Critical Race Theory – In the Air Force!
You will not believe the Marxist drivel being taught at our Air Force Academy. I genuinely fear for the future of our military.
We received 478 pages of records from the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), a component of the United States Department of Defense, which include instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
We obtained these records as the result of a November 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Defense Department failed to respond to a request for Air Force Academy training material records on Critical Race Theory (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:22-cv-03510)).
The records include a PowerPoint presentation titled “Political Psychology, Lessons 32-33: Prejudice and Racism.” On a slide labeled “Race and Partisanship” is a bullet stating: “Opposition to interracial dating correlated with white partisanship after Obama’s election despite being unrelated to party identification in previous decades.”
That presentation includes a set of tables with the headline “White Americans’ Support for Democratic Candidates for President as a Function of Old-Fashioned Racism.” Another slide depicts tables which purport to show “Correlations between Republican Party Identification and Old-Fashioned Racism among White Americans.”
A slide titled “Racialization of Public Policy” includes a bullet stating “They [pollsters] found that the image of a black man greatly impacted responses among Trump supporters.” The next bullet asserts:
After exposed to the black racial cue, Trump voters:
Were less supportive of housing assistance programs
Expressed higher levels of anger that some people receive government assistance
Were more likely to say that individuals who receive assistance are to blame for their economic situation.
Another slide purports to show a chart depicting “White Identity among White Americans,” with the subtitle “How Important Is Being White to Your Identity?”
Additional slides are titled “How White Identity Shapes Politics” and contain tables purporting to show:
- Effect of White Identity on Empathy toward People of Color
- Effect of White Identity on Support for Voter ID Laws
- Effect of White Identity on Support for Political Violence
A slide titled “Race and Politics” includes an image of President Obama with the bullet “Because the President is the leader of his respective party – Obama signified a massive shift in image of the stereotypical Democrat,” followed by the bullet: “The Democratic party became branded as the party of Black Americans.”
A “CRT Talking Points” document prepared at the direction of the Air Force Academy Superintendent includes the question “Does CRT teach cadets to hate our country?” The scripted “academic answer” to the question asserts, “much of what is ‘divisive’ [about CRT] is that it’s hard for people to hear the words ‘white supremacy’ without feeling defensive, even though that is the academically correct way to talk about most of American history.”
The records include a transcript of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s June 23, 2021, congressional testimony in which he tells Rep. Matt Gaetz, “I don’t know what the issue of critical race theory is and what the relevance here in the department. We do not teach critical race theory. We don’t embrace critical race theory. And I think that’s a spurious conversation.”
Two weeks later, on July 7, 2021, Dean of Faculty Brigadier General Linell Letendre forwards to Superintendent Lieutenant General Richard Clark, Commander of Cadets Brigadier General Paul Moga, and others whose names are redacted, a Washington Post opinion piece written the previous day by USAFA Professor Lynne Chandler Garcia, titled “Why U.S. military academies should teach critical race theory.” Letendre adds a note promoting the piece:
My thanks to Dr. Chandler Garcia for putting into words what many of us have expressed to each other around the water coolers about the importance of teaching our cadets how to think. [Emphasis in original] As future leaders of the profession of arms, we owe them nothing less.
An August 13, 2021, email exchange between academy officials details hosting a virtual discussion with Stephen Brookfield, author of “Teaching Race: How to Help Students Unmask and Challenge Racism,” to USAFA faculty members. One official raises concerns over Brookfield’s discussion topics related to Critical Race Theory.
In a separate email chain, a person whose name is redacted sends the Brookfield event information to Letendre: “In case this slipped your notice, I just wanted to make sure you and the dean were aware that the [redacted] book group initiative has the potential to further the CRT storm.”
The dean replies, “Thanks for the SA [situational awareness]. No concerns. We need to keep doing the right things to prepare and develop faculty.” Forty-three faculty members signed up for Brookfield’s talk.
Another presentation discusses the teachings of Brookfield and has the headline “The (White) Elephant in the Room” and bullets which are partially obscured.
A slide in the series has the title “Team Teaching” and includes the bullet: “Allows you to … Demonstrate how to engage in difficult conversations in a way focused on behaviors not personhood, & on learned white supremacy not essential moral differences or failings.” Another bullet states “Allows you to … Facilitate racial affinity groups.”
Another slide is titled “The Fatigue of WWW – Witnessing White Woke-ness.”
