Posts Tagged ‘college’

Ken Paxton Takes On The Bar Association

Thursday, October 1st, 2026

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hasn’t been shy about taking on big entities breaking Texas law, be it Meta, ActBlue or MyChart. Now Paxton has taken aim at an association intertwined with the heart of America’s legal system, the American Bar Association.

Texas is investigating the American Bar Association’s alleged anti-competitive law school accreditation practices.

According to Attorney General Ken Paxton, the investigation will examine whether accreditation requirements set by the American Bar Association (ABA) “have unlawfully restricted competition or increased the cost of legal education, including through requirements affecting faculty compensation and law school operations.”

Paxton alleged that the American Bar Association has “weaponized” its “significant influence over legal education” across the nation to “artificially inflate faculty salaries, exclude law schools who challenged the ABA’s view of ‘elite’ legal education, and impose costly, burdensome accreditation requirements.”

Additionally, he alleged that the ABA uses its accreditation power to “impose unconstitutional racial and gender preference requirements on law schools’ admissions and hiring processes.”

Paxton also argued in his Wednesday announcement that this anticompetitiveness has levied significant costs on both existing and potential law schools, which deprives “the market of innovative, lower-cost approaches to legal education.”

“There must be competition and a fair playing field when it comes to law school accreditation, or else we risk inflated costs for students, unfair restrictions, and illegal discriminatory practices,” said Paxton. “My office will investigate whether the law school accreditation process has been used to unlawfully limit competition and burden students and institutions. No organization should be permitted to use its position of influence to violate our antitrust laws.”

Earlier this year, the Texas Supreme Court issued an opinion that eliminates the requirement for law students to attend an ABA accredited law school before taking the state bar exam, which Paxton noted will open new avenues for students to attain a legal education.

The court’s opinion highlighted that it intends to continue giving “approval to schools that satisfy a set of simple, objective, and ideologically neutral criteria using metrics no more onerous than those currently required by the ABA.”

For the majority of America’s history, lawyers didn’t need either American Bar Association imprimatur (or even a law degree) to practice law. Abraham Lincoln and Clarence Darrow never went to law school. Parallel to the New Deal, the ABA and the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) sought to cartelize the legal profession to restrict access and raise rates. Previously, self-study and apprenticeship was the path to a legal career.

Forcing law schools to implement quotas and cram social justice down student’s throats is a good reason to strip the ABA of its law school gatekeeper powers.

Bill: Hey Universities, You Can Take Money From The ChiComs, Or From Uncle Sam, But Not Both

Thursday, June 25th, 2026

Many of America’s universities have proven eager to take money from communist China for “partnership” arrangements. A new bill aims to put an end to that by making them choose between ChiCom money and federal funding.

Republican U.S. Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas has introduced legislation that would prohibit federal funding for higher education institutions that partner with the Chinese Communist Party.

H.R. 9123 would “establish intelligence community funding restrictions on institutions of higher education that have a relationship with certain entities in the People’s Republic of China.”

The legislation amends the National Security Act of 1947 to prohibit intelligence community support for any higher education institution that participates in a series of relationships with entities tied to China.

This would seem a common sense policy implemented that should have been implemented long before now. Communist China is always looking to steal technology from the West through its “Thousand Talents” espionage program, and Chinese nationals have been stealing technology from American universities (including Texas A&M) for a while now.

Examples of these entities include:

  • Confucius institutes
  • Institutions that participate “in the Chinese defense industrial base”
  • Institutions that are “affiliated with the Chinese State Administration for Science, Technology and Industry for the National Defense”
  • Institutions that receive “funding from any organization subordinate to the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party”
  • Institutions that provide “support to any security, defense, police, or intelligence organization of the Government of the People’s Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party”
  • The legislation also places restrictions on partnerships that undermine America’s relationship with Taiwan and on Chinese propaganda efforts against U.S. citizens.

    This is a good first step, but we should go further and ban Chinese nationals from holding any position at any U.S. research university, laboratory or institute that takes federal money.

    To paraphrase Bob Dylan, you have to serve somebody, and it shouldn’t be communist China. As I’ve said before, anything that discourages colleges and universities from working with a genocidal communist dictatorship is a good thing.

    Paxton Opposes College Sports Commission Agreement

    Sunday, November 30th, 2025

    I hope everyone is enjoying their Thanksgiving weekend.

    For those of you who watch college football, there’s evidently a
    “College Sports Commission Agreement” sneaking up under the radar, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is agin it.

