Soros, Funders of Domestic Terrorism, Form 'Coalition' Against Fed Investigations

Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog

The Soros clan, along with other family foundations of the liberal elite, Knight, MacArthur, Ford, Omidyar, and the Rockefellers, have announced that they’re teaming up to fight investigations by the Justice Department.

While Alex Soros, George’s son, bragged that he would not give in, “over my dead body”, the presidents of the MacArthur and McKnight Foundations have declared that everyone needs to dust off their “crisis plans” and put their “legal teams on speed dial” ahead of a crackdown.

What are they afraid of?

The Unite in Advance coalition was formed so quickly by the big liberal grant making groups funding radicalism to form a ‘united front’ that it didn’t even have the time to build a site.

While Unite in Advance’s joint letter mentions the Charlie Kirk assassination and subsequent investigations of Antifa and other radical groups, an initial version of this ‘unity’ push had come out back in April with over 700 leftist groups, led by the MacArthur Foundation and, despite the claims of ‘non-violence’ included signatories like the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where a key figure supported Hezbollah, the Soros network, which has provided money to extremist and terrorist front groups, and BLM funders like the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.

The latest incarnation of what the radical leftist funders are billing as the ‘Freedom to Give’ complains that they are being portrayed as “contributing to those acts of violence” and accuses unnamed figures, seemingly conservatives and the Trump administration, of plotting to “silence speech, criminalize opposing viewpoints, and misrepresent and limit charitable giving.”

After decades of trying to censor, ‘debank’ and ban conservative groups, the funders of these efforts are suddenly hailing a “freedom to give” when the investigation risks turning their way.

It’s nice that the Knight Foundation, a major SPLC donor, and which also provided millions to fund ‘disinformation’ research which was used to deplatform and silence opposing groups, has suddenly come around to believing in the value of free speech. But only when it’s their speech.

But speech, on either side, isn’t a crime. Funding domestic terrorism however is.

The frantic calls for unity, the 700+ signatories of the April letter and the 200 plus and counting foundations that have signed on to the ‘Unite in Advance’ letter are rightly worried about their legal exposure to funding foreign and domestic terrorist groups, rioters and others engaged in criminal activities that, as Freedom Center Investigates has shown over the years, violates their nonprofit status.

Take the Climate Emergency Fund, a 501(c)(3), funding some of the environmental vandalism in America and around the world, which received a founding grant from the Aileen Getty Foundation. The Getty Foundation bragged about “Greta Thunberg and disruptive groups like Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion” which vandalized art masterpieces around the world.

Then there was the financial backing for the BLM movement from big nonprofit players like the Ford Foundation and W.K. Kellogg. And there’s the Soros backing for groups involved in the campus pro-Hamas riots and the more recent anti-ICE riots. Even the legal ‘non-violent’ No Kings protests can fall afoul of the tax-exempt nonprofit status of an organization depending on how they are being conducted.

Free speech is sacrosanct, but that doesn’t cover burning down neighborhoods, assaulting police officers, attacking Jewish students on campus or vandalizing art museums. Nor, for that matter, does it cover blocking roadways, shutting down Congress and other illegal activities that have been billed as ‘civil disobedience’ but that serve as grounds for loss of tax-exempt status.

The big lefty foundations assumed that they could not and would not be held accountable. Now they’re panicking because the Trump administration is moving to finally impose accountability.

The billionaire funders of leftist hate and violence have taken to pretending that they’re “charitable giving organizations” that contribute to “communities”, helping “new parents and elders, veterans and school children, hospitals and libraries.”

The reality is that the vast majority of their ‘giving’ is political.

You don’t go to George Soros if you’re hungry. The Open Society Foundations describe giving grants to “movements, coalitions, networks, collectives and even informal groups”.

Not soup kitchens.

The MacArthur Foundation lists categories such as ‘climate solutions’ and ‘criminal justice’. The first signatory to the Unite in Advance letter is the Action for Transformation Fund which announced that it’s “moving resources to trans-led organizing”.

Other signatories include the Foundation for Systemic Change that works to “highlight ongoing economic, political, social, racial, ethnic, and environmental inequities”, the Fund for Nonviolence, which ironically helped unleash a crime wave, and iF, A Foundation for Radical Possibility, which focuses on ‘systemic racism’.

