Liz Cheney Rips Apart Mike Lee's Jan. 6 Conspiracies! | Tim's Take

I wonder what Liz's dad thought of his daughter taking on Mr. Trump!

SGT (Join to see) good day Brother Charlie, always informational and of the most interesting. Thanks for sharing, have a blessed day!

https://youtu.be/T0cgc3p--VU?si=kIKwAcOZroLwN-Ps



https://youtu.be/I4dBQ9mKu-g


1.) Veterans React to SCOTUS’ Affirmative Action Decision: ‘A Slap In the Face’

SOURCE : https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/supreme-court-affirmative-action-military-veterans-react [login to see] /amp/



2.) Military Academies Exempted from Supreme Court Ruling Ending Affirmative Action

However, the Court specifically exempted the military academies from its decision on race-based affirmative action. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, said in a footnote that this policy would not impact how military service academies approached admissions, citing "distinct interests" those institutions have.

"The special nature of military academies and their interests was addressed in an important amicus brief filed in Grutter v. Bollinger almost 20 years ago," said Lawrence Friedman, JD, professor of law at New England Law Boston. "The Supreme Court's decision tacitly acknowledges that."

The Supreme Court's decision allows the academies to continue race-conscious admissions policies that have historically been justified by the need for a diverse officer corps. As of 2022 the Department of Defense’s Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion assessed that while 19% of the military’s enlisted personnel were Black, only 8% of its officers were Black.

"The military knows that if you don't get a diverse set of student leaders into commissioning sources, you don't get diverse officer leadership," said Daniel Walker, an Air Force Academy alum and former F-22 pilot. Currently a JD candidate at Harvard Law School, and a member of the Black Veterans Project, Walker said he believed that less diversity in leadership led to a weaker overall force.

Despite the service academy carve-out, the court's decision will still likely impact the officer corps: Military academies are not the only source for commissioning officers. The Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) commissions over half of the military's officers in a particular year, according to a recent Government Accountability Office report.

Additionally, another quarter of the nation's officers commission via Officer Candidate School (OCS) -- some of whom have no prior qualification beyond a bachelor's degree from an accredited college.

SOURCE : https://www.military.com/daily-news/2023/06/29/military-academies-exempted-supreme-court-ruling-ending-affirmative-action.html/amp


3.) Your Military

Service academies exempt from Supreme Court affirmative action ruling

Thursday, Jun 29 2023

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a footnote in the majority opinion, “No military academy is a party to these cases, however, and none of the courts below addressed the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context.”

“This opinion also does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.”

SOURCE : https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2023/06/29/service-academies-exempt-from-supreme-court-affirmative-action-ruling/


4.) SUPREME COURT

Published June 30, 2023 5:54pm EDT

Footnote in Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling excludes military academies

One expert told Fox News Digital the court 'punted' on the issue and will likely address it at a later date
By Andrew Mark Miller | Fox News

The Supreme Court’s decision Thursday striking down affirmative action in the college admission process included language that will exclude military academies from the ruling.

The majority opinion from Justice John Roberts came with a footnote explaining that military academies are not subject to the ruling because they were not involved in the prior cases that were eventually heard in the Supreme Court.

"The United States as amicus curiae contends that race-based admissions programs further compelling interests at our Nation’s military academies," the footnote said.

"No military academy is a party to these cases, however, and none of the courts below addressed the propriety of race-based admissions systems in that context. This opinion also does not address the issue, in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present."

SOURCE : https://www.foxnews.com/politics/footnote-supreme-courts-affirmative-action-ruling-excludes-military-academies.amp

——-
——-

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS, INC. v.
PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 20–1199. Argued October 31, 2022—Decided June 29, 2023*

Harvard College and the University of North Carolina (UNC) are two of
the oldest institutions of higher learning in the United States.

Every year, tens of thousands of students apply to each school; many fewer are admitted. Both Harvard and UNC employ a highly selective ad-missions process to make their decisions. Admission to each school can
depend on a student’s grades, recommendation letters, or extracurric-ular involvement. It can also depend on their race.