    Paxton’s office says the participation agreement would give the CSC “practically limitless power” over member schools, going far beyond the enforcement role envisioned under the House v. NCAA settlement that created the commission.

    The agreement would require universities to:​

  • Accept CSC’s authority to impose fines, penalties, and other sanctions with almost no meaningful right to appeal.
  • Waive their right to challenge CSC enforcement decisions in court and instead submit disputes to an arbitration system built around the House settlement.
  • Automatically comply with any additional policies the CSC adopts in the future, even if those rules are issued without prior notice.​
  • Is this a commission contract or a Microsoft license agreement?

    Paxton calls the arrangement a “power grab” that undermines the integrity of college sports by centralizing enforcement authority in an unaccountable body while pushing legal and financial risk onto public universities.​

    One of Paxton’s central objections mirrors concerns raised by Texas Tech University’s general counsel in an internal memo.

    The CSC agreement includes a “nonassistance” provision that would:​

  • Bar schools from cooperating with any lawsuit or legal action brought by their home state’s attorney general against the CSC.
  • Trigger major penalties—such as loss of conference revenue and postseason eligibility—if a school “assists” its state AG in such litigation.​
  • If you’re demanding non-cooperation with legal authorities, I’ve got to think your agreement is unenforceable from the git go.

    For Texas public institutions, Paxton notes, the agreement is not just bad policy—it may be illegal.

    Among the issues his office and Texas Tech’s memo highlight:​

  • Texas law restricts state entities from entering binding arbitration, yet the CSC agreement would require public universities to funnel disputes into a private arbitration process and waive jury trial rights.​
  • Vague, open-ended fines and penalties could be treated as “unknown debt of the state,” which Bentley has warned would violate Texas law on state obligations.​
  • The document’s structure appears to bind universities to future CSC rules that may conflict with Texas statutes and constitutional provisions, creating ongoing legal exposure.​
  • Because of these conflicts, Paxton’s letter argues that Texas universities may be legally unable to sign as written, even if they otherwise support the House settlement and revenue-sharing framework.​

    The problem, of course, is that the well-meaning reforms designed to do away with traditional big college solutions to the problems of recruiting “student athletes” (bags of Kuggerands and lightly-used sports cars), namely the transfer portal, has taken control out of the hands of traditional power schools and put it into the hands of those same student athletes, and That Simply Will Not Do.

    Given the history of college athletics, the only thing we can assume about the current “reforms” is that they shall soon require even more radical adjustments necessitating even more expensive “reforms”…

    Feds Sue Texas Over Illegal Alien Tuition

    Thursday, June 5th, 2025

    Usually it’s been Texas suing the federal government (especially under Biden) for breaking the law when it comes to illegal aliens, but yesterday saw a reversal when the federal government sued Texas for providing discounted in-state tuition to illegal aliens.

    Just two days after the Texas Legislature adjourned without passing legislation to end in-state tuition for illegal aliens, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Texas.

    Now, the state has settled, ending the discounted tuition for illegals for now.

    Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, the lawsuit challenges longstanding provisions of the Texas Education Code that allow certain illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities—rates that are significantly lower than those charged to U.S. citizens from other states.

    “Federal law prohibits illegal aliens from getting in-state tuition benefits that are denied to out-of-state U.S. citizens,” the DOJ complaint reads. “There are no exceptions. Yet the State of Texas has ignored this law for years.”

    The lawsuit cited a federal statute that bars states from offering postsecondary education benefits based on residency to illegal aliens unless the same benefit is available to all U.S. citizens regardless of residency. The DOJ argued Texas law is in direct violation of that statute and therefore preempted under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

    Since 2001, Texas has allowed illegal alien students to qualify for in-state tuition if they attended Texas high schools and resided in the state for a certain period. At the time, the policy received bipartisan support and was signed into law by then-Gov. Rick Perry.

    During his 2012 presidential campaign, Perry defended the law and infamously called critics of the policy “heartless” during a nationally televised debate.

    It was a stupid idea then. Government benefits should be reserved for American citizens. Giving them to illegal aliens is not only morally wrong, it encourages other aliens to break the law by coming here illegally.

    Senate Bill 1798 by State Sen. Mayes Middleton would have repealed that provision and barred state-funded financial aid from going to illegal aliens. Despite being placed on the Senate intent calendar, the bill was never brought up for a vote.

    Curious.

    Now, with the legislative session over and the bill dead, the Trump administration stepped in to accomplish what the Legislature didn’t.

    The DOJ asked the court to declare the Texas provisions unconstitutional and to permanently block the state from enforcing them.

