Another day, another lawsuit against the Biden Administration over unconstitutional federal overreach, in this case issuing a vaccine mandate for Texas National Guard troops that aren’t under federal control.
Gov. Greg Abbott sent a letter on Tuesday to Texas Military Department (TMD) Adjutant General Tracy Norris stating his intention to sue the Biden administration over its effort to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for members of the Texas National Guard.
In August, Abbott issued an executive order prohibiting governmental entities from mandating “any individual to receive a COVID-19 vaccine,” but mandates over the Texas National Guard have been unclear.
Following a military-wide order in August from U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin mandating the vaccine, Norris issued a directive to members of the Texas National Guard that service members must meet the requirement or submit a request for a medical or religious exemption.
On November 30, 2021, Austin issued a memorandum that further stipulated “all members of the National Guard must be fully vaccinated for COVID-19 [. . .] in order to participate in drills, training and other duty conducted under title 32.”
In December, Abbott responded to Austin’s memorandum in a letter, saying, “If the federal government keeps threatening to defund the Texas National Guard, I will deploy every legal tool available to me as Governor in defense of these American heroes.”
TMD public affairs staff previously stated that guardsmen “serving on Title 10 orders” — those who have been called on active duty at the national level — were required to be in compliance with the vaccine mandate or request an exemption by December 15, 2021.
Unvaccinated members of the Texas National Guard could potentially lose drill and training pay as those funds come from the federal Department of Defense (DOD).
In his new letter, Abbott specified that it “addresses all Texas guardsmen who are serving in a Title 32 or a state active duty status,” rather than those under Title 10 orders.
“Unless President Biden federalizes the Texas National Guard in accordance with Title 10 of the U.S. Code, he is not your commander-in-chief under our federal or state Constitutions. And as long as I am your commander-in-chief, I will not tolerate efforts to compel receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine,” said the governor.
Abbott said that the “federal courts have the power to decide whether President Biden violates the U.S. Constitution’s Second Militia Clause by undermining my commander-in-chief power, instead of federalizing Texas’s guardsmen to use his own commander-in-chief power.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sent out a Tweet confirming the lawsuit:
Biden is NOT the commander-in-chief of the Texas Military Dep’t. That’s @GovAbbott’s job.
Biden is once again attempting to use federal power to bully state troops to get a Covid vax. This is wrong—and illegal. And I won’t let it happen.
— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) January 4, 2022
The text of the lawsuit itsself can be found here.
1. There has long been a clear and distinct line between when National Guardsmen are governed by state authority and when they are governed by federal authority. When National Guardsmen are serving the State, the federal government has no command authority. Neither the President nor federal military officials can order the Governor of Texas and state officials how to govern the Guardsmen under their command. Under the Constitution’s carefully crafted balance between federal and state sovereignty, only the State, through its Governor, possesses legal authority to govern state National Guard personnel who have not been lawfully federalized.
2. Defendants unilaterally severed the division between state and federal authority over the Army National Guard and Air National Guard by attempting to impose a mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policy (“Military Vaccine Mandate”) on Guardsmen under state control, and in violation of Texas state law. Rather than exercise their own authority and lawfully activate the President’s chain of command, Defendants have attempted to force state officers to do the work for them, in violation of both the U.S. Constitution and federal laws.
3. This is not a case demanding a position of pro- or anti-vaccine, nor is it a case that challenges any aspect of the federal government’s authority over National Guardsmen once that federal authority has been properly established. Instead, this case seeks protection from the federal government’s unconstitutional action to force Texas, through its Governor, to submit to federal orders and impose federally dictated disciplinary action on its National Guardsmen. “There is no military exclusion from our Constitution.” U.S. Navy Seals 1-26 v. Biden, No. 4:21-cv-01236, slip op. at 2 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 3, 2021). Therefore, Plaintiff Greg Abbott, in his official capacity as Governor of the State of Texas, and as Commander in Chief of the Texas National Guard, brings this suit to enforce rights guaranteed to the Governor and the State of Texas by the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes.
The Roberts Court has tended to show considerably deference to state rights and prerogatives, so expect Texas to prevail in this suit if it reaches that level. But who knows how lower courts will rule, or how long it will take the case to wind its way to the Supreme Court…
I get a lot of fundraising emails from Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s reelection campaign, sometimes three or more a day, a lot of which tout his support for Texas building a border wall, which he announced back in June. From an email June 19:
The Biden Administration has abandoned its responsibilities to secure the border and Texans are suffering as a result.
If the federal government won’t do its job, Texas will.
Through this comprehensive public safety effort, we will secure the border, slow the influx of unlawful immigrants, and restore order in our border communities.
Since then, Abbott seemed to talk a lot more about building the border wall than actually getting it done (Texas state bureaucracy may be more efficient than the feds, but it’s still a bureaucracy), but that may finally be changing.
Gov. Greg Abbott recently held a press conference debuting the construction of the Texas border wall in Rio Grande City — just six months [!] after he announced Texas would build its own border wall. The press conference took place in front of the first phase of the wall being built on state land managed by the Texas General Land Office (GLO).
The governor was joined by GLO Commissioner George P. Bush and Texas Facilities Commission (TFC) Chairman Steven Alvis, who spoke of the progress made to secure the southern border by building the Texas border wall. Sen. Kelly Hancock, Rep. James White, Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steve McCraw, Texas Military Department Adjutant General Tracy Norris and Deputy Adjutant General Monie Ulis also were in attendance.