None of this is charity, it’s leftist political organizing, and the refusal by the signatories to come out and say so, or to hide behind smaller local nonprofits, is dishonest and shameful.

If these big foundations had been funding soup kitchens, hospitals and libraries, rather than political organizing and radical violence, they wouldn’t need to preemptively form a ‘Unite in Advance’ front. And the heads of the MacArthur and McKnight foundations wouldn’t be urging foundations to “stand in solidarity”, organizing for mutual defense against “threats”.

They’re not afraid of being busted for feeding the poor, but for feeding violence and hate.

Now the groups that tried to shut down their political opponents are rallying to the Constitution and the First Amendment, things they never believed in and had worked to destroy, but suddenly rediscovered just in time to become born-again patriots and lovers of freedom.

But no one is buying it.

When these leftist groups had the chance, they tried to eliminate the political opposition. Now they’re terrified of having the actual laws, not imaginary laws about ‘disinformation’, but actual tax code regulations and domestic terrorism laws, being enforced against their activities.

And wouldn’t that be a shame.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.  Thank you for reading.

 

The electric vehicle doom loop

January 4, 2024 By Mike McDaniel

The inevitable, planet-saving, path to universal electric vehicle (EV) ownership is becoming increasingly cratered. Some 4000 dealers recently begged President Biden to stop pushing EVs. They can’t give them away.  About half of all Ford Dealers refuse to stock them, and more than 50% of Buick dealers recently went out of business rather than sell them.  Ford has largely bet its EV future on the F-150 Lightning pickup. It’s a sucker’s bet. Ford recently announced it was cutting its EV production plans in half. Articles like Motor Trend’s “Our Last Ford F-150 Lightning EV Pickup Road Trip Was A Nightmare” explains why..........To Read More...

Electric Cars Are Bankrupting the Auto Industry

By Daniel Greenfield April 03, 2023 @ Sultan Knish Blog

Ford reported that it’s going to lose $3 billion on electric cars in 2023.  Unlike most automakers, Ford reports its electric vehicle numbers separately, but experts estimate that most car companies are losing similar amounts on the dead end business.

Ford’s investment in Rivian’s electric cars can’t be helping. Last year the startup electric pickup truck maker was spending $220,000 to make the electric vehicles that it sells for $81,000.

That’s bad news for George Soros and for CalPERS: California’s massive public employees retirement fund and a ticking time bomb which owns hundreds of thousands of shares in Rivian.

GM and Ford both project that their electric cars will be profitable in a few years. Ford plans to make 2 million electric cars every year by 2025. That would be impressive considering that Ford only sold 61,575 of them in 2022. It sold 3,624 electric vehicles in Feb 2023.

That’s a long way from 2 million.

GM plans to sell 1 million electric cars by 2025. It sold less than 40,000 in 2022.

Projections like these might make sense if GM and Ford had hot products and untapped market demand. Instead there are too many electric car models chasing a tiny market. Electric car sales have yet to break the million mark. Most of the electric car activity continues to be concentrated in the luxury SUV market which only has so many buyers able to afford them.

Even the “affordable” electric cars, like GM’s Bolt, start at $30,000, and lose as much as $9,000 for the company.

The only way to create demand for electric cars is through government mandates.

After 2035, if you want to buy a new car in California, it’s electric cars or it’s nothing. California’s mandates that fined car manufacturers, forcing them to buy credits from electric car makers like Tesla, financed the electric car industry. By 2035, California will simply eliminate the competition.

New York, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington have also moved to ban the sale of new cars. About a dozen Democrat states have similarly decided to prevent residents from buying cars. Virginia’s House voted to drop its car ban, but the state’s Senate Democrats have kept it in place. Biden has proposed a similar ban nationwide following its adoption by the EU.

By 2040, GM expects to stop making and selling cars on the assumption of such a ban.

George Soros has reportedly lost over $1 billion with his Rivian investment, and his other electric car investments may seem shaky, but in the long term the leftist politicians he has backed are expected to eliminate the competition and clear cars off the roads and highways.