    Hours after the lawsuit was announced, a settlement was announced, with the state agreeing not to offer discounted tuition to illegal aliens.

    “In-state tuition for illegal immigrants in Texas has ended. Texas is permanently enjoined from providing in-state tuition for illegal immigrants,” wrote Gov. Greg Abbott in a social media post.

    Funny how you can get things done when Republicans control both the state and national executive branches.

    Slowly but surely, common sense is returning to government, and official government preferences for illegal aliens are being stripped away.

    Faster, please.

    Bowled Over

    Monday, December 27th, 2021

    In a followup to A&M pulling out of the Gator Bowl, there have been three outright bowl cancellations:

    The 2021 Military Bowl has been canceled for the second year in a row. Boston College was forced to pull out of its matchup against East Carolina, scheduled for Monday, due to a combination of COVID-19 cases and injuries, according to 247Sports’ Stephen Igoe. Additionally, the Fenway Bowl, featuring SMU and Virginia, has been canceled after positive cases on the Cavaliers’ roster. The game was set to be the final one for coach Bronco Mendenhall at UVA after he resigned from the program earlier this month

    The bowls are the second and third outright cancellations of bowl season, joining Hawaii pulling out of the Hawaii Bowl against Memphis on Christmas Eve. Additionally, Texas A&M was forced to pull out of the Gator Bowl due to COVID issues, but Rutgers stepped up to take the Aggies’ place as a 5-7 squad. Last season, 18 bowls were canceled by the pandemic.

    The matchup is the second straight bowl game canceled for SMU, though the Mustangs would have been without a bulk of the coaching staff after former coach Sonny Dykes left for TCU. The Cavaliers, meanwhile, were searching for their third winning season in the last four years under Mendenhall before new coach Tony Elliott takes over the program.

    For East Carolina, the cancellation is especially disappointing. The Pirates have not played in a bowl game since 2014 but earned a 7-5 record in Mike Houston’s third season. Boston College has not won a bowl game since 2016.

    Also, Miami is out of the Sun Bowl, so that might not happen either.

    Honestly, I don’t give a rat’s ass about college bowl games, and it’s probably been well over a decade since I watched one. (When did the Longhorns last have a good team?) But Flu Manchu doesn’t provide much of a threat to healthy college football players, and Omicron is so mild that it’s probably safer to contract and exhibits less side effects than the vaccination for it. Banning football games because of exposure in nannyism gone mad.

    Update: Evidently they cancelled the Holiday Bowl just hours before kickoff when UCLA pulled out.

    What 12th Man?

    Thursday, December 23rd, 2021

    Texas A&M’s football team has withdrawn from the Gator Bowl following a bout of Flu Manchu.

    News broke on Tuesday that A&M’s football team had not practiced since last Saturday as a number of athletes had tested positive prior to the Aggies hitting the practice field on Sunday and then again during the next two days. The team was supposed to be released to go home on Tuesday until Dec. 26 when players were to make their way to Jacksonville for final bowl preparations. People both within the program and the highest levels of the administration were pessimistic as early as Tuesday night due to practical considerations arising from numbers via NCAA protocols that the game would take place.

    The Aggies were already down quite a few players going into bowl game workouts last week given their status due to injuries and opt outs even before news of possible problems with COVID tests had emerged. There are as many as ten upperclassmen who are draft eligible who could or already have opted out of the game. In addition, two more (Zach Calzada and Dreyden Norwood) have entered the NCAA transfer portal since the regular season ended. Finally, by our count, there are as many as 12 players who are done for the season and won’t play in the game due to injury. Those items push the Aggies down towards approximately 60 scholarship players being available for the game including just one quarterback in Haynes King (who missed most of the season himself due to a broken ankle and has just returned to workouts).

    Wait, 60 players? That’s seven more than an NFL roster. You need 11 players each side, for a total of 22. (And prior to 1941, the same players played both offense and defense.) You’ve got enough to play, even if a few players have to learn new positions in a hurry. It’s the postseason, the only postseason your team gets this year, and you’re wimping out.

    Also note: “Scholarship” players. Whatever happened to the much-vaunted “12th Man” tradition at A&M, about to turn a century old? One of the features of the 12th Man was a willingness to play walk-ons. A bet dozens (if not hundreds) of ex-high school football playing Aggies would be happy to volunteer to join the football team in their hour of need. And I bet the NCAA would approve it.

    But no, we can’t have that. Better to cancel it because someone might get an ouchie.

    Evidently the Aggies of 2021 just aren’t made of the stern stuff of the Aggies of 1922. Or even 1983.

