We have previously discussed bizarre cases of self-incrimination from tattoos to rap lyrics. A federal case out of California is based on another rap-song-to-rap-sheet scenario. Fontrell Antonio Baines, 31, of Memphis, Tenn. (aka “Nuke Bizzle”) cut a music video posted on YouTube that bragged about getting rich from an unemployment scam. What is interesting is that, while he allegedly defrauded California Employment Development Department (EDD) and sang about his “my swagger for EDD,” he was actually charged in the federal system with fraudulently applying for more than $1.2 million in jobless benefits.
Chuck Todd interviewed Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer this morning and turned to the recent decision of the Michigan Supreme Court that ruled that she had violated the Michigan Constitution in her extended pandemic orders. Todd did not challenge Whitmer stating falsely that the opinion was a “partisan” decision. It was not. The “Democrat justices” agreed that Whitmer violated the Constitution. They only disagreed on the remedy. However, that untruth was quickly lost in what was a flagrantly untrue statement by Todd himself. He told NBC viewers that the justices did not cite any law to support their decision against Whitmer. Todd stated as fact that the Court did not “cite any Michigan law, they didn’t cite any law in deciding that you didn’t have this power.” The roughly 50 page opinion contains over 60 cases discussed in support of the decision. It does not seem to matter anymore at Meet The Press or NBC. NBC is not alone. I previously noted how the Washington Post also has failed to correct openly false accounts of cases. Not only is there no apparent inclination to be accurate but even less expectation to do so.
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
It seems that the regulatory web that envelopes United States federal regulations has grown so complex and gigantic, reform necessitates the use of artificial intelligence to tame the dragon.
Reuters reports the White House Office of Management and Budget last Friday announced that federal agencies will use Artificial Intelligence technology to “eliminate outdated, obsolete, and inconsistent requirements across tens of thousands of pages of government regulations.”
The project follows success found in 2019 using Machine Learning and Natural Language algorithms with software at the Department of Social and Health services in identifying hundreds of technical errors and outdated requirements in agency rulebooks
In a manner of speaking we have reached a point where the regulatory morass was allowed to become so formidable, that ordinary human-powered rule making is no longer capable of restraining or modernizing the red tape.
I previously testified in the Senate on Antifa and the growing anti-free speech movement in the United States. I specifically disagreed with the statement of House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler that Antifa (and its involvement in violent protests) is a “myth.” My greatest concern remains the growing use of violence to shutdown free speech events around the country — a practice that has been going on for years on our campuses. That danger was evident in San Francisco yesterday when a conservative group gathered for a free speech rally to protest the recent actions of big tech companies like Twitter. They were violently attacked and the organizer had two teeth knocked out before the event was canceled. Continue reading “Conservatives Attacked by BLM and Antifa Supporters In Effort To Hold Free Speech Rally In San Francisco”
Below is my earlier column on the Biden controversy and the notable omission of three responses that one would have expected in the days following the disclosure in the New York Post. As I have said repeatedly, the timing and manner in which this information came to the public is highly suspicious and could well be the work of foreign intelligence. Even Rudy Giuliani now puts the chances that he worked with a Russian agent at “50-50.” However, that would still leave the question of whether the underlying emails are authentic. The Clinton emails were hacked by the Russians but they were also true. These emails show clear influence peddling, if they are authentic. Instead of addressing the specific emails or even denying their authenticity, figures like Rep. Adam Schiff simply dismissed the story as a Russian hit job. For his part, Joe Biden dismissed reporters asking him about the emails as participating in a smear campaign. There are legitimate questions about how this information was produced (questions that the FBI is reportedly investigating). However, there are also legitimate questions about the content of some of these emails and what they say about an alleged influence peddling scheme related to a presidential candidate.
Here is the column: Continue reading “The Biden Scandal In Three Barks: Why The Most Telling Elements May Be What We Were Not Told”
We have been following the spending spree on Capitol Hill for years. Even before the pandemic, both the Trump Administration and Congress seemed to dispense with any notion of restraint on spending. The result is a towering debt that now exceeds our gross domestic product. The situation is worsening by the day as both the White House and the Congress seek massive new spending. The federal government spent a record $6,551,872,000,000 in fiscal 2020. That is a 45.4% increase from 2019 — an addition of $2,044,283,520,000 above the previous record of $4,507,588,480,000. The budget deficit has now tripled. Yet, there is no indication that the spending spree will end. Trillions of additional spending have been pledged by Democrats for programs ranging from free college to new environmental programs to bail outs for cities. The Trump Administration has pledged even greater tax cuts as the country struggles with a debt load that could be a burden for generations.
By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor.
The below is a reprint of an article I authored four years ago concerning the hazard government agencies face in their reliance on censorship wielding organizations such as Facebook and Twitter to disseminate official information to the public. While it offers a quick, cheap, and easy way to offer news to the public, the price demanded in terms of arbitrary third-party rules, ownership of information, public records keeping liability, and reliance on a platform that could remove individual or all postings without prior notice is a risk the public should not be expected to bear.