Automakers are spending billions to build electric cars that no one wants and no one can afford because governments have assured them of a captive market. And after all that money flushed down the drain, their lobbyists are aggressively pressuring legislators to impose new bans and keep the existing bans in place. They’ve also been seduced with the promise of subsidies and tax credits that will free them from the pedestrian business of actually turning a profit.

Woke pension funds and party donors have kept the pressure on to see that it pays off.

Detroit’s bet that customers will just accept this as the new normal and just pay higher prices for worse performance is a bad one. The electric car mandates are the work of a Democrat party that is closely tied to a wealthy elite even as Republicans are becoming a working class party. Assuming that half the country will just accept being priced out of the car market when car ownership remains the key to economic and social mobility is as arrogant as it is clueless.

Even assuming that Republicans remain too dysfunctional and outmaneuvered to significantly roll back the leftist agenda, the new car market will drastically shrink. Americans, like Cubans, will desperately work to keep old cars going because for much of the country they will be the only option. The number of illegal cars on the road will dramatically increase. But as brownouts and energy shortages continue to hammer California and other blue states that have also gone all-in on solar and wind power, those will be the only cars that can actually remain on the road.

Woke car companies will have their monopoly handed to them only to find that it’s worthless.

Like their former European counterparts, American automakers will become even more deeply entangled with the government. The inverse spiral of subsidies and sales will climax in bankruptcies. Detroit has failed to innovate and electric car theater is no substitute for actually doing the work to make the cars that people want rather than the ones ad agencies try to make them want.

Letting government mandates instead of consumer demand drive sales is embraced by companies that have given up on even trying to make an appealing product. If electric vehicles were legitimately popular, it wouldn’t take a ban on cars to make them economically viable.

American automakers used to be revolutionary, now they’re the regime.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribeto my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation. Thank you for reading.

Biden Drives Ford to Mexico – Is UAW Happy Now?

It did not take very long for a major American company to move production to Mexico under President Joe Biden. 

By: Andrew Moran March 20, 2021Articles, Business @ Liberty Nation News

Sometimes, you can’t always get what you want. Unions across the United States must have thought that it would be all sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows everywhere for leftist institutions under President Joe Biden. But as it turns out, their man in Washington has either fallen asleep in front of his log fire at the White House, or his first eight weeks have been a dereliction in duty. After two months of poor decisions for the working-class, will unions eventually ask for their votes and money back? Union workers might clamor for the return of Orange Man Bad if 46 continues to destroy their livelihoods.

Ford Goes Down Mexico Way

According to a letter to its members that was made public this week, United Auto Workers (UAW) rejected Ford’s proposal to construct a new electric vehicle south of the border instead of Ohio. The automaker wants to produce a next-generation EV in Cuautitlan, Mexico, where its Mustang Mach-E is manufactured.

The union accused the company of violating a 2019 agreement that included a $900 million investment in the Ford assembly plant in Avon Lake, OH. During tense labor negotiations, the two sides had added a provision for producing a new product in 2023. UAW Vice President Gerald Kariem noted that the arrangement would have secured the plant’s “employment well into the foreseeable future,” but stated that Ford “has decided it will not honor its promise.”

UAW officials had submitted data requests to understand the rationale behind the decision. Instead, the union highlighted that Ford has only provided “strategically limited information.” UAW is now “intensely exploring our options at this time.”

“Ford management expects us to just hang our heads and accept the decision. But let me be clear, we are making a different choice.

We 100% reject the company’s decision to put corporate greed and more potential profits over American jobs and the future of our members. We expect the company to honor its contractual commitments to this membership and when it fails to do so we will take action.”

The Hill obtained a copy of a response from Ford plant manager Jason Moore. He explained that the 2019 agreement is still in effect as the corporation is moving ahead with its investment in the plant and increasing production of Super Duty trucks.

Joe Biden – A Bad Return on Investment?

In April 2020, UAW, representing more than 400,000 workers, announced its endorsement of President Joe Biden. It accused former President Donald Trump of waging an “assault on worker rights to organize and fair wages,” adding that the administration had installed “anti-worker appointees.”

“In these dangerous and difficult times, the country needs a president who will demonstrate clear, stable leadership, less partisan acrimony and more balance to the rights and protections of working Americans,” UAW President Rory Gamble said in a statement.