    Supreme Court Rumbles NCAA Scam

    Tuesday, June 22nd, 2021

    I used to follow some college athletics. Now I don’t. At the same time universities were getting more and more expensive, they were also getting more and more woke. College sports used to be an oasis from that nonsense, but so many programs bent the knee to #BlackLivesMatter last year that I just stopped paying attention.

    So I was happy to see yesterday’s Supreme Court decision that colleges couldn’t collude to avoid paying student athletes.

    he U.S. Supreme Court on Monday threw out limits set by the major governing body for American intercollegiate sports on education-related benefits that schools can give players as a violation of antitrust law, handing a big victory to student-athletes fighting for greater financial compensation.

    The 9-0 ruling put the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) further on the defensive as it struggles to preserve a business model – huge revenues generated by college sports and big salaries for executives and coaches while players remain unpaid – under assault on multiple fronts.

    The NCAA’s curbs on non-cash payments to college athletes related to education – including benefits such as computers, science equipment and musical instruments – were part of what critics have called the fiction of amateurism in college sports, an enterprise that rakes in billions of dollars annually.

    These limits, according to the ruling authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, are anticompetitive under a federal law called the Sherman Antitrust Act. The ruling could pave the way for challenges to other NCAA compensation rules, a prospect that Justice Brett Kavanaugh appeared to invite in a separate opinion agreeing with Gorsuch.

    Kavanaugh wrote that those other limits on compensation for players “also raise serious questions under the antitrust laws” and suggested they likely would be struck down if lower courts follow the analysis laid out in Monday’s ruling.

    “The NCAA is not above the law,” Kavanaugh added.

    For years, football and basketball have been big moneymakers for some colleges and universities (and money losers for others). Why not let student athletes benefit from that? Tradition? Hell, colleges are hellbent on destroying every tradition that made them vital institutions (including freedom of speech, free inquiry and the rule of law), so why not that one as well?

    I’ve long thought that traditional football power schools (Alabama, Texas, USC, Oklahoma, etc.) could make a lot more money by leaving the NCAA and forming their own competing football conference of 15 or so teams, playing a round robin schedule plus playoffs. They could pay athletes and forge a partnership deal with the NFL to provide year-round professional coaching. It would provide more entertainment than watching power schools beat up on Rice or UNT every year.

    America’s entire higher education system needs a hard reboot: Shut down all colleges and universities for a year, eliminate SJW departments like Women’s Studies entirely, hand every woke professor and administrator a pink slip, and deny federal loan and contracts for any university it costs students more than 10 grand a year to attend. Right now all this is a pipe-dream, but college athletics are one of the last sources of unwarranted affection ordinary people feel toward higher education. (“College is a $120,000 hooker, and you are an idiot who fell in love with her!”) Maybe the demise of the current plantation athletic complex will help pave the way for real reform.

    Here’s the text of the decision.

    And here’s a South Park clip to round out the post:

    Bill Maher On The College Scam

    Thursday, June 10th, 2021

    As the one-eyed myopic liberal in the land of the blind, there are a bunch of Bill Maher videos that I’ve almost posted, only to get about three-quarters of the way in and go “Nah, too smarmy.” Or “Not funny enough.” Or “Too much gratuitous Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

    But this one, on the state of higher education, was just good enough to pull the trigger on.

    Ignore the swipe at Florida, the swipe at Trump, and the several pregnant “please clap” pauses,

    “Let’s talk about what higher education in America really is: A racket, that sells you a very expensive ticket to the upper middle class.”

    “We imagine going to college is the way to fight income inequality, but actually it does the reverse.”

    “Is it really liberal for someone who doesn’t go to college and makes less money to pay for those who do go and make more?”

    “Colleges have turned into giant, luxury babysitters anxious to indulge every student whim.”

    “A third of students now spend less than five hours a week studying, and when they do it’s for their onerous magna cum bullshit course load of Sports Marketing History Through Twitter, Advanced Racist Spotting, Intro To Microaggressions, and You Owe Me An Apology 101.”

    “Say what you want about Lori Laughlin, at least she understood one good scam deserves another.”

    “Since 1985, the average cost of college has risen 500%.”

    Plus thoughts on grade inflation and credentialism.

    (Hat tip: PawPawsHouse.)