There are extant messaging protocols that are not dependent upon third-party proprietary services. These include methods such as RSS Feeds, list based e-Mail servers to push information in addition, and standard web pages. Each more than adequately can fulfill the needs of the informed public. But as long as social media companies act as arbitrary and capricious gatekeepers to official information that information is at risk.
It really is also a matter of controlling the integrity of the information. Governments and agencies are opening themselves up to failure and censorship by taking the easy way out and not deploying these technologies in-house. If either of these supposedly “too big to fail” social media platforms suddenly collapsed (either financially or technologically) it would cause an immediate breakdown of a messaging system spanning governments globally. It can be one of the worst forms of single-point failure imaginable. Yet if each agency or government maintained their own system, if one individual server broke down the damage would be rather benign.
The most immediate problem before us presently is the proclivity to censor by social media outfits which might be at odds with legislation or rulemaking relating to public records and news announcements by government. It is not a duty of the social media companies to edit or formulate this information.
Here is the article:
Continue reading “Government Agencies Should Stop Using Facebook And Twitter”
For years, many of us have criticized President Donald Trump for his attacks on the media when they asked him about controversies involving him or his family. The media however has been largely silent as Democratic leaders have ratcheted up attacks on any journalists who question their positions. That was evident recently when Speaker Nancy Pelosi bizarrely attacked CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer as an apologist for the Trump Administration simply because he pressed her on blocking the stimulus package. Other liberals attacked Blitzer after the interview. Now Joe Biden slammed the first network reporter who asked for a response to the unfolding scandal involving his son Hunter Biden. In emails found on the laptop, Joe Biden is named in communications with foreign figures seeking influence over U.S. policy. Biden refused to comment and then disparaged CBS News reporter Bo Erickson for even asking him the question. Continue reading “Biden Slams CBS Reporter For Asking About The Hunter Biden Scandal”
Below is my column in the Hill on the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett and the oddly disconnected questions during her confirmation hearing. While I have written about the revealing moments of the hearing, the Democrats clearly elected not to focus on the nominee but the election. When they did attack the nominee, they fired wildly and missed completely in three areas.
Here is the column: Continue reading “Franklin’s Rule: How The Barrett Hearing Left The Democrats Holding An Empty Sack”
Loyola Marymount University student Stephanie Martinez is exactly what schools seek in admissions. She is politically and socially active. She has been involved in the school’s governance and community, including serving at the government senator for diversity and inclusion. She is also conservative. That last element proved unacceptable recently when fellow students impeached her after a three-hour proceeding because she expressed her opposition to illegal immigration on social media. While a few students protested, other students mocked the outcry and the coverage on sites like The College Fix. One student is quoted on social media as saying “it’s a f***ing seat on a random student government senate. Why are these old white people so upset!?” The answer is something that is becoming less and less of a concern on campuses: free speech. Continue reading ““Why Are These Old White People So Upset!?”: Loyola Marymount Students Impeach Latina Senator Over Her Conservative Views” 
Below is my column in USA Today on the troubling course taken by Democratic members in the confirmation hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. As I have stated, there are a host of legitimate questions to be raised over Judge Barrett’s view of the law. Indeed, I praised the exchanges between Sen. Dick Durbin (D., IL.) and Judge Barrett as the substantive highlight of the hearing. Unfortunately, those were the exceptions. Instead, the thrust of the entire hearing was that Barrett was unqualified due to her expected vote in the upcoming case on the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Various senators directly stated that they would vote against Barrett to protect the ACA. That is what is so unnerving about the Barrett confirmation hearing.
Here is the column:
Faculty members at Cornell University’s English Department have reportedly voted to change the department’s name as an anti-racist reform. To avoid the “conflation of English as a language and English as a nationality,” the Department will now be called “The Department of Literatures in English.”I will be continuing to blog on the hearing and occasionally tweak highlights. As noted earlier, I will step away for a speech at the Brookings Institution around 11 am. Continue reading “The Barrett Confirmation: Questions and Answers (Day 2)”
Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on Roe v. Wade and the doctrine of stare decisis (or the respect and preservation of precedent). One of the most notable moments in the hearing came when Judge Barrett suggested that Roe was not “super precedent.” Indeed, she noted that the concept of “super precedent” is the work of others in academic publications. However, on Roe, Judge Barrett had an interesting exchange with Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. in which she identified Brown v. Board of Education as such super precedent. However, when pushed on Roe, she noted “I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall into that category.”
This issue was addressed in the column: Continue reading “Barrett: There Is Nothing Super About The Precedent In Roe v. Wade”
Today I have the pleasure of speaking at Brookings Institution as part of the Washington University’s speaker’s series. Ironically, the speech is on the use of legislative history, a subject much discussed yesterday in the confirmation hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett. I will therefore step away from blogging for an hour to appear virtually. Continue reading “Turley Speaks At Brookings On Legislative History and Judicial Interpretation”