On June 16, Abbott announced the state of Texas’ plan for the border wall and authorized the transfer of $250 million as a down payment to launch construction. He also directed the TFC to hire a program manager to oversee its construction.
In September, a program manager was selected to lead the process of planning and executing the border wall. Gov. Abbott also signed House Bill 9 into law that month, providing an additional $1.8 billion in state funding for border security, including border wall construction.
The border wall is not a panacea, and it’s no substitute for the Biden Administration actually enforcing federal border control laws, something it has steadfastly refused to do. Democrats would rather try to sneak illegal alien amnesty in while no one is looking. Though now the Biden Administration has said (no doubt reluctantly) that it will close “a few gaps” in the wall, mainly in Arizona.
A border wall will help, but ranks third among strategies that would actually secure the border, behind enforcing existing laws and passing universal E-Verify, which would dry up a lot of illegal alien migration by cutting off employment opportunities.
Funny how you don’t hear much about E-Verify these days, almost as if Republican business interests have killed it off behind the scenes to keep an endless supply of illegal alien labor coming…
You may have heard that the America added an anemic 210,000 jobs in November, which was (as has become standard in the Biden era) much less than “experts” predicted.
Employment in Texas has reached nearly 13 million non-agricultural jobs, eclipsing the pre-pandemic high set in February of 2020.
From October, the unemployment rate dropped 0.2 percent with the addition of 75,100 jobs. Since November of last year, 698,700 jobs have been added to the rolls.
“By reaching nearly 13 million jobs last month, Texas has surpassed our pre-pandemic employment levels — a remarkable achievement and testament to our welcoming business climate and strong workforce,” Governor Greg Abbott said in a release.
According to the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC), Amarillo continues to post the lowest unemployment rate in the state at 3.1 percent. Austin-Round Rock follows closely behind at 3.2 percent.
Also crowing about adding jobs: Florida governor Ron DeSantis, whose state added 50,000 jobs:
Florida added over 50,000 new jobs in the month of November, a much faster rate than the nation, which added 210,000 jobs in November. pic.twitter.com/7LOG5ZipAY
75,100 + 50,000 = 125,100. So just shy 60% of jobs added in November came from two states known for low taxes, light regulation and general economic freedom.
(If you dig further into the statistics, the lesson is a bit less clear cut, with California (45,700), New Jersey (25,800) and New York (23,600) ranking 3-5 for most jobs added.)
According to census data, Texas and California have a combined population of 50,683,692, while the U.S. has a census-estimated population of 328,239,523. (Both those numbers have undoubtedly gone up a bit since census data was released in July.) Which means that two states with less than 1/6th the total population of the U.S. accounted for more than 60% of job growth.
Why, it’s almost as if red states run by Republican governors are better at creating jobs than blue states run by Democratic governors…
Celebrities (especially those as famous as McConnaughey) tend to be formidable candidates, but there was no guarantee he would even win a primary. His hetrodox views might prevent him from winning the Democratic primary over Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke, and a run against incumbent Greg Abbott (and his giant warchest) in the increasingly crowded Republican primary was no sure thing either.
I recently received my first flyer in the race, from the Don Huffines campaign. As you can see from the scans below, the issues he’s emphasizing are controlling the border, ending property taxes and election integrity. Good as far as it goes, but he may have missed a bet by not supporting a special session for outlawing vaccine mandates.
Is it a bit early to be dropping direct mail flyers? A bit, but: A.) As a longshot challenger, Huffines has to raise his profile to have any chance at all, and direct mail probably offers a much bigger bag for the buck than broadcast media advertising. (There may be lots of online advertising as well, but I have so many online ads blocked that I almost never see them on my Mac.) And: B.) It’s not that early, as we’re roughly six months out from the May 1st primary date.
I haven’t received any campaign mailers from Team Abbott, but lord, have I received a lot of fundraising emails. Over 60 in November alone, some of which go out of their way to insult my intelligence. Like the one that claims to be from “Greg Abbott (iPhone).” Is there anyone stupid enough to believe that Abbott is personally emailing fundraising solicitations from his personal iPhone? Also annoying: “Your Order Confirmation” and “YOUR EXCLUSIVE OFFER.” Just stop…
It’s always intriguing when a well-known figure whom everyone understands has no chance of winning decides to run for office.
I doubt even Beto’s under illusions about his chances. He’ll be running in a red state facing a massive red midterm wave against a Republican who’s more popular than the one he ran against in 2018 and who’s raised more money than any governor in U.S. history. Why bother?
Some blather about the “hardness” of Abbott’s stand on vaccine mandates snipped, as Texas conservative activists have been all over Abbott for refusing to call a fourth special session to outlaw vaccine mandates by statute, not just decree.
A poll published last week found him rocking a 27/57 approval rating among independents in Texas. If the 2022 midterm environment was as favorable to Democrats as 2018 was, I’d give them an outside chance of pulling an upset.
More erroneous analysis snipped.
But 2022 isn’t 2018. And a candidate as far left as Beto O’Rourke isn’t the man to dethrone a longtime governor.