    Kristi Noem’s Tranny Pander

    Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021

    Last year, when South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem was keeping her state open despite pushes for endless lockdowns from the MSM, there was lots of talk about her as a dark horse 2024 Presidential candidate among conservative activists. Well, that talk is dead following her caving in to the radical transsexual lobby by using a technical veto on a bill prohibiting men from competing in women’s sports that she had previously promised to sign:

    On Friday, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem balked on signing House Bill 1217 when the bill to promote fairness in women’s sports crossed her desk. But instead of vetoing the legislation, Noem returned the bill to the House with what she called “recommendations as to STYLE and FORM.” The Republican governor’s spin, however, cannot withstand scrutiny—most specifically her claimed reasoning for removing collegiate athletics from the bill’s protections.

    As finalized by the South Dakota legislature, Section 1 of H.B. 1217 provided that athletic teams and sports in the state, including at institutions of higher education, must be expressly designated as male, female, or coeducation. It also stipulated that teams or sports designed as female must be “available only to participants who are female, based on their biological sex.”

    After promising to sign H.B. 1217, Noem instead took to Twitter on Friday to state why she had changed her mind and instead returned the bill to legislators for modifications. Noem elaborated on her reasoning in a letter to legislators.

    Snip.

    The most striking changes Noem demanded, however, came in her insistence that the legislature strike collegiate athletes from the bill’s protection and eliminate Section 4’s promise of a remedy to girls and women harmed in a violation of the bill, or who were retaliated against for complaining about violations of the law. Let’s break these changes down a bit, because they render the entire proposal meaningless.

    As drafted by the South Dakota legislature, Section 1 of the bill mandated that athletic teams or sports, at the elementary, secondary, and collegiate level, designated as female be “available only to participants who are female, based on their biological sex,” as verified by the students’ parents (or, if they are over 18, the student), based on “genetics and reproductive biology.” Then, in Section 4, the South Dakota legislature created a “cause of action,” or a right to sue, entitling students deprived of athletic opportunities or otherwise harmed as the result of a Section 1 violation to sue the school.

    In other words, Section 1 demanded schools—including colleges—limit women’s sports to women. If an education institution violated that mandate and allowed a male student to join a female team, Section 4 provides that a female athlete injured by that violation could sue the school and obtain an injunction to prevent a continued violation and damages to remedy the harm.

    Section 4 added a second protection for South Dakota student athletes: It also protected students from retaliation if they report violations of the act to a school representative, athletic association, or a state or federal governmental entity with oversight authority. Thus, for instance, if a female basketball player complained to an athletic department that a coach had allowed a male athlete to join her team, and the school responded by banning the complaining student from school-sponsored sports, the female student would be entitled to sue the school for retaliation.

    In sending the bill back to the state legislature, Noem made two requests related to these interrelated provisions: She excluded collegiate athletes from the bill’s coverage and then directed the legislature to strike, or delete, Section 4 in its entirety.

    In other words, Noem asked the South Dakota legislature to amend Section 1 so that the bill applied only to elementary and high school student athletes, while then denying those students any remedy for violations of the law. All that would remain, then, if the state legislature adopts Noem’s amendments, would be these two sections.

    Snip.

    Noem’s explanation would lead one to believe that H.B. 1217 conflicts in some way with the governing regulations of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and that if the bill became law, South Dakota collegiate athletes would be barred from competing in NCAA events and tournaments.

    To the contrary, NCAA regulations provide that if a male competes on a female team, that makes the team a “mixed team,” which is ineligible to compete for a women’s NCAA championship. The NCAA does, however, allow a male “student-athlete being treated with testosterone suppression medication for Gender Identity Disorder or gender dysphoria and/or Transsexualism,” to compete on a women’s team after “completing one calendar year of testosterone suppression treatment.”

    However, nothing in this NCAA policy requires a college or university to treat a male student-athlete as female. Given the number of religiously affiliated colleges and universities participating in NCAA sports, any such mandate would face tough opposition and likely be unworkable.

    The NCAA also does not ban collegiate athletes from events or championship competitions if their schools do not allow transgender athletes to compete on teams of the opposite sex. That is why, when Idaho passed a bill last year similar to the bill pending in South Dakota, nothing of the sort happened to Idaho.

    So not only is Noem surrendering on issue she promised to fight for, she’s preemptively surrendering on behalf of an institution that itself hasn’t yet surrendered.

    Reality is not optional. Defending the reality of biological sex is not a hill that can be surrendered to radical social justice, especially since the overwhelming majority of Americans agree with conservatives. If Noem is unwilling to fight for that hill because it gives Chamber of Commerce RINOs a case of the vapors, then she isn’t the leader Republicans need.