The question pre-sented is whether the admissions systems used by Harvard College and UNC are lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Four-
teenth Amendment.

SOURCE : https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf


Understanding …..

https://youtu.be/T0cgc3p--VU?si=kIKwAcOZroLwN-Ps

1.) How One Conservative Think Tank Is Stocking Trump’s Government

By placing its people throughout the administration, the Heritage Foundation has succeeded in furthering its right-wing agenda.

The Trump team may not have been prepared to staff the government, but the Heritage Foundation was. In the summer of 2014, a year before Trump even declared his candidacy, the right-wing think tank had started assembling a 3,000-name searchable database of trusted movement conservatives from around the country who were eager to serve in a post-Obama government. The initiative was called the Project to Restore America, a dog-whistle appeal to the so-called silent majority that foreshadowed Trump’s own campaign slogan.

Today it is clear that for all the chaos and churn of the current administration, Heritage has achieved a huge strategic victory. Those who worked on the project estimate that hundreds of the people the think tank put forward landed jobs, in just about every government agency. Heritage’s recommendations included some of the most prominent members of Trump’s cabinet: Scott Pruitt, Betsy DeVos (whose in-laws endowed Heritage’s Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society), Mick Mulvaney, Rick Perry, Jeff Sessions and many more. Dozens of Heritage employees and alumni also joined the Trump administration — at last count 66 of them, according to Heritage, with two more still awaiting Senate confirmation. It is a kind of critical mass that Heritage had been working toward for nearly a half-century.

Feulner saw something in Reagan long before he became president. “We had met with him when he was governor in California; we had visited his ranch and seen copies of Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek with marginal notes in the book,” Feulner told me. “So we knew that he was one of us.” In the run-up to the 1980 election, Heritage spent $250,000 to assemble a comprehensive guidebook for conservative rule that it called “Mandate for Leadership” and aggressively marketed it to members of Reagan’s transition team, in particular Edwin Meese, who was Reagan’s chief of staff in California and later became his attorney general in Washington.

The big gamble paid off: Meese told me that Reagan asked that the 1,093-page document be distributed at his first cabinet meeting. Reagan also turned to Heritage and Feulner to help staff and organize his administration. An enduring, mutually beneficial friendship was born. Meese wrote a letter on White House stationery stating that members of Heritage’s President’s Club — at the time, donors of $1,000 or more — would “provide a vital communications link between policymakers and those key people who made possible Reagan’s victory,” as Sidney Blumenthal reported in his 1986 book “The Rise of the Counter-Establishment.”

The relationship worked both ways. When Reagan’s second term ended, Meese joined Heritage as its first Ronald Reagan Fellow in Public Policy, with an annual salary of more than $400,000. Now 86, he remains at the think tank as distinguished fellow emeritus of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies.

Over the following decades, Feulner continued to pursue his dream of turning the counterestablishment into the establishment. The prospects had perhaps never looked bleaker than they did in 2012, when Obama was easily elected to his second term. Having just turned 70, Feulner decided that it was time to retire. At that moment in conservative history, it was not difficult for him to see where the future of the think tank lay: the Tea Party. Heritage had helped organize and underwrite the anti-tax, anti-government — and, most of all, anti-Obama — movement, even creating a lobbying organization, Heritage Action, to help harness the energy it unleashed.

DeMint intensified the think tank’s marketing efforts, targeting Obamacare in particular. A Heritage billboard went up in Times Square — “Warning,” it read, “Obamacare may be hazardous to your health” — and DeMint led a “Defund Obamacare Tour” across the country. In Congress, he had been something of a one-man ideological enforcer. Now he had at his disposal the power of an $80 million institution whose name was a one-word shorthand for movement conservatism; the backing of some of the country’s richest, most politically engaged Republicans; and a significant slice of the conservative base. Within months of his arrival, he was pressing House Republicans to send the president a spending bill that wouldn’t fund the Affordable Care Act, thus inviting a government shutdown. “There’s no question in my mind that I have more influence now on public policy than I did as an individual senator,” he said in an interview with National Public Radio in 2013.