But is there an intensifying divide between union leadership and blue-collar workers? During autopsies of the 2020 presidential election, the data highlighted a growing realignment of both parties, with working-class voters heading toward the Republicans and the professional class shifting to the Democrats. Biden performed worse than Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama in counties populated by blue-collar folks, the so-called forgotten men and women of America.

Considering what has unfolded since President Biden received the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, will the heads of unions emulate their members and endorse GOP candidates? Out of survival, they may have to begin diversifying endorsements for political hopefuls rather than the typical Democratic politician.

In January, one of Biden’s first acts was putting the kibosh on the Keystone XL pipeline, a decision that cost thousands of jobs and approximately $2.2 billion in lost wages. Affected workers were disturbed. Labor unions were upset, but there was ostensibly a gap between the outrage.

Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) called it “politics at its worst,” while the United Association of Union Plumbers and Pipefitters slammed the Biden-Harris administration for “listening to the voices of fringe activists instead of union members and the American consumer on day one.” The AFL-CIO says it was disappointed by the news, but it understands that Biden “also promised to create jobs, good union jobs, and be the best union president that we’ve ever had.”

Miss Him Yet?

Before even moving into the White House, Trump had scored a critical victory for workers. The division of United Technologies had announced plans to move its manufacturing operations of air-conditioning equipment from Indiana to Mexico. This would have resulted in 1,400 lost jobs. During the campaign, Trump said he would slap a 35% tax on every A/C unit built in Mexico and sold in the U.S. After discussions at Trump Tower, Carrier said it would keep half of the jobs it planned to shift to Mexico. Although it cost taxpayers $7 million, it was a public relations move that was meant to boost Middle America’s morale. The oft-touted “blue-collar boom” was decent enough to see job creation at the fastest rate in more than 30 years. The former president fell short of his ultimate objective, but America First Republicans at least placed the forgotten man on a mantle rather than angry pink-haired progressives.

~

Read more from Andrew Moran.

 

Feinstein On Kavanaugh Accuser: 'I Can't Say That Everything Is Truthful'

Matt Vespa Sep 18, 2018

Wait a second, so Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) sat on a secret letter given to her by Christine Blasey Ford, who alleges that she was the victim of an attempted sexual assault by a drunken 18-year-old Brett Kavanaugh 30+ years ago for weeks. Feinstein obtained the letter in July and then dropped it at zero hour last week. Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who has been nominated to fill the vacancy left by Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, looked as if his confirmation was a guarantee. Now, chaos has engulfed the process. Feinstein wants scores of witnesses. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says he will hold a hearing on Monday.

The problem: Ford has gone AWOL.........To Read More.....

Blasey Ford Tells Grassley Why She Has Not Accepted Invitation to Testify

Cortney O'Brien Sep 18, 2018

The Senate Judiciary Committee asked Christine Blasey Ford to come forward and testify on Monday about her accusation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. She claims he sexually assaulted her in high school, over 36 years ago. She has not accepted the invitation to tell her story publicly in Congress, however, puzzling many senators. Tuesday night, her attorneys sent a letter to Chairman Chuck Grassley explaining their client's hesitation. They claim that the committee was trying make Ford testify at the same table as Kavanaugh. .............. A couple of spokesmen for Grassley rejected that claim..........To Read More.....

The Last-Minute Character Assassination of Judge Kavanaugh

Desperate Dems revert to their old playbook.
 

September 17, 2018  Joseph Klein 

Using any despicable tactic at hand to derail Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation less than a week before the Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on whether to approve his nomination, Senate Democrats have sunk to their lowest level of character assassination yet. They have resorted to peddling an allegation of sexual misconduct against Judge Kavanaugh that supposedly occurred while the judge was in high school.

The accuser had refused to identify herself before and during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. She conveniently waited until this Sunday to come forward via an on-the-record interview with the Washington Post. The accuser’s name is Christine Blasey Ford, a registered Democrat who is currently a California professor teaching clinical psychology.