    LinkSwarm for July 10, 2020

    Friday, July 10th, 2020

    China buys Pakistan, the Supreme Court gives Oklahoma back to the Indians, another cartel shootout in Nuevo Laredo, and cancel culture comes for everyone! Enjoy another Friday LinkSwarm!

  • “In a major Supreme Court decision Thursday, justices decided that a large swath of [Oklahoma], including part of Tulsa, is still an American Indian reservation. Tribal members can no longer be prosecuted by the state for crimes that happen in the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.” I have not had time to read the decision, but my impression is that it’s somewhat less sweeping than the MSM is making it out to be.
  • The Trump Administration officially withdraws from WHO.
  • Interesting piece on the Sino-Indian conflict:

    China has become the ultimate fiscal lifeline for Pakistan. Decades of deficits, growing corruption, excessive defense spending and military domination have left Pakistan broke and few willing to give or lend enough cash to keep Pakistan solvent. A recent example of how this works was seen when despite economic recession and a public debt crisis (no one will lend to Pakistan anymore), the Pakistani defense budget was increased twelve percent for 2020, with annual spending now $7.85 billion. Spending on dealing with covid19 has averaged about $100 million a month and by the end of the year military spending will be at least five times what was spent on covid19. The India defense budget is also up (13.6 percent more) in 2020 to $66 billion.

    The only economic relief available to Pakistan is China and CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic corridor). CPEC is a vast Chinese investment and construction effort that depends on vigorous support of the Pakistani military to succeed. China needs the Pakistani military to keep Islamic terrorists and tribal separatists from attacking the Chinese construction projects. Pakistan also helps China by keeping Indian forces occupied in Kashmir and the northwest Indian portion of the Pakistani border.

    Northwest India (Ladakh State) is the current a hot spot because India has been building roads to the border and threatening to take back the portion of Kashmir Pakistan illegally, according to the agreement that established the India-Pakistan border after the British left in 1947, seized from India. Pakistan signed that agreement but had second thoughts as it was being implemented. Pakistan urged Pakistani Pushtun tribes in the area to “liberate” Kashmir from the Hindus and managed to grab about half of the disputed area. This dispute has remained unresolved ever since and led to several wars with India. Pakistan always lost but India never sent troops into Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The current Indian leader is openly questioning the wisdom of that policy.

    India controlling all of Kashmir is a major economic threat to China, which has invested over $10 billion to build a highway and rail line from China to the Pakistani coast and it goes through Pakistani occupied Kashmir. This link is part of the Chinese OBOR/BRI (belt and road project) which aims to revive the ancient Silk Road that for thousands of years was the main economic link between East Asia and the rest of Eurasia. The Pakistani portion is called CPEC and is costing China at least $62 billion (so far). The Indian threats to the Kashmir road-rail link are minor compared to the problems China is having with Islamic terrorist and tribal violence against CPEC projects as well as the high levels of corruption in Pakistan which are also damaging CPEC projects. This is driving up costs while lowering quality and slowing progress. But China also claims ownership of much Indian territory so helping Pakistani keep what they have grabbed is considered something of a professional courtesy. At the same time the Pakistani military have gained an ally they cannot abandon or say no to.

    In June China revived the border war over Pangong Lake, which is largely in Tibet and patrolled by a small Chinese naval force. This is the longest lake in Asia and part of the 134-kilometer long lake extends 45 kilometers into the Indian Ladakh region. China is using its usual “sneak, grab and stay” tactics to slowly move the border into territory long occupied by India. The portion of the lake shore in dispute has no native population. The only people who visit the area are soldiers from India or China.

    Given this newly declared foreign threat China has, since 2019, sent new Type928D Patrol Boats to guard the lake. This fast (70 kilometers an hour) boat is armed with an RWS (Remote Weapons System) using a 12.7mm machine-gun plus two or more smaller (7.62mm) machine-guns that can be outed elsewhere on the boat and operated by one of the ten sailors on board. There is also seating below deck for up to twenty troops. India has smaller boats patrolling it portion of the 4,200-meter high lake, except for the few months when the entire lake is frozen over.

    In the last decade China has been building roads into remote and formerly inaccessible (via vehicle) portions of the lake coastline. China has built some of these roads into areas claimed by India but not regularly patrolled because special mountain troops must be employed to get into these areas without coming in by boat or on foot over the ice.

    India admits that the Chinese aggression along its northern border is active again and the Chinese are now actually taking control of Indian territory and apparently plan to continue doing so. Despite Indian nuclear weapons China believes it can get away with gradually gaining control over more than 100,000 square kilometers of Indian territory it claims. This will be done by grabbing a few square kilometers at a time without triggering a nuclear exchange. Fortune favors the bold, even in slow motion.