Churn is a central feature of this administration, even for its unofficial staffing agency. Paul Winfree, a Heritage economist who helped draft Trump’s first budget, is back at the think tank. So are Stephen Moore, who worked on the Trump tax cuts; David Kreutzer, who played a key role in dissolving a White House working group that was studying the monetary costs associated with climate-warming carbon dioxide; and Hans von Spakovsky, who helped run the now-defunct voter-fraud commission, which was created to find evidence to support Trump’s baseless claim that millions of people voted illegally for Hillary Clinton.

SOURCE : https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-foundation-think-tank.html


There’s more insecure white racist nationalists groups/organization’s than just Project 2025, The Heritage Foundation ( No refuge, white racist nationalist will no longer have anonymity to remain anonymous )

2.) The Claremont Institute: The Anti-Democracy Think Tank

It was once (mostly) traditionally conservative and (sort of) intellectually rigorous. Now it platforms white nationalists and promotes authoritarianism.

August 10, 2023

NatCon conferences, as they are often called, have been held in Italy, Belgium, and Florida and are broadly associated with what is increasingly called the “New Right.” In London, speakers denounced “woke politics,” blamed immigration for the rising cost of housing, and said modern ills could be solved with more religion and more (nonimmigrant) babies.

The break room was lined with booths from organizations such as the Viktor Orban–affiliated Danube Institute, the U.K.-based conservative think tank the Bow Group, the Heritage Foundation, and the legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom, which is headquartered in Arizona but has expanded to include offices in nearly a half-dozen European cities.

When I attended NatCon London in May, I heard a number of American accents in the crowd, and I was not surprised to see Michael Anton, a former national security official in the Trump administration and a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a right-wing think tank, on the lineup. These days, Anton and other key representatives of the Claremont Institute seem to be everywhere: onstage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC); at the epicenter of Ron DeSantis’s “war on woke”; and on speed-dial with GOP allies including Josh Hawley, J.D. Vance, and Donald Trump.

Most of us are familiar with the theocrats of the religious right and the anti-government extremists, groups that overlap a bit but remain distinct. The Claremont Institute folks aren’t quite either of those things, and yet they’re both and more. In embodying a kind of nihilistic yearning to destroy modernity, they have become an indispensable part of right-wing America’s evolution toward authoritarianism.

Extremism of the right-wing variety has always figured on the sidelines of American culture, and it has enjoyed a renaissance with the rise of social media. But Claremont represents something new in modern American politics: a group of people, not internet conspiracy freaks but credentialed and influential leaders, who are openly contemptuous of democracy. And they stand a reasonable chance of being seated at the highest levels of government—at the right hand of a President Trump or a President DeSantis, for example.

There is a story you hear from the podiums at gatherings like NatCon and CPAC, and if you go to enough of them, it will sound as familiar as a classic rock song. It goes something like this: The sum of all our problems—and the greatest threat that the American republic has ever faced—is the rise of the “woke” elite. Cosmopolitan, overeducated, gender-fluid, parasitic, and anti-Christian—the leaders of this progressive cabal worship at the shrine of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion offices, which they use to elevate undeserving people of color and crush hardworking “real” Americans.

They control “the regime,” or so the song tells us: “the administrative state,” the institutions of culture, law enforcement, even the military.

Any and all means to annihilate the power of the woke, up to and including political violence and overturning elections, must be seriously considered if we (right-thinking Americans) are to “save our country.”

It’s not just the NatCon types who are humming this tune; it has permeated other sectors of the American right. In the run-up to the 2023 Road to Majority Policy Conference, an annual gathering of religious right activists, strategists, and politicians that took place in Washington, D.C., in June, seasoned Christian right strategist Ralph Reed sent out a fundraising email asserting, “Woke culture and anti-Christian, anti-American radicals drive our public life further and further from the Light of God’s Word.” From the main stage of the conference, Ron DeSantis railed against the “woke mind virus”; Vivek Ramaswamy took a swipe at the “administrative state”; and Josh Hawley asserted that “woke corporations” and “Marxists in the C-suite” are “pushing relentlessly this Marxist agenda, pushing relentlessly this religion of woke.” At the gala dinner, Trump delivered a rambling attack on his political opponents in the Democratic Party, whom he accused of “trying to impose their blasphemous creed of woke communism.”