Team Abbott posted this ad featuring some of Beto’s greatest hits a few weeks ago. They’re going to attack him as too liberal for Texas, which he is:
O’Rourke’s defining issues when he ran for president two years ago were liberalizing America’s border and grabbing guns. Given the crush of migrants seeking asylum that the U.S. has seen this year, though, open borders is an especially toxic position to hold in Texas of all places. And gun-control is a perennial loser in a state with as robust a gun culture as Texas had. You would think today’s announcement would be an occasion for O’Rourke to say he’s rethought his previous positions on firearms. Instead, incredibly, he’s doubling down:
Abbott has already been campaigning against O’Rourke as too liberal for Texas, branding him “Wrong Way O’Rourke” and seizing on multiple positions he has taken since last running statewide. At the top of the list is O’Rourke’s proposal to require buybacks of assault weapons during his presidential campaign. That led to a memorable moment on the debate stage in which O’Rourke proclaimed that, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.”
O’Rourke said he was not backing away from that proposal in his latest campaign.
“I think most Texans can agree — maybe all Texans can agree — that we should not see our friends, our family members, our neighbors, shot up with weapons that were originally designed for use on a battlefield,” said O’Rourke, whose hometown of El Paso was the site of an anti-Latino mass shooting in 2019 by a gunman who killed 23 people.
His progressive views during his 2020 presidential run appear to have stuck to him in Texas as he’s polled poorly there over the past few months. Last month a UT survey found his favorable rating at 35/50, including 22/48 among indies. O’Rourke trailed Abbott 46/37 in that same poll, a pitiful showing against a governor whose popularity had waned lately. Another poll taken a month earlier also put O’Rourke at 37 percent against Abbott. A third recent survey from Quinnipiac had a mere 33 percent willing to say they thought Beto would make a good governor.
I’ll give you a few possibilities. One, simply, is time. If O’Rourke had waited to challenge Ted Cruz for Senate again in 2024, he would have risked being perceived as old news, especially having failed in his two previous statewide runs. The 2024 Senate primary could be a competitive one for Democrats, with no guarantee of Beto winning. This year’s primary is easier for him since no one else wants to to face Abbott in a Republican-friendly cycle. Simply put, his political capital was depreciating. He could either use what was left of it for one more campaign or go bankrupt.
Two is fundraising. I’m skeptical that we’ll see the return of the “Betomania” money juggernaut in full force in Texas but it probably remains true that O’Rourke can raise cash more easily than the average Dem, if only by dint of name recognition. He’ll be at less of a money disadvantage against Abbott than any other prospective nominee would be. Of course, if Betomania does run wild among Democratic donors nationally, that’ll backfire on the party by drawing cash into Texas in a likely losing effort that could have gone to more competitive races elsewhere. Double-edged sword for Dems.
Three is enthusiasm. Between Biden’s troubles and the likelihood of a red wave, Democrats will have a hard time getting Texas liberals excited to vote in 2022. Having a charismatic well-known liberal at the top of the ticket who captivated them once before might boost turnout at the margins. And while that won’t be enough to make Beto governor, it might help Dems win a few state races downballot that they otherwise would have lost. His candidacy is a favor to the state party, in other words. He might even be able to steer some Latino voters who defected to Trump and the GOP last year back into the Democratic column.
Realistically, the best-case scenario for O’Rourke is that he raises a ton of money again, loses by a respectable margin, and is then targeted by Biden for some sort of national job either in the cabinet or at the DNC. Beto’s long-term challenge is staying politically relevant and another run for office advances the ball — albeit at the risk that he’s well and truly done politically if he gets blown out.
Actually, O’Rourke is already starting to tack right on border security, saying that Biden hasn’t done enough to secure the border.
O’Rourke has some Democratic Primary competitors (Larry Baggett, Michael Cooper, and Deirdre Dickson-Gilbert), but I can’t even find working websites for the first two.
Likewise, Chad Prather‘s campaign has been essentially invisible, and Allen West‘s all but invisible.
There’s also someone named Danny Harrison, who seems to be running on a “legalized gambling and weed” platform, an interesting choice for the Republican primary. Harrison actually has a bit of polish, so the guy is punching above his weight class (Gadfly). Like Prather, I get the impression he could actually make some noise in a lower-level race (State Rep., County Commissioner, etc.).
In a sequel sure to be every bit as beloved as The Hangover Part III, failed Senatorial and Presidential candidate Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke has announced that he’s running for high office yet again, this time for Texas Governor.
For months, Texas Democrats have failed to field a single serious candidate to challenge Governor Greg Abbott’s reelection bid. But today, Beto O’Rourke is announcing in Texas Monthly that he is entering the 2022 gubernatorial race. The former three-term congressman from El Paso who had run losing bids for U.S. Senate against Ted Cruz in 2018 and for president in 2020, is not expected to face any serious challengers for his party’s nomination. He will seek to become the first Democrat to win statewide office in Texas since 1994, ending the longest statewide losing streak in America for either party.
It will be an uphill battle. Abbott, who has raised more money than any governor in U.S. history, had $55 million in his campaign treasury as of July 15, the last time he reported the size of his war chest. While polling has found that Abbott is not as popular as he once was, O’Rourke’s numbers are worse. A University of Texas poll conducted in October found 43 percent of Texans approved of the job Abbott is doing and 48 percent disapproved, but only 35 percent of respondents had a favorable opinion of O’Rourke against 50 percent who had an unfavorable view.
At this point O’Rourke is anything but a fresh face. But before we enumerate O’Rourke’s many negatives, let’s give Bobby Francis his due and list the assets he brings to the race:
First and foremost, he does the work. He’s an indefatigable campaigner who constantly gets out and meets potential voters. Given the fact that so many high profile statewide Democratic candidates have not done that over the last twenty plus years (I’m looking at you, Ricardo Sanchez), it’s no small thing.