Judge Kavanaugh issued a statement on Friday in which he said, "I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time."  ................In other words, the only written documentation Ms. Ford has offered in support of her allegation about the incident she said took place while she was in high school – a therapist’s notes of a couples therapy session occurring 30 years after the alleged incident – did not mention Judge Kavanaugh’s name.............. As of now, the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican majority plans to move forward with Judge Kavanaugh's nomination as scheduled. It is time for the Democrat obstructionists to slink back into their shadowy corner..............To Read More.....

Dianne Feinstein’s Metzenbaum Moment

Why the embattled senator really initiated the Kavanaugh smear campaign
 

September 17, 2018 Lloyd Billingsley 

Last week California Senator Dianne Feinstein kept confidential the individual who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh more than 30 years ago. On Sunday, the accuser came out of the closet in classic style.

Christine Blasey Ford, a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University in California, is an activist Democrat, who in June signed a letter denouncing President Trump’s border policy. The ACLU used the letter in a lawsuit against the Trump administration. Ford told the Washington Post she had been attacked by four individuals from an unnamed “elitist boys school.” The four attackers were all now “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.”

The attack occurred at a private residence but Ford did not recall who owned the house or how she got there. On the other hand, she did recall that Brett Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge were “stumbling drunk” when Kavanaugh tried to remove her clothes and put his hand over her mouth.
“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” Ford told the Post. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.” The attack left her with “anguish and terror about retaliation,” and “derailed me substantially for four or five years.” And so on, like the bogus University of Virginia rape story in Rolling Stone. For some observers the smear job on Kavanaugh may recall the 1991 hearings for Clarence Thomas.............To Read More....

The Case for Equal Opportunity Investigation

Time to scrutinize the Kavanaugh accusers

September 18, 2018 Lloyd Billingsley

Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, endured the FBI’s most thorough background check. This background check applies to a judge who will only review laws passed by Congress. In recent years a case has been building that those who seek to make the law should be subject to same scrutiny.

As PBS noted in 2016, “prospective justices are put through the nation’s most thorough background check, an invasive process where nothing is off-limits.” In this process, “candidates’ taxes, writings, childhoods, business dealings, medical histories and, yes, love lives, are all scrutinized for potential red flags.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy sat through more than 10 hours of FBI interviews and a three-hour session with the attorney general and White House counsel. The questions included: “have you ever engaged in kinky sex? Did you shoplift as a kid? What about any associations with groups like the Klu Klux Klan? Ever abuse a girlfriend? Engage in cruelty to animals? And tell us about sex in college: How often, how many women, and did you ever contract a venereal disease?......To Read More....

Notes From an Intergalactic Freakshow

The Democrats’ last-minute Christine Ford allegations push America deeper into the political abyss. But President Trump has some declassifying in mind.

Scott McKay

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Sen. John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) referred to the mess the Senate Judiciary Committee on which he sits had become as an “intergalactic freakshow.”

“I’m fairly confident that our Founding Fathers did not intend the process to work this way,” said Kennedy of the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. “The only thing missing was the genitalia-shaped headgear” among the multitudes of protesters the Democrat members of the committee invited to the hearings.

“Most Americans… are looking at this and they’re thinking that Congress has hit rock bottom and started to dig.”

That was before Monday’s Duke Lacrosse-style news explosion, in which a cryptic letter alleging high school hijinks involving Kavanaugh was fleshed out and an accuser named. Kennedy may have been overstating the case as an intergalactic freakshow on Sunday morning; 24 hours later his description is insufficient..........Does anyone actually believe Christine Blasey Ford? ...........To Read More...

What is Christine Braley Ford trying to hide?

By Monica Showalter September 17, 2018

After Democrats all but lose the prospect of derailing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, suddenly a new accuser with a 35-year-old charge of groping abuse comes out of the woodwork. Problem is, she doesn't want to tell us everything.

Christine Blasey Ford's accusation started with a letter – an anonymous accusatory letter of bad behavior dating from high school. A letter we were supposed to believe, a guy's career we were supposed to ruin, yet we were to take only on faith that there was any merit to it.

Well, that fell apart, so the accuser came forward.  She had psychologist's notes dating from 2012. She says she passed a polygraph. And the picture she painted was imaginable, as witness stories are – there were holes in the story (she had no idea where she was or how she got home, she didn't want to say anything to anyone so as to avoid getting in trouble), and her charges – groping, clothes grabbed at, but no rape – were not over the top. All of that made her look rather believable, because, well, I am about the same age as her and know what it was like to be 17. Seventeen-year-old girls often are groped by certain kinds of boys.