An additional slide proposes:
A calculus of understanding amongst Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) who have negotiated the dynamics of structural racism all their lives & are tired of WITNESSING ‘WOKENESS’ in White people coming to new racial awareness. [Emphasis in original]
One of the Brookfield slides is titled, “Hard Truths I’ve Learned as a White Instructor/Leader” and contains bullets such as “I MUST assume that for students and colleagues of color, EVERYTHING is seen through the lens of race. For them, NOTHING is ‘race free’.” And, “I MUST acknowledge my own racist behavior when it’s pointed out to me – not to try to ‘explain’ it away, not protest my innocence.” [Emphases in original]
Still another Brookfield slide contains the bullets “I MUST NEVER ask people of color to teach me about racism – figuring out what whites should do is MY responsibility” and “I MUST NEVER ‘confess’ my racism so as to seek ‘absolution’ from BIPOC students & colleagues.” [Emphases in original]
Among the works written by Brookfield listed in the bibliography is “Creating an Anti-Racist White Identity.”
A slide from Lesson 28 in Behavioral Science 362 is titled “What is CRT?” and includes:
- Recognize that race is not biologically reality, but socially constructed and socially significant
- Helps us understand the legacy of racism and how embedded within social institutions
- Sees racism as systemic
Another slide in the presentation discusses the 1619 Project that argues that America was not founded in 1776.
A presentation, which has no specification as to whether it is intended for faculty or the students, is titled “Free Speech in the Military” and has a slide labeled “The Commie Cadet,” which includes images of West Point cadet Spencer Rapone at his West Point graduation ceremony showing the inside of his cap in which is written “Communism will win,” and one of him wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt under his uniform.
A presentaion, apparently intended for the cadets, is titled “American Political System & Theory, Lesson 25-31 Law & Democracy” and a slide containing a list of information under “Things to Know,” which describes Critical Race Theory as: “Critical Race Theory studies racism as a social construct” and “Proponents say learning the history of racism is crucial to addressing inequities.”
Lesson 14 of a Social Sciences presentation is titled “What does Race have to do with Security?” The next slide, titled “Critical Race Theory,” provides several bullet points of “definitions” of CRT, such as:
A collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view, (Brooks 1994)”
The view that the law and legal institutions are inherently racist and that race itself, instead of being biologically grounded and natural, is a socially constructed concept that is used by white people to further their economic and political interests at the expense of people of color. (Curry 2009).
Another slide discusses the “‘Myth’ of American Peoplehood” with one bullet claiming: “The U.S. too has a creation myth: The Declaration of Independence declares that all men have rights endowed by their Creator; Ideas of social contracts forged in a state of nature.”
In the same Social Sciences presentation is a slide titled: “Lesson 16: Black Lives Matter – Causes and Context.” A bloc of slides in the presentation discusses BLM, with one slide alleging: “White privilege doesn’t mean your life hasn’t been hard. It means that your skin color isn’t one of the things making it harder.” [Emphases in original]
Various slides promoting BLM follow, including one depicting a white police officer holding a sign pointing to a black man, asking, “Is his life worth less than mine?” and a white woman holding a similar sign pointing to a black woman.
Numerous slides depict alleged police brutality against blacks, one of which states “Nearly 90% of documented force used by FPD [Ferguson, MO Police Department] was used against African Americans.”
The Air Force is fomenting racialism, racial separatism and segregation, and anti-white hatred among its rising young leadership at the Air Force Academy. These documents show the Biden Defense Department is teaching these cadets on how to hate America using repackaged revolutionary Marxist propaganda.
New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been under fire for his soft-on-crime approach in New York City, but he has no trouble going after a former president whose politics he abhors. We’re learning more about his prosecution.
We received the engagement letter showing Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.
We obtained the agreement as the result of an April 11, 2023, Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request followed by an appeal for records of agreements between Alvin L. Bragg or the New York County District Attorney’s Office and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP for work related to Bragg v. Jordan, Case No. 23-3032 filed in the U.S District Court for the Southern District of New York on or about April 11, 2023.
The letter welcomes “the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office (“the DA”) as a client of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP … You are retaining us to provide legal services to the DA in connection with a congressional investigation, potential litigation, and related matters regarding the DA’s investigation of Donald Trump (the “Matter”).”
Initially redacted in its first production of records, the “professional fees” section states: “For this matter we have agreed on the following hourly rates for our attorneys: $900 per hour for partners, and $500 per hour for associates. These rates will remain the same for the life of the matter.”
The House Judiciary Committee on March 20 sent a letter to Bragg demanding records related to the “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority: the indictment of a former President of the United States and current declared candidate for that office:”
The New York County District Attorney’s Office has been investigating President Trump since at least 2018, looking for some legal theory on which to bring charges. The facts surrounding the impending indictment have “been known for years.” Michael Cohen, President Trump’s disgraced former lawyer, pleaded guilty over four years ago to charges based on the same facts at issue in the impending indictment. By July 2019, however, federal prosecutors determined that no additional people would be charged alongside Cohen. Now, in the words of one legal scholar, you are attempting to “shoehorn” the same case with identical facts into a new prosecution, resurrecting a so-called “zombie” case against President Trump. Even the Washington Post quoted “legal experts” as calling your actions “unusual” because “prosecutors have repeatedly examined the long-established details but decided not to pursue charges.”