His previous campaign organizations have tended to be more notably competent than other high profile Texas Democrats. (I’m looking at you, Wendy Davis.)
His “hyerpscale” outreach, IT, data and comms teams were particularly praised.
He has a high national profile, generating a ton of positive MSM press.
He has an huge, national list of previous contributors to raise money from.
He still has those “boyish, Kennedyesque good lucks” reporters love to swoon over.
He’s facing an incumbent whose popularity has taken a hit.
He currently has no serious competitor in the Democratic Party primary, allowing him to focus on the general election fight.
However, O’Rourke has an even more daunting list of disadvantages for this race:
See all those positives above? He had all those for his Senatorial and Presidential races as well (save the no serious competitors bit for the Presidential run), and it wasn’t enough to propel him to victory. In the heavyweight class, O’Rourke’s record is 0-2.
In his Senatorial run in particular, he has just about every single thing going his way (a clear nomination path, a midterm election with a polarizing Republican in the White House, an incumbent (Ted Cruz) damaged by his own unsuccessful run, and more fawning political coverage and money than any Democratic senate candidate in the history of the Republic), and it still wasn’t enough to win Texas.
In his presidential run, O’Rourke moved so hard left on a range of issues, from gun control to open borders to taxes, that he’s all but unelectable in Texas.
As I mentioned before, the very issues Abbott is must vulnerable on are the ones where O’Rourke doesn’t have the standing or positions to challenge him:
Border security? While the Rio Grande Valley is in the midst of a Republican upswell over the issue, Beto wants to tear down the border wall.
Ice storm? Beto wants to keep pouring money into the same green energy boondoggles that couldn’t keep the lights on.
If anything, Biden’s disasterous open borders policies have made Democrats even more unpopular in the Valley than they were in 2020.
Indeed, the 2022 electoral environment looks to be much more challenging for Democrats than 2018. Supply chain issues and inflation have ordinary Americans furious at a Democratic Party that promised a “return to normality” in 2020. Right now, Republicans enjoy a 10 point lead in generic ballot questions, the largest since they’ve done polling on the issue. All polls should be taken with a grain of salt, but those are substantial headwinds.
When O’Rourke and Abbott were both on the ballot in different races, Abbott got 600,000 more votes than O’Rourke. That’s an awful big gap to make up in a Republican-favorable year.
The issue that Democrats are most fired up about, abortion, didn’t seem to help Wendy Davis in 2014. Any single-issue pro-abortion voter was already backing O’Rourke over Cruz in 2018, and it wasn’t enough.
O’Rourke still has a reputation as an intellectual lightweight.
Very, very few American politicians have lost two profile races in a row only to go on to win a third. Richard Nixon is the only one that comes to mind, but 1968 was a long time ago.
Having hoovered up record amounts of cash only to lose two previous races, donors may be hesitant to keep throwing good money after bad. As a commenter here observed, “Beto Campaigns in Texas are where progressive money goes to die.”
With less than a year before election day, O’Rourke’s official entrance to the race is later than typical for a winning candidate. A relatively minor point, but O’Roruke may regret dithering for a couple of months rather than campaigning and fundraising.
Could the dynamics of the race change to be more favorable to O’Rourke? Sure. Things change all the time. If one of Abbott’s challengers catches fire, he might be forced to spend time and money on a runoff. Abbott could suffer a gaffe or high-profile medical problem. (Unlikely; Abbott has previously been a pretty hardy campaigner (wheelchair not withstanding), and he’s the sort of careful, polished politician that doesn’t tend to make gaffes.) The economy could improve. Inflation could indeed prove transitory, as it was 1980-1982. I rather doubt those last two, because the people in charge seem hellbent on making everything worse and Paul Volcker is dead.
In 2018, O’Rourke ran the most competitive statewide campaign any Democrat has run this century…and it wasn’t enough. That’s probably more of a ceiling than floor, and O’Rourke’s floor may turn out to be a lot lower than observers thought when he was a fresh-faced newcomer…
It appears that Texas DPS Troopers have, for the time being, done what the Biden Administration seems actively hostile to doing: secure the border at the Del Rio crossing.
State troopers deployed to the border by Gov. Greg Abbott are being credited for doing the federal government’s job and stopping thousands more migrants in Mexico from illegally crossing into the United States after well over 15,000 made it through here late last week.
A swarm of Texas Department of Public Safety officers, known as troopers, descended on the riverbank Saturday afternoon as a show of force to deter people in Mexico from wading across the Rio Grande. Approximately 150 black SUVs were still lined up Sunday afternoon on the dirt road that runs parallel with the river.
Their arrival on the scene Saturday had an immediate impact, stopping foot traffic from primarily Haitian migrants who had been going back and forth between the U.S. and Mexico.
“With our DPS troopers, there have not been any crossings from that specific area,” Lt. Chris Olivarez, spokesman for the department’s South Texas Region, said in an interview on Sunday.
The impact DPS’s arrival has had on Border Patrol agents has been significant. Despite it being the responsibility of Customs and Border Protection to patrol the nation’s borders, virtually all agents have been pulled from the field to transport migrants to and from holding facilities and then process and care for them once in custody.
Those under the bridge are in an unusual go-between point as they are not in custody, but they are waiting under the bridge in hopes of being taken into custody and then released into the U.S. They may claim asylum to avoid being flown back to Haiti, though Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Sunday that most families will be released into the country and adults will be repatriated.