But her case rapidly fell apart when it wasn't just a problem from her long ago......... Read more

Lawyer for Kavanaugh’s Accuser: My Client Isn't Saying Kavanaugh Shouldn't Be Confirmed to the Supreme Cour

Katie Pavlich Sep 17, 2018

 

The lawyer for Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct during a party in high school, says her client hasn't taken the position her allegations disqualify him from serving as a justice on the Supreme Court.

"She has not taken a position that he should not be confirmed," attorney Debra Katz said on CBS News Monday morning.

Katz is a major Democrat donor and called those working for President Trump "miscreants."
Blasey Ford went public Sunday as the woman behind a letter Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein referred to the FBI last week about Kavanaugh's alleged behavior. She has accused him of forcing himself on her during a party 35 years ago. She said they both had been drinking. From the Washington Post:...........To Read More....

 

Sen. Collins Criticizes Democrats' Handling of Christine Blasey Ford's Accusations Against Kavanaugh

Lauretta Brown  Posted: Sep 17, 2018

 

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) told The New York Times Sunday that the way Democrats have handled Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh was “not fair” to Kavanaugh or Ford.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) initially referred Ford’s anonymous allegations against Kavanaugh to the FBI last week although she was aware of them back in July. Ford, a California college professor, finally revealed her identity to The Washington Post Sunday along with more details about the allegations that Kavanaugh locked her in a room, groped her, and put his hand over her mouth during a high school party.

“What is puzzling to me is the Democrats, by not bringing this out earlier, after having had this information for more than six weeks, have managed to cast a cloud of doubt on both the professor and the judge,” Sen. Collins commented.

 

“If they believed Professor Ford, why didn’t they surface this information earlier so that he could be questioned about it?” she wondered. “And if they didn’t believe her and chose to withhold the information, why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it? It is really not fair to either of them the way it is was handled.”...........To Read More....

 

 

Before Believing Kavanaugh's Accuser

Allie Stuckey Sep 17, 2018

On Sunday, the Washington Post published the account of Brett Kavanaugh’s previously anonymous accuser. Her name is Christine Blasey Ford, she is a professor in California, and she claims Kavanaugh forced himself on her in high school—more than 30 years ago.

Ford says she contacted Senator Feinstein’s office with her story in July, and she had hoped that her story would be kept secret. Feinstein failed to fulfill Ford’s wishes when she cryptically released a letter last week stating that someone had contacted her about a sexual assault allegation against Kavanaugh. Frustrated by the circulating inaccuracies following the publication of the letter, she reached out to the Post to set her story straight.

The details are disturbing. Ford alleges Kavanaugh held her down against her will, groped her, attempted to take her clothes off, and covered her mouth when she tried to scream. Ford told the Post: “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.” She reportedly told no one about the incident until couple’s therapy with her husband in 2012—a claim her therapist supports..........To Read More....

The Legal Advisor for Kavanaugh’s Accuser Is a Big Time Democratic Donor, Thinks People Who Work for Trump Are 'Miscreants'

Timothy Meads  Sep 16, 2018

 

The Washington Post reported this afternoon that Stanford professor Christine Blasey Ford is the woman behind the confidential letter given to Sen. Dianne Feinstein accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault as a teenager. According to the Post, Ford initially refrained from revealing the alleged information of a horrendous sexual assault due to privacy concerns for herself and her family. But she thought it was her duty to come forward on the record after the advice of Washington lawyer Debra Katz. Katz, however, has a long history of dismissing sexual assault allegations against liberal politicians, donating to left-wing causes, and even publicly demonizing all Trump advisors as "miscreants" who are worse than deplorables.

Ford kept the following account to herself until a 2012 couples' therapy session and declined to initially name Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge according to her therapist's notes from the appointment:...........To Read More.....

Attorney Says Kavanaugh's Accuser Is Willing to Testify in Public

By Susan Jones | September 17, 2018         

 

(CNSNews.com) - Attorney Debra Katz told CNN on Monday that her client, the woman who has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault in the early 1980s when both were in high school, is willing to testify in public before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The committee planned to vote on Kavanaugh this week, but that confirmation vote may be put on hold after Christine Blasey Ford, a psychology professor from California, publicly identified herself as Kavanaugh's accuser in a Washington Post report published on Sunday.