In addition to the novel and untested legal theory, your star witness for this prosecution has a serious credibility problem—a problem that you have reportedly recognized. This case relies heavily on the testimony of Michael Cohen, a convicted perjurer with a demonstrable prejudice against President Trump. Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress in 2018. In 2019, when he testified before Democrats on the House Oversight Committee to aid their fruitless investigation into President Trump, Cohen lied again—six times. Cohen has been vocal about his deeply personal animus toward President Trump. Under these circumstances, there is no scenario in which Cohen could fairly be considered an unbiased and credible witness.
On April 4 Bragg announced a felony indictment of former President Donald Trump.
The Judiciary Committee on April 6 issued a subpoena, compelling the testimony of former New York County Special Assistant District Attorney Mark Pomerantz, who resigned from office the previous year because Bragg was reluctant to pursue charges against Trump. The committee in March had written Pomerantz a letter stating that his “efforts to shame Bragg have worked as he is reportedly resurrecting a so-called ‘zombie’ case against President Trump using a tenuous and untested legal theory.”
On April 11, Bragg filed a lawsuit against Jordan to block his alleged “interference” and “obstruction” of the investigation of former President Donald Trump in New York.
On April 19, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a decision denying Bragg’s requested temporary restraining order. The House Judiciary Committee subsequently issued a statement: “Today’s decision shows that Congress has the ability to conduct oversight and issue subpoenas to people like Mark Pomerantz, and we look forward to his deposition before the Judiciary Committee.”
Bragg’s unjustified, malicious prosecution is not only corrupt but it’s also a waste of taxpayer funds as he tries to thwart a legitimate House investigation into his attempt to interfere in the 2024 election. Rather than spending $900 per hour on lawyers to defend his abuse of office and political jihad against Trump, Bragg should focus on taking dangerous criminals off the streets of New York.
The philosopher Diogenes of ancient Greece held up a lamp and searched the faces of Athens for an honest man. We can only wonder what he would find in the Justice Department today. In Investigative Bulletin, Micah Morrison, our chief investigative correspondent, examines the man behind one long-time Washington face.
On June 20, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware announced a sweetheart plea deal with Hunter Biden, the son of President Biden. Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two tax charges and enter a diversion program on a gun possession charge. Diversion programs are usually focused on drug offenses—Biden has a well-documented history of crack cocaine use—and generally consist of psychotherapy and class work on building life skills. There would be no jail time.
Outrage ensued. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called it “a miscarriage of justice whose chief beneficiary is President Biden.” In Congress, House GOP leaders sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland calling for the appearance of eleven witnesses before the House Judiciary Committee to address “allegations of politicization and misconduct with respect to the Department’s investigation of Hunter Biden.”
The star witness? David Weiss, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware. “We want to talk to David Weiss,” said House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan. Weiss ran the five-year probe into Hunter Biden. Weiss’s defenders are quick to note that the prosecutor was a Trump appointee, but that’s only part of the story. Weiss has deep roots in Democrat-dominated Delaware and spent key career years as a top Obama Administration prosecutor in Wilmington.
Weiss got his ticket punched as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Delaware from 1986 to 1989, then moved on to a lucrative career in the private sector. From 1989 to 1999, Weiss worked at the Wilmington law firm Duane Morris, becoming a partner in 1993, according to his Justice Department bio. In 1999, Weiss joined the Siegfried Group, also based in Wilmington, a financial services firm, serving as chief operating officer.
In 2007, Weiss returned to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware. In 2009, Barack Obama appointed Weiss to leadership positions at the Delaware office, where he served as both Acting and Interim U.S Attorney. In 2018, President Trump, following historic practice, named him U.S. Attorney upon the recommendation of the two U.S. senators from Delaware, Democrats Tom Carper and Chris Coons.
House GOP leaders want details of the control exerted by Main Justice over the Biden case. Garland had repeatedly promised a “hands-off” approach to the inquiry and noted that Weiss had been given “full authority” to decide the matter. GOP leaders in their letter to Garland noted that recent testimony from IRS whistleblowers involved in the case raised “serious questions about the Department’s commitment to evenhanded justice and the veracity of assertions” made to the Judiciary Committee.
Specifically, the letter noted, House GOP leaders “seek to examine whistleblower claims that the Department’s investigation of Hunter Biden was purposely slow-walked and subject to improper and politically motivated interference.” An earlier letter to Weiss from Jordan also sought “documents and information” related to retaliation against one of the IRS whistleblowers.
On June 30, House investigators got the response from Weiss: drop dead.