I don’t believe this “catch and release into the U.S.” policy is actual law, but rather the Biden Administration’s perversion of the law in order to install as many illegal aliens in America as possible to amnesty them as future Democratic Party voters.
Fortunately, the footage of the giant illegal alien camp in Del Rio was enough for the Biden Administration to resume deportation flights to Haiti.
“Finally, the White House has directed appropriate U.S. agencies to work with the Haitian and other regional governments to provide assistance and support to returnees,” the press statement read.
While DHS added that “our borders are not open,” the Biden administration has faced criticism for making policy moves this year that have seemingly incentivized illegal immigration. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) argued last week that the rush on the border can be partially attributed to a decision to cancel deportations of Haitians on September 8.
After repatriated Haitians, many of whom have been in South America for years, began arriving Sunday in the nation’s capital, Port-au-Prince, officials in the Haitian government were reportedly complaining about the deportations to their country, which is currently in poverty and disarray.
Haiti is always in poverty and disarray. Until the Biden Administration, this was never considered a legal rational to illegally transport Haitians to the United States.
One wonders if the same radical leftwing groups (Pueblo Sin Fronteras, La Familia Latina Unida, Centro Sin Fronteras, etc.) are responsible for the latest wave of illegal alien caravans like they were for the ones a few years ago. All three have money trails “lead back to George Soros’s well-funded Open Society Foundations.”
In recent years, OSF has given millions of dollars to other organizations that directly assisted the caravans with fundraising, legal assistance, and media support. These organizations included the American Constitution Society, Centro para la Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos (Center for Legal Action in Human Rights), Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, Amnesty International, National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, Center for Constitutional Rights, Human Rights First, and Church World Service.
A bill adding $2 billion for border security passed during the last special legislative session, including $750 million for border wall construction.
As mention yesterday, Abbott’s potential Democratic gubernatorial opponent Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke isn’t just opposed to spending more on border security, he wants to tear down existing walls:
Dems: We're not for open borders, we just don't want more walls.
I’m glad the border appears to be secured at Del Rio for the time being. But for how long? And how many other border crossing points are receiving massive influxes of illegal aliens that we may not be hearing about?
Greetings, and welcome to another Friday LinkSwarm! Chaos at the border and buying American military tech to oppose China are two of the themes this week:
8,000 illegal aliens await processing underneath the Del Rio bridge on the U.S./Mexican border.
Here’s a drone shot:
BREAKING: Our drone is back over the international bridge in Del Rio, TX. Per source, the number of migrants waiting to be processed has now swelled to approx 8,200. It was 4,000 yesterday AM. Doubled in one day. BP overwhelmed, & I’m told situation is “out of control” @FoxNewspic.twitter.com/ThJJJ0JWCT
Those illegal aliens are there because Democrats and the Biden Administration want them there, so they can turn those illegal aliens into Democratic Party voters via amnesty.
So damaging is that drone footage that the FAA has closed airspace over the bridge to prevent it:
NEW: We’ve learned that the FAA just implemented a two week TFR (Temporary Flight Restrictions) over the international bridge in Del Rio, TX, meaning we can no longer fly our FOX drone over it to show images of the thousands of migrants. FAA says “special security reason”. pic.twitter.com/aJrjAPO2Pz
This effort is just one part of a new partnership between the three countries, dubbed AUKUS, which is short for Australia-United Kingdom-United States, that also includes cooperation in other areas, including long-range strike capabilities, cyber warfare, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing. President Biden said AUKUS would help all three countries work more closely together to help ensure peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region in the long-term.
On the whole, this is probably a good move to counter China, and I hear that Canberra was the driving force behind the agreement. All that said, the United States was already in formal alliances with the UK and Australia through other treaties, so it’s not anything like a tectonic shift.
Another sign of the new alliance: The UK is going to station new vessels in the Indo-Pacific. [Senior Royal Navy admiral Tony Radakin] “said that the Taiwan Strait is clearly ‘part of the free and open Indo-Pacific.'”
Naturally France pitched a snit fit over the deal because Australia cancelled a contract with French shipbuilder Naval Group. “This brutal, unilateral and unpredictable decision reminds me a lot of what Mr Trump used to do,” Le Drian told franceinfo radio. “I am angry and bitter. This isn’t done between allies.” Cry some more, Jean-Claude. But it isn’t like France was ever going to come to Australia’s aid in a dust-up with China, so the deal makes sense as drawing Australia closer to the regions remaining nuclear naval powers. (Russia can barely keep its own navy running these days.)
Speaking of possible China opponents buying American technology, Japan is buying more F-35s.
John Durham finally files an indictment over the Russian collusion hoax investigation. “Special counsel John Durham reportedly seeks a grand jury indictment against Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer at a Democratic-allied law firm closely linked to British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s discredited dossier.” That firm, of course, would be Perkins Coie, who you may remember from regular appearances in the Clinton corruption updates.
The Democrats of Texas have long, as in 30 years or more, believed that the Hispanic vote would eventually hand them total control of Texas forever. They believe they need not adjust their policies on faith, family, life, the Second Amendment, taxes — anything — because the party brand itself was enough. If it wasn’t, then they would resort to bullying. They could go all the way left to Wendy Davis and Karl Marx if they wanted to — and they have — and the Hispanic vote would save them.