  • Bank runs in China?
  • “Stony Brook professor Helmut Norpoth says Trump has a 91% chance of winning in November.” (Hat tip: Stephen Green at instapundit.)
  • Twelve members of a cartel hit squad killed in Nuevo Laredo shootout.

    The dead were allegedly members of the Tropa del Infierno, or Hell’s Army, the armed wing of the Northeast Cartel, who attacked soldiers while they were patrolling the highway to the airport. No military personnel were reported injured in the shoot-out.

    Investigators at the scene recovered two of the squad’s vehicles that were reported stolen in the United States, as well as 12 guns including two Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifles and eight AR-15s.

    The Northeast Cartel, a faction of Los Zetas, is headed by Juan Gerardo Treviño Chávez, alias El Huevo. A reward of 2 million pesos (US $89,000) has been offered for information leading to his arrest. Treviño is the nephew of the former leader of Los Zetas who was arrested in Houston in 2016.

    Nuevo Laredo, which is right across the Mexican border from Texas, was also the scene of two previous massive cartel shootouts, in 2012 and 2018.

  • “As Black children are killed in spiking urban violence, where’s the outrage from the white and the woke?”
  • New Jersey Democrat-to-Republican U.S. Representative Jeff Van Drew won his primary. (Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)
  • “Inside Ghislaine Maxwell’s Life on the Lam.”

    Her business, first and foremost, was keeping Jeffrey Epstein happy. He shared much with her father: a humble origin, a vast fortune derived by mysterious means, even rumors of ties to the Mossad and other intelligence agencies. Like Robert Maxwell, Epstein also attached himself to a woman of higher status. In those days, Manhattan was party central, a place where connections were made at night, person to person. “Ghislaine was at the epicenter of all that,” says Euan Rellie, a British investment banker who knew Maxwell in both London and New York. “She befriended everybody and had a massive Rolodex of influential people.”

    Those connections proved pivotal to Epstein. “I always say that Ghislaine helped Jeffrey become who he became,” says one of Epstein’s victims. “He had the money, but he didn’t know what to do with it. She showed him.” Epstein built a 21,000-square-foot mansion on a 10,000-acre ranch in New Mexico, which he boasted made his New York town house “look like a shack,” and named it the Zorro Ranch. He also acquired a 72-acre island in the Virgin Islands and an 8,600-square-foot home in Paris, which is said to have featured a specially built massage room. Maxwell is said to have shared Epstein’s bed in each of the residences, as his girlfriend, before moving on to become his “best friend,” as he called her in Vanity Fair. (“When a relationship is over, the girlfriend ‘moves up, not down’ to friendship status.”)

    Maxwell soon had a bed of her own in a five-story town house on the Upper East Side, tended by a live-in couple who served as her housekeeper and driver, two secretaries (one for her and a second for Jeffrey), and an immense budget for the six properties she was managing for Epstein. She had found a path back to the lifestyle she’d lost when her father died. “She was used to living very well,” says a friend who knew her then. “She didn’t want to go back to where she was.”

    She wore a large diamond ring Epstein had given her, which she called her engagement ring, according to one of Epstein’s victims. “She would say things like she was the only one who Jeffrey slept with,” the woman says. “I know that she would have died to marry him. She would have done anything for him. He trumped everybody and everything.”

  • Former Reddit CEO Ellen K. Pao in 2011: “Sure, everyone knew Ghislaine Maxwell provided underage girls for sex.” Decent people: “Did you go to the police?” Pao: [LOCKS TWITTER ACCOUNT]
  • “Authors of Study on Race and Police Killings Seek Retraction Because Conservatives Cite It.”
  • “British Media Outlets Wake Up, Begin Distancing Themselves From UK Black Lives Matter Organization.”

    There is, of course, a big difference in saying you believe black lives matter versus saying you agree with the Black Lives Matter movement. It’s a very important, key distinction to make in this debate. Unfortunately, “woke” reporters here in the U.S. often deliberately blur the lines by conflating the two as if they mean the same thing, so they can play the exact type of word games they did with [White House press secretary Kayleigh] McEnany over Trump’s tweets.

    Across the pond in the UK, however, there’s been an unexpected development on this front. Unlike the mainstream media here that routinely fails to make the distinction between saying “black lives matter” (blm) versus saying you support Black Lives Matter (BLM), a growing number of media outlets there have started distancing themselves from the political group because of their calls to defund the police and after a series of anti-Israel, anti-Semitical tweets posted by BLM-UK were recently posted.

