, and focused on enforcing laws rather than making them. It’s also clear from the actions of our early presidents that the executive branch was never intended to be a one-person solution to all of America’s problems. The Problem with an Expansive View of the Presidency The contemporary view of the president as a national savior has consequences. It shifts personal responsibility away from individuals and the states. Instead of looking to local leaders or personal initiative to solve problems, we expect the federal government — particularly the president — to swoop in and save the day. This warped view has led to an unprecedented and downright dangerous expansion of executive power. Consider the sheer size of the executive branch today. George Washington’s Cabinet consisted of just four departments: State, Treasury, War, and the Attorney General. Fast-forward to today, and the executive branch has ballooned to include 15 federal departments, including everything from Education to Housing and Urban Development (hard to imagine which of the president’s powers those departments fall under). Each of these departments exercise considerable power and control over nearly all aspects of daily life, often with minimal oversight from Congress. This expansion of executive power has been accompanied by the rise of executive orders, which presidents increasingly use to bypass Congress and enact their own agendas. What started as a tool for issuing administrative instructions has become, in many cases, a substitute for lawmaking. For example, President Joe Biden issued more than 60 executive orders in his first year alone, many aimed at reversing or bypassing policies from the previous administration. Arguing the Wrong Point We’ve strayed so far from the original intent of the presidency that it’s become almost unrecognizable from what the Founders envisioned. It’s like we started out building a dog house and then you look up, years later, to find that you’ve built something entirely different — an enormous, convoluted structure that no longer resembles the modest, functional design originally intended. This is precisely what has happened with the role of the presidency. Instead of a restrained, constitutionally limited office, it has morphed into a position that is expected to solve all of society’s problems — from creating jobs to managing health care. And yet, we’ve never stopped to ask: Should we even be debating these things? Is it the president’s job to provide health care, child care, or jobs in the first place? The Constitution is clear. The president’s role is narrow, with specific powers like enforcing laws, commanding the military, and negotiating treaties. The Founding Fathers intended the states and individuals to handle much of what we now expect the federal government to manage. So, before we get caught up in campaign promises of how much health care or child care the president will provide, we need to pause and ask if this is even within the scope of presidential power to begin with. Know the Job Before You Vote What can be done to reverse this trend? The answer is simple but requires discipline. Educate yourself on the proper role of the president as outlined in the Constitution. Understand the difference between what the president can and cannot do. The next time you hear a politician or a fellow voter promise that the president will fix the economy, create jobs, or solve local issues, push back. The president is not a king, a dictator, or a genie. If you don’t understand the job of the president, you shouldn’t be voting for one. It’s time to stop expecting magic and start demanding constitutional governance. Only then can we reclaim the republic our Founders intended. Brady Smith is a fellow with the Freedom Rising Fellowship Program at the American Journey Experience and a policy advisor for The Heartland Institute. The post Most Americans Misunderstand the Duties of the President appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Jen Psaki recently praised Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff for “reshap[ing] the perception of masculinity” through his support for his wife, Kamala Harris. Her comments proved that the Left will continue to prop up Emhoff as a role model for virtuous masculinity even in light of the news that he conducted an extramarital affair with his children’s nanny during his first marriage. In this episode of The Spectator P.M. Podcast, hosts Ellie Gardey Holmes and Lyrah Margo discuss Emhoff’s affair and how he is not, in fact, an example of virtuous masculinity. Ellie and Lyrah also discuss how the Left’s progressivism has damaged feminism and masculinity today. Tune in to hear their discussion! Like and share The Spectator P.M. Podcast, and tune in to our next episode! Read Ellie and Lyrah’s writing here and here. Listen to the Spectator P.M. Podcast on Spotify. Watch the Spectator P.M. Podcast on Rumble. The post <i>The Spectator P.M.</i> Ep. 79: Even After Affair With Nanny, Doug Emhoff Is Still Left’s Masculinity Role Model appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

BREAKING.?? Whistlleblower informs @GOPoversight about U.S. intelligence uncovering verified links between the C.C.P. and Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz pic.twitter.com/eMeL9oaT5g — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) September 30, 2024