But a funny thing happened along the way. People like state Rep. Aaron Peña switched parties on principle and others followed them. And more are following them. His daughter, Adrienne Peña-Garza, is quoted in this Texas Monthly story regarding how the Democrats operate when it comes to independent-minded folks like her father and herself.
Peña-Garza, the Hidalgo County Republican chair, said Hispanic South Texans, who have long been conservative, “have become liberated” to vote on their long-held beliefs. “People have been bullied into voting Democrat. If you got involved [in conservative politics], people said, ‘I’m not going to give you this contract; I’m not going to give you this job.’ But I think the bullying has backfired. People are more empowered and courageous.”
When I was reporting on border issues in Hidalgo County during my first stint with PJ Media, I’d hear about the bullying she mentions but it wasn’t provable. Rampant and endemic, but hidden with no paper trails. Tejanos and Tejanas started standing up to it a decade ago, some by running for office, others by working courageously together underground and actually going after some of the political criminality. People noticed. Groups like Hispanic Republicans of Texas and the Conservative Hispanic Society rose up to answer the call outside any party structure. One of the most popular and successful talk radio hosts in the Lone Star State is my friend Chris Salcedo, the “liberty-loving Latino.” The conservative juggernaut is heard expounding on the joys of freedom and how Democrats would take it away on the air every day in Houston and Dallas and nationally on NewsmaxTV.
People are noticing how embarrassingly paternalistic and out-of-touch the Democrats are when it comes to South Texas. They really don’t know Texas at all and haven’t bothered to understand.
Snip.
That’s because they’re not immigrants. Treating them as immigrants cancels their ancestors and their heritage. Tejanos have been in Texas for generations, from the time when it was part of the Spanish Empire. Badly misunderstood and under-reported is the fact that Tejanos are and have been part of the culture of Texas long before we Anglos showed up. By the time my ancestors arrived in Texas in the 1850s and 1860s, Tejanos had been building Texas for more than a century. They’re not immigrants in any sense of the word. They’re Texans and American citizens. They resisted elitist dictator Santa Anna, fought at the Alamo and San Jacinto, they’ve served in every major war defending the United States, they’ve won Medals of Honor and have state veterans homes named after them — and their communities are the most directly affected by the chaos that out-of-state Democrats tend to unleash on the border. They serve in the Border Patrol and the Coast Guard, and they work in the oil fields and own thriving businesses. Coyotes, cartels, drugs, and trafficking all affect Tejano communities first, while the rich Democrats who party at the Met are unaffected personally and weaponize the border as a racial cudgel. RGV citizens are not happy about that and they know whom to blame.
Gov. Greg Abbott visited Houston on Monday to sign new legislation he said would directly address lenient bail practices and rising crime in Harris County.
“Lives are being lost because the criminal justice system in Harris County is not working the way it should,” said Abbott.
Known as the Damon Allen Act, Senate Bill (SB) 6 is named after a state trooper who was shot and killed during a routine traffic stop on Thanksgiving Day 2017. Despite having a history of assaulting a law enforcement officer, the shooter was out on a $15,000 felony bond at the time of the murder.
Allen’s widow, Casey Allen, who has become an advocate for the reforms implemented by SB 6, joined Abbott at the Safer Houston Emergency Summit held by a coalition of ministry groups.
Noting that her husband had been killed by a “violent, repeat offender,” Mrs. Allen added, “The murderer still went to jail, and my life and my kids’ lives were forever changed by actions that can’t be taken back.”
The new law will create an online public safety report for judges and magistrates to access more complete information about a suspect’s criminal history before setting bail. In addition, SB 6 requires additional training for judges and magistrates, and prohibits the release of certain violent suspects or repeat suspects on personal recognizance (PR) bonds.
“Same FBI That Chased Russia Collusion Hoax for Years Covered Up Sexual Abuse of USA Gymnasts.” Why did James Comey’s FBI fail to investigate charges against Larry Nassar?
Now that the Biden EPA has rolled back the conflict-of-interest standards imposed by the Trump EPA on the agency’s outside scientific peer review panels, it has gone back to its old practice of stocking its peer review boards with agency research grant-recipient cronies who can be counted on to rubber-stamp whatever EPA wants to do. The Biden EPA most recently announced the particulate matter (PM) subpanel for the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC). As per below, 17 of the 22 members are current and/or former EPA grantees. The amounts associated with them as principal investigators are shown. Note the largest grantee (Lianne Sheppard, recipient of $60,032,782 in EPA grants) is, naturally, the chairman. Sheppard is also the chairman of the main CASAC panel as well as a member of EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a separate outside review panel. The Biden EPA needs a reliable multi-purpose rubber-stamper and that is Sheppard, an activist who sued the Trump EPA because it instituted conflict of interest rules under which she was ineligible to rubber-stamp agency wishes.
Here’s a UK funeral director who claims all the Flu Manchu deaths he’s seeing now are from vaccinations:
Take this with a grain of salt and in the interest of gathering data points.
What. The. Hell. “Apple threatened to kick Facebook off its App Store after a 2019 BBC report detailed how human traffickers were using Facebook to sell victims.” What’s a little sexual slavery compared to all those likes?
Busted!
It appears as though @LanceNBCSD, the assignment editor for the San Diego NBC affiliate, forgot to switch to his anti-Trump burner account… pic.twitter.com/XfAAQX31Ex
Investigators call into hospital asking for the name of the people featured in a news broadcast only to find out they weren't admitted to the hospital!