    Is it too much to ask for our own MSM to start waking up as well?

  • Another week, another fake hate crime.
  • “It Wasn’t My Cancelation That Bothered Me. It Was the Cowardice of Those Who Let It Happen.”

  • Cancel cultures comes for Steven Pinker. “This transparently idiotic diatribe, previously dissected by folks such as Jerry Coyne and Barbara Partee — the latter of whom notes Pinker’s role in recruiting female and minority linguists to the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences — can’t possibly succeed. Can it?” I wouldn’t want to bet money on that proposition. Reason and logic play no role in cancel culture.
  • “Anyone Who Claims Cancel Culture Is Real Is A Bigot Who Should Lose His Job.”
  • On the other hand, Kurt Schlichter sees an opportunity to kill off academia as we know it. “Academia today is a pack of rabid reds, and we need to put it down like Old Yeller. And academia itself has loaded up the 12 gauge.” (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
  • Fairly horrific F5 load balancer security bug discovered. Those things are pretty much everywhere in tech, so this is a big deal.
  • “Media Begging for a ‘Second Wave.”‘
  • “Governors Reinstate Lockdowns To Combat Recovering Economy.”
  • Physicians: ObamaCare deserves to die.
  • “This Was Russia’s Version of the F-22 Raptor. And It Was a Big Failure.” (Hat tip: Instapundit.)
  • Mayor of Seoul dead in possible suicide.
  • This is indeed an extremely good parody. For me the giveaway was her saying she was running for Florida’s 28th congressional district…

  • Old and busted: Banning Jews. The new hotness: Banning “Jews.”
  • Good catch.
  • Ivy League cancels fall athletics.
  • While the Big 10 is moving to a conference-only schedule.
  • “I Survived the Warsaw Ghetto. Here Are the Lessons I’d Like to Pass On.”

    I would, first, urge future generations of Europeans to remember my generation as we really were, not as they may wish us to have been. We had all the same vices and weaknesses as today’s young people do: most of us were neither heroes nor monsters.

    Snip.

    Second, just as there is no such thing as a “heroic generation”, there is no such thing as a “heroic nation” – or indeed an inherently malign or evil nation either.

    Snip.

    Third, do not underestimate the destructive power of lies. When the war broke out in 1939, my family fled east and settled for a couple of years in Soviet-occupied Lwów (now Lviv in western Ukraine). The city was full of refugees, and rumours were swirling about mass deportations to gulags in Siberia and Kazakhstan. To calm the situation, a Soviet official gave a speech declaring that the rumours were false – nowadays they would be called “fake news” – and that anyone spreading them would be arrested. Two days later, the deportations to the gulags began, with thousands sent to their deaths.

    Those people and millions of others, including my immediate family, were killed by lies. My country and much of the continent was destroyed by lies. And now lies threaten not only the memory of those times, but also the achievements that have been made since. Today’s generation doesn’t have the luxury of being able to argue that it was never warned or did not understand the consequences of where lies will take you.

    Confronting lies sometimes means confronting difficult truths about one’s self and one’s own country. It is much easier to forgive yourself and condemn another, than the other way round.

    (Hat tip: ASM826 at Borepatch.)

  • Couple plot to ambush the wife’s ex-husband and new wife, drive from North Carolina to Ohio to murder them. Big mistake:

    According to the transcript of his Feb. 12 interview with sheriff’s deputies, Lindsey said he owns a gun, but had left it in the house earlier, and so he asked Molly if her gun was in the car. Both Duncans have Ohio conceal carry permits, which they told investigators they had obtained out of fear that Cheryl Sanders wanted to do them harm. They obtained the permits when they moved about four years ago to the area, where Molly has family nearby.

    With Molly’s gun in hand, Lindsey said he exchanged fire with the man later identified as Reed Sanders. Lindsey said his ex-wife then pulled up in a vehicle, got out and also threatened them with a gun before being shot by Duncan.

    The Greene County coroner said in February that the apparent cause of death for the Sanderses was multiple gunshot wounds. Investigators reported finding three weapons at the scene and multiple shell casings. The Duncans were not physically hurt in the altercation.

    The ambush took place in February, but due to coronavirus-related court closures, the grand jury didn’t no-bill them until recently.

  • Heh:

  • Say Uncle on The Great Pickle Shortage of 2020, which I’ve also noticed here.
  • Sounds like Amber Heard is a really shitty person.
  • Dwight has a nice collection of things that blew up real good.
  • Much crypto. Many monies.
  • “It’s time to put Facebook away.”