Judicial Activist Nominated to High Court
President Biden bowed to pressure from his radical base and selected a judicial activist to fill Justice Stephen Breyer’s seat on the Supreme Court. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has a long record of left-wing activism both on and off the bench.
Disturbingly, President Biden seems to have selected Judge Jackson under a process that excluded potential nominees simply because of their race and sex. The Senate must not only investigate Biden’s invidious discrimination but must also be prepared to reject Judge Jackson or any other nominee who wants to further politicize the Supreme Court by legislating from the bench.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has gone seriously “woke.” Among other curiosities, employees are taught that asking someone where they are from is a racial microaggression.
We learned this in 48 pages of records from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) that included a PowerPoint presentation titled “Race and gender based microaggressions” that was used for training employees.
We obtained the documents in response to a January 27, 2021, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request asking for:
- All records of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) containing any of the following key words: ‘whiteness’; ‘unconscious bias’; ‘intersectionality’; ‘white privilege’; ‘Kendi’; ‘Robin DiAngelo’; ‘systemic racism’; ‘structural racism’; ‘close hold’; ‘climate justice’; or ’critical race theory’
- All CFPB records instructing or suggesting that any individuals or groups of people are fundamentally privileged, oppressive, oppressed, racist, or evil on account of their race; and 3.
- All CFPB records instructing or suggesting that America is a fundamentally racist or evil country.
The new records include a presentation by the CFPB’s Director of the Office of Civil Rights Melissa Brand titled “Race and gender based microaggressions”
The “goals” of the presentation include:
To help you identify race and gender based microaggressions
To help you understand how microaggressions can turn into discrimination and/or unlawful harassment
To help you understand YOUR role in preventing discrimination and harassment in the workplace
To help you know how to respond to these situations
A slide titled “Microaggressions” defines microaggressions as “verbal and nonverbal behaviors” that “communicate negative, hostile, and derogatory messages to people rooted in their marginalized group membership (based on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, etc.)” The slide further notes that microaggressions can be “intentional or unintentional,” and are “more subtle” than “using racial epithets or displaying swastikas.”
Other slides discussing “Stereotypes lead to microaggressions,” begin with a warning to the viewer: “Trigger warning: the next slide contains images of offensive stereotypes.”
Cartoons are used to depict “offensive stereotypes,” which include people of color being offered various items such as: someone wearing a hoody and gold chain being offered sports balls; a hijab-wearing girl being offered a lit bomb and a picture of Osama bin Laden; a girl being offered a maid’s apron and a sombrero; a male being offered a guitar and a construction hat; a girl being handed a bottle of Aunt Jemimah syrup; and a girl being handed a spear, a teepee, and a Cleveland Indians baseball pennant.
A section titled “Common race-based microaggressions in the workplace” depicts people saying various things, as well as what a minority “receives.”
For instance, white males are shown saying: “When I look at you, I don’t see color;” “There is only one race, the human race;” and “When it comes to race, I am colorblind.”
A female of color is shown to receive the message as: “Denying a person’s racial/ethnic experience;” “Assimilate to the dominant culture;” and “Denying the individual as a racial/cultural being.”
In another “microaggression” slide, a white male says: “All lives matter,” but a hijab-wearing girl supposedly perceives it as: “Ignoring systemic racism, such as in police interactions.” Additionally, a pink, protest hat-wearing woman says: “As a woman, I know what you go through as a racial minority,” from which the hijab-wearing girl perceives: “Your racial oppression is no different than my gender oppression.”
The presentation discusses “Two approaches to take when taking action” against microaggressions. One is to “disarm” the person: “If you choose to confront a microaggression, be prepared to disarm the person who committed it.” Also: “One reason we avoid conversations about race and gender discrimination is that they make people defensive. Perpetrators of microaggressions typically fear being perceived — or worse, revealed — as racist or sexist.”
The other approach is to “defy” and “challenge the perpetrator to clarify their statement or action.”
In a slide titled “What Can You Do?” about filing Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints, a line of business people is shown. They all have Xs over their images, except for a youthful white man with a broad smile on his face, who is singled out with a check mark over his image.