Greetings, and welcome to another Friday LinkSwarm! It’s seems less that I “finish” these than I abandon them…
Flu Manchu deaths hit zero in Sweden. Seems like “protect the elderly and go for herd immunity” was a much better strategy than “lock everything down, throw the economy into a steep recession, throw millions out of work, practice ineffective masking theater and let antifa/#BlackLivesMatter burn everything down so the Democratic Media Complex can drag Biden’s ambulatory corpse across the finish line in November.” Who’d of thunk it?
Did Republicans surrender on pork-laden infrastructure bill? Sure seems that way. You can brag about how small the shit sandwich you’re eating is compared to the much larger one they wanted to shove down your throat, but it’s still a shit sandwich. Write your senators to express opposition to any infrastructure bill.
The brother of one of President Joe Biden’s closest advisors lobbied members of the National Security Council for General Motors in the second quarter, according to a new disclosure report reviewed by CNBC.
The report shows that Jeff Ricchetti, brother of White House counselor Steve Ricchetti, engaged with the NSC for the car-making giant on “issues related to China.” The company paid Ricchetti $60,000 last quarter for his lobbying services.
Gavin Newsom just might lose the California recall. How bad do you have to suck to lose a recall election in a one-party state? The answer is “Gavin Newsom bad.”
By an overwhelming 9-1, they would feel safer with more cops on the street, not fewer. Though one-third complain that Detroit police use force when it isn’t necessary – and Black men report high rates of racial profiling – those surveyed reject by 3-1 the slogan of some progressives to “defund the police.”
“It’s scary sitting in the house, and when you go outside to the gas station or the store, it’s possible someone will be shooting right next to you,” said Charlita Bell, 41, a lifelong Detroit resident who was among those called in the poll. Last year, when her car was hit by stray bullets during a shopping trip, she hurried home rather than wait for the police for fear the shooter might return.
Things that make you go “Hmmmm“: “Why Are Soros And Gates Buying UK COVID Testing Company?”
In 2015, French intelligence officials warned the U.S. State Department and their own foreign ministry that China was cutting back on agreed collaboration at the lab, former State Department official David Asher, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute think tank, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
By 2017, the French “were kicked out” of the lab and cooperation ceased, leading French officials to warn the State Department that they had grave concerns as to Chinese motivations, according to Asher.
90% of the illegal aliens let in by the Biden Administration don’t report to ICE as required by law. This is my shocked face. (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
Bridgeport Councilman Michael DeFilippo has been indicted by a federal grand jury on multiple election fraud charges.
DeFilippo, 35, a Democrat who represents Bridgeport’s 133rd District and has been a city councilman since 2018, is accused of conspiring to “interfere with and obstruct Bridgeport citizens’ right to vote by falsifying his tenants’ voter registration applications and absentee ballots applications, then stealing tenants’ absentee ballots and forging their signatures in order to fraudulently vote for him,” according to Acting U.S. Attorney Leonard C. Boyle.
Billionaire financier George Soros directed $1 million to a left-wing group that seeks to cut funding to police departments around the country, according to federal records.
Soros sent the funds to the Color of Change PAC on May 14, the Washington Free Beacon reported on July 22, citing Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. The contribution was the largest political contribution made by Soros during the 2021 election cycle.
Color of Change, which describes itself as a racial justice group, has frequently called for the defunding of police departments across the United States, including leading an online campaign to slash funding following the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.
MyPillow employee beheaded in Shakopee, Minnesota. Suspect is in custody. “They say Alexis Saborit is also facing previous charges of property damage, arson, and obstruction. The presiding judge, Richard C. Perkins, allegedly ignored claims of mental illness brought forward to the court and [Saborit] was somehow released back into the public.”
Does Texas have a competitive Gubernatorial race in 2022? No, not yet. But on the Republican side, we have something that resembles a competitive primary a lot more than we did at any point of the 2018 election cycle.
In 2018, incumbent Republican Governor Greg Abbott was running against someone named Barbara Krueger (of whom I have actually no memory whatsoever and who reports show raised literally no money), and gadfly Larry SECEDE Kilgore (yes, that’s how his name appeared on the ballot), whose funding raising totals equaled Krueger’s. Abbott walloped those two with 90.4% of the primary vote in 2018.
That’s not going to happen in 2022.
Abbott already has two much higher profile challengers in former state senator Don Huffines and former Florida congressman and former Texas GOP head Allen West, both of whom are campaigning against Abbott from the right. (Humorist Chad Prather is also running in the Republic primary, but I see no signs his is a serious campaign.)
Abbott had a huge advantage in money-on-hand in the 2018 race, and will likely have the same this time around, with over $55 million on hand this time around. However, Huffines already has over $7 million as well. That’s enough to build out statewide campaigning and fundraising infrastructure. Huffines also pulled in over $4 million in fundraising, indicating there are some deep pocketed contributors out there who are unhappy enough with Abbott to put their money where their mouth is. (West declared he was running July 4, which means he won’t have to file his campaign fundraising reports until the end of the year. But as someone who’s name has been showing up in fundraising solicitation campaigns for at least a decade (and I see he was featured on one of those National Review cruises back in 2013), I have to imagine that he still has something of a national fundraising network to draw on.)
Huffines also picked up a high profile endorsement from Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. That’s going to get him some attention from national Republicans who weren’t even aware Abbott had a primary challenger.