"Will your client, Christine Ford, be willing to testify in public to the Judiciary Committee?" CNN's Alisyn Camerota asked Debra Katz on Monday.............To Read More....

Observations From the Back Row- 4/13/11

By Rich Kozlovich

Bill Ford of Ford Motor Company became the “Carbon Laughingstock” in April 2011 because for years he shot off his mouth ab out CO2 emissions and then he found out what happens when industry sides with green leftist loons.  Thirteen states adopted more stringetn CO2 tailpipe emission standards.  What did he think was going to happen?  How stupid can someone be? 

Ford unhappy with outcome of climate alarmism Bill Ford has spent much of the past 11 years agitating for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions limits. Now Ford is unhappy that his company is reaping what he sowed. In a January 12 letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Ford Motor Co. complained that California and 13 other states adopted stringent CO2 tailpipe emissions standards.

Wal-Mart goes back to basics. After suffering seven straight quarters of losses, today the merchandise giant Wal-Mart will announce that it is “going back to basics,” ending its era of high-end organic foods, going “green,” and the remainder of its appeal to the upscale market. Next month the company will launch an “It’s Back” campaign to woo the millions of customers who have fled the store. They will be bringing back “heritage” products, like inexpensive jeans and sweatpants.

Few may recognize it as such, but this episode should be seen as a cautionary tale about “progressives” and social engineering experiments on low-income Americans. This morning’s Wall Street Journal article is blunt: That strategy failed, and the Bentonville, Ark., retail giant now is pursuing a back-to-basics strategy to reverse the company’s fortunes.

My Take - I have never understood these people at Ford. Apparently they have been listening to the whacky ideas promoted by the activists who have taken over the Ford Foundation. When business people get to that level you have to think they are pretty smart. I wonder! Somehow they think they are making points with the greenies and their lackeys in government, and they believe that is some way they will get a leg up on their competitors. In reality they are undermining everything they are and everything they do.

No agreement with the greenies will ever be honored because they have no command and control system. Just as soon as one group makes a deal with industry the others will attack both. And there will never be an end of their demands. This Neville Chamberlain approach is madness.

I remember when Wal-Mart made the decision to go down this road. The pundits all predicted that they were so big that this would alter the merchandising landscape in favor or “organic” and “all natural” forever. Wal-Mart was going to turn the world green. I said then and I say it now; Wal-Mart is today what Sears was fifty years ago and fifty years from now someone else will be what Wal-Mart is today. Get over it! They did not and will not turn the world green and the CEO who took them down this road should be fired and anyone on the board of directors who supported him should be escorted right out the door with him. The other officers of the corporation should be looked at very seriously also. Unfortunately they guy who pushed this is a greenie who was awarded an obscene amount of money for promoting failure.

I do so hope that those who used to receive Green Notes will remember that I had said when they went down the “green brick road” that if Sam Walton was alive he would roll over in his grave….so to speak.

It is impossible for “green” to be a good business proposition. Those who promote green and those who promote capitalism are fundamentally at odds. Greenies want to destroy capitalism and capitalists wish to expand capitalism. How can there possibly be any common ground? The more you give in to the greenies the more they will demand. We shouldn’t be trying to cooperate with ‘green’, nor should we be trying to define or redefine ‘green’. We should be defeating it. Thinking that we need to be at the table in order to help define “green”, or believing that we will enhance our business image by going green is delusional.

Green is their issue and they will define it the way they choose to define it and your being at the table will be meaningless in the long run. Green ideas have consistently shown that they are bad business because greenies don't have a clue as to what works and what doesn't.  Because everything they promote.....doesn't . 

In the retail market it is clear much of society is suffering from “green fatigue”; people just can't stand it anymore and don't care because they have come to the correct conclusion that 'green' is a load of horsepucky. I do believe that 'green fatigue' is a phrase I coined and I give everyone permission to use it…..often.

It is also bad social policy because history has spoken! To be green is to be irrational and misanthropic.

###