In the appendix, slides are titled “Examples of racial microaggressions.” Examples include:
“Where are you from?”
“Where were you born?”
Asking an Asian American or Latino American to teach them words in their native
“You are so articulate.”
“Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough.”
Person of color is mistaken for a service worker.
College or university with buildings that are all named after ‘White’ [sic] heterosexual upper class males.
Overabundance of liquor stores in communities of color.
A section featuring “Examples of sex based microaggressions – aimed at females,” includes:
“Have you been working out? You look good!!”
“You have a doctorate?”
Male colleagues interrupt women at meetings.
Federal Agencies shouldn’t abuse tax dollars for CRT indoctrination, which makes a mockery of serious race and sex discrimination issues. These documents show that critical race theory is alive and well in the Biden administration.
We are legally pursuing details on the Biden Administration’s disaster in Afghanistan. The horrors are endless. Now, courtesy if the administration, many Americans are unwitting neighbors to poorly vetted Afghan refugees. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports:
Dozens of Afghan refugees released in the U.S. have Pentagon records that “indicate potentially significant security concerns,” according to a new federal audit that reveals the multi-agency intelligence conglomerate created after 9/11 to protect the nation from terrorists has failed to properly vet thousands of Afghans. Under the Biden administration’s Operation Allies Welcome (OAW), approximately 80,000 “displaced persons from Afghanistan” have been admitted into the country under a special immigrant visa (SIV) or humanitarian parole. The president directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to lead the chaotic plan to resettle the Afghans and the administration assured Americans the refugees would be thoroughly screened. That has not materialized, and for months media reports have exposed crimes, including child molestation, assault and domestic violence committed by Afghans housed at military bases throughout the U.S.
Now a probe conducted by the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General (IG) offers more troubling details that shed light on the magnitude of the problem. Investigators found that the agency responsible for clearing the Afghans by conducting thorough background checks is not doing its job, creating serious national security issues and undoubtedly threatening the safety of Americans. The agency is known as the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and it functions under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). It was launched in the aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attacks by consolidating intel gathered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), DHS, and the DOD. The NCTC’s stated mission is to lead the national counterterrorism effort by fusing foreign and domestic counterterrorism information and its vision is to be a center of gravity and leading voice that unifies counterterrorism intelligence for the homeland and abroad with a record of sustained excellence across all mission areas.
When it comes to screening Afghan refugees however, the NCTC has failed to use all available DOD data to properly vet candidates prior to arriving in the U.S. Besides missing the significant DOD security concerns of at least 50 refugees, the nation’s lead counterterrorism intelligence entity also failed to stop at least four dozen Afghans with “derogatory information” in their record, the report states. The document defines derogatory information as potentially justifying an unfavorable fitness or access determination, requiring further investigation. Those potentially dangerous refugees are somewhere in the U.S. and cannot be located, the DOD watchdog warns. “As a result of the NCTC not vetting Afghan evacuees against all available data, the United States faces potential security risks if individuals with derogatory information are allowed to stay in the country,” the DOD IG writes. “In addition, the U.S. Government could mistakenly grant SIV or parolee status to ineligible Afghan evacuees with derogatory information gathered from the DoD ABIS database.”
Also of tremendous concern, the audit discloses that Afghan parolees have the right to leave U.S. military bases, officially known as “safe havens,” after receiving required vaccinations and tuberculosis testing. As of late September, 1,236 Afghans left their government safe havens without finishing processing. Here is how the government handles the early “egress” of Afghan evacuees; DHS personnel conduct a meeting with the parolee to discuss the ramifications of leaving the immigration program early, arrange for the parolee’s exit from the facility, and record and track the parolee’s removal from the installations’ lodging. This may seem like a joke, considering Afghanistan is a terrorist sanctuary and the refugees are so poorly screened by the U.S. A ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley, points out that the problems processing the Afghans pose serious national security and public safety concerns. Among the IG’s recommendations for improving the situation is that the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security develop procedures for sharing derogatory information on Afghan evacuees with the DOD and interagency stakeholders.
Until next week …