Then there’s the looming threat of actor Matthew McConaughey possibly getting into the race, something he’s hinted at several times. Though not the level of, say, Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2003, McConaughey is a high profile star, and celebrity politicians can be quite formidable in a general election (as Schwarzenegger, Donald Trump and Jesse Ventura have all proven). McConaughey claims he’s a centerist, and hasn’t declared which party he would run in. A run in the Republican primary would turn it into a high profile, high-spending battle royal between McConaughey’s fame and Abbott’s money and infrastructure.
You would think that being locked-out of statewide office victories for over a quarter-century would give McConaughey an easy path to the general election on the Democratic Party side, but that may not be the case. It’s quite possible that McConaughey expressing heretical centrist thoughts on any number of hard-left hot button orthodoxies (election integrity, abortion, illegal aliens, guns, social justice, etc.) would draw a high-profile, hard left outrage candidate into the race just to block him. (Beto O’Rourke can’t win a statewide race against Abbott, but he might very well be able to win a Democratic primary against McConaughey.) While there’s a world of difference between a Hollywood star and an offbeat country musician/mystery writer, Kinky Friedman losing to a non-campaigning nobody in the 2014 Democratic primary for Ag Commissioner tells you Democrats prefer losing to heterodoxy.
As for non-McConaughey Democratic possibilities, the leading candidate seems to be a Deirdre Gilbert, formerly Deirdre Dickson-Gilbert, whose prime political experience seems to be a third-place finish in a three man Democratic Primary field for Fort Bend County Justice of the Peace Precinct 2. She has all of $617.56 on hand, which is less than the Green Party candidate. Also running is Michael Cooper, who came in eighth in a ten man field in the 2020 Democratic Senator primary. But he still looks good in that bolo tie…
All this may amount to nothing, and Abbott is still the odds on favorite to be sworn in in 2023. But his lockdown decisions and the ice storm debacle has Abbott looking his most vulnerable since being elected governor. He’s not seriously vulnerable, but he’s at least “Eric Cantor in 2013 vulnerable.” And we all know how that turned out…
Today the Texas Special Legislative Session begins:
Governor Greg Abbott unveiled an agenda of 11 items for the legislature to tackle in its first special session of 2021 when it convenes later this week.
The whole agenda includes:
Bail reform
Election reform
Border security
Social media censorship
Article X funding
Family violence protection
Requirement for student athletes to compete within their own sex
Restriction on abortion-inducing drugs
Supplemental payment to the Teachers Retirement System
More comprehensive critical race theory ban
Property tax relief
Foster care system appropriation
Cyber security appropriation
Items like election reform, social media censorship, and a more comprehensive ban on critical race theory were already identified by Abbott as part of the agenda.
After House Democrats walked out of the chamber on the last night of the regular session — breaking quorum and killing various pieces of legislation, most notably the election bill — Abbott declared that he would call a special session to tackle some of those items in addition to the fall special dealing with redistricting and federal coronavirus funds.
Another bill that died that night was bail reform, which was among Abbott’s emergency item list. It is included on the special session call.
Abbott then vetoed Article X of the state budget which governs funding for the legislature due to, in his words, the legislature not “showing up and doing their job.”
House Democrats petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to block Abbott’s veto of legislative funding and also appealed to Speaker Dade Phelan (R-Beaumont) earlier this week to commit to stalling any special session agenda item until Article X funding is restored.
Here’s Abbott on the special session:
I've outlined a list of Special Session priority items that put TX first. I look forward to working with the #txlege as we build a brighter future for all Texans.
Notably missing from the agenda: A ban on the genital mutilation of minors.
Michael Quinn Sullivan noted via email:
The items placed on the call by Gov. Abbott can be thought of as the “primary effect” – which is to say, how the coming contested primary is impacting the governor’s actions.
The items on the call read like a laundry list of what the Texas Senate under Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has actually done… and what the Texas House under Speaker Dade Phelan failed to do.
The day before Abbott released the agenda, Phelan announced the creation of a new committee: the House Select Committee on Constitutional Rights and Remedies. “The issues that will be submitted by the Governor for our consideration in the upcoming special session impact some of the most fundamental rights of Texans under the U.S. and Texas Constitutions,” Phelan said.
“These issues, by their very nature, are complex. A select committee with expanded membership and expertise is the ideal forum for ensuring the thoughtful consideration of diverse viewpoints as these constitutional issues are expressed, debated, and decided by the House.”
The committee will be chaired by Rep. Trent Ashby (R-Lufkin) and vice-chaired by Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston).
The other members on the body include:
John Bucy (D-Austin)
Travis Clardy (R-Nacogdoches)
Charlie Geren (R-Fort Worth)
Jacey Jetton (R-Richmond)
Ann Johnson (D-Houston)
Stephanie Klick (R-Fort Worth)
Brooks Landgraf (R-Odessa)
J.M. Lozano (R-Kingsville)
Oscar Longoria (D-Mission)
Joe Moody (D-El Paso)
Victoria Neave (D-Dallas)
Matt Shaheen (R-Plano)
James White (R-Hillister)
That committee doesn’t fill one with confidence. Geran was Joe Straus’ righthand man for many years, and an aide once filed a false child protection report against a primary opponent. Klick was one of only 16 Republicans to vote for creation of a Critical Race Theory-friendly Office of Health Equity in the regular session.
Then there’s a the question of whether Democrats will walk out again to avoid the election integrity bill from passing, just as they did during the regular session.