In a letter to Chairman Jordan, Weiss noted that in order to protect law enforcement sources and internal investigative deliberations—standard boilerplate but this time involving a case that had been largely closed with the plea deal—“I will not provide specific information related to the Hunter Biden investigation at this time.” Weiss also repeated that “I have been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including where, when and whether to file charges.”
It’s unlikely that Jordan and other House leaders will go quietly into the night on the Hunter Biden case. There’s more to come. Legal minds may quibble over whether Hunter Biden got the standard deal for a first-time offender on two tax charges and a gun case, but that misses the point. The big picture here is what Hunter Biden and other family members, and perhaps even the current president of the United States, were up to in Ukraine and China, raking in tens of millions of dollars in exchange for…what?
David Weiss spent five years investigating Hunter Biden. What does Weiss know about Biden’s Ukraine and China dealings? Did Weiss act properly with his “ultimate authority?” Did the attorney general act properly? Did the White House?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes—who will guard the guardians?
Given the Biden administration’s purposeful border crisis, are you at all surprised that a foreigner on the terrorist watchlist was free in the U.S. for more than two weeks while the feds sorted out their inept system for keeping the nation safe? Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
In the latest national security blow to come out of the southwest border U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehended and subsequently released an illegal immigrant on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) terrorist watchlist. CBP arrested the migrant, whose gender is not being identified by authorities, and their family in Yuma, Arizona, and supposedly screened them for national security threats. Based on the information provided by CBP, the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) determined that the migrant was an inconclusive terrorist watchlist match and the frontline Homeland Security agency released the illegal alien. A few days later, the suspect and family members checked in at the Palm Springs International Airport in California for a flight to Tampa, Florida and during pre-flight screening the TSC obtained additional information from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) that “confirmed the migrant was a positive Terrorist Watchlist match,” according to a heavily redacted federal audit. It took another two weeks for the feds to finally arrest the illegal immigrant, according to the report.
The document was recently made public with extensive redactions by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General, which concluded that “CBP’s ineffective practices and processes for resolving inconclusive matches with the Terrorist Watchlist led to multiple mistakes.” As an example, investigators write that CBP sent a request to interview the migrant to the wrong electronic mail address, obtained information requested by the TSC but never shared it, and released the migrant before fully coordinating with the FBI screening center. “Once the migrant was identified as a positive match with the Terrorist Watchlist, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) prioritized arresting the migrant but faced multiple challenges sharing information within ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations while planning and conducting the arrest,” the report states. When ICE finally received the necessary information, it safely apprehended the illegal alien, the report confirms.
In all, the foreigner on the terrorist watchlist was free in the U.S. for more than two weeks while the feds sorted out their inept system for keeping the nation safe. The DHS watchdog found that CBP missed multiple opportunities to help the TSC verify the migrant was a “positive Terrorist Watchlist match before releasing the migrant.” Because such large chunks of the report are redacted, specifics of how CBP dropped the ball are not available, but it appears to be a broad problem at the agency that is hardly limited to this case. That is why the DHS IG conducted the probe to review CBP’s screening process of a suspected terrorist and the timing of ICE’s subsequent arrest following the suspected terrorist’s release in the U.S. “If CBP’s ineffective practices for resolving inconclusive Terrorist Watchlist matches continue, the component risks releasing individuals into the United States who potentially threaten national security and public safety,” the report states. Despite the omitted portions, the document does a solid job explaining that CBP released the migrant without sharing information that would have confirmed the terrorist watchlist match.
The public disclosure of this inconceivable case comes on the heels of equally distressing information involving terrorists and the famously porous southern border. Just a few weeks ago, Judicial Watch reported that a record number of foreigners who appear on the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) have been caught trying to enter the U.S. through Mexico. In April alone federal agents caught 16 illegal immigrants who appear on the TSDB trying to enter the country through the southern border, according to the latest government figures. The TSDB contains thousands of records that are updated daily and shared with federal state, local, territorial, and tribal law enforcement as well as the intelligence community and international partners to “ensure that individuals with links to terrorism are appropriately screened,” according to the FBI. The April figure is more than the total terrorists caught in four previous years—2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 combined. With about three months till the end of the fiscal year, Border Patrol agents have already encountered 98 migrants that appear on the TSDB list.
The new probe exposing how the nation’s frontline Homeland Security agency handles potential terrorists who cross into the U.S. through the largely unsecured southern border should concern all Americans. Incredibly, the DHS, created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack, seems most concerned with the new report’s title misleading readers into believing that CBP knowingly released an individual on the terrorist watchlist. The watchdog stands by its probe, explaining that the document’s title, “CBP Released a Migrant on a Terrorist Watchlist,” is accurate and supported in the report’s findings.
Until next week,