SOURCE : https://newrepublic.com/article/174656/claremont-institute-think-tank-trump


*** Disclaimer : This a repost from myself, because people are tooooo comfortable with the status quo. ***

“I will not apologize for telling the FACTS, in a world that worship the lies”.

* They’ve been actively working against the American People and for the large corporations and rich.

Before you chime in and snub your nose, have INTEGRITY with yourself if you ACTUALLY befitting from :

The Heritage Foundation's "After Obamacare Repeal" Plan

This page covering a proposed federal healthcare bill was last updated in 2017. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.

After Obamacare Repeal is a healthcare plan released by The Heritage Foundation in October 2013. The plan would primarily provide consumers with tax credits to purchase insurance and encourage the use of health savings accounts.

Employer-sponsored insurance would also be amended ending the federal tax deduction for health benefits. The Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, would be repealed in its entirety.

* HIGHLIGHTS

Under the proposal, employers would offer their employees a cash contribution to purchase their own insurance, rather than providing health plans directly.
In place of the prohibition on denying coverage for preexisting conditions, the plan supports either state-operated high-risk pools or state reinsurance programs that would reimburse insurers for the cost of covering individuals with complex or expensive conditions.

Federal Medicaid funds would be distributed to states either through block grants or a per-capita allotment, rather than as a matching percentage of state funds.

The Heritage Foundation public official program/plan to continue to hurt the American people and this is the same group that is publicly funding those GOP/REPUBLICANS that in 2023’ want to gut/defund/eradicate Social Security starting day one of the first 180 of the new GOP Commander In Chief.

—

The following is summary text from The Heritage Foundation's After Obamacare Repeal plan

allow Americans to reclaim control of their own health care and benefit from competition in a free market for insurance and health care, Congress should repeal the Obamacare statute and enact patient-centered, market-based reforms based on five principles:
• Choose, control, and carry your own health insurance;
• Let free markets provide the insurance and health care services that people want;
• Encourage employers to provide a portable health insurance benefit to employees;
• Assist those who need help through civil society, the free market, and the states; and
• Protect the right of conscience and unborn children.[1] ”
—The Heritage Foundation[2]

The Heritage Foundation's After Obamacare Repeal would repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in its entirety. The plan also proposes ending the federal tax deduction for health benefits offered by employers and instead offering all individuals a tax credit to purchase health insurance on their own. The plan would also support offering each American a standard tax deduction for health insurance as an alternative to tax credits.[3] Under the proposal, employers would offer their employees a cash contribution to purchase their own insurance, rather than providing health plans directly

* After Obamacare Repeal would also encourage the use of health savings accounts (HSAs) by removing the restriction on using HSA funds for health insurance premiums and by raising the limit on the amount of money an individual may deposit into the account each year. In place of the prohibition on denying coverage for preexisting conditions, the plan supports either state-operated high-risk pools or state reinsurance programs that would reimburse insurers for the cost of covering individuals with complex or expensive conditions.[2]

* With the goal of increasing competition, the proposal would remove federal barriers to selling insurance plans across state lines. Under the plan, small businesses and individuals could pool together for the purpose of purchasing insurance, and religious groups and fraternal organizations could offer insurance plans to their members.[2]

* After Obamacare Repeal would also make changes to Medicaid and Medicare. The proposal would encourage states to provide low-income Medicaid beneficiaries with cash assistance to purchase private health plans. Federal Medicaid funds would be distributed to states either through block grants or a per-capita allotment, rather than as a matching percentage of state funds. The Medicare program would be altered by allowing doctors and patients to "[contract] privately for medical services outside of traditional Medicare." The plan also supports providing Medicare enrollees with a subsidy to purchase a health plan of their choice.[2

SOURCE : https://ballotpedia.org/The_Heritage_Foundation%27s_%22After_Obamacare_Repeal%